Ogden board studying self storage facility zoning issues No vote taken at Nov. 13 public hearing

Following a pubic hearing held November 13, members of the Ogden Town Board are taking some time to contemplate issues raised by residents concerned about a proposed local law that regulates and authorizes self storage facilities in the town.

Supervisor Gay Lenhard tells the Suburban News that the public hearing, held during the board’s regular meeting, lasted two hours. The law proposes self storage as a conditional use in the Restricted Business, Neighborhood Commercial, and General Commercial Districts of the town as well as in the Light Industrial District which is the only district where the facilities are currently permissible.

Resident Duane Gaul says eight people spoke during the hearing. He says he does not believe the zoning changes are a good idea. Gaul and other residents shared a great amount of information with the board.

Gaul prepared a chart showing the zoning codes for all the towns in Monroe County and where sheds and warehouses are allowed. A second chart showed that 20 self storage shed businesses are located within a 14-mile radius of Slayton Avenue in Spencerport. “Do we have enough people living in Ogden (pop. 19,856 according to the 2010 census) to support another self storage facility?” Gaul questions. “We already have 20 self storage facilities within 14 miles of Slayton Avenue in Spencerport. How many of these facilities do we need in the western part of Monroe County?”

He also discussed the need to make proposal 210-92 – which is an addition to the zoning code providing guidelines for the establishment of the facilities – more strict. “A fence should be required around the perimeter of the storage facility,” Gaul says. “A password protected, automatic gate should be required at the entrance… evergreen trees should NOT be planted around the perimeter….we don’t want to hide criminal activity and block the view of citizens and police officers.”

Gaul also says the code change would allow existing buildings to be repurposed as self storage facilities.
Additional concerns discussed included crime problems with self storage facilities, the issue of facilities auctioning off items of people who don’t pay their rent and town board members were shown photographs of good versus bad self storage shed businesses.

Resident Frank Rakoski also spoke during the public hearing.

“The debate was not so much over allowing or denying self storage facilities in the town, but over the best method to allow them, and still retain town control over their location and appearance,” Rakoski says.

The Town of Ogden currently does not have any self-storage facilities, he says, and based on Duane Gaul’s research in addition to other speaker comments, “… it seems a single facility of about 400-500 units would likely serve the current needs of the town.”

Rakoski also points out that builders/developers currently have multiple path-ways to build a facility under existing laws and codes including, #1 – building in a Light Industrial District; #2 – a specific property could be rezoned to Light Industrial, if the Town Board feels it is appropriate and immediate neighbors agree; or #3 – a conditional use permit or a use variance can be applied for on any specific property in any current zoning district without rezoning it, he says.

“This would require Zoning Board of Appeals approval at a public hearing,” Rakoski says. “Also the ZBA could put restrictions on the permit, as well as deny the request.”

Rakoski says he sees several major drawbacks to the proposed code change. “Basically, it would allow a builder/developer to place these facilities on any current commercially zoned parcels, or any parcel that is rezoned to commercial in the future. This means that no town board hearing and approval would be needed for any of these commercial parcels. The zoning board of appeals would have a hearing to issue a conditional use approval, but it would be very difficult, if not impossible, for them to deny the request, due to the wording of the proposed code change. The ZBA would have a difficult time refusing the request to build a facility if it met the new code – even if the location was not desired by the residents or the town board, and even if sufficient facilities already existed.”

11/24/13