[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6291989,"mediaKeyId","2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c","parentId",2528526,"title","Planning Commission approves three on‑sale liquor conditional‑use permits for existing and new businesses","audioSeconds",967,"startMs",2284000,"endMs",3251000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c&start=2284&end=3251","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c/thumbnail_2284000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6291989/Rapid-City/Pennington-County/South-Dakota/Planning-Commission-approves-three-onsale-liquor-conditionaluse-permits-for-existing-and-new-businesses","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6291989-834bfa58936d8305b53e7e1396a3c172/orig.mp4?Expires=1771200648&Signature=gmPamLw4gRlRGqqfGi2M4WwTJhbqfAU5avQCMRtjtJl2KxtXHZriIuErcmzaxmV-fnp6UqZ5RzLDBiU~XK2ujqmqtH8KDrekHBhcNJtP8UPmbMLv8TRlFMP5Tsj5CzJN3U4wfBr4JQRvZfPGStVFMX5JkfzThtX1BwNV3AEpZi8w4LtEVGX0-AxSzcQSCNfKmHzNeOQDcgLFz6IWmrg5PS96U7RrqCzIVIVQd6BXGxlja8krPkthBGqFaApoOzt3wmBRPeRxT9O5Su154Fd-gaVpErFCeBZt01~E8sk2xm4sHMD9sTeuA4qahoOHvvbPEqNqsYDHPHzeKMFU4sl29A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Rapid City SD","date","2025-03-06T00:00:00Z","article","The Rapid City Planning Commission on March 6 approved three conditional‑use permits to allow on‑sale liquor uses in separate commercial properties, each with staff‑recommended stipulations.

What was approved:
- Old School Sliders (2120 W. Main Street): Staff recommended and the commission approved an on‑sale beer permit for the restaurant operating in Suite 4. The restaurant is currently operating and proposed to serve draft and canned beer stored in a locked cooler and at a counter with taps behind it. Staff noted the nearest residential zoning is roughly 695 feet away and that no school, park, playground or religious assembly was located within 500 feet of the site; the commission approved with conditions recorded in the staff report.

- Clubhouse Hotel and Suites (Hope Court off Catron and Mount Rushmore): The commission approved an on‑sale permit limited to private events at the hotel (weddings, corporate functions and similar). Staff said beverages would be served by trained staff at portable bars for events, stored in locked areas when not in use, and monitored with security cameras covering exits and corridors. Staff noted one nearby single‑family residence on property zoned general agriculture at about 510 feet; commissioners found the private‑event limitation appropriate and approved with stipulations.

- Tap house and storage building at Elkvale/Homestead (case referenced as 24 02 4): Staff described a mixed building under construction with roughly 16,520 square feet; an on‑sale tap house of about 14,540 square feet is proposed within one suite (approximately 2,000 sq ft for the tap house) and the remainder of the building will be used for storage by Wood Builders. Because parking on the site is constrained, staff recommended approval that accounted for the combined uses rather than approval for a larger standalone on‑sale facility. The commission approved the conditional‑use permit with stipulations.

Why it matters: Each approval was evaluated for proximity to residential areas, schools, parks and places of worship, parking adequacy and compatibility with surrounding commercial uses. Staff presentations indicated the sites met the conditional‑use criteria or that stipulations and shared parking arrangements mitigated concerns.

Outcome and process: Each motion to approve carried and was recorded as \"motion carries\" in the transcript; specific vote tallies were not provided in the recorded discussion. The approvals include the standard staff stipulations listed in each staff report (for example, security and locked storage for alcohol, limits on types of alcoholic beverages, and parking conditions where applicable).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Rapid City Planning Commission 03-06-2025 SD","oneSentenceSummary","The Rapid City Planning Commission on March 6 approved three conditional‑use permits allowing on‑sale liquor at separate commercial properties — a restaurant, a hotel event space and a tap‑house within a mixed building — with staff stipulations for each site.","taxTitle","Rapid City, Pennington County, South Dakota","taxId",2748,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6291994,"Commission approves major amendment for Block 5 sign package, including pedestrian and awning signs",945,767000,1712000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c&start=767&end=1712","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c/thumbnail_767000.jpg","/articles/6291994/Rapid-City/Pennington-County/South-Dakota/Commission-approves-major-amendment-for-Block-5-sign-package-including-pedestrian-and-awning-signs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6291994-1e96b970cd6de622a3f7b96f7e5df699/orig.mp4?Expires=1771200648&Signature=dMOqA4BjpWxNO~Ezr20YItcd8C7aEmY4L4GejNou5eb3R5q3GfkVhK1UBx7YxTMnBHkQZ6oVJuX6Ayo0hrCvXOgp-MGbdH7RW1-3WMGau~GX53Cd7m27deq0YKZEH~S5rxf7hjCXyza2bEIDKOH0b849Tfu3HZFZcvmGVVifYK4ja963Z-qsnijIikDXuR3r3PkcZt9fxxHpPkbyhCxpXZEiVBnrMJfR25rJRaCJYEacwWIdkpXzbd1qygjZmZRVJw76BOQccwz0tssN8aqTiJ9hdVLHaT411zpZiAT0ITAzoaSnbCX78O5LZWwZTGDNKtHfmzoil4kOXPCz8t6EBw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Rapid City Planning Commission on March 6 approved a major amendment to a planned development overlay for Block 5 (525 Saint Joseph Street) to permit an expanded sign package for the mixed‑use development that includes the Hyatt Place hotel, apartments, conference space, retail and parking.

