Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-City Administrator C I T Y 0 FAN B ERN R DIN 0 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 8812-1301 TO: Honorable Mayor and Common Council FROM: George Webster, Chairman, Parking Place Commission SUBJECT: Appeal of Yoram Shily - Request for long-term Parking Lease - Downtown Parking District, Lot #1 DATE: December 1, 1988 COPIES: Parking Place Commission, Fred Wilson, the City Administrator, Ann Harris- Project Manager, Gene Klatt, Assistant Engineer Assistant to Main Street City ------------------------------------------------------------- At the regularly scheduled meeting of the Parking Place Commission on December 1, 1988, the Commission again considered the lease request of Yoram Shiley. The motion was made and unanimously carried to deny Mr. Yoram Shily's request to lease 86 parking spaces in Parking District No.1. The reasons for the Commission denial are as follows: 1. Does not address the greater need of the District. 2. Unfair to future developers and current property owners, as it will adversely impact existing activities/businesses. 3. Sets undesirable precedent for future leases. 4. Creates "reserved" spaces not available for use by the public. 5. Long-term leases limit the potential for future master planning of property. 6. Existing building is grand fathered for present use. 7. Existing building currently has 45 parking spaces and shares a portion Parking District lots. on-site of the 8. Proposed plan by Mr. wirts is not available for review, therefore, does not merit further consideration. (f) INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: J812-1301 Mr. Shily's Request to Lease Parking Spaces December 1, 1988 Page 2 In conclusion, as much as the Commission would like to see the proposed development occur, we feel that granting a long-term lease to Mr. Shily would not be in the best interest of the downtown area. We are, however, willing to consider Mr. Wirt's'proposal for the development of a comprehensive plan on the issue of leasing on a district-wide basis as one potential solution to downtown parking. Respectfully, ~~~ George Webster, Chairman Parking Place Commission C.I T ~ 0 F S AN BERNARD I NO INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 8811-908 TO: Mayor and Common Council FROM: Fred A. Wilson, Assistant to the City Administrator SUBJECT: Appeal of Yoram Shily - December 5, 1988 DATE: November 29, 1988 COPIES: James E. Robbins, James C. Richardson, Ann Harris, John Wilson, Michael Loehr, Gene Klatt The request of Yoram Shily to lease 86 spaces in Parking District Lot #1 was considered by the Central City Parking Place Commission at their September 1, 1988 meeting. Mr. Shily indicated at this meeting that he was interested in purchasing and rehabilitating the old Southern California Gas Company building at the northeast corner of 4th and "F" Streets into a multi-tenant retail building. He noted that he was in escrow to purchase this property and needed assurances that additional parking would be available before. escrow closed. Based on the current parking requirements, it was noted that this type of retail development would require approximately 110 parking spaces. The building has 45 spaces on site which resulted in a deficiency of 65 spaces. Mr. Shily's request was to lease the 65 spaces on a long term basis from the city. His preference was a lease of at least a 30-year term. The Parking Commission, after some deliberation, voted to table Mr. Shily's request for a long-term lease. This action was in part based on a recent change in the Commission's policy to not allow the leasing of parking in downtown parking lots 1, 2 and 3. The Parking Commission had previously permitted the leasing of parking in these district lots but due to concerns expressed by Main Street and other businesses in the downtown area, the policy was discontinued. Mr. Shily's contention is that a long-term parking lease is the only alternative worth pursuing to ensure the viability of this project and has therefore appealed the Parking Commission decision to the Mayor and Common Council. The building has remained vacant since the Gas Company relocated their headquarters. Two other development proposals for this building have not come to fruition becaus~ of the inability to resolve the parking issue. (3), INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8811-908 Appeal of Yoram Shily November 29, 1988 Page 2 subsequent meetings have been held with Mr. Shily and Bob wirts who has been retained by Mr. Shily to identify other options which are available to satisfy his parking requirements including: 1. Municipal Code section 19.56.290 authorizes the payment of in lieu fee of $10,000 per space. Mr. Shily however has indicated that this option is not viable as it will not provide any additional guaranteed parking which he considers essential to ensure the success of this type of project. 