Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />SEPTEMBER 14, 2017 <br />Buesing clarified that this is a new interim use pen -nit and not extending an <br />existing one. Mr. Lee Rossow stated that he owns several properties in the <br />industrial park and none of his uses have changed for many years. <br />There were no comments from the public. <br />Schwalbach recommended approval of the five year Interim Use Permit for <br />outdoor storage at 3164 Ryan Lane, with the conditions stated in the <br />Planners report, and a start date of August 25, 2015. <br />Motion seconded by Johnson. <br />Motion carried 6 — 0. <br />PUD AMENDMENT The Associate Planner explained that Hearth Development, owner and <br />FOR INCREASED <br />developer of Cardigan Ridge at 3300 Rice Street, has applied for a Planned <br />SIGNAGE AND A <br />Unit Development (PUD) amendment that would allow permanent signage <br />GAZEBO AT <br />in excess of that allowed by Code, and the addition of an accessory <br />CARDIGAN RIDGE building gazebo to the property. She stated that this property is zoned <br />SENIOR LIVING, <br />PUD, Planned Unit Development, with a guided use of R-3, high density <br />3300 RICE STREET; <br />residential. She noted that there was no design plan for the gazebo <br />APPLICANT: <br />submitted, so staff will review to ensure that the design and materials will <br />LITTLE CANADA <br />be complimentary with the exterior of the building. She stated that the site <br />SENIOR <br />plan did not show the setback of the accessory building from the pond, so <br />PROPERTIES, <br />staff has requested this information to ensure it complies. The Associate <br />LLC/HEARTH <br />Planner reported that Hearth Development will also be replacing the <br />DEVELOPMENT <br />woodchip path around the pond area with a hard surface to better serve <br />their residents who use wheelchairs and walkers. She noted the applicant is <br />working with the watershed district on these items. <br />The Associate Planner reviewed the signage request, explaining that the <br />property is guided by the R-3, High Density Residential Zoning District, <br />which has signage guidelines, although within a PUD District, there is <br />flexibility to deviate from the zoning code. She stated that the applicant <br />has indicated that although they are a residential property, they also have a <br />commercial component with the need to attract senior residents on a regular <br />basis. The applicant feels this rate of resident turnover brings a uniqueness <br />that warrants the increase in signage. The Associate Planner explained <br />that the applicant is requesting to be allowed two freestanding signs; a <br />monument sign along Rice Street, and a pylon style sign along Country <br />Drive. She stated that they have requested to have the sign area on each <br />sign be 60 square feet rather than the allowed 35 square feet. She noted <br />that no wall signage is being proposed. She explained that the 120 square <br />feet is less than what would be allowed in a commercial district, and even <br />though this property is residential, it is surrounded by commercial <br />-2- <br />