Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good morning. Welcome to the August 6th, 2026 Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting, starting at 7 a.m. this fine morning. If any member of the audience wishes to speak to an item on the agenda today, there are speaker request forms to 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 over there. The public hearing on item number one, the approval of the July 23rd, 2026 Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting minutes is hereby opened.

Motion to approve. Second.

All right, Vince made the motion, and Mike Quazney seconded that motion.

Jessica.

Any discussion on the motion to approve those minutes? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number two.

Good morning. All right, item 26VA018 is a setback variance request for the existing building on the property at 136 Krebs Drive. This property is .57 acres in size and there is only this one building currently located on the property. The property owner has requested that the property be rezoned from general commercial district to general agricultural district. And this variance is necessary to bring this building into compliance with the more restrictive setback requirements in general agricultural district. The request is to reduce the north side yard setback from 35 feet to 9.7 feet and the front yard setback to the west from 35 feet to 32.3 feet. The property is currently zoned general commercial district. And the future land use of the property is low density neighborhood. The property is accessed from Krebs Drive, which is shown as a proposed collector on the city's major street plan. And this is a picture of the site plan showing the distances to the property lines. The setback variance, again, the request is to reduce the north side yard setback from 35 feet to 9.7 feet and the front yard setback to the west from 35 feet to 32.3 feet. This is a picture of that building on the property. This building used to serve as an auto repair service building and has not been used as that for some time. It is now used as a storage building that serves the agricultural property to the east. This is a picture looking east at the property from Krebs Drive. Picture of the animal clinic that is located on the property to the north. This is the residential property to the south. This is looking north up Krebs Drive. And then looking south down Krebs Drive towards Deadwood Avenue. The proposed rezoning of the property from general commercial district to general agricultural district creates a special circumstance for this property. The building is required to comply with the more restrictive setback requirements of general agricultural district and the requested setback variance amount is the minimum adjustment necessary in order to maintain that existing building. Accessory buildings including barns, sheds, and other farm buildings are a permitted use in the General Agricultural District. This building has existed in its location for many years and no change to the building is proposed at this time. The proposed variance does not appear to be injurious to the neighborhood or detrimental to the public welfare and appears to be in alignment with the city's comprehensive plan. As such, staff is recommending approval of this variance request to reduce the minimum front yard setback from 35 feet to 32.3 feet and to reduce the minimum north yard setback from 35 feet to 9.7 feet for this existing storage building. And we do have the applicant here with us, and if you have any questions for them, and I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you. Anything from the commission on this item? Alicia?

Thank you. My one question is, I'm wondering, you mentioned that the long plan was low density residential. So how does that affect you said it's in alignment with the city's comp plan, but just wondering how it makes sense that to the east, it's agricultural. So wondering long term what that neighborhood will look like with one agricultural spot?

Mr. Chair?

Yeah.

Thank you for the question. That's a really good question. So Jim Bailey, who's in the audience today, he has a plan. As you may recall, you've already acted on it last Monday night. City Council also took action on first reading of numerous re-zones where Jim is putting all of this land into general ag. He wants to preserve it. He wants to make a conservatory out of this area where it's retained in its natural format. We identified the general ag district as a holding zone. So whether it's the no use district or the general ag district, It serves the purpose of preserving this property until at such time that development is ready to be brought into this area. What you did at your meeting is be cognitive of the fact that general ag up this close to residential could have a negative impact if you're running cattle or other livestock. And so you put a plan development designation on all of the general ag property that Mr. Bailey was proposing to rezone. He currently runs 41 head of cattle, and we reserved it to just that number. Any additional cattle or any additional change in use specifically for today on this lot, would require that Jim comes back before all of you with the final plan development. Long term, we do believe this is going to be residential. But to hold it in reserve and allow this to remain open space for as long as Jim owns it, we think is a win for the community.

Alicia?

Oh, I got to get you back.

Thank you. That makes sense, Vicky. And I think the variances to allow the existing structure also makes sense.

Mr. Chair, to that point, there's a lot of value left in that structure. And just because we're rezoning, which as Jenny identified, has bigger setbacks, we don't want to see this structure come down or be reduced. It's being used for ag purposes today. That value will be retained for that purpose. So the special circumstance is that while it at one point met setback, rezoning it and only rezoning it is the reason that it doesn't and that's a very unusual and special circumstance and so this one was fairly easy for us to bring forward with the recommendation to approve all right mike quasi thank you mr chair at the point that this becomes residential then i'm sure all this stuff will be re redone anyhow i would make a motion to approve

All right, Mike, Vicki.

