Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

2026 zoning board of adjustment meeting minutes is hereby opened. Approval. Second. All right. Karen made the motion to approve and Eric Hikis seconded that motion. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor? Please say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number two, 26VA00002.

Can you hear me on this one?

Okay. Um, item number two before you. This is your only variance request on your agenda today. This is 26VA002. This is a variance request to reduce the minimum required on-site parking from 43 spaces to 35 spaces and to allow shared parking to be located 675 ft from the building's primary entrance in lie of the maximum 300 ft. So we are at property located at 8:15 Jackson Boulevard. This property is currently zoned general commercial district. Future land use of this property is mixeduse commercial and access to this property is off of Jackson Boulevard which is classified as a principal arterial street on the city's major street plan. So this property you will recognize is the old westside Sonic location um which is currently vacant and has been vacant for quite a while. So this property consists of two separate tax parcels that are about82 acres in size. What is being proposed here is to demolish the existing structure and the parking lot and construct a new 4545t Chick-fil-A restaurant. Um, this will have two drive-thru lanes. Um, and then also the parking lot as well and the associated landscaping. Um, so by code, this restaurant at this size is required to provide a minimum of 43 on-site parking spaces with seven stacking spaces for each drive-thru lane. So, their drive-through lanes do meet the minimum or stacking requirements. In fact, they exceed the minimum stacking requirements. Um, but their parking lot itself um on site within the property boundaries only provides 35 parking spaces. Um, to supplement that reduced on-site parking, they do have an agreement with the property to the north, which is this parking lot right here. That parking agreement dedicates four parking spaces that are right here. specifically for Chick-fil-A um and

Chick-fil-A's customers. It does also allow, you'll see their drive-thru stacking lanes also extend on the west side of this parking lot right in here. That parking agreement does also allow that. Um and there is also some additional kind of back and forth unspecified. Yes, you can use our parking and we can use your your parking kind of back and forth type situation. Um, and they are also proposing to with that north parking lot, it will be restriped. Um, and then it will also have new pavement details added that are going to indicate where the access drives are. So, these arrows that you see um on the map here. Those will be painted. Um, they will paint these um drive-thru aisles. And there are a couple do not block locations right in here that will be painted on the asphalt as well um to kind of direct the traffic and make sure that everyone is moving in the direction that they should be. Um they have also secured a property at 9:07 um or 907 Jackson Boulevard, excuse me. That is about 15ish feet right here. You can see it just off the side of the screen right here. So, they have secured that. Um, they have bought that property and will use that building for storage for Chick-fil-A. And there are 19 parking spaces on that parking lot um that they will use exclusively for Chick-fil-A employee parking. Um, so here's kind of a floor plan of what this um Chick-fil-A restaurant is going to look like. Here's some elevations of what this Chick-fil-A looks like. Here's kind of an uplose view of what they've got going on site specifically. Um, so this kind of shows the turning movements and things along those lines with regard to how traffic will flow through the north adjacent parking lot to get into the Chick-fil-A, through the

drive-throughs, and then out through the Chick-fil-A as well. Um, so when we're looking at variance requests, we are looking at several different factors. Um, one of the things that we're looking at is if there's anything in particular with regard to the property that's a special circumstance um that would support the variance request. So, this property um there is adequate area to configure this development to meet minimum parking requirements. Um, since they are completely demolishing everything that's on this property, they're starting with a blank slate um on a flat piece of ground. Um, so we did not find that there was any special circumstances. if they were to be able to reconfigure um the size of this building or the layout of this property to meet minimum parking requirements, that would negate the need for us to consider the shared employee parking that's offsite. Um that could still be used for employee parking, but it would not need to be a factor in terms of um supplementing a deficiency in on-site parking. Um the other thing that we look at is whether or not um that granting the variance allows for reasonable use of the property. Um the applicant has noted that the proposed size of this restaurant at a little over 4,500 square ft is necessary to ensure efficient restaurant and drive-thru operations. Um and that it is smaller than their standard building footprint by about 10 to 15%. Um, and however, when staff is looking at it, we still view a 4,500 foot restaurant as a substantial size for a lot of this acreage. Um, so staff is looking at it as it being excessive and overbuilding the lot essentially. Um, which is not the minimum adjustment necessary for a variance request. Um, another thing that staff is looking at is the purpose and intent of parking requirements, which is to make sure that there's adequate parking, um, that does not impede public right away, um, restrict traffic flow or encroach onto

neighboring properties. So, when we're looking at that, we did take into consideration that parking agreement and access agreement that they have with the north adjacent parking lot. I do want to point out that that north adjacent parking lot does also have two other shared parking agreements in place. They currently have a shared parking agreement with Kelly's which sits um let me get back to a site plan that shows you exactly where Kelly's sits. So Kelly's sits right here. Um they do have a shared parking agreement for 20 shared parking spaces with Kelly's. Um and then they do also have a parking or shared parking agreement with RC Hardware. Um that they are allowed to take up 12 spaces for their seasonal greenhouse and Christmas tree lot um that they put up during those months. Um and and then when we are looking at um the spaces that were dedicated to Kelly's, so in the original agreement with Kelly's, they had 20 parking spaces directly adjacent to this west property line. Um the north property owner has indicated that Kelly's has agreed to move those parking spaces to elsewhere within the parking lot. Um we have not seen that formal parking agreement, but as you can see um those parking spaces will go away entirely and be replaced by Chick-fil-A's drive-through lanes. Um and then when we are looking at um whether or not traffic flow can be maintained, one thing that they are proposing as part of this development is there currently is an existing access right here um that goes directly to Jackson Boulevard. with this development that access is going to close. So their sole and primary well not soul but primary access is going to be this east access right here um which also feeds to um the four tenants of this building and also feeds to um tenants of Kelly's. Subway is right here and Safeway is up

here. So this parking lot sees quite a bit of activity. So that is something that staff took into account. the applicant did um submit a traffic impact study with this request. Um what one thing that the traffic impact study showed is that it is recommending that this entrance right here um this would be a full access entrance. So right and left both in and out. Um but what it does recommend is that that access be restriped so that there is one single entry lane but two exit lanes. um both dedicated for a right lane or a right turn and a left turn out of there. Um currently the traffic impact study shows that with this development that internal Q lengths at that access would increase from about 75 ft to about 250 ft during peak times. Um with that restriping um and providing the dual exiting lanes, it is proposed to decrease that queue length to about 125 ft for the left turn lane and about 25 ft for the right turn lane. Um but I do want to point out that the approach um so this is the approach to get into the Chick-fil-A parking lot. this and out of the Chick-fil-A parking lot. This is the exit for the um drive-thru. So, I do want to point out that the approach on Jackson Boulevard right there is about 44 ft to the end of the Chick-fil-A drive-thru exit and about 80 ft to the parking lot exit there. So, um, with even with a reduced queue length, um, we're still looking at during peak hours that exiting left left turn traffic um, will stack past the Chick-fil-A um, parking lot entrance right there and it will also stack past the drive-through exit obviously. Um,

and that could also impact entering traffic and cause additional congestion um, in this area. So staff did identify that there are some concerns for movement and circulation conflicts um diminish traffic flow within um both the Chick-fil-A property and the north adjacent parking lot. Um this will also push most of the traffic or a significant portion of the traffic since right now this is this west side of the north parking lot is currently an access aisle. Um, with this being taken up now by Chick-fil-A drive-thru, um, except for there is this through lane right here, this access drive down here that, um, directly fronts these four businesses is likely going to see a heavy increase in traffic right there. Um, so that is something that staff looked at as well. Um, so staff did not think that this was in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the regulations and could cause um detriment to public welfare or the neighboring properties. So here again, this is just a little bit closer up of um what the Chick-fil-A property itself is going to look like. This is that offsite parking lot. So, this is that building that currently exists at 907 Jackson Boulevard. Here's showing that there will be 19 parking spaces. Again, this is employee parking only according to the applicant. However, that is difficult to um regulate and guarantee that that is the only people that are parking on that property is restaurant employees only. So, here is a graphic showing what that proximity looks like from the Chick-fil-A property to that off-site shared parking. Um, when we calculated that distance from the off-site parking

lot to the Chick-fil-A property, um, you can see that it is um about 115 ft from property line to property line. However, by code, when we are looking at shared parking and that 300 ft maximum, we are looking at code reads that it is from the nearest parking space to the building's primary entrance by crosswalks and sidewalks. So that puts um our calculation at the nearest parking space right here, down the sidewalk on Jackson Boulevard, up the sidewalk here, through a sidewalk, and then to the building's primary entrance, which is right here. Um so that is how staff calculated that 675 ft. This shows um a graphic from the parking agreement that they have with the north adjacent parking lot. You can see these are the Chick-fil-A parking spaces and then these would be parking spaces for that that north um multi-tenant building. That's just more of the parking agreement. So, here's how this property looks today. This is looking at the back side of that property fronting Jackson Boulevard. Here's where Sonic's drive-thru lane is. This is also where Chick-fil-A's double drive-thrus would come in. So, this is looking at that multi-tenant um building on the north side. Here's again a graphic just kind of showing what that parking lot typically looks like. These are the parking areas that are on the eastern side um of that north adjacent parking lot as well. This is looking back towards Kelly's over here. So, this is looking at the west side of the Chick-fil-A property and the north parking lot. This is where the Chick-fil-A drive-throughs would be.

