More than $5.5 million in bond money set aside to fund a new downtown parking structure has languished in a bank account for almost a year after the Gilroy Public Library opened on Sixth Street.
But it’s still unclear just when that structure will get built. The City is currently at an impasse as staff tries to recommend what shape and height the parking structure will be, as well as when it will be built and where it will be located. Downtown proponents, however, argue that Gilroy could benefit twofold by positioning the structure within proximity to Monterey Street, while one former Councilman thinks the City should scrap the project altogether.
Currently, the City’s preferred venue for the new parking structure is at the Old Gilroy Police Station, which is adjacent to the old County Courthouse at Church and Seventh streets in Gilroy.
The Old Gilroy Police Station is one possible option that would fulfill the criteria that the residents of Gilroy voted for when they passed Measure F, which in 2008 authorized the City to issue $37 million in general obligation bonds to fund the construction of a larger municipal library.
A main component of Measure F criteria includes building within four blocks of the library a new parking structure that could potentially accommodate up to 270 cars.
Another site that could work is a city-owned parking lot on Eigleberry Street between Fourth and Fifth streets. That lot is also within four blocks of the library and would increase the capacity for downtown parking.
But Jay Baksa, a member of the Library Bond Oversight Committee and former longtime City Administrator, thinks the Eigleberry Street option is a dead end.
“It’s kind of far. I don’t think it’s going to be close enough to mitigate the parking issue for the Civic Center,” he said, referring to the area that includes the new Gilroy Public Library, the Gilroy Police Department and City Hall.
Baksa does, however, acknowledge the City should take a look at the possibility of putting the parking structure closer to downtown. He says this would be ancillary to Gilroy’s slow-moving, but determined plans for a downtown revitalization.
Still, he’s wary of straying from the mandate voters gave the City when they approved Measure F.
“Civic Center has to come as a priority,” he said. “Not the downtown parking (issue).”
The Civic Center Master Plan imagines a municipal paradise on Rosanna Street, where people can access City services in a campus setting. The planned parking structure would cater to the Gilroy Public Library and surrounding City offices, giving commuters, residents and visitors additional parking options besides the 500 spaces at the Gilroy Caltrain Station on Monterey Street.
But all that could be a ways off, admitted Mayor Don Gage. He said the time frame for erecting the parking structure stretches several years into the future. The exact dimensions and formation, for that matter (the structure could be L-shaped, square and two or three-stories tall) are still open to input from City staff, Gage said.
City Administrator Tom Haglund said the cost of a two-story structure would be in the range of the $5.5 million left in the Measure F kitty, but the price tag of a three-story building could reach up to $7 million.
Furthermore, if the City wants a square parking structure, it must acquire the old County Courthouse property. The City hasn’t scratched the surface of those negotiations, stated Gage.
Having ample parking spaces for visitors, at least, is at the very core of the City’s vision for Gilroy in the 21st century.
Some business owners think Gilroy stands to benefit twofold if the City erected a new parking structure between the library and downtown.
President James Suner of the Gilroy Downtown Business Association said the idea has crossed his mind.
“We did broach the subject, but Councilman Dion Bracco and (former) Councilman Bob Dillon made a determination that the parking had to be directly next to the library structure,” he said.
While cognizant that the bond money wasn’t raised specifically for downtown parking, Suner still likes the idea of marrying the parking needs of the Civic Center and Gilroy’s downtown revitalization.
“The Downtown Business Association would be totally down with it,” he laughed.
However, any proposed alterations to what Measure F already mandates will run into problems, according to Dillon.
The former councilman – who retired in 2012 after a total of nine years on the dais and also participated on the Library Bond Committee – has strong views on the subject.
“I’m still opposed to that,” he said, referring to any plan to move the new parking structure closer to downtown.
In fact, Dillon questions whether there is a need to build a parking structure for the library at all.
“It’s been open a year and I haven’t seen any problem with parking,” he pointed out.
Dillon claims there are empty parking spaces all around downtown that people can park in, such as the lots on Eigleberry Street and the parking stalls on Monterey Street. In the long haul, he reasons, the remaining $5.5 million in bond money could be returned to the taxpayers – although that isn’t as simple as it might sound. The bond money would have to be put into an escrow account, as “the bonds that were sold can’t be called for 10 years,” explained Dillon.
President Susan Valenta with the Gilroy Chamber of Commerce understands the allure of lumping the two parking issues together. However, she warns that oversimplifying the parking issue won’t solve any problems.
“It goes beyond what the lay person can really understand,” she said.
Valenta points to the endless studies a City must undertake to determine how to accommodate traffic flows in growing downtown areas. She is also aware of the obvious benefits of having a multi-story parking structure located behind the old Dick Bruhn store located at 7540 Monterey St., or even behind her own office at 7451 Monterey St.
As Valenta reflects on the ramifications of moving the parking structure closer to downtown – namely finding a common ground that’s palatable to everyone involved – she underscores the importance of the issue.
“We care a lot,” she said. “We would like to hear more about it. But, at the end of the day I understand that these discussions take time.”
