Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Storage Facilities Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve several mini-warehouse projects and ask staff to review storage parking rules
Summary
The board approved multiple mini-warehouse (self-storage) projects across the valley and directed staff to return with a Title 30 cleanup to reconsider parking requirements for storage facilities after commissioners said current rules may have unintentionally increased parking minimums.
Get email alerts on the Storage Facilities Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County commissioners approved a series of mini-warehouse (self-storage) applications across Enterprise and other areas while several commissioners flagged that Title 30 changes may have unintentionally raised parking requirements for storage uses.
Applications for mini-warehouse projects (multiple use permits and waivers) were presented by applicants including Andrea Carroll and Jennifer Lazovich and by counsel Bob Groenauer. The projects sought waivers ranging from reduced parking and driveway-width changes to modifications of buffering and screening and reduced driveway throat depth. Projects described in the hearing included sites at Valley View and Frias, Neil Avenue near I-15, and Arville Street near Windmill.
Andrea Carroll described a project at Valley View Boulevard and Frias Avenue and said the majority of the waivers were due to a power easement and updates to Title 30. After the presentation, Commissioner Christian Jones said he recommended granting the requested parking reduction "but also, that we bring back an agenda item, whether it's this specific or a title 30 cleanup, to consider whether that was the right direction to go on storage units" because the Title 30 change had resulted in increased parking in some cases. Jennifer Lazovich and Bob Groenauer presented separate mini-warehouse proposals; Groenauer told commissioners his Arville Street site is "approximately an acre and a quarter" and that the project proposes a reduction in parking from 20 required spaces to 10 on-site, plus roll-up-door loading zones. Groenauer said the proposal provides "more than sufficient parking for a facility like this."
Commissioners extracted conditions in several cases: where detached sidewalks or vacations of right-of-way were required, applicants were told to coordinate with public works; one motion included a modification to allow elimination of detached sidewalks along Bridal Avenue where appropriate. Where applicants withdrew waivers (for example, an applicant withdrew a waiver allowing an attached sidewalk and will instead pursue a vacation to permit a detached sidewalk), commissioners noted the change on the record.
Mr. Jones' request that staff evaluate whether Title 30's parking requirements for storage facilities are appropriate was accepted on the record as a direction to return with a cleanup or discussion item. Several mini-warehouse items were then approved by motions that passed. Public comment on these items was minimal; one resident supported redevelopment of a vacant lot but had no substantive objection specific to storage uses.
The approvals allow projects to proceed to engineering and permit review, subject to the usual staff conditions and any needed right-of-way or public-works modifications. The board's request to review Title 30 parking standards creates a follow-up policy task for county planning staff.