So, these parking spaces are what would be um removed. This is that west approach that's going to be closed on the Chick-fil-A property. And this is that main access from Jackson Boulevard as it currently exists today. And this is that um access drive right in front of the four tenants of that building on the north. And then this is a graphic of that proposed offsite lot. Um this will be striped for those 19 parking spaces. It's not currently striped right now. Um but it will be striped. And there's that parking lot again. And then this just kind of shows this is standing right at the nearest um parking space on that off-site parking lot for the employees and gives you kind of a frame of reference of where that building would be. So ultimately staff is recommending denial of this variance request um due to the fact that it is not the minimum adjustment necessary. Um there are no special circumstances and it could create some substantial movement and circulation issues um traffic flow issues and stacking conflicts. Um I will stand for any questions. I do want to note that the city's traffic engineer is here in the audience today to speak to some of those um traffic concerns and um a representative from Chick-fil-A is here as well um to speak.

Thank you. I also have a speaker request form on this one. Uh Patrick Bidal, if you'd like to speak on this item, [clears throat] I apologize. Can't hear you. We can call you up later if you if you They're debating on if he wants to go first or if Chick-fil-A would like to present first. Just want to follow the process. Yeah, go ahead. Once you're up at the microphone, identify yourself, please.

Uh, good morning. My name is Pat Vidal. I am a co-manager of JB Properties. JB Properties owns the um north adjacent parking lot where um it's where the strip mall is. And then I'm also president of Black Hills Properties and Black Hills Properties is the manager of the offsite property that is being proposed for parking. So, I can speak on both of those properties. Um, first thing I'd like to talk about is the Where' Cassie go?

Is there a mouse that you can a cursor that you can move? Okay. on the on the stacking at the intersection of that access drive with Jackson Boulevard. They they are assuming that everybody that comes out of that um those drive-thru lanes, those drive-through exits are going to go on to Jackson Boulevard at that intersection. And as you can see, there's there's probably five different ways you can go to get on to either Jackson Boulevard, Mountain View Drive, or West Main. Okay. Now, the one is by as you come out of there, if you want to go on Jackson Boulevard and go west, you can turn right and go that way. Or you can go through the you can go through the access drive and through that parking lot that's at the end of our building because there's an access there also. Can you show them where that access is?

That right there that goes over here. Let me see. Good. I can see this better than I can [laughter] see. Or are you talking about this one?

This one over there right there. They can go through that parking lot and and use that act that exit if they want to. Or they can turn left and go up the access drive. And when they get to that point at the end of our building, they can turn either right or left. If they turn right, they can go to West Maine, which is about a half a block. Or there's another drive, another um you can go through another parking lot and get onto Jackson Boulevard. Or they can turn left and they can go to Mountain View. Now they the aisleways between the rows of parking stalls are going to be one-ways. So a lot of people are going to be driving. What's this direction according to you? Is this

east? East. If the highway is that direct traffic east, those people that want to get out west. Sorry, west. Pat. Sorry.

West, I guess. Okay. West towards Kelly's. [laughter] Those people that drive towards Kelly's can turn right and get out onto Mountain View if they want. or they can turn back around and come back and and use the what what the staff calls the main access drive and and get onto Jackson Boulevard that way. So there's what I'm saying is that there's plenty of ways that people are going to be able to go and they're going to be able to see well here's two cars stacked right here so I'm just going to go straight and go out that access or I'm going to turn left instead and I can still get onto either Jackson Boulevard or West Main or Mountain View by using one of the other accesses. So they're really not representing all the possible ways that a person can get out. So I don't think the stacking is going the when you're driving in that parking lot, you're going to take the the quickest way you can see to get out because you know you can get going in any direction you want, no matter which way you go. And I'm just speaking from experience.

All right. Um Okay. Okay. Now, I'd like to speak with regard to the um off-site parking. Okay. We we want that off-site parking to be used. So, because if you if you don't use that, the customer no matter what size restaurant you have there, the customers are going to come. And if if if they don't have if if if the employees aren't in that off-site parking spot that area, they're going to either be in the Chick-fil-A's parking lot or they're going to be in our parking lot. And we don't want them in our parking lot. So it so we we want those 19 additional parking spots to be available. If they're used by the employees, that's that's fine. At least they're not the employees aren't going to be in our parking lot. And you know, I just don't I don't I really don't understand what the difference is between 300 feet and 600 feet. You're walking along a sidewalk that goes along Jackson Boulevard. It's it's no big deal. I'm not sure what the purpose of that 300 foot code is quite honestly because you know what's the difference in the to the public interest whether an employee is walking 300 feet or 600 ft to his job. You know he's going to get more exercise [laughter] but that that's about that's about the only difference that I can see. I mean, and they talked about that there was no guarantee that the employees would use that parking lot. Well, the agreement with we have with Chick-fil-A is that

they will use that parking lot or Chick-fil-A will be in default of that that agreement. So, I'm pretty sure Chick-fil-A is going to make stress the importance of the employees using that parking lot. They're not make, you know, we've we've made an excuse for um disabled employees. They don't have to use that parking lot, but everybody else does. And we're going to watch them and make sure they do because we don't want them in our parking lot. Chick-fil-A can they [laughter] know when we negotiated with them, they understood that we don't want your customers or your people in our parking lot. We'll let you we'll let you use the access and we can understand that they can't watch everybody. So, some people may slip in, but um as far as we're concerned, we don't want them in our parking lot, but we under but you know, there there's going to be people that are there and if they're there, then there there should be an opening in their parking lot and our people can use that parking lot stall. So that's so but it's important that we add those 19 parking lot spaces. It's more important for our parking lot than it is for for Chick-fil-A's. Well, no, it's important for Chick-fil-A so they can have the size building they want. But it's it's important for our parking lot so that there's not an overflow into our parking lot from Chick-fil-A, which there will be because the customers are going to come no matter what size buildings there. You're not going to reduce the customers by reducing the size of the building and they're going to want to park somewhere. So, please

add add these 19 spaces that we want them to use. Like I say, I just I just don't see how the 600 feet hurts things. All right. Thank you, Mr. Vidal. We may ask some questions if you if you don't mind staying close. We'll call you back up if any of the commissioners have questions on the agreements that you've come up with. Thank you for letting me speak. You bet. Thanks, man. Now, I don't have a speaker request form from the applicant, but uh would you like to speak on this item as well? Okay, come on up. Identify yourself once you're up.

See if we can go. I can introduce myself.

Uh good morning. Justin Lurk with Chick-fil-A. I'm our development leader over the the Midwest region. Um so, Mr. Commissioners, uh, members of the board, thanks for having us, uh, bright and early on, uh, on a Thursday morning. Appreciate that. Um, appreciate staff's work. We've been working on this project for for quite some time. Um, and just wanted to go through a few a few items here and add add a little bit more color and and talk about the the minimum requirement uh that we feel for the for the off-site parks to be included in this in this calculation. Um, first I'll just give a elevator speech of of Chick-fil-A, who we are, and kind of how we operate. A lot of us, you know, a lot of people look at a big a big brand coming in, but I want to note that it, you know, it'll be a locallyowned and operated uh location. So, as Chick-fil-A, we are a family-owned and privately held company. Um, and we are a franchise company. The difference between us and most other franchises is by being a Chick-fil-A franchise owner operator, you're guaranteed one location. And the difference there is you can't come into a market and say, "Hey, I'm going to buy the Dakotas and open up 25 locations like some other franchise um um restaurants do. You get one location." And for being a Chick-fil-A owner operator, that means you're in the store six days a week working with the team, meeting the customers, understanding the customers. um working on that uh hospitality and customer service that we're known for. So, I just wanted to note that that typically you're allowed one location. In some circumstances, if your location uh your own you're open and operating and you just can't sell any more chicken, you're kind of at max and we have to open up another location nearby. It'll have an impact on your location. you as an owner operator, you can apply for a second location to be

