The Pennington County Planning Commission on Sept. 22 approved a planned unit development amendment, PUR-23-08, permitting an applicant to live in an RV on a PUD lot while constructing a single-family residence, with 22 conditions attached.
The commission voted to approve the amendment after staff explained how PUD conditions and enforcement would apply. Cody Sachs, senior planner, told commissioners that the subject property covers 4.09 acres while the PUD’s required common-lot area is 9.67 acres, and that the 9.67 figure is a leftover condition from the original PUD approval rather than a limit on the requested amendment.
"When you amend it, you're adding a use to that lot. We can't just end it and take it away because it's now part of that zoning district for that lot," Sachs said, describing why the PUD remains in effect and why the county set the approval as a reviewable action. He said the county would bring the matter back to the planning commission if officials receive complaints or observe that the RV residency violates PUD conditions: "So, you know, 3 weeks from now, if we get a complaint that they're still living in that RV or we're out there and we see that they're still living in that RV, we can bring them back in front of the planning commission to have you guys put it on the agenda for the next meeting."
Commissioners moved and seconded approval; the motion carried on a voice vote.
Discussion versus decision: commissioners and staff framed the action as a conditional, complaint-driven approval rather than an open-ended change to the PUD. No amendments to the 22 conditions were recorded. The commission’s approval is a recommendation to the Pennington County Board of Commissioners, which has final authority on land-use decisions originating from this planning commission agenda.
Background and context: the planners emphasized that PUDs function as negotiated zoning districts and that original PUD conditions (including common-lot acreage) remain part of the zoning for the lot unless formally changed. The commission did not adopt new enforcement mechanisms beyond bringing items back for review when complaints are received.
What’s next: the Board of Commissioners will consider the planning commission’s recommendation at its regular meeting on Oct. 7, 2025. The planning commission directed staff to return the matter for review if complaints or observed violations occur.