2. The parking facilities lease agreement dated February 1, 1977 outlines a procedure to be followed for the sale of a portion of the public parking lot for private use. This alternative would allow Mr. Shily to purchase the desired number of spaces from the district lot and, in turn, provide replacement parking within approximately 700 feet of the location. (There is also an option that stipulates that the Redevelopment Agency can deposit with the fiscal agent sufficient money to reduce the debt service on the bonds by a fraction equal to the fraction of parking spaces removed. This option has never been exercised.) Mr. Shily has indicated that this option is also not feasible as the cost to provide replacement parking would be prohibitive. The major concern staff has identified with the approval of a long-term parking lease is the limitation that it places on the City for future master planning purposes. The lease revenue bonds used to finance the parking district will be repayed by the year 2002 but a 30-year parking lease would commit the City to the year 2018. In addition, Main street is involved in master planning the development of the downtown area and has expressed a concern that long-term lease obligations would cause some difficulties in their plan development. The issue of satisfying the legal parking requirements for vacant buildings in the parking district which do not have adequate on site parking has remained as a major problem since the district was formed. Although the original intention behind the creation of the parking district in 1976 was to provide for additional parking, the emphasis was on INTEROFFICE.MEMORANDUM. 8811-908 -Appeal of Yoram Shily November 29, 1988 Page 3 customer parking needs as opposed to employee parking needs. A recent analysis by the Planning Department revealed that under the current parking requirements, assuming all buildings in the parking district were fully occupied, approximately 8,400 spaces would be needed in the downtown area. The number of off-street public parking spaces currently available in the downtown area is approximately 2,500 with an additional 2,500 spaces available in private off-street parking lots. Based on these numbers, the deficiency is approximately 3,400 spaces. Discussions in the past have centered on the need to expand parking in the downtown area but have not centered on satisfying the legal parking requirements for vacant buildings. In order to partially alleviate this deficiency, it has been proposed that an ordinance amendment be initiated to implement a joint use parking concept as it relates to restaurant uses. This proposal would reduce the parking requirements for restaurants in the downtown area only. The assumption is that a significant amount of restaurant activity occurs after 5:00 p.m. when a majority of employee parking lots are available and, as such, could be "shared" with restaurant uses resulting in an overall reduction in the parking requirements for restaurants. Should the Mayor and Common Council desire to pursue a lci~g- term lease option, it would be the staff recommendation that such a lease be subject to the following conditions--non- exclusive designation of spaces and some flexibility to allow adjoining uses to utilize the leased parking spaces. In addition, it can be anticipated that other requests will be received for long-term leasing. In light of this potential, it would be appropriate to undertake a study of the implementation of a long-term leasing program on a district wide basis to ensure equity and appropriateness in granting leases. Bob wirts has indicated that he has prepared some of this data as part of his contract with Mr. Shily and would be willing to expand his report to address these issues on the district wide basis at a cost to the City which would not exceed $2,500. It would be recommended that such a study be undertaken prior to the approval of any long-term leases. E A. WILSON Assistant to the city Administrator FAW/sh C I T Y 0 FAN B ERN R DIN 0 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 8812-1301 TO: Honorable Mayor and Common Council FROM: George Webster, Chairman, Parking Place Commission SUBJECT: Appeal of Yoram Shily - Request for long-term Parking Lease - Downt()wn Parking District, Lot #1 DATE: December 1, 1988 COPIES: Parking Place Commission, Fred Wilson, the City Administrator, Ann Harris- Project Manager, Gene Klatt, Assistant Engineer Assistant to Main Street city _______________________________e______________________-------- At the regularly scheduled meeting of the Parking Place Commission on December 1, 1988, the Commission again considered the lease request of Yoram Shiley. The motion was made and unanimously carried to deny Mr. Yoram Shily's request to lease 86 parking spaces in Parking District No.1. The reasons for the Commission denial are as follows: 1. Does not address the greater need of the District. 2. Unfair to future developers and current property owners, as it will adversely impact existing activities/businesses. 3. Sets undesirable precedent for future leases. 4. Creates "reserved" spaces not available for use by the public. 