Commission approves 24,290‑sq‑ft commercial building with outdoor storage amid easement dispute

The Planning Commission on Jan. 22 unanimously approved a conditional use permit, CUP S‑20230011, to construct a 24,290‑square‑foot industrial tilt‑up building with about 8,717 square feet of outdoor storage on a 3.84‑acre parcel north of 875 Cochran Street. Staff also determined the project is exempt from CEQA.

Associate Planner Ruchi Chaparian presented the project and staff's recommendation, describing access via two shared access easements from Cochran Street and planned improvements inside the easements (paving, restriping and landscaping). Staff said the project meets the West End specific plan's height, setback, parking and landscaping requirements and recommended approval with conditions, including a new condition clarifying that a depicted freeway sign on the plan is not part of the CUP.

Applicant representatives (architect Brian Poliquin and applicant Michael Lohman of Coolant Rentals) said the project would serve manufacturing, warehousing and outdoor storage needs, and that the applicant intends to occupy part of the building initially and could accommodate additional tenants later.

Public comment focused on a private civil dispute between the applicant and the abutting property owner over a recorded access easement and prior encroachments onto that easement. Doug Feldinger, who said he owns the property to the west and is the dominant tenement under the 1988 access easement, described a history of negotiated rights and a 2017 amendment allowing his encroachments and said the project as shown would invade those encroachments; he urged the commission not to approve the project as presented. Attorney Pooja Nair, representing Crockman Properties (the dominant tenement), argued the CUP, if granted, would permit changes that impair her client's recorded property rights and said the dispute should give the commission pause.

City staff and the applicant responded that the planning commission is not the appropriate forum to adjudicate private property rights and that the city was processing the land‑use application on the applicant's representation of legal authority; staff pointed to a January 20 supplemental response to the attorneys' letters. The project's civil engineer said the tentative map and title report show recorded easements and that the project plan reflects those easements.

Commissioners discussed compatibility and expressed concern that the easement dispute remain unresolved but noted that the planning commission's role is land‑use review; several commissioners encouraged the parties to seek resolution. Commissioner Tolson moved to adopt the resolution approving CUP S‑20230011; the motion was seconded and passed unanimously.