The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPH 1 USE PERMIT 84-27 02-04-85 ..... CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - NO. 1 A 2-4-85 DATE: January 29, 1985 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: HONORABLE FIRYOR AND CTTY COUNCIL COflHUNZTY DEYELOPflENT DEPARTNENT APPEAL OF USE PERHZT 84-27 STORAGE FACILITY AT 550 #. 6th STREET DISCUSSION: The City Council at its meeting on December 18, 1984 appealed Use Permit 84-27 which would have authorized construction of a _1~o story public storage warehouse with on-site caretaker's residence at 550 W. 6th Street. The proposal included variances for reduction in the stdeyard setback adjoining the Foster Art property and reduction in parking requirements. The proposal included a request by the new property owner Calder Hughes & Co. to encroach 10 feet into a city easement along the westerly side of the property adjoining the Tusttn Boys Club. Attached to this transmittal are copies of staff's original report to the Planning Commission at which time we recommended approval of this project. The Planning Commission on Decembr 10, 1984 approved the subject use permit which was subsequently appealed by Council. In staff's opinion, the project is an appropriate use for the property since it should not produce significant traffic and circulation impacts on 6th Street. The remaining issue to be resolved is the proposed encroachment by the project proponent 10 feet into a city ingress and egress easement. The easement was originally 41.75 feet in width in favor of the city of Tustin to provide access to the rear of the Boys Club property for future water well purposes. Since it is probable that a well may not be located on the Boys Club property due to future widening of the I-5, it appears acceptable to relinquish a portion of our easement to that matching an underlying easement possessed by Metropolitan Water District. Therefore, if the Council agrees and sells the 10 feet of easement as requested, our ultimate easement will be co-terminus with MWD's. C~C7 Council Use Permtt 84-27 page ~o RECaNqE#DATZO#: Pleasure of the Counctl Director of Communt~7 Development DDL:do attach: Calder Hughes & Co. let~ar,'Jan. 8th Planntng Commission staff report on Use Per,Hr 84-27, Dec. loth Blue prtnts Community Development 'Department Repor to the Planning_ Commission DATE: DI:C~BER 10, 1984 SUIMECT: USE Pt~!1T 84-27 ITE~ NO. 4 OtmER/ APPLICAIE: LOCATTON: ZONING: ~ILLI~I HUGHES, STUART CALDER 650 WEST SIXTil SIREEr (PM) Pt. AMIIED INOUSTRIAL ENYTRONI4ENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: A HEGATTYE DECX.JUtATI011 HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR TO COMPLY Hl'lll THE CALIFORNIA ENYIRONMENTAL QUALI'T'T ACT. AUTHORTZATZON TO COliSTRUCT' A STORAGE FACZLZ'I'T Mrfll oii-Sl"l~ CARETAI~3~S RESXDENC~ WHILE VARYING ilITH THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND ONE SIDE YARD SETBACk. BACKGItOUNO: This property was for~erly owned by the Ctty of Tusttn and purchased by Walter Foster in ~ep~er 1979. In Decrier of 1979 and August of 1981, ~o separa~ var4ances were approved for a proposed warehouse for the Foster A~ co. lex whtch was ~vee but1:. DEYELOPRENT PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to develop a self storage facility with 49g units totalling $1,790 square feet with an on-site caretaker's ~estdence. Pursuant to Section 9242 b of the zoning code, residential uses for caretakers (in conjunction with Industrial uses) require a conditional use pe~it. This proposed project is a fatrly new innovation in the storage business where all the units a~e contained within one structure rather than the traditional storage units that appear to be garages. This proposed structure has three loading areas with elevator access to the second story. The site plans submitted and attached to this submittal tndtcate nine parking spaces proposed for this project. The applicants have applied to' vary from the number of spaces tequtred for a storage facility (one space per 2.000). The applicants have developed and own the Trabuco Self Storage and the Anaheim Self-Storage. A traffic study was performed for the facility in Anaheim which is attached to this report. In Tusttn, the public storage facility on Dow and Franklin Avenues contains 571 units and provides four striped stalls. The Koll Company storage facility at Redhill. and Moulton which contains 584 units, provides three striped spaces. Corn reunify Development Department .Planning Commission Report Use Permit' 84-27 page t~o The developers a~e requesting ~ yaw from the stde yard setback on the es~erly stde of the building. The code ~equ~rement for ~e stde yard setback feet and ~e st~ plan shes ~e propos~ bu~ld~ng at s~x ~nches. The existing ;os~ A~ ~ctltt7, con=Jguous ~ ~e east of ~e proposed ~act~ttT, set back stx ~nches whtch ~ans that ~e~ would ~ a one ~oot gap be~n ~e p~oposed but]dtng ~nd ~e ~xtsttng ~n~. The a~ea ~een ~e bu~dtngs be a "dead" o~ useless a~ea ~ga~dless tf the se~ack ~s 6 1riches o~ ~ because of ~e variance whtch was ~an~ed ~ ~e butld~ng nex~ doo~. Butld~ng elevations submitted tndica~a pa~n~ad concrete panels wtth ve~ctcal board trim and oak ftntsh doors. The mansard w~11 be standtng seam ribbed