Laserfiche WebLink
be a heavy volume of trade related as it is to the shopping center anci the industrial <br />area to the north and west. The sife indicates no aff-street parking which is,,of <br />course,required as a part o.f the ordinance. <br />4. We are also concerned �about the aesthetics of the site in question inasmuch <br />as this interse�tion will be a very important arid prominent e�ntrance to the <br />shopping cent�er and the� quality industria) area to the west. No p{ans wer� <br />submitted as t�� the design of the service station itself, but v�ie note that th� <br />service bays are oriented toward the shopping �center (east). A number of <br />better designed service stafiions recentiy have ��riented the service bays towards <br />the rear of the service station site rather than toward the front as proposed <br />in this case. Perhaps, because the site is small for the location, this may be <br />difficult under the circ��mstances. <br />5. The appl icant has also requested a 10 foat setl;�ack on the nc�rth side rather <br />than a 20 foot as required in the industrial zone. Here again, the need <br />for such a request demonstrates the fact that the site may well be inadequate <br />for the structure and volume of business proposed. In any c�se, it is extremely <br />impnrtant that adequate off-street pa�lcing be providec� . The site as currently <br />' d�signed cannot provide this space. <br />6. It would also be advisable to question the Dayton Development Corporation <br />as to their proposal for any further service stations in relationship to the <br />shaR�ing center. With the extreme shortage of land that exists contiguous <br />to and in the vicinity of the shopping center, it would seem to us des9rable <br />to insure a single, large, well designed service station in the vicinity of <br />the westeriy side of th� shopping center. We question whether the current <br />proposal satisfies this criteria. <br />� <br />, :, <br />