Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

morning everyone welcome to the june twenty fifth twenty twenty six zoning board of adjustment meeting starting at seven a m in the morning if any member of the audience wishes to speak to an item on the agenda today there are speaker request forms on the left side of the room please fill out the request with the agenda number of the item you wish to speak to and hand it to the staff seated on that side of the room Public hearing on item number one, the approval of the June 4th, 2026 Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting minutes is hereby opened.

Motion to approve.

Second.

All right, Vince made the motion to approve those minutes, and Mike Quasney seconded that motion. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries. Item number two.

Good morning, Chair, Zoning Board of Adjustment. Item number two before you is your first variance request. This is a variance request to allow gravel or asphalt millings in lieu of hard surfacing for a storage lot. We are at property located at 2526 Marlin Drive. This property currently consists of 3.63 acres and is zoned light industrial. Future land use of this property is employment center. And access to this property is off of Marlin Drive, which is classified as Collector Street on the city's major street plan. What they are proposing to do here is they are proposing to construct a private storage lot that is approximately 103,300 square feet in size. This will be for parking of trailers, semi-tractors, light duty commercial vehicles that are associated with a private business. So this will not be open to the public. They are also proposing to enclose this with a seven foot tall OPEG fence with an automatic gate at that south side to fully restrict access. This gives you also a landscaping plan. Of the property, they are also proposing to install several trees, mostly as you can see along the north side and the east side of the property with large trees. Some smaller trees will also be installed along the Marlin Drive side to try to buffer the visual impact of this. So this property might look a little bit familiar. This was recently rezoned from general commercial to light industrial district. Since they are intending to construct this storage lot on the property, It does involve a component of medical waste transport terminal, if you'll recall, which was deemed to be a use that is more suited for the light industrial district. So this property was successfully rezoned just a few months ago from general commercial district to light industrial district. When we're looking at variances for especially gravel or asphalt millings, we are looking at the impact on the surrounding neighborhood. So when we reviewed this, this is a pretty flat lot. There's not really any super aggressive topographical challenges with this lot. And it does abut Marlin Drive on the south side, as I said, as a collector street. But it also abuts Elkville Road on the north side. which is a principal arterial street on the city's major street plan and is also identified as an entrance corridor in the comprehensive plan. So that we also took into account as well, given the location of this property and the size of the proposed lot. Um, the other thing that we took into account is that there is established residential development, um, almost directly across from this property across Marlin drive and that residential property extends down to east Minnesota street and then further south. So there is quite a bit of established residential development in this area. Um, also when we look at gravel storage yards or asphalt storage yards we look at what kind of equipment or vehicles are going to be traveling on there would they reasonably damage hard surface so with what is expected to be stored on this property It does not appear that anything would be of a heightened weight or tracked equipment that could potentially damage hard surfacing. So this covers approximately 65% of this lot. So when staff reviewed this, we did not feel that this was the minimum adjustment necessary for reasonable use of the land. So staff is recommending denial of this variance application. I do want to draw your attention to the email that we received from the applicant last night. He does address some mitigation measures, some mitigation efforts that they would be willing to put in including the landscaping and the screening. He does also draw attention to some of the other similar type storage yards located around the area. But again, we look at these on a case by case basis, including proximity to roadways and residential development. So I will stand for any questions. The applicant is here in the audience as well. And Mr. Chair, I do believe he would like to speak at some point.

Thank you. We do have a speaker request on this. I'll go to that. I just want to note for all speakers today, we have a three-minute time limit on speakers, but you'll see a timer up on the screen to follow. Will Vanderland, if you'd like to address the commission.

All right. Good morning everybody. My name is Will Vanderlinde. Um, myself and my brother and our wives own this V4 properties. Um, basically the only reason we're buying this property through V4 is so that our family trucking business, medical waste transport can, um, have a successful transfer station since we do quite a bit of business, uh, out here. I'd like to kind of discuss on my thoughts, why we would like to have a gravel yard. Um, basically there's enough tree coverage out there where, I mean, It's almost excessive. We're trying our best to make sure that we keep everything as nice as possible. When we deal with medical waste, everything has to be correct, and safety is a top priority for sure. Also, we got A major concern, I know it sounds bad, but in the horrific chance that there may be a spill, if there is hard surface, potentially it could leak off of our property. If it's gravel or something like that, it can be excavated quickly with very minimal damage. It can be treated properly by our family business. I wouldn't have to deal with... news, I wouldn't have to deal with DNR. I wouldn't have to deal with any of that. That's a major concern. I guess the only example I can say that is with our cars and our houses, we all have insurance. We've looked at insurance carriers to insure this property for just parking. But since V4 is a separate entity from medical waste, a lot of insurance companies don't want to take the risk since they're different facilities. So my only chance of insurance on that situation is making sure that I can keep everything on my property if something bad was to happen. And our father started this company back in the eighties and there's never been a situation where we've had to excavate. But like I say, I'd rather be safe than sorry because, um, medical waste is a very serious situation. And, um, we handle almost 6 million pounds a year and we don't have very many complaints that I can think of off the top of my head. Um, other than that, when it comes to snow removal, we all know that rap city gets more ice and snow and you know, you put asphalt or concrete, it's dangerous. If you try to slide around, gravel's a lot safer. And the environmental impact, as I was driving through town, I saw many fuel trucking companies, they all have gravel out. And I'm sure the reason they do that is because of the environmental impact if they also had a spill. And I feel like that's how I need to be treated as well. I mean, better safe than sorry. I guess that's all I have to say.

Thank you. If there's questions, we'll call you back up. Great. Thank you.

Yep.

All right. Anything from the commission on this or the board, I guess? Kelly?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Question on this. To me, storage lot kind of refers to a sedentary lot, not a lot of traffic. Is this more of a depot, as in what's the traffic count in and out? Is this a high-trafficked area for your intended use?

We will have about three or four semi-trailers sitting there. One is for overflow for, like, empty containers. We have a straight truck guy that... does a daily route. Our semi-driver comes out every other day, twice a week, somewhere around there, and they truck it all back to Sioux Falls to our treatment facility. And then we don't have any people that are renting spots from us at the moment, but ideally, whatever we can really find.

So it would be all contained within your business, private, in-house, I guess you're saying. You wouldn't have renters or leases in and out with traffic on that lot?

As of right now, no. But we've got plenty of spots. I think there's like 70 spots on this property. We're going to take up four or five, and then I would like to rent every other spot to help with the payments and stuff like that.

All right. Thanks for the clarification.

All right. Anything else from the board?

Mr. Chair? Yeah. The comment made by the applicant regarding if, in the case of a spill, is a concerning element for this use. Morgan Twomley, our environmental planner, is with us today. And if you would allow, I think Morgan could share some information on how gravel may or may not address that spill issue.

Morgan, if you're willing.

Sorry, just really briefly, the reason that we worry about gravel as it pertains to air quality is because of the fines associated with it. Similarly, that can impact the ability for medical waste to infiltrate into the ground. So I'm not really sure how well that will actually help the applicant in making sure that everything is contained to the property. The idea of medical waste getting into the ground is a little bit concerning, especially near this neighborhood to the south.

