Council receives report on proposed West Artesia self‑storage; no entitlements approved

The Bellflower City Council on Feb. 24 voted 3-2 to receive and file a staff report on a proposal to build a four‑story, multi‑level self‑storage facility on a remnant parcel within the West Artesia Specific Plan area. The council did not approve any entitlements at the meeting; staff said environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has not yet been completed.

The project parcel previously carried entitlements for a 69‑room Comfort Inn granted in 2019 but remained undeveloped. The applicant, Jason Borg, said hotels no longer pencil out on the site and proposed a 141,000‑square‑foot building with roughly 105,000 square feet of rentable climate‑controlled storage, 16 on‑site parking spaces and an agreement for 11 shared spaces on the adjacent WoodSpring Suites parcel. Borg said the project would include 24/7 surveillance, gated access and private patrols and estimated construction costs at about $25 million.

Staff and the applicant outlined the entitlements required to allow the use. Elizabeth Ova, Director of Planning and Building Services, told the council the West Artesia Specific Plan does not currently allow self‑storage and that the proposal would need a Development Agreement Zone Layover (DASL), a zone change and a General Plan amendment to change the site’s designation from commercial to industrial. Ova said the project as presented "does not allow for self storage facilities nor does it have any development standards or operational standards for them," and that the application cannot be approved until the city completes the required environmental review.

The applicant has proposed a development agreement structure that would provide the city a perpetual annual payment of $170,000 as a substitute for the transient occupancy tax anticipated from an earlier hotel entitlement. The proposed agreement would also include buyout options: a city‑initiated buyout could be triggered any time after five years and a developer‑initiated buyout after 10 years; the applicant estimated a net present value (NPV) buyout of approximately $2,125,000 using an 8% discount rate. Tay, the city finance representative, told council members that the NPV varies substantially with discount‑rate and growth assumptions and suggested that using a lower discount rate or factoring growth could double or quadruple the buyout amount.

Parking and circulation were central points of debate. Staff said a 100‑room hotel would require roughly 92 parking spaces—about 40 more than would be available on the remnant parcel even counting the 11 shared spaces from WoodSpring—and that special agreements or amendments would be needed to make more permanent parking available. Jim (staff) and others said Southern California Edison has recently been more open to temporary overflow parking in its rights‑of‑way but warned that Edison does not typically permit permanent, entitlement‑tied parking.

Supporters and opponents spoke during public comment. Frank Miranda, who lives at a nearby mobile‑home community, urged the council to approve a secured, well‑maintained storage project now, saying recent cleanups and security patrols had improved conditions nearby. "This project with the storage, I think it's gonna be a very good benefit for the community," Miranda told the council. Applicant Jason Borg said the site has attracted encampments and illegal dumping and argued that a secured storage facility would reduce blight and bring payroll and property tax benefits back to Bellflower: "A self storage facility will actively mitigate these issues by improving security and site maintenance," he said.

Staff's recommendation recorded in the staff report was to deny the application because the project as submitted lacked the environmental review needed for council approval; the city attorney and city manager reminded council members that the council could not approve entitlements at this meeting without compliant CEQA review. After discussion the council declined to deny the application and instead voted to receive and file the report, which allows staff to process an application and, if complete, return the project through the regular public‑hearing and environmental review process.

The substitute motion to deny the application was made by Mayor Pro Tem Sonny Santanez and failed on a 2‑3 vote (Santanez and Council Member Dan Coops voted yes on denial; Council Members Sanchez, Morse and Mayor Dunton voted no). The subsequent motion to receive and file — made by Mayor Dunton and seconded by Council Member Wendy Morris — passed on a 3‑2 roll call (Sanchez, Morse and Dunton yes; Santanez and Coops no).

Next steps: because the council chose to receive and file, staff will continue processing the application, complete the required CEQA analysis and, if the application is complete, proceed to noticed public hearings and consideration of the zone change, General Plan amendment and development agreement. Any final approval would require completion of CEQA review and subsequent council action.