the owner operator of a second location if it's having an impact on your your operations at your current store, but you max out at three. You can't have more than three locations ever for a Chick-fil-A owner operator. So, I just want to go through that because our strategy in Rapid City, um we're obviously working on another location at I90 in Lacrosse, which is under construction now. Now the hotel's gone, which was uh a nice uh I think that'll be a great development up there. Typically, we would want to wait and open up the second location in a market to give that first owner operator the ability to apply for the second location. But as an organization, uh we decided to try to open two locations at the same time in Rapid City. We understand this is obviously a brand new market. We're not here today. Uh, so there's going to be some pent-up demand and once we open there's going to be a honeymoon phase um where everybody's everybody's flocking to Chick-fil-A, if you will. Um, so we're trying to mitigate some of that by opening two locations at the same time. This one that we're talking about today being being um location number two. So I just wanted to go to go through that some of the strategy that we had at Chick-fil-A. Um, we understood this is a small uh property as as Cassie mentioned, 082 acres. Um, our typical restaurant location like at I90 in Lacrosse um is I wanted to look at the numbers 5,34 square ft as you heard where we have customized this building. So, typically we like to put our standard building size on every location. Um, and that's what we're doing up at I90 in Lacrosse. we customized this building uh and and and shrunk the size of this building to try to fit this location. And what I mean by that is as as Pat kind of alluded to, um

we're cognizant on the number of seats that we provide to customers. As mentioned, if if we shrink the building further and we go from what's proposed at 72 seats to call it 15 seats, doesn't matter how many seats we have, um the customers will still come. We feel like the the building that we have on the site is right sized for this site and it's um uh 759 ft less than what we would typically do. So, we customized that building as she mentioned right at a 15% reduction. Um, knowing that there was a there was an opportunity, not a not a guarantee, but an opportunity to work with staff on a parking reduction as long as it's no more than 20% reduction from code, which is what we're proposing here. The 35 spaces is right at 18% reduction from from code, right? Um, so that's how we customize the building to stay within those goalpost, stay within those bounds, and to stay within that 20% threshold. and we feel like this is the right size for that building. Um the the second point that I wanted to um reiterate, I won't go through this cuz cuz Cassie hit on uh the site plans here, but I wanted to talk about the other lot that we've got under contract to purchase. Um again, the strategy for that was parking is a premium in this area obviously. Um so we wanted to secure the second location for employee parks as mentioned. Uh, and as mentioned, the property lines are 115 feet apart. Um, the way the code reads, as Cassie alluded, is that you've got, you know, you have to measure it from the closest parking space to the primary entrance of the building. So, um, we understand that's where the 600 some odd feet, uh, measurement came from. What we're proposing here and what you're seeing on the screen here is uh the

off-site off-site parking spaces being here and then represented by this blue line would be what we feel is the part is the walking path for our team members. Right? And what I wanted to highlight, oops, let me go back one slide here and then I'll go to this one. What I wanted to highlight with with team members using that off-site parking space, they're going to they typically don't come through our front doors, they come through our back door. So the code reads the measurement is to the primary entrance, right? So what we're proposing here is to do another little another little sidewalk connection kind of like the college experience, right? Or the college um you know see where the students are walking and then put your sidewalks in. So in our mind we always unders we always v envisioned our team members kind of using this back door. If you look at that measurement from the closest parking space to the back door it's approximately 350 ft. So code allows for 300 ft. So that's what we feel like is the minimum requirement here to massage massage that code from 300 ft to 350 ft. allow our employees to come in that back door. And with that, we can put in another little sidewalk connection here and assign that for, you know, team members only. So, I'll flip to the next screen. And that's what this would look like. So, they could they could use the sidewalk along Jackson Boulevard. The blue would be the new proposed sidewalk here and then crossing our drive-thru and entering that back door. So, we feel like that's a a reasonable re request and that's what we wanted to talk through here today. Um, and certainly here to answer any questions you all may have, but feeling, you know, instead of the 600 and some odd feet to the primary door, looking at it as a 350 ft versus the 300 foot per

code. So, um, that's what we wanted to to highlight and we're here to answer any questions you all may have. But, thank you for having us. Appreciate it. Thank you, Vicki.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, first let me say uh we've been visiting with Chick-fil-A for two years now to try to find two locations, which we appreciate that they want two locations here inside the city limits. And what I love about working with this team is that they are uh upfront and honest. And at those original meetings when we were going through what is our requirements and we went that you will need to require to provide seven stacking lanes per drive up. Um they said well we will far exceed that because with Chick-fil-A and if any of you have traveled and gone to a Chick-fil-A it's popular and it sustains popularity. Um they've got that recipe downright. So, what I like about this is that they reached out to Pat Vidal knowing that they are going to stack deep. And I think on the site on um Lacrosse Street, you've got over 40 parking uh stacking spaces for the drive up knowing that that is what we could have. Um the only other thing I wanted to say is that uh Pat Vidal made a comment that we are assuming on that stacking. We didn't make those assumptions. There's a traffic impact study that they provided and their traffic engineers looked at this whole area, looked at the access points. So, those queuing and stacking distances are based on that assessment. Um, and with that, we may want to see if there's anything that the city's traffic engineer wanted to speak to in relationship to turning movements. And just the the difficulty is this. This is a vacant lot. When Sonic is gone, it's vacant. And so when you look at the criteria for a variance, we're looking at where's that hardship and that's always a dilemma when we have a vacant lot. And in this case, a smaller

building, everything fits, we move on. Um, I can appreciate what Justin just said. This is a big reduction for them. They've got a standard that they need to maintain. So, we put we are putting it on you in part in in large part because of the traffic issues that this use is going to create at this location. Thanks, Vicki. U might see if there's a couple more questions for you before going back into another speech, but if you have something quick.

Yes, just real quick. It was highlighted that the the 20 parking spaces along the west side for Kelly's would be removed. I just wanted to reiterate there just one they're being relocated and with the restriping effort for this lot. It's a net ad of parking spaces from what exists today. So there's no reduction in parking spaces on the northern lot on Pat's lot. It's a net ad by doing all this restriping. So I just I wanted to make sure that was clear as well. So, we're adding parking spaces to this and we're securing another lot next door. Okay. Thank you. Yep. Mike Quasnney.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, as far as the employee parking, I don't think there's going to be a problem. I I've run restaurant before and you want to get the the employees off so you have customer parking. I think it'll just naturally happen. I don't think that's going to be a problem. Uh we have several restaurants and and I'll cite Colonial House right now on 8th Street. They they have their employees parked quite a ways away and then cross and there's a crossing on Mount Rushmore Road and that light is regularly used by their employees. So I don't think that employee parking is going to be a problem. I I think that's great that you planned for that. It's it's good to do. Um, I I foresee the problem being coming out of their drive-thru and the number of people that want to go on to Jackson Boulevard and turn right and I foresee their back their drive-thru backing up. What I foresee is they figure out how to control the traffic and they have somebody at the end of it and they're doing it. I've watched them I've watched Chick-fil-A operate um and and they do that actually pretty well. Uh my compliments to them. So, um there are multiple access as was noted by Mr. Badal and I think that all those will get used. The people uh that drive like to get in and out and and they'll figure it out pretty quick. So, I I I don't foresee that being a problem. One of the problems I see is when the hardware store puts their greenhouse up, and I've been in there, I've seen that. Uh the concern I have is that they will take more parking than uh than you'll realize with that and and that's where I think it's going to be a problem. Uh that hardware store has taken up quite a few

parking spots with that. So I I guess that would be something that would have to be controlled and I foresee that that causing more problems than anything along this. So, I don't know what they can do with that, but um I foresee that being a problem. Mr. Chair Vicki,

um Pat, let me see if I can help you out here. So, uh he Pat's aware [clears throat] of that and um just for clarification, yes, uh Pat does have additional parking in part because he did secure very successfully uh a reduction of his required parking by 20%. So they are they do have an additional number. It brought their parking down so that all they need on that site is 155 instead of 187 87

87. So that's in place. And um Dan French who does put up the greenhouse um they did secure a variance to reduce the parking by 12. And Pat noticed that he was taking up more spaces. So, he's working through that with that individual and at some point you may see a variance request before the zoning board of adjustment to allow the outdoor greenhouse area. But I don't think that um that should be penalized against Chick-fil-A if I don't think the four parking spots that align on Pat's property, but they're in alignment with the Chick-fil-A parking lot. I I I don't see anybody using that but possibly Chick-fil-A customers. I I just a point of clar your point is well made and that again goes to the congestion and whether or not this is just overbuilding this uh this uh to be vacant lot but um I I don't think that what happens later on this spring with that greenhouse um should be a part of your decision today. I I kind of agree with you on that and I only hesitate because I've been in that parking lot when that greenhouse is up and I've watched that parking lot and and it it could be a problem. I think that this has more excess parking than some of the others that we've done in the past that it's actually got additional parking close by more so than any some of the things that we've passed in the in the past. Um, I think it what are we asking if we deny it? What are we asking them to do to make it where it works?