roof which wtll resemble spanish ttle.. e From past expe~fences it appears that-the amount of traffic genera~l by this use is lass than most Industrial uses and. the parking spaces shown on the plan would be adequate. The side yard se+back vartance request is justified stnce the adjoining complex also varies from the se+back. S~aff ~ecommends that this dead area be fenced as ~o preclude any small children or animals f~om venturing In between the buildings.. The eleyations have been upgraded ~o give somewhat of a ~estdenttal flavor to the surrounding area. 4. On the westerly proper~y line there ts a 31' 9" stde yard setback t~ comply wtth l~e Metropolitan Water Ots~'t.ct Easement. REO]I~EgDAT]OI: S~aff ~ecommends that Use Peri,it 84-27 be approved by the adoptton of Resolution No. 2201 with conditions of approval 11s~ed tn Exhtbtt "A". MARY A~t?,;CHAMBERLAIN, Associate Planner MAC:do Attchments: Site and elevation plans Traffic study Exhibit "A" Resolution No. 2201 - Development Review Summary Corn munity Development Department -BEVELOPMENT REV1:£~d SUt,~IAR¥ USE PERMIT 84-27 Loca~tOfl/Ot$~C~: 550 W. 6th St-~99~, Planned Industrial District Ac~ton: PROPOSED CODE 25 feet (to match inches &-40 feet 3 feet 25 feet 10 feet 78,000 N/A 61,790 N/A 50 feet. 2 Tilt-up concrete with trim Coverage ~.q~q ?n.nnn 100% less P a~t ng: l~und=er of Spaces Ra'Cto (space/squa~'e foot. age) Pe~:enl:' of' Co~ac~ Spaces Type 9 1 per 2,000 ~one At qrade Uses: public storage with caretaker tlumber o¢ Pub1 tc ]¢ol:tftca'ctons (Owners): Envt ronmen'cal .Stat. us 225 Negative Declaration * Mo Standard JUSTIFICATION FOR PARKING VARIANCE The proposed self-storage facility will contain eight on-site parking spaces plus two areas for loading and unloading storage material. Hours of operation of the facility will be approximately 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. seven days a week. The on-site manager will be allocated one parking space, leaving seven spaces for prospective' customers. Typically, for a self-storage facility, maximum customers using t_he facility at any one time is four, with the average typically running between one and two. Peak periods are likely to occur on the weekend when a majority of the people are not working and doing domestic chores. The excess number of parking spaces during peak periods is three and during normal operation is five. In summary, the proposed eight on-site parking spaces for the proposed self- storage facility is more than adequate for the intended operational use. TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTAi'ION ENGINEERIN~ April 30, 1984 Mr. Jack Jenkins Linkletter Properties 765 Baker Costa Mesa, CA 92626 P'1:."C£11/£0 ~//A¥ .- .[ 1984 Dear Mr, Jenkins: This letter summarizes our review of 'parking needs for your proposed self- storage facility on Lakaview Avenue'in the City of Anaheim. The review is based upon information provided by you and field studies by our staff~ The proposed facility would be located on the east side of LakeviewAve- hue between'La Palma and orangeth°rpe-Avenues- A total of 61g storage units are planned for the facility The site plan indicates ll marked parking spaces outside the gate to serve customers and visitors to the office. All persons must stop at the office to sign in and out when visiting their unit. This is the p~incipal source of the parking' demand. In order to determine parking needs, field stuides were conducted at the Linkletter'Self Storage facility on Imperial Highway iE Brea. This faci- lity'has 773 storage units..and parking for six cars. ~-in records indicated peak activity on weekdays during the 7 to 8 AM, ll:30 AM t~ 1:30 PM and 3to 4 PM periods and all da~ on Saturdays. Observations were made of parking demands at various times and these are sunmarized in Table 1.. Review of Table I indicates that the maximum observed parking demand was for two vehicles. Discussions with the manager of the Brea facility indicated a maximum of four vehicles has been observed. On tile basis of the field observations at the Brea facility, the proposed plan with ll parking spaces would be adequate for the proposed facility. 2651 EA.~I' C"J,,L~PJ)~AN AVFNtlF · RUITE 11O · FULLERTON. CA~.[F~=I_HJ~, g2631 . L7~1 _ -3- Since the proposed facility Will have 20 percent less storage units, the parking demand would also be reduced providing a safety factor.~ The proposed provision of ll parking spaces would be adequate to accommodate 'anticipated parking demands. In sumnary, field studies of a self-storage facility in Brea indicated that the maximum parking requirement was two to four' vehicles. The pro- posed facility with ll spaces will be adequate to acco,~nodate these parking demands. We trust that this study will be of assistance to you and the City of' Anaheim. If you have any questions or requi~e additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted,. Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of California Nu~ers C168~8 & TR565 cc: I~lr. Jim MOffett WSP:bas #84300 'Table 1 PARKING SURVEY SUMMARY DAY TIME PARKED VEHICLES April 25 April 27 April 27 April' 28 April 2B April 28 APril 30 ~u~d~ Friday Friday Satu~ay Sa~ay ~n~y 2:00 PM 7:35 AM 1:30 PM 8:45 AM 12:30 PM 2:45 PM' 7:35 AM 1 1 1 1 2 0