Staff presentation and exceptions requested: Jennifer Bergstrom, Special Projects Planner, described a request to increase permitted wall sign area from 425 square feet to 619 square feet, to allow seven pedestrian‑oriented projecting signs where the code allows two, and to permit awning signs that project from the canopy surface (an exception to the wall‑plane rule). The proposed signage includes five Hyatt Place signs already approved by the Historic Sign Review Committee; the remainder of the package would still need historic review if the amendment is approved.

Why it matters: Staff recommended the amendment because the larger building scale makes additional directional and pedestrian signage appropriate for wayfinding and for identifying multiple tenant entrances. Commissioners said the pedestrian projecting signs are important for downtown storefront legibility and compared Block 5 to other large structures downtown and at Monument Hospital where additional signage was necessary to identify entries.

Applicant and commission remarks: Mark Quasney, President of Development with Lloyd Companies, said he had no additional comments beyond staff’s presentation. Jennifer Bergstrom said the awning signs would be proposed by future tenants and that one predesigned tenant sign (Tostique) was available in the materials.

Outcome and conditions: The Planning Commission approved the major amendment with staff stipulations. The record notes that although the amendment was approved by the commission, the remaining signs identified for downtown historic environs must still go to the Historic Sign Review Committee for approval prior to sign permits being issued.

Clarifying details: Staff emphasized the distinction between signs already reviewed (the five Hyatt signs) and those that still require historic sign review (retail awning signs, pedestrian signs and directional wall signs). The transcript did not include numeric conditions such as exact illumination levels or final tenant sign designs, which are to be submitted at permit stage.","The Rapid City Planning Commission approved a major amendment March 6 to allow a larger sign package for the Block 5 mixed‑use development at 525 Saint Joseph Street, including additional pedestrian and awning signs for retail and leasing entrances.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6291996,"Planning Commission approves treatment facility overlay; commissioners require operational limits and major-amendment review for changes",191,528000,719000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c&start=528&end=719","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c/thumbnail_528000.jpg","/articles/6291996/Rapid-City/Pennington-County/South-Dakota/Planning-Commission-approves-treatment-facility-overlay-commissioners-require-operational-limits-and-major-amendment-review-for-changes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6291996-fc91e7e4f46e5b0772067163ee378d17/orig.mp4?Expires=1771200648&Signature=PBvk-50UWrYHO19DH9opjauvNrhed~-uTly-KfuuWjyjYe7xmdfp9WoP32V8dxeDyXy89XkL8FVAeXFvIbDZdj6q5Bi2cabBW86Vf-TWgWICjZrf5sf~oicrPFxhDNUZ6bUBLGfhYoQZDIcben8kHz9mKhBawaXijtBzYJrZYe2sZ8a9ru33rSWqqcxzTRRrOYRBmvePwOz0Ash~oy0NLC9p2IQpLj~Y5-es2YtrqESykjSvfA1qrx~AVzWE3uvdK6lOfYddN864sGwzkH7Xr1RuefteJTw7sqsSONrbtIaJHKmy~wl6AuWKrgr5kuOpGWk50ZS6Y4wTW1xUbVH8JA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Rapid City Planning Commission on March 6 approved a planned development overlay to allow a voluntary substance‑use treatment facility to operate at a property subject to an operational plan and stipulations.

Why it matters: Commissioners sought clarity that the facility will be a voluntary treatment operation rather than a detention center where individuals would be held. The commission's action hinges on the applicant’s operational plan; staff said that any change that would require involuntary detention or substantially alter operations would trigger a major amendment and a return to the Planning Commission.