Mr. Chair,

if this variance gets denied, um, Justin can come back with a smaller footprint requiring less parking and, um, it's just a building permit. I'm of the belief though that if you build a restaurant and it doesn't matter what you do if you um I think their drive-thru will take care of it if they they run the drive-thru right. But the the what happens when you reduce you you actually sometimes cause more congestion. And I I don't know that that's the answer to this problem. um you're just going to have people backed up. They'll figure out if if they run a good operation, you you're going to it's going to take care of you're building congestion by not building properly. So that that would be my concern by reducing the what what you're asking of of the restaurant. Um, I I think uh I think they've got adequate parking. I I like the additional parking that's on this lot. My only concern is still the greenhouse. I think it's going to cause a problem. And I think when that happens, they're going to see that that's a problem. And I So, I think that that's something that they should address early on. And I we're not here to manage this. That's not our job. I understand that. But that's the big concern I have is is is when they had the greenhouse there.

Can I ask a follow-up question to Mike's comment on reducing the restaurant? What square footage are we talking about to reduce it by eight spaces? Um, so, oh, you do? Okay, perfect. Justin has already made that calculation. Uh, so currently we're proposing 45,545 ft [clears throat] to hit the code with with the patio because the patio also requires a few parking spaces or outdoor patio. Okay.

Um, which we understand probably only going to be used four or five months out of the year. So, we're like, why are we putting a patio in and making it harder on ourselves, but we want to offer our full suite of services to our customers, right? Uh to answer your question, to meet code, we would have to go down to 3,730 ft. So it' be an additional 815 ft reduction in the restaurant, which uh to Mike's point, that's not going to come out of the kitchen, that's not going to come out of the restrooms, that's not going to come out of anywhere other than the customer seating area. So that would take our seating count from 70ish to in the in the 30s, which we don't feel like is the right move. But if we get denied, that's an that's a that's an opportunity that we have to consider as a company. We feel like this is the right size building. We are willing to forego our patio if that helps. That would take the required parking spaces from 43 to 40 and then we're looking at a 35 parking space on our site. So then that would be a 12% reduction in the required code. So more more than you asked for, but it's uh 37 3730 ft.

Helpful to hear. I appreciate it. Yep. Eric Hikis. Mike, are you done? I I went past you. Sure.

You done? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh I agree with Mike's comments. the first two initially, especially the uh I don't have an issue with the parking. Um I think a healthy general average human can walk about 800 feet very comfortably. Um no problem. It's we're kind of lazy sometimes and don't want to do that. But um uh I do have and I really appreciate Jeremy's uh information. My first question was are you guys doing not doing the other site now? I guess you're do both sides. That's exciting. So, my daughter loves your product. So, I'm sure. And I've also seen the Cheyenne Chick-fil-A at full volume at lunchtime on a weekday. And it's it's amazing. Not only the amount of people that come through, but the way that the staff handle it. They're out there with handhelds and they're actually, you know, it's just what you said. Okay. Um, so this this street here

what's the name of that one? Sorry.

So I'm calling that an intersection. So is is there any way possible and this and I and I'm also very helpful I mean great thank you Vicki for clearing up that if they do not get this variance right that they could change it but then it's just a permit right so we're not here to design their site for them so I'm going to be really clear about that but is there any possibility of uh Valentine and that entrance having some sort of control aspect on it in the long term, I guess. And that is I'm not I know that's not part of the discussion today. So maybe that's a good chance for the traffic engineer to talk. Thank you.

All right. Once you're up, if you could identify yourself.

Y my name is Matt Layman. I'm the traffic engineer for the city of Rapid City. Uh so the intersection of Valentine, there is really no volume on Valentine Street. I believe that goes to a single family. really the only driving volume would be on the axis itself. The with the traffic impact study that was conducted, it did not warrant any type of controlled access. So that that was something that was reviewed during this process. Um and then with if it was to be done, it would require some modifications to the intersection itself. You can tell from the aerial view, it is a skewed intersection. So it does not align. there would be some work to kind of make that more of a angular approach. Um, you know, the one one thing I do want to kind of touch on a little bit is, you know, the big issue with the stacking is the driveway approach. How close that is to Jackson. Those vehicles making that left to leave or the making the right to go to Jackson will start stock stacking up and that's where the problem's going to be. the actual so on that whole access side that is a that is an exit only for both the driveway and for the the the uh drive-thru. So for the parking lot and for the drive-thru. So everyone has to leave on that side regardless. And the traffic impact study did look at trip distribution throughout the site as well. So that 150 125 150 ft stacking length that was accommodating vehicles going alternative routes. So that was the big concern. Um, you know what we have seen with other developments and especially because we have two competing movements on the same approach is that exit for the drive-thru

or for the parking lot right now is projected to be 24 ft which would allow two lanes allow a left and a right to exit that. It would impact on further impact the on street park or the onlot parking but converting that driveway to to instead of exiting onto the access road but exiting into the parking lot itself. That's what we've seen a lot of other fast food restaurants how they handle that kind of access um which would then allow additional stacking length for that movement um onto Jackson. And the big issue was the the delay time went from I think don't don't quote me I don't have the report in front of me and it was about 300 pages. So I probably am going to say this wrong but it it it jumped substantially from a couple you know 15 seconds currently to over 90 or around 90 seconds per vehicle delay. So it it was a quite a bit of delay to make that left out. And so that's where that stacking is coming up is there's just the volume on Jackson doesn't allow the the gaps in traffic to to really accommodate that.

Thank you. While we have them up here, any questions for Matt? Uh Mike Quasn, I'm sorry, Eric, you still have your lights up again. I'll go to Mike here. Uh Matt, thank you for your input. Uh, two things here. So, one of the things you say stated coming out of the drive-thru, if you were to take four parking spots out, now we're reducing parking again,

and have them go further down, you would reduce the amount of backup then. Would that make correct? Is that kind of what you were indicating? I I guess what I'm indicating is you'd reduce the the risk of stacking within the drive-thru aisle, right?

So, basically, if anyone's leaving the the parking lot right now to to get onto Jackson, the current is they have it striped, which is off-site striping to say do not block access. We we know how well those will work. Um unless you have a staff member out there directing people to not stop there. Um, a lot of those issues, you know, people don't like to pay attention to those. Um, and so if vehicles do stack past that driveway approach or the driveway exit, anyone trying to make the left to go to a different and use the site, they they don't have that ability, which causes stacking within the drive-thru.

Correct. Y correct. Which would be managed then by individuals in the restaurant. Um, the other option is and and we have this in many places in town is to have when they come out of there a right turn only lane. Is that something that was considered?

So onto Jackson Boulevard. We have it on East North Street at a bank where they can only turn right. U I I don't know if that's an option. Now it's re restricting a lot of things and it'll make people if that's a right turn only. People will figure out how to go over to Mountain View and over other access points. Then it'll change the traffic flow on the parking lot. But is that an option to put a right turn lane on there? A right turn out of the drive-thru

out of onto Jackson Boulevard out of that parking lot, the whole parking lot. So the heavy the heavy movement the the the whole stacking issue was with the left turn. The right turn there's gaps in traffic that would allow that to to flow freely. Um Cassie did allude that stacking I believe was maybe 20 something feet a car a car car or two lengths at any given time during their peak hours. So the right turn is not the issue. It's the left turn stacking. Right. But by having it right turn only coming out of there you re you don't have a left turn.

So then correct. So that driveway is currently a quite a large driveway. I don't know the exact footage but if we're having three lanes I would guess a 36T foot. Um you would have difficulty if you you can stripe it that that way. you'd have difficulty controlling it as this is a private access as well. I think they have difficulty in anytime they put a right lane. I've seen it. Um but it does change the thought process of the driver, the average driver. Mhm.

Some drivers there's no changing what they want to do. But the fact is is that you do control it somewhat. So there is is that an option is I guess is what I'm asking. that would also so it is an option. The problem would be that it would impact the existing businesses as well. With the existing businesses having a lot more exit points than most businesses, I think that it's something that we we've done uh throughout the city. Um there's a whole lot more exits on this point than there are in a lot of places. So yeah.

Yeah, we when we can do it um and that would either require a concrete median or something along those lines or a striped median to basically create a pork chop to direct traffic to make that right turn movement. But yes, that is something that could be done. So there is a fix if we saw that this is a problem. Correct. Okay.

