The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About40-Public Works CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO R 7-58/RP87-29/CUP 86-24 - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: ROGER G. HARDGRAVE Ra~_6 Retail Commercial Development - "~A~~t~t Corner of Waterman ~ Aven~ltand Third Street - Request 8 SEp 22fcm Wpt\yer of Traffic Syst Fee -~ME~~~EL DEVELOPMENT Dept: Publ ic Works/Engineering Date: S e p tern b e r 13, 1988 Synopsis of Previous Council action: 09-19-88 -- Request from Merickel Development for waiver of Traffic Systems Fee continued to 10-03-88 Recommended motion: 1. That a non-transferable credit in the amount of $1,548.00, against the Traffic Systems Fee applied to Building IIAII, be authorized. 2. That future non-transferable credits against the Traffic Systems Fees for Buildings IIBII, IICII, 11011, and IIEII, be authorized subject to the condition that Merickel Development applies for building permits as owner and pays the Traffic Systems Fee for each building. 3. That the request from Mer~~kel DevelO~Pt f r waiver System Fee for southeast corner of Wat rm venue denied. c c : Jim Rob bin s Sig Jim Richardson .Jim Ppnmrtn be Michael Loehr. Contact person: M i c h a e 1 W. G rub b s Staff Report, Letter, Supporting data attached: Memo da ted 9/1/88 Phone: 5179 1 Ward: FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N / A Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. DescriPtion) Finance: Council Notes: 75-0262 Agenda Item No. 1/-6 CI'. I OF SAN BERNARDr 10 - REQUr IT FOR COUNCIL AC JON STAFF REPORT In the attached letter of August 12,1988, Merickel Development is requesting a waiver of the Traffic Systems Fee for Building "A" of their retail/commerical development located at the southeast corner of Waterman Avenue and Third Street. Building "A" is proposed to contain 16,950 square feet and is one of five buildings approved for the site, but not yet constructed. The total proposed square footage of all five buildings is 69,621 square feet. The project has been through several reviews, the most recent of which was Review of Plans 87-58 which was approved 7/23/87 by DRC. The first project review was in 1986 as CUP 86-24 for the entire site whi 1 e the most recent pl an submi tted was 6/24/88 and was approved 8/18/88. We have calculated the TrafficSyst-em-s---Ree for Building "A", bas~d oni~s proposed retail use, to b~(l34~8~?~O~j base~ on 2,82~ new veh1cle tr1ps per day generated. Mer1c1c-e1 Development 1S request1ng a waiver of this fee because of "prolonged plan check due to structural changes", and because they did not have time to "build inll the fee in their development costs. The Traffic Systems Fee was imposed by Ordinance No. MC-628 which received final approval on June 7,1988, but did not become effectjve until July 7, 1988, due to the mandatory 30 day waiting period. The City Clerk routinely insures that legal requirements for advertisement of proposed ordi nances are met (newspaper, agendas, request 1 etter on file, etc.). In addition, Engineering Division posted a notice at the front counter advertising the proposed fee. This notice was posted in March 1988, and it remained until the fee was approved in June 1988. The BIA was notified of the fee and became heavily involved in the public hearings and committee meetings on behalf of the Building Industry. We feel the advertisement of the proposed fee was adequate; therefore, we do not recommend a waiver based on lack of notification. There was no grace period allowed in the ordinance, except for the 30 day delay in implementation; therefore, it appears the intent of the ordinance is that all new developments and substantial improvements, which will result in a net increase in vehicle trips generated and which did not have a building permit prior to the effective date, be subject to the fee. There was no exemption for projects "in process" as of the ordinance effective date. This project was not subject to any other traffic related improvement costs. Our records indicate the building permit was not applied for until August 19, 1988; therefore, this project, being a new and substantial traffic generator, is clearly subject to the fee. Merickel Development does appear to be eligible under the ordinance for a credit of $1,548.00 against Building "A" Traffic System Fees. See attached memo for details. 75-021>4 9 / 13/88 MERICKEL DEVELOPMENT 129 CABRILLO STREET SUITE 200 COSTA MESA, CA 92627 TELEPHONE (714) 722-1000 9/13/88 August 12, 1988 Planning Director City of San Bernardino 300 N "0" Street San Bernardino, CA 92402 " Re: R.O.P. 87-29 275 N. Waterman Dear Sir, 4UG:1 ~ :', ,', ~?