Friendly amendment to the motion maker and second. Due to the special circumstance that the rezone created.

Due to the special circumstance the rezone created. I approve that.

Thanks, Mike. Second from Jeff. All right, Mike made the motion as stated and assisted by Vicki, and Jeff seconded that motion. Any discussion on the motion? Haven. Thank you.

The question, does the change in the zoning affect in any way what can be stored on the property or whether or not it's a nuisance if there are certain things that aren't taken care of on the property?

Mr. Chair?

Vicki?

Yes, it does. That's an excellent question as well, Haven. It can only be used for agricultural purposes once this rezone becomes effective. Council has a second reading of the rezone. So it'll be another probably 45 days and the rezone will be effective. So anything stored in this property or any use of this structure must be specific to the general ag property. So they could store feed in there or equipment that you're using. to go out and mow or take care of the property. If there was ever a nuisance, if something created an odor or a noise or something along those lines, independent of what it's zoned, the nuisance ordinance would kick in and we could address that issue.

Yeah, what I was kind of thinking of, he could build a little corral on the south side of this shed and winter those cows there. Would that be allowed?

Mr. Chair, similar to what I just said earlier, if that's what Jim wanted to do, that would be a new use on this lot and it would require a final plan development be brought forward for your review and more importantly for the neighborhood to get noticed and speak to the issue as well.

All right, the motion on the floor is to approve this variance. Are there any other comments on the motion or questions from the commission? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries. Item number three.

So good morning, item number three is a variance request to waive the minimum required public street frontage for proposed lot C of Stever Heights subdivision. So this proposed lot is part of a preliminary subdivision plan to replat four undeveloped residential lots located southwest of Pine Hills Drive and Kingswood Drive. So the property is owned low density residential district one. And in this zoning district, it does require that all residential lots about a public street, a minimum distance of 25 feet. And the purpose of that requirement is to ensure that each lot has legal access and sufficient frontage for utilities. So the future land use is low density neighborhood. The lot will have to be, the proposed lot will have to be developed in compliance with the underlying zoning district. So this variance will not allow a land use that's otherwise excluded in the zoning. And then the proposed development is located west of Sturgis Road, which is classified as a principal arterial street on the city's major street plan. So this is the plat document that was submitted. I've highlighted proposed lot C. This proposed development is gonna be accessed by a 52 foot wide private access and utility easement and then water and sewer are gonna be served by a shared well and septic. The access road will be privately owned and maintained which is permitted in the infrastructure design criteria manual when serving up to four lots. So it'll be a private road rather than dedicating public right of way. There is 66 feet of section line right-of-way that runs north and south along the western plat boundary, and that section line right-of-way currently satisfies that minimum 25-foot public street frontage requirement for proposed lot C. The applicant has applied to vacate that section line. to increase the buildable area of this development. And if that section line is vacated, proposed lot C will no longer comply with the minimum requirement. So this variance is necessary for the vacation of section line. It's not necessarily necessary for this replatting to move forward. This is just looking at the approximate location of where the 52-foot-wide private access and utility easement will be built. That easement will provide legal access and provide a corridor for utilities, which meets the purpose and intent of the zoning requirement, that 25-foot public zoning requirement. And then this is looking down the section line highway, the unimproved section line highway. Access to the Development will be taken from the private road rather than the section line and as as already mentioned the infrastructure design criteria manual Does allow for private rows to serve up to four lots? So we thought staff thought that these factors constituted a special circumstance that would justify approval waiving that minimum required public street frontage and Then this is looking east along Kingswood Drive Looking west along that same street So staff is recommending that this variance be approved because it does not allow land use that's otherwise excluded in the zoning district. It meets the purpose and intent of the zoning requirement. And we thought that access to the subdivision constituted a special circumstance. So with that, we'll stand by for any questions. And I believe the applicant is an audience as well.

Thank you. Any questions from the commission on this one?

Jeff, were there any comments received by neighbors?

Yeah, no comments were received. Thank you.

Mr. Chair?

Vicki?

Kind of a win for the city on this one is that easement is going to require that it be maintained by those adjacent property owners. So that's less long-term infrastructure that the city has to use our limited CIP budget on. So there's that win. And I think that this truly is the minimum adjustment necessary to allow for additional residential lots while still minimizing the long-term cost for the city for maintenance.

I'm just gonna jump in with mine, and that's probably not germane to the issue at hand, but I see that both the well and the septic field are intended to be shared. I've seen shared wells before, but not shared septic inside the city. Is that something that we have regulations for and will become an agreement between these lot owners?

