Laserfiche WebLink
• Block 1, Barrett' s .Addition, 3900 Fordham Drive. <br /> __Motion carried- unanimously. <br /> The meeting was recessed from 7 :56 to 8 :00 P.M. <br /> Chairman then- opened the Public Hearing on the -rezoning request <br /> from Mr. Gordon Hedlund for beauty shop at 3909 Silver Lake Road. <br /> Mr. Hedlund presented-his- proposal for remodeling the existing struc- <br /> ture to accomodate the Gold .Tiara Beauty Shop by introducing the owner, <br /> Mr. Jim Hughes, , whose beauty shop is now located on Old Highway 8 in <br /> New Brighton. Major .remodeling of the 864 square foot structure would <br /> be- mostly interior with .�some dressing up of the exterior of the build- <br /> ing, but a retention .of. the. residential character of the property. <br /> There would be 8parking' '9paces provided in front;�of':.the 'building with <br /> traffic directed onto Silver Lake Road. Mr. Hedlund discussed with <br /> Mr. Hiebel .the manner in, which: the parking lot would be graded and said <br /> the signage .would probably be of the monumental type. He then showed <br /> a rough draft of .such a sign which is almost identical in appearance <br /> and size to the Herfurth Realty Company next door. <br /> When Mr. Johnson said hewas not .opposed to the beauty salon per se <br /> but felt the request would result in spot zoning which he did oppose, <br /> Mr'. Hedlund said it- had not .been• his intention to rezone the property <br /> • but' only to seek a special use permit which would restrict the use of <br /> the property to only the use he•rwas seeking. When it was pointed out <br /> to him that the beauty shop was not a permitted use for RII property <br /> under the new; -zoning ordinance, the developer expressed his surprise <br /> that the property had. to be rezoned- to..allow the beauty shop and said <br /> he would have expressed more opposition,%:ao the new ordinance if he had <br /> realized it was ,even more restrictive when applied to his property than <br /> the old zoning ordinance. He questioned whether it made sense or was <br /> fair to disallow. his proposal..which he felt was so similar to those <br /> from Twin �Ci.ty .Federal and Herfurth Realty for -which conditional use <br /> permits had -so recently been. granted.. <br /> Mr. Hedlund then reiterated:�aall. the difficulties he had encountered in <br /> his attempts to develop this and .the otehr property adjoining over the <br /> past 16 years, especially citing how .his early efforts to develop the <br /> area .for RII had been thwarted. <br /> He mentioned how the Nason Wehrman Chapman study of the area had re- <br /> commended -that .a strip .be devoted to service office usage and felt it <br /> was too late -to prevent such .a development now that approval had been <br /> given .to Herfurth and Twin City Federal. He expressed bitterness that <br /> the City had now made ,it even more complicated for him to develop his <br /> property profitably than it had been under the old zoning ordinance. <br /> Mr. Cowan felt the logical approach was for Mr'. Hedlund to .present 'a <br /> • plan for the development of the entire tract rather than approach its <br /> disposal in a piecemeal manner and suggested the developer ask the <br /> City. for a planned concept for all the property. <br /> -2- <br />