HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.1 Condo Conversion
CITY CLERK
File # nff ~ra.;~~
·
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 1,2005
SUBJECT:
P A 04-044 Condominium Conversion Ordinance Policy
Alternatives for Regulating the Conversion of Existing Apartments
in the City to Condominiums.
Report Prepared by; Jeff Baker, Associate Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
City Council Staff Report (February I, 2005)
City Council Meeting Minutes - February 1,2005
Housing Element .,-- Table 40
RECOMMENDATION;...., _ Dr Provide direction to Staff on policies that should be considered as
/\ {/V"V part of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: No financial impact at this time. Implementation of a condominium
conversion ordinance will have a potential impact on the City's tax
revenues and will also have an impact on Staff time in relation to
monitoring policy provisions. The impact on tax revenue and Staff
time is not currently known. The full extent of the financial impacts
would be based on the number of conversions that occur. Further
analysis of this impact will be presented to the City Council at the
time the proposed Ordinance is presented. .
·
. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
On September 7;2004, the City Council adopted a Resolution (Resolution #181-04) initiating proceedings
to adopt an ordinance regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the City to for-sale
condominiums. Following that meeting, Staff studied the various mechanisms for regulating
condominium conversions. This Study included a complete review of the Subdivision Map Act, City of
Dublin General Plan Housing Element and condominium conversion ordinances from different cities
throughout California, including the Cities of Livermore and Walnut Creek. Based on this Study, Staff
developed a series of policy alternatives for the City Council to consider.
On November 16, 2004, Staff presented these policy alternatives to the City Council. The City Council
provided Staff with direction regarding the development· of the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance. The City Councilfurtber directed Staff to hold a meeting with the owners of apartments
within the City of Dublin in order to infonu them of these policy recommendations and solicit their
comments.
On December 9, 2004, Staff held a meeting with these property owners and other interested parties. Staff
utilized the feedback received at this meeting to further develop the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance.
___w______~___________~______·~__________w___~__________________________---------------~------------.~----.-
-,~2?
In-House Distribution
Property Owners
Interested Parties
ITEM NO. 7. L
·
COPIES TO:
G:\PAII\2004\04..o44 Condo Conversion l.OA. \..or3-I..oS.DOC
On January 11, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council
adopt an urgency ordinance and a non urgency ordinance to regulate the conversion of existing apartments
to condominiums.
On February 1, 2005, the City Council held a public hearing and reviewed the Planning Commission .
recommeri.dation (Attachment 1). However, the City Council raised concerns about the proposed
Ordinance and directed Staff to do further analysis (Attachment 2). The following is a summary of the
concerns raised by the City Council:
)- Explòre the possibility of requiring projects with existing Condominium Maps, but no Public
Report, to provide Inclusionary Housing;
)- Explore ways to allow apartment owners to obtain a Condominium Map without issuing a
Condominium Conversion Permit; .
)- Provide additional justification for the prohibition· on conversions unless rental housing equals
30% of the housing units in the community. .
o Provide a clearer understanding of the Housing Element and the impacts of conversions on
the provisions of the Housing Element;
o Provide build out projections to provide a better understanding of what the housing supply
will look like in the future;
o Look at what percentage of the housing stock in the City should be rental housing in the
fut1¡re; and
>- Build flexibility into the Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
This sta:ffreport contains additional background information and a series of policy alternatives to address
the concerns raised by the City Council.
Condominium Conversion Scenarios
.
Staff thought it would be useful to illustrate the application of the proposed condominium conversion
·ordinance to the following scenarios. Based on what Staff has heard from the property owners, Staff
believes that there are three distinct types of conversion scenarios.
Scenario 1 - Projects that were built and approved with a Condominium Map but currently operate as
rental apartments.
. The owner could be required to obtain a Condominium Conversion Permit from the City if they do
not already have a Public Report unless they can establish that they have obtained a vested right to
sell the units individually.
Scenario 2 - Projects held under a single ownership that currently operate as rental apartments without
a Condominium Map and wish to convert to for sale condominiums.
· The owner would need to seek approval for a Condominium Map under the Subdivision Map Act
and a Condominium Conversion Permit from the City in order to convert from rental apartments
to forsale condominiums. The owner could seek both approvals at the same time.
Scenario 3 - Projects held under a single ownership that wish to obtain a Condominium Map but
continue to operate as rental apartments. It is unclear what pmpose this serves, but the representative
from the Archstone Apartments has indicated that the map, even without the Condominium
Conversion Permit, creates additional value.
.. The owner could apply for a Condominium Map for these projects and at a later date obtain a
Condominium Conversion Permit.
.
The following are three key decision points for the City Council to consider in reviewing this staff report.
1) Is there a need to adopt a condominium conversion ordinance; 2) Should the ordinance apply to
2
projects with existing Condominium Maps; and 3) Should the City establish a housing ratio and limit
conversions.jfthe ratio is not met.
Application of a Condominium Conversion Ordinance to Projects that Have a Condominium Map
but Have Yet to Receive a Public Report
. Apartment Projects with"Existing Condominium Map!;
One of the controversial aspects of the proposed condominium conversion ordinance that was presented
to the Planning Connnission but not.recommended to the City Council has been its proposed application
to projects that have been previously mapped as condominiums but that have been operated as rental
projects under a single ownership. In order to convert an apartment complex to for-sale condominjums
and be able to sell the units to individual buyers, a property owner must, in addition to recording a
Condominium Map, obtain a Public Report rrbm the Department of Real Estate (DRE). Based on two
appellate cases involving West Hollywood's condominium conversion ordinance, the City Attorney
concluded that the City could apply a condominium conversion ordinance to projects that have already
been mapped unless such proj ects have Public Reports. The City of Laguna Hills provides an example of
a city that adopted a condominium conversion ordinance that applies expressly to mapped projects that do
not have a Public Report. The cities of Citrus Heights, Pacifica, Scotts Valley, and Sunnyvale have
ordinances applicable to projects without a Public Report because they require a use pennit in addition to
the approval of a subdivision map.
There currently are 5 apartment complexes with approximately 1,063 units that have been mapped as
condominiUms but are operated as rental apartment communities. The DRE has not issued a Public
Report for these properties. The City Attorney has reviewed the letters prepared by attorneys for the
property owners and believes that the City can enact a conversion ordinance that would require a
condominium conversion permit from the City prior tothes.e units being sold to the public as individual
units. If the property owners believe that they obtained a vested right to proceed with the sale of the
. in. dividual units at the time they built and mapped their projects., they can present the City with evidence
to that fact at the time that they wish to proceed with conversion.
If the City· Council desires, as discussed in more detail below under alternatives, it could choose to revise
the condominium conversion ordinance to inelude only limited regulations for projects that were already
mapped. For example, Councilmember Zika suggested that the condominium conversion ordinance be
written to permit already mapped projects to convert but require them to provide Inelusionary Units. This
would be done by requiririg such projects to obtain a condominium conversion permit, but it could
exempt such projects from the requirement that the housing ratio must be met. This would leave the
tenant-protection and the Inclusionary Zoning requirements in place.
The question of fairness should also be considered when determining if already mapped projects should
be subject to the condominium conversion ordinance. The owners of the 5 mapped projects believe that
they received entitlements from the City to establish condominium units and that application of a
condominium conversion ordinance would effectively reverse these approvals. While the City Attorney
has detennined that there is a legal basis, the.jssue of fairness remains when apply a conversion ordinance
to these properties.
Apartment Owners that Wish to Obtain a Condominium Map but Continue to Operatè Apartments
Some apartment owners may wish to obtain a Condominium Map but continue to operate their property
as rental units. The proposed ordinance allows an owner to obtain a Condominium Map and later obtain
a Condominium Conversion Pennit from the City. This two-step process would, for example, allow the
owners of the Archstone apartment projects to obtain a Condominium Map but defer getting a
condominium conversion permit and selling the units individually at a later date. This is Scenario 3
above.
.
3
Reasoning Behind the Urgency Ordinance
Initially, the Staff proposed an urgency ordinance to ensure that projects that receive condominium maps
before the ordinance becomes effective are subject to the ordinance. This urgency measure was to ensure
out of an abundance of caution that the granting of a condominium map approval does not somehow vest
the converter's rights to proceed with the individual sale of units without complying with the .
condominium conversion ordinance. However, we think that the risk is sufficiently slight-given the
West Hollywood decisions-,-that the City Council does not need to adopt the ordinance as an urgency
ordinance, with the understanding that projects that have already been mapped and that subsequently .
receive a public report, which we understand takes about 6 months, could vest their rights to selI
individual units by obtaining a public report. .
Rationale for Why Staff Recommended a Prohibition on Convenlons Unless Rental Housing
Equals 30% of the Housing Units in the Community
General Plan Housing Element
State law provides that cities have the responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the
improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all
economic segments of the community (Gov. Code, § 65580(d). At the local level, the City of Dublin
implements State housing law policies through the adoption of the General Plan Housing Element, which
was reviewed _and certified by the State's Department of Housing and Community Development
(HCD)(Gov. Code, §§ 65583, 65585). Among other things, the Housing Element contains a statement of
the community's goals, objectives and policies related to the maintenance, preservation, improvement,
and development of housing along with an action program to implement these goals, objectives and
policies (Gov, Code, § 65584(b)-(c»). On June 3, 2003, the City Council approved the City of Dublin
Housing Element (1999-2006), and the State Department of Housing and Community Development
. certified it on July 11, 2003.
Preservati()n of Housing: . .
The current Housing Element eliminated the programs &om the 1990 Housing Element that required the
City to monitor the availability of rental housing and potentially enact a condominium conversion
ordinance. The Housing Element concluded that conversions were unlikely because of the strong demand
for rental housing in Dublin coupled with the development of numerous condominiums that would tend to
satisfy the demand for condominiums. In fact, multi-family rental property represented approximately
30% of the total housing supply when the current Housing Element was prepared. But, the Housing
Element did not establish a target housing ratio or require the City to adopt a policy to maintain a certain
percentage of rental units. Therefore, it would not be a violation of the current Housing Element for the
City to permit the conversion of existing apartments to for sale condominiums. Notwithstanding-that fact,
the City has the authority under State law to adopt an ordinance to regulate condominium conversions if
the Council believes that such an ordinance would be beneficial to the City.
Regional Housing Needs."
The current Housing Element also contains policies related to the development of housing ba!ied on our
regional housing needs. The Association of Bay Area Govenunents (ABAG) is the Council of
Govenunents authorized under State law to identify existing and future housing needs for the City.
ABAG prepared a regional housing allocation plan in 1999, called the Regional Housing Needs
Determination (RHND). This plan assigI).s the City a share of the region's new housing construction need
thiough 2006. The housing needs are then broken into income categories (i.e. very low, low, moderate
and above moderate income), but do not specify rental versus ownership housing needs. The City uses
this needs allocation to identify measures (policies and ordinances) that are consistent with these new
construction goals. The City must also identify areas with the potential for residential development to
meet the RHND (Attachment 3). It was anticipated that a substantial portion of the City's affordable ..
obligation would be met with rental units. But, the Housing Element does not require the City to adopt
policies to regulate rents or restrict condominium conversions to comply with housing goals. For
4
example, rents may increase over time and eventually exceed affordable income levels. Similarly,
apartment owners could convert their units to condominiums and reduce the supply of rental units.
The City will prepare a new Housing Element in 2006 when the current Housing Element expires. The
. new Housing Element will address the preservation of housing and apartments will continue to playa role
· in providing a diverse housing supply. A new Regional Housing Needs Determination will be prepared
by ABAG and included in the updated Housing Element. The new Housing Element will need to be
certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development.
The City is currently processing two condominium subdivision applications. and has received inquiries
&om several other apartment owners indicating their intent to file subdivision documents to convert their
projects to condominiums. The conversion of existing apartments to condominiums will reduce the
number of apartments and thereby reduce the diversity of the housing supply. Therefore, Staff is
concerned that the City may have a difficult time getting the new Housing Element certified if apartment
projects continue to convert to condominiums and significantly reduce the supply of rental units.
Rental Housing Ratio
To assist the City Council in determining the appropriate percentage of rental housing at which to prohibit
condominium conversions, Staff calculated the current ratio of existing multi-family housing that is for
sale and for rent. This infonnation is included in Table 1 below.
Table 1 - Ratio of Multi-Famlly Rental vs. Ownership Housing
Total Multi-Family
Housing Units
Multi-Family
Rental Units as
a Percentage of
Total Multi-
Famll Units
60%"
440..1,^
Multi-Family
ownership Units
as a Percentage
of Total Multi-
Famil Units
40%"
560..1,^
·
Multi-Family Housln as of 2005 6393
Multi-Family Housing as of 2005 6393
* 1,063 mapped apartments included as rental units
^ 1,063 mapped apartments included as ownership units
Staff also calculated the ratio of multi-family rental units and multi-family ownership units as a
percentage of the total housing supply in 2000, currently, and at build out under the General Plan. Staff
assumed that all undeveloped parcels with existing Medium/High and High Density General Plan Land
Use designations will be developed as multi-family projects. A combination of existing approvals and
projection infonnation from property owners was used to determine which parcels would be developed as
rental and ownership housing. Staff used the information from Table 1 to estimate housing types for
parcels where future development information was not available (assumes that mapped projects remain as
rental units). Table 2 and table 2a provide a comparison of these housing ratios.
Table 2 - Housing Supply Ratios
·
Multi-Family Multi-Family
Rental Units as OWnership Units
a Percentage of 8$ a Percentage
Total Housing of Total Housing
Units" Units
9597 30% 10%
15447 25% 16°;'
Pro acted Ratio at Build Out 27,385 20% 21%
* Includes the 1,063 existing apartment projects with Condonùnium Maps
Total Housing
Units
5
Table 2a - Housing Supply Ratios
(assumes all mapped projects (1,063 units) convert to condominiums at build out)
Current Housln Rlltio
Pro ected Ratio at Build Out
15.447
27.385
Multi-family
Rental Units as
a Percentage of
Total Housing
Units'
18%
16%
Multi-Family
Ownership Units
as a Percentage
of Total Housing
Units
23%
25%
e
Total Houalng
Units
The build out projections shown in Tables 2 and 2a indicate that multi-family rental units will decrease as
a percentage of the housing stock while the percentage of multi-family ownership units will increase.
Multi-family ownership units, such as condominiums and townhouses, are typically considered to provide
a more affordable ownership opportunity than single-family homes. Therefore, the projected increase in
. condominiums and townhouses will provide increased homeownership opportunities for the community.
But, the anticipated decrease in rental units will result in fewer housing options for people who are not in
a position to purchase a property.
Housing Need.'! Survey
Staff discussed the development of a Housing Needs Survey with the Housing Division and a
representative ITom the consulting finn (Cotton, Bridges and Associates) that prepared the City's current
Housing Element. Housing needs vary by community and there is not a clear method for detennining
those needs as they relate to a target ratio of rental housing.
The Housing Division will be conducting a Housing Needs Survey this spring and expects to have the
results by July of this year. The intent of the survey is to provide justification for complying with the
programs identified in the current Housing Element or for determining that a given program is not
necessary. However, the survey could include an assessment of the types of housing that are needed or ..
desired in the community. But, the results of this survey would be based on the personal preferences of .,
the residents and business owners, and would not ret1ectthe actual ratio of housing that is needed for the
City.
The consultants at Cotton, Bridges and Associates find that housing ratios· are not the best measure of a
community's housing needs.. Instead, they prefer to look at income levels and determine if people are
locked out of the homeownership market because of a disparity in prices and income levels. For example,
a housing unit is typically considered affordable if housing expenses represent less than 30% of household
income. Data which shows that some households are spending more tl¡an 30% of income indicates a
shortage of affordable housing. Census data indicate that affordable housing is the type of housing in
shortest supply in the City of Dublin. Apartments are often considered one of the most affordable types of
housing. Therefore, the conversion of apartments to condominiums will reduce the number of apartments
that are available in the community and further compound the shortage of affordable housing. The
affordable housing shortage could be addressed by requiring converted projects to comply with the City of
Dublin's Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (Zoning Ordinance Section 8.68) rather than limiting
conversions based on a set housing ratio (See alternative C.2 below).
POLICY ALTERNATIVES
Staff has prepared the following series of policy alternatives to assist the City Council in providing
direction to Staff Or! the development of a condominium conversion ordinance. These alternatives are
separated into the following decision points; 1) Is there a need to adopt a condominium conversion
ordinance; 2) Should the ordinance apply to projects with existing Condominium Maps; and 3) Should the .
City establish a housing ratio and limit conversions if the ratio is not met.
6
e
.
.
A. Is there a Need to Adopt a Condominium Conversion Ordinance?
The City Council could elect not to take action on a condominhirn conversion ordinance at this time.
In this case, the City Council could direct Staff to postpone the item indefinitely, or re-evaluate the
need for a condominium conversion ordinance in one year. .
Discussion:
The City would continue to rely only on the provisions the Subdivision Map Act to regulate the
conversion of unmapped projects if the City Council elects' not to adopt a condominium conversion
ordinance at this time. The State regulates condominium conversions through the Subdivision Map
Act and these standards are enforced by local jurisdictions such as the City of Dublin. The
Subdivision Map Act provides technical requirements for the preparation of maps, and requires basic
noticing to tenants and requires property owners to offer existing tenants the right of first refusal to
purchase their unit at market rates. However, the Map Act does not provide a mechanism for the City
to evaluate the housing balance within the community, nor does jt require the property owner to
mitigate the impacts of conversion to the community by methods sucli as providing affordable housing
for low income households or relocation assistance to tenants who. are displaced by the conversion. If
the Council does decide to postpone consideration of this item, it should be aware that projects that are
already mapped could vest their rights to sell individual units by obtaining a public report.
B. Should the City Adopt an Ordinance that Requires Projects with Existing Condominium Maps
but No Public Report to Obtain a Condominium Conversion Permit?
The Council· can define "condominium conversion" in a manner that would. apply to projects that
already have final condominium maps but no public reports. Such an ordinance would require the
owner of such projects to obtain a condominium conversion permit from the City.
If the Council wishes to adopt such an ordinance, the ordinance could prohibit the issuance of
condominium conversion permits unless the rental. housing ratio is less than 30% (or a different
amount set by the Council). It could also require the property owner to provide Inclusionary Units
and provide certain tenant protections.
DisCU$$ion:
There are approximately 1,063 rental apartments within the City of Dublin that have already been
mapped as Condominiunis but have not received a Public Report from the Department of Real Estate.
If all of these units were converted, a large number of apartments would be eliminated from the
market and a significant number of tenants could be displaced; Requiring projects to comply with the
City's Inclusionary Zoning regulations would help to reduce the shortage of affordable housing and
help an underserved segment of the community. Similarly, relocation assistance would reduce the
burden on tenants that are displaced by conversions. In addition to requiring a target housing ratio be
met, the City Council could require converted projects to meet current lnclusionary Zoning
requirements or require property owners to. provide certain protections for tenants, or, the Council
could require both.
C. Should there be a Housing Rado that Limits Conversions? If so, what should that Ratio Be?
1. Identify a Target Housing Ratio and Limit Conversions if the Ratio is not Met.
a. Adopt the Proposed Ordinance as Recommended by the Planning Commission.
As explained in the previous staff report, this would prohibit conversions of unmapped
projects when the rental housing ratio is less than 30%. It would also require the property
owner to provide Inclusionary Units and provide certain tenant protections.
7
b. Choose an Appropriate Target Housing Ratio Other than 3D%. and£imit Conversions Until
the Housing Ratio is Met.
As the City is exercising its police and zoning power, it can choose to establish any ratio it ..
deems appropriate. This ratio can be based on the City Council's perception of the
community's needs without using a study to establish the ratio. For example, rental
apartments are estimated to represent approximately 20% of the housing supply at build out,
assuming that the existing mapped projects remain as rental units. TIrls ratio drops to 16% if
the existing mapped projects convert. Therefore, the City Council could decide to set the
housing ratio at either 16% or 20% to mirror the build out projections.
2. Require Conversions to Provide lnclusionary Units and Tenant Protections without Limiting the
Number of Conversions.
Conversions would be required to provide Inc1usionary Units and provide certain tenant
protections as described in the Ordinance that was recommended by the Planning Commission.
These measures would benefit the community and help to mitigate the impacts of conversion.
TIrls alternative would not place any limitations on the property owner's ability to convert a rental
complex to for sale condominiums. The marketplace would control the supply of rental and
ownership housing within the City. In theory, the market would self adjust to meet the demands
of the community. Additional apartments might be built during periods of strong demand for
rentals. Similarly, condominium conversions might occur during periods of weak rental demand
in order to provide a balanced housing market. The City would not regulate conversions to
maintain a core stock of rental housing for the community under this alternative. .
3. Establish an Annual Limit on the Number ofUnifS that Can Be Converted.
As the City Council is exercising its police and zoning power, it can choose to establish the
amount of housing that is permitted to convert per year that it deems appropriate. .The permitted
amount of convertible housing can be based on the City Council's perception of the community's
needs. For example, a limit of 200 conversions per year would require approximately nineteen
years to convert all existing apartments, under the unlikely scenario that they all wish to convert.
.
TIrls alternative would avoid a scenario where a sudden increase in condominium conversions
decimates the City's rental housing stock. Under this alternative, changes in the rental housing
ratio would happen more. slowly thereby allowing the City to use other means-such as zoning
more land for multi-family residential-to ensure that there is adequate rental housing in the
community.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council provide Staff with direction regarding the policies that should be
considered as part of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
.
8 V: 'ß
D
, VII
CITY CLERK
File # D[!l]~[Q]-[g][Q]
e
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 1, 2005
P A 04-044 Condominium Conversion Ordinance Regulating the
Conversion of Existing Apartments in the City to Condominiums.
Report Prepared by: Jeff Baker, Associate Planner~
SUBJECT:
ATTACHMENTS:
. RECO~MENDATION:
Y'·'¡:
1.
2.
Urgency Condominium Conversion Ordinance
Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Non urgency
ordinance)
List of Dublin Apartments
City Council Staff Report (Dated September 7, 2004)
City Council Staff Report (Dated November 16, 2004)
without attachments
Planning Commission Staff Report (Dated January 11, 2005)
without attachments
Planning Commission Resolution 05-02 Recommending that
the City Council Adopt an Urgency Ordinance and Non
Urgency Ordinance Regulating the Conversion of Existing
Apartments in the City to Condominiums
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (1/11/05)
Letter from Dav{d Van AttaDated January 5, 2005
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
1.
2.
Open Public Hearing;
Receive Staff. Presentation and take testimony from the
applicant aDd pûblic;
Close Public Hearing and Deliberate; and
Waive the Reading and Adopt the Urgency Ordinance
(Attacbment 1) Regulating the Conversion of Existing
Apartments in the City to Condominiums
Waive the Reading and Introduce the Non-Urgency
Ordinance (Attachment 2) Regulating the Conversion of
Existing Apartments in the City to Condominiums
5.
The conversion of rental apartments to for sale condominiums has the
potential to create additional property tax revenues for the City.
Additional property tax revenues would be generated by establishing a
new tax basis with the sale of each unit. The full extent of the
financial impacts would be based on the number of conversions that
occur. Similarly, the sale of an apartment complex from one group of
investors to another could also create additional property tax revenues
for the City. Implementation of the Condominium Conversion
Ordinance will have an impaet on Staff time in relation to
adh1inislering and monitoring policy provisions. The impact on Staff
time is discussed in the implementation sections of this Staff Report.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
e~-.---------~--_._--------------~----------------~~------------~----------
COPIES TO~
G:\PA#\2004\04-044 Cðndo Conversion ZOA \cl::!iõr2-1-0-5.doc
~- \ ~O':'i '1 I. \
ATTACHMENT I
,;J- 61 [1,\
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Apartment units provide a type of housing that is a key to a healthy diversity of housing stock in the
community. Apartments provide housing for all levels of affordability in the community and are a _
valuable tool for providing work force housing. Staff believes that the conversion of one or two of the ..
City's apartment communities could have a major impact on the diversity of the City's housing stock in
that it would remove from the market a significant percentage of the existing rental units. If sold rather
than rented, the units would no longer be available to a segment of the community that is not in a position
to purchase such units. In addition, the loss of these units would like]y decrease the vacancy rate, may
ipcrease rmts, and this may in turn further exacerbate the City's shortage of affordable rental units. This
might cause a lasting imbalance in the diversity of housing stock in the City, .
In the past 10 years the City has seen the development of approximately 1,500 residential apartment
units, for an overall total of approximately 3,172 units throughout the City. It should be noted that
approximately 1,119 of these units are already mapped for condominiums but continue to operate as
apartment cOl11111unities (Attachment 3). However, the California Department of Real Estate (DRE) has
not issued a Public Report for these properties. The Public Report vests the property owner's right to sell
the units individually. These apartment communities remain subject to new City ordinances until the
property owner has received a Public Report ITom the DRE. If all of these units converted, the ratio of
apartments to ownership units would be greatly reduced.
In the past ten months, Staff has received inquiries ITom several existing apartment owners indicating their
intent to file subdivision documents to convert their projects to condominiums. The City is currently
processingï;ubdivision applications to convert the following apartment projects to for-sale condominiums.
Current Subdivision Applications
Iron Horse Trail Apartments (Dougherty Road) .
Archstone - Emerald Park Apartments (Hacienda Drive) -
Total
117 units
324 units
441 Units
.
On September 7,2004, the City Council adopttld a Resolution (Resolution #181c04) initiating proceedings
to adopt an ordinance regulating the conversion of existing apartments· in the City to for -saìe
condominiums (Attachment 4). Following that meeting, Staff studied the various mechanisms for
regulating condominium conversions. This Study included a complete review of the Subdivision Map
Act, City of Dublin Gen.eral Plan Housing Element and Condominium COI1Version Ordinances from
different cities throughout California, including the cities of Livermore and Walnut Creek. Based on this
Sto.dy, Staff developed a series of policy alternatives for the City Council to consider. On November 16,
2004, Staff presented these policy alternatives to the City Council (Attachment 5). The City Council
provided Staff with direction regarding the development of the proposed CondominiUlll Conversion
Ordinance. The City Council further directed Staff to hold a meeting with the owners of apartments
within the City of Dublin in order to inform them of these policy recommendations and solicit their
comments. On December 9, 2004, Staff held a meeting with these property owners and other interested
parties, Staff utilized the feedback received at this meeting to further develop the proposed Condominiunl
Conversion Ordinance, Feedback ITom the property owners is included in the analysis section of this
Staff Report. On January 11, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending that
the City Council adopt an urgency ordinance and a non urgency ordinance, which are included as
Attachments 1 and 2 of this Staff Report, to regulate the conversion of existing apartments to
condominium. The PlanniDg Commission adopted the resolution after malcing several minor
nlOdifications to the proposed ordinance. A discussion of the Planning Commission's comments and
modifications are presented in the Analysis section of this Staff Report. e
2fb1t
~
b t'
Process:
At the present time should a property owner wish to convert an existing apartment complex to for-sale
condominiums, the property owner must record it Condominium Map and obtain a Public Report from the
PRE. The application for a Condominium Map would be processed in accordance with State law under
.the Subdivision Map Act. The Subdivision Map Act contains provisions that require the property owner
o give notice to tenants and gives tenants the right to purchase their existing units at market rate before
they are placed on the market for-sale to the general public. State law permits the City to expand upon
these basic requirements through the adoption of a condominium-conversion ordinance. State law
provides that cities have the responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the improvement
and development of housing to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments
of the community. (See Gov. Code, § 65580(d)). For example, a condominium conversion ordinance
could limit conversions to maintain a balance of housing stock and could require the provision of
affordable units under the City's lnclusionary Zoning Ordinance.
