Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Commercial Grooming Cup topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission approves Good Clean Dog grooming at Hanley Industrial Court with sign and paint conditions

5764075 · June 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission recommended approval of a conditional-use permit for a Good Clean Dog grooming salon with a drive-up pick-up canopy, subject to sign-plan compliance and exterior painting limitations; commissioners asked the applicant to submit a revised comprehensive sign plan to staff before final permits.

The Planning and Zoning Commission on June 11 recommended approval of a conditional-use permit for Good Clean Dog, a dog-grooming business proposed for 1234 Hanley Industrial Court, with conditions tying any new or altered exterior signs and façade painting to a comprehensive sign-plan review.

Applicant Jen Stewart described the business as grooming-only (no boarding or daycare) and said a key feature will be a “Car Side Fetch” pickup canopy at the rear of the building; the operation requires harnesses (for safety) and enrollment to use the car-side process, and Stewart said no transactions would be taken at the pickup point because a card on file would be required. "Car Side Fetch ... will require enrollment," Stewart told the commission, explaining additional safety measures.

Staff reminded the commission that the site sits within a parcel that has a recently adopted comprehensive sign plan for the front elevations; the applicant had initially proposed a turquoise paint treatment that staff said would conflict with the front-facing comprehensive sign plan. Staff’s recommendation and the motion included conditions that the tenant’s building elevations be revised to avoid painting the brick (maintain neutral/consistent colors) and that no sign or paint changes occur on the front façade unless they conform to the comprehensive sign plan or an approved modification.

Staff also noted the applicant must submit a revised sign plan showing any canopy or rear elevations that the applicant wants to use as graphic/art elements; staff clarified art or graphics on the building are treated as signage under city code. The commission and applicant agreed a revised comprehensive sign plan or a modification should be submitted before final sign permits; the applicant said she had only received the comprehensive sign-plan documents from the landlord six days before the meeting and requested time to comply.

Commissioners voted unanimously to recommend approval of the conditional-use permit with the stated conditions. The action authorizes the use subject to compliance with the sign-plan and building permit requirements; the recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Aldermen on July 21 for final action. Staff reminded the applicant that exterior painting or signage inconsistent with the comprehensive sign plan could not be implemented until the plan is revised and approved.