5. Long-term leases limit the potential for future master planning of property. 6. Existing building is grand fathered for present use. 7. Existing building currently has 45 parking spaces and shares a portion Parking District lots. 8. Proposed plan by Mr. wirts is not available for review, therefore, does not merit further consideration. on-site of the 6) INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 3812-1301 Mr. Shily's Request to Lease Parking Spaces December 1, 1988 Page 2 In conclusion, as much as the Commission would like to see the proposed development occur, we feel that granting a long-term lease to Mr. Shily would not be in the best interest of the downtown area. We are, however, willing to consider Mr. wirt's proposal for the development of a comprehensive plan on the issue of leasing on a district-wide basis as one potential solution to downtown parking. Respectfully, ~~~~ George Webster, Chairman Parking Place Commission C.I T 3 0 F S AN B ERN A R DIN 0 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 8811-908 TO: Mayor and Common Council FROM: Fred A. Wilson, Assistant to the city Administrator SUBJECT: Appeal of Yoram Shily - December 5, 1988 DATE: November 29, 1988 COPIES: James E. Robbins, James C. Richardson, Ann Harris, John Wilson, Michael Loehr, Gene Klatt -------------------------------.------------------------------ The request of Yoram Shily to lease 86 spaces in Parking District Lot #1 was considered by the Central City Parking Place Commission at their September 1, 1988 meeting. Mr. Shily indicated at this meeting that he was interested in purchasing and rehabilitating the old Southern California Gas Company building at the northeast corner of 4th and "F" Streets into a multi-tenant retail building. He noted that he was in escrow to purchase this property and needed assurances that additional parking would be available before escrow closed. Based on the current parking requirements, it was noted that this type of retail development would require approximately 110 parking spaces. The building has 45 spaces on site which resulted in a deficiency of 65 spaces. Mr. Shily's request was to lease the 65 spaces on a long term basis from the city. His preference was a lease of at least a 30-year term. The Parking Commission, after some deliberation, voted to table Mr. Shily's request for a long-term lease. This action was in part based on a recent change in the Commission's policy to not allow the leasing of parking in downtown parking lots 1, 2 and 3. The Parking Commission had previously permitted the leasing of parking in these district lots but due to concerns expressed by Main Street and other businesses in the downtown area, the policy was discontinued. Mr. Shily's contention is that a long-term parking lease is the only alternative worth pursuing to ensure the viability of this project and has th.erefore appealed the Parking commission decision to the Mayor and Common Council. The building has remained vacant since the Gas Company relocated their headquarters. Two other development proposals for this building have not come to fruition because of the inability to resolve the parking issue. (1), INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8811-908 Appeal of Yoram Shily November 29, 1988 Page 2 subsequent meetings have been held with Mr. Shily and Bob wirts who has been retained by Mr. Shily to identify other options which are available to satisfy his parking requirements including: 1. Municipal Code section 19.56.290 authorizes the payment of in lieu fee of $10,000 per space. Mr. Shily however has indicated that this option is not viable as it will not provide any additional guaranteed parking which he considers essential to ensure the success of this type of project. 2. The parking facilities lease agreement dated February 1, 1977 outlines a procedure to be followed for the sale of a portion of the public parking lot for private use. This alternative would allow Mr. Shily to purchase the desired number of spaces from the district lot and, in turn, provide replacement parking within approximately 700 feet of the location. (There is also an option that stipulates that the Redevelopment Agency can deposit with the fiscal agent sufficient money to reduce the debt service on the bonds by a fraction equal to the fraction of parking spaces removed. This option has never been exercised.) Mr. Shily has indicated that this option is also not feasible as the cost to provide replacement parking would be prohibitive. The major concern staff has identified with the approval of a long-term parking lease is the limitation that it places on the city for future master planning purposes. The lease revenue bonds used to finance the parking district will be repayed by the year 2002 but a 30-year parking lease would commit the City to the year 2018. In addition, Main Street is involved in master planning the development of the downtown area and has expressed a concern that long-term lease obligations would cause some difficulties in their plan development. The issue of satisfying