Both of the subdivision applications referenced above would only be "subject to the Condominium
Conversion Ordinance if it is adopted before the City takes action on these subdivision maps. Ordinarily,
under the Subdivision Map Act, the City may only apply standards in effect at the time that an application
for a tentative subdivision map is deemed complete (Gov. Code, § 66474.2(a)). However, the City
Council adopted Resolution 181-04 initiating proceedings to adopt a condominium-conversion ordinance
(Attachment 4). This Resolution was designed to prevent those that :file subdivision applications to
convert existing apartments to condominiums from avoiding the pending condominium-conversion
ordinance. The Resolution permits the City to apply the Condominium Conversion Ordinanèe in effect on
the date the City approves or disapproves a tentative map (Gov. Code, § 66474.2(b)). The Subdivision
Map Act requires the City to take action on maps within 50 days of deeming an application complete. At
the time that this Staff Report was prepared, the subdivision applications referenced above had not been
deemed complete. -
.Neighboring Juri6<dictions: ,
Cities throughout California have adopted Condominium Conversion Ordinances including the cities of
Livermore and Walnut Creek. Both of these cities adopted conversion"ordinances that contain provisions
wJùch restrict the conversion of apartments to condominiums and provide reJocation benefits to displaced
tenants. The following is a synopsis ofthe policy components contained in these ordinances:
The City of Livermore:
· Application of the ordinance: Projects with 2 or more units.
· Limitations on Conversions: The City Council must annually determine the maximum number of
apartments that are permitted to convert.
· Limitations on Rent Increases: Rent increases are not permitted from the date a tentative ma?
àpplication is filed until the tenant relocates.
· Relocation Assistance: All tenants receive financial relocation assistance equal to 2-months rent.
Seniors are offered rent controlled lifetime leases. Low and moderate income tenants shall b<::
offered a minimum of a 3.year, rent control1ed lease. Tenants with school aged children rec<::ive a 6·
month lease extension.
· Building Code Requirements: Projects shall conform to the applicable building code in effect at the
time the last building permit was issued.
· Site Development ReView: Landscaping and buildings shall be reviewed by the Planning
Department and refurbished and restored to achieve a high degree of appearance.
The City of Walnut Creek:
· Application of the ordinance: Projects with 2 or more units.
.. Limitations on Conversions: Conversion is limited to no more than 5% of the City's potential1y
convertible rental stock in anyone calendar year.
· Limitations on Rent Inoreases: Rent increases are not permitted for a period of 2-years from the date a
3'b1'1
'-'
C'blf1
tentative map application is filed with the city.
· Relocation Assistance: All tenants receive financial relocation assistance equal to 2-months rent.
Seniors are offered rent controlled lifetime leases. Low and moderate income tenants shall be offered
a minimum of a 3-year, rent controlled lease.
· Building Code Requirements: Projects shall confonn to the applicable building code in effect at thc
time the last building permit was issued.
· Site Development Review: Landscaping and buildings shall be refurbished and restored to achieve a
high degree of appearance.
·
PROPOSED POLICY COMPONENTS:
The following is a discussion of the key policy components of the proposed Condominiunl Conversion
Ordinance. The discussion of each component includes an analysis of the policy along with a discussion
of the feedback received at the meeting with the Property Owners and recommendations made by the
Planning Commission. In some instances, the ordinance has been modified based on the feedback and
recommendations that Staff received. This analysis also includes a discussiol1 of the impacts on Staff time
as a result of implementing these provisions.
A. Application of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance
The following criteria would be used to identify multi-family properties that are subject to the
proposed Condominium COl1version Ordinance:
·
Residential rental projects in which units have been occupied as rental units (Attachment 1 -
Section 8.54.030);
Developments containing 21 or more dwelling units under the same ownership that are held
for lease to the general public (Attachment 1 - Sectiön 8.54.020); and
Apartment projects with a recorded subdivision map on September 7, 2004, would be exempt
from the Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Attachment 1 - Section 8.54.030).
·
·
·
Analysis: The conversiol1 of tfuits that have already been occupied could result in the displacement
of residents. Therefore, apartments would be subject to the ordinance if they have already been
occupied. Teoants that would be displaced by conversion would be eligible to receive relocation
benefits required by the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance as discussed in SectiOI1 D of
this Sta:ffReport.
The original recommendation to include a provision to make all projects with 20 or more rental units
subject to the Condominium Conversion Ordinance is consistent with the threshold that has been
established for the existing Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (Section 8.68). This would exclude
duplexes and small apartment buildings from the ordinance·. Th.e Alders Apartments is the smallest
apartment building in the City with only 8 units. The Evan Alan Apartments is the next smallest
with a total of 20 units. However, this provision has been modified by the Planning Conmlission as
discussed below, to apply to projects with 21 or more units.
The requirement to obtain a public report fÌ"om the DRE would make units that have already been
mapped for condominiums subject to the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance. The City
Attorney's Office's legal review concluded that only the Public Report vests the building owners'
rights to sell the units individually. Without the Public Report, the development remains subject to
new City ordinances regardless of whether the building is already mapped. At the time that this
Staff Report was prepared, the DRE had not issued a Public Report for any units within the City that
have been mapped for condominiums. However, if alJ of these units were converted, the ratio of
apartments to ownership units would be greatly reduced and a significant number of tenants would
be displaced. Implementation of this provision would reduce the potential impact to these tooants.
·
4 ð() \ '"\
.
.
e
'0 0b II
This approach to regulating the conversion of mapped apartments to condominiums is :Qot currently
used by surrounding jurisdictions but is common in Southern California. This provision has been
modified by the Planning Commission as discussed below, and would exempt existing projects with
Condominium Maps.
City Coundl Meeting (11/16/04): The policy alternatives that were presented to the City Council
included an alternative that would make existing projects with recorded Condominh:nn. Maps subject
to the provisions of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance if the Department of Real Estate
(DRE) has not issued a public report for the project.
The policy alternatives that were presented to the City Council also included a recommendation to
apply the ordinance to apartment projects with 20 or more units. The City Council directed Staff to
prepare an ordinance that included both of these provisions.
Property Owner's Meeting (12/9/04): Several property owners expressed concern about applying
the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance to properties that have already processed a Final
Map with the City. These property owners indicated that .approval of their existing condominium
maps implied certain approvals rrom the City and that application of a Condominium Conversion
Ordinance would effectively reverse these approvals and devalue their properties.. Staff also
received a letter prepared by David Van Atta on behalf of property owners in the City of Dublin
(Attachment 9). This letter argues that California law does not permit the regulation of the
conversion of projects with approved Condominium Maps. The City Attorney's Office has
reviewed Mr. Van Atta's letter and stands by its conclusion that the City may regulate conversion if
the property owner has not obtained a Public Report.
The owner of the Evan Alan Apartments requested that the ordinance apply tõ properties with 21 or
more units in order to exclude it rrom the ordinance. The Evan Alan Apartments has 20 units and
has processed a Final Condominium Map but does not have a Public Report rrom the DRE.
The property owner(s) also expressed concern that they were not notified of the City Council
meeting, held on September 7, 2004. It was at this meeting that the City Council initiated the
development of the proposed ordinance. The City sent a public hearing notice to the leasing office
at each property advising them of the City Council hearing. However, the property owner(s) were
inadvertently not sent a copy of the hearing notice. Staff has updated the address list for the public
hearing notices to include each property owner. All property owners were sent a notice advising
them of the Planning Commission hearing on January 11,2005.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/11/05): Thc Planning Commission raised concern that applying
the ordinance to projects with approved Condominium Maps would reverse previous approvals that
were granted by the City. Based on this concern, the Planning Commission recommended that the
City COW1cH adopt a Coo.dominium Conversion Ordinance that excludes existing projects with
maps. There are six existing apartment projects, with a total of 1,119 units, within the City of
Dublin that have recorded Condominium Maps (Attachment 3). The City approved these
Condominium Maps at the time that the original entitlements were granted for these projects. As
noted above, these projects would be exempt rrom the provisions of the proposed CondominiUJl1
Conversion Ordinance. These projects are also exempt from the condominium conversion
provisions of the Subdivision Map Act because they already have existing maps.
The Planning Commission also took testimony rrom Mr. Joseph Au, owner of the Evan Alan
Apartments. Mr. Au requested that the ordinance apply to projects with 21 or more units rather than
projects with 20 or more units as originally proposed. The Planning Commission directed Staff to
modify the proposed ordinance to make projects with 21 or more units subject to the ordinance.
56Q 1+
Therefore, the Evan Alan Apartments would be exempt rrom the ordinance because it has 20 un~ 1!:-1 \\'1,
and an approved Condominium Map.
Implementation: Implementation of these policy components would not have a fiscal impact On
their own. However, Staff time would be required in order to implement the overall ordinance.
.
B. Limitations on Conversions
Section 8.54.040 of the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance would permit conversions if
the minimum number of rental units within the City of Dublin exceeds 30% of the total housing
supply. Conversions would not be permitted if the conversion reduces the total number of rental
units below 30% of the total housing supply.
Analysis; This provision sets clearly defmed standards that can be used to determine if rental units
may be converted to condominium units and continue to preserve diwrsity in the housing stock.
When the General Plan Housing Element was updated in 2000, multi-family rental units represented
approximately 30% of the total housing supply. This ratio was consistent with the composition of
the nationwide housing supply at that time and ensures a diversity of housing types to meet the
nee& of different economic segments of the community. Implementation of this provision in the
ordinance would preserve a core stock of rental housing consistent with the housing ratio identified
at the time that the Housing Elementwas updated.
City Council Meeting (11116104): The policy alternatives that Staff presented to. the City Council
included a recommendation to require a 30% rental housing ratio in order to pennit conversions.
The City Council. directed Staff to include this provision in the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance.
The policy alternatives that were presented to the City Council álso included a recommendation that .
would require; . as a prerequisite to conversion, that the City wide vacancy rate exceed 5%
(Attachment 5). The City of Dublin General Plan Housing Element (Appendix A, Dublin Housing
Stock) indicates that a vacancy rate of 5% is considered ideal for adequate consumer mobility and to
ensure that alternative housing is available for tenants that are displaced by conversion. The City
Council recommended that this provision be included in the draft ordinance.
. Property Owner's Feedback (J 219104): The property owners raised concern that the 30% housing
ratio identified in the Housing Element was an arbitrary number and not based on an analysis of the
needs of the community. These owners feel that condominiums also play an important role in the
community.
The property owners also expressed concern about requiring a 5% vacancy rate as a pœrequisite to
conversion. The owner's indicated that vacancies are at least partially a œflection of the rents that a
property is charging. Therefore, the vacancy rate can be manipulated by an increase or decrease in
rent. Staff also discovered a number of implementation issues associated with this provision.
Vacancy rates are difficult to track. Professional vacancy reports do not typically track small er
apartment complexes and would not necessarily give an accurate representation of the overal!
vacancy rate within the City. Staff could periodically survey property owners in order to determil¡e
the vacancy rate. However, this would be a labor intensive task and it would be difficult to verify
the accuracy of the infonnation that is collected. Based on the concerns raised by the property
owners and the difficulty in tracking vacancy rates, Staff has decided to recommend against
including a vacancy requirement in the proposed Condominium Conversion OrdinaDce.
Planning Commission Feedback (1111105): As previously mentioned, the Planning Commission
recommended excluding existing projects with Condominium Maps rrom the Condominium
.
6"6\1
.
e
.
I
Conversion Ordinance. Staff has re.evaluated the current housing ratio based on the
recommendation by the Planning Commission. As of October 2004, approximately 18% of the
residential pennits issued were for multi.family rental housing (excluding existing projects with
Condomicium Maps). The ratio would increase to 25%, for the SaIne period, if existing projects
with Condominium Maps were included in the calculation. Therefore, no conversions would be
permitted until additional multi-family rental housing is constructed and the housing ratio exceeds
30%.
U-f:, \t',
Staff also estimated the housing ratio when the City reaches build out. This analysis was done using
2000 Census data, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) projections, and the current
General Plan Land Use Map. This ratio is based on the assumption that all undeveloped parcels
with existing Medium/High and High Density General Plan Land Use designations will be
developed as rental units. However, it is unlikely that all of these parcels will be developed as
apartments without any for-sale units. Excluding the existing projects with Condominium Maps,
multi-fan1ily rental units are anticipated to represent a maximum of approximately 32% of the total
housing supply when the city reaches build out.
Condominiums help to provide a variety of ownership opportunities for different economic
segments of the corm:nunity. Staff believes that it would be undesirable to only build apartments to
the exclusion of for-sale-condominiums. Condominiums provide many first time buyers with
affordable homeownership opportunities. But, the construction of for-sale condominiums would
reduce the ratio of rental units below 32% of the total housing supply. For example, if half of the
undeveloped MediumŒigh and High Density parcels are developed as for-sale-condominiums the
ratio ,of multi-family rental units would equal 21 % of the total housing supply. Therefore,
condominium conversions would not be permitted because the ratio of multi-family rental housing
would be below 30% of the total housing supply. The Condominium Conversion Ordinance would
in effect prohibit the conversion of additional rental units to for-sale-condominiums. However,
should the City Council wish to set the housing ratio below 30%, they could direct Staff to modify
the ordinance prior to adoption. .
Implementation: A minimal amo\UJ.t of Staff time would be required to calculate the current housing
ratio. .The City already collects the information that is needed to calculate the ratio. The cost of
Staff time needed to calculate the ratio would be recovered through the pre application fee described
in Section 8.54.040.A of the ordinance. .
C. Limitations on Rent Increases
Section 8.54.100 restricts rent increases from the date the property owner provides each tenant with
a Notice of Intent to Convert pursuant to Section 8.54.050 until twelve months following the
approval of the Condominium Conversion Permit or six months following the issuance of a public
report by the Department of Real Estate (DRE), whichever occurs later.
Analysis: Restricting the property owner's ability to raise rent will limit the potential for property
owners to encourage tenants to vacate early in order to avoid the noticing requirements of the
Subdivision Map Act and the proposed City of Dublin Condominium Conversion Ordinance. Rent
would be held in place for a minimum of 6·12 months under this provision,
City Council Mæting (11/16/04): This provision was included in the policy recommendations to the
City Council. The City Couneil directed Staff to include this provision in the proposed
Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Property Owner's Meeting (12/9/04): The property owners did not express concern regarding this
specific provision.
7av \~
% ð"¿ nO¡
Planning Commission Meeting (JIll/OS): The Planning Commission is in support of this provision
and did not direct Staff to make further modifications.
Implementation: A self reporting process would be utilized and a minimal amount of Staff time .
would be required to impJement this policy. The property owner would be required to notify each
tenant of the limitation on rent increases and provide Staff with a copy of the notice as described in
Section 8.54.050.A of the proposed ordinance.
D. Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan
Section 8.54.110 of the proposed ordinance requires the Applicant to implement a Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan. The relocation plan shall be prepared by the Applicant and indicate the
Applicant's commitment to provide tenants with the benefits required by the Condominium
Conversion Ordinance. These benefits include financial assistance with moving expenses and an
extension oflease terms for qualified tenants.
Financial Relocation Assistance
Section 8.54.lI0.D of the proposed ordinance requires the property owner to provide each tenant
with a payment equal to 3 months rent to help cover moving expenses. The property owner is
required to make this payment within 10 days of the tenant's waiver to purchase their existing unit.
Analysis: There are costs associated with the physical act of moving and setting up new utilities,
However, the Subdivision Map Act does not require property ownèl's to provide relocation assistance
to displaced tenants. The ordinance requirement to pay moving expenses is intended to reduce the
financial burden that is placed on tenants as a result of the property owner's decision to convert and
the tenants' subsequent need to relocate.
.
City Council Meeting (J 1/16/04): The policy alternatives that were presented to the City Council
included a recommendation to pay moving expenses equal to 2-months rent within 14-days of
relocation. However, the City Council directed Staff to require a payment equal to 3-months prior to
relocation. This provision has been included in the proposed ordinance as requested by the City
Council.
Property Owner's Meeting (12/9104): Concern was raised by the property ·owners regarding the
requirement to provide financial relocation assistance. Several property owners stated that the
annual tenant turnover rate was between 50% and 80%. These property owners do not feel that they
should be required to pay reloca.tion expenses for tenants that would likely move regardless of "-
conversion. They suggested that relocation benefits be limited to longtime tenants. However, as
demonstrated by these property owners, as much as 50% of their tenants remain for more than one
year. Even tenants that might plan to move in a given year could be forced to move early as a result
of a conversion. These tenants will incur moving expenses that they might not have otherwise
incurred if the property was not converted. Many of these residents may not have the firumcial
resources to pay moving expenses. Therefore, Staff continues to recommend the financial relocation
assistance provision for all tenants.
Planning Commission Meeting (lIJI/05): The Planning Commission is in support of this provision
and did not direct Staff to make further modifications.
Implementation: A self reporting process would be utilized and a minimal amount of Staff time .
would be required to implenlent this policy. The property owner would be required to notify each
8 ~ \i
·
·
·
tenant of their relocation benefits and provide Staff with a copy of the notice as described in Secti~s (\{) t\'~
8.54.050 and 8.54.110 of the draft ordinance.
Continued Tenancy for Qualified Tenants
Section 8.54.1 J O.E of the proposed ordinance requires property owners to provide a 12-month
extension of tenancy to 13.11 eligible tenants beyond the 180 day period required by the Subdivision
Map Act (Section 66427.1(c). This 12-month extension shall be provided if the head of household
or spouse meets the fo11owing eligibility criteria:
· . Has attained age 62 or older;
· Has a disability as defined by Section 54 of the California Civil Code;
· Is a resident of an inelusionary housing unit; or
· Is residing with one or more minor dependent children.
Analysis; There is a limited amount of housing that meets the needs of senior, disabled and low-
income tenants. For example, a disabled tenant may require an apartment on the ground floor.
Ground floor apartments are harder to find and tena.nts may require an extended period of time to
locate such a unit. The Subdivision Map Act requires property owners to give tenants a 180-day
notice to vacate an apartment prior to termina.ting a tenancy due to a condominium conversion.
However, 180-days may not be a sufficient amount of time for a displaced tenant with special needs
to find suitable replacement housing in Dublin. Similarly, the 12-month extension for families with
school aged children will provide them with the flexibility to avoid moving during the school year
and disrupting the education process. The 12-month extension included in the proposed
Condominium Conversion Ordinance would - provide these tenants with additional time to find
housing within the community and further reduce the potential negative impacts of moving.
City Council Meeting (1/16/04); The policy alternatives that were presented to the City Council
included a recommendation to provide a 3-yeat lease extension to tenants that were seniors, disabled
or low income (Attachment 5), However, the City Coun.cil expressed concern that a 3-year
extension may be overly burdenson1e to property owners and result in discrimination against renting
to these tenants. The City Council recommended the 12-month extension that is included in th~
proposed ordinance.
Property Owner's Meeting (1219/04); The property owners agreed that a 3-year lease extension was
burdensome and also questioned the need to provide any type of time extension.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/11/05); The Planning Commission is in support of this provision
and did not direct Staff to n1ake further modifications.
Implementation: A minimal amount of Sta:fftime is required to implement this policy. The property
owner is required to demonstrate that they have entered a binding lease extension or that the temmt
has refused an offer for an extension. The cost of Staff time needed to review this documentation
could be bil1ed to the Applicant on a time apd materials basis.
E.
Inelusionary Zoning Regulations
Section 8.54.130 of the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance treats condominium
conversions as new residential development proj(lcts. As DeW residential development projects,
these converted properties would be required to comply with current Inclusionary Zoning
R(lgulations. The c:urrent Inclusionary Zoning Regulations require new developments to provide
12.5% of the mùts as affordable (Section 8.68). However, if the project had complied with the
inc1usionary Zoning Regulations in effect at the time the proj ect was built, the converted project wi1l
9 Df) Ii
only be required to make up the difference. Thus, if the project has complied with a 5% inclusi~~arv "b rl~
requirement at the time it was constructed, then the conversion would be required to satisfy th~
remaining 7.5% inclusioilary obligation under the existing ordinance.
Ana{ysis: The conversion from apartments to condominiums could result in a substantial loss of .
market rate and affordable rental units. However, condominiums are often seen as an affordable
fow of homeownership. The conversion of apartments to condominiums will provide tl1e
community with additional affordable ownership opportunities. In addition, the provision to require
converted properties to confow to the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations wiJl make 12.5% of the
units affordable to a segment of the market that might not otherwise be able to purchase a
condominium Unit.
City Council Meeting (1/16/04): The policy alternatives that were presented to the City Council
inclu.ded a recommendation to require converted properties to compJy with current Inclusionary
Zoning ReguJations. The City Council directed Staff to include this provision in the proposed
Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Property Owner's Meeting (12/9/04): The property owner's comments were limited to receiving
credit for the portion of any affordable obligation that has already been met. However, the
ordinances include a provision that gives property owners credit for in-lieu fees that were previously
paid to meet their affordable obligation. .
Planning Commission Meeting (1/11/05): The Planning Commission is in support of this provision
and did not direct Staff to make further modifications.
Implementation: A substantial amount of Staff time could be required tò implement this policy if a
Jarge number of units are permitted to convert at one time. Howewr, this Staff time could be billed
to the applicant on a time and materials basis.
.
F. Tenant's Right to Purchase Units
The proposed ordinance (Section 8.54.090.B) requires property owners to provide ten!lllts living in
inc1usionary units with an exclusive right to contract for the purchase of the unit occupied by the
tenant at the sales price set forth in the lnclusionary Zoning Regulations based on the tenant's
annual household income.
Analysis: The Subdivision Map Act requires property owners to provide tenants with an exclusive
right to contract for the purchase of their existing unit upon the same terms and conditions that such
unit will initially be offered to the general public or on t= more favorable to the tenant.
However, the Subdivision Map Act does not address inclusionary units. The provisions of the
proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance will provide tenants that reside in incIu.sionary units
with the same preferential treatment that market rate tenants receive. The purchase price would be
based on the tenant's hou.sehold income in accordance with the Inclu.sionary Zoning Regulations
(Section 8.68). This could enable tenants that rent affordable units to purchase their existing unit at
an affordable purchase price and avoid being displaced by the conversion.
City Council Meeting (1/16/04): The policy alternatives that were presented to the City Council on
November 16, 2004, included a recommendation to extend the right to purchase to inclusionar:J'
tenants at a price consistent with the lnclusionary Zoning Ordinance. The City Council directed
Staff to include this provision in the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
.
...;.
10 Œb\t
e
e
e
Property Owner's Meeting (12/9/04): Staff discussed this provision with the property owners at ~-e ~ HC
meeting on December 9th. The property owners did not provide comments to Staff regarding
changes to this provision.
Planning Commission Meeting (J/ll/05): The Planning Commission recommended notifYing
tenants of the financial obligations of purchasing a condominium. This includes the creation of a
homeowner's association and CC&R's that specify these financial obligations. Section 8.54.090 of
the draft ordinance has been modified based on this recommendation (Attachments 1 & 2).
Implementation: A substantial amount of Staff time could be required to implement this policy if a
large number of units are pennitted to convert at one time. However, this Staff time could be billed
to the applicant on a time and materials basis.
G. Building Code Requirements
Section 8.54..080 of the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance requires converted units to
meet the building code requirements in effect at the time of construction. Any retrofitting or
remodeling work would be required to meet current building code requirements in effect at the time
that building permits were issued. Converted units would also be required to meet the current
Housing Code as defined by the Dublin Municipal Code.
Analysis: Many existing residential dwellings, including apartments, within the City of Dublin were
built prior to the current building code requirements. These dwellings are considered safe and
inhabitable structures. Therefore, the City does not typically require costly retrofitting of these
properties to bring them up to current building code requirements. Conversion of existing
apartments to condominiums does not substantially change the use of these structures in a way that
would make them less safe or inhabitable. However, any remodeling or retro fitting work that the
property owner performs wouJ.d be required to meet current building code requirements. The
Housing Code provides minimum standards fat life safety. Existing apartments are required to meet
these current Housing Code requirements. Converted units would be required to confonn to the
housing code at the time of conversion.
City Council Meeting (J1/16/04): This provision was included in the policy recommendations to the
City Council. The City Council directed Staff to include this provision in the proposed
Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Property Owner's Meeting (12/9/04); The property owners did not express concern with this
provision.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/11/05): The Planning Commission directed Staff to research and
advise the City Council on the feasibility of requiring converted projects to meet accessibility
requirements under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Staff researched the federaJ
ADA requirements and determined that the ADA is regulated by the Federal Government not the
City. However, the State regulates accessibility requirements under the California Building Code,
Title 24, and these standards are enforced by local jurisdictions. The accessibility requirements
under Title 24 are in general more stringent than th.e requirements under the ADA. It should be
noted that projects tllat were built after 1992 are in substantial conformance with current Title 24
standards. Staff has researched the feasibility and economic issues associated with requiring
converted projects to meet current accessibility standards under Title 24. These requirements apply
to the project site and associated buildings. .
11~ It
Site Accessibility:
Title 24, like ADA, includes site design requirements to ensure that new projects are accessible to
people with disabilities. In order for the project site to be accessible to people with disabilities, the
parking lot, walkways and other common areas must meet maximum slope standards and provide
wheel chair access. Should the City Council decide to require existing projects to meet current site
accessibility requirements under Title 24, projects that were built prior to 1992 would require
modifications to the site design in order to meet these standards. The site modifications to these
projects would require a limited amount of work at a minimal cost to the property owner.
1')-- 'Þ
Ill.
e
Buüding Accessibility:
Title 24 also applies to the design of the units within the apartment project. Current Title 24
standards for new construction require all ground floor units and ) 0% of the total units within a
project to be adaptable for accessibility to people with disabilities. In order to be considered
adaptable, these units must be accessible to people with disabilities including a person in whee)
chair accessible, and the interior of the units must be designed to accommodate a wheel chair and
people with other disabilities. In order to accommodate a wheel chair the door frames must meet
minimum width requirements, the kitchen and at least one bathroom in each adaptable unit must
meet minimum size requirements to ensure wheel chair maneu.verability and the kitchen and
bathroom must be designed with adjustable counters for use by people with disabilities. Should the
City Council decide to require converted units to meet current accessibility requirements under Title
24, the units that were built prior to 1992 would require extensive modifications. For example, an
elevator or wheel chair lift may be required to provide wheel chair access to adaptable units. The
kitchen and one of the bathrooms may need to be enlarged to nleet minimum size requirements.
The kitchen and bathroom counters and cabinets won1d need to be modified in order to be functional
for a person with disabilities. These modifications could be cost pwhibitive and would likely
discourage the conversion of older apartments.
The Planning Conmiission directed Staff to infonn the City Council of the feasibility of modifYing _
existing projects to meet current accessibility standards. However, the'Planning Cor.nmission did .
not direct Staff to modifY the ordinance. Therefore, should the City Council wish to require
converted projects to meet current accessibility standards under Title 24, the City Council could
direct Staff to modifY the ordinance prior to adoption.
Implementation: The ordinance requires the property owner to provide the City with a report on the
condition of each structure and any variation in the code requirements. The cost for a City inspector
to review the property and the report would be billed to the property owner on a time and materials
basis as part of the cost for a Condominium Conversion Pennit. The property owner would be
required to obtain a building permit for retrofitting work. The cost of building inspections is
included in the building permit fecs.
H. Site Development Review
Section 8.54.060 of the proposed Condominium Conversion ordinance requires Site Development
Review (SDR) concuITent with a request to convert to condominiums. The SDR will allow the City
to evaluate the physical appearance of the property and require work to refurbish and restore thc
project as necessary to achieve a high degree of appearance, quality and safety.
Analysis: A Condominium Map is required in order to convert an existing apartment complex to
condominiums. However, the map process does not provide a mechanism to evaluate the physical
appearance of a property. For exanlple, the City could receive an application to convert an existing
apartment comp1ex with deferred maintenance that creates an eyesore within the community. This .
deferred maintenance could include external painting and landscape maintenance to repair sparse or
overgrown 1andscaping. The SDR permit will provide the Planning Commission with a mechanism
12 'Ö! 'f
tv
to evaluate the physical appearance of the property and impose conditionE that require remedial work
to maintain the visual appearance of the City of Dublin.
"b \\
.
