CORRESPONDENCE
MEMORANDUM
4 February 1987
TO:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Zoning Board
FROM:
Carmen S. Annunzatio
Planning Director
RE:
Cross Creek Centre - Parking Lot Variance
Section 5-144(c)(4) of the Code of Ordinances requires that
when a variance to Section 5, Article X, Parking Lots is
requested, the Technical Review Board must forward to the
Planning and Zoning Board a recommendation, and that the
recommendation forwarded is to be made part of the public
hearing proceedings. To that end, this memo is forwarded
consistent with 5-144(c)(4).
Kevin McGinley, agent for Steven Rhodes, has requested a
variance to Section 5-141(m) "Fire Lanes" of the Parking Lot
Regulations which requires that all shopping centers,
retail-office complexes, and retail establishments for which
the gross floor area is fifteen thousand (15,000) square
feet or greater shall have fire lanes along the front of all
buildings which shall allow efficient access to the fronts
of all buildings by fire protection vehicles. Furthermore,
five lanes shall not be encumbered by parked vehicles, and
shall not be used for loading or unloading of commercial
vehicles. In this instance, the applicant is requesting
relief from the requirement for fire lanes along the front
of the 20,000 square foot commercial building and the 15,000
square foot office building. The variance request is being
submitted in connection with subsequent site plan approval
which proposes to construct a 35,000 square foot
retailloffice planned commercial development, consisting of
a 20,000 square foot commercial building and a 15,000 square
foot office building. For an explanation of the code
requirement, the nature of the variance requested, and the
variance justification, please refer to the attached Notice
of Public Hearing and application.
On Tuesday, February 3, 1987 the Technical Review Board
(TRB) met to review the plans and documents submitted, and
to formulate a recommendation with regard to the variance
requested. After review and discussion, the TRB recommended
that the variance requested be approved in part and denied
in part. With respect to the recommendation for approval,
the TRB made findings that requiring the applicant to
construct a fire lane along the front of both the commercial
building and the office building would impose an
unreasonable hardship owing to the narrow configuration of
the parcel. Therefore, the TRB recommended approval of the
variance request to eliminate the fire lane in front of the
15,000 square foot office building, provided that this
bUilding be sprinkled. However, the request to eliminate
the fire lane in front of the 20,000 square foot commercial
building was denied. The reasons for this recommendation
are as follows: ^