Uh Eric Hikis, I turned your mic off. Can you request again? Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. [clears throat] Also, Mike, every thing you say today, I'm tracking. You're stealing my thunder. But uh I do have some concerns with the intersection onto uh on Sheran Lake Road there. Is that right? Mountain view. Uh Jackson Jackson, sorry. Uh but that's not what I'm being asked here today. So, we're asked for a parking variance. So, um, my answers have been my questions have been answered. Thank you,

Hayden. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I guess my question uh I'm familiar or it's it's I think it's important that we're looking at the Jackson Boulevard exit going west from this property. uh as one of the speakers explained to either Mountain View or West Maine is very difficult uh to go to West Maine. You go basically through the parking lot at Safeway with cars uh pulling out and and [clears throat] backing up into that lane. Uh that's a a difficult exit as well as going to um Mountain View which would require I think as the speaker mentioned uh uh going west and then taking a left and again you're going through the parking lot that's usually fairly crowded and there's it's not a direct uh route to um to uh Mountain View. So, I I do think going west to either West Main or uh Mountain View from this property is is probably not going to be used that often. And and it's difficult and it would it would seem like it would seriously impact several businesses if if the traffic did increase substantially going west. So, I think it is uh the right idea to kind of focus on the Jackson Boulevard traffic and and you know, we we uh when when we were considering the Chick-fil-A on on North Lacrosse, uh traffic was a was a issue of it was brought up by a couple of people at that u meeting that we had. And you know, Chick-fil-A, this is a seems like a very good location for a

restaurant. It's just that we're kind of wrestling with some some I think pretty important problems uh with this particular location and particular lot. The uh I guess that's just kind of an ob observation I had. I uh one question I guess I had and and uh that would be when we are talking about drive-thru and and uh and dine in what's the percentage breakdown of that for a normal Chick-fil-A?

Yeah, good question. Uh that can vary per area, but in general, a general rule of thumb is about 55% drive-through business, 45% din. Thank you. Uh just so I don't lose this question, uh if if we were to approve what's on the agenda today and there was traffic apocalypse, does the city have any ability to add the right turn only later or is that because it's a private access road, would that be a um something that would have to come as part of the regulatory process. Now,

Vicki, so um typically at the time of a building permit, if the traffic impact study shows that that is needed, then it would be on the developer to pay for that improvement. Um if it if the this is approved today and they secure that building permit. Um, and if the city's traffic engineer says that that one could be safely designed there, um, then it would be on the city to make that improvement. Okay, Karen.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, this is a a difficult area to to think about. I just happened to be driving past that spot at noon yesterday and there's a lot of traffic on Jackson Boulevard. I suppose people coming to go eat to lunch or something like that and there's lots of cars in the parking lot already. And so I was trying to look at that trying to think how how would that work? And if I'm driving by and I've been to Chick-fil-A in Denver and it's busy all the time and and we always just drive through and leave because it's just so busy. And and so I thought if I wanted to go there, first I have to figure out how to get there. And and if I'm driving by, I'd have to look a couple times before I even decided to do that, I think, because, you know, don't want to take my eyes off the road. So, um, but to get out, if if the drive-thru only comes out at that one location, I mean, if you're driving around, you have to make a left or right turn on Jackson Boulevard. and and I can't see the idea of turning left when there's so much traffic or already and when I've gone to like Hardware Hank and places like that, you know, and it's chopped in that that strip mall there. I've tried to come out left in it and it's been a quiet day like in the middle of the afternoon and it I can get out turning left, but if I'm in a drive-thru, how would I ever get left out of there? And then if that stacks up and then the people that are trying to drive through, it's going to take so long for people to get out. So I think if you're going to have that that a exit on to Jackson Boulevard at that one location, I think it almost has to go right. I mean, people might not like it, but they'd have to go around the block or however they get out. But if if I was if I was a customer and I don't live on the west side, I want to go I want to go east.

I I wouldn't I wouldn't want to sit in that drive-thru lane and try to make a left-hand turn out of there. I I just know I wouldn't. And I don't know how that would affect the the property, but I'm trying to make sure that Chick-fil-A when it's there is is successful. I don't want people to go, "Well, I don't want to go there because it's too crowded. I can't get out." And I I think if we we like we we've said, we can't design the place for them. But how do we go about if we decide as a person, I just don't I just think that's too congested. It's too cramped in there to to make it a success. And so I vote against it. How do they do that other than coming back and redoing it? Is there any other way that if we say we want to make sure there's a right turn only, does that help? I I'm just trying to think the logistics of how this would work the best. Got any ideas, Vicki? putting you on the spot here.

Yeah. Anyone? I I just think we're getting into dangerous ground when we're trying to design their site for them. I think Matt made some great statements based on the traffic impact study that was provided by this applicant. Um the the concerns that we've noted are from their engineers. So, uh, and again, we start restricting access, that's going to impact Pat Fidal's existing businesses, and I I don't know how that's going to align either. So, I don't know that we could make a decision in the meeting today on that one.

Okay. So, I I guess my idea is if we I mean, it's the parking. I I think we can work around those parking. I don't mind the employee parking, you know. I think that'll work fine. But it's it's the day-to-day traffic out there that's that's troubling me. And if I um I don't know if we can continue this. Can you do that if they want to look at it again before we make the final decision or just we just make the decision and go from there? Sorry, that was where my head was at too offering that continuence up as an option.

I I just know Justin probably flew in from Yeah, this one.

Yeah. So, um, we'll let we'll let it populate here on the screen, but wanted to to highlight as Matt mentioned, um, leaving the drive-thru, we have this striping area. So, if cars leaving the center or heading to Jackson, they're stopping before that striped area. And again, if you're the owner operator for this Chick-fil-A, one of the requirements is this is your sole source of income. You can't have another job. So, if this is your business, you're going to want to make sure your customers can get in and out safely along with the rest of the uh customers on site, right? Um so, as as Mike alluded to, a lot of times we do have staff out there to help to help train um train our guests on how to get in and out safely. Um, and I alluded to a honeymoon period earlier, right? Takes a little while um to get that down pat, but as as the owner operator of this location, you're going to want to make sure it's a good guest experience whenever guests are coming. Um, I know there there was a lot of discussion about taking restricting this left turn movement. That's something that can certainly be looked at in the future. Again, if the board recommends denial of the parking variance, you know, that's what we could put a drive-thru only restaurant on here. I don't think traffic will change. I don't think we're I don't think that'll change traffic. If I put five seats in here or 90 seats, the traffic will still come. Um, and we feel again, we feel like this building is the right size for that. Here tonight, we're or here today, sorry. Um, used to evening meetings. Um here today we're looking at the parking variance and feel like feel like we've made a good case to uh allow those 19

parking spaces uh to be applied to our our our use here. Does that help? But taking any measure we can to make sure it's safe to get on and off of our lot from an operational standpoint. Okay. Uh Jeff, thank you, Mr. Chair.

Oops. There we go. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh and thank you Eric Hikis for reminding us that uh the item before us has to do with parking spaces and gentleman from Chick-fil-A. Also, I also have concerns regarding congestion on the potential congestion on this site. I'm wondering did staff receive any concerns expressed by any of the neighbors or are there members in the audience uh that representing any of the neighbors that uh have concerns with the parking space? Great question. Um, I have not received any um other than Mr. Vidal here, I have not received anything either in favor or in opposition um to what Chick-fil-A is requesting.

Okay. Thank you very much. Also, uh, Chip, Fire Department, have any concerns? Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Mike Quasn. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so the existing strip mall does not have enough parking right now. Did I catch that? No, it does not. Mr. Chair, parking, Mr. Ball, one one second. We'll get to you. Okay. Oh, I'm sorry, Vicki.

Um, they did secure a parking exception to reduce the parking by 20%. And then they also secured a variance to reduce the parking further to allow a smaller greenhouse than what has been put up uh each year. But based on that reduced number, they have additional parking beyond that. So that they've now they they've uh have a shared parking agreement with Kelly's and then another one with Chick-fil-A and then there is a shared access and parking agreement back and forth with Safeway. Is that correct?

Correct. That said, there's so there's no option. There's additional parking just beyond their parking lot here. They can't designate that as Chick-fil-A parking. So, there's not something that they could do in order for Chick-fil-A to have designated parking. There's not an option for them to take over some of that parking there. We would like to reserve some of that excess parking in the event the use of our building changes and requires us requires that building to have more minimum off- streetet parking requirement.

Okay. Because I saw that as an option, not designing again, but um it just seemed like that was an option. I actually think the lacrosse street e is more of a problem than this one even because I saw that one and I said, "Oh, that that's going to be crazy." But I see more of a problem there than I do with this. So, I I really don't have a big problem with the parking on this this lot here. I I I think there's adequate parking with all that's here, much more than than some that we've given. So, I don't have a problem with the parking. So, I I will be voting not to deny I I I don't want to deny this. I want I think there's adequate parking. So,

thanks, Mike. Uh Todd.