City Council Meeting (1/16/04): Staff presented this policy alternative to the City Council for
consideration. The City Council directed Staff to include a provision requiring a Site Development
Review permit in this ordinance.
Prope¡<ty Owner's Meeting (12/9/04): The property owners raised COD cern that the SHe
Development Review process might provide the City with the arbitrary power to make
modifications beyond simply rehabilitating the property. However, the language in the proposed
ordinance limits the City's evaluation to maintenance and confonnance with prior site and
architectural approvals. The intent of this provision is not to reopen full site development review
but simply to ensure that the property remains in conformance with existing approvals.
Planning Commission Meeting (J /11/05): The Planning Cormnission is in support of this provision
and did not direct Staff to make further modifications.
Implementation: Community Development Department Staff time would be required to perfonn a
physical inspection of the property and review proposed improvements. However, the cost of this
review would be included in the application fee for a Condominium Conversion Permit.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City
environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that
environmental documents be prepared. This project has been found to be exempt from the· California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), because it can be
seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed changes to the Municipal Code will have a
.ignificant effect on the environment. " , ,"
CONCLUSION;
Apartment units provide a type of housing that is a key to a healthy diversity of housing stock in the
community. Staff believes that the conversion of one or two of the City's apartment communities could
have a major impact on the diversity of the City's housing stock in that it would remove from the market a
significant percentage of the existing rental units. In consideration of the potential impacts Staff has
prepared the attached Condominium Conversion Ordinance. The proposed ordinance would regulate the
conversion of rental apartments to for-sale condominiums and mitigate relocation impacts to tenants.
On January 11, 2005, the Planning Commission voted 4-0 to adopted a resolution recommending that the
City Council adopt an urgency ordinance and a non urgency ordinance, with modified language, to
regulate .the conversion of rental apartments to for sale condominiums. The urgency ordinance and non
urgency ordinance are included as Attachments 1 and 2 of this Staff Report. The ordinance would exempt
projects with condominium maps from the provisions of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Adopting an urgency ordinance (Attachment 1) will ensure that the ordinance is in effect before the City
takes action on the current subdivision applications. Ordinances typically require two rcadings before the
City Council and take effect 30 days following the second reading. However, the urgency ordinancc
would take effect immediately after adoption. To enact the urgency ordinance, the City Council must
determine that the conversion of these apartments to CO!1dominiums might frustrate the City's goal aDd
State law obligation to adequately provide for the housing needs of all economic segments of the
community. To ensure that the Ordinance becomes effective in the event that the urgency ordi!1ance is
. eChalle!1ged, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council also adopt a non urgency
ordinance (Attachment 2). The non urgency ordinance would supersede the urgency ordinance upon
becoming effective.
13tr{)\Ù¡
RECOMMENDATION:
\1.( G),. {I '1
Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) open public hearing; 2) receive Staff's presentation and take
testimony from the applicant and public; 3) close the public hearing and deliberate; 4) waive the reading
and adopt the Urgency Ordinance (Attachment 1) regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the
City to condominiums; and 5) waive the reading and introduce the Non-Urgency Ordinance (Attachment .
2) regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the City to condominiums.
.
.
14UO\~
.
e
.
IS 61 ~\"l
ORDINANCE NO. .05
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADDING CHAPTER
8.54 TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE)
RELATING TO CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS
The City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby ordain as follows:
Section 1.
Findings.
A. State law provides that cities have the respoI1Sibility to use the powers
vested in them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make
adequate provision for the housing needs of aU economic segments of the community.
B. The City Council finds that conditions in the residential real estate market
have led to the increase in proposals to convert existing multi·family rental projects to
condominiums and other forms of multiple ownership and that the conversion of one or
two of the City's apartment communities could have a major in1pact on the City's
housing market, in that it would remove from the market a significant percentage of the
existing rental units.
C. The City Council finds that the conversion of residential structures from
individual ownership to condominiums or any other form of multiple ownership interest
has the potential to create specific community problems, both social and economic. For
exampJe, conversions may significantly affect the balance between rental and ownership
housing within the City, and thereby reduce the variety of individual choices oftenure,
type, price and location of housing. Conversion may also increase overall rents, decrease
the supply of rental housing for all income groups, displace individuals and families, and
disregard the needs of the housing market place.
D. Accordingly, the City Council finds that the adoption ofa condominium·
conversion ordinance is necessary to limit the impacts on the community of
condomicium conversions, to provide guidelines for the City to evaluate the economic
wd social problems associated with condominium conversioI1S, and to establish
requirements that must be included in any conversion approval.
Section 2. Addition afChapter 8.54. Chapter 8.54 is hereby added to the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance to read as follows:
CHAPTER 8.54 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION REGULATIONS
8.54.010
Intent. The purpose of this Chapter is to:
A.
Maintain a supply of affordable and market rate rental housing.
2-I-t.>5
!' -¡.
U-I ;:"1-
127S:52.3
-]-
JSIlU8.I)I' 19, 200::;
ATTACHMENT ,
B.
Provide a reasonable balance of ownership and rental housing in the
co=unity and a variety of choices in the type and price of housing.
C. Establish criteria for the conversion of existing multi-fanlily rental
housing to condominiums. .
D. Reduce the impact of Conversion on residents of rental housing that may
be required to relocate due to the conversion of rental housing to
condoIDiniums.
E. Provide the opportunity for very low-, low-, and moderate-income perSons
to participate in the ownership process and to maintain a supply ofœntal
housing for very low-, low-, and moderate-income persons; and
F. Ensure that converted housing achieves a high degree of appearance,
quality and safety.
8.54.020
Condominhun Conversion Defined. A "condominium
conversion" means the conversion of the ownership of the units in
a residential housing project containing twenty-one or more units
that are or were previously occupied as rental units from a single
ownership to an ownership in which the residential units may be
sold individually. Such condominium conversions may include,
but are not limited to, the conversioD of existing multiple unit
residential housing projects to any of the following, all as defined
in Civil Code section 1351(a) a co=unity apartment project, (b)
a condominium project, and (c) a stock cooperative.
8.54.030
Condominium Conversion Permit
A Permit Required. No condominium conversion may talce place in the City
without the owner first obtaining a Condominium Conversion p=it
pursuant to this Chapter and, where applicable, an approvoo subdivision
map.
B Exemptions. A Condominium Conversion Permit shall not be required
prior to the sale of individual units to the public for any of the following
residential housing pro.iecl~:
1. Projects that had recorded subdivision maps for a community
apartment project, a condominium project, or a stock cooperative
on September 7, 2004.
2. Projects in which none of the units have been occupied as rental
units.
n7~$2.~
-2-
J8IlU8T')' 19, 2QO~
\ b 6"~ \ \'1
.
e
.
.
··e
.
<.'
7275S2.~
y
·JL tl~
01.
8.54.040
Preliminary Application Process.
A.
Preliminary Applications. Prospective applicants for Condominium
Conversion Permits shall initially submit a preliminary application on
fo=s provided by the City. Preliminary applications shall identify the
owner or the owner;s authorized agent and the location and number of
units in the building to be converted. The preliminary application shall be
accompanied by a preliminary application fee, the amount of which shall
be as set forth from time to time by resolution of the City Council.
B. Department Review, The Community Development Director shall review
preliminary applications for condominium conversions.. The Community
Development Director shall authorize the submittal of a Condominium.
Conversion Permit application ifboth of the following criteria are met:
1. Notice of Intent to Convert. The applicant provides satisfactory
evidence to the Community Development Director that the Notice
ofIntent to Convert required by section 8.54.050 was received by
all tenants of the project proposed for conversion and that 60 days
have elapsed since the applicant made the last such notification.
2.
Reutal/Owncrship Housing Ratio. The ratio that multiple-family
units in developments of twenty (20) or more rental units bears to
the total number of housing units in the City as a whole exceeds
thirty percent (30%). For the purposes of this calculation, the units
proposed for conversion should be treated as housing units but
should not be treated as rental units.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Condominium Conversion Permit
application shall be accepted for projects that propose to convert onJy a
portion of the units in an existing multiple unit residential project. The
Condominium Conversion Permit application shall be submitted no later
than 60 days following the Community Development Director's
authorization.
8,54.050
Notice of Inteut to Convert,
A. At least sixty (60) days prior to submitting an application for a
Condominium Conversion Permit pursuant to section 8.54.070, the
applicall¡ shall provide notice substantially in the fonn outlined in
subdivision B to each tenant in the project proposed for conversion.
B. The notice shall be substantiaJ1y as foJlows:
"To the occupant(s) of [address]:
-3-
JDII~ty 19,2.00$
\. ').. :'b \. \"\
The owner(s) of this building, at [address], planes) to file an application
for a Condominium Conversion Permit with the City of Dublin to convert .
this building to condominiums, community apartments, or a stock
cooperative project. You will be provided with notice of each hearing
held by the City on the proposed conversion, and you have the right to
appear and the right to be heard at any such hearing. Be advised that
Chapter 8.56 of the D\lblin Municipal Code may give you, as a tenant of a
structure proposed for conversion to condOl'niniums, certain rights.
[signature afowner or owner's agent]
[date]
C. In the. event that the applicant is simultaneously applying for a tentative
map and a Condominium Conversion Permit, the notice required by this
section may be combined with the notice required by Government Code
section 66452.9
8.54.060
Site Development-Review Required.
AJ)y condominium. conversion shall also be subject to Site Development Review,
pursuant to Chapter 8.104, to provide the City with a mechanism to evaluate
issues related to maintenance of the property and consistency with prior site and
architectural approvals and, if necessary, require modifications to existing site
conditions. The applicant shall submit an applica.tion for Site Development
Review concurrently with the application for a Condominium Conversion Permit.
The decision maker shall impose such conditions as are necessary to require that
buildings, structures, fences, patio enclosures, carports, accessory buildings,
sidewalks, driveways, landscaped areas and utility facilities are re!'u.rbished and
restored as necessary to ensure that the proposed conversion project is and
remains orderly and attractive.
.
8.54.070
Condominium Application Requirements. AJ) application for a
Condominhn:n Conversion Permit shall be accompanied by the
following items:
A. A report on the physical elements of each structure and facility, which
shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
1.
A repOli detailing the condition of each element of the property,
including foundation, structural, electrical, plumbing, utilities,
walls, ceilings, windows, recreational facilities, soul~d transmission
of each building, mechanical equipment, parking facilities, and
appliances. Regarding each element, the report sha11 state to the
best knowledge or estimate of the applicant when the element was
.
7Z7~.52.3
-4-
JaIlUilI'y ]9, 2005
·
·
·
127552.3
\(~
\'-"1 I'
, -b
Hi
constructed or installed, when the element was last replaced, the
approximate date upon wlrich the element will require
replacement, the cost of replacing the element, and any variatioD of
the physical condition of the element from the applicable zonin.g
and building wde. The report shall identify each known defective
or unsafe element and set forth the proposed corrective measures to
be employed;
2.
A report from a licensed structural pest control operator on each
structure and each unit within the structure;
3.
A report on the condition of the common area improvements,
including landscaping, lighting, utilities and streets;
A report on any known soil and geological conditions regarding
soil deposits, rock formation, faults, groundwater and landslides in
the vicinity of the project, and a statement regarding any known .
evidence of soils problems relating to the structure. Reference shall
be made to any previous soils report for the site and a copy
submitted with the report; and
5. A statement of repaÌIs and improven1ents necessary to refurbish
and restore the proj ect to achieve a high degree of appearance,
quality and safety.
4.
B.
A site/development plan;
C. Specific infonnation cODcerning the characteristics of the project,
including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Square footage a¡1d number of rooms Í11 each unit;
2. Estimated sales price range of units; and
3. Names and mailing address of all tenants.
D. A detailed list ofren!s for each unit to be converted for the twelve (12)
months prior to the application;
E. Economic and demographic informatioD regarding the current tenants as
required by the Community Development Director;
F. A Tenant RelocatioD Assistance plan as required by Section 8.54.110;
G. Evidence that aU eligible tenants entitled to special protection have been
offered lease extensions in accordance with Section 8.54.11 O.F.
H.
A decla¡'ation of covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) that
would be rewrded and would app1y to each owner of a condominium unit
-5-
Jw:JIWY t9, 2QQ5'
within the project. The declaration shall include, but notbe limited to,
pertinent infonnation regarding the conveyance of units and the
assignment of parking, an agreement for common area maintenance,
including facilities and landscaping, together with an estimate of any
initial assessment fees anticipated for maintenance, and an indication 0 f
appropriate responsibilities for maintenance of all improvements and
utility systems for each unit. The city has the right to review apd approve
the CC&Rs to ensure that (l) the appropriate conditions of approval are
included in them and. (2) those provisions reflecting the city's conditions
may not be amended without city approval; and
1. Such additional infonnation as the Community Development Director
deems necessary to ensure the compliance with this Chapter.
8.54.080
Building Code RequIrements
A building proposed for conversion, and each unit within the building, shall
comply at a mininmm with all applicable building standards in effect at the time
of the last alteration, repair, relocation, or reconstrUction of the building,
necessitating complia.nce with the building standards, or, if none, at the time of
first constru.ction. In addition, the building proposed for conversion and each "Unit
within the building shall comply with. the current Housing Code as defined by
section 7.48 of the Dublin Municipal Code. The Building Official shall, if deemed
necessary, inspect the project. Upon completion of the inspection, if any, the
Building Official shall identify all items evidenced by the application or the
inspection to be in noncompliance with applicable building and housing
standards, All such items shall be corrected to the sati.sfaction of the Building
Official, prior to granting the Condominium Conversion Permit.
8.54.090
Tenant's Right to Purchase Units
A. All Units. The applicant shall, as a condition of approval of the
Condomini= Conversion Permit and before offering the unit for sale to the
general public, be required to provide tenants with an exclusive right to contract
for the purcl>ase of the unit occupied by the tenant upon the same ternlS and
conditi.ons that such unit will be initially offered to the general public or on terms
more favorable to the tenant. The right shall run for a pe¡iod of 90 days from tl)e
date of issuance of the subdivision public report pursuant to section 11018 of the
Business and Professions Code, unless the tenant givcs prior written notice of his
or her intention not to exercise the right. At least ten days prior to the submission
of an applicati.on to the Department of Real Estate for a public report, the
applicant shall provide notice to each tenant in the project oithe fact that the
application for a public report will be submitted and that upon the issuance of the
public report the tenant will be granted an exclusive right to contract for the
purchase of the unit occupied by the tenant upon the same tenns and conditions
that such unit will be initially offered to the general public or on tmns more
n7~~~_~
-6-
Ji';ti.uary 19, '-OQ~
}..-C1 ~\ \ \ C(
. '. tì \
·
·
·
e
.
e
7:27;552.3
'1-. \ 6b \ ~ '\
favorable to the tenant. The notice shall further indicate the project will be
subj ect to conditions, covenants, and restrictions that establish a homeowners'
association to manage the project, that may restrict how the property is used, and
that impose certain finJmcial obligations on the owners of units within tlle project,
such as the payment of monthly homeowners' association dues. In addition,
within 10 days of the issuance of the public report, the applicant shan by mail
notify each tenant in writing that the public report has been issued and shaJ1 in
writing grant the tenant the right to purchase the unit as provided in this section.
If the notice is not mailed within 10 days of the issuance of the public report, the
tenant's right to purchase granted pursuant to Ibis section shall be extended for a
period equal to 80 days from mailing of the notification.
B. Affordable Units. If a tenant occupies an inclusionary unit pursuant to
the City's inclusionary zoning pro gram, all of the provisions of Subsection A
shan apply except as otherwise provided in this Subsection B. The applicant shall
initially determine the income category (i.e. very low, l(! w, or moderate income)
under Section 8.68.030 at which the inclusionary unit is being rented to the teDant.
The applicant shall thereupon offer the unit to the tenant at the sales price that a
unit in the unit's income category could be sold under Chapter·S.68, subject to the
City's certification of the tenant's qualifications to purchase the unit. Should the
City detennirte that the tenant's household income is such that the tenant does Dot
qualify to purchase the unit within the income category at which it is offered, the
applicant shall:
1. - Offer the unit to the tenant pursuant to Subsection A: If the tenant -~
accepts the offer, the applicant shall convert a unit within the
project not previously designated as an inc1usionary unit to an
ffidusionary unit in the income category of the unit purchased by
the tenant. The number of bedrooms in the converted unit shall be
equal to or greater than the number of bedrooms in the unit
purchased by the tenant.
2. If the City determines that the tenant's household income is such
that it meets one of the other income categories set forth in Section
8.68.020.D (i.e. very low, low, and moderate incomes), and
provided that there are available inclusionary units within the
proj ect at that income category, offer the unit to the tenant at a
sales price that a unit in the tenant's income category could be sold
under Chapter 8.68, subject to the City's certification of the
ten.ant's qualifications to purchase the unit. If the tenant accepts
the offer, the available unit shall be designated as an inclusionary
unit at the income category at which the unit purchased by tJw
tenant was previously rented.
8.54.100
Limitations on Rent Increases Pending Conversion. Rents shall
not be increased from the date of issuance of the Notice of Intent to
-7-
¡~nua!Y 19, 2005
'}"-' 6b \ \~
Convert pursuant to Section 8.54.050 until twelve months
fol1owing the approval of the Condominium Conversion Permit or .-
six months following the issuance of a public report by the Real _
Estate Commissioner pursuant to Business and Professions Code
section 11018, whichever occurs later. If the applicant withdraws
an application for a Condominium Conversion Pennit, this section
shall have no further effect
8.54.110
Tenant Relocation Assistance
A. Requirement. The applicant shall, as a condition of approval of the
Condominium Conversion Permit, be required to implement the Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan that is approved by the City in conjunction
with the issuance of the Condominium Conversion Permit. The Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and shall
indicate the applicant's commitment to provide the tenant benefits
required by this section.
B. Eligible Tenant. As used in this section, the term "eligible tenant" means
any tenant who was a resident of the property both on the date of the filing
of the application for a Condominium Conversion Pennit and on the date
of approval of the permit and who does not intend to purchase a unit in the
conversion project.
',è. Notice of Terminatiøn of Tenancy. Bach tenant of a project proposed
for conversion shall be given 180 days' written notice of intention to
terminate tenancy due to the conversion. The notice shall also provide the
tenant with a summary description of the City-approved Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan and information on where to obtain a copy.
The notice shall also indicate that the tenant will be granted a right to
purchase the unit the tenant oCCllpies. Each person who becomes a tenant
of a conversion project after the date of such 180 days' written notice shall
. be given a copy of the notice of intention to terminate tenancy before
entering into any written or oral rental agreement but shall not be entitled
to 180 days' written notice prior to termination of tenancy due to the
conversion.
D. Financial Relocation Assistance. The Plan shall include a provision that
requires the applicant to provide fmancial assistance equal to the rent for
the three-month period prior to the filing of the application for the
Condominium Conversion Permit to any Eligible Tenant that relocates
after the issuance of the Condominium Conversion Permit. The financial
assistance payment shall be made 15 days prior to the termination of the
EligibJe Tenant's tenancy, if the Eligible Tenant provides notice to the .
applicant of the Eligible Tenant's termination of the lease, or 15 days prior
to the expiration of 180 days Notiœ of Termination of Tenancy period,
72755:2.3
-8-
Jbt'lWl:ljl19,~OCS
e
e
e
.
.
7:275:52.:3,
-:::"'7 ." 6 \\'1
whichever is earlier. Notwithstanding Subsection B of this Section, a
tenant shal1 be deemed an Eligible Tenant and eligible for the fu.1ancia.l
assistance payment if the Condominium Conversion Permit has not yet
been granted but 165 days have elapsed since the tenant was provided a
Notice ofTennination of Tenancy. A tenant is not entitled to financial
assistance pursuant to this subsection if the tenant has been evicted for just
cause or has not made rental payments to which the applicant is legally
entitled.
F.
Continued Tenancy for Tcnants Entitled to Special Protection.
1. Special Protection. An eligible tenant is entitled to "special
protection", as defined in this Section 8.54.110, if the head of
household or spouse satisfies one or more of the following criteria:
has attained age 62; has a disability as defined in Section 54 of the
California Civil Code Code; is residing with one or more minor
dependent children; or is a resident of an inclusionary housing unit.
2.
12-Month Extension of Tenanc~'. The applicant shall be required
prior to the issuance of the Condominium Conversion permit to
demmistrate that either (a) it has entered into agreements with each
eligible tenant entitled to special protection granting such tenant
the right of continued tenancy, but permitting the tenant to
terminate his or her tenancy upon 30 days' notice, at the rent and
on the "terms in effect on the date of the mailing of the Notice of
Intent to Convert pursuant to section 8.54.050 until twelve months
following the::~t;:nd of the 180-day period pursuant to section
8.54.11 O.C or (b) the eligible tenant has œfused the offer of such
au extension.
8.54.120
Notification of New Tenants. All prospective tenants of a project
for which a Notice of Intent to Conve::rt has been issued to tenants
pursuant to section 8.54.050 shall be provided with a copy of the
Notice of Intent to Convert. If provided with such notice,
prospective tenants shall not be entitled to tenant relocation
assistance provided to tenants pursuant to section 8.54.110.
8.54.130
Compliance with Inciusionary Zoning Regulations.
Condominium conversions shall be treated as "new œsidential
development projects" under and shall be required to comply with
the then-current Inclusionary Zoning Regulations in Chapter 8.68.
The decision maker shall include conditioDs in the Condominium
Conversion Permit approval sufficient to ensure compliance with
the provisions of Chapter 8.68. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if
the project was required to comply with the Inc1usionary Zoning
Regulations at the time the project was cODstructed, the project
-9-
j'~nuBJ'}' l~. 2005
o¿ 'i ¿~ \\'1.
. shall receive a credit for the number of affordable units required at
the time the project was constructed. Iffecs were paid in lietl of
creating the affordable units, the credit may only be used to satisfy e
that portion of the obligation under the then-current lnclusionaty
Zoning Regu}ations that may be satisfied by payment of fees in
lieu of creation of affordable units. By way of illustration, if at the
time a 20-unit rental project was constructed, the Inclusionary
Zoning Regulations reqnired 5% of the units in the project to be
affordable, and the developer paid fees in lieu of constructing one
affordable unit to meet the project's obligations under the
lnclusionary Zoning Regulations, then, upon the event of a
conversion of the 20·unit project, the converter would be entitled
to a one-unit credit against its Inclusionary Zoning obligations.
Thus, if the then-current Inclusionary Zoning Regulations require
that 12.5% of the units be affordable and provide that at least 7.5%
of the units mtlst be constructed, then the converter's Inclusionary
Zoning Obligation would be 1.5 units, which is 2.5 units minus the
one unit credit. As the one-unit credit was created by the payment
of in~Jjeu fees and is equal to 5% of the total units in the project,
the remaining inclusionary obligation could not be satisfied
through the payment of in-heu fees.
8.54.140
Development Standards - Utilities
" A. .' Gas,. Each condomi,!)-ium unit shall ,have a separate gas service where gas
is a necessary utilitÿ. If this provision places unreasonable economic
burden on the applicant, the Building Official may approve an alternative
method.
.
B. Electricity. Each condominium unit shall have a separate electrical
service, with separate meters and disconnects.
C. Telephone Company Access. The telephone company serving the
location under conversion shall have the right to construct and maintain
(place, operate, inspect, repair, replace, and remove) communication
facilities as it may from time-to-time require (including access) in or upon
any portion of the common ar(:a, including the interior and exterior of the
buildings as necessary to maintain communication service within the
project. This provision may not be amended or terminated without the
consent of the serving telephone company.
8.54.150
Findings Required for Approval
The decision malœr shall not approve a Condominium Conversion Permit unless
it finds:
.
.'
7275$2.,';;
-10-
J1\td18fY 19, 20~
e
.
.
7:27~52.3
<¿s .;1)
~
, I.."'.
\\ \
A.
That the proposed conversion is consistent with the General Plan and auy
applicable specifi.c plans, in particular with the objectives, polic:ies, and
programs of the Housing Element of the General Plan designed to provide
for the bousing needs of all economic segments of the community.
B. Thatthe proposed conversion, as conditioned, conforms to the
requirements of this Chapter.
C. That the ratio that multiple-family units in developments of twenty (20) or
more rental units bears to the total number of housing units in the City as a
whole exceeds thirty percent (30%). For the purposes of this calculation,
the units proposed for conversion should be treated as housing units but
should not be treated as rental units.
8.54.160
Term and Lapse of Condominium Conversion Permit. A
Condominium Conversion permit shall lapse 1 year following the
date on which the permit became effective, if the applicant has not
yet received a subdivision public report from the Real Estate
Commissioner pursuant to Business and Professions Code section
11018 authorizing the sale of the units proposed for conversion to
the public. The permit shaH be extended for a period of not more
than one year, if the Community Development Director finds that
the applicant is diligently pursuing but has not yet received a
subdivision public report from the Real Estate Commissioner
pursuant t9 Business and Professions Code section 11018
authorizing tbe sale of the units proposed for conversion to the
public. Upon receipt of the subdivision public report from the Real
Estate Commissioner authorizing the sale of the units proposed for
conversion to the public, the Condominium Conversion Permit
shall be automatically extended so long as the subdivision public
report remains in effect.
8.54.170
Action. The decision maker for Condominium Conversion
Permits shall be the Planning Conunission. The Planning
Commission shall hold a public hearing, and after the public
hearing is closed may, by resolution and based on evidence in the
public record and the findings above approve, conditionally
approve, or deny a Condominium Conversion Permit.
5.54.180
Adjustments and Waiver~.
A.
Authority to Waive or Adju~t Requirements. The requirements of this
Chapter may be adjusted or waived if the property owner demonstrates to
the City Manager that applying the requirements of this Chapter would
take property in violation of the United States or California Constitutions.
A person ~eeking an adjustment or waiver shall apply to the City Manager
-11-
J~!;"19,2005
':LG 6b \\î
and provide such infonnation as the City Manager finds is necessary to
determine whether applying the requirements of this Chapter would take .
property in violation of the United States or California Constitutions.
B. Consideration and Decision. In making a detennination on an application
to adjust or waive the requirements of this Chapter, the City Mauager shall
consider all relevant evidence subrnitted by the applicant. The burden
shall be on the applicant to demonstrat¡: the applying th¡: requirements of
this Cahpter would take property in violation of the United States of
California Constitutions. The City Mauager, upon legal advice provided
by the City Attorney, wj1J make a determination on the application and
issue a written decision. Th<:\ City Manager's decision shall be final.
C. Adjustment or Waiv¡:r of Requirem¡:nts. If the City Manager, upon
legal advice provided by the City Attorney, determines that the application
of th¡: provisions of this· Chapter would take property in violation of the
United States or California Constitutions, the requirements of this Chapter
shall be modified, adjusted or waived to reduce the obligations under this
Chapter to the extent necessary to avoid an unconstitutional result. If the
City Manager detennin<:\s no violation of the United States or California
Constitutions would occur through applieatiÒnof this Chapter, the
requirements ofthis Chapter remain applicable.
Section 3: . Eff<:\ctive Immediatelv. This ordinance is adopted as an urgency
ordinance pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government ëodé section 36937, to take effect
immediately, and is for the immediate preservation ofthe public peace, health and
wdfare. The facts constituting the urgency are the following: This ordinance applies to
condominium conversions that have not received all governmental approvals necessary to
sell individual units, including a public report from the Department of Real Estate.
Should a converter receive a subdivision report from the D¡:partment of Real Estate
. before this ordinance becomes effective, the converter could evade the application oftlris
ordinance. Similarly, under the Subdivision Map Act, the City may only apply standards
in effect at the time that an application for a tentative subdivision map is d"emed
complete. However, if the City initiates proceedings by resolution and publish"s a public
notice containing a description sufficient to notify the public of the nature ofth" propos"d
chang" in th" zoning or subdivision ordinances. the City may apply th" ordinance enacted
or instituted as a result of the proc"edings that are in effect on the date the local ag"ncy
approves or disapproves the tentative map. The City adopted such a resolution on
September 7, 2004. If a converter were to receive a subdivision approval bdore this
ordinance became effective, it could evade this ordinance. If a converter were to evade
the application of this ordinance it would thereby frustrate the City's intent to (a)
maintain a supply of affordable and market rate rental housing; (b) provide a r"asonable
balanc¡: of ownership and rental housing in the community and a variety of choices in the
type and price of housing; and (c) establish criteda for th" conversion of existing multi-
family rental housing to condominiums; (d) reduce the impact of conversion on residents
of rental housing that may be required to relocat" due to the conversion of rental housing
.