I have seen it before, but I'm going to defer to Todd. I believe Danner reviews that as well.

Todd? Yes. The state would have to review and approve that. And then if the state approves it, then we would issue a permit for it as well. But we would follow the state's lead on that. The lots are large enough. So if for some reason the state denied it, the lots are still large enough for each lot to have their own system.

OK. Thanks, Todd. Anything else from the commission? Possibly a motion.

Excuse me.

Karen?

I'll make a motion to approve this with the reason it was a special circumstances. And you have your light on, Vicki.

Minimum adjustment necessary.

Minimum adjustment necessary.

I'll second it.

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

Good morning. Item number four is another variance request. This one is at 5823 Capacitor Street. This is the new Black Hills Industrial Center. It's a generally industrial development. This property, again, is zoned heavy industrial. Underlying land use is light industrial. This is that larger industrial area. This is the first phase of it down Capacitor Street. They do have access. Old Folsom Highway 79 are all principal arterials. So what the applicant is proposing is to build essentially a contractor shop on this property. They are meeting all of the standards within their own parking lot and the shop itself. In addition to that, they are requesting a variance to the hard surface paving requirements for a contractor storage yard behind the contractor shop to allow asphalt millings in lieu of that hard surface. So that... storage areas a little over 19 000 square feet they're going to be storing heavy equipment and vehicles associated with construction as well as some construction materials it is fenced with a six foot chain link and will have a gate so they're looking at storing things like excavators bulldozers dump trucks skid steers loafers other equipment we've seen this before with some of these larger vehicle operations where the pavement tends to deteriorate over time faster than it would. So they opt for, excuse me, something like a gravel or an asphalt milling surface. In this case, they are requesting asphalt millings, which generally seems to be the preferred alternative to hard surfacing.

So I'm going to go through

The criteria here, sorry, I always get a frog in my throat in the mornings. So this area is generally gonna be industrial in nature. There's not residential near here. I think a mile is the closest residence to this particular area. So that paving requirement really is to provide that durable surface, mitigate dust impacts, and generally be more urban than rural. In this case, this property, since it is located in heavy industrial, that storage yard is going to be oriented to the rear of the building. And as you see, there's not a lot that's going to see that storage yard. Again, it is fenced and we'll be hosting heavy equipment. So with that limited visibility and that particular location, I'll go back to the site plan. of the storage yard. Staff noted that is kind of a special circumstance that they've hidden in a way in the back. The proposed use is a permitted use in the district. So it doesn't allow a use that otherwise is not allowed. So that meets that criteria. The type of machinery, including that weight and the type of tracks they use, as I noted, generally deteriorate faster. And they do have a low traffic volume. So it's a reasonable alternative for use of the property as a contractor shop and yard. Asphalt millings are typical of this use and type of location, but they do have dust impacts. So staff is recommending a stipulation of approval to address that through dust palliative as needed or annually. to mitigate those impacts. So those considerations, it does not appear to be injurious to the surrounding area or general neighborhood. So it meets that criteria as well. So staff's recommending approval of the variance with the stipulations noted in the report. Again, it's that location limited visibility special circumstance. It's a permitted use in the district. The asphalt millings are a reasonable alternative for use of the property. And with the dust mitigation, it does not appear to be injurious to the neighborhood. Thank you. I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you.

Anything for Jessica?

Only question I have is just to make sure I'm reading this plan right. It looks like there's like 185 feet from the street to the storage area, but there's no other access point to that, right? It's through that 40-foot approach off of the street?

Correct. They would use the paved parking lot. So that also does mitigate dust, rock, things that would be coming off that yard or going in the parking lot, not necessarily under the street.

I've got no problem with that That's a nice break from the road Haven Thank you.

We've proved the asphalt millings on several occasions previously, I guess My question would be if For some reason, the use of the asphalt millings would create a problem to the surrounding properties at some time in the future. What's the recourse, then, once we've approved the asphalt millings?

Mr. Chair?

Vicki?

