LUCERNE >> Ever since Marymount University abandoned the Lucerne Hotel, more commonly known as the Castle, county officials have been identifying projects that would hasten the facility back on the market. Yet a central question in still unanswered: Sell or lease?
There is a reason for the county’s effort. Michelle Scully of the County Administrator Office said she has been contacted by 13 different entities with expressed interest in the Castle. These groups provided concept ideas ranging from making a community center to a soup kitchen to a destination for marijuana-related activities.
“The Lucerne Hotel was purchased in 2010 by the county’s redevelopment agency as it was in the boundaries of the Northshore Redevelopment Plan Project Area,” Scully said. “It was purchased to fit the goals that were identified for that project area which are preventing and eliminating blight, developing a conference and event center in the Northshore area and providing an economic engine for Lucerne, the Northshore and all of Lake County.”
The county originally purchased the facility for around $1.4 million. Over the past 7 years, the county invested over $3 million in repairs and upgrades.
Yet this amount only applied to 22,000 of the 55,000 square feet. This still leaves more than half of the building in potential need of work, at more cost.
At the same time, a new appraisal rated the property at $3 million.
The Board of Supervisors decided to narrow down what the county would like to see in the Request for Proposals (RFP). Once this is complete, they can advertise for bids.
County Administrative Officer Carol Huchingson said once the university pulled out — a move that surprised local officials — county staff has been working as efficiently as possible to get to the next step of the process.
“The thing I think we would all readily agree on is it does no one any good to have the Castle continue to sit empty so we are looking for the best form of purposing for it,” Huchingson said.
Maintenance of the building runs approximately $78,000. This includes repairs, electricity, propane, alarm system, sewer, water and other routine work.
District 3 Supervisor Jim Steele said there is a common vision for the Castle as a destination.
“They really want to have a conference center with people passing through and bring vitality to that location and I share that passion,” Steele said.
The supervisors debated options of selling or leasing the property. District 5 Supervisor Rob Brown said that he would rather lease it out and see how successful it is before selling. This option would give the county some control. Once it is sold, Brown pointed out, the owner can do whatever they want with it.
“There’s no hurry in my opinion. The big hurry is to get out from underneath all the ongoing cost that we have on this property but another six months doesn’t hurt anything to see if a group can be put together to come up with something that is mutually beneficial to the county as well as the entity that is awarded the RFP and the community,” Brown said.
Even though buyers may have funds to purchase the Castle, the idea they want to incorporate may not work out, leaving the facility unused.
“I don’t know what their bank account looks like so I couldn’t say if they have deep pockets or not and it doesn’t really make a difference to me they put their pants on one leg at a time like everyone else. If they come in here and they decide that their big dream isn’t going to work then it goes to the lesser dream,” Brown said.
District 1 Supervisor Moke Simon said it would be better to sell it rather than just lease it and continue to hold the county accountable for maintenance work on it.
“I really think the opportunity is to move with selling the facility. It’s a unique opportunity and we just sold a couple of the other facilities that we owned for quite a long time with redevelopment and it moved very quickly,” Simon said. “I do see the vision. I think it’s a beautiful facility and if you get the right people in the room they will come in and develop it.”
He added that the longer the county holds on to the property, the more it’s going to cost.
A detailed description of what is to be required in the RFPs that will be submitted will be brought to the Board in December or potentially early 2018 Huchingson said.