.
7'-7552.3
-12-
January 19, 2005
e
.
.
;2, "Î <$1.:, \.\~
to condominiums; and (e) provide the opportunity for very low-, low-, and moderate-
income persons to partjcipate in the ownership process and to maintain a supply ofrental
housing for very low-, low-, and moderate-income persons; and (f) ensure that converted
housing achieves a high degree of appearance, quality and safety.
Section 4: Posting. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this
Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dubli:n in
accordance with Section 36933 of the Goveroment Code of the State of California.
Section 5: Automatic Repeal. This ordinance shall be automatically repealed
upon Ordinance No. _ -û5 becoming effective.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
AYES:
NOES:
..,ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
727S52J
-]3-
,2005.
J~1'IUaI¥ 19,2005
:1S orb \\~
ORDINANCE NO. - 05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADDING CHAPTER 8.54 TO THE
DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) RELATING TO
CONDOMINIUM CONVERSlONS
·
The City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby ordain as follows:
Section 1.
Findings.
A. State law provides that cities have the responsibility to use the powers
vested in them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make
adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community.
B. The City Council finds that conditions in the residential real estate market
have led to the increase in proposals to convert existing multi-family rental projects to
condominiums and other forms of multiple ownership and that the conversion of one or
two of the City's apartment communities could have a major impact on the City's
housing market, in that it would remove from the market a significant percentage of the
existing rental units.
C. The City Council finds that the conversion of residential structures from
individual ownership to condominiums or any other fonn of multiple ownership interest
has the potential to create specific community problems, both social and economic. For
example, conversions may significantly affect the balance between rental and ownership
housing within the City, and thereby reduce the variety of individual choices of tenure,
type, price and location of housing. Conversion may also increase overall rents, decrease
the supply of rental housiug for all income groups, displace individuals and families, and
disregard the needs of the housing market place.
·
D. Accordingly, the City COUDcil finds that the adoption of a condominium-
conversion ordinance is necessary to limit the impacts on the community of
condominium conversions, to provide guidelines for the City to evaluate the economic
and social probl=s associated with condominium conversions, and to establish
requirements that must be included in any conversion approval.
Section 2. Addition of Chapter 8.54. Chapter 8.54 is hereby added to the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance to read as follows:
CHAPTER 8.54 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION REGULATIONS
8.54.010
Intent. The purpose of this Chapter is to:
A.
Maintain a supply of affordable and market rate rental housing.
·
727~8;J.~
-1-
. ,hlD\lm'Y 19.~Oös
, AtTACHMENT ;L
e'
.
.
n7$8~.3
2--"\. Gt
!\<?,
\, ¡
B.
Provide a reasOIJable baJance of ownership and rental housing in the
community and a variety of choices in the type and price of housing.
c.
Establish criteria forthe conversiolJ of existing multi-family rental
housing to condominiums.
D. Reduce the impact of conversiolJ on residents of rental housing that may
be required to relocate due to the conversion of rental housing to
condominiums.
E. Provide the opportunity for very low-,low-, and moderate-income persons
to participate in the ownership process and to maintain a supply ofrentaJ
housing for very low-, low·, and moderate-income persons; and
F. Ensure that cOIJverted housing achieves a high degree of appearance,
quality and safety.
8.54.020
Condominium Conversion.Defmed. A "condominium
conversion" means the conversion of the ownership of the units in
a residential housing project containing twenty-one or more units
that are or were previously occupied as rental units from a single
ownership to an ownership in which the residential units may be
sold individual1y. Such condominium conversions may include,
but are not limited to, the conversion of existing multiple unit
residential housing projects foany of the foUowing, an as defmed
in Civil Code section 1351 (a) a communityi:1.partment project, (b)
a condomiuium proj ect, and ( c) a stock cooperative.
8.54.030
Condominium Conversion Permit
A. Permit Required. No condominium conversion may take place in the City
without the owner first obtaining a Condominium Conversion Permit
pursuant to this Chapter and, where applicable, an approved subdivision
map.
B Exemptions. A Condominium Conversion Permit shall not be required
prior to the sale of individual units to the public for any of the following
residential housing projects:
1. Projects that had recorded subdivision maps for a community
apartment project, a condominium project, or a stock cooperative
on September 7,2004.
2. Projects in which none of the units have been occupied as rental
units.
-2-
JanUlIT)' 19,20Q5
71'15B3.3
cj,-, \\tA
.A:¡ "f, . I
'.-
8.54.040
Preliminary Application Process.
A.
Preliminary Applications. Prospective applicants for Condominium
Conversion Permits shall initially submit a preliminary application on
fonns provided by the City. Preliminary applications shall identify the
owner or the owner's authorizèd agent and the location and number of
units in the building to be converted. The preliminary application shall be
accompanied by a preliminary application fee, the amount of which shal1
be as set forth ITom time to time by resolution of the City Council.
e
B. Department Review. The Community Development Director shall review
preliminary applications for condominium conversions. The Community
Development Director shall authorize the submittal of a Condominium
Conversion pennit application if both of the following criteria are met;
1. Notice of Intent to Convert. The applicant provides satisfactory
evidence to the Community Development Director that the Notice
of Intent to Convert required by section 8.54.050 was received by
all tenants of the project proposed for conversion and that 60 days
have elapsed since the applicant made the last such notification.
2..
Rental/Ownership Housing Ratio. The ratio that multiple-family
units in developments of twenty (20) or more rental units bears to
the total number ,Of housing units in the City as a whole exceeds
thirty percent (30%). For the purposes of this calculation, the units
proposed for conversion should be treated as housing units but
should not be treated as rental units.
.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Condominium Conversion Permit
application shall be accepted for projects that propose to convert only a
portion of the units in an existing multiple unit residential project. The
Condominium Conversion Permit application shall be submitted no later
than 60 days following the Community Development Director's
authorization.
8.54.050
Notice of Intent to Convert.
A. At least sixty (60) days prior to submitting an application for a
Condominium Conversion Permit pursuant to section 8.54.070, the
applicant shall provide notice substantially in the form outlined in
subdivision B to each tenant in the project proposed for conversion.
B. The notice shall be substantially as follows:
"To the occupant(s) of [address):
.
-3-
JanuBJ}' ¡t;I, ~(J05
e
.
e
TI7$!tU
The owner(s) of this building, at [address), planes) to file an application
for a Condominium Conversion Permit with the City of Dublin to convert
this building to condominiums, community apartments, or a stock
cooperative project. You will be provided with notice of each hearing
held by the City on the proposed conversion, and you have the right to
appear and the right to be heard at any such hearing. Be advised that
Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code may give you, as a tenant of a
structure proposed for conversion to condominiums, certain rights.
[signatw'e of owner or owner's agent)
[date]
C. In the event that the applicant is simultaneously applying for a tentative
map and a Condominium Conversion Permit, the notice required by this
section may be combined with the notice required by Government Code
section 66452.9
8.54.060
Site Development Review Required.
Any condominium conversion shall also be subject to Site Development Review,
pursuant to Chapter 8.104, to provide the City with a mechanism to evaluate
issues related to maintenance of the property and consf stency with prior site and
architectural approvals and, if necessary, require modifications to existing site
conditions. The applicant shall submit an applicatiçm for Site Development
Review concurrently with the application for a Condominium Conversion pmt.
The decision maker shall impose such conditions as are necessary to require that
buildings, structures, fences, patio enclosures, carports, accessory buildings,
sidewalks, driveways, landscaped areas and utility facilities are rdurbished and
restored as necessary to ensure that the proposed conversion project is and
remains orderly and attractive.
8.54.070
Condominium Application Requirements. An application for a
Condominium Conversion Permit shall be accompanied by the
following items:
A. A report on the physical elements of each structure and facility, which
shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
1.
A report detailing the condition of each element of the property,
including foundation, structural, electrical, plumbing, utilities,
walls, ceilings, windows, recreational facilities, sound transmission
of each building, mechanical equipment, parking facilities, and
appliances. Regarding each element, the report shall state to the
best knowledge or estimate of the applicant when the element was
-4-
January 19, ZOO,
:'11 úb \\~
727583,3
1) ~ "t \L'\
cons1ructed or installed, when the element was last replaced, the
approximate date upon which the element will require _
replacement, the cost of replacing the element, and any variation of .,
the physical condition of the element ITom the applicable zoning
and building code. The report shall identify each known defective
or unsafe element and set forth the proposed conective measures to
be employed;
2. A report from a licensed s1ructural pest control operator on each
s1ructure and each unit within the s1ructure;
3. A report on the condition of the common area improvements,
including landscaping, lighting, utilities and streets;
4. A report on any known soil and geological conditions regarding
soil deposits, rock fonnation, faults, groundwater and landslides in
the vicinity of the project, and a statement regarding any known
evidence of soils problems relating to the s1ructure. Reference sball
be made to any previous soils report for the site and a copy
submitted with the report; and
5. A statement of repairs and improvements necessary to refurbish
and restore the project to achieve a high degree of appearance,
quality and safety.
.
B.
A site/development plan;
C. Specific information concerning the cbaracteristics of the project,
including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Squm:efootage and number of rooms in each unit;
2. Estimated sales price range of units; and
3. Names and mailing address of all tenants.
D. A detailed list of rents for each unit to be converted for the twelve (12)
months prior to the application;
E. Economic and demographic infonnation regarding the current tenants as
required by the Community Development Director;
F. A Tenant Relocation Assistance plan as required by Section 8.54.110;
G. Bvidence that all eligible tenants entitled to special protection have been
offen~d lease extensions in accordance with Section 8.54.11 O.F.
H.
A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&RB) that
would be recorded and would apply to each owner of a condominium unit
e
-5-
JSDUOI')' 19,2005
e
.
.
727511:;,)
...} '2
'.);) ,re \\"'1
within the project. The declaration shall include, but nót be limited to,
pertinent infonnation regarding the conveyance of units and the
assignment of parking, an agreement for common area maintenance,
incJuding faci1ities and landscaping, together with an estimate of any
initial assessment fees anticipated for maintenance, and an indication of
appropriate responsibilities for maintenance of aH improvements and
utility systems for each unit. The city has the right to review and approve
the CC&Rs to ensure that (1) the appropriate conditions of approval are
included in them and (2) those provisions reflecting the city's conditions
may not be amended without city approval; and
1.
Such additional information as the Community Development Director
deems necessary to ensure the compliance with this Chapter.
8.54.080
Bunding Code Requirements
A bui1ding proposed for conversion, and each unit within the building, shall
comply at a minimum with all appJicable building standards in effect at the time
of the last alteration, repair, relocation, or reconstruction of the building,
necessitating compliance with the building standards, or, ifnone, at the time of
first construction. In addition, the building proposed for conversion and each unit
within the building shall comply with the current Housing Code as defined by
section 7.48 of the Dublin Municipal Code. The Building Official shall, if deemed
necessary, inspect the project. Upon completion of the inspection, if any, the
Building Official shall identify all items evidenced by the application or the
inspection to be in noncompliance with applicable building and housing
standards. All such items shall be corrected to the satisfaction of the Building
Official, prior to granting the Condominium Conversion Permit.
8.54.090
Tønant's Right to Purcha.se Units
A. All Units. Thø applicant shaH, as a condition of approval of the
Condominium Conversion Permit and before offering the unit for sale to the
general public, be required to provide tenants with an exclusive right to contract
for the purchase of the unit occupied by the tenant upon the same tenns and
conditions that such unit will be initially offered to the general public or on terms
more favorable to the tenant. The right shall run for a period of90 days ITom the
date of issuance of the subdivision public report pursuant to section 11018 of the
Business and Professions Code, unless the tenant gives prior written notice of his
or her intention not to exercise the right. At least ten days prior to the submission
of an application to the Department of Real Estate for a public report, the
applicant shall provide notice to each tenant in the proj ect of the fact that the
àpplication for a public report will be submitted and that upon the issuance of the
public report the tenant will be granted an excJusive right to contract for the
purchase of the unit occupied by the tenant upon the same terms and conditions
that such unit will be initially offered to the general pubJic or on temlS more
-6-
J 1'1lliS!'}' 19, 2005
n'75g~.3
favorable to the tenant. The notice shall further indicate the project will be
subject to conditions, covenants, and restrictions that establish a homeowners'
association to manage the project, that may restrict how the property is used, <Uld
that impose certain financial obligations on the owners of units within the project,
such as the payment of monthly homeowners' association dues. In addition,
within 10 days of the issuance of the public report, the applicant shall by mail
notify each tenant in writing that the public report has been issued and shall in
writing grant the tenant the right to purchase the unit (j,S provided in this section.
lfthe notice is not mailed within 10 days of the issuance of the public report, the
tenant's right to purchase granted pursuant to this section shaH be extended for a
period equal to 80 days· from mailing of the notification.
B. Affordable Units. If a tenant occupies an inclusionary unit pursuant to
the City's inclusionary zoning program, all of the provisions of Subsection A
shall apply except as otherwise provided in this Subsection B. The applicant shall
initially determine the income category (i.e. very low, low, or moderate income)
under Section 8.68.030 at which the inc1usionary unit is being rented to the tenant.
The applicant shall thereupon offer the unit to the tenant at the sales price that a
unit in the unit's income category could be sold under Chapter 8.68, subject to the
City's certification of the tenant's qualifications to purchase the unit. Should the
City determine that the tenant's household income is suCh that·the tenant dQes not
qualify to purchase the unit within the income category at which it is offered, the
applicant shall:
1.
Offer the unit to the tenant pursuant to Súbsection A. If the.tenant
accepts the offer, the applicant shall convert a unit within the
project not previously designated as an inclusionary unit to an
inclusionary unit in the income category of the unit purchased by
the tenant. The number of bedrooms in the converted unit shall be
equal to or greater than the number of bedrooms in the unit
purchased by the tenant.
2. lfthe City determines that the tenant's household income is such
that it meets one of the other income categories set forth in Section
8.68.020.D (i.e. very low, low, and moderate incomes), and
provided that there are available inc1usionary units within the
project at that income category, offer the unit to the tenant at a
sales price that a unit in the tenant's income category could be sold
under Chapter 8.68, subject to the City's certification of the
tenant's qualifications to purchase the unit. lfthe tenant accepts
the offer, the available unit shall be designated as an inc1usionary
unit at the income category at which the unit purchased by the
tenant was previously rented.
8.54.100
Limitations on Rent Increases Pending Conversion. Rents shall
not be increased from the date of issuance of the Notice ofIntent to
~7~
J3I'Jl.Jary 19.2005
~'1 CG
'\~
I· I
·
·
·
.
e
.
7Z7:5B3.3
8.54.110
~/; ôb \ \'\
Convert pursuant to Section 8.54.050 until twelve months
following the approval of the Condominium Conversion Permit or
six months following the issuance of a public r~ort by the Real
Estate Commissioner pursuant to Business and Professions Code
section 11018, whichever occurs later. If the applicant withdraws
an application for a Condominium Conversion Permit, this section
shall have no further effect.
Tenant Relocation Assistance
A. Requirement. The applicant shall, as a condition ofapproval of the
Condominium Conversion Permit, be required to implement the Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan that is approved by the City in conjunction
with the issuance of the Condominium Conversion Permit. The Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and shall
indicate the applicant's commitment to provide the tenant benefits
required by this section.
B. Eligible Tenant. As used in this section, the term "eligible tenant" means
any tenant who was a resident of the property both on the date of the filing
of the application for a Condominium Conversion P=it and on the date
of approval ofthe permit and who does not intend to purchase a unit i:o the
conversion proj ect.
c.
Notice of Termination of Tenancy. Each tenant ofa"þrojéct proposed
for conversion shall be given 180 days' written notice ofintention to
terminate tenancy due to th.e conversion. The notice shall also provide the
tenant with a summary description of the City-approved Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan and infonnation on where to obtain a copy.
The notice shall also indicate that the tenant will be granted a right to
purchase the unit the tenant occupies. Each person who becomes a tenant
of a conversion project after the date of such 180 days' written notice shall
be given a copy of the notice of intention to terminate tenancy before
entering into any written or oral rental agreement but shall not be entitled
to 180 days' written notice prior to termination oftenancy due to the
conversion.
D.
FinancialRelocation Assistance. The Plan shall include a provision that
requires the !lpplical1t to provide financial assistance equal to the rent for
the three-month period prior to the filing of the application for the
Condominium Conversion Permit to any Eligible Tenant that relocates
after the issuance of the Condomini1.lln Conversion Permit. The financial
assistance payment shall be made 15 days prior to the termination of the
Eligible Tenant's tenancy, if the Eligible Tenant provides notice to the
applicant of the Eligible Tenant's termination of the lease, or 15 days prior
to the expiration of 180 days Notice ofTennination of Tenancy period,
-8-
J~I'1illtfj' 19, 200$
727183.3
whichever is earlier. Notwithstanding Subsection B of this Section, a
tenant shall be deemed an Eligible Tenant and eligible for the financial
assistance payment if the Condominium Conversion Permit has not yet
been granted but 165 days have elapsed since the tenant was provided a
Notice of Termination of Tenancy. A tenant is not entitled to financial
assistance pursuant to this subsection if the tenant has been evicted for just
cause or has not made rental payments to which the applicant is lega1ly
entitled.
F. Continued Tenancy for Tenants Entitled to Special Protection.
1. Special Protection. An eligible tenant is entitled to "special
protection", as defined in this Section 8.54.110, if the head of
household or spouse satisfies one or more of the following criteria:
has attained age 62; has a disability as defined in Section 54 of the
California Civil Code Code; is residing with one or more minor
dependent children; or is a resident of an inc1usionary housing unit.
2.
12-Month Extensiou of Tenancy. The applicant shall be required
prior to the issuance of the Condominium Conversion Permit to
demonstrate that either (a) it has entered iÍ1to agreements with each
eligible tenant entitled to special protection granting such tenant
the right of continued tenancy, but permitting the tenant to
terminate his or her tenancy upon 30 days' notice, at the rent and
on the tenus in effect on the date of the mailing of the Notice of
Intent to Convert pursuant to section 8.54.050 until twelve months
following the end of the 180-day period pursuant to section
8.54.11 O.C or (b) the eligible tenant has refused the offer of such
an extension.
8.54.120
Notification of New Tenants. All prospective tenants of a project
for which a Notice of Intent to Convert has been issued to tenants
pursuant to section 8.54.050 shalJ be provided with a copy of the
Notice of Intent to Convert. Ifprovided with such notice,
prospective tenants shall not be entitled to tenant relocation
assistance provided to tenants pur-suant to section 8.54.11 O.
8.54.130
Compliance with IncludoDllry Zoning Regulations.
Condominium conversions shall be treated as "new residential
development projects" under and shalJ be required to comply with
the then-current Inclusionary Zoning Regulations in Chapter 8.68.
The decision maker shall include conditions in the Condominium
Conversion Permit approval sufficient to ensure compliWîCe with
the provisions of Chapter 8.68. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if
the project was required to comply with the Inclusionary Zoning
Regulations at the time the project was constructed, the project
-9-
Janullry 19,.2005
.:;.l.t
C" t..
L)
[\0\
·
·
·
·
·
·
117583.3
61 6--b \1,"\
shall receive a credit for the nwnber of affordable units required at
the time the project was constructed. If fees were paid in lieu of
creating the affordable units, the credit may only be used to. satisfy
that portion of the obligation under the then-current Inclusionary
Zoning Regulations that may be satisfied by payment of fees in
lieu of creation of affordable units. By way of illustration, if at the
time a 20-mut rental project was constructed, the Inclusionary
Zoning Regulations required 5% of the units in the project to be
affordable, and the developer paid fees in lieu of constructing one
affordable unit to meet the project's obligations under the
Inc1usionary Zoning Regulations, then, upon the event of a
conversion of the 20-unit project, the converter would be entitled
to a one-unit credit against its Inclusionary Zoning obligations.
Thus, if the then-current Inclusionary Zoning Regulations require
that 12.5% of the units be affordable aDd provide that at least 7.5%
of the units must be constructed, then the converter's Inc1usionary
Zoning Obligation would be 1.5 units, which is 2.5 units minus the
one unit credit. As the one-unit credit was created by the payment
of in-lieu fees and is equal to 5% of the total units in the project,
the remaining inc1usionary obligation could not be satisfied
through the payment of in-lieu fees.
8.54.140
Development Standards - Utilities
A.
Gas. Each condominium unit shall have a separate gas service where gas
is a necessary utility. If this provision places unreasonable economic
burden on the applicant, the Building Official may approve aD alternative
method.
B. Eleetricity. Each condominium unit shall have a separate electrical
service, with separate meters and disconnects.
C. Telephone Company Access. The telephone compaDY serving the
location under conversion shall have the right to construct aDd maintain
(place, operate, inspect, repair, replace, and remove) communication
facilities as it may from time-to-time require (including access) in or upon
any portion of the common area, including the interior and exterior of the
buildings as necessary to maintain communication service within the
project. This provision may not b~ amended or terminated without the
consent ofthe servingte1ephone compaDY·
8.54.150
Findings Required for Approval
The decision maker shall not approve a Condominiurn Conversion Permit unless
it finds:
-10-
JSTI\,I lry 19, 2005
?:!1$83.3
~<ii < b \ \~I
A.
That the proposed conversion is consistent with the General Plan and My
applicable specific plans, in particular with the objectives, policies, and
programs of the Housing Element of the General Plan designed to provide
for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community.
·
B. That the proposed conversion, as conditioned, confonns to the
requirements of this Chapter.
C. That the ratio that multiple-family units in developments of twenty (20) or
more rental units bears to the total number of housing units in the City as a
whole exceeds thirty percent (30%). For the purposes of this calculation,
the units proposed for conversion should be treated as housing units but
should not be treated as rental units.
8.54.160
Term aud Lapse of Condominium Conversion Permit. A
Condominium Conversion Permit shall lapse 1 year following the
date on which the permit becan1e effective, if the applicant has not
yet received a subdivision public report from the Real Estate
Commissioner pursuant to Business and Professions Code section
11018 authorizing the sale of the units proposed for conversion to
the public. The permit shall be extended for a period of not more
than one year, if the CommuIÚty Development Director finds that
the applicant is diligently pursuing but has not yet received a
subdivision public report from the Real Estate Commissioner
pursuant to Business and Professions Code section (¡ 0 I 8
authorizing the sale of the units proposed for conversion to the
public. Upon receipt of the subdivision public report from the Real
Estate Commissioner authorizing the sale of the units proposed for
conversion to the public, the Condominium Conversion Permit
shall be automatically extended so long as the subdivision public
report remains in effect.
·
8.54.170
Action. The decision maker for Condominium Conversion
Permits shall be the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission shall hold a public hearing, and after the public
hearing is dosed may, by resolution and based on evidem,e in the
public record and the findings above approve, conditionally
approve, or deny a Condominium Conversion Penni!.
5.54.180
Adjustments and Waivers.
A.
Authority to Waive or Adjust Requirements. The requirements of this
Chapter may be adjusted or waived if the property 0W11er demonstrates to
the City Manager that applying the requirements of this Chapter would
take property in violation of the United States or California Constitutions.
A person seeking an adjustU1ent or waiver shall apply to the City Manager
·
-11-
JII:f'¡lW)' 19, 2005
·
·
·
3C,
and provide such information as .the City Manager finds is necessary to
determine whether applying the requirements of this Chapter would take
property in violation of the United States or California Constitutions.
B.
Consideration and Decision. In making a determination on an application
to adjust or waive the requirements of this Chapter, the City Manager shall
consider all relevant evidence submitted by the applicant. The burden
shall be on the applicant to demonstrate the applying the requirements of
this Cahpter would take property in violation of the United States of
California Constitutions. The City Manager, upon legal advice provided
by the City Attorney, will make a determination on the application and
issue a written decision. The City Manager's decision shall be fmal.
c.
Adjustment or WllÎver of Requirements. lfthe City Manager, upon
legal advice provided by the City Attorney, determines that the application
of the provisions of this Chapter would take property in violation of the
United States or California Constitutions, the requirements of this Chapter
shall be modified, adjusted or waived to reduce the obligations under this
Chapter to the extent necessary to avoid an unconstitutional result. If the
City Manager detennines no violation of the United States or California
Constitutions would occur through application of this Chapt(Jf, the
requiremcnts of this Chapter remain applicable.
Section 3: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced
thirty (30) days following its adoption.
Section 4: Posting. The City C!(Jfk of the City of Dublin shall cause this
Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in
accordÍlllce with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ~ day of
,2005.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
'1~7Sg3J
-12-
Janµ~ )9, 2005
C:>"',
"
\\~.
Y"f)
ATTEST:
City Clerk
727583.3
. -13-
}ill.nuaty 19,2()05
en
Iò
\l~
·
·
·
e
e
~
c
c
C\I
~
o
::I
t:
o
.,
.....
o
'"
-2.
~
~
LLI
~
C!::
~
«
~
-
.....
CO
~
OJ
"''0"'<1"'08°"'<1"0-
:= i.t) 0 I..() 1.."1 -...0 N t-.
C:L()('.I ('.1-
~ -
Q)
"0 2
oug2Q)
Q) 0 .::,¿ .¡:: .1;
.1; 0::: Q) 0 0
o'::'¿Q)Q)
Q).....~-O
Q)~u..co
-aU~o~
C:--'-oco
o 0..... 0 .....
:;::Zl..1...uov>
8dÓg~¿::¡
o~o-~"'t('")
.... co 1'--1'--1'--1'--
....,'~'.
c
::E
o
"C
c:
o
u
:5
§
'"
.....
0.. '" '"
Q <C......õ.
E(ßc~-5.<c
o":'::..o..:.::<cv
zO:::>Q)co
><--'o~ 0
Q ..... -.Q>-
_ocu<CE:
0..1'0",
EOE 0 Ô § æ
o >..... > ....
U <C <C U IJ...d'
Q)
2
U
-0
o
o
S:
.::,¿-
.....
o
D.... -
o
°
M._
I'--
~
oÕ.
.....
Q. '"
<e:::
c
>-:;,
.....
:::>....
>< 0
:::> .....
--' Q
"0..0
o E
o :;)
3:;z
.::,¿-
..... .E
~ ~
~\r db \\'l
COO"'<tr.tJCOr--..ML00f2~
co N "'<t '0 I'-- 0:> "- 0-.. ~, ,....
(")('.I(")~N.....MO-
N M
I
"0 "0 Q)
> >
a:I a:I .t:;
>- >- uQ)
Q) Q) Q) "0 .1;
oõuoo
»000
..... .... D.... S: -0
o 0 c c C
"D -0 ( ) 0 Q)
° 0 > :::: u
E E 0 0 °
<C<CIUI
1.l)~1.l)OO
o-l'--o-01.l)
1.l)1.l)01.l) °
1'--1'--1.l)'Û1.l)
c
:E
o
1;,
c
o
U
'"
.....
'" 0..
C<C
Q) >-
E ( )
.....
..... 0
8.>
<C 0
"'"D
m 0
"'0 E
<C<C
-
:!
o
..c
-
~
.::,¿ ...,
..... .....
o 0..
D.... <C
"D è
o :::> ~
.....~><Q.
Q) 0.. :::> <C
E <C --'
LU"DCO
I 0S!2~
Q) 0 l') Q)
cS:"D~
o coo
t;;O.....J:
-5::::Q)c
-<8tb2
"D"DU
o
g DO O"D
~ 0::: 0<: 0
>->-C~
..... t 0
millE e
-"= -"= 0 0
OJ OJ ~ "i5'
:::> :::> c '"
00 0 "'0
OOv)f--
(")000
(")1.l)00
N"'<I"~CO
'Û-or--.."'<I"
'0
(lJ
-
-
'-
l..::;xl
I >::1
51
U
'" ... ..
