HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.B- City Manager 6.B
DOC ID: 4662
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO — REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Report/Information
From: Mark Scott M/CC Meeting Date: 10/03/2016
Prepared by: Tanya Romo, (909) 384-
5122
Dept: City Manager Ward(s): All
Subject:
Discussion Regarding Code Amendment to Allow Commercial Parking Operations on
Unpaved Property.
Current Business Registration Certificate: Not Applicable
Financial Impact:
No financial impact at this time.
Motion: Discuss and take possible direction.
Background:
San Bernardino Municipal Code 10.16.240 Parking on Unpaved Parcels of Real
Property states the following:
A person shall not stop, stand or park a vehicle on any unpaved parcel of real
property; provided however, that nothing in this section shall be construed to
prevent the parking of a vehicle in a residential zone on an unpaved driveway or
a drive approach to a garage or other durable or permanent driveway or pad
installed for the purpose of parking such vehicle on a parcel of real property which is
not subject to Section 19.24.060(18) of the City of San Bernardino Development
Code at the time of violation.
The purpose of this item it to discuss the possibility of an amendment to the San
Bernardino Municipal Code to allow commercial parking operations on unpaved
property.
Brenda Faulkner is an independent operator of off-site parking for event locations such
as the National Orange Show Fairgrounds. She and other independent operators
occasionally lease property near that location to sell parking to event attendees. Ms.
Faulkner desires to lease an unpaved parcel from the City, but has been told it cannot
be used because it is not paved.
Noting that Code 10.16.240 allows exceptions for Christmas tree and pumpkin patch
operations, she is asking for a City Council agreement to amend Code 10.16.240 in
such a manner that her lease of the City parcel would be possible. Ms. Faulkner
indicated that such use is occurring despite the code restriction. She argues that the
City should desire to obtain lease revenue.
Staff's concern about such an amendment is that it opens the door to other public and
Updated: 9/28/2016 by Tanya Romo Packet Pg. 680
6.B
4662
private property being used in such a manner. Without a case-by-case CUP process,
this creates a precedent that might be regretted. Creating such a CUP process
suggests a cost and fee overload that might negate the value to operators like Ms.
Faulkner.
Supporting Documents:
Updated: 9/28/2016 by Tanya Romo Packet Pg. 681