Yeah. Um I guess there's been some discussion on the restriction of the left turn movement onto Jackson. And historically, [snorts] um the city would look at that if there's an accident history, and we're less likely to look at that due to congestion on private property. Uh if you look at the old Chopco building that was a high accident intersection by Nwood and uh Fifth Street or Hannes and the city did go in and put that kind of that retrofit for that median in there to restrict the left turn movement for that reason. And I would see that being the scenario where we would get involved here is if there is an accident history which there could be but we would evaluate that based on accident history.

Gotcha. That makes a lot of sense Todd. Thank you, John Roberts.

Thank you very much. This has been an interesting discussion, long interesting discussion for parking. I think that one of the things you need to think about is the fact that this is for parking and that staff spent two years designing this with engineers and with Mr. it all and and uh you know there could be a egress entrance issue in the future. Um and some of that will go away over time because like they said there's going to be a honeymoon period. So there's going to be a lot of people and a lot of these people will start to understand the turning movements and how they get through the parking lot and all of that other stuff. I was going to mention that access on Hannes Avenue because uh most people probably don't remember because it was so long ago. I was against it. I thought there was a different way we could have rerouted traffic up there that would have been better. But saying that and knowing that and seeing that interse many many many times a day, even though we put a median in and we tried to restrict traffic, it hasn't worked 100%. I see people going around that median almost every single day. So, people are going to do what they're going to do no matter what we do as board or we do as a as you know uh city council. There's going to be people that always break the rules, let's say. But as far as the parking itself, um I I really don't see an issue with that. I mean I mean if you start bleeding that over into wanting to design this property for them then maybe there is an issue with that. But if I was a part of this board I definitely would support the parking on this. That's all I wanted to say. Thank you.

Thanks John Alicia.

Uh thank you chair. I feel like a lot has been discussed um and uh I appreciate information from Matt and from Justin. Uh, I think that it's um impressive to bring two um of your businesses to the community and I think that it'll be, you know, um having the two locations will probably help over time after those honeymoon phases. I also, you know, want to appreciate that this is about the parking variance and looking through just why the staff um you know did make their determination on no special needs um and no special requirements that it is a blank slate for development. I, you know, think about Matt and um him saying what is going to be the impact on existing businesses and future businesses and the community and this like really important sort of hightra high volume centrally located space. So I think if we set a precedent um you know to to make a um a special circumstance without those special circumstances needed then it's challenging just kind of for the future development of the area. So, I yeah, I do wonder what it would look like um you know, if you could get a little closer to meeting to meeting the requirements and still being able to provide your you know, your restaurant, whether it's drive-thru or whatnot. Um just thinking about kind of the the general community and, you know, future future requests for this area. So, thank you.

Thanks, Alicia. Eric Hikus.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. 75 minutes. Um I'm going to throw up a motion. Uh the motion is to uh accept the variance for the parking in lie of the discussion we've had today in lie of uh I'm my objectivity is probably right in the middle of this one but let's get a motion out there. So um to accept the variance as the reduction of parking with the discussion we've had today with the possible parking issues um being moderated by some of the considerations the the offsite the employee involvement that sort of thing. So, and then would you say parking or Armageddon approach Armageddon? I think that I think the traffic Armageddon issue is is is not what we're talking about in this motion. So, um but I do think that the the citizens of Rapid City need to be aware that this is that's a possibility at that intersection. So, um with that, there's my motion. M

Mr. Chair, do you have any input on the motion? Yeah, you'll need to site some conditions, our criteria that there it will not adversely impact the neighborhood, that it's minimum adjustment, and that reasonable use of the property would be denied without it. Okay. Can I can I just add on what you said to my motion, please? For the record, thank you, Vicki. All right. Okay. Mike Quney seconded Eric's motion. Uh discussion on the motion. Haven.

Uh thank you. The uh yeah what's before us is a request for a variance [clears throat] for parking. I just for clarification for everybody here. If the variance is approved and we've there's been a lot of discussion on concerns on traffic. How would that issue be addressed in the future if we approved the variance for the parking? Mr. Chair, Vicki,

I think Todd answered that quite well that we'd be looking at the traffic on Jackson Boulevard and based on accident um information, if need be, then there would be some type of control mechanism to prevent those left-hand turning movements. And then people would have to learn how to exit the property in different directions if they wanted to make that lefthand turn. Um, yeah, thank you. So really that puts it on the a business, I guess. If there's a obviously if there's an issue for people to get in and out, it's going to affect the business and that's something that the business would have to address.

Karen,

thank you, Mr. Chair. Everybody knows what I'm my thoughts on this property. I think it's just really congested. But the motion is to to do what the request is for parking and I I my question was not so much about the parking as it was the getting out. So I want to support the the motion. I think that's the right motion to make. And down the road, if if the business is in uh affected by the fact that people just don't want to go because they can't get out, then the property owner will have to take some, you know, come before and do something to make that right and and or work with the city to have a no left turn out of there or whatever. And and so I that's my thoughts that it's going to be up to them and not necessarily us after this. So

Mike Cosnney. Thank you, Mr. Chair. One final note, success breeds success. So if this is a successful restaurant and things go well, I foresee the parking that's needed for the other businesses also to increase because I think people when they go to an area and they want to do the hardware store may get more business because the restaurant's right there. You know, it's an amazing thing. So I think success breeds success. So, we hope every business in town is successful. All right. Anything else on the motion to approve the variance? All those in favor of the motion, please say I. I.

Opposed.

All right. The motion carries with Alicia voting no. Did I catch that correctly from the commissioners? All right. That is our um agenda for zoning board of adjustment. I'd look to a motion to All right. Karen made the motion to adjourn Z board of adjustment. Is there a second to that motion? Haven seconded that motion to adjurnn. All those in favor of adjournment of zoning board of adjustment, please say I. I. Any opposed? All right. We will now commence the Rapid City Planning Commission meeting for February 19th, 2026 here at 8:21 in the morning. Again, if any member of the audience wishes to speak to an item on the planning commission agenda, please grab a speaker request form. They're located on the left side of the room. Hand it to the staff over there and we'll make sure we get you recognized. Items 1 through 7 have been placed on the consent calendar today and may be approved as a group. Action will be taken on all consent items in accordance with staff's recommendation by a single vote. Any item may be removed from the consent calendar by any planning commissioner, staff member, or audience member for separate consideration at this time. The findings of this planning commission are recommendations to the city council. The city council will make the final decision with the exception of the following items. Item 5 26 UR39. Item six, 26 UR00002 and item 7 26 UR00003. The Rapid City Plan Commission action on these items is final unless any party appeals that decision to the Rapid City Council. All appeals must be submitted in writing to the Department of Community Development by close of business on the seventh full calendar day following action by the planning commission. Are there any items 1 through seven that staff would like removed? Number five, please.

Okay. I've got a number of speaker requests on that item. Any items that the commission would like removed? Item six. Okay. Haven asked for item six. Mike. Sorry. On item number five because it's already been pulled. I just wanted to make note that Pat and I were in a meeting this last week at Rushmore Road uh where it was discussed. We left the meeting. So, it was not something that we listened to the the discussion on it, but wanted to note that we were at a meeting where that was discussed.

Okay. Uh any other items from the um audience? We're pulling five and six from the consent calendar. I would look for a motion then to approve items 1 through 4 and seven in accordance with staff's recommendation. Second. All right. Mike made the motion. Karen seconded it. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor please say. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number five.

Mr. Chair, because there are so many people in the audience for number five, um Morgan is going to make a brief presentation so that we all have the same information as the uh discussion follows. 2539. I als this one

good morning. Um 25 UR039 is a conditional use permit to allow medical cannabis facility at 2209 Mount Rushmore Road. This property is zoned general commercial district. In the general commercial district, a dispensary is a permitted use. However, we are within 500 ft of a residentially zoned district, which therefore makes us a conditional use. From property line to property line, we're about 50 ft here. Um, but there is a hotel to the rear of this property that's going to buffer those uses. Future land use of the property is urban neighborhood. So we are located on Mount Rushmore Road which is identified as a principal arterial street on the city's major street plan. This is also a state highway. So this application was routed to SD dot who had no concerns with the request. Given that one of the criteria for review is whether we're creating a saturation of use in our community, I thought it would be pertinent to show where all of the dispensaries are located in the city. So the proposed dispensary is way down here with the star. As you can see, there's really no dispensaries anywhere near that facility and so staff does not feel that we're creating a saturation of use in approving this. I'll additionally note these three red dispensaries. These dispensaries, like the one we're looking at today, were also a conditional use because they're within 500 ft of a residential zoning district. So there is precedent for approving um a dispensary within that 500t buffer. I'm going to point out namely 230 East North Street because this facility is actually closer to a residential zoning district than the one we're looking at today. It's only about 17 ft from property line to property line and the only thing in between the two uses is an alley and a fence. Um, additionally, that facility is a Genesis Farms facility. So, um, we've not had any odor complaints at

that facility. And so I wanted to point that out because kind of goes to indicate that their order control plan works really well. This is their floor plan. So essentially um we're going to have Genesis Farms on this side on the ground floor. They're going to operate adjacent to a med clinic that's already here. And then uh above that facility there are two rental units. You'll note that they take access off of Mount Rushmore Road. This is just an elevation. Uh you'll see their proposed signage. This is again um a smoke shop today. And then this is the med spa with the rental units above. Again, this is their proposed signage. This is a poll sign that exists today. This is the property as it exists today. Um, like I said, we have the smoke shop here where the dispensary would like to locate adjacent to the med spa. This is looking north up Mount Rushmore Road towards Floorman Street. This is east across the street and this is south down Mount Rushmore Road where you'll see that um sign. So, ultimately staff is recommending approval with the stipulations noted in the report, namely that we're not creating a saturation of use in this area. um and that there is precedent for approving this use within the residential zoning buffer. Um I'll stand for any questions. The applicant is also here if you guys have any questions for him and I know there are quite a few speaker requests as well.