OK. Thank you. Mike ?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. On that medical waste, I'm sure that the chances of it happening other places other than just on this parking lot exist. Is there an established way to handle it? And normally you're going to be on asphalt or concrete or something, I would assume, if it should occur. It seems like asphalt or a hard surface would be better suited to take care of that so that it doesn't get done into the ground. That would be my concern. Thanks, Mike.

Mr. Chairman, thank you. These are always hard, and we try to be consistent with the recommendations that we bring to you. Some of the things we look at is what is the proximity of this property to in relationship to a highly traveled arterial gateway into the city. We also look at the proximity to residential because we do want that air quality to be maintained to the highest degree possible. When we brought the proposal forward, to you to rezone this to light industrial. And Cassie, maybe if you could go back to the zoning. There was a lot of good discussion and concern. Should it be light industrial? Should we leave it general commercial? because of that residential component. So the compromise was, let's go ahead and make it light industrial, but ensure that we are protecting the residential on the other side of Marlin, as well as the impact of any industrial use adjacent to the arterial street. But again, these are always difficult. And we understand for the applicant's point of view, it is a great cost differential to have to hard surface. There are many, many storage yards within the city that are legal non-conforming. Those that have come forward in the last 20-some years, we do try to be very consistent with the recommendations that we bring to you if there is a variance request to gravel those. And I think Cassie did a really good job spelling out what those parameters are.

Pat Roseland. Thank you. Question, is most of this medical waste, is it liquid or hard or is it more paper? Is it, what is the basically, what are you putting through there so that if you, I guess if you lose some paper products, whatever, and it's not treated obviously, none of this stuff is treated. What's the difference of stuff like blowing on there? I know you've got fences, but still, it's very windy out there. And I'm really concerned about probably more liquid than the other that you have. But could you explain a little bit what the medical waste is?

Yes, absolutely. So none of this material ever touches the ground. Our straight truck backs up to a semi-trailer and just gets transferred from a delivery truck to a 53-foot trailer. So it never touches the ground. The DOT tells us that we have to have it in a transport container, which is basically a 32-gallon garbage can. If there's any liquid, it gets into a sharps container, which is considered a non-puncturable container. So just in that aspect, it's contained twice if there is any liquid. There is some cloth, like the blue surgery cloth stuff, quite a bit of that. Usually that's not contaminated with any blood unless they have a major deal, but still it was used in a surgery, so it's considered medical waste. But they got other things like sharps, which is your needles, and like I say, those all go in sharps containers, non-puncturable containers, and then it goes into our DOT certified containers. So it's actually into non-puncturable containers. is how that works. So if there is any liquid or this or that, but like I say, it never touches the ground. It never realistically gets out of a vehicle because the truck is just butted up to the trailer. It takes them like 20, 30 minutes to unload the truck into the semi trailer. It gets off the property within 48 hours. Um, my family's owned this business since I was a little baby and I can't think of any problems that we've ever had. You know, it's just, It's just a nasty sounding word and everybody gets worried about it. But I mean, we wouldn't be in business for 30 plus years if we did it the wrong way. And you know, we have a little bit of slope to that grade. So that's why I don't necessarily like that hard surface because If it does start to run, it will not run with gravel. Because we have had cleanups that we've dealt with with geotech and other situations that wasn't involved with us that we had to treat that material. And I would rather run gravel through my $400,000 shredder than a bunch of asphalt.

Thank you. I know there's a substance, I can't remember what it is, a powder that you can add to the liquid. Do you do that before you move it to Sioux Falls or is it transported to Sioux Falls in a liquid condition?

We don't handle any of the material. We handle the container for safety reasons. Wherever it comes from, the hospital or the clinic or the school or the nursing station or the fire department or wherever, all of those are our customers here in town, and we don't touch anything but the transport container. So I would say that liability is more on the customer or the client, and they all have extreme training as well, so there is no... Johnny do it quick this way or halfway that way. It's all done correctly because we have DNR people, we have state people, we have federal people. They all show up constantly throughout the year. We just had DNR show up last week and they said, no problem. I can give you Nick's cell phone number right now. I mean, we have a very good standing with how we handle material. It's important to us. It's our family business.

Yeah, thank you very much. Appreciate that.

Eric Hikas.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sorry to grill you at the questions. I think you answered mine. Are you transferring things from truck to truck on this site? Is that what I'm hearing? Is something being pulled out of one container and into another?

Nothing gets moved out of containers. The container just goes from our Freightliner delivery truck to our 53 utility trailer or whatever. So he just dollies it Nothing. No lids ever get opened. We're not digging through this stuff. My driver assigned confidentiality paperwork It just goes from container from the truck container to the semi and then back to our yard Sioux Falls That answers my question.

Thank you. Yep.

Thanks All right anything else from the board Mike quasi I

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The other thing that was mentioned is that this is going to be leased to others, so the traffic flow is a concern. So I guess I would make a motion to, I guess we have to deny. Is that what the recommendation is of the staff?

Can I comment on that real quick, though?

I'm sorry, sir, let me finish this here.

With the stipulations that are in?

I think it's just straight denial, no stipulations.

Okay.

All right. Mike Kwasny made the motion to deny this variance, and there was a second from Eric Heikes.

Mr. Chair.

Vicki?

You will need to cite criteria specific to the ordinance as an example that reasonable use of the property is not being denied as a result of denying this variance, and that it does limit the adverse impact or injurious impact to the adjacent properties by preserving the pavement.

With that said, Vicki, is there anything I would put those stipulations in? How about being close to residential? Is that any effect?

Absolutely. The arterial street location and proximity to residential could be cited as well. But the criteria specific to the regulations would be reasonable use and adverse impact. And then, again, you can validate with additional information, such as proximity.

Okay. So I would do the two that you stated and then the proximity to existing residential.

Friendly amendment to second.

Okay. Mr. Vandalendi, if you have a quick comment on this.

We have, I think it's 88.7 foot of that concrete before we actually get to the gate. So we wouldn't be dragging any gravel. onto the street. Like I say, right now we have zero tenants except for medical waste. I would recommend the speed limit for five miles an hour. We've talked to multiple companies here in Rapid City that do spray to keep the dust down to a minimum. You know, they recommend doing that every quarter, which would be every three months. But like I said before, my main concern is, you know, Gravel is a way better option just by driving through here. Everybody has flammable liquids and AMG oil and Harms oil. They're all alongside the interstate. I mean, they're dealing with the same environmental potential problems as I am. And I just don't want anything going off our property if there's ever an issue. Like I say, we haven't had any issues. But I mean, I have to have some sort of insurance. And that's really the only type of insurance that I can provide for myself for safety. I don't need to get in trouble. And if something bad happens, that's the only way I can handle it is through gravel. That's the best way to do it. And we've got plenty of tree coverage. We've got 100 different ways to keep dust down.

Thank you.

Vince? Oh, thank you, Mr. Chair. And as the motion maker pointed out, and as Vicky pointed out earlier, when we reviewed this light industrial area, or to rezone it to a light industrial area, the concerns remain with the homes that are nearby. Not that Mr. Bandling's point isn't well made. And again, I thank you for being here to let us see that and let us hear that. I appreciate it. Thank you.

Mike Kwasny. As the motion maker, I want him to understand that I also understand where he stands, but there are, I guess if we needed gravel, I guess there's other areas of town that we could put this lot or whatever, but there are options, so I guess that's what I would state.

