Agenda - Council - 09/10/2019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Planner Anderson explained that the shared access agreement would solve that problem. He noted that conceptual drawing showed an access onto Bunker but advised that would need further discussion and approval from the County. Bob Mikulak, applicant, stated that the previous owner owned the entire parcel and has many ideas. He stated that his idea is to develop the self -storage and sell the corner lot. He stated that he is not interested in a phased access and would rather place the access in its final location to begin with. He highlighted the differences between this request and the previously approved request which includes elimination of the garage doors, elimination of the fencing, no site lighting, less blacktop and hardcover, increased greenspace, and downcast LED lighting on the building and along the entrance/exit. He stated that the previous request was roughly 125,800 square feet which would be constructed in several phases while this facility would be completed in one phase with similar square footage. He stated that this building will be much more efficient in terms of energy and technology. He stated that loading and unloading would all occur inside the facility rather than having outdoor units, which will make the site quieter and cleaner. Chairperson Bauer asked the size of the interior loading/unloading space. Mr. Mikulak replied that the doors would be 12 feet high and therefore could accommodate typical moving vans but would not accommodate a U-Haul type vehicle. He noted that the unloading section is 40 feet by 60 feet. Ron Powell, architect representing the applicant, stated that his firm has experience with self - storage buildings and their experience is that most zoning laws do not provide for self -storage facilities in terms of parking requirements. He stated that a list of six buildings in the metro area was provided that range from seven to 12 parking stalls and therefore they feel the 25 required stalls would be excessive. He stated that they would be proposing 13 parking stalls. He noted that he also included national examples, which range from five to 12 parking stalls. He noted that one city has an updated zoning ordinance that bases the number of stalls on the number of storage units and using that calculation this facility would require 12 stalls. He stated that they would have 13 exterior parking stalls and four interior stalls, which they feel would be more than adequate. Chairperson Bauer asked the basis of the staff request to add additional parking. City Planner Anderson stated that recommendation was based on the recommendation of the civil engineer of the applicant, which stated 25 or 26 parking stalls. He clarified that the City does not have self -storage minimum parking standards within the zoning code. He stated that the City would typically look to see how others have addressed the issue and there are not a lot of standards out there specifically related to self -storage facilities. He stated that he did review the ordinance of Portland, Oregon and the parking proposed by the applicant would meet the parking proposal of the applicant. He stated that there is more greenspace on the site than existed in previous proposals. He noted that proof of parking could be accepted, as there would be space for additional parking on the site, should that become an issue in the future. Planning Commission/ July 10, 2019 Page 11 of 13