Riverside blocks one path to U-Haul taking over former K-Mart site

City council voted not to rezone the property but could alter current zoning code

RIVERSIDE — U-Haul’s plan to transform the former site of a K-Mart store into a storage and truck terminal was blocked this week after city officials voted against rezoning the property.

In a 6-1 vote, the City Council voted not to rezone the property ― located on Woodman Drive ― from general business to light industrial. Mayor Peter Williams cast the lone vote in favor rezoning the property.

Rezoning is not the only way U-Haul could get what it needs. At a meeting that’s scheduled for Monday, the City Planning Commission will consider an amendment allowing indoor storage and retail moving centers under business zoning.

City Council Member April Franklin said she is not opposed to U-Haul moving into the space, but would rather change the zoning code than rezone the property.

“I hated that the change in the zoning became about either pro-U-Haul or against U-Haul, and to me it should never have been that,” she said. “It shouldn’t have been about a business … This is about finding the best use for that space … Basically, the city is considering changing what business zoning means.”

Williams said the zoning code is out of date and he doesn’t view U-Haul’s proposal for the site as an industrial use.

“But the zoning code that we were presented with, that’s the only way we could make it work and try to reinvigorate a major corridor in our city that has more vacancies that we care to deal with and that was before COVID,” he said.

Williams pointed out that there is more than a quarter-million square feet of empty retail space in the Woodman-Harshman corridor, and U-Haul has been a reliable partner to the city in the past. U-Haul plans to purchase the former K-Mart property and invest about $7 million in the proposed project.

Not everyone in Riverside wants U-Haul to take over the space. One community member said at Thursday’s public hearing that citizens are not excited about a storage facility and the city is “settling” for a less than ideal business at the location.

Council Member Brenda Fry said she is concerned about the adverse effects large truck traffic would have on residents surrounding the proposed U-Haul site. She also pointed out that self-storage does not create many jobs.

Although the only application the city has received for that property is from U-Haul, a woman speaking during the public hearing said she was an attorney representing a Fortune 500 retailer that is interested in the location and maintaining its current zoning.

Another community member said during the public hearing that if the city council prevents U-Haul from moving in, the council members should work hard to find a better business to occupy that location.

About the Author