All right, anything else from the board of adjustment? The motion is to deny. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. All right, item number three.

Item number three before you is a variance to increase the maximum height of a detached garage from 15 feet to 21.8 feet. This is on property located at 4670 Cliff Drive. This property consists of about 3.36 acres, currently zoned low density residential district. Future land use is low density neighborhood. And access to this property is off of Cliff Drive, which is classified as a local street. What the applicant is proposing to do here, there is currently a single family dwelling and a detached garage on this property. The detached garage currently has a flat roof. They are looking to add a second story onto this existing garage to be used as a personal exercise room. That second story will bring the median height of this detached garage to about 21.8 feet. In the low-density residential district, detached structures are limited to a height of 15 feet, so that is the need for this variance request. That height increase is about a 45% increase from the standard. However, when staff was looking at this one, this existing garage was built in 1965. You can see it on this picture. It's that white box located towards the center of the property. It puts it about 220 feet from Cliff Drive and over 130 feet from all of the neighboring properties. It is substantially separated from the surrounding dwellings and from the street view. In addition, there are, as you can see in this picture, several large mature trees that do provide screening of this detached garage as it exists right now, which would also help to mitigate the impacts of a second story onto this garage. And then finally, The garage as it currently exists about six feet of the wall that faces cliff drive So the street view side of it is currently buried into a hill because of topography So that further helps mitigate the impact Visually of a second story. So let me show you this is what they are proposing to add as a second story and This rear elevation right here, this is what you would see from Cliff Drive, and this is what would be seen from the neighboring property to the west. So you can see it does have some residential character to it. As you can see, it's just going to be an open space exercise room. This identifies it as a man cave. This is how the garage currently exists today. So as you can see, it does have that flat roof on it right now. The new addition of the second story would add a pitched roof to it. Here's the house in relation to the garage. This is the backside of that garage. It's kind of a dark picture, but this right here is where the garage currently sits. Again, another showing just the, the minor separation between the house and the garage. And this is looking at that garage from cliff drive. So you can see the garage sits right here. A second story would put it roughly in line with the roof line of the existing house. Um, those trees right there do help screen it. Um, so when staff was looking at this one, we felt that this one was minimally impactful, um, to the neighborhood. does not seem to be that it would be injurious to the street view or the views of the surrounding properties. It does seem to be appropriate for the area. So staff is recommending approval of this variance request. No stipulations associated with this one.

Thank you.

I'm going to make a motion. I know it's a little quick, but it looks pretty straightforward. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Do we want to do any discussion before? We can discuss a motion.

OK. Let's discuss the motion then. I'm going to move approval of this item, citing the minimal adjustment necessary and also the minimal impact to the neighborhood because of the tree buffer and the distance from right-of-way.

All right. Eric made a motion, as he stated. And Mike Quazney seconded that motion.

Further comments from Eric.

OK. Mike Kwasny. To Eric's point, I think this is pretty, this is just going to look like an addition to the house almost. It's pretty, I think this is an easy one.

So I think the title of man cave is a little inappropriate, though. More like a man nest or maybe a man loft, really, because it's on the second. Pat Roseland.

Thank you. Christopher Vicki, have they mentioned putting restrooms in that upper floor or not, since it's a man cave? There might be a lot of living conditions going in there.

Therefore plan does not indicate that there's going to be any sort of restroom in here.

Okay. Thank you.

Appreciate that Okay, in addition they could never convert this to an accessory dwelling unit because it's in an accessory structure and a second floor and accessory dwelling units cannot be at that location looking down on the neighborhood and So it would always have to be used as just extra space for the residents that live on the property.

All right. So the motion on the floor for item three is to approve the variance. Any other comments? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Are there any in opposition? All right. Motion carries. Item number four.

All right, item number four, last one. This is a variance to reduce the minimum required parking from 155 spaces to 80 spaces. This property should look pretty familiar to you. We've seen it a few times here in the last few months. This is property located at 780 Mountain View Road, currently zoned General Commercial District, future land use of mixed use commercial. And access to this property can be taken a few different ways. Jackson Boulevard, Mountain View Road are a few ways to access this. So to give a little refresher on this property, since we have seen it a few times, the most recent thing that we saw this for was for the variance request for the greenhouse that is associated with the hardware store, the seasonal greenhouse and Christmas tree lot. So that variance was just approved in April of this year. Prior to that, in 2018, there was a zoning exception approved on this property that administratively reduced the minimum required parking on the property from 187 spaces to 155 spaces. When the variance in April was approved, that was approved to allow 23 parking spaces to be used for the seasonal greenhouse and the Christmas tree lot. As you might recall, when we analyzed the variance request for the greenhouse part of What was brought forward is the parking agreements that currently existed on that property? So there are still two standing parking agreements on this property one is with Safeway They have reciprocal access parking between the Safeway property to the north and this parking lot. There is also a parking agreement with the future Chick-fil-A that is going south of this property where the old Sonic used to be. That dedicates four parking spaces to Chick-fil-A, but also allows Chick-fil-A to have their two stacking lanes on the west side of this property, if you'll recall from when we reviewed that. So going back to the greenhouse variance part of that variance, what they did, there used to be, or there was a parking agreement in place, a shared parking agreement with Kelly's sports lounge sports lounge, which you see to the west. Um, during the variance process for the greenhouse, um, the applicant terminated that parking agreement, um, in order to help assist with getting the variance for the greenhouse. So that was terminated as of April 30th of this year. The termination of that agreement put Kelly's Sports Lounge in or out of compliance with the parking requirements and also with the requirements of their conditional use permit. so that is what is bringing this variance forward is the applicant is seeking to re-enter into a shared parking agreement with kelly's they are asking to allow 75 spaces to be leased to kelly's that is based on the average need that they see they have done a parking lot analysis on their own time a three-month analysis of parking spaces within the parking lot as it exists right now. Um, so with the four tenants that are currently there, those four tenants would have access to 80 parking spaces if this variance were approved. Um, so when we were looking at this one, um, one of the things that we looked at is how much parking does Kelly's need per the requirement. So according to Kelly's conditional use permit, they need 68 parking spaces. They currently have 27 parking spaces on site. So they are deficient by 41 parking spaces. So when we were looking at this, we were looking at they need 41 to be in compliance with their conditional use permit. The applicant is proposing to give them 70. So we looked at is that the minimum adjustment necessary? Staff does not feel that that is the minimum adjustment necessary because they only need the 41 spaces another thing that we were looking at is that we have The current owner of Kelly's is actively pursuing alternative parking outside of this parking lot He is actively pursuing purchasing Property elsewhere and developing his own parking lot so that he does not have to have shared parking agreements with folks But that will take several months to come to fruition, but he is actively pursuing that I do want to point out that because Kelly's is out of compliance currently with parking requirements and their conditional use permit I do want it to be known that standard procedure for properties that are out of compliance is is to allow them to continue operating as long as they are making progress towards resolving their noncompliance. So in this case, as long as Kelly's continues to make progress towards securing alternative parking, the city would not actively pursue shutting down the business or restricting the business or anything along those lines. I think it's very important to note that in this case. The other thing that we looked at is whether or not this is truly a necessity. So there are alternative parking areas, I guess, that Kellys could pursue currently. The other concern that we have with this, and I have it in a slide here. This is their parking calculations. I'll go back to that in just a second. But I want to point this out. So this is the future reconfiguration of the parking lot based on what we know about Chick-fil-A when Chick-fil-A will be built. So that will come with a reconfiguration of the current parking lot, which will or is expected to bring in a net increase of parking spaces. However, with it allowing the two stacking lanes on the west side of this property, Any of Kelly's patrons using this parking lot would have to cross through those two drive-through lanes with no identified crosswalk, no identified means of, please don't run me over. And so that is a safety concern that we did review. Also, with the future Chick-fil-A coming in, it is unknown at this time what impact that will have on this parking lot and on the circulation on the access in this parking lot historically when you look at at chick-fil-a's they do draw a significant demand we discussed that when we were talking about chick-fil-a's variants so it's unknown what impact that will have So when staff was looking at the variance application that is in front of you right now, we did consider that unknown factor because if the impact of reconfiguring the parking lot and bringing in a new business does have more of an impact on this parking lot, what does that do to Kelly's in the future or even the greenhouse in the future? So staff looked at this property holistically in terms of what has already been approved, what exists right now, and whether or not this is just overextending this parking lot. And that's where staff landed with this one, is this is overextending a parking lot that already has various factors going on. There's future impacts to it. So that is ultimately why staff is recommending denial of this variance request right now. This will give you an idea of the parking counts. that they did. This is their parking analysis that they did daily. They went out, took parking counts at various times throughout the day for about a three month period through Memorial Day. and kind of came up with this summary table that they Are using to justify that 80 parking spaces is sufficient for the four tenants of the property They do also acknowledge that if any of those tenants were to change and require a higher amount of parking that that would also impact the shared parking agreements that they have on the property and could result in a needing to renegotiate or potentially terminate some of those shared parking agreements as well. So with that, I will stand for any questions. I know you have a couple of speaker requests from the applicant as well.