And that's a good question, Haven. And that's why there was a stipulation of a condition of approval on this variance. And it really goes to the application for those dust palliatives, because air quality and tracking would be the two things. Importantly to what you just said is that this is a heavy industrial district. This property is surrounded by heavy industrial zoning. So when we look at all the uses that are allowed in heavy industrial, the fact that a storage area will have asphalt millings, would have a minimal impact on the neighborhood compared to what some of those other future uses might be, such as a power plant would be a permitted use in heavy industrial. When we bring these to you, we don't always recommend to approve. We look at What is the surrounding zoning? Is this more of an industrial nature? If this were in a general commercial area, we may not be bringing you the same recommendation. We look at the proximity to residential. Always concerned about that air quality and just the aesthetics of what an alternate surface might be. And then, of course, we look at what is getting stored on the property, is it really needed? Are they just trying to reduce the cost? And in this case, we could check the box on every one. And they fully demonstrated that the equipment that will be on this property and at times stored on this property would hurt that hard surface. And with asphalt millings, it will be easier for them to keep that area maintained.

All right. Anything else from the commission?

I guess we're the board currently, the zoning board.

All right, Karen.

I'll make a motion to approve this variance with the stipulation of the dust pallet and those things that are on there with the reason of special circumstances and not injurious to the neighborhood.

And I'll second that.

All right. Karen Bowman made the motion to approve the variance. Vince seconded that. Any discussion on the motion to approve? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries. That's our last item on the Zoning Board of Adjustment. I look for a motion to adjourn Zoning Board of Adjustment.

Motion to adjourn.

Okay, Vince made the motion. Second. Jeff seconded that motion. All those in favor of adjournment, please say aye. Aye. That leads us to the Rapid City Planning Commission meeting for August 6th, 2026. starting at 7.26 in the morning. If any member of the audience wishes to speak to an item on the Planning Commission agenda, again, there are speaker request forms along the left side of the room. Please grab the request, fill it out 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. Items one through three 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. The RAP city planning, sorry, we've got a double up here, but... The Rapid City Planning Commission's action on these items are final unless any party appeals that decision to the 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 one through three that staff would like removed from the consent calendar for separate consideration?

No, thank you.

Any items one through three that any Planning Commissioner would like removed for separate consideration? and any items one through three that any audience member would like removed for separate consideration. The chair would then entertain a motion to approve items one through three in accordance with the staff's recommendation.

Motion to approve items one through three in accordance with the staff's recommendation stipulations.

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

Mr. Chair? Yeah. The applicant has requested that this item be continued to your next meeting, which is?

August 27th? Does that look right?

August 27th. All right. And that would be our recommendation.

Okay. Okay. Mike Kwasny made the motion to continue to August 27th. Is there a second?

Second.

Alicia, second of that motion. Any discussion on the motion to continue? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. That takes us to the end of the Planning Commission agenda. Any staff items today, Vicki?

Just one, and I want to offer my apologies first to Gary Saber. We have failed to welcome him to the Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Adjustment. I've known Gary for many, many years. and always loved the demeanor that he brought to the front counter when we were working with him. When I saw his name as someone that was interested in planning commission, I knew he would be a wonderful pick. And while he currently serves as an alternate over time, as openings occur, and from time to time they do, I hope, Gary, that you stay with us and, of course, We will invite you as well as all of Planning Commission and the City Council for a Planning 101 and Subdivision 101 luncheon. We have yet to date found a date that a lot of you can land on, so additional dates have been sent out. We're just trying to find a time where several of you can attend. But those of you who have not gone through that training yet, and there are some new council members and planning commission members, we strongly encourage you to take the time to join us for that training.

All right. Welcome, Gary. Glad to have you.

Welcome, Gary.

Anything from the commission today? Haven. Haven.

I was out of town two weeks ago, but I logged in and I made this comment once before I really want to commend whoever puts together the Website and the ability to log into our our meetings that the video and the audio are excellent you can see who's talking. It's easy to hear them. I want to commend my fellow commissioners here for their thoughtful comments, and it shows that they're dedicated to the job that we have to do. I'll also say, while I was on, the website noted there were 15 people that had logged in to the website. And that's really important. I get many comments after our meetings about things that happened. So there's just so many people in the community that are interested in what we're doing, but can't make it here, but do take the time to log in. So it's a very good and important service for the community.

Mr. Chair?

Yeah, Vicki.

Thank you for those comments, Haven. And as importantly, there are those that can't attend the meeting. And honestly, it's a small group within our community that actually is interested in what goes on in these meetings. But there are many times that after the meeting has been recorded, people will be talking within the community or a city council member knows that the item's coming forward. and that there was some great discussion at Planning Commission. Because of the way that we maintain those videos, they can go back and watch it and see in real time the discussions that took place. So we've done this for years, and we'll continue to do that going forward.

All right. Anything else from the commission? OK. Maybe a motion? okay karen made the motion to adjourn vince seconded that motion all those in favor please say aye aye