Laserfiche WebLink
fl! 11 X71 1 VO•:J1 V111 Vl" LVU1V, 1LLL <br />J1 41 un:14P11 FROM KOELBEL <br />FOELBEL <br />Bill Simmons <br />Tom Davidson <br />Paul Wood <br />Members of City Council <br />March 31, 1997 <br />Page 5 <br />APR. 01 '97 (TUE) 09:58 <br />V V <br />COMMUNICATION No:38' <br />1 <br />nn 11V. JUJU I JOV`t <br />TO 5739043 <br />?i)015/ 00i5 <br />J. 9. SPECIAL DESIGN STANDARDS LARGE RETAIL <br />ESTABLISHMENTS <br />A. 1 9.1 BUILDING ENTRANCES We would like to <br />specifically go on record to state that even a guideline which <br />states that each side of a large retail building facing a public <br />street must have one customer entrance Is in direct violation of <br />the function and security requirements for such retailers. <br />Consequently, this guideline is unacceptabk. <br />B. 1 9.2 PARKING LOT O <br />RIENTATION Virtually no <br />rationale was presented justifying any requirement establishing <br />a maximum amount of parking between the front facade of the <br />principal building and primary abutting street. This will be <br />unacceptable to the very category this paragraph provides for. <br />Consequently, it is an unacceptable Standard from o <br />perspective. <br />Following extensive discussion and explanation on our part representing a developer <br />and user position, we have, outlined and identified by italics the above areas ti at <br />continue to be unacceptable from our standpoint. Our <br />the Primary concern focuses on <br />he com <br />prehensive nature of this document and the utilization of restrictive <br />"Standards" which, approved by ordinance, will make it most difficult to effectuate <br />a reasonable process for changes in the future. <br />PAGE. 6 <br />1 UU/. UV <br />