Thank you. We do have two requests, one from Pat Vidal and one from Jeremy Orstad. If you'd like to dress together or separately, you can choose. You each get three minutes. You can take that as two times three and six minutes if you do it both at the same time, or you can do it separately. Your choice. And once you're up, just identify yourself and your relationship.

Thank you for hearing me today. My name is Patrick Vidal. I'm the co-manager of JB Properties, who owns the strip mall and parking lot in question. First, I'd like to say that we are proposing that this be a temporary lease. We want it to... not be needed by the time Chick-fil-A opens up their business. We have several concerns with the community development's minimum required parking requirements that they say Kelley's needs. Their number came from a conditional use permit that was was done, I believe, in 2004. At that time, the building was either 7,000 square feet or less. Since that time, the county records show that two additions have been made to the building. I don't know. They didn't describe what those additions were. But I do know that since that time, Kelly's has added significant outside seating to its restaurant. I went there Saturday and counted 75 chairs around tables outside. For that reason, obviously Kelly's needs more parking than what they did in 2004. By my count, adding up all the areas that were used for that outdoor seating plus their building, they need 95 spots. And that would mean they need to find an additional 68 spots to meet those minimum required parking requirements. Our study showed that Kelly's truly uses our parking lot and oftentimes uses parking greater than 75 spaces. Our tenants, we did a study of our tenants' use of the parking lot when Kelly's was closed. The high use we saw at any time was 60 spots. So we thought 80 should be enough for them. So 80 plus 75 is 155. The numbers I'm giving you for Kellys, when the Kellys need 75 spots, that's with the greenhouse standing. So what we're saying is that based on what their minimum required parking should really be, And what our parking lot study shows is actually being used by Kelly's. They need an agreement that would provide them 75 spots. Again, it would be a temporary agreement. We don't want it to last into Chick-fil-A's operation. I'll let Kelly's talk now about the progress of their search for replacement parking.

Thank you, Mr. Vidal. We might call you up if we have questions.

Hi, my name's Jeremy Offset. I'm with Kelly's Sports Lounge. I am in the process of brining property to the west side of Kelly's, which would be the subway property adjacent to Kelly's. Here is my letter from the bank that shows that I'm in process of purchasing. Here's my purchase agreement. Hopefully by the middle of July I'll have everything all settled up and done and closed on the property that I can go back through and figure out parking structure and all that others what not and then get back with Pat and the city and everything else to Get more parking for Kelly's So me and Pat we've been working we see everything that we've been doing for the last 25 30 years has been working You know, we made it work with the greenhouse going on right now. You know, like I said, this is just going to be a temporary until I can get everything figured out with what I got going on. So I'd take it into consideration to approve this variance for us.

Thank you, that's good information. Likewise, we might call you up if we have further questions. I guess I want to jump in with one for staff. Is this a little early to be considering this variance if we're shortly a month or two away from making large changes again to the parking situation there?

And I'm referring to the proposed purchase of property.

Vicki?

Mr. Chair, I think for Kelly's Sports Lounge, they need this parking secured. And while Pat is notorious for being a great neighbor, that's revenue that he's losing. Because right now, Kelly's patrons are parking on his parking lot. So I don't think that we can wait to see if the subway property can be purchased. Otherwise, we've just got parking violations going on and that becomes a civil matter. So Pat would have to post it no parking and then tow those vehicles. And I think he is trying to be a good neighbor, maybe a little too good because he's wanting to give every spare extra parking that he believes he has to his adjacent business.

That's a great compliment. By the way, I would love to be known as notorious for being a good neighbor. So when we looked at the greenhouse, we put a timeline on that one, right? We've got a year where we see how it works and we look at it again. Am I correct in that?

Mr. Chair, you are correct. Our big unknown is what will be the impact of Chick-fil-A. We've seen across the nation what some communities are dealing with years after a Chick-fil-A opens. They have a loyal customer base. And I think you heard from Pat as well, that is somewhat concerning. And we know we've got about a year between now and when we think there will be a grand opening for that Chick-fil-A. Just for clarification, while... Cassie explained that we think this is too big of a variance. We could get behind a variance where if Pat wants to enter into a parking agreement to allow that 41 spaces. And mind you, when we look at the building permits that were issued over the years, a lot of that was for uses that didn't calculate out at 10 per thousand. Regardless, what we do know is that Kelly's is a very popular area. after work location. So maybe the 10 per thousand isn't enough for their fan base. But that was one we thought we could support. That appeared to be the minimum adjustment necessary. In case, let's say, one of Pat's existing uses should change their operational plan, create a larger customer base, he's still reserving the parking that he needs for his uses. And we visited with Pat about this. We met with both of these gentlemen. They've been fantastic to work with. We continue to remind Pat that he needs to protect his tenants first. But in the case of the 41, we also thought that if we did get behind that one, it would be for one year only. And Cassie, what was the other? Part of that?

That the city be party to the shared parking agreement so we know if it gets extended or terminated. Thank you.

All right. Good information. Mike Kwasny?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess in when this came before us before it was brought up about the the problems if we have the tree lot or whatever it is that it's going to create the problem I think we knew that this was if we deny this And they do nothing. They don't put up anything that says this is private parking or whatever. Can it just happen? I mean, the parking is just going to take place because we have a situation where he's purchased land. I guess I'm confused on the need. I think to your point, Eric, is it seems this is just a temporary thing. And I think it's going to happen. The parking is going to happen without it. I guess I'm confused for the need for this variance.

