Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.
The Spearfish Planning Commission met in regular session on Tuesday, April 7, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 625 5th Street, Spearfish, and via Zoom. Members present were Tysdal, Moths, Wilde, and Bordewyk; members absent were Davison, Byrum, and Duncan. Staff present included Community Development Director Peter Wysocki, Assistant Planning Director Jaymia Ecker, City Engineer Kyle Mathis, Staff Engineer Abbey Larson, and Planning Technician Vasiliki Pistoftzian. The commission approved routine items, acted on a minor plat, a sign request, a major plat, and two ordinance revisions, continued one public hearing, and received two informational briefings.
No public comment was offered during the final public comment period, and the meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m.
And that would be a recommendation to city council, which is the ultimate approving body in this case. This is a major final plat, and it's located outside of city limits and within the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction, also known as the ETJ. The location is just south of the intersection of East Colorado Boulevard and Maitland Road. The property is accessed from Maitland Road and is located west of Centennial Road, which will come into the presentation a bit later. Okay. So for a bit of background on this, the preliminary plat was approved by the commission in October of this, excuse me, last year, 2025. There was an earlier version of the preliminary plat, and the developers' plans for the property ultimately changed. So there was a new preliminary plat presented alongside three different variants requests. Two of those variants requests were approved by the commission, and those are shown on the screen here. They have to do with the road design. The first being the standard for future arterial roads within the ETJ to be thirty-six feet in width with a six-inch gravel surface. In addition, there were some variances to the minimum radius of the curve, the minimum length of tangents, and also the maximum grade. So those are also shown on the screen. And the approved variants that came from the preliminary road design submitted with the preliminary plat. So once again, the the third variance, which was not approved, had to do with extending that road to the eastern boundary of the property. So ultimately, the commission decided not to approve that variance, and the applicant was required to extend the road to the boundary of the property, which is within the subdivision code. And this is specific to the ETJ subdivision ordinance. Those are reviewed by the city's engineering department and approved. Then construction would commence, and finally, that final plat is recorded with the county, and those lots become legal lots. There's also a remainder, and the applicant has expressed an intent to annex that, that's the northern portion of the property, into the city at a future date, although there's no application for that at this time. Additional notes here, and we'll get into this in further detail is that the final plat is not in conformance with what was approved on the preliminary plat application. I'm gonna ask Vana to rotate my screen here and then zoom in just a little bit. So this exhibit shows a side by side. On the left is the preliminary plat, which was approved by the commission in October. Could you zoom in just a little bit more? Thank you. Perfect. And then on the right side of this shows what has been submitted as the final plat. So the most significant difference here, and what we feel is important to point out to the commission is that the road, which is centennial road and in the future will likely connect to the existing centennial road to the east of this, is no longer centered on the section line right-of-way. So that section line right-of-way exists. It has not been vacated. The end of this property is about three quarters of a mile from Centennial Road to the east. The preliminary plat, including the preliminary road design, showed this road centered on that section line, which would allow for a future connection with or without subdivision of the adjacent properties because of that existing statutory section line right-of-way, which is 66 feet in width. The final plat now shifts that road alignment further north and entirely onto the subject properties boundaries within the subject property boundaries. So the section line is not being vacated here. It will still exist. The right-of-way is in excess of what would otherwise be required, and the road alignment is now 36 feet or so north. This also creates a tighter curve, as you can see on this screen. So this is further out of compliance with the submitted variances along with the preliminary plat. I won't belabor this any further. You go to the next one. Yeah, thank you.