Thank you. Uh just want to note Haven Stuck is abstaining from this item as well as item six. Uh speaker requests mic fell if you'd like to approach and speak. And once folks are up the mic, please uh identify yourself.

Uh good morning. My name is Mike Fel. I'm with u uh the secretary treasure and board member for the organization protecting South Dakota Kids and Protecting South Dakota Kids Foundation. Um, I'm with News Radio KOTA, but I'm here as an individual, uh, not representing the radio station this morning, but representing Protecting South Dakota Kids. Just want that to be clear. Um, the comments that were submitted, uh, hopefully everyone on the board has had a chance to review from Deb Jensen, uh, longtime business owner in town, owner of, uh, Black Hills Bagels with her husband Jack. Uh I think those comments um are really important to review. There's statistical information um citing citing a number of of concerns. Um I was at a meeting at the Mount Rushmore uh road group. Uh there was certainly not a complete consensus as to uh submitting the permit for approval. Uh there were concerns from law enforcement. We know there's dispensaries around the area. I think the real big concern is the proximity to a very thriving uh neighborhood with regards to the West Boulevard neighborhood. U there's also concerns related to um particularly the use of cannabis with regards to medical. I think that a lot of times I think across the board we know medical cannabis dispensaries are okay. We know that and uh that's understood across the board. But the cannabis today it is powerful. There's a high THC rate that should be recognized. Um that means there's a high

potency. And the other thing is to me this is one big experiment. This is a location with uh tremendous amount of traffic and Deb Jensen I think got into that very clearly. Over 30,000 vehicles a day on this arterial road. Um I've seen the Genesis Farms at the family fair location operate very cleanly. I work nearby. Haven't seen any issues at all there. So I think everybody's a good neighbor in this situation. Um but the concerns that that our organization has and that Bob Fischer, a friend of mine, also has is that uh we could have um instances with more vehicle accidents on this hightra area and concern about spillover effect with perhaps customers in the West Boulevard neighborhood who who can't necessarily handle the product in the way in which they're supposed to be. And let's not forget, there are people that have medical cannabis cards that law enforcement officials across the the state and the community say shouldn't have those cards. It's not been a very welltightly regulated medical cannabis system in the state of South Dakota. Uh those are my comments.

Thank you, Emtt Riceer. [clears throat] Good morning. EMTT Rice Strawer, director of government relations for Genesis Farms. Uh, first I just want to say nice to meet you, Mike. Nice to meet you.

Um, wasn't expecting it under these circumstances, but I'm glad to finally meet you. Um, we just talked on the phone the other day, but um, I do represent Genesis Farms and, uh, now with some management agreements in place and license transfers pending, um, you know, we now operate, I'll say, six dispensaries, um, only two are currently licensed under Genesis because we're working through that license transfer process. But I'm just proud of our team. I brought some of the members of our team here today uh with our West River retail director uh Nico and uh one of our local uh retail managers, Michael. Um they've done a fabulous job of operating these dispensaries, being good neighbors. Um you know, today um we're before you asking for a conditional use permit. Um we've been successful obtaining those permits in the past and maintaining them since then without any complaints. Um, I appreciate the note about odor control. Uh, that's something I've personally worked on extensively. Um, at more at some locations more than others. This is another location where we we will actually go above and beyond our normal plan. Um, we've had to do this in other uh cities where we're in a multi-unit complex. We'll add even additional layers of filtration. We'll increase the frequency of replacing our filtration. Um and uh we'll be monitoring for any odor issues or complaints. It's usually just within the building that we would deal with that with like the beauty salon next door. Um I have never had a neighbor um at a retail location complain um who's, you know, on a different property. One of the major reasons why it's not a problem for us and maybe could be I guess with uh with other dispensaries is we have prepackaged inventory. We do not handle the raw or the bulk product um that some

places could which can allow odor to emit. So it's in a tamper evident childresistant airtight sealed container before it even arrives at the dispensary. Um also there are some differences between us and the current operator um which I will note respectfully. Um they do sell some of the same products. The difference is they are not licensed. That's kind of a questionable situation on its own. Um, but I know there are concerns with neighbors that are valid, you know, about recreational cannabis. I just want to emphasize our business is medical. Our patients have to have doctor certifications. We have to have a secure entry lobby. The current store does not. Um, we have to verify their medical cards with state software. The current store does not. Um, our cameras are accessible to the state department of health 247 live, uh, anytime they want. Current business does not have that type of regulation. Um, we also have a great relationship with law enforcement. The other cup we have at 230 East North Street. Um, you know, we've tried our best to improve the quality of life in that area as much as we can as a neighbor. That means when police reach out asking for video requests, I've heard about this. It's happening more than I wish it would uh because of other issues in the surrounding area, but we are there when the police request video of our parking lot. Of course, we respect patient privacy. Um but outside, if there's the gas station across the street um or the apartment building behind us and we have an exterior camera that can help them, we we try to try to help with that. So, I I don't know if I'm getting off topic. Maybe I am a little bit. I I'm just trying to touch on some of the points in the letters I saw that came in. Again, I respect these neighbors. We're going to do everything we can to address their concerns today. When you look at the staff report, you'll see um I I believe we've

documented that we have met the criteria points for the CUP. And [clears throat] but beyond that, I'll make a commitment to the neighborhood. They've got my phone number. I sent a letter. I'll meet, you know, with uh Mike and his group or any neighbor anytime. we will be very quick to respond to any complaints that could ever come up. I don't imagine there would be. Uh traffic uh is a is a a big topic here. Um and I think this location um why we're spreading it out, why we're spreading out our locations, why we want to go to this uh location is actually uh to meet our patients needs. Some of them are also here today uh and which I've asked to speak very briefly so you don't have to hear the same thing over and over. But um getting closer to Monument and the other medical clinics on that side of town is something we've been hearing about. Um even with my mother the other day, we like to do stack our appointments in the same day when we can. Um we have a number of patients, you know, we have their their um addresses on file uh for many of them and I did an analysis. I can't share that for public record, for privacy, obviously, but I could populate their uh residences on a map. And this is kind of a um you know, a heat zone, if you will. There was a lot of dots on the map in this area. Um South Rapid City does not really have a dispensary. North Rapid City has several. Um, so we're trying to move, if the CUP is granted, the goal is to move a location in North Rapid City to spread our locations out and to meet our patients needs. That's ultimately why we're here today. I do really believe by spreading out our locations, we'll reduce our traffic at all of our locations. Uh, kind of like I heard Chick-fil-A say, you know, their approach with two locations is to spread out that demand. We're kind of trying to do the same thing here is to just spread it out. So, I think all of our locations will benefit. The one at Bacon Park is

the one that has always been my biggest stress with parking. Um, there have been no issues, but as patient counts increase, we want to get ahead of that. Adding this location to South Rapid City, uh, will hopefully pull some traffic from our westside location, which is our smallest store, very small in that corner building there at Jackson and, uh, Canyon Lake. Um, so I think I spoke long enough. I can answer any questions. Uh we think we'll have less traffic than the current tenant. We're going to go above and beyond on the odor control. Um we'll respond to complaints or concerns, but ultimately today I think we do meet the criteria for the question that's before you. It's really not and I'll ask my uh patients I've asked to come and speak to to please be brief because we're not debating marijuana today. Um we're just really trying to meet their access needs at the location. Thank you.

Thank you. We will call you up if we have any questions.

Hannah Watland. Hello, I'm Hannah Watland. I'm a medical card holder. I live in the area. I have some pretty severe orthopedic problems, so it would be really nice to have a location closer to where I live. Um, it's hard for me to travel long distances, so that would be really helpful for me. Um, I also think it would be a lot safer use of the current space.