the legal parking requirements for vacant buildings in the parking district which do not have adequate on site parking has remained as a major problem S1nce the district was formed. Although the original intention behind the creation of the parking district in 1976 was to provide for additional parking, the emphasis was on INTEROFFICE. MEMORANDUM Appeal of Yoram Shily November 29, 1988 Page 3 8811-908 customer parking needs as opposed to employee parking needs. A recent analysis by the Planning Department revealed that under the current parking requirements, assuming all buildings in the parking district were fully occupied, approximately 8,400 spaces would be needed in the downtown area. The number of off-street public parking spaces currently available in the downtown area is approximately 2,500 with an additional 2,500 spaces available in private off-street parking lots. Based on these numbers, the deficiency is approximately 3,400 spaces. Discussions in the past have centered on the need to expand parking in the downtown area but have not centered on satisfying the legal parking requirements for vacant buildings. In order to partially alleviate this deficiency, it has been proposed that an ordinance amendment be initiated ~o implement a joint use parking concept as it relates to restaurant uses. This proposal would reduce the parking requirements for restaurants in the downtown area only. The assumption is that a significant amount of restaurant activity occurs after 5:00 p.m. when a majority of employ~e parking lots are available andl. as such, could be "shared" with restaurant uses resulting in an overall reduction in ~he parking requirements for restaurants. Should the Mayor and Common Council desire to pursue a long- term lease option, it would be the staff recommendation that such a lease be subject to the following conditions--non- exclusive designation of spaces and some flexibility to allow adjoining uses to utilize the leased parking spaces. In addition, it can be anticipated that other requests will be received for long-term leasing. In light of this potential, it would be appropriate to undertake a study of the implementation of a long-term leasing program on a district wide basis to ensure equity and appropriateness in granting leases. Bob wirts has indicated that he has prepared some of this data as part of his contract with Mr. Shily and would be willing to expand his report to address these issues on the district wide basis at a cost to the City which would not exceed $2,500. It would be recommended that such a study be undertaken prior to the approval of any long-term leases. E A. WILSON Assistant to the city Administrator FAW/sh ('.:'- ~_ __u -- ~t 'I) -ADMIN. OFF. -~_uS)HILYCG ,,~, -7 au 1: &7 IstSB .'tvw \ " . \~;f)"" --:rf2;~ " I,. '. ' .'-'~, '\ ,\ '\ November 3, 1988 Ms. Evelyn Wilcox, Mayor and Common Council City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 RE: APPEAL FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING REGARDING THE BUILDING ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 4TH STREET AND "F" STREET Dear Mayor wilcox and Common Council: I wish to appeal the decision of September 1, 1988 by the Parking place Commission to table the request to lease 86 parking spaces in Parking District Lot #1. My company, SHILYCO is in the process of purchasing the property on the northeast corner of 4th Street and "F" Street from the Southern California Gas Company. It is proposed to rehabilitate the building into a 2-level multi-tenant retail building with a Spanish design. The existing building has 45 parking spaces located just north of the building, however, 63 more parking spaces are needed to satisfy the requirements of the city ordinance. The actual demand for the proposed development is 86 additional spaces. The city ordinance alternative for an in-lieu payment of $630,000 ($10,000/space) is unrealistic as no increase in parking is provided for the building. Also, to purchase the parking needed from the Parking District is not a viable solution due to the fact replacement parking must be provided within walking distance of approximately 700 feet at a prohibitive cost. Therefore, the only recourse is to obtain a long-term lease from the District, or it appears the building must remain unoccupied. Parking District Lot #1 has 244 parking spaces. Most of these spaces could be leased as they are presently occupied by all-day parkers which have parking provided at other nearby privately owned properties. The lease revenue may be dedicated to assist in adding future parking spaces. q . . Letter to Mayor Evelyn Wilcox and the Common Council of the City of San Bernardino November 3, 1988 Page Two I feel the leasing of Parking District spaces is in the interest of the District and can play an important role in the revitalization of downtown San Bernardino. As the Parking District was created to promote rehabilitation and new development, it is requested that a long term lease for 86 parking spaces be approved for the building. y submitted, YSS/kw