-+"-......-
"Ê~;g5
Q) Q) .... .....
~EuOO
O"to..........
<COD....~lf
oo.."DE_
t:: <C 0.... :;) :5
ill '" "-
V> OJ ..... ;Z, 2;
..:.:: c .2 Õ '"
..... "t:: 0 ...... .;:.
~a-5:~~
ATTACHMENT 3
'-'I' is l
CITY CLERK
File # nP71fžllõl-r2I[()l
\\'l
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 7, 2004
.
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing - PA 04-044 Adoption of Resolution Initiating
Proc=dings to Adopt an Ordin¡mce Regulating the Conversion of
Existing Apartments in the City to Condominiums
(&port Pr¡;par¡;d by: ]eri Ram, Planning Manager)
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Initiating Proceedings to Adopt an Ordinance
Regulating the Conversion of &is ring Apartments in the City
to Condominiums.
2. Notice of Public H~ing to Consider Initiating Proc~dings
to Adopt a Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
3. Copies of Sections from the 1990 Housing Elemmt.
4, . Copies of S~tìons from the 1999 - 2006 Housing Element.
RECOMMENDATION:
V
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Open Public Hearing:
Receive StaffPresootation;
Ques¡ion Staff and. the PubHc;
Close PubHc Hearing and Deliberate; and
Adopt Resolution Initiating Proceedings to Adopt 3!'-
Ordinance Regulating the Conversion of Existing Apartments
in the City to Condominiums
e
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
No [mancial impact at this tirœ.
BACKGROUND:
State law provides that cities have the responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the
improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all
<::conornie segmmts of the community. (See Gov, Code, § 65580(d).) At the local1evel, cities imp1ement
state housing law policies through the adoption of th:ö: Housing Elements of their General Plans, which
dements are reviewed and c¡mified by the sta~'s Department of Housing and Community Development
("HCD"). (See Gov. Code, §§ 65583,65585.) Among oth~ things, HOUl>ing Eli:.ments must contain a
statement of the community's goals, objectives and poJicies related tc the maintenance, preservation,
improvemlent, and development of housing along witb an action program to implement these goals,
objectíves and policies. (See Gov. Code, § 65584(b)-(c).)
.___~__~~~A.__M~_____.__._.~M._______~~~~______..~M~,W_____..~_~~_--~--R--~------~--------------~---~-~--~---~
COPIES TO:
In-House DÏ¡¡tribntion
.
-.
G,\!'A.#\2004104.044 Condo Convmlon WA\ccØ!"·7'()4.I!OC
ATTACHMENT Y
L{'2 6~ ~~
'The City's 1990 Housing Element included several policies that encouraged and suggested actions to-
IInSWC the availability ofrental housing. One policy roquired that large multifamily projects includll a
rental cOInpommt for a five-y= time period. ADotha policy rllquim:l the monitoring of the aVailability
.,tal housing and, if monitoring disdosed that it was necessary, the enactment of a condominium-
Wnversion ordin/me:: (Attachment 3). At the time of the adoption of the 1990 Housing Ei=e:nt, tlll:re
was II concern that, because there were JlO condominiUl11s or apartments under development. it was
possible that applications would be submitted to convert ex.istlng apartments into condomÎIutuns.
On J ¡¡ne 3, 2003, the City Council approved the City of Dublin Housing Element (1999 - 2006) ("the
Curn:nt Housing Elemll11t"). and the State Department of Housing and Comnnmity Development certified
it on July 11, 2003. The Current Housing Element eliminated the program that required the mDnitoring of
the availability of rental housing and potential enactment of condominiUl11-conversion ordinance,
reasoning that there was litt1e likelihood that existing rental housing property owners would conv!:rt their
properties to condominiUl11s. It concluded that convmions WC1'e unlikely because of the strong demand
for rental housiug in Dublin coupled with the development of numerous condominiunu; (including 1396
condominium units th(ID-currently under constrUction) that would tend to saûsfy the demand for
condominiums. The Current Housing Element also noted that the City would assess the need for a
condominium-conversion ordinanœ each time it updates the: Housing Element (AttaChment 4).
Since the adoption of the Current Homing Element, conditions in the höuslng market ha.ve cl1anged
markedly. The Community Dev<::,;lopment Department has noted that the incidence of condominium
conversion projectS in other communities is increasing. In addition, Staff has received many questions
from possiblèinvestors and purchasers of e~isting apartment communiues about the City's requ.ircinents
in relationlo·condoro.inium conversions; Staff believes that the increase in condominium-conversion
.tiVity due to the following f~ctors;.
· Higher vacancy rates for apartments as more and more peopJe are able to qualify for loans fo;'
homes due to lower interest rates;
· An increased market for condominiums in the area;
· The ability of the property owna to maximize profit by selling units rather than renting them.
In the past 10 years the City has seen th:: development of a.pproxÎmatcly 1,500 residential apartment units,
fO! an overall total of approximately 2,800. units throughout the City. It filiould be noted that
approx.imately 1.119 of these units are already mapped for condominiums and would not be subject to the
condominium coIlversion ordinance or the City's Inclusion.ary Housing Ordina:nc:e. Additionally, if all
these unitS converted, thie ratio of apartments to own!\r>hip units would be greatly reduced..
The remaining apartment units provide a type of housing that is a k!\y to a healthy diversity of housing
stock in the community. Apartments provide housing for alll""els of afforda.bility in the community and
are a valuable tool for providing work force housing.
In the past S""e11. months. Staff has received inquiries from several Misting and potential apartment
developmeIlts of their intent to me subdivision documents to convert their projects to condominiums.
These possible projects include:
.
Existin\)" Projects
Iron Horse Trail Apartments (Dougherty Road) -
Archst= Apartments - Emerald Park ( Hacienda Drive) -
117 units
324 writs
-:;,...,.~ ~ .. fII;" ~, ~ ., '1\ ~,'-"~ '\
,,"'; \ ~ .i ,¡'."1
~~!)) '-b \ l '1
Nl'w ProÍl'rn
Avalon Bay Apartm~ts (Transit Center) -
305 units
Staff bslil'ves that the conve.rsion of one or two of the City's apartment communities could have a major .
impact OlJ the diversity of the City's housing stock. ilJ that it would remove from th¡\ mark~ a signiflcant
P(:l'Centag¡: of thl': ~isting rental units. If sold ratb(:l' than rentl':d, the units would no longer be available to
a segment of the community that is not in a positionto purchase such units. In addition, 1M loss of these.
units would likely decrease the vacarlcy rate and accordingly rend to increase rents, and this would tend to
further exacerbate thl': City's shortage of affordable reota1 units. This might cause 1\ lasting imbalance in
the diversity of housing stock in the City. In addition, conversion of apartments without addresging aU of
th<:l policy issues would be in conflict with the assumption¡; that formed the hasis of the City's Housing
El=ent
At the present time should a property own(lr fiI<:I a request for a condominium conversion, the application
would be processw in accordance with State law under the Subdivision Map Act. The Map Act contains
provisions that require notice to the tenants and gives tenants the right to purchase the units befor¢ they
are placed on the market for sal¿ to the general public. State law p¡\¡mits the City to expand upon these
basic requir::=ts through the adoption of a condominìum-conversion ordinance. For e¡::amplc. a
condommium-conv(:rSion ordinance could limit· conversions to maintain a balance of housing stock and
could require the provision of affordable units under the City'S IncIusionary Zoning Ordinance:.
Because_ of market conditions, Staff belie\v~s that it is important. to begin the d~elopmcnt of Ii!
condominium-conversion oro.inanct. As thert artinany differelnt me:chanisms for regulating conversions
in eff¡,ct throughout the state, City Staff bl:llieves it appropriate at this time to I:\Xplore the various options.
,This study and the eventual draftilJg would take an unlmown !U1lount of time, but Staff anticipates having .
an ordfuance re.ady to presentTD the City Council within 6 months.
Staff is concerned that while the cóiÎdominium-conversion ordinanç:c is under development, II subdivision
applic.a.tion might be filed to ç:onvert an existing apmime:nt complex to condo:minhll'Ils. For the re.asons
indic:ated above, such n conversion could potentiaJ]y havI:I an impact on the City's ability to provide
hotlÛng for all economic segments in the community.
Thus, if the City Council detennines that II conversion of apartments to condominiums might .negative.ly
impact the City's goal and State law obligation to adequately provide for the housing needs of all
eçonomic segrnl.':nts of the community, Staff rcco=ends that the City Council adopt the attachw
Re$olution initiating proceedings to adopt a condominium-conve\rsion ordinance. The Resolution is
designed to prevent tho&e that file subdivision applications to convert eÚsting apartments to
condominiums or oth~ fonns of ownership mat pennit the sale of individual units from avoiding the
pending condominium-conversion ordinance. Ordinarily, under the SubdivIsion Map Act, the City may
only apply standards in effect at the time: that an application for a tentative subdivision map is deemed
compJete. (Gov. Code, § 66474.2(a).) However, if the City initiates proceedings by Tesolution I'U)d
publishes a public notice containing a description sufficient to notify the public ,of the nature of the
proposed change in the zoning or subdivi~ion ordinances, the City may apply the ordinance e:nacted or
instituted as a result of the proceedings that are in effect on the dat~ the ] ocaJ agency approves or
disapproves the tentative map. (Gov. Code, § 66474.2(b).) The City published the appropriate notio(: 13$
rlCqllired by Government Code section 65090 (Attachment 2) and, in addition although not required by
law, provided mailed notice to ail the owners of apartments in the City. The attached Resolution wtmld -
talœ the formal step of initiating proceedings. ...
'-\'--( ~b \\~'
RECOMMENDATION:
Stalf reoomrntnds the City COWJdl Open Public Hearing: receive Staff presentatiDn; question Staff and
* Public; clQse the Public Hearing and doliberate; and adDpt Resolution (Attacl1m~t 1) i¡¡itiating
.=dings to adopt an Ordinance regulating tho conversion of existing apartments ÎJ:¡ the City to
CDl1dorniniums
, .
.
.
t.l;S ó\ \\~
RESOLUTION NO. -04
RESOLUTION OF THE CITI:' COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
INITIATING PROCEEDINGS TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE
CONVERSION OF EXISTING APARTMENTS IN THE CITY TO CONDOMINIUMS
.
WHEREA.8, State law provides that cities have the responsibility to use tbe powers ve:sted in
them to facilitate the improvement and devolopment ofbousing to mskeadequ!l1e provision fer the
housing needs ofal! economic segments of the community; and
WHEREAS, at the !oca1Ievel, cities imp1ement state housing Jaw policies through the adoption of
the Housing Elements of their General Plans, which eJementa are reviewed and approved by the state's
Department of Housing and Community DeveJopment ("HCD"); and
WHEREAS, among other thing¡;, Housing Elements must contain a statement of the ¢ornmunity's
goals, objectives and policies related to the maintenanòe, preservation, improvement, and development of
housing along with an action program to implement these goals, objectives and policies; and
WHEREAS, the City's 1990 Housing Ekment incJuded several policies that encouraged and
suggested actions tc,> ensure the availability of rental housing, including a policy that required the
monitoring of the availability of rental housing and, ifmorntoring dis<::Josed that it was necessary, the
Mactment of a condominium-conversion ordinance; and
W}lEREAS, in accordance with sta.te housing law, the City adopted its., 1999-2006 Housing .
Element ("the CurnmtHousing Eh:mi:l1t") i¡;¡ June 2003, and it was certified by HCD on July 11,2003;
and
WHEREAS, the Current Housing Elementel:iminated the program that required the monitoring of
the a.vailabiIity ofrental housing and potential enactment of condon1inium-oonv::rsion ordinance,
reasoning that there was little likelihood that existing rental housing prop~ owners would convert their
proprnies to condominiums due to the strong demand for rental housing in Dublin and the dev¡eloprnent
of condominiums (including I 396 condominium units currently under const:ruction) to satisfy the demand
forcondonilniums;and
WHEREAS, the Current Housing Element further indicated that the City would assess the need
for a condominium-COl1version ordinance each time it updates the Housing Element, if the need arises;
and
WHEREAS, since the adoption of the Current Housing Element, condJtions in the housing market
have changed markedly, and the Canununity Development Department has noted that the incidence of
c01Idominium-coI!version project¡; in other communities is increasing; and
WHEREAS, the City of DubJin believes that the following market c::onditions have led to the
increase in proposals to convert existing multi-family rental project¡; to condominiums:
a. The higher vacancy rat<;:s for apartments as marc and more people ar<:: able to qua1ify
for loans for homes due to historically low interest rates;
.
G:\PA#\2004\D4-U44 Co""" COlw.,, on ZOA\::mi","oton~·7 -04.coc
LlL 'b \ \"\
b. 111.1\ increased market far cando:min±ums in the area; and
e
c. The ability of the property owner to maximize profit by selling units rather than rtmting
them.
WHEREAS, in the past ten yean, the City has developed over 1500 rc:sidential apartment units
for III overall total of approximately 2,800 units throughout the City. These units and the other rental
-units in the provide a type of housing that is one of the keys to providing for the housing needs of all
ooonomÎc segcnents of the community; and
. .
WHEREAS, rental units provide housing for persons iIi an income levels, aDd they are a valuable
tool for providing workforce housing; and
WHEREAS, the conversion of one or two of the City's apartment communities could have a
major impact on the City's housing market, in that it would re:move from the market a significant
p/;/'centage of the e;¡imng rental units; and .
"WHEREAS, if units are sold rather than n:nted, the units would no longer be available to a
segment of the community that is not in a position to purchase such units; and
"v". .
WHEREAS, the loss of these units would ljkely decrease the vacancy rate and accórdingly tend to
jn;;rease ren~, and this would tend to further exacerbate the City's shortage of affordable rental units; and
. WHEREAS, due to these changes in the marketplace and their potential consequences on the
ity's ability to provide for the housing n<»ls of all economic segments of the co¡nmunity, the
. ... COIll!J1unity Dev¡o;Íopment Department has begun the development of a condominium-conversion
onlinance; and
WHEREAS, the approval of the conversion of e¡¡:isting residential apartment "UIlits to
condominiums or other fo=s of ownership that permit the units to be sold individually, during the period
in which the City is considering the adoption of 8. condominium-conversion ordinance, could fhlstrate the
City's efforts at providing for the bOUBing needs of aU eoonomicsegcnoots of the community; because it
would result in the removal ofunits from the City's inventory of rental UIlits available to those !It lower
income levds and became it would tend to increase the rents of those rental units that remain; and
WHEREAS, to provcnt these goals from being frustrated, the City desires initiate proceedings to
adopt a condominium-conversion ordinance and desir~ to place potential subdividers on notice pursuant
to Governmc:nt Code seJction 66474.2 of the City's intent to adopt II condominiuro-CODversion ordinance,
the effect o[which will be to p=it the City to apply the condomi:cium-conveJI'SioD ordinance if it is in
effect on the date the City approves or disapproves the tentative map.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITYCOUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
A. lnltiatioD of Stud~' of Pl)tenrlal Adl)plil)D of Còndominium-ConversÎon Ordinance.
Staff is hereby directed to study the potential adoption of a condominium-conversion ordinance and, if
"eemed necessary due to existing conditions in the City and the mark~lace, present such an ordinaDce to
~e Planning Co:rnmission and City Council for potential adoption in the m!lm1eI" required by law. This
resolution shall constitute, under subdivision (b) of section 66474.2 oftbe Governmoot Code, the
2
t{i ~. \\'1
initiation of proceedings to adopt an ordinance that regulates, restricts, or pro!n'bits the conversion of
; o:xisting residential aparto:lcnt units held in a single ownership, in whatever form, to condominiums or
Qth~ furms af ownership that permit the units to be sold individually. . .
B. Notification to Subdividers of Intent to Apply Condominiul1J-Conversion Ordinanc:e.
Notwithstanding stlbdivision (a) of section 66474.2 of the Government Code, the City intends. to apply the .
condominium-conversion ordinance adopted as a result aftheproceedings initiated by this Resolution to
all applications for approval of tentative maps and vesting tentative maps tha.t have not beendeemed
complete as of the date of this Resolution.
c. Compliance with CalHornia Environmental Quality Act.. This ordinance is not a
"project" within the meaning of Section 15378 of the State crQA Guidelines, because it has no potential
for reBUtting in physical change in the environment, directly or ultimately.
D. Severability. If any provision of this -o:rdinance or the application thereofto any person or
circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance, including tne application of such part or
provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force
andemct. To this end, provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that
it would have passed each section, S'Ubsection, S'Ubdivision, paragraph, sentence, c1ause, or phrase hereof
irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, Sl:mtences,
clauses, or phrases be lield unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this. 7th day of September 2004.
--
,
.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
. ABSTAIN:
Mayor
City Clerk
e
3
· YS -d'S· \\'1
CITY OF DUBLIN
100 Civic "Iaza, Dublin, California 94568
Wabslte: http://viww.cLdublln.ca.u$
NOTJ:CE OF PUBLJC HEARING
The City of Dublin City CotJ11cil will hold a public he:aring and take action on the following project;
PROJECT:
P A 04-044 Amendment to tbe Dublin Municipal Code
:PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Resolution Initiaring Proceedings to Adopt an Ordìnance Regulating the Con';'ersioD
of Existing Aparttnents in the City to Condominiums. The· specific corrt~t of ili.~
Ordinance that will be ev~tually proposed to City Council is prcsœtly unknown. A
proposed ordinance will be drafted after thorough study of the is!I\1e by the
Community Development Department and by other City departments. At present, it
is anticipated that the Ordinance would regulate, ¡e$triOt, and, :in some cases, prohibit
the conversion of exisring resióential apartnlent UIrits h<l'ld in e single ownership, in
whaterrel' fonn, to condominiums or other forms of ownership that p=it the units to
be sold in¿;vidua11y.
,.;-
LOCATION:
Citywide
ENVIRONMENTAL
1rW:
APPLICANT:
This project has b<l'en found to be Exempt from the California Environmental Quality
__Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15Qó1(b)(3).
City ofDubllii
PUBLIC HEARING:
A pubJk hesring will be held before the City Council on Tuesday, September 7, :004 at 7:00 pxn in the City Council
Chambers, 1 00 Civic Plaza, Dublin. Any interested po:rson may appear and be heard on tm. m¡¡tter. If you cha11eng::: th~
above-describ:::d actiDn in court, you may be limited to raising only thDse issues Y01.1 Dr other p:::r;ons raised at tho ptlblio
h",aring de.scribed in this notice, or ÎD. written con-espondence delivered to the City of Dublin at, or prior to, the public
h:::aring.
The proposed project i. available for review at the City Office, 11)() Civic Plaza, Dublin, Californ.Îa. If you have BDY
que~tio )s or comments, ¡:iJeag~ contact the Co=1lllity Development Departnlent at (925) 833-6610.
J cri Ram, .AlCP
PJouuring Manager
DBled:
.hod:
August 25, 2004
Auguot 28,2004
Nea. Co'¡c (925) . City Man.s"" 833-6650' City CounciJ 832-6650' Pm"",,"] 8:¡3·66C5 . Eco-nomio D""etopmont 133-6650
F"""oe 133-6640 . Publio Wori<slEnglne<ring 833-6630' Porl:., & Community Service< 833-6645 . Pol;"" 833-6670
Plonnin¡¡lCode Enfcr-oe11:!etlt 833-6610 . Building Inspection 833-6620 . Fir<: PreventiO"- Bureau 83 >·6606
LQ. Q t~'l
Re.\-ev",,,,,, T $"e'--¡-I~yJ5
Qr
CYTY OF DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN
HOUSING ELEMENT
ADO P TED B Y:
THE CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 11, 1985
REV I 5 E D B Y:
THE CITY COUNCIL
JuNE 11, 1990
The Housing Element is a revision of Volume 6
of the General Plan as adopte~ by the
city counoil on February 11, 1985
·
·
I
·
e
e
e
Policy Objective:
Quantified
Objective:
5~ ~ It ~
Encourage development of affordable
housing byp~ivate organi~atiQns not
primarily engaged in housing
construction or management
90 units (affordable to low and
moderate income households)
Action Undertaken: Inclusion of "Semi-public u¡se"
definition in the General Ph.n that
allows housing
ActioP5 to be
Undertaksn:
Financing:
Impl~rnenting
Responsibility:.
Time Frame:
,,-
contact owners of semi-public
property to lpform them of this
policy; and grant additional
incentives such as reduced site
design standards, priority processing
and fee reductions
.Minor administrative cost to City (A)
Planning Department
1991 (adopt incentives) and 1992
(contact owners)
Require a percéntage of units in large multi-family
projects (i.e., projects with more than 10 units) be
rented for a specified period of time. The difficulties
of first-time home buying make rental units the only
affordable housing for many moderate income households
that do not have the assets to make a down-payment on a
home. Other households may ~hosa to rent for other
raasons.
E.
policy Objective:
Action Needed;
Financing:
Insure availability of rental units
in Dublin
Require that a minimum of 10% of the
units in large multi-family projects
be maintained as rental units for a
period of five years.
No cost to City
55
.Financing:
- 51
Housing Authority fund and m.inor
administrative (Jost to City (A and D)
~ \\'1
'rime frame:
Housing Authority and Planning
Department
Ongoing implementation
e
Implementation
ReSponsibility:
I. Monitor AvailaÞility of Rental Housing. If deemed
necessary, consider enactment of condominium conversion
ordinance. Only one (Jondaminium conversion project has
been approved by the City. The developer did not follow
through with implementation of the project.
Policy Objective:
As;sist in maintaining rental stock
as housing affordable to moderate
income DUblin households
Actions to be
Undertaken:
After an application for ð
condominium conversion is received by
the City, evaluate the City-wide
rental vacanty rate; pass a
condominium oonversion ordinance, if
necessary
Financing:
ImplemanÚition
Responsibility:
Minor administrative cost to City (AI·
Planning Department
e
--
/,
Time Frame:
Ongoing implementation
J. Require evidence of developer effort to receive public
financial assistanoe for purpose of including below
market rate units in proposed projects; and assist
developers in obtaining information. on available
programs. The range of available state and fede:::-al
programs designed to increase housing affordability
varies from year to year. To insure that developers are
participating in appropriat.e programs when possible, the
City will :r¡equire evidence that developers of multi-
family hous;ing have investigated program availability and
are using available assistance whenever possible. To
reduce the burden on developers çreated by this
requirement, the City will prepare a packet of
information on available programs, including a list of
agency contact persons responsible for program
implementation. This information will be given to
developers as early as possible in the project approval
process. This requirement will apply only to developers
of projects that contain 75 or IDore multi-family units.
.
58
·
e
I.
I
I
p ~b It'll
..
r;
;
~
!<t\tv(.I""T &e.C""'¿'" O~
City of Dublin
; . ' . . . . .
" \ -, ," " - . - . '
;¡; . ~ . .
.... ....~.' '.:. ' ~.. " ~~.'.:
d
-
Hoús·ingElement .
(1999-2006)
i"
:'~\
<~
"~
~i
If!
.I~~
j;
¡..
.,
I,:
~,
":~
Adopted by the Dublin City Council on June 3, Z003
Resolution No. 113·03
(Approval of Housing Element)
Resolution No. 114-03
(Adoption of Negative Declaration) .
;~i
~~
:.\.
[~,
~:
'I:\~
"¡
I~
Certtfied by the State Department of HOL5ing and Community Development July 11, 2003
,
,.
/
',~.
¡I~
'11~
'il
",j,
I'~'
~~"
~;
{!
,k
¡~;
¡);f '
I,·~
I
.~
~:. .
.,
-.... ..;
S~ 0b \\tt
"IT Y "F D U a L 111
HOUSING ELeMENT (,.",g-2C~e)
1. Monitor availabiJity of rental bousing. If doomed nec:ee5Ð!)', consider OUBctmlmt of tho
condominium convm;on ordinance. The City has approved onJy one condominium
conversion project. The developer did not followthrough with impl=entarion of the proj~t.
Policy ObJtQ!Ìvco:
Actio,," to be
Undertake",
Financing;
IropJemcDtation
lto"ponsibillty:
TUnc Fnn>o;
Achkvomcnts:
I
Assiet in mainta!:rdng rontal stock as housing affordabJo to mod~att:-:incom"
Dublin households
After an appJication for a condominium. cD1JVe¡:sion is reociv.d by thc Cit:.',
ova!ua1e the City-wide rontal vao¡mey rate; pa.!S a ocndominiwn cO!lVmion
oTdiœuce. if no.esOll!)'
Minor admÎJlistrative oostto tho City
Comnlunity Dovoloprnont Department
Ongoing implcmonmtion
A oondominium conversion ordinance was nev~ adopted bocauso tho City does.
Dot beli"". that Ibt::ro is a current neod for sw:h an ordim.ncc. There is little
Ji:k.1ihood that ~isting rontal housing property own= will oonvcrr theÍr
propomos to condomtnJums d".to tho strong d.=d for rental housing in
Dublin and tho d""elppmont Gf oondo¡niniu!D.I1l> satisfy the demand for this type
ofhousin¡¡.
There arc currontJy 1,396 condominium<; under com1ruction in the City, Th.o
City will as""ss the need f=a coDdominium conver";on ord!mmc. .aoh timo it
updat<:B tho Housing Element if. need aris.s,
,
It
~;'
.'
't;
,.
CITY
File #
CLERK
54 0Ìj
[1.,\
.
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 16, 2004
SUBJECT:
P A 04-044 Prl\$entation of Policy Recommendations for the
Proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Report Prepared by: Jeff Baker, Associate Planner ()(¡!::.-
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
City COl.W.cil Resolution IBI-04,1niûating Proceedings to
Adopt an Ordinance Regulating the Convl:rsìon of Existing
Apartments Îl1. the City to Condominiums.
City Council Staff Report dated September 7, 2004, without
attachments.
2.
RECOMMENDATION''-' . .1\.-
. /\ ¿.vr
Provide direction to Staff on policies that should be c{ nsidered as
part of the Condominium Conversion Ordim.'IDce.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
No fJ.1'1!U1cia1 impact at this time. Implementation of the
Condominium Conversion Ordinance will have an impact on Staff
time in relation to monitoring polìcy provisions. The impact on
Staff time is not currently !aíown. Further analysis of this impact
will be presented to the City Council at the time . the proposed
Ordinance is pr:.sented.
eBACKGROÚND:
,
On September 7,2004, the City"Council adop~d a Resolution (Resolution #181-04) initiating proceedings
to adopt an ordinance regulating the conversion of existing apl.\r\ments in the City to condominiums
(Attachment 1). Following that meeting, Staff he.'; studied the various mechanisms for r¡;gulating
condomini= conversions. This study inciuded a complete revi~w·ofthe Subdivision Map Act, City of
Dublin G~neral Plan Housing Element and Condonún.i= Conversion Ordinances from fIfteen diff~rent
cities throughout California, including the cities of Lh,=ore and Walnut Crecl:.. Based on this study
staff has dew:loped a series of policy alternatives for tb!: City Council to consid~.
PrrJcess:
Implementation of a Condominium Conversion Ordinance will include the development of a new ohapt~,.
in the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance for Condominium Conversions as well as related amendments to
the existing Inclusionary Zoning Regulations and· Site Devdopment Review chapters of the Zonillg
Ordinanœ (Chapters 8.68 and 8.104). Fo1ìowingthis policy discussion, Staff will prepare a draft ordinanc~
for r(lview at public hearings before both tk P1æming Commission and City Council.
.---.-------------------~o;~~~-~~-----------·--;:~;:::-~~::~~~;i::--··
G:\PA#\2004\04-044 CDndo co~\'cr,d(]n ZOA\(:~il:rl1-16-04.DOC
L_. _._..