Okay. Thank you, Bill Hamby. Yes, I'm Bill Hembi and I'm here more support for the uh organization. They try to keep their areas clean and it's uh I don't know they they they've got a good area and they need more support from you folks. That's all I've got to say.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Hamby. Heather Ari.

Hello, my name is Heather Acriman. I am a resident in the Mount Rushmore area. I do believe that having a um another cannabis location there would be more access to myself um if I've got my doctors there my doctor's appointments because I have pretty much all of my dentist doctors all in the same area that would be great for me to be able to go to and I think that a lot of our other patients elderly or those have um access or restrictions that they can't go very far that would be perfect for them because they brought like EMTT said that everybody likes to try and get all their appointments in one day or at least, you know, in the sim similar area, it would help to have something closer to what you're trying to do in the area instead of having to go a thousand different places.

Okay. Thank you very much. Um, anything from the commission on item five? Mike or Eric? Eric first. Beat you to the punch, Mike.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh I appreciate the testimonials uh in the audience and those who came and spoke. Um was particularly interested in the comment that the the individual made uh for Genesis that the previous tenant was a little less regulated and a little bit more cavalier and you are going to be more regulated and careful that those those comments were resonant for me. Thank you. MikeWasny.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I need I guess a reminder. Did we Wasn't there going to be a uh medical marijuana behind the gas station uh on Fairmont uh on Mount Rushmore Road in Fairmont? Did that not I can't remember if it's there or not. I don't think they won the lottery for that one. Um [clears throat] that was the common sense. It was, but that one actually did get denied anyway for that location because of the senior housing. Okay. Directly next door. Thank you for the reminder. I couldn't remember. I thought there was some issues there and I I couldn't remember, but that was the senior housing that was Okay,

Vicki, this is more of a general question. There's been a lot of um action at the council on whether licenses can be traded or um there was a moratorum for a while and to be honest I was hoping John might stay around cuz I've just left that all to the council and haven't really paid attention much. Can you kind of give us a summary on where we stand with So I'm probably going to kick this over to Kinsley if she would.

Nope. Okay. Um, so yes. [laughter] So, uh, right now there were some that didn't activate their licenses within the time frame called. And should those then be put back in and should they go next in order to those that didn't get drawn a dispensary license or does it go back into a raffle? Just a lot a lot of discussion. But you will see and you have looked at acted on some where those licenses are getting sold and or transferred. Um there is some discussion uh with a couple of the council that are considering um allowing cultivation facilities potentially to have a dispensary license. uh it seemed like the lottery draw and the way people submitted massive numbers of of applications on one property but said it's for sweet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 it kind of skewed the odds and uh so there are some that that that don't have a dispensary license. So, there's that ongoing discussion, but for today, um, everything that's there does not increase the number that the city council determined were appropriate. Um, I think EMTT, is there 10 licenses that are being used in the city right now?

Nine or 10.

Nine or 10. So, there's there's some on hold. There's a lawsuit pending and the state's working through some issues. Um, may I I just wanted to remind all of you though that there are those that are concerned about this use and while we have had no complaints on any dispensaries, they've all operated well, they're really no different than if you look at a pharmacy or if one prefers uh someone that would sell uh alcohol. People go in, they come out. Uh it it has a reduced uh parking and or activity than other retail uses such as um uh sales or uh of just general retail where everyone can go in um and or a restaurant. Of course, this is a conditional use permit. If for whatever reason we did have failure at this location, a complaint could give get filed and we do have the option of bringing a revocation of a conditional use permit back before you, the planning commission, and you would have an opportunity to reconsider it if the conditions of approval are not being met. Sometimes it takes me twice to get my question really narrowed down, but what I heard is is kind of the answer I was looking for. Um, or am I fair to say that these this five and six are licenses that were previously granted and not subject to any of the other um storms surrounding what we have going on.

You are correct. Okay, good enough for me. Anything else from the commission? Motion maybe on five from anybody. Eric, you looked at me. I know. I usually look at me. All right. [snorts] So, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh item five, move approval of conditional use permit to allow medical cannabis dispensary with the stipulations outlined in the project report.

All right. Pat Rosland seconded Eric's motion. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number six. Don't have speaker requests on this one, but Haven wanted it pulled so he could abstain on it. Mr. Chair. Yeah. Staff is recommending that this item be approved with the stipulations as noted in the report. All right. Anybody on the commission want a presentation on this or I'll make a motion to approve. Okay. Second.

Karen made the motion to approve and Jeff seconded that motion. Any discussion on the motion to approve? And I'm assuming that comes with the stipulations. Okay. All right. All those in favor, please say I. I. I. Any opposed?

Motion carries. Item number eight. Good morning. So, item number eight, we just wanted to pull this one to give you guys a heads up that this is happening. This is kind of an exciting one. Um, this area has been zoned light industrial for a really long time and it is going to general commercial. Um, so just quickly to hit the highlights, the when the city was formed, you know, square mile, the north half of it was all industrial. Um, it's transitioned over time. So it's appropriate that the zoning does as well. The future land use notes that as mixeduse commercial. Um, just to show you, we're on uh West Main Street just east or sorry, west of West Boulevard and that kind of weird triangular area and the park's right there across the street. There are a number of non-conforming issues with this property. They don't need to do anything with that. There's no increase in non-conformance with this proposal. Um, right now the the applicant is actually kind of trying to spruce up the property itself. It's been mostly retail uses in this area. So, general commercial makes sense here. Um, so we just wanted to highlight this one so you guys knew that this was transitioning into more commercial uses that you could see here in the in the near future. So, with that, especially since we're we're closing in on 9:00, um, I'll stand for any questions. We are recommending approval on this. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh just a congratulations to the applicant there for sitting through Chick-fil-A as well as what he's doing to this uh these properties. It's exciting to see something redone. No, no, you got to you got to see it all. Haven, yeah, I'm familiar with this property because I drive by it all the time. It is a very difficult uh uh piece of property to do anything with. My only question is is that this this property has been used for uh general commercial for years and years. Uh so I'm surprised that it's uh it's uh currently zoned industrial.

How what's the history on that? Retail uses are allowed in industrial to a certain extent. So they've almost kind of just always been able to do some level of commercial in there. Um but now we're just recognizing all commercial uses should be allowed in this area. Thank you, Karen. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm just anxious to see what's going to happen to the property. So, you know, I do have some questions for you guys. Once you're up, if you could identify yourself, that'd be great.

Thank you, Sam Papic. Uh we're doing this development down here. And really our goal at the beginning was to uh get these properties up to modern safety and code standard and then also maximize curb appeal for other retail businesses that might want to go in there or office spaces. For the the Antique Mart building, we're currently in the middle of doing quite a flip on that. We had to kind of gut it, but I think we're going to run into some parking restrictions on on this little spot here. We do have parallel parking in front of the buildings in the lot where the the dealership is. There's some extra parking there. And then you can see about seven spots in this corner here. But I think for the uses that you'll be seeing in the next probably month or two, we're going to have to request some parking variances on that. I think so. I don't know what your appetite is for for getting some, you know, flexibility on that, but um maybe just to prep you for that.

I wish we could tell you, but until we see the application, we can't. Uh today we'll just have to do the zoning reszoning. Yeah, no problem. Well, thank you. Eric Hikis.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh this area I'm particularly excited about. Um I I grew up in that neighborhood. I I went to Lincoln uh elementary. I think this is one of the areas in Rapid City that has kind of just not really seen that redevelopment and that attention that it needed. And I'd like I'm very encouraging to see this this changing in here. Uh Sam, thank you. And also not only this area, but also the area to the south. Um I think we're going to see that area begin to kind of spruce itself up and regenerate uh because because that's a nice area. Thank you. Pat Rosland. Morning, Sam. I appreciate what you're doing there. I know you probably bid off more than you thought when you bought that property knowing what was in the the antique store. Uh spent a lot of time there. And I really appreciate what you're doing to the neighborhood because I think that group of buildings have seemed like always been there and never changed more or less. and you're going to make a big impression on there, I'm sure. Even though I'm not sure what you're doing, uh I'm sure it's going to be positive and I really thank you for uh putting yourself out there. Appreciate that.

Mike Quazn I'd like to make the motion to reszone. It's It's surprising that it's industrial. I don't know what industry you'd put in there, but uh I would make the motion to reszone with all the spec all the specs. All right. Is there a second to Mike's? Uh Haven seconded that. Alicia. Um I just wanted to note that I need to abstain from this one.

Okay. All right. Any other comments on the motion to approve the reasonzoning? All those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries with Alicia abstaining. All right, we got five minutes. Anything else? No, I think a bunch of us have to run out of here for another meeting. So, thank you today. You put in a lot of hard work. We appreciate it. All right. Anything from the commission? to All right. Karen made the motion to adjurnn.

Pat seconded that motion. All those in favor, please say I. I. That's interesting. Oh, yeah.