Churchill County planning staff propose three-tier industrial zoning, maps and land-swap tie-ins

Churchill County planning staff presented proposed amendments to the county code and zoning map to break the single industrial zoning category into three tiers and add clearer definitions for industrial uses.

At a workshop, Randy Hines of Public Works Planning and Building outlined a draft land-use table that would create I1 (light industrial), I2 (medium industrial) and I3 (heavy industrial) categories, specify which activities require administrative zoning and design review versus a Planning Commission special use permit (SUP), and keep several existing SUP "catchall" standards in place. Hines said the changes aim to give owners and neighbors more clarity about "what can I do with my private property, and what can my neighbors do with theirs?"

Why it matters: commissioners and members of the public raised safety, nuisance and water-supply concerns for sites near homes and Lake Lahontan, and staff tied the mapping work to federal land-consolidation efforts that could enlarge contiguous private parcels for industrial use. The proposal affects roughly 173 parcels now zoned industrial across the county, including areas around Hazen, the airport and the 40 Mile Desert, and interacts with large energy projects already approved or under review.

Key elements of the proposal

- Three-tier zoning: I1 would be tailored for lighter uses such as indoor warehousing and low-impact fabrication; I2 would accommodate most industrial activity but require SUPs for high-risk uses (for example, specialty chemical manufacturing); I3 would be the most permissive for heavy uses at greater distances from residences.

- New and clarified use definitions: staff added lines for hazardous-material warehousing (including batteries), data centers, heavy manufacturing, industrial fabrication, bulk fuel yards, explosion/combustion testing and other uses that were previously handled case-by-case. The draft marks which tier each use would allow and whether review would be by zoning and design review (administrative) or SUP.

- Review procedures: the draft keeps a two-track review path. Permitted uses would proceed by zoning and design review (an administrative determination by the planning director). Uses requiring SUPs would move to a public hearing before the Planning Commission, which would determine whether a preponderance of evidence supports findings required by Churchill County code. Hines noted the code's existing SUP catchall for 24-hour businesses, major traffic generators, hazardous substances and large water use would remain and could still require SUPs.

- Public notice: staff proposed notifying property owners within 300 feet and expanding the radius until at least 30 unique property owners are reached. Hines said the 300-foot radius comes from Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) and the county uses the extra 30-owner rule to broaden outreach.

Maps and site examples

Staff showed a countywide exhibit of industrial parcels (about 173 total) and zoomed views for Hazen, the Leadville Junction/New Millennium corridor, the Fallon airport area and corridors along Interstate 80. Examples noted during the presentation: - NV Energy's approved Sierra solar project north of I-80 (phase 1 described as about 4.5 sections of land in staff remarks). - A Fervo geothermal exploration project south of I-80 described by staff as having SUP approval and covering roughly 20 sections in the area discussed.

Land-swap and federal lands context

County staff and a guest presenter described a separate but related effort to consolidate checkerboard federal/private ownership created in the 19th century. Jim (staff) summarized that the National Defense Authorization Act expansion of the nearby Navy airbase enlarged federal holdings and prompted county efforts to trade county or private lands for contiguous federal parcels under authorities such as the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act. He said the county expects some direct conveyances (he cited roughly 14,000 acres conveyed to the county in past exchanges) and that the BLM's draft plan is under internal review before public NEPA review. That land-swap work would, over time, make larger contiguous private blocks available for industrial development while consolidating federal land on less usable ridge areas.

Public concerns and commissioner feedback

Multiple Planning Commissioners and members of the public urged changes before any formal zoning action. Suggestions included removing solid-waste landfills from the proposed I1 tier and excluding "major power generation" from I1. Public commenters asked staff to avoid heavy industry near Lake Lahontan and the state park, and to ensure parcels adjacent to residences were assigned the lighter I1 designation. Avita Keller's emailed comment, read into the record, asked that "industrial power be limited to light industry only" near Lake Lahontan because "thousands of people utilize the state park every year." Resident Amber Sanchez asked how to determine whether green (I2/I3) areas shown on the map include her property and was directed to staff for a zoomed exhibit or one-on-one map review.

Next steps

Staff asked commissioners to submit suggested mapping or code edits by roughly two weeks to allow staff to prepare a finalized draft. Commissioners indicated they were close to consensus on changes and asked staff to bring revised materials to the Planning Commission for a hearing; if accepted there, the zoning changes would be considered by the Board of County Commissioners (zoning changes are typically a single hearing; code amendments require two readings and final adoption). Planning Commissioner Joe Frey said, "I think we're pretty darn close," and several commissioners favored proceeding to a Planning Commission hearing rather than another workshop.

Votes at a glance

- Approval of the meeting agenda: Motion by Tammy Edgemond to approve the agenda "as submitted and revised." Chair called for aye; the motion "passes unanimously." No other formal zoning or code votes were taken at the workshop.

Ending

Staff will compile written comments from commissioners and the public, revise the draft code and maps, and return with a proposed ordinance and zoning map amendments for the formal public process. Comments were solicited by email to the planning department and staff offered one-on-one map help for property owners who could not read the large-format exhibits.