Mr.

Chair? Vicky?

So not meaning to speak on Pat Vidal's half, however, you are correct. Right now, without disagreement, patrons of Kelly's are parking on this property. by granting a variance that may be more of a minimum adjustment. That allows the two property owners to enter into a shared parking agreement. And then that allows Pat and his team to capture that revenue. Because remember, there's maintenance on this parking lot that falls solely on Pat. So I think that was kind of the compromise that we were trying to work out with them, is that would keep Kelly's open. It would be a one-year agreement. Hopefully by then, Jeremy has secured the purchase of the subway property, and he no longer needs to reach outside of his land for the parking that he needs for his business.

I guess I'm back. I'm pretty sure that they could come to this agreement without this variance. It sounds like they're good neighbors. I just am. When we grant a variance like this, it just seems like it's more of a, it should be more of a long-term solution and that's what we normally do for variances. This one seems just a little offbeat to me and I'm pretty sure they could come to an agreement without this.

Mr. Chair, Mike makes valid comments. This is a very unique property. Between Safeway, the four businesses that Pat has, Chick-fil-A and now Kelly's, we've got a lot of moving parts and So it is not unusual that over the last 30 some years, that from time to time, we will have to put a time limit on a variance. And what we saw with the tree lot and greenhouse variance, that variance was granted for one year. And we want to come back and assess what is the impact of Chick-fil-A. Following that protocol, you could do something similar to assist Kelly's in the interim while We're working on different solutions to get Kelly's parking.

OK. On that same line, though, we're recommending denial. So if we deny, what I guess is going to happen is it's going to continue. It doesn't affect Kelly's if we deny it right away, does it? Because he has parking that he's trying to establish.

Mr. Chair?

Vicki?

The variance was advertised to allow 80 parking spaces to be leased to Kellys. Without re-advertising, you in this meeting today can either approve that request or approve any number less than that request. You couldn't approve more, but it falls within the scope of what did get advertised. So you do have options to keep this moving forward.

I guess I've made my voice known, so I am still a little confused where we're at on this.

Mr. Chair, can I? Yeah, Kathy. So I should have said it earlier, but it might provide a little bit of clarification for you. that when the greenhouse and Christmas tree lot variants got approved, it got approved, like Vicky mentioned, for a period of one year, but it also got approved with a stipulation that they could not enter into any more shared parking agreements without the city's approval. So that is also what's driving this variance as well, is that stipulation that was put on the prior variance, if that helps clarify why this variance is partly here.

All right, Karen. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If we decide to deny this, it actually puts Kelley's out of compliance, if I understand that correctly, because they won't have the correct number of parking spaces to date. To me, it seems like 80 is maybe more than that we need to have a variance for because way it works. And we could lower that number if we decide to approve a variance of any kind. And we could do that with a stipulation that whether it's a year or six months or whatever we would need to make sure that Kellys get additional parking. And then if they did that, then that variance If we have a time limit on it, when the time limit came up, we wouldn't need the variance because he's got other parking. Sounding right?

You are. And the variance would actually expire after that one year timeline, or whatever timeline you choose to put on it.

OK. Well, to me, that seems like the right thing to do, because we can't just deny it and leave Kelly out there hanging. So I'm going to make a motion to approve a variance with less numbers. I don't know what that number should be, 40 or whatever we decided. I can't remember.

We're going to have to decide for a motion. I know, but they talked about lowering the number. They need 41. 41.

So we could approve the variance for 41 parking spaces and have a time limit of, I think, six months is maybe more than we need.

we have another one that's a a year variant you know in the greenhouse i would put it on the same timeline yeah which is what staff thinks

Mr. Chair, to allow Kelly's to enter into a parking agreement where the city would also be a party to it for a period of one year, then your motion should be to reduce the minimum required parking from 155 spaces to 114 spaces. And that would allow then Pat to enter into this agreement with Kelly's. And then the conditions on it would be that that would be for a period of one year.

Was there another one, Cassie?

Yes. So I have a couple of stipulations. The first one would be that the city of Rapid City shall be notified to the shared parking agreement with Kelly's Sports Lounge and be notified of amendments, terminations, or extensions to the agreement. And the amount of lease parking shall be limited to 41 spaces. And then the variance shall be limited to a period of one year from the date of approval. During such time, Kelly's Sports Lounge shall secure alternative parking to meet their minimum parking requirements or a subsequent variance would need to be obtained.

I like all those things you just said. That is my motion.

All right. Pat Roseland seconded Karen's motion. Discussion on the motion. Mike Crosney.

Is there any way, I guess, I understand the year, is there any way to tie it to the Chick-fil-A, the development that's going in that is directly once the Chick-fil-A development has been established that that's the time limit?

I think you do need to be more date specific, but I think from what we heard with Jeremy and he showed you kind of the letter, I don't believe he's going to need that full year to secure his own parking. OK. For the motion maker citing criteria, there is a provision that speaks to the granting of the variances in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this title, which is Title 17. And I think that really captures the essence of what we're all trying to do here. We have successful businesses at this location. We want to partner with them to ensure that they remain successful. And I think this is a good show of faith to these property owners. that we're trying to work towards a temporary solution to ensure that we keep all doors open.

I'll add to your last comment.

Sorry. I just turned you off. One more time.

OK. Okay, thank you. I'll add Vicki's last comment to my motion so that we make sure that we've got everything together. Hopefully Andrea can keep track. Okay, thanks.

Pat, does that work for your second? Okay. Eric Heikas? Yes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to applaud the diplomacy and collaboration and cooperation by the various parties. Also, applause to Jeremy for being proactive in securing his parking and purchasing the subway facility. Thank you.

All right, the motion is to approve a variance to reduce the parking to 114 spots from 155. Any further comments on the motion? All right, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? The motion carries. That's our last item on the Zoning Board of Adjustment. I'd look for, oh, there it is. Karen made the motion to adjourn. Vince seconded that motion. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All right, we will now commence the Rapid City Planning Commission meeting for June 25th, 2026, starting at eight o'clock in the morning. Again, if any members of the audience wishes to speak to an item on the agenda today, there are speaker request forms on the table along the left wall. Hey, guys. I'm sorry. If you need to talk, if you need to talk, if you could step out to the hallway, I'd appreciate it. If any audience member wishes to speak at the microphone about any agenda items today, please grab a speaker request form from the staff, fill it out and hand it back and we'll make sure you get to speak on that item. Items one through seven 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. Are there any items one through seven that staff would like removed today for separate consideration?

Item number four, please. Okay.

Are there any items one through seven that any planning commissioner would like removed for separate consideration? And are there any items one through seven that any audience member would like removed from separate consideration? We are pulling four. All right, the chair then entertain a motion to approve items one through seven in accordance with staff's recommendation with the exception of item four.

Motion to approve. All right, Vince made his motion.

Is there a second? Karen seconded that motion. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number four.

Mr. Chair, item number four is a preliminary subdivision plan to create 14 lots in an area known as Black Hills Industrial Center. We do have an audience member today that has asked to speak to this item. We'll listen to that conversation, and then if there's questions that we can assist with, we can make a brief presentation at that time or answer the questions directly.

Okay. Thank you. Laura Armstrong, if you'd like to come up.