ATTACHMENT .5
ANALYSIS:
",,-Co . I.,
.j I..,;
\\'1
Th~ fol1 owing is a list of goals that Staff has used as a framework for developing policy alternatives, These
goals wert\\ d3rÎved from the General Plan HoUlring Element and tht\\ Resolution initiating proceedings to
adopt an ordinance regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the City to condomÎIliums. Th~se
goals help to ensure the creation of policies tha.t ~. consistent with the City of Dublin General Plan
Housing Element. .
.
Condominium Conversion Policy Goals:
1. Maintain a supply of affordable and market rate rental housing.
2. Provide a reasonable balance of ownership and rental housing and a variety of choices in the type and
price of housing.
3. Establish criteria for the conversion of existing multi-family rental housing to condominiums,
4. Reduce the impact of conversion on residents in rental housing who may be required to relocate due to
the conversion of apartments to condominiums.
5. Ensure that converted housing achÜw~s a ìUgh degre~ of appearanc::, quality and safety.
Based on the above goals, Staffhlw prepared policy categoril:s tI'mt w(luld bo included in a Condominium
Conversio:n Ordinance. These categories are presented with a Staff recommendation and an alt=ative
optiQn.
Subdivision Map Act:
The Subdivision Map Act provides ¡¡orne protection for certain groups that may be affected by
Co:ndominium Conversions. However, State Housing Law provid:,:s that c::ities have the responsibility to
use the powers vested in them to facilitate the improvement and developrne:nt of housing to make
adeqUJ3.te provisions for the housing needs of all ~coIÏom1t: segments of the community (Gov. Code, § .
65580(d». Staffs recommendations would build from and· aUginont the provisions of the Subdivision
Map Act.
A. CODdomínium Conversion Ordinance
1. Application of th.e CondoJninium Conversion Ordinance
Staff Recommendation: The.. fol1owing criteria would be used to identify propercies that are
subject to the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance:
· Multi-farnily reside¡;¡tial developrner¡ts containiDg 20 or more dwelling units under the same
ownersmpthat are held for lease to the general public.
· Multi-family residentiaJ rental projects that have received a release of occupancy.
· Multi.family residential r¡:;ntalprojects that have not received a public re:port. from the
Department 6f R:::al Estate (regardless of whether or not they have a recorded condominium
m~. .
Analysis: The provision to make all projects with 20 or more rental units subje:ct to the
Condominium Conversion Ordinance is consistent with the thresht>ld that has been established for
the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. Implementation of this reoommendation would excluœ
duplexes and small apartment buildings from the ordinance. The Alders Apartments is the .
smallest apartment building in the City with only 8 units.
smallest with a total of 20 units.
lne µvan AJ:l:U.l ^jJ4tIoLi.l......L..U"'s).~ we n!,,:"',"T
.
¡;.:/
.)D. o.(~~
lPcorporatÎng :into the ordinance .the recommendmion requiring II public report from the DRE
would ~ave the effect of making units that· have been mapped for condominiums subject to the
Condominium Conversion Ordinance, in most if not all case~. ID ordm' to convert an apartment
complex to for-sale condominiums, the property owner must record a Condom1niu:m Map and
obtain a Public Report from the Department of fu:al Estate (DRE). State law provides that only
the Public Report vests the building own~s' rights to sell tho units individually. Without the
Public Report, the development remains subjðct to new Cîty ordinances regardless of whether th.e
building is already mapped.
\\~
The City has n:>leased occupancy of approximatdy 3,172 multi-family rental units throughout 111$
City. . It should be noted that approximately 1,119 of these units are already mapped for
condominiums. The DRE has not issued a Public fu:port for any units that have been mapped for
condominiU!I1S. If all .of these units were converted, the ratio of apartments to own::rship unit.
would be greatly reducad and a significant number of tenants would be displaced. Implementation
of this provision would reduoe the potential impact to thl:lse t:mants.
Fiscal Impact: Implementation ofthis recommendedpo1icywould not have an impact on its' own.
However, d<:opending on the overal1 policy dir<:oction there will be a different a.mount of Staff time
dedicated to the implementation of the ordinance. This analysis would b~ brought forward to the
City Council with the draft ordinance.
e
Altermr.tive Recommendation: The Condominium Cm:m:rsion Ordinance w()u1d be ¡rpplicab!e
to multi-family residential developments containing 3 or more dwelling units under the same
ownership. All oth::r recommended provisions listed above would also be included.
,
Analysis: This would include all existing apartment projects wi1hin the City of Dublin but this
wouJd continue to exclude duplexes from. the conversion ordinance.
Fiscal Impact: Implementation of this policy will not have an impact on its own. However,
depending on the overall policy direction there will be a differe¡¡t amount of Staff tim.e dedicated
to the implementation of the ordinance. This analysis would be brought forward to the City
Council with the d:raft ordinance.
2. Limitatiottß on Conversions
The limitations listed below would be utilized by the City to evaluate requests for conversion çÎ
multi-family rental property to condominiums:
Staff Recommendation: Condominium conversions would only be pennitted if the minimum
number of rental unit. within the City of Dublin exceeds 30% of the total housing supply and the
average citywide vacancy rate over the previous year exceeds 5% witbin the City of Dublin.
Conversion cannot reduce the total nUD.1ber of rental units below 30% of the total housing supply
and cannot reduce the vacancy rate below 5% as estimated through Staff review.
e
Analysis: This provision. sets clearly defmcod standards that can be used to deter.m.ine ifr¡mtal units
may be converted to condominium units and continue to pres&Ve diversity in the housing stock.
When the General Plan Housing Element was updated in 2000, th::re were 9,5·97 residential uni,s
,'.
within the City of Dublin. Multi-family rental units represcnted 2,921 or approxirnateJy 30% of"
the total housing supply. This was oonsÎsta1t with tho composition of tho nationwide housing ~)l ',6 \I'
supply at that time. Implementation of this provision in the ordinanco would preserve e. coro stook .
of rental housing consistent with the housing ratio identified in the Housing Element.
The City of Dublin Housing Element (Appendix A, Duhlin Housing Stock) indica.tes that a .
v¡¡pancy rate of 5% is considered ideal for adequate conSUD:1er mobility and choice. A vacancy rat",
bdow 5% indica.tes a strong rontal m.a.rket with limited availability. A vacancy rate that is greater
than 5% would indioate some excess availability of housing within the City of Dublin. Tnis
. provision would help to ensure the availability of alternative housing for residents that 8I"e
displaced by conversion. However, implementation .of this alœmative could limit futuro
conversjons based on the housing IIDd vacancy ratios within the City.
FiscallmpCJct: A minimal amount of Staff time would be required to obtain the CUD:'ent housing
ratios and vacancy rates; however, this time oould be oharged to the Applicant.
Alternative Recommendation: Condominium conver&ions would only be pemrltted if the
minimum number of rental .units within the City of Dublin exceeds 25% of tho Iota] housing
supply and tho average citywide vacancy rate over the previous year exceeds 5% witl:ùn the City of
Dublin. Conversion cannot reduce the total number of rental units below 25% Qfi:lw total housing
supply and cannot roduce the vaoancy rate bdow 5%.
Analysis: The ratio of rental housing has e.hanged since the General Plan Housing Elem:mt was
updated in 2000. As. of October 2004, tho City has issued or fina1ed building pennits for 15,447
res.idential units. Approximately 25% of the residential permits thll1 have been issued were for
multi-family !ental housing. This alternative would ensure: that the rental housing supply as a
percentage of the total housing supply would not drop þelow the current ratio.
F/scal1mpacr: A minimal amount of staff time would be required to obtain the cUttent housing
ratios and vaoancy rates; however, this time could be charged to the Applicant
.
3. Tenant Relm:ation AasistaDce Plan
A T",nant Relooation Assirumce Plan shal1 be prcpared by the Applicant to indicate how the
Applicant will assist tenants who will b~ displaced in s~ouring decent, safe, sanitary and affordabk
replacement housing not higher in oost thm the rent of the existing unit being converted. Staff
r¡:co=ends that, at a minimlllIl, the relocation assistanoe plan includ¡: moving exp~ses and an
extension of lease t¡:rInS as discussed below.
&. Moving Expenses
Staff ReCOIlunendatiolJ.: Payment of moving expenses equal to 2 months rent to all tenams
who reside in the property at the time that tb~ "Notice of Intent to Convert" is issued pursuant
to the Subdivision Map Act (S~tion 66452.9) or tho alt=ative notice required by the
Condominium Conv=rsion Ordinance for projeots that already have final condominium maps.
Payment shall b:; made within 14 days of relocation. However, any tenant who tenninates ¡:
lease prior tD re:oeiving a notice to vacate :5:orn the property owner or is in atrears of rental or
leasehold payments, unless withholding payment is legally allowed, sha1l not be entitled to
relocation beneÎlts. .
Analysis: The· paymem of moving expenses is mtenoeo to reau¡;e WI;: J.1_U<W¡';'''' ouraen that IS
placed on tenants as e. result o~ the property own~' s deci;ion to convert. and the tenan1 oo. '.1
subgequ6nt need to relocate. This monl:\Y will help to defray the cost OfphySlce.lly moving and Sf; ':b
related moving expl:\nses. The Subdivision Map Act does not require property owners to \ tl
provide relocation assistance to displaced tenants.
· Fi¡<çal Impact: Depending on the policy ilirection and implementation procedures there will b~
a different amount of Staff time dedicated to the implementation of this ordinance provision.
There is a possibility that some type of self-reporting procedure could be implemented that
would minimlze Staff monitoring time. Furth~ analysis of îke amount of Staff time will be
included when ~ ordinance is brought back to thl:\ City Council.
Alternative Recommendation: Payment of moving expenses equal to 2 months rent only to
tenants that are seniors (age 62 and above), pennanently disabled tenants and tenants that
reside in affordable units as defined by the City of Dublin Inc1usíonary Zoning Ordinance
(Section 8.68).
Analysi:;: The payment of moving expenses to this select group of tenants will help to reduce
the financial burden fOT those tenants that are likely to hB.ve the most difficulty relocating and.
are ¡east able to bear the costs associated with moving. The Subdivision Map Act does not
require property owners to provide relocation assistance to displaced tenants.
·
~.Fiscal Impact: Depending on the policy direction and impleroentation procedures there "Will be
. a diffeT~t amount of Staff time dedicated to the implementation of this ordinance provision.
There is a possibility that some type of self-reporting prooedure could be imp1::mented that
would minimize Staff monitoring time~ Further analysis of the amount of !šta.ff time will be
included when the ordinance is bruught back to the City Council.
-
,
b.Lease Agreements
Staff Recommenda.tion: Staff recomm!:D.dS inclusion of -the following provisions in the
Condominium Conversion Ordinance:
·
A. Rent will not be increased from the date of issuaDce of a "Notice of Intent to Convert"
pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (Section 66452.9) or or the alternative notice required
by the Condominium Conversion Ordinance for projects that already have final
condominium maps, whichever occurs first, until 6 montll.s following the receipt of a
public report from the Department of Real Es"ta.t:::, or the tenant purchases a unit úT
relooates to other accommodations, whichever occurs first.
B. Provide lease/rental agreement extensions of no less than 3 yea:rs to all tenants that are
seniors (ag" 62 and above), pem).!!!Lently disabled tenants and tenants that reside in
affordable units as defmed by the City of Dublin Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (SectiDn
8.68). The 3-year ex.tension shall start from the date of issuance of the public report from
. the Department of R~l Estate (DRE). Annual rent increases during this 3-year period may
not exceed 75% of the lat:::st average annual rent increase of the residential rent component
of the Consumer Price Index.
C. Extend leases/r",ntal agf",,,,ments to families with children in grades K through 12 for a
minimum of 1 year from the date of issuance of a. public r¡¡port from the DRE.
Analysis: The Subdivision Map Act requireS property owners to give 6 months notice of
intention to copvert prior to terminating tenancy due to th.e conversion, and the Condominiurr . "
Conversion DrdíllllIlce would require· a similar notice prior to SIIbmission of an application t¡, SCt
convert a proJ~t that has already been mapped for condominiums. Howevel:. th~r~ is a limited
amount of housing that meets the needs of senior, disabled a¡¡d low-income tenants.
Implementation of staff's recommendation would provide these tenants with additional time to
find housing within the community and further reduces the potential negative impaC"!$ of
moving. . .
t t
-"C)
\\~
.
Providing tenants with school age children a l-yea!' extmsion will help to avoid moving during
the school year and disrupting the education process, Reslricting the ability to raise rent will
limit the potential for property owners to encourage te:nants to vacatc units and avoid the
noticing requirements of the subdivision Map Act and payment of relocation assistance
required Þy the City of Dublin Condominiu:rn Conversion Ordinance. Rent would be held in
place for a minimum of 6-12 months unckr this provision,
Fiscal Impact: Staff time will be required to 6IlÍorce these provisions. The amount of Staff
time will be determined as the draft ordinance is developed. Further analyõis of the amo\.mt of
staff time will be determined when the ordinance is brought back to City Council.
Alternative Recommenda.tion: The following are alt!m1stive provisions for consideration in
the Condominium Conversion Ordinance. Either one or both of these provisions could be
implemented with the Staff recommendations listed above:
A. Provide a lease/rental agrooment extension of no leas than 1 year from the dafu of issuance
of the public report from the DRE to all tenants that are seniors (age 62 and above),
pe=anently disabled tenants and tenants that reside in ¥fordable units as defil1ed by the
CiTY of Dublin Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (Section 8.68). A
B. Permanently disabled or low-income tenants that 8!'('J also seniors shallrecidve a lifetime ,.
lease in which ren! increases are tied to the CPr. All other recommended lease provisions
listed above would also be included.
AnalySi¡;: Implementation of these provisiop.s would provide additional protections tbat !<Te not
required by the Subdivision Map Act for tenants that are considered to be·difficult to relocate.
The lease extensioD will provide t=ts that are seniors, disabled or living in affordable units
with 6 months more time to relocate than provided by the Subdivision Map Act.
Implementation of this provisioD would enable certain tenaD.ts to avoid relocauoD altogefuer
because of the difficulty in finding rephwement housing and physically moving.
Fiscallmpact: Staff time will be required to enforce these provisions.. The amount of Staff
time will be determined as the draft ordinance is developed. Further analysis of the amount of
staff time will be determined when the ordinance is brought back to City Council.
4. Building Code Requirements
The following recommendations address the: application of building code requirements to
condoroinium conversioru::
.
e
Staff Recommendation: Converted condominiums Shall be reqUIrea w m""< "''''' ouuamg COOf'
reguirements in effect at the time of construction. Any retrofitting or ro.rnodeling wOIk shall me,."
current building code requirements in effect a.t the time building permits are issued for the wo!!" (",¡,
a:c
11"\
Ana(ysis: Many existing residential dwellings, including apartments, within the City of Dublin
were built prior to the current building code requirem\:11.ts. These dwellings are cOnsidered safe
and inhabitable structures. Therefore, the City does not typically require costly retrofitting ofthes"
properties to bring them up to current building code requirements. Conversion of e»dsting
apartments to condominiums does not substantially change the use of these structures in a way that
would make them less safe or inhabitable. However, any remodeling or retra fitting work that the
propmy awnerperforms would be required to meet current building code requir=ents..
FÌ$çal Impact: None. The property owner would be rèquired to obt!Ûn a building permit for
retrofitting work. The cost of building inspections is included in the building permit fl:'es.
Alternative Recommendation: All converted condominiums shall be retrofitted to the standards
required of new residential condominiums as required by the Building Official.
Analysis: Extensive retrofitting would be required for many older properties in order to bring
them up to current buildIDg code requirements. This is an expenSive proposition that would likely
discouxage the conversion of older apartment complexes that were not built to currelu
condom:inium standards.
Fiscal Impact: None. The property owner would be required to obtain a building permit for
retrofitting work. The cost of building in3pections is included in the building pennit fees.
flÞB. IndU$iOna~ Zoning Regulations. . . . .
. The followmg are recommendatlOns regardmg the application of Inc!USIO!W'Y ZonÜlg and the
purchase of below market rate rental units in developments that are converted to for sale
condomir1iums.
.
I·
L Applicatio.n of Inclusionary Zoning
Stafr Recommendation: A.mendthe Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (Section 8.68) to require
multi.family r~tal proj ects that are subj ect to the cOlldominium conversiOD ordinance to provide
12.5% of the total number of dwelling units within the developmont as affordable purchase units if
they have not alrea.dy obtaiced a public roport from the DRE.
Analysis: Approximately 29% of the rental units within the City are located in properties where "-
Final Condominium Map hilS already been recorded. Conversion of these rental units could result
in a substantis:J loss of ¡narket rate and affordable rental units. This provision would ·require
property owners to provide affordable units at the time of conversion regardless of whether or not
a Final CondOIniniurn Maphw; b~n recorded on the property. This is an innovative approach 10
providing ¡nelusionary housing with cOndominimn conversions that is not . currently used by
surrounding juris dictions.
Fi.tcal Analysis: Staff time will be Tequired for Staff to implement and monitor the 1nclusiona¡-y
Zoning R",gulatjons on all newly conv",rted condominiums.
""
Alternative Recommendation: Amend the lnclusionary Zoning Regulations (Section 8.68) to .
require condominium projects with 20 or more units to provide 12.5% of the total number ofl "
dwelling units within the development as affordable units if a Final CQndonûnium Map bas not \Ø t "-!:)
bec:m recorded on the property.
\\~
Analysis: ,N; previously discussed, approximately 29% of the rental units within the City are _
located in properties where a Fj¡¡al Condominium Map haJj already be~ recorded. These .,
properties would not be subject to inclusionary zoning tÌnder this provision. However, properties
that do not have a recorded Final Map would be subject to inclusionary zoning and contribute to
the supply of affordable purchase units within the City.
Fisoal Analysis: Staff time will be required to implement and monitor the Inclusionary Zoning
Regulations on those developments that have not already recorded a Final Condominium Map.
2. Purchase of E:dsting Below Market Rate Units
Staff Recommendation: Tenants that reside in affordable units as defiIlfld by the City of Dublin
Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (Section 8.68) shall have the right of fIrst refusal to PU1'chase their
current unit at an affordable purchase price in accordance with the provisions of the lnelusionary
Zoning Regulatiow and the City of Dublin's "Laypersons Guide to Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance
Regulations" .
Analy¡,'is: This provision would help to reduce the impact of riòlocation on low-income tenants and
provide them with preferential tr:::atmcnt in the purchase process. The Subdivision Map Act does
require property owners to offer ten¡mts an exclusive right to purchase his or her respective unit at
market ratiò. However, implementation of this provision would enable "Lenant. living i:o affordable
units to purchase their existing unit at an affordable purchase price calcJJlated based on the ...
Inc1usionary Zoning requirements. ',.,
Fiscal Analysis: Stafftirne will be required to verifY iliat low.lncome tenants recdve the right of
first refusal. Additi.onal staff time wilJ be required in order to verify the household's eligibility for
these n¡:;wly converted units.
Alternative Recommendation: Offer below market rate purchase units to the gep-eral public
without preference to the existing affordable tenants.
Analysis: ImpJementationoffuis provisiop-would mirror the r¡;:quirements of the Subdivision Map
Act. No special preferenœs would b\\ given to existing tenants living in lnclusionary rental units
that want to p1.U'chase an Inclusionary for sale Wlit. All existing tenants would be offered the right
of first refusal to purchase their unit at market rate based on the requirements of the Subdivision
Map Act. Tenants currently living in lnclusionary renta.! units that wish to purchase an
lnclusionary unit would have to choose from the units that are available at the Inclusionary priCe.
Th:::8e tenants might have to move from their existing unit.
Fiscal AnaIY$is: Staff is already verifying household eligibility for existing for sale housing.
Additional Staffcime would be requited for those newly converted units.
.
Co Site Development Review
11- 0;.'
Ie> 1_,
A Condominium Map is required in order to convert an existing apartment complex L -,'
condominiums. How~ver,!:be map process do~s not provide a mechanism to evaluate the physical \ \~
appearance of a property. For =pl::, the City could receive an application to COnVert an existin"
apartment complex with deferred maintenance that creares an eye:sore: within the cormnunÌty. Thi~
deferred maintenance could include external painting and lands¡;ape lIlaintenanCe to re>pair sparse or
overgrown landscaping. A Site Development Review permit would pmvide the. City with a
m~hanisrn to evaluate the physical app~anceof the property and require modifications. The
following are recommendations regarding the application of a Sitl;) Development Review Pennit to
condominium conversions.
·
Staff Recommendation: Each main building, strUcture, fence, patio enclos1).l'e, carport, accessory
building, sidewalk, driveway, lancbcaped area and utility shall be refurbished and restored ~s
necessary to aöhieve a high degree of appearance, quality and safety.
Analysis: This provision will provide the CityCoUDci! with the ability to require propOrty own~& to
pc:rfotm deferred rr.mntenance prior to convf:I:sioll. This will help to maintain the visual appearance of
the City of Dublin. An amendm¡;:nt to include condominium conversions in the Site Development
Review section of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 8.104) would be required in order to implement this
provision.
Fiscillimpact: No fimmcial impact. Community DevelopIDl;)nt Department Staff time would bee
required to perlow a phy,siccl insp~ction of the property and review proposed împrovements.
How¡;:ver, the Applicant would be requir:::d to apply for iii Site Developm\Jnt Review Application and is
then charged on a time and roaterials basl£.
· Alternative Rec(lmmendiïtiDn: Rcquire the prOperty owner to establish a reserve fund in excess'Qf
DRE requirements for ongoing maintenance of the property. .
Aru;¡/ysis: Condorniniumassociations are required to establish budgets and resm'e funds for ongoing
maintenance. Thi& provision wouJd only require additional fund& be set aside for such repron:.
How¡;:ver, it does nbt require the existing property own~ or the newly created condominiwYl
association to perfow maintenance and repairs. There:fore, multi.fa:rnily developmemts could convert
without perlonning improvements.
Fiscal Impact: No finmcial impact since no action. would be required of Staff.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction to Staff on policies that should be considered as
part of the Condommium Conversion Ordinance.
·
v;:) "I, \\~
AGENDASTATEMJ!:NT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: .JANUARY 11,2005
·
PUBLIC HEARING - PA 04·044 Condominium Conversion
Orilinance . AP~
(Repartprepared by: Jeff Baker, Associate Planner)~
SUBJECT:
.ATTA.CHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
RECOMMENDA TJON:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
7.
8.
9.
Resolution Recommending that the City Council Adopt an
Ordinancf\ Regulating the Conversion ofEx.isting Aparto:lents
in the City to Condominiums.
Urgency Condomini= Conversion Ordinance
Condomini= Conversion Ordinance (Non urgrncy
ordinance)
Alternative Urgency Condominium Canversion Ordinance
Alternative Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Non
urgency ordinance)
Notice of Public Hearing to Consider Initiating Proceedings
to Adopt a Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
List of Dublin Apartments
City Council Staff Report (dated Sept(\ ]1ber 7,2004)
City Council Staff Report (dated November 16, 2004)
without attachments
City Council ResolutioD 181-04, Initiating Proëeedings to
Adopt an OrdinanDe Regulating the Convmion of Existing
Apartments in the City to Condorniniwns.
City Council Mewng Minutes ofNovemberJ,6, 2004
Open public hearing;
Receive Staff Presentation;
Question Staff, Applicant and the public;
Close Public Hearing and De1iberate; and
Adopt Resolution (Attachment I) Recommending City
Council Adopt an Ordinance Regulating the ConversioD of
Existing Apartments in the City to Condominiums.
·
10.
11.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
B"ckground:
On Sept=ber 7, 2004, th¡, City Council adopted a Resolution (Resolution #181-04) initiating proceedings
to adopt an ordinanc:e regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the City to for-sale
condominiums (Attac:hment 10). Following that meeting, Staff studied the various mechanisms for
regulating condornÎni= conversions. Tnis Study included a com.plete r.wiew of the:: Subdivision Map
Act, City of Dublin General Plan Housing Element and Condomini= Conversion Ordinanc:es ITom
different cities throughout California., induding the cities of Live:rmore and Walnut Creek. Based on this
Study, Staff developed a series of polic:y alternatives for the City Counc¡" to consider. On Nov=ber 16,
2004, Staff presented th¡,se policy alternatives to the City Council (Attachme::nt 9). The City COU1)cil
provid"d Staff with direction regarding the. development of the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinanc:e. The City Council further directed Staff to hold a meeting with th: oWners of apartments
COPIES TO:
PAFile
·
a:\PA#~004\04.04o:1 Conde ConvCfliicrnZOA \þC'~ .11 wO~.dcc
ATTACHMÈNT'L~
')
within the City of Dublin in order to inform them of these policy recommendations W1d solicit tñ'"e¡,..'
comments. On December 9, 2004, Staff held a meeting with th¡::se property owners and other interested
parties. Staff utilized the feedback received at this meeting to further develop the proposed Condominium
Conversion Ordinance (Attachments 2..5). Feedback from the property owners is included in the analysis
.ction of this Staff Report.
Apw1:ment units provide a type ofbousing that is a key to a healthy diversity of housing stock in th.e
commulÚty. Apartments provide housing for all levels of afford ability in the community and are a
valuable tool for providing work force housing. Staff believes that the conversion of one or two of the
City's apartment communiti¡::s could have a major impact on the diversity of the City's housing stock in
that it would remove from the market a significant percentage of the existing rental units. If sold rath.er
than rented, the units would no longer be available to a segment of the community that is not in a position
to purchase such units. In addition, the loss of these units would likely decrease the vacancy rate, may
increase rents, .and this may in turn further exacerbate the City's shortage of affordable rental units. This
might cause a lasting imbalance in the diversity of housing stock in the City.
\0 \
..)!
In
In the past 10 years the City has seen the development of approximately 1,500 resideIltial apartment
units, for an overall total of approximately 3, 172 units throughout the City. It should be noted that
approximately 1,119 of these units are already mapped for condomiuiums but continue to operate as
apartment communities (Attachment 7). However. the California Department of Real Esta.te (DRE) has
not issued a Public Report for these properties. The Public Report vests the property own~' s right to seU
the units individually. These apartment communities remain subject to new City ordinances until the
property owner has received a Public Report from the DRE. If all of these: units converted, the ratio of
apartments to ownership units wouJd be greatly reduced.
In the past seven months, Staff has received inquiries from several existing apartment owners indicatiag
.¡reir intent to file subdivision documents to convert their projects to condominiums. The City is curroutly
wocessing subdivision applications to convert the following apartment projects to for-salec:;()~dominiums.
Current Subdivision Applications
lrPn Horse TraiJ Apartments (Dougherty Road) -
AIchstone - Emerald Park Apartments (Hacienda Drive) -
Total
117 units
324 units
441 Units
Process:
At the present time should a property owner wish to convert an existing apartment oomplex to for-sale
condonriniums, the property owner must record a Condominium Map !Uld obtain a Public Report D-Om the
Department of Real Estate (DRE). Tbe application for a Condominium Map would be processed in
accordance. with State law under the Subdivision Map Act. The Map Act contains provisions that roquire
the property owner to give notice to tenants and gives tenants the right to purchase their existing units
before they are placed on the market for-sale to the gen.::ral public. State law permits the City to expand
upon these basic requirements through the adoption of a condominium-conversion ordinance. State law
provides that cities have the responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the improv=ent
aDd devdopment of housing to make adequate provision for the housing Deeds of all economic segmenrs
of the community. (See Gov. Code, § 65580(d)). For example, a condominium conversion ordinance
could limit conversions to maintain a balance of housing stock and could require the provi.<;ion of
affordable units under the City's Inc1usionary Zoning Ordinance.
