02/01/2022 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Mack presented the case to the board. Mr. Mack stated that while reviewing the civil site plan the City was able to determine the dimensions between structures was 26' and the minimum fire lane is 24' therefore if the fire lane is centered between the structures there would be 1' on either side which does not meet the required 12' parking and loading area as required by ordinance. He continued that upon further examination the ordinance had not been enforced on the first phase of this project or other similar projects in the City. Mr. Mack continued that if the variance is approved, there will be a 20' fire lane turning radius requirement that cannot be deviated from. A diagram has been presented as a potential option for the client to provide a safe turning movement for emergency access on both sides of the structures. The 24' width still allows for two- way traffic and would provide standard width requirement for 90 degree parking. Mr. Mack mentioned that there will still be locations available for parking between buildings and that most of the parking will be short term for loading and unloading. Lastly, Mr. Mack recommended approval to the board with no conditions based on the staff findings of fact. Mr. Sanders stated that this project is not very old, so he did not understand how the codes allowed the development to be built as it is to begin with. Mr. Mack replied that both the developers engineer and the City staff did not initially identify this requirement and for that apologies have been extended to the developer. He also noted that the first phase was built before he and the current engineer were on staff. Mr. Mack assured the board the moving forward the City is now aware of the requirement and will enforce it consistently. Ms. Alsobrook asked if there will have to be additional construction to accommodate the turning radius. Mr. Mack explained that this addition is in the beginning phases of development and this radius along with any other minor changes can still be revised on the plat if needed since it has not yet been recorded. There are also other turning radius options that have been provided by the civil engineer currently in review. This variance will help with the finalization of the civil site plan and help the developers move forward with the building permit process. Ms. Bruce clarified that the variance in question is for parking spaces. Mr. Mack confirmed that it is and continued by explaining that currently the parking is proposed to be in between buildings. This area is provided by the larger spacing between the buildings to avoid the firewall or sprinkler requirements. Otherwise, the fire lane would be temporarily obstructed while customers are loading and unloading. Ms. Bruce asks if two cars will be able to fit between the buildings. Mr. Mack replied that the space between the buildings is big enough for two cars to pass or turn around. In addition, fire trucks would have two possible routes in case of emergency. Ms. Alsobrook asked where the fire hydrants would go. Mr. Mack confirmed that the minimum distance requirements have already been discussed and will be met. Mr. Sanders asked if it is the City's opinion that there will be minimum safety issues. Mr. Mack replied that this is a fair statement. Stephanie Harris, City Attorney, reminded the Board that the issue before of the Board is whether to grant the variance presented and not to address other development.