Good morning and thank you. Just have some questions regarding item four. I'm looking through the attachments and through the agenda. The questions I have, we'll just start with what is the specific use in these areas? What's that going to be for? And we can maybe just start with that. Do you want all my questions or do I just do question by question?

Probably easier if you just do all the questions, and then we'll try to get through it.

So I didn't see the specific use, so if you could just point me in that direction, or what it is for. And are these rezoning requests for data centers? I did hear something about it being a battery center, and I'm wondering if that is just synonymous with data center. And I want to make sure if there's adequate public notice. We'll just start with those three, please.

And thank you.

Maybe we could pull up the zoning map.

Yeah, that would be great. Those are great questions, and thank you for them. So a couple things going on. Right now, the property is already zoned both heavy industrial and light industrial. This is actually a preliminary subdivision plan application. So it's the step one of a three-step planning process. We call it the what if. If we subdivide, what will be required? So as a part of what's on the agenda today, it's letting the applicant know that as a part of doing this, these streets need to be constructed to this standard. These utilities need to be extended. Drainage needs to be accommodated. As a part of a plat, we do not have the ability to ask or typically do not know what those future uses would be. But we can always look at what is in the zoning regulations and what that would entail. So both in light industrial and heavy industrial, a data center would be a permitted use in the existing zoning. But that could happen today outside of this plot if a building permit were to come forward. This is just to create 14 transferable lots that would be of a size and dimension that make them marketable for future industrial uses. And we too, when we reviewed the TIF, and I believe you may have actually been on city council at the time, when we reviewed a TIF for this area, There was a battery manufacturing facility that was identified as maybe a future user. Not sure where that is in the process today, but what we do know is that at this point, we're ensuring that the infrastructure would be in place before any of these lots could be sold and or developed. And that infrastructure includes utilities, streets, and drainage. Does that answer the question?

Absolutely. So if I wanted to know that specifically, I would go to Dream Designs or those involved with this BHIC.

Mr. Chair? Vicki? That would be an excellent opportunity. And that developer is usually very readily accessible to share whatever he has. We also do a document each week. We call it the rap sheet. And any time we get a building permit, at the very earliest stages, we put it on the rap sheet. We post it online. Our communication coordinator puts out a PSA on it. We directly send it to the council members. And it says, if you're seeing a shovel of dirt get turned, here's what the end user is going to be as a result of that.

Excellent. Thank you.

Mr. Chair? Yeah, Vicki? Our recommendation is to approve the preliminary subdivision plans with stipulations noted in the staff report.

OK. Eric Kikas?

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for the clarification, Vicki, and the question, Laura.

I'm particularly interested in this development because of the proximity to rail. and the potential for value-added industrial, value-added agriculture. And I continue to be a proponent of this. So it's good to see this coming forward. Thank you.

All right. Anything else from the commission?

I'll second too.

Karen. I make a motion to approve the preliminary subdivision plan as presented with stipulations. OK.

Karen made the motion, and I think Vince seconded the motion. Any discussion on the motion to approve? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number eight.

All right, item number eight before you. This is a final plan development overlay to allow a physical therapy clinic. So we are at property located at 2425 Haynes Avenue. This property is currently zoned General Commercial District with a plan development designation on it. Future land use of this property is mixed-use commercial. Access to this property is off of Pahasapa Road. It does front Haynes Avenue. However, access cannot be off of Haynes Avenue because there is a non-access easement along that full street frontage. So what the applicant is proposing here is they are proposing to construct a physical therapy clinic that would have three physical therapists doing appointment-based one-on-one services. So that is a permitted use in the general commercial district The applicant is requesting three exceptions as part of this final plan development overlay The first exception that they're requesting is a parking reduction by code they are required to provide 14 on-site parking spaces They are requesting an exception to reduce that number down to 10 parking spaces. That is based off of two factors. Number one, they will have three physical therapists, appointment-based only. So maximum number of people, including the overlap of coming and going, would be nine on the property. They are proposing 10. The other justification for that is there is currently a bus stop located directly adjacent to this property as well. That does give people another means of getting to the property, another mode of transportation. So staff did not see any concern with reducing that number of onsite parking spaces I do want to point out that that exception, if granted, will come with the stipulation that if anything in the future comes into this building that increases that parking or changes that operational plan to where it's no longer just one-on-one appointment-based type situation, then they would have to come in for a major amendment with a separate parking exception if needed. The second exception that they are requesting is a setback reduction to the south property line So with this property currently being zoned general commercial district the property to the south right now is zoned low density residential by code They do have to provide a 15-foot rear yard setback to residentially zoned property That property to the south is not developed residentially. Let me go back to an aerial photo as well that will kind of show you. So this is the property that we're looking at. It's this little section in between the yellow here and this parking lot. So you can't really see it on this map, but It currently contains just a small MDU Montana Dakota utilities facility on that east side right there. The whole property is owned by Montana Dakota utilities. The configuration of that lot would realistically prevent it from ever being developed residentially, at least not right here. It does extend west further and get a little bit larger on the west side. But in this location, it would be realistically inhibited from being developed residentially. In addition, the future land use of that property is mixed-use commercial. So when staff looked at this setback reduction, they're asking to reduce this from 15 feet to nine feet on that South property line. Um, if this, if that South property were zoned in accordance with the future land use plan. So if it were zoned general commercial district, no setback would be required on that rear property line by code. Um, so because of those two factors, staff does feel that the setback reduction from 15 feet to nine feet is an appropriate request, um, and minimally impactful. The third exception that they are asking is for a fencing modification. So by code in the general commercial district property lines that abut residential zoning are required to have a screening fence installed. So for this property in particular, they need to install a screening fence on the west property line and on the south property line. They are proposing to install a six foot tall chain link fence with black opaque slats along the full property line on the west side. So that is what currently abuts residential zoning and development. On the south property line, they are requesting a modification to have that fence extend from this West property corner along the South property line, but then tie into this Southwest corner of the building rather than having it extend the full length of the South property line. Um, again, staff looked at that in relation to what exists, um, on the South property. And there again, if that property were zoned in accordance with the future land use plan, there would be no screening fence required at all on that South property line. So there again, staff felt that their request to modify that screening fence to not have it extend the full length of that South property line, um, seemed appropriate and a reasonable request. Um, so overall staff found that this, um, would be an appropriate use, um, and location for what they are proposing. Um, this is moving and existing physical therapy clinic. This is currently located just a little bit further South on Haynes Avenue and one of the shopping centers. So this is just allowing them to expand into their own space onto their own property. So staff is ultimately recommending approval with the stipulations noted in the staff report. This is some elevation drawings of what the building is going to look like. There's a 3D rendering. So fits into the character of the neighborhood. Their landscaping plan does meet all landscaping requirements. And here's the property as it exists today. So as you can see, just a flat property. Here's that bus stop. um that currently exists there and then proper notification was posted i will stand for any questions i'm not sure if there's anyone in the audience today all right thank you anything from the commission seems like a pretty straightforward application all right uh with the stipulation with the stipulations i did in the staff report all right is there a second events motion

Thanks, Pat. Any discussion on the motion to approve? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? The motion carries. Item number nine.