Both of the subdivision applications referenced above would only be subject to the Condominium
aonversion Ordinance ifit is adopted before the City takes action on these subdivision maps. Ordinarily,
.nder the Subdivision Map Act, the City may only apply standards in effect at the time that an application
for a tentative subdivision map is d<,=ed complete (Gov. Code, § 66474.2(a»). Howeveor, the City
Council adopted a ResolUTIon initiating proceedings to adopt a condominium-conversion ordinanc<ò
2
, C·· \ \
:, .,·101
"(').,,~ '" .;. \
(Attaclunent 10). This Resolution was designed to prevent those that file subdivision applications ,:;'
COIlVert existing apartments to condominiums from avoiding the pending condominium-conversion
ordinance. The Resolution permits the City to apply the Condøminium Conversion OrdÎr1ance ÎIleffect on
the date the City approves or disapproves a tentative map (Gov. Code, § 66474.2(b»). The Subdivis:ion .
Map Act requires the City to take action on maps within 50 days of deeming aD application Complete. At
the time tha.t this Staff Report was prepared, the s1Jbdivision applications referenced above had not beerl
deemed compJete,
Neighboring JurisdictionI':
Cities throughout California have adopted Condominium Conversion Ordinances including the cities of
Livermore and Waln.ut Creek. Both of these cities adopted conversion ordinances that contain provisions
which restrict the conversion of apartments to condominiums and provide relocation benefits to displaced
tenants. The following is a synopsis of the policy compommts contained in these ordinances: .
The City of Livermore:
· Application of the ordinance: Projects with 2 or mcre units.
· Limitations on Conversions: The City Council must wmually determine the maximum number of
aparlments that are permitted to convert.
· Limitations on Rent Increases: Rent increases are not p=itted from the date a tentative map
application is filed until the tenant relocates.
· Relocation Assistance: All tenaDts receive financial relocation assistance eaual to 2-months rent.
Seniors are offered rent controlled lifetime leases. Low and moderate in~ome tenants shall be
offered a minimum. of a 3-year, rent controlled lMse. Tenants with school aged children receive a 6-
month Jease extension.
· . Building Code Requirements: Projects shall conform to the applicable building code in effect at the:
time the last building permit was issued.
· Site Development Review: Landscaping and buildings shall be reviewed by the Planning .
Department and œfurbisbed and restored to achieve a high degree of appearance.
The City of Walnur Creek:
· Application of the ordinance: Projects with 2 or more lIDits.
· Limitations on Conversions: Conversion is limited to no more than 5% of the City's potentially
convertible rental stock in anyone calendar year.
· Limitations on Rent Increases: Rent increases are not permitted for a period of 2-years from the date a
tentative map appHcation is filed with the city.
· Relocation Assistance: All tenants receive financial relocation assistance equal to 2-months rent.
Seniors are offered rent controlled lifetime IMses. Low and moderate income tenants shall be offered
a minimum of a 3-year, rent controlled Jease.
· Building Code Reql.lÎrements: Projects shall confonn to the applicable building code in effect at the
time the last building permit was issu/:d, .
· Site Development Review: Landscaping and buildings shall be refurbished and restored to achieve "-
high degree of app"arance~
Propos(!l/ Policy Components:
In consideration of the potential impacts fi'om conversion Staff has prepared a Condominium Conversion
Ordinance to regulate the conversion ofrentw apartments to for-sale condominiums, The key components
of the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance are as follows:
·
Application of the Condominium Conversion Ordina.o.ce
LirnitaÚons on Conversions
Limitations on Rent Increases
Tenant ReloC!rtiol1 Assistance Pla.o.
.
·
·
·
3
· Inclusionary Zoning Regulations
· Tenant's Right to Purchase Units
· Bui1ding Code Requirements
· Site Development Re'view
.affr~commends that the City Council adopt the attached Urgency Condominium Conversion Ordinance
to ensure that it is in effect before the City takes action on the current subdivision applications
(Attachment 2 or 4). Approval of an ordinance typically requires two readings before the City CounciJ
and then takes effect 30-days following the second reading. However, the City Council may cause the
Ordinance to take effect immediately by adopting it as an urgency ordinance if the City Council
determines that the .conversion of these apartments to condominiums might ITustrate the City's goal. and
State law obligation to adequately provide for the housing needs of all economic segments of the
oommunity. There is the; ,potential that the urgency ordinance could be challenged. Therefore, Staff
recorrunends that the City Council also adopt a non· Ilrgcucy Condominium Conversion. Ordinance
(Attachment 3 or 5). The non urgency ordinance will provide the City with a bac q¡p ordinance in the
event that the urgency ordinance is challenged.
(de c{' \I{~
ANALYSIS:
The following is a discussion of the key policy components of the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance (Attachments 2-5). The disc:ussion of each componoot includes an analysis of the policy a10ng
with associated comments received at the meeting with the property owners, and a discussion of tbe
financial impacts of implementing these provisions.
A.
Appücation of the Condominium Conyersion Ordinance
The following criteria would be used to identify multi-family properties tha.t are subject to tbe
proposed Condominium Conversio¡¡ Ordi¡¡ance:
.
·
Developments containing 20 or more dwelling units under the same ownership that are held
for ¡ease to the general public (Attachment 2 - Section 8.54.020);
Residential rental projects in which units have b¡:oen occupied as rental units (Attachment 2 -
Section 8.54.030); and
Projects that have not received a public report from the Department of Real Estate (Attachment
2 - Section 8.54.030).
·
· .
Analysi.l": The provision to make an proje:cts with 20 or more rental units suÞject to the
Condominium Conve:rsion Ordinance is consistent with the threshold that has beeJ:l established for
the existÎIlg Inclu¡¡ionary Zoning Regulations (Section H.68). ThÎswou!d ""elude duplexes and
small apartment buildings from the ordinance. The Alders Apartments is the smBlJest apartment
building in the City with only 8 units. The Evan Alan Apartments is the ne:xt smallest with a total of
20 units.
The conversion of units that have a1ready been occupied could res\llt in the displacement of
residents.. Therefore, apartments would be subject to the ordinance if they have: already been
occ:upied. Tenants that would be displaced by conversion would be eligible to receive relocation
benefits required by the proposed Condominium Co¡¡version Ordi!lil11ce,
.
The requirement to obtain a public report from the DRE would make uÌJitE that have already beeD
mapped for condominiums subject to the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance. State law
provides that only the Public Report vests the building owners' rights to sell the units individually.
Without the Public Report, the development remains subject to Dew City ordinances regardless of
whether the building is already mapped. At the time that this Staff Report was prepared, the DRE
4
!:ï c' \\"'\
had not issued a Public Report for any units within the City that have been mapper.. b"ur
condominiums. However, if all of these units were converted, the ratio of apartmonts to ownership
units would be greatly reduced and a significant number of tenants would "be displaced.
Imp1emmtation of this provision would reduce the potential impact to these tenants. This approach
to regulating the conversion of mapped apartments to condominium.s that is not currently used by .
surrounding jurisdictions but is common in Southern California.
The City Council recommended induding the provision as described above in the Condominium
Conversion ardimwce.
Property Owner s Feedback: At·the meeting he:ld with the property owners on December 9, 2004,
several of the owners expressed concern about applying the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance to properties that have already processed a Final Map with the City. These property
owners indi cated that approval of their existing condominium maps implied certain approvals from
the City IiI1d that application of a Condominium Conversion Ordinance would effectively reverse
these approvals and devalue their properties. Additionally, one property owner requested that the
ordinllIlce apply topropmies with 21 or more units in order to exclude the Evan Alan Apartments.
The Evan Alan Apartments has 20 units end has processed a Final Condominium Map but does not
have a Public Report from the DRE. The property owner(s} also expressed coU(:ern that they were
not notified of the City Council meeting, held on September 7, 2004, in which the City iIritiated the
development of the proposed ordinance. The City sent a public hearing notice to the leasing office
at each property advising them of the City Council hearing. However, tbe property owner(s) were
inadvertently not sent a copy of hearing notice. Staff has updated the address list for the publi c
hearing notices to include each propmy owner. All property own~s were s<:mt a notice advising
them of the Planning Commission hearing on January 11. 2005.
Staff has prepared an alternative ordinance (Attachments 4 & 5) that would exclude properties wim
all approved condominium map from the conversion ordinarlce. This alternative ordinance is .
available shou]d the Planning Cömmission decide to recommend to the City Council the approval of
a Condominium Conversion Ordinarlce that exéÍudes properties with approved condominium maps.
Fiscal Impaçt: ImplementatioD of these policy components would not ha.ve arI impact on their own.
However, Staff time would be required in order to implement the overall ordinanoe.
B. Limitations 011 Conversions
Section 8.54.040 o[the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance would permit conversions if
the minimum number of rental units within the City of Dublin exceeds 30% of the total bousing
supply. Conversions would not be permitted to reduce the total number of rental units below 30% of
the total housing supply.
Analysis; This provision sets c!=ly defined standards that = be used to determine if rental UJlÎts
may be converted to condominium units and continue to preserve diversity in the housing stock.
'When the General Plan Housing Element was updated in 2000, there were 9,597 residential units
. within the City of Dublin. Multi-family rental units represented 2,921 or approximately 30% of the
total housing supply. This ratio was consistæt with the composition of the natioIlwide housing
supply at that time and ensures a diversity of housing types to meet the needs of different economic
s::grnents of the community, Impkmentation of this provision in the ordinance would pres.erve a
core stock of rental housing consistent with the housing ratio identified in the Housing Element.
The ratio of existing rental housing bas changed since the General Plan Housing Element wa.s .
updated in 2000. As of October 2004, the City has issued or fina1ed building permits for 15.447
residential ur1Íts. Approximately 25% of the residential permits tha.t have, heen issued were for
5
·
·
·
1 ." .J I h· Th L' d .. . uld b ' !.:JI "'6
mu jie,am¡ y renta DUSing. ere,ore, no con onIlmum converstons wo e per.rn¡tte¿ UInl!
additional multi-family rental units are constructed and the ratioofthe~e units exceeds 30% of the
total housing supply.
fiCO¡
I
Sta.ff has estimated the City's housing ratio at built out utilizing 2000 CensIls data, Association of
Bay Area GOVem1Tlents (ABAG) projections, and the =ent General Plan Land Use Map. Multi-
family rental units are anticipated to represent a maximum of approximately 36% of the total
housing supply when the city is fully built out. This ratio is based on the assumption that all
undeveloped parcels with existing Medium/High and High Density General Plan Land Use
designations will consist of rental units. However, it is likely that for-sale c.ondominiums will be
built on some of these parcels. The construction of for~sale condominiums rather than rental
apartments would therefore reduce the ratio of rental units be10w 36%. The ultimate housing ratio
will effeot the ability of property owners to convert apartment to condominiums.
The policy alternatives that were presented to the City Council on November 16, 2004, also included
a recommendation that would require as a prerequisite to conversion that the City wide vacancy rate
exceed 5% (Attachment 9). The City of Dublin General Plan Housing Element (Appendix A,
Dublin Housing Stock) indicates that a vacancy rate of 5% is considere:d ideal for ad~uak
consumer mobility and to ensure that alternative housing is available for tenants that are displaced
by conversion. The City Council recommended that this provision be included in. the draft
ordinance. However, Staff has discovere:d a number of implementation issues associated with this
provision. Vacancy rates are djfficult to track. Professional vacancy report!:: do not typic¡()Jy track
smlÙ.b;:r "'apartment complexes and would not necessarily give !ill acc:urale representatian of the.
overaRvacsncy rate within the City. Staff could periodically survey property owners Î11 order to
det=ine the vacancy rate. However, this would be a labor intensive task!illd it would be difficult
to verify the accuracy of the information that is collected.
Property Owner's Feedback: The prcperty own~ indicate:d that vacancies are at least partially a
reflection of the rmts that a property is charging, Therefore, the vacancy rate can be manipulated by
an increase or decrease in rent. Based on tbese concerns and the difficulty in tracking vacancy rates,
Staff has decided to. recommend against including a vacancy requirement in the proposed
Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Fiscal Impact: A minimal amount of Staff timlÕ would be r~uired to. calculate the current housing
ratios. The City already collects the information that is ne&led to calculate the ratio. The cost of
Staff time needed to calculate the ratio would be recovered thraugh the pre application fee described
in Section 8.54.040.A of the ordinanc:e.
c. LimitlLtions on Rent Increases
Section 8.54.100 restricts rent iœreases from the date the property owner provides each tenant witb
a Notice of Intent to Convert pursuant to Section 8.54.050 until twelve months following the
approval of the condominium Conversion Permit or six months following the issuance of a public
report by the Department of Real Estate (DRE), whichever occurs later.
Analysis: Restricting the property owner's ability to raise rent will limit the potential far property
owners to encourage t=nants to vacate early in order to. avoid the noticing requirements of the
Subdivision Map Act and the proposed City of Dublin Co¡¡dominium Conversion Ordinance. Rent
would be heJd in place for a minimum of 6-] 2 months under this provision. The City Council
directed Staff to include this provision in the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
PrDperty Q11'11er's Fl'l'dback: The property owners did not express conc= regarding this specif¡::
provision.
6
tel 1\')
\ IQ, .~!
Fiscallmpact: A se1freporting process would be utilized and II minimal amount of Staff time w~....\';
be required to implement this policy. The property owner would be :required to notifY each tenant of
the limitation on rent increases and provide Staff with a copy of the notice as described in Section
8.54.050.A of the proposed ordinance..
\ \l
D.
Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan
.
Section 8.54.110 of the proposed ordinance requires the Applicant to implement a Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan. The relocation plan shall be prepared by the Applicant and indicate the
Applicant's "commitment to provide tenants with the benefits required by the Condomiruum
Conversion Ordinance. 11Ies6 benefits include financial assistance with moving expenses and an
extension oflease terms for qualified tenants.
Financinl Relocation Agsistance
Section 8.54.110.D of the proposed ordinance requires tbe property owner to provide each tenant
with a payment equal tc 3 months rent to help cove:r moving expenses. The property owner is
œquired to make this payment within 10 days of !be tenant's waiver to purchase their existing unit.
Ana(ysis: The Subdivision Map Act does not require propc:rty ownc:rs to provide relocation
assistance to displaced tenants. Howevc:r, !bere are costs associated with the physical act of moving
aDd setting up new utilities. The payment of moving ex.penses is intended to reduce the financial
burden that is placed on tenants as a result of tbe prop:::rty owner' sdecision to convert and the
tenants' subsequent need to relocate. .
The policy alternatives that were presented to !be City Council on November 16, 2004, included a
recommendation to pay moving expenses equal to 2~months rent within 14-days of relocation.
However, the City Council dir"cted Stafflo require"ª" payment equal to 3·months prior to reJoc:atio!'.. .
This provision has been included in the proposed ordinance as requested by the City Coun::il.
Property Ovmer's Feedback: Concern was raised by the property owners regarding the requirement
to provide financial relocation assistance. Several property OWl:)ers that were present at the meeting
stated that the annual tenant turnover rate was between 50% and 80%. These property owners do
not feel that they should be requin;,d to pay relocation expenses for tenants that would likely mow
regardless of a conversion. They sugg~sted that relocation bel:)efits be limited to longtime tenants.
However, as demonstt'ated by these property owners, as much as 50% of their tenants remain for
more than one year. Even tenants that might plan to move in a given year could be forced to move
early as a result of a conversion. These tenants will incur moving expenses that they might not have
oth.rwise incurred if tbe property was not converted. Many of these residents may not have the
financial resources to pay moving expenses. Therefore, Staff continues to recommend the financial
relocation assistance provision for a11 tenants_
Fiscallmpact: A self reportipg process would be utilized and a minimal amount of Staff time wouid
be required to impJ=ent this policy. The property owner would be required tc notifY each tenant of
their relocation benefits and provid~ Staff with a copy of !be notice as described in Sections 8.54.050
and 8.54.110 of the draft ordinance.
Continued Tenanc:yfor Qualified Tenants
Section 8.54.110.E of the proposed ordinance requires property owners to provide a 12·mouth .
ex.tension of tenancy to all eligible tenants beyond the 180 day period required by the SubdivisiolJ
Map Act (Section 66427.1 (c). This 12·month extension shall be provided if!b('; head ofhollsehoJd
or spouse meets the folJowing eligibility criteria:
7
e
e
e
· Has attained age 62 or older;
· Has a disability as defined by Section 54 of the California Civil Code;
· Is a resident of an inc1usionary housing unit; or .
· Is residing with one or more minor dependent children.
']G
rr~r
G
l\~
Ana~vsis: There is a limited amount of housing that meets the needs of senior, disabled I'Uld 10w-
ÌDcome tenants. For example, a disabled tenant may require an apartment on the ground floor.
Ground floor apartments are harder to find and it may require an extended period of fune to locate
such a unit The Subdivision Map Act requires property owners to give tenants a ISO-day notice to
vacate an apartment prior to tenninating a temaDcy due to a condominium canv¡:¡"sion. However,
] SO-days may not be a. sufficient amount of time for a displaced tenant with special needs to fmd
suitllble replacement housing in Dublin. Similarly, the l2-month ext~ian for families with school
aged children will provide them with flrodbility to schedule their move and potentially avoid moving
during the school year and disrupting the education process. The 12-monthextension inc1uded in
the proposed Condominium. Conversion Ordinance would provide these tenants with additional time
to find housing within the con:ununity al1.d further reduce the potential negative impacts of moving.
The policy alternatives that w¡:¡"e presented to the City Council, included a recommendation to
provide a. 3-year lease extension to terlal1.ts that were seniors, disabled or low ÎDoome (Attachment
9). However, the City Council expressed concern that a 3~year extension may be overly burdensome
to property owners and reMt in discrimination against renting to these tenants. The City Council
rec01I1!nended the 12.roonth extension that is included in the proposed ordinance.
Property Owner's Feedback: The property o~m agreed- that a 3-year lease extension was
burdensoroe and also questioned the need to provide any type oftime extension.
Fiscallmpacr: A minimal amount of Staff time is required to implement this polic:y. The property
owner is required to demonstrate that they have eriteI'ed a binding lease extension or that the tenant
has refused an offer for aIJ extension. The cost of Staff time needed to review this documentation
could be billed to the Applicant on II time and materials basis.
E.
Indusionary Zoning Regulations
Section 8.54.130 of the proposed Condomin.ium Conversion Ordinance treats condomìn.iuTI1
conversions as new residential development projects. As new residential development projects.
these converted properties would be required to comply the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. The
current Inclusio¡¡ary Zoning Regulations require new developments to provide 12.5% of the UJ1its as
aff"ortiable (Section 8.68). However, if the project had complied with the Inch¡sionary Zoning
ReguJations in effect at the time the project was built, the converted project will only be required tel
make up the difference. Thus, if the project has complied with a 5% inelusionary requirement at the
time it was constructed, then the conversion would be required to satisfy the remaining 7.5%
incJusionary obligation under the existing ordinance.
Analysis: The conversion from apartments to condominiums could result in a substantial loss of
market rate and affordable rental units. However, condominiums are often seen as an affordabb
form of homeownership. The conversion of apartments to condominiums will provide the
community with additional affordable ownership opportunities. In addition, the provision to require
converted propcrties to conform to the Inelusionary Zoning Regulations will make 12.5% of th"
units affordable to a segment of the market that might not otherwise be able ..to purchase a
condominium unit.
The policy alternatives that weœ presented to the City Council, inc1uded a recommendation to
8
[\ c¡, \\S
require converted properties to comply with current Inclusionary Zoriing Regulations. Tw....;Üy
CouncjJ directed Staff to include this provision in the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance. .
Property Owner's Feedback: Staff discussed this provision with the property owners at the meeting e
on December g". The property owner's comments were limited to receiving credit for the portion of
¡my affordable obligation that has already been met.
Fi:.>cal Al1a~ysis: A substantial amount of Staff time could be required to implement this policy if a
large number of units are permitted to convert at one time. How~er, this Staff'time CQuld be bil1ed
to the aþplicant on a time and materials basis.
F. Tenant's Right to Purchase Units
The proposed ordiDance (Secticn 8.54.090.B) requires property owners to provide tenants Jiving in
inelusionary units with an exclusive right to contract for the purchase of the unit o¡:çupied by the
tenant at the sales price set forth in the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations based on the tenant's
annual household income.
Analysis: The Subdivision Map Act requires property own!m to provide tenants with an exclusive
right to contract for the purchase of their existing unit upon the same terms and conditions that such
unit will initially be offered to the general public or on terms more favorable to the t=t.
However, the Subdivision Map Act does not address inelusionary units. The provisions of the
proposed Condominium Conversion Ordimmee will provide tenants that reside in inc1usionary units
with the same preferential treatment that market rate tenants r(%:eive. The purchase price would be
based on the teUlllt's household income in accordlllce with the Inclusionary Zoni1Jg Regulations
(Section 8.68). This could enable tenants that rent affordable units to purchase their existing unit at _
an affordab! e purchase price and avoid being displaCed by the conversion. ..
The policy alternatives that were presented to tbeCity Co unci] on November 16, 2004, included a
recommendation to extend the right to purchase to inclusionary tenants at a price consistent with the
lnclusiona.ry Zoning Ordinance. The City Council directed Staff to include this provision in the
proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Property Owner '8 Feedbaá: Staff discussed this provision with tht': property owners at the meeting
on December 9'". The property owners did not provide .comments to Staff regarding changes to this
provision.
Fiscal Ana(vsis: A substantial amount of Staff time could be required to implement this policy if a
large number of units are permitted to convert at one time. However, this Staff time could be bil1ed
to the applicant on a time and materials basis.
G. Building Code Requirements
Section 8.54.080 of the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance requires converted units to
meet the building code requirements in ¡,ffeet at the time of constnlction. Any r"trofitting or
remodeling wcrk would be r<:!quired to meet current building code requirements in effect at the time
that building permits were issued. Converted units would also be required to meet the curreDt
Housing Code as defined by the Dublin Municipal Code.
Analysis: Many existing r~sidemtial dwellings, includi¡¡g apartments, withi¡¡ th~ City of Dublin wen~ e
built prior to the =ent building code requirements. These dweIHngs are considered safe and
inhabitabJe structures. Therefore, the City does not typically require costly retrofitting of these
9
·
·
·
7'2 ~.~
properties to bring them \lp to current b\lilding code reqv.ir=ents. Conversion 01 ~lSf!'hg
a.partments to condotniniums does not substantially change the use of theBe structures in a way that
would make them less safe or inhabitable. Howev/':r, any remodeling or retro fltting work that the
property owner pmonns would be required to meet CUITent building code requirements. Housing
Code provides basic safety req\lin:ments. Existing apartments are required to meet these cum:nt
Housing Code r~qllir=ents. Convme:d units wou1d be required to conform to the housing code at
the time of conversion.
'.\I.~.
" I
The: City Council discussed this policy component at the city Council he:aring on November 16,
2004. The City Counci1 directed Staff to include in the ordinance a provision that requires buildings
to be in confonnanc~ with the Building Code at th~ time that th~ units were constructed. Staff
discussed this provision with the property .owners.
Property Owner's Feedback' The 'property owners did not express concern with this provis:ion.
Fiscal Impact: Non~. The ordinance requires the property owner to provide the City with a report
on the condition of each stnlcture and any vllriation in th~ code reqllirements. The cost for a City
inspector to review the property and the report would be billed to the property owner on a time and
materials basis as part of the cost for a Condominium Conversion P=it. The property owner
would be required to obtain a building permit for retrofitting work. The cost ofbllilding inspections
is included in the building pennit fees. .
H.
Site Deyelopment Review
, -
Section 8.54~060 of the proposed Condominium Conversion ordinance requi~s Site Development
Review (SDR) conclllTent with a request to convert to condominiums. The SDR will allow the City
to evaJuate the physical appearance of the property and require work to refurbish and restore the
proj~ct as necessary to achieve a high degree of appearance, qW\lity and safety.
'0';".
Ana/pi:;: A Condominium Map is required in order to convert an existing apartment complex to
condominiums. However, the map process does Dot provide a mechanism to evaJuate the physical
appearance of a propoiy. For example, th.e City could receive an application to convert an ex.isting
apartment complex with d~fe;Tn~¡d ITIaintenanc~ that creates an eyesore: within the community. This
deferred maintenance could include external painting and landscape maintenance to repair sparse or
overgrown landscaping. The SDR permit will provide the Planning Commission with a mechanism
to evaluate the physical appearance of the property and impose conditions that require r=edia! work
to maiptain the visual appearance of the City of Dub1in..
Staff presented this policy alternative to the City Council for consid&"ation. The City Council
directed Staff to include a provision requiring a Site Development Review p=it in this ordinance.
Property Owner's Feedback: The property owners raised concern that the Site Development
Review process might provide the City with th~ arbitrary power to make modifications beyond
simply rehabilitating the property. However, the language in the proposed ordinance limits the
City's evaluation to maintc:nance and confonmm.ce with prior site and architectural approvals. The
intent of this provision is not to reopen full site development review but simply to ensure that the
property remains in conformance with existing approvals.
Fii>ca/lmpact: Community Development Department Staff time would be req\lired to perform a
physical inspection of the property and review proposed improvements. However, the cost of this
review would be included in the application fee for a Condominium Conversion Permit.
10
"1 " ì
"'7 ,,'
,)
\\'l
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The California Envirol11l1entaJ Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City
epvirol11l1ental regulations require that cena.in projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that
A'lvironmental documents be prepared. This project has been found to be exempt from the California
~Dvironmental Q1Jality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Se¡;tion 15061 (b)(3), because it can
be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed changes to the Municipal Code will
have a significant effect on the environment.
CONCLUSION:
ApartJm:nt units provide a type of housing that is a key to a healthy diversity of housing stock in tho;>
community. Staff believes that tho;> conversion of one or two of the City's apartment co="Unities could
have a major impact on the diversity of the City's housing stock in that it would remove from the market a
significant per¡;entage of the existing rental units. In consideration of the potential impacts Staff has
prepared the attached Condominium Conversion Ordinance. The proposed ordinance would regulate the
conversion of rental apartments to for-sale condominiums and mitigate relocation impacts to ter:IIUlts.
As p~viously di.sc:u.ssed, Staff' has prepared two alternative versions of the Condominium Conversion
Ordinance for consideration by the Planning Commission (Attachments 2·5). Attachments 2 and 3
contaip a provision that would make a project with a condDminium map subject to the ordinance if th~
Department of Real Estate (DRE) has not isS1Jed a public report. Attachment 2 is an urgency ordinance
IIDd Attachment 3 is a nOD urgency ordinance. Attachments 4 and 5 are iDc1uded ,should the Planning
Commission decide to recommend adoption of an ordinance that exempts projects with condominium
maps regardless of whether or¡¡ot the DRE has issued a public report. Attachment 4 is an urgency
Drdinanee and Attachment 5 is a non urgency ordinance.
.aff recommends that the Planrring Commission rooommend to the-ÇityCo.uncil adoption Df both an
gency ordinance and a non urgency ordinance (Attachments 2 and 3 or Attachments 4 and 5). The
m-gencyordinanc:e w01Jld take effect immediately and ensure that the ordinance is in effect before the Cii"y
takes a.ctionon the current subdivision applications for condominium conversions. The non urgency
ordinance will provide the City with a backup ordinance in the event that the urgenoy ordinance is
chaJlenged.
RJ3;COMMENDA nON:
Staff recommends that the Planrring Commission: 1) open public hearing; 2) receive Staff presenmtion; 3)
question Staff and the p1Jblic; 4) close the public hearing and deliberate; 5) adopt a resolution (Attachmem
1) recommending that the City Council adopt a resolution adopting an ordinance reg¡¡lating the
conversion of existing apartments in the City to condominiums.
.
Cì:\FA#'J.004\ù4-044 Copdo C[]nvc:r!õìon ZOA \pr:stI.] ]r05,doc
11
'7'-1 o-b \ \ 'î
RESOLUTION NO. 05-0Z
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
.