Applicant statement and condition: Ryan Letterman of RMD Recovery told the commission the facility is not affiliated with Monument Hospital though he had consulted with a Monument physician who supports the project. Letterman said the operation is under a lease-to-purchase agreement for the property. Planning staff (identified in the meeting as Vicki) told commissioners that \"you are approving a treatment facility...these are voluntary patients or clients\" and that \"a change in that operational plan would require a major amendment and planning commission would have to take action on it.\"

Commission discussion: Commissioners asked whether a court‑ordered detention requirement would change the facility’s classification. Staff answered that a judge-required detention for treatment would be a different classification and therefore would not be covered by the approval for a voluntary treatment facility; such a change would need a separate review. Commissioners also expressed concern about compatibility with nearby developments and asked that the operation remain consistent with the presented plan.

Outcome: Commissioner Mike Gallagher moved approval with stipulations; a second was recorded and the motion carried. The commission approved the request contingent on the operational plan presented; staff will require that future substantive changes come back as a major amendment.

Clarifying details: The applicant said the facility is under a lease‑to‑purchase agreement and not currently owned by Monument Hospital. The transcript does not provide the facility’s permitted capacity, financial details, or a detailed operating schedule beyond the assurance that services will be voluntary and governed by the presented operational plan.","A proposed voluntary substance‑use treatment facility (RMD Recovery) was approved by the Planning Commission with stipulations limiting the operation to the presented operational plan and requiring a major amendment for substantive operational changes; commissioners requested assurance it will not function as a detention facility.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6291997,"Planning Commission backs preliminary plat but flags second-access, water and fire-safety concerns",188,236000,424000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c&start=236&end=424","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c/thumbnail_236000.jpg","/articles/6291997/Rapid-City/Pennington-County/South-Dakota/Planning-Commission-backs-preliminary-plat-but-flags-second-access-water-and-fire-safety-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6291997-45040800de042a94a2e7144d783464c1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771200648&Signature=DKZFLwFuQ20zjVUCNkxT-ms~gLHFnahHZ-eDK~MX2u9fA~UU5heSBk-RHyRC86aM9OAD-bKa6WZl286AQq85WDF9y4XYZn9zsKh-eCtknc6fkmsRthfn~pKbc8f5KooQ-Ukm7dTDUZ4nUuAsB07H2DlSR5u78msiRxPKXqjKwdPB2WpYWfVHR-47Rvemjbn~O~QnYJ68YNznbYBVRZDY0QQc25qzH-nJZczyBSHWgMpn8obSAPdlqEqFkKCqsJlvEo8ZpJQXB-VfUT4bXax3ybSYjI5tqc0L8s~aunzRtkrLwLM1G59RA3wxscNx59n1cxXfco-D2XaXmMizjqYXIQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Rapid City Planning Commission on March 6 recommended approval of a preliminary subdivision plat that creates a lot from an existing unplatted parcel outside city limits.

The commission’s recommendation follows staff analysis that the parcel is large enough to support residential development but would require an exception to a county \"40-unit rule\" and documentation that a community water system can provide service if the plat advances. Staff also said a fire mitigation plan and fire-retardant building materials would be required if the development moves forward.

Why it matters: Commissioners pressed the point that parcels developed without adequate access or firefighting water can put residents and first responders at risk. Commissioner Michael (first name on record as “Mike”) and others compared the site to other forested areas where development occurred without a second access and said the commission should emphasize second-access and water-supply conditions when the matter goes to the City Council.

Staff comments and conditions: City planning staff noted that because the property is outside the city limits it must seek a county exception to the 40-unit rule in addition to local approvals. A representative of planning staff (identified in the meeting as Vicki) said, \"there is a community water system in the area. If they want to advance, they will need to bring in documentation that they are consenting to provide this service.\" She added that required fire mitigation would include removal of dead fuels and that fire suppression systems and fire-retardant building materials would be necessary.

Commission discussion: Commissioners voiced similar concerns about emergency access and water capacity if a private water system were relied on. Commissioner comments emphasized the regional implications of fire-risk decisions and urged that the City Council weigh second-access and water-supply robustness when reviewing the final plat.

Outcome and next steps: Commissioner Karen moved approval with stipulations; another commissioner seconded and the motion carried. The Planning Commission’s action is a recommendation to City Council; because the property is outside the city limits the county’s 40-unit exception also will be required before any final development action. Any appeal of the commission’s decision 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.