Good morning, chair, planning commission. I'm going to go through an overview of five re-zones. They're on two parcels north of Mall Drive and east of Haynes Avenue. And then we'll go, this one I think will go a little faster than the one that we had to do last time that had multiple re-zones. We'll go through the overall zoning. and then we'll go through each one individually. I'll start with 26RZ14. At the end of this presentation, we can kind of talk overarching. If you have questions, the applicant and their agent is in the audience. And then from there, we can go into that individual review of each rezone. The rezones are split up because there's multiple zoning districts going to another zoning district and we do a one for one. So right now, It's a little hard to tell, but just on the southern portion here, this is part of the same property. It's currently zoned general commercial, and we'll see that with the zoning map. But that is proposed to be retained. 26, RZ14, which we'll talk about first, is a rezoning from general commercial to light industrial. 15 is from general ag to light industrial. So the gray is where the light industrial will be in the future. Again, this would be general commercial down here. And then office commercial to the north. This portion is general ag, this portion is Medium density residential there have been multiple kind of proposals along this property is how it got rezoned that way in the first place that fell through So looking at the first area here, this is that light industrial to this is a vacant property It does have quite a bit of topography as well Originally, this was zoned as general commercial. I'll note there are a couple of plan developments on the properties. The only portion that does not have a plan development overlay or PD or designation is this portion of general ag right here. So The zoning scheme, and I'll go back to this one really quick. The reasoning for keeping general commercial on the front, office commercial on the north side, and then the light industrial, it kind of buffers that light industrial in the middle because they are looking to do a business park. with light industrial uses, commercial long, mall drive, and then office commercial actually allows for a limited number of uses, mainly offices. There's medical that can go there. Multifamily is another use. There's a few conditional uses as well, such as assisted living group homes and things like that. We'll get there when we get to that one as well. I just wanted to point out, One, there is protections of existing plan development. If that plan development is revoked, it would have to go through the planning commission to review. The planning commission could also choose to add if they did want to add a plan development to this area. So again, vacant property. This one is general commercial. This whole area is urban neighborhood. We touched on this when we looked at the TIF for this property. The TIF did get approved, and that was focused on the collector street, which we'll get to on the transportation side, and some grading work. And I do want to touch on the comprehensive plan, because we talked about this a little bit with the TIF conversation. The future land use in this area hasn't been updated, at least since the 2014 comprehensive plan. Right now we are undergoing a process to go out into the community as this would be one of those areas and talk about what the future land use should be moving forward. This area to the south has experienced change in a more commercial mixed use, which you see to the south there is that red coloring is where that line of commercial mixed use kind of stopped in the 2014 future land use plan. There's a regional center very near here And the policies within the 2025 comprehensive plan that we're going to use in order to inform the future land use update, they do support having more opportunities for jobs-based economies, amenities near neighborhoods. Mall Drive is, and I'll get to the transportation side of it now, is a principal arterial. Maple, North Maple Extension will be a collector street. So there is transportation and infrastructure there. in the area, some of it would likely need to be upsized to accommodate for this development, but in that vein, it's not out in the middle of nowhere. It truly is infill when it comes to doing a mix of uses, and those things are supported by the policy direction within the comprehensive plan near a regional center, which a regional center is about this area, so just north of there. So there is connectivity to the policies that support that mix of uses near residential areas, and then it further goes into saying buffering compatible uses, and that was the attempt of the applicant to offer that office commercial on the north side of the property. There is the future Native American school and community center and housing that would be going to the north there, so they wanted to make sure that there was a line drawn with the industrial properties prior to getting to that property as well. So this is, again, the overall rezoning scheme. These eventually will be platted. I believe you saw that with the TIF presentation. So there's a number of one to five acre industrial lots here, kind of similar things, some commercial fronting, mall drive here, and then the office commercial in the rear. So this would be the rear of those lots, and there would be a road kind of coming through here. So the first one that we'll discuss is the first general commercial to light industrial. And then we'll go through the other ones. But I kind of want to take a chance now and stand for any questions. If you have questions on the overall part of it, and then we can go into the incremental. And staff is recommending approval on each one of these. So I'll stand for questions. Thank you.

Kelly, you've got to line up.

Thank you. Question for staff on, since we're talking overall, general ag. I guess my question is, what's the ultimate, the threshold of end use for that? General ag, I'm assuming it could be grazing land, it could be maybe some light farming. Would a general ag designation allow an industrial scale operation like a hog farm or a slaughterhouse or processing plant? Is there a threshold where general ag does not allow, because you've got a residential there, commercial. Can you just walk through the general ag as it applies to this?

Mr. Chair. Vicki. So there are some larger acre parcels in the city that are zoned general ag and used for grazing, haying, that type of thing. For the most part, though, where we see general ag, and it says so in the zoning designation itself, it serves as a holding zone. The property owner isn't ready to develop it yet. They've got a minimum of 40 acres. They zone at general ag. It helps with the taxation. And in this situation, in this case, in working with the property owner for several years on many, many different concepts that just didn't come to fruition, that was his intent, is to just leave it as a holding zone.

Yeah, I figured it was sort of a placeholder, but I just wanted to check. OK, thanks.

Good question.

All right, anything else at this point from the commission?

Mr. Chair, if I might, we did have a preliminary meeting with members of Elevate to discuss how this project might come forward. And we wanted to ensure that we retained the commercial integrity along East Mall Drive. And we also wanted to ensure that we had that buffer to what we know that Indian Collective is bringing forward with their master plan. So they did some door knocking. They went out into the neighborhood. They contacted property owners. And I think that that might be why we don't see individuals opposing this. As Jessica mentioned, three-fourths of this acreage is currently in a plan development designation. You can leave that. And rezoning those applications, that plan development designation stays in place. There is the one rezone to light industrial that is currently void of a plan development. If you feel it's more appropriate that this should be in a plan development and be retained in a plan development, because it is unique that we are fitting this within an area that doesn't have other industrial uses, you could approve that rezone, and Jessica can bring that one to your attention, what number it is. In today's motion, you could approve it in conjunction with the plan development designation, and that's just an administrative review and approval that we would work with the applicant to secure. But for today, that plan development on the other 75% stays in place. And as Jessica mentioned, if the applicant chooses to revoke that, that would come back to you for action. All right.

Thank you. Eric ?

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I applaud the land use consideration. This is the classic model of tiered zoning. I think using the general commercial as a buffer on one side and the other side as another buffer to screen the light industrial is powerful. Can I ask for a little bit of latitude on this one? Can you give us some examples of types of light industrial uses? Because I think the The delineation between industrial and light industrial, I think, is meaningful. So can you give us a couple of tangible examples of a light industrial site or user or customer?

We came prepared. So banks, retail, offices, those are all allowed in light industrial. But because this is being stood up as an industrial park, we anticipate that many of the other uses that would be called out in light industrial might be how this is going to get marketed. A contractor's yard would be an example. There's a lot of manufacturing and processing that would be permitted in light industrial, but it all has to be within an enclosed building. In addition, a lot of the outdoor storage has to be screened by a minimum seven foot high opaque fence. And that is a great point. There is a significant difference between light industrial and heavy industrial. There are other uses within light industrial that are conditional. And those would come before you, whether it be in a planned development or not. And you would have to take action on whether or not this was the appropriate location for those conditional uses. And let's see. An example of a conditional use in light industrial would be a brewery, potentially a correction facility, child care center, church. Again, it's not too heavy into the industrial side of things as conditional. That's reserved more for the heavy industrial.

