Group raises objections to CARTA parking agreement with developer
Members of a city board on Wednesday declined to take any action regarding an agreement CARTA made for a developer to use spaces at Renaissance Park.
Valerie Malueg, assistant city attorney, told the board it was not necessary for it to act on the agreement CARTA made with developer Mitch Patel, who is building an apartment complex at Cherokee Boulevard and Manufacturers Road.
Citizen activist Helen Burns Sharp said that was the first time the agreement had been discussed as an agenda item at a public meeting. She said the public should have been given the opportunity to discuss it since, she said, public spaces were being lost by the popular park.
Lisa Maragnano, CARTA executive director, said, "We're not talking parking away from the citizens of Chattanooga."
She said CARTA is promoting "shared-use parking" and trying to steer some seeking parking to under-used public parking in North Chattanooga, including a CARTA garage at Frazier Avenue and Tremont Street.
"The garage has not reached its full potential," she said.
Ms. Maragnano says CARTA keeps close tabs on how many spaces are not being used in the various lots.
David Dalton, a member of the CDRC board, said CARTA would be gaining income from the developer and also during part of a day will get income from public parkers in the same spot. The apartment occupants will get 75 hang tags. They may park wherever a space is open.
The developer will pay $1 per day per spot for the parking privilege.
A resident of the adjacent Bridgeview Condominiums said the Renaissance Park lot is heavily used, especially during the frequent special events.
Brooke Bradley King said, "This public parking lot should be for everyone's use."
Franklin McCallie said the developer only built 25 surface spots for 84 units and "saved millions of dollars" through the CARTA agreement.
He said, "I don't understand this. These are public spaces. This gentleman didn't build enough spaces. When his people are occupying the public spaces, nobody else can park there."
He added, "If this is the 'Chattanooga Way', I am really concerned about the Chattanooga Way."
Work has begun on the Patel apartments.
Mrs. Sharp said, "The CDRC owns Renaissance Park, including the surface parking lots along Manufacturers’ Road between two condominium complexes. In 2007, the CDRC entered into an agreement with CARTA to manage these lots.
"Section 2 of the Agreement is called 'Limitations Upon Use.' It reads as follows: 'CARTA may utilize the parcels only as surface parking lots, or as dedicated parking reserved for use and support of civic events such as the annual Riverbend Festival. If any other use is proposed by CARTA, CARTA shall obtain the prior written consent of CDRC for such proposed alternative use.'
"On November 18, 2015, CARTA entered into a Parking Lot Usage Agreement with Vision Chattanooga Northshore LLC. This company had begun construction of an apartment complex immediately adjacent to the CDRC parking on the old “Christmas Tree lot” on Cherokee Boulevard. (Unlike the developers of the condo complexes on either side or the apartment complex across the street, VCN chose not to provide structured parking for their 84 apartment units or ground floor commercial tenants. VCN plans about 25 surface spaces on their property.)
"CARTA agreed to make 75 parking spaces available to VCN within the Renaissance Parking Lot through a 'hang tag' arrangement. The agreement gives VCN, without the consent of CARTA or any other person or entity, the right to assign the agreement in the future. The initial term is 10 years from when occupancy begins, with the option to renew for 4 additional 10-year terms. As consideration, VCR will pay a usage fee equivalent to $30 per space per month—a dollar a day—during the first five years. The fee may be adjusted, modestly, every five years.
"State law (TCA 12-4-106) addresses competitive bidding as it relates to contracts regarding public property. TCA 13-4-104 requires that when any public property is going to be leased, it must first be submitted and referred by the Planning Commission. TCA 7-51-904 requires--when a contract is over five years--that a notice of the meeting at which the contract will be considered by the governing body be published at least seven days prior to the meeting.
"ATM QUESTIONS REGARDING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
1. Did CDRC vote to approve this use? If so, when? If not, why not?
2. Did CDRC give the required written consent prior to the CARTA /VCN Agreement?
3. Was there discussion of the impact to the public, particularly Park users?
4. Was the Agreement competitively bid? If not, should it have been?
5. Did the Agreement go to the Planning Commission (mandatory referral)?
6. What governing body (City Council, CDRC, CARTA) considered this Agreement?
7. Was notice of the meeting published 7 days prior to the meeting?
ATM PERSPECTIVE
"We respectfully request that the city and its boards and commissions make sure they follow the rules they and the state have adopted and that you establish and follow policies and procedures in instances where they do not currently exist but are needed. (PILOTs are an example.)
"We ask that our city officials do a better job of making the public aware when you are making public policy decisions. Many feel that this parking agreement will have a negative impact on the public. To our knowledge, this item never, until today, appeared on the agenda of any public policy board where we could express our concerns. The building is under construction and the agreement is signed. Questions have been raised on whether the Agreement was properly executed.
"After researching and discussing the issues raised in this memo, we ask the CDRC to address whether the proper procedures were followed. If they were not, we hope that you will contact VCN to see if you can negotiate anything that could mitigate the impact on the public. We do not fault the company for proposing a deal that saved them several million dollars for not accommodating their own parking onsite. We are disappointed in our city policy makers for apparently not deliberating about the impact on the public and for not giving citizens the opportunity to comment."