Clarifying details: The staff presentation described the item as a preliminary subdivision plan, meaning it identifies necessary infrastructure and regulatory steps rather than approving construction; the parcel is an unplatted balance that will be made into a lot for transfer of ownership. The transcript did not provide an estimated number of homes that would be built, a development timeline, or a certified fire-flow figure; those items were listed as needing documentation if the applicant advances the plat.","The Rapid City Planning Commission recommended approval of a preliminary subdivision plat that will create a lot from an unplatted parcel, while commissioners emphasized the need for a second access, reliable water supply and fire mitigation where the property sits outside city limits.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6291992,"Planning Commission recommends approval for five‑story jail addition that would double bed capacity",423,1735000,2158000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c&start=1735&end=2158","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2528526-9a4c0216bbecc06bdd295fbe71f3e19c/thumbnail_1735000.jpg","/articles/6291992/Rapid-City/Pennington-County/South-Dakota/Planning-Commission-recommends-approval-for-fivestory-jail-addition-that-would-double-bed-capacity","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6291992-e794d4fefccd9f989970a2d81925ca2b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771200648&Signature=Or8TR1hLlJEY2vc9jqgf5tDIFTxHbpuD8MMg9m9~4TsyfhjvNFceFMr9-EERHUCxx7HVQmUek8mjeCdrfnF2j~Hid-TK6p7BwNu6c1BhWFJ8Fulpj9GHqMeBK4IpH2MpQKNf4KHGBF1vajfhtjciqPRkPnuSU1jkVyeGhERoHWc24C~sEtN9TQg1Ysa79yG0WSTv9wGG7QhweJz~86v-oDl1220GkTq8aaAp1014kRgYglsuVgp50-5VUC6WFOYzbiFufX7XIUVL4UIKh4~rgoDZd9RYSgslyplN~GOxK0iHUAya0dR8yfBKUW7-o1P4HGTvqCe2DEfcCN3lvf5RHQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Rapid City Planning Commission on March 6 recommended approval of a major amendment to the planned development overlay to allow an eastward expansion of the Pennington County Jail on St. Joseph Street that would add up to 600 beds, doubling the facility’s capacity from 600 to 1,200 beds.

Project scope and exceptions: Kip Harrington, Long Range Planning, described a five‑story addition that would contain officer stations, cells, program and recreation space, and flexible upper floors with roughly 110 to 148 beds per floor. The project requests exceptions including a zero‑foot setback for a sally port, allowance for fencing up to 12 feet in select internal locations (previous approvals allowed an 8‑foot front fence), and an increase in maximum stories from the public district standard of four stories/45 feet to five stories and approximately 127 feet, which matches the existing jail profile.

Why it matters: Staff said the sally port will improve detainee transfer safety by allowing buses and vans to enter and exit in a single direction without blocking St. Joseph Street; the city council previously vacated the public right of way where the sally port will connect. The project will decrease on‑site landscaping modestly and reduce 51 parking spaces, but staff cited an earlier parking study (from a prior PD) and proximity to the county parking garage and county‑owned land as evidence there is sufficient parking in the complex.

Commission comments and applicant presence: Commissioners asked about sidewalk continuity across the new sally port entrance and whether county‑owned properties were available for overflow parking. Staff confirmed the sidewalk will be shifted and that the county owns nearby properties, including a recently purchased building and parking areas east of the site that provide overflow capacity. Commissioner Mike Quasney (first name recorded as Mike/Mark in the transcript) expressed support for the project and moved approval with stipulations.

Outcome and next steps: The Planning Commission recommended approval with stipulations; the project will require final administrative and permitting actions consistent with plan development requirements. The transcript does not include construction funding sources, a project timeline, or the final number of beds per floor beyond the range staff presented.

Clarifying details: Staff said the sally port location is the result of the recently vacated right of way and will allow buses to enter and exit in one direction to reduce traffic impacts. The project will match materials to the existing jail with precast concrete and dark bronze metal accents. Parking reductions were noted but the prior parking study and adjacent county garage were cited as mitigating factors.","Commissioners recommended approval of a major amendment to permit a five‑story addition to the Pennington County Jail that would add up to 600 beds, expanding capacity from 600 to 1,200; the project requests multiple exceptions including building height and fencing and will reduce on‑site parking while relying on adjacent county lots.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning Commission approves three on‑sale liquor conditional‑use permits for existing and new businesses

Commission approves major amendment for Block 5 sign package, including pedestrian and awning signs

Planning Commission approves treatment facility overlay; commissioners require operational limits and major-amendment review for changes

Planning Commission backs preliminary plat but flags second-access, water and fire-safety concerns

Planning Commission recommends approval for five‑story jail addition that would double bed capacity