- , " ')7888 L~ ' II-. L-='" .<'J, j .'.......~ / I ", Due to a prolonged plan check due to structural changes on our project (R.O.P. 87-29; approved 5/7/87), we request relief from the traffic system fees recently imposed upon the project. We are aware that the remaining four buildings will not be exempt and we will "build in" the fees i:n our development costs. However, we are not able to do this concerning the building at 275 N. Waterman. We feel that our project is an asset to the city and these increased fees make it ever more difficult for the project to be feasible. ~J."";'" \.; , .;'-.- Thank you for your consideration of our request. John Hogan Construction Manager w '':; (~) '-;J '] '\ 'I' f'? _ II'" I ~ II I, ..., , ,oJ I.... I,~ U' ~ ....:.; ,~~ J L1 m'-'. III I:' I"'::' AUG 1 5 1988 CiTY ?Li'.~,,!r~:r;;~ ::;.-'''.~ ~T~;~[r~T S^a,1 SI'J'f'1 (..' . ',' I'A . r1JU t:f\'''Hi'L~.~tJ, u " ~ITY OF SAN ..,ER'" ~ARDINO - ~ ~EMORANDUf{ ROGER G. HARDGRAVE. Director of To Public Works/City Engineer MICHAEL GRUBBS. From Sr. C i v i 1 E n gin e e r Subject RP 87-58: Retail Commercial Development at Date Southeast Corner Waterman Avenue and Third Street Requeit for Waiver of Traffi~ A dSystems Fee By Merickel Development for Buildjna pprove -oate September 1. 1988 File No. RP 87-58 II All i t l' ( 'k c' : .. { , , As you requested. I researched the file for Parcel Map No. 8664 which is the underlying parcel map for the subject project. The purpose of the research was to determine if Merickel Development. as original subdivider. was required to make traffic improvements which may entitle them to credit under the provisions of the Traffic Systems Fee Resolution. No improvements eligible for credit were made; however. Merickel Development was required to pay $8.500.00 as the project's share of the cost of a future City project to restripe Waterman Avenue to provide six lanes between Rialto Avenue and Fifth Street. This fee appears to qualify for credit. but only to the extent that Building II A" generates traffic in proportion to the total traffic generation when the land of the parcel map is built out. Attached is a summary of all existing and proposed buildings on the parcel map and the estimated trips generated based on the ITS Trip Generation Manual. Building "A"IS proportionate share of the credit is calculated to be $1.548.00. Additional future credit can be applied against the Traffic System Fees to be collected when Building "B" thru II E" permits are applied. for. up to a maximum of $4.261.00 total credit including Building II All credit and paid only to the original developer. MICHAEL W. GRUBBS Senior Civil Engineer MWG:pa Attachment cc: Anwar Wagdy. Traffic Engineer 9/13/88 ,J PARCEL 1: PARCEL 2: t- .J - :;) ~ BLDG. "G" CIRCLE K BLDG.'''F'' BAKER1S TACO BLDG. "H" RETAIL o UJ (/) o 0. o ct: 0. BLDG. "A" RETAIL BLDG. "B" MULTI-TENANT BLDG. "c" MULTI-TENANT BLDG. "0" MULTI-TENANT BLDG. "E" MULTI-TENANT BLDG. II A" CREDIT = BLDG. "B" BLDG. lie" BLDG. 110" BLDG. uEII 9/13/88 PARCEL MAP 8664 TRIP RATE TRIPS 304 APARTMENTS 6.6/UNIT = x 2,800 S.F. X 887/1000 = 1.800 S.F. X 632/1000 = ,12,600 S.F. X 166/1000 = 16,950 S.F. X 166/1000 = 14,220 S.F. X 95/1000 = 14,220 S.F. X 95/1000 = 14,091 S.F. X 95/1000 = 9,460 S.F. X 95/1000 = TOTAL = 2,820 (8,500) = $1,548.00 15,485 = $ 742.00 = $ 742.00 = $ 735.00 = $ 494.00 2,006 2,484 1,138 2,096 2,820 1,351 1,352 1,339 899 15,485 TOTAL $4,261.00 (INCLUDES BLDG. "A") .. MERICKEL DEVELOPMENT 129 CABRI LLO STREET SUITE 200 COSTA MESA, CA 92627 TELEPHONE (714) 722-1000 rtl\y.J~ 0~ t\.\0.6 RES-D. - ADM.,.. .F'. ~tC(\= i 1988 SEP -, AM 9: 56"'-- . ~-::~ .; I ,'~,11. ~ \J August 31, 1988 City Council City of San Bernardino 300 liD" Street San Bernardino, CA 92402 Re: Petition for Relief of Traffic System Fee Phase II, Warm Creek Center Parcel Map 8664 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, H}1S, Ltd., owner and developer of the above referenced property respectfully requests a two week extension of our Petition for Relief of the Traffic System Fee for Phase II of our project at the corner of Third Street and Waterman Avenue before the Council. Our request is scheduled to be heard before the City Council on September 6, 1988. We wish to present our Petition before the City Council at their regularly scheduled meeting on September 19, 1988. HMS, Ltd. also wishes to introduce to the City Council via this letter, Mr. John Litt1eburn, who will serve as the developer's representative for this petition. Respectfully yours, HMS, Ltd. Mericke1 Development General Partner /- '..--J / /.. ~'i- i.-ZC/'I 'll..ct'tt. Ronald P. Mericke1 President It/ cc: Michael Grubbs Engineering Department