Chair? Yeah. The applicant would like to offer some information if you would like to.

Sure. Sounds good. Please identify yourself once you're up.

Good morning, Mr. Chair. Planning Commissioner, excuse me, Garth Wadsworth with Elevator Rapid City. Um, appreciate the question. Uh, I do have a proposed lot layout if that helps. Uh, it does identify the lots as really no bigger than five acres. Uh, and so I think the Rushmore industrial park over off of Elkville is a helpful example. These are not smokestacks, right? These are relatively small facilities. If you think of a Little Fuse or Respec or Sealock, all great tenants out in the Rushmore Industrial Park. Oh, perfect. Biggest lots, or the single biggest lot is seven acres. There are a couple that are just a smidge over five. But once you back out the steep graded areas, you have usable space that's really well below five acres. And so they're just not well-suited to large-scale smokestack-type facilities. So they're really going to be offices that have a little bit extra, some specific equipment or fleet storage that they need, but they really function as office spaces with additional storage space.

Thank you. Is that good for you, Eric? Okay.

Thank you, Garth, and thank you, Vicki. Appreciate it.

Mr. Chair, Eric's comments are very important. And even looking at the setback requirements, let's say there is additional development to the east and it does stand up residential, there's a minimum 50-foot setback. So again, trying to ensure that there's that buffer, taking that into account helped us to get behind this proposal.

All right, back to you, Jessica.

All right, so do you want to just start taking action on 26RZ14, that being the general commercial to light industrial district?

So that's item nine, and that's talking about the stuff directly north of Mall Drive in the red here, correct?

Yes, yeah, the red outline just north of the general commercial that's being retained on Mall Drive. OK. We'll do the one with the numbers. There you go.

All right. Eric Heikes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Move approval.

OK. Second. Eric made his motion. Mike seconded that motion. Any discussion on the motion to approve? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number 10.

So item number 10 is 26RZ15. That is the general agricultural district to light industrial district. Let me know if you do want to go through the individual slides for each of these, but you can see them just north here. See, this is the general agricultural area, but I can back out and get into the other presentation if you need me to.

And this is one of those parts where if the planning commission sees fit to add a plan development designation, they can ask for that.

Yes, you'll see the plan development outline ends here, so it would be applicable to this one as well. I'll note it on the office commercial as well. OK. You can't see it, but it ends on this line right here.

Eric ?

So sorry. Vicki. Thank you, Mr. Chair. VICKI, COULD YOU REPEAT THE PLAN DESIGNATE DEVELOPMENT, PLAN DEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION, EXCUSE ME. WILL THAT CONTINUE TO BE IN PLACE OR WILL THAT HAVE TO BE, WILL THAT HAVE TO BE UPDATED? I'M SORRY. EXCUSE MY FRIEND.

YEAH.

YOUR MIC'S NOT ON, VICKI, SORRY.

Lordy B, do I actually need a mic? 26RZ15, that area right now, along with the RZ17, those two rezone applications do not currently have a plan development designation. What you just took action on on 14, that plan development exists, and it stays in place. That's what I thought.

OK, thank you. That answers my question.

All right, anything from the commission on this one, item 10? Thoughts? Karen?

I'm going to make a motion to approve this rezone with the addition of adding the plan development designation. Is that the right language?

You would approve the rezone in conjunction with the plan development designation.

That's what I wanted, in conjunction with the plan development.

I'll second.

All right, been seconded Karen's motion.

Any discussion on the motion to approve with the addition of a plan development designation? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number 11, RZ 016.

Thank you. Item number 11, 26RC16 is medium density residential to light industrial. This portion, and I'll go back to it, does have a plan development designation on it already. And recommendation is to approve.

OK. Okay, Mike Kwasny made the motion to approve. Is there a second to Mike's motion? Pat Roseland seconded. Any discussion on the motion to approve? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number 12.

Item number 12, 26RZ17. This is General Ag 2 office commercial. This is one of the ones that does not have a plan development designation. Recommendation is to approve. You may choose to approve it in conjunction with the plan development designation. Thank you.

Mr. Chair. Vicki. In looking at the master plan for Indian Collective, as you know, they have a school. They are doing the Hisapa OTV Community Center. in the same area. For the area directly adjacent to the office commercial, there is potential that there would be multifamily, maybe some apartments. Staff did not feel that this area warranted a planned development designation. The office commercial district is very limited in what it does allow, and we saw very minimal impact between the two uses.

Okay, thank you. I actually, Pat, I'm jumping ahead of you here, sorry. Indian's master plan, does it match the future street alignment where Northridge would go through their property, or is there a roadway planned for the top of?

Did you mean Maple?

No, Northridge or Neva. I don't know if that's.

You know, off the top of my head, obviously there was consideration back when we approved that preliminary subdivision plan. And I'm going to make that assumption that yes, we did look at that because that's the stuff that we look at. But Todd, do you recall the details? Too much time has passed.

I know. Todd?

Yeah, the plans that they have in do show that Northridge extending east, as shown on the major street plan.

OK. See, I knew it.

Mostly for curiosity's sake. Sometimes the road helps with buffering, but we can't depend on that in this case.

OK, Pat? I move to approve this. Thank you.

OK.

Is there a second to Pat's?

Kelly was in first. Pat Roseland moved approval. Kelly moved to second his motion on RZ 017, item 12. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Last one, RZ018.

So item number 13, RZ18. This one is rezoning from medium density residential to office commercial. And staff recommends approval.

All right. Anything from the commission on this?

I move approval. All right.

Karen made the motion to approve. Second. Vince seconded that motion. Any discussion on the motion to approve? All those in favor?

Oh, Mike, who snuck in there? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm assuming the odd shape on these is because of the lay of the land.

In part, it's also associated with the roads that would be internal roads for the preliminary subdivision plan.

Okay. Just a curious question.

Mr. Chair.

Okay.

So, Garth handed out a layout that I think got distributed to you. And if you look at it, you can see how those lots and streets lay out. I, too, thought the same thing. That's an unusual shape. But then when you see the layout, it makes perfect sense.

Yeah, it made some sense. But I was curious if the lay of the land kind of determined that, too.

Absolutely.

OK. All right, any other questions or comments on the motion to approve?

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries. That gets us to the end of the posted agenda. Are there any staff items today?

Just quickly, because I know we all have busy days, wanted to announce that we will be sending out a doodle poll to you and all council members, including the newly elected council member. We are going to be doing a Planning 101 and Subdivision 101 training session. for those of you who haven't received that training and as a refresher. We'll do it during a 90 minute lunch. We'll serve you food, but it's just to better help you understand what the zoning ordinance allows, doesn't allow, and what part you play in the growth of our community. Stay tuned. Jessica will be coordinating that with all of you. We'll have to post it as a noticed meeting, so absolutely. We'd love to have you there.

Thank you.

Eric Heikes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I apologize for my allergies. Sorry about all the sneezing. I think it has to do with going past 8.30.

I thought it was just me. Maybe it's Vince. All right.

Anything else from the commission? moved to adjourn okay karen karen made the motion to adjourn vince seconded that motion all those in favor please say aye