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE REGULATING
THE CONVERSION OF EXISTING APARTMENTS IN THE CITY TO CONDOMINIUMS
(P A 04-044 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE)
WHEREAS, State law provides that cities have the responsibility to use the powers vested in
them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for the
housing needs of all economic segments of the comro.unity; and
WHEREAS, at the local level, cities implement state housing law policies through the adoption of
the Housing Elements of their General Plans, which elements are reviewed and approved by the state's
Department of Housing and Comro.unity Development ("BCD"); and
WHEREAS, among other things, Housing Elements must contain a statement of the community's
goals, objeétives and policies related to the maintenance, preservation, in1provement, and development of
.. housing alÓ~g with an action program to implement these goals, objectives and poLicies; and
WHEREAS, the City's 1990 Housing Element included several policies that encouraged and
suggested actions to ensure the availability of rental housing, including a policy that required the.
.. . .. monitoring of the availability of rental housing and, if monitoring disclosed that it.was necessary, the .
. .::- enactment of a condominium-conversion ordinance; and
..^",".
,
WHEREAS, in accordance with state housing law, the City adopted its 1999-2006 Housing
E1ement ("the Current Housing Element") in JUDe 2003, and it was certified by HCD on July 11,2003;
and
WHEREAS, the Current Housing Element eliminated the program that required the monitoring of
the availability of rental housing and potential enactment of condominium-conversion ordinance,
reasoning that there was little likelihood that existing rental housing property owners wouJd convert their
properties to condominiums due to the strong demand for rental housing in Dublin and the development
of condominiums (including 1396 condominium units currently under construction) to satisfy th.e demand
for condominiums; and
WHEREAS, the Current Housing Element further indicated that the City wouJd assess the need
for a condominium-conversion ordinance each time it updates the Housing Element if the need arises;
and
WHEREAS, since the adoption of the Current Housing Element, conditions in th.e housing market
have changed markedly, and the Community Development Department has noted that the incidence of
condominium-conversion projects in other communities is increasing; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin believes that the following market conditions have led to the .
increase in proposals to convert existing multi-family rental projects to condominiums:
ATTACHMENT 7
1'3 ~ò II.')
,
a. The higher vacancy rates for apartments as more and more people are able to qualifY
for loans for homes due to historically low interest rates;
.
b. The increased market for condominiums in the area; and
c. The ability of the property owner to maximize profit by selling units rather than renting
them.
WHEREAS, in the past ten years, the City has developed over 1500 residential apartment units
for an overall total of approximately 3,172 units throughout the City. These units and the other rental
units in the provide a type of housing that is one of the keys to providing for the housing ne~ds of all
economic segments of the community; and
WHEREAS, rental units provide housing for persons in all income levels, and they are a valuable
tool for providing workforce housing; and
WHEREAS, the conversion of one or two of the City's apartment communities could have a
major i1npact on the City's housing market, in that it would remove from the market a significant
percentage of the existing rental units; and
WHEREAS, if units are sold rather than rented, the units would no longer be available to a
segment of the community that is not in a position to purchase such units; and
WHEREAS, the-loss of these units would likely decrease the vacáncy rate and accordingly tend to
increase rents, and this would tend to further exacerbate the City's shortage of affordable rental units; and
. WHEREAS,· conversion of apartm. ents to condominiums could result in displacing e¡cisting
enants; and ' . ," ~
WHEREAS, tenant relocations that result ITomconversion of apartments to condominiums could
place a financial burden on displaced tenants; and
WHEREAS, there is a limited amount of housing that meets the needs of senior, disabled and
10WHincome tenants; and
WHEREAS, the Subdivision Map Act does not provide a mechanism to evaluate the physical
appearance of a property; and
WHEREAS, the City could receive an application to convert an existing apartment complex with
deferred maintenance that creates an eyesore within the community; and
WHERE AS, a Site Development Review pennit would allow the City to evaluate the physical
appearance of the property and require work to refurbish and restore the project as necessary to achieve Ii
high degree of appearance, quality and safety; and
WHEREAS, due to these changes in the marketplace and their potential consequences on the
City's ability to provide for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community, the
Community Development Department has been considering the development of a condominium-
conversion ordinance; and
. WHEREAS, the approval of the conversion of existing residential apartment units to
condominiums or other fonns of ownership that permit the units to be sold individually, during the period
2
1~
..,1
. \,)
\\"\
in which the City has been developing a condominium-conversion ordinance, could frustrate the City's
efforts at providing for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community, because it wouJd
result in the removal of units from the City's inventory ofrental units available to those at lower income
levels and because it would tend to increase the rents of those rental units that rernam; and .
WHEREAS, to prevent these goals ITom being ftustrated, the City Council adopted Resolution
181-04 to initiate proceedings to adopt a condominium-conversion ordinance and to place potential
subdividers on notice pursuant to Government Code section 66474.2 of the City's intent to adopt a
condominium-conversion ordinance, the effect of which will be to pennit the City to apply the
condominium-conversion ordinancè if it is in effect on the date the City approves or disapproves the
tentative map.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has developed a condominium-
conversion ordinance to regulate the conversion of apartments to for sale condominiums and mitigate th.e
impacts to residents that are displaced by conversion; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said Condominium Conversion
Ordinance on January II, 2005, for which proper Dotice was given in accordance with California State Law;
and .
WHEREAS, the ordinance is intended to comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Map
Act, regarding the provision and regulation of converting apartments to for sale condominiums and the
Housing Element (1999~2006) of the Dublin General. Plan, related to maintaining a diversity oJ housing
.. stock in the City ofDubliñ; and
.;c
WHEREAS, the Planning CommissioD did hold a properly noticed public hearing on this project
.: on January 11,2005, and did recommend Ordinance xx-os to the City Council to regulate condominium ..
conversions as stated in tJ:íe OrdiÏrnnce; and ...
.......:::¡;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at its January 11,2005, meeting did hear and use its
independent judgment and consider all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set
forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Dublin Planning Commission does
hereby fin.d that, the ordinance is consistent with the Subdivision Map Act, General Plan Housing Elernen:
and all applicable Specific Plans; and, this ordinance is not a "project" within the meaning of Section
15378 ofthe State CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change in the
environment, directly or ultimately; and, recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinance to
regulate the conversion of apartments to coudominiums in accordance with the Ordinance in Attachments
2 and 3 of the Staff Report for P A 04-044.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of January 2005.
AYES:
Cm. Schaub, Biddle, Wehrenberg, and King
NOES:
ABSENT:
.
ABSTAIN:
3
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
·
Planning Manager
·
·
4
11 t'~ \\q
c.Pfanning Commission 5Winutes
lß 6'1:, \4
CALL TO ORDER
.
·
A regular meeting of the Oty of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, January 11, 2005, in
the Council Chambers located at 100 Ovic Plaza. Chair called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioner King; Jeri Ram, Planning Manager; Jeff Baker, Associate Planner, Charity
Wagner, Associate Planner; Kristi Bascom, Senior Planner; Kay Keck, Oty Clerk; and Maria Carrasco,
Recording Secretary.
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA
Jeri Ram, Plmning Marmger stated there are revisions to the agenda and Oral Conununicatiol1s will be
addressed before the Minutes of the previous meeting. She introduced Mayor Lockhart
ORAL COMMUNICATION -
Mayor Lockhart welcomed the three new Plarm:ing Commissioners and thanked Cm King for his
continued service. She explained to the Commissioners that they will be participating in something that
is very important to the conununity. There will be a lot of opportunities to,lookat a variety of projects -
and concepts on how to improve the community. She looks forward to the Commission s observations,
ideas and communicating to the Council their vision for the community. She tharù<:ed them for
volunteering and serving the community in this capacity.
6.1 Swearing In of New Planning Commissioners
·
Ms. Ram introduced Kay Keck, Oty Clerk.
Kay Keck, Oty Oerk swore in the new Planning ConuniBsioners - Bill Schaub, Donald Biddle, and
Doreen Wehrenberg.
6.2 Election of Officers for Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson
Ms. Ram explained that nominations for Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson always take pla.ce at the first
meeting in January. She opened up the meeting for nominations for Chairperson.
On motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. Wehrenber:g by a unanimous vote, the Planning
Commission elected Cm. Schaub as Chairperson.
Ms. Ram asked o.air Schaub to continue with the election for Vice Chairperson.
ChaiT Schaub entertairled a motion for a Vice OlaiTperson.
On motion by Cm. Wehrenberg, 2"" by Chair Schaub and by unanimous vote, the Planning Commission
elected em. Biddle as Vice Chairperson.
·
Chair Schaub thanked the members of the audience for their patience.
<Pú",nr.g CmnmúSÌOll
<1{(!{JuÚlr !M.utiJt¡J
I
ATTACHMENT qn~ryll,zQ!)5
'10 e'6 W:~
Ms. Ram stated that if anyone wishes to speak on any of the items on the agenda there are blue speaKer
forms located on the table under the General Plan map.
Ms. Ram took another roll call.
e Present Commissioner's Wehrenberg; Biddle; Kmg; and Chairperson Schaub.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS - The minutes of the previous Pla1mir1g Commission Meeting
were continued to the January 25, 2005 meeting.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.1 P A 04-058 Kids Learning Center - Conditional Use Permit for a Large Family Daycare
The proposed project is a request for a Conditional Use Permit application for a large
f=rily daycare in a single-family home located at 7029 Tory Court in Dublin. The
applicant currently operates a small family daycare at this location and proposes to
expand the operation. The property is zoned R-1 Single-Family Residential and the
General Plan designation is Single-Family Residential. Large family daycare homes (up to
14 children) are permitted ÍJ:1 this zoning district upon approval of a Conditional Use
Permit.
Chair Schaub opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Charity Wagner, Associate Plarmer presented the staff report and explained that the Applicant is
. requesting approvaJ of a Conditional Use Permit for a Large Family Daycare (up to 14 children) in a
single-family home located at 7029 Tory Court. The standard operating hours for the daycare"are
Monday- Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. The Large Family baycare will have two full-time
employees consisting of the Applicant and her daughter-in-law. As indicated in the attached written
statement, the Applicant wants to increase the size of the day care to allow for her to care for her
grandchildren and to help meet the need for infant care in the conununity. The Applicant intends to care
for up to 4 infants and 6 to 8 toddlers. The City has not received any complaints regarding the existing
daycare operation.
Staff visited the site and determined that noise impacts to surrounding residences would be rninU.ruJ.
The project site is an interior lot surrounded by single-family homes. The City's Traffic Engineer
determined that the traffic irrtpacts of the proposed Large Family Daycare home would be minimal and
that nO Traffic Impact Fee is required. Pick up and dTOp off times will be primarily in the morning and
evening hours, but the number of children being served is few enough that there should not be a great
concentration of vehicles to and from the house at any particular time. Condition 4 states that outside
activities are restricted from taking place before 9:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m.
Per the City's Parking Ordinance, a daycare facility of this size is required to provide seven (7) off"street
parking spaces. Two (2) parking spaces are reserved for the home, one (1) space is reserved for the
employee, and four (4) parking spaces based on the number of students the daycare will serve. This
project site has four (4) off-street parking spaces: two (2) spaces in the garage and two (2) spaces in the
driveway, resulting in a shortage of three (3) off-street parking spaces.
eThe Applicant will utiliÚ the parking spaces ÍJ:1 the garage and the employee (daughter-in-law) will use
one of the parking spaces in the driveway. There is one parking space in the driveway and two (2) on-
street parking spaces available in front of the house for parents to use when they are dropping off and
11'(,mttÛl{/ Co",,,,#siI>tt 2 JattU4ry 11, 2005
lJ{r¡¡ufar ;M..ÛTI{J
qs 6b
picking up their children. Parking studies have been prepared for previous Large Family Da.yc<""
Conditional Use Permits. These parking studies have demonstrated that it takes approximately six (6)
minutes to drop-off or pick-up a child. Because of staggered drop-off and pick-up times, the
combination of available on-street and off-street parking should be sufficient to serve the proposed
daycare use.
f\t1
.
Condition 6 has been included in the resolution and requires the operator to subnrit a copy of the State of
California Department of Social Services License Permit for the operation of a Large Fanrily Daycare
Home for verification purposes, prior to establishment of the use.
Ms. Wagner explained that notices were sent to property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project
to advise them of this request for a Conditional Use Permit Staff received an email and a phone call
from neighbors that are in favor of the project.
Staff believes that the proposed Large Family Daycare Home would have limited impacts to the
surrounding neighborhood regarding noise, traffic, and parking. The facility will be properly licensed,
and no complaints have been received about the existing Small Daycare Home that would lead Staff to
believe that expanding the use would be problematic. She concluded her presentation.
Roy Stanley, Applicant stated he was available to answer any questions the Plannmg Commission may
have.
em. Wehrenberg asked Mr. Stanley if he was in agreement with the conditions of approval and Stafr s
.c:' recommendation.
" Mr. Stanley responded yes.
" Chair Schaub asked Mr. Stanley how long they öperat~ their CUITent daycare.
.
, -,,~
..",,';'
",;;~ Mr. Stanley stated they have operated their CUITent daycare on and off since 1975. He explained that his
wife operated a daycare when their children were little as well as teaching in preschool for about 10
years.
Chair Schaub clarified that the approval of the daycare is for a permit in land use.
Mr. Stanley stated he understood that.
Chair Schaub asked if there were any other speakers on the issue. Hearing none he closed the public
hearing and asked for a motion.
Cm. Biddle stated that the Staciey' $ have demonstrated they have operated a successful daycare. The
aty has not received any complaints from SUIrounding property owners and there is a need for
daycares in the co¡mnw;¡ity.
Cm. Wehrenberg stated that she reviewed the site and was concerned about the parking. Mter
reviewing the site she felt there was adequate parking and it appears to be a win-win situation.
Chair Schaub asked for a motion.
On motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. Wehrenberg, by a vote of 4-0, the Plannmg Commission e
unanimously adopted
tFfannirtg Commi..ts:io-n.
l1iJo·"'r9>(utma
3
JanlliJty 11, 2Q05
<1t (b í\'1
RESOLUTION NO. 05-01
.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A REQUEST FOR P A ü4-058.KIDS LEARNING HOME DAY CARE CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A LARGE FAMILY DAYCARE HOME
AT 7029 TORY COURT
8.2 P A 04-Q44. Condo Conversion Ordinance - Amendment lòthe r>u.blin Municipal Code
Resolution recommending that tÌ)e City COl.U\çil adopt an ordinance regulating the
conversion of existing residential apartment units heIdin a single ownership, in whatever
from, to condominiums .or other forms of ownership that permit the units to be sold
individually. The ordinance would provide criteria for the Planning Commission to
regulate, restrict and insome c<wes, prohibit the future conversion of existirlg residential
apartment units; evaluate the physicaiappearançe of the pro'peiiy being cOnverted; and,
mitigate the impacts to tenants that are displaced by such a conversion. .
Chair Schaub opened the public hearing and asked for the staff repOrt.
Jeff Baker, Associate Planner presented the staff report and explained that the projectis for a
proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance tegulatingthe conversion of existing residential
apartment units held in a single ownership, in whateverform, to condo~Wl1S or other forms of
ownership that permit the units to be Bold individually. The ordiJ:ulnce would provide criteria for the
ePlarming Commission to regulate, restrict andinsome cases, prohibit the future conversion 9f e>;isti+lg
residential apartment units; evaluate the physical appearance of the property being converted; and,
mitigate the imp¡tcts to tenants that are displaced by such.a conversion.-
Mr. Baker stated that state law provides that cities have a responsibility to facilitate the development and
make provisions for housing to meet the needs all economic segments of the community. Cities
implement housing law policies through the adoption of the General Plan HouSing Element. The
Housing Element for the City of Dublin contains sta.tements of goals, objectives and policies related to
the maintenance, preservation and development of housing, The =rentHousing Element requires the
City to assess the need for a condominium conversion ordinance with eåch updated housing element.
Apartment units provide a type of housing that is a key to a healthy diversity of housing stoék in the
community. Apartments provide housing for all levels of affordability in the community ahd are a
valuable tool for providing work forceho\rsing. Staff believes that the conversion of one or two of the
City's apartment communities could have a major i~pact On the diversity of the City's housing stock in
that it would remove from the market a significant percentage of the existing rental units.. If sold rather
than rented, the units would no longer be available to' a segment of the community that is [lot in a
position to purchase such units. In addition, the loss of these units would likely decrease. the vacancy
rate, may increase rents, and this may in tu.m further exacerbate the City's shortage of affordable rental
units. This might cause a lasting imbalance in the diversity of housing stock in theCity.
In the past seven months, Staff hasr.eceived inquiries from several existingapartinentowne¡'s indicating
.their . intent to file subdivision documents to convert their projects to· cándominiu:ìns· The City is
currently processing subdivision applications to convert the fdllowing apartment projects to for-sale
condominiulIlS.
!l'f4nniJJg O>mmi.<si<m
'R.'O"¡,,,,*mmg
4
Jan""ryH, 2005
Current Subdivision Applications
Iron Horse Trail Apartments (Dougherty Road) ~
Archstone - Emerald Park Apartments (Hacienda Drive)-
Total
"";-"O¡
'"-c, ,
117 units
324 units
441 Units
On September 7, 2004, the City Council adopted a Resolution (Resolution #181-04) initiating proceedings
to adopt an ordinance regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the City to for-sale
condominiums. Staff studied the various mechanisms for regulating condominium conversions. This
Study included a complete review of the Subdivision Map Act, City of Dublin General Plan Housing
Element and Condominium Conversion Ordinances from different cities throughout California,
includiTIg the cities of Livermore and Walnut Creek. Based on tills Study, Staff developed a series of
policy alternatives for the City Council to consider. On November 16, 2004, Staff presented these policy
alternatives to the City Council. The City Council provided Staff with direction regarding the
development of the proposed Condominium Conversion OrdÌl:lanCe. The City Council furth.er directed
Staff to hold a meetirlg with the owners of apartments within the City of Dublin in order to inform them
of these policy recommendations and solicit their conunents. On December 9, 2004, Staff held a meeting
with these property owners and other interested parties. Staff utilized the feedback received at tills
meeting to further develop the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
In developing the ordinance, Staff developed a list of policy goals based on the General Plan Housing
Element and the resolution that initiated the proceedings to adopt an ordinance,
1.
~2.
;··'3.
;' 4,
..,; 5.
Maintb.in supply of affordable & market rate rental housing.
Provia'e balance of ownership and rental housing.
Establish criteria for conversion of exiBtiIlg multi-family rental housing.
Reduce impact of conversion on residents in rental housing.
Ensure converted housing has high degree of appearance.
,.
In consideration of the potential impacts from conversion Staff has prepared a Condominium
Conversion Ordinance to regulate the conversion of rental apartments to for-sale condominiums.
Mr. Baker explained in detail each of the key components of the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance as follows:
· Application of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance
· Linritations on Conversions
· Limitations on Rent Increases
· Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan
· Indusionary Zoning Regulations
· Tenant's Right to Purchase Units
· Building Code Requirements
· Site Development Review
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Urgency Condominium Conversion
Ordinance to ensure that it is in effect before the City takes action on the current subdivision applications
(Attachment 20r 4). Approval of an ordinance typically requires two readings before th.e City Council
and then takes effect 30-days following the second reading. However, the City Council may cause the
Ordinance to take effect immediately by adoptiIlg it as an mgency ordinance if the City Council
deternrines that the conversion of these apartments to condoIniniums might frustrate the City's goal and
StIlte law obligation to adequately provide for the housing needs of all economic segments of the
corrunurrity. There is the potential that the urgency ordirlance could be challenged. Therefore, Staff
œl4nniT¥! Cammissiltn.
<1I§¡¡ufm" 'M"'&to
5
Jan""ry 11, 20a5
".\ '\.\Ci"
"8 I
·
·
·
C~!·""j
v.) os
recommends that the aty Council also adopt a non urgency CondomIDium Conversion Ordinance
(Attachmept3 or 5). The non urgetlcy ordinance will provide the aty with a backup ordina:oce in the
evept that the urgency ordinaPce is challenged.
. Staff believes that the conversion of one or two of the Oty's apartment commurrities could have a major
impact on the diversity of the Oty's housing stock in that it would remove from the market asigni£icant
percentage of the existing rental urrits. In consideration of the potetltial impacts Staff has prepared the
attached Condominium Conversion Ordinance. The proposed ordinance would regulate the conversion
of rental apartments to for-sale condominiums and n1itigate relocation impacts to tenants.
H'1
As. previou.Jy discussed, Staff has prepared two alternative versions of the CondomIDium Conversion
Ordinance for consideration by the Planning Commission (AttachD:lE'nts 2-5). Attachments 2 and 3
contain a provision that would make a project with a condominium map subject to the ordinar>ce if the
Departmetlt of Real Estate (DRE) has not i';sued a public report. Attachment 2 i'; an urgency ordinance
and Attachment 3 i'; a non urgency ordinance. Also there i'; a provision to make all projects with 20 or
more rental units subject to the Condominium Conversion Ordinar>ce which is consistent with the
threshold that has been established for the existing Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. Attachments 4 and
5 are iT1cluded should the Plaruting Commission decide to recommend adoption of ar> ordinance that
exempts projects with condominium maps regardless of whether or not the DRE has issued a public
report.
Staff has received a letter from. the law firm of Hmma & VanAtta in opposition to the Condo. Conversion
Ordinar>ce which would impose additional regulations on buildings that have already been approved as
condominium projects when irritially constructed and that had receivedsubdivisionapptovals from the
City as condomIDium projects upder the Subdivision Map Act.
. Staff recommends that the Pla.ru1ing Commission recommend to the aty Coupcil adoption of both an
urgency ordinance and a nor¡ urgericy ordinance (Attachmepts 2 and 3 or Attachments. 4 and 5). The
urgency ordinance would take effect immediately and ensure that the ordinance is in effect before the
City takes action on the currentsubdivision applications for condominium conversions. The .non
urgency ordinance will provide the Oty with a backup ordinance in the event that the urgency
ordinance is challenged. He stated he was available for any questions the Commission may have.
Cm. King asked what the distirlction is with the combined ordinances, attachments 2 and 3 opposed to
attachments 4 and 5.
Mr. Baker stated that attachments 2 and 3 are a pair an.d would make existing projects with condo maps
to subject to the ordinance if they do not have a public report from the Department of Real Estate.
em. King asked about the ordinances which are attachments 4 and 5.
Mr. Baker stated that attachments 4 and 5 would make existing projects with condo map. exempt from
the ordinance.
Cm. King asked Staff if they are sure the statement on pagE' 4 is correct which states that State law
providE's that omy the Public Report vests the building owners' rights to sell the units individually.
Kit Faubion, Oty Attorney explained that the City Attomey's office reviewed a number of casE'S that
_ have addressed the role and naturE' of a condo conversion ordinance. She stated that they believe thE'
,. statement at the bottom of page 4 is accuratE'.
œú",nj,¥! Com""'.tilm
'1I.19:Wr !Muti,¥!
6
January 11, 20tl5
em. Biddle asked for darification on what is a condo map.
(~
G'\
" ,
W1
Ms. Faubion stated that a condominium map is a tentative map under the Subdivision Map Act for
condominium purposes. The Subdivision Map Act is regulated by the State. The process of establishing
a condominium is that a tentative map is filed with the City which allows multiple ownership .
opportunities. The map is usually labeled tentative map for condominium purposes, which is usually
called a condo map for ease of reference. The City will process it according to its subdivision regulatiOr\s
and once the City approves it, then it goes on to the State process. The map is processed tluou.gh the
City jn accordaI1ce with subdivision regulations. The applicant then must file a request for a. public
report wit the Department of Real Estate.
Crn. Biddle asked what the State Real Estate Report entails.
Ms. Faubior\ stated she does not mow exactly what the document contaills but it basically identifies the
ownership and it is necessary to be issued to the DRE before a property can be sold. The City goes
through its process, the applicaI1t goes through a process before it is a final condominium map then it
goes on to the State. Until the final report is issued, the developer cannot sell the units.
Crn. Biddle asked if the process by the State and the process by the City could run concurrently or are
they sequential.
Ms. Faubiou.responded they would be sequential; the City first than the State.
-
,.. Chair Schaub asked whether the 1,119 units that do have condo maps were approved by the City to be
_ condominiums.
.¡~
.
." Mr. Baker stated yes.
. .~. CIWr Schaub stated there are 1,119 ¡rnits that are in the rental =ket today which would not be part of
.,..:....:< the rental market if they would have been sold as condos.
Mr. Baker said that additional units could have been constructed it those units were not in the market as
rental units.
ern. Biddle asked Staff if they know when those condo maps were applied for.
Mr. Baker said to his knowledge the condo maps were done when the units were constructed which has
been roughly over the last 10 to 12 years.
em. Biddle asked if there was any effort wade to get the report from the State.
Mr. Baker stated the report has a life to it which could be renewed, but many property owners would not
have that report if they were holding properties as rental units.
Cm. Wehrenberg asked for clarification on.the number of units being constructed that are designated
rentals.
Mr. Baker stated that at this time there are 15,447 units and 25% were for rental units. Approximately
600 of those units are in the construction stage.
.
Chair Schaub called on Mr. Rafanelli who wished to speak on the itern.
pw.ning CmttrÍ.;Wm
qqg"rar :MMri"ll
7
January 11, 200.'
CiS L'\ \ \t\
I,) ),
ROr\ Nahas, 1 Bates Boulevard, Orinda stated he would like to speak before his partner Mr. Rafanelli. He
explairled that they have developed and oWl\edproperty in Dublin since 1984. He stated that of the
1,119 units spoken of they have built 1,083. He stated that the ordirumce and the presentation is
edismgenuous. Effectively this ordinance is a ban on condominium conversions and not an ordinance to
regulate them. The current ratio of rentals in the City of Dublin is.about 25% which have not all been
built. Until that ratio rises to 30% no conversions would be allowed. He asked what problem is this
ordinance trying to fix. He would argue that conversions are necessary and desirable at this momer\t in
the housing market. The price of for-sale housing is soaring at 25% a year and rents on rental housing
have been falling since 2001. The artificial constraint on the movement of rental UIJits into for-sale
housing does not work. Such restrictions simply transfer costs-from one person to another. San
Francisco has been doing it for years and it has the most umifordable rental housing as well as for-sale
housing. He stated that there is no evidence that the 30%ratio taken from the housing element has any
meaning at all with regard to theaffordability or the availability of rental housing. When the Housing
Elemerlt was adopted the ratio was slightly more than 30% and because it was slightly more than 30% in
theory condominium conversions at that time would have been allowed. He stated that when the
Housing Element was adopted in 2000 the average vacancy rate for the aparhnents they own and
manage was less than 3 % and rents were rising at over 6 % a year; both indicating that there WaS a
shortage of rental housing. In. 2004, rental housing is only 25% of the housing stock so in theory under
this ordinance, no one would be allowed to convert an aparhnent. He continued to state that the
vacancy rates in their apartments have exceeded 7% and rents have been falling every year since 2001
which is an indicator that there is an excess of rental housing in this market. . Convetsionwould have
been allowed when there is a shortage of apartments and baIIDed when there is a surplus of a.parb.n.ents.
He stated that the staff reports indicates there are minima1 fiscal impacts but he would argue that there
are huge fiscal impacts for the Dublin tax payers. Converting an aparhnent to a for-sale unit is a tax
win.dfall for the City, the County and the School District. Real Estate Tax receipt upon sales will double
eor triple. The two projects that Staff is anxious to get an urgency ordinance adopted to stop these
projects from cOr\verting could contribute an additional $800,000 a year in tax reveriues to the City, the
County and the School District. There is a proper role for the City in encouraging affordable housing -
the City could reduce its fees. In regard to conversions the City could focus on tluee things. There
should be a review of the quality and condition of common improvements, an orderly =keting plan
with adequate notice to tenants, and disabled tenants and occupants of below market rate units need to
be protected. The City should not transfer its obligation for affordable housing onto the back of
apartment owners.
Mark Rafenelli, 1 Bates Boulevard, Orinda stated he disagrees with the City Attorney. He stated that
attempting to apply this ordinance to existing condominiums is not consistent with California law. They
processed 1,083 units as condominiums and built the UIJits as condominiums. They recorded final
Bubdivisionmaps and condomin.ium maps on all the units. The City Staff recommendation is relyillg
upon one case illvolving the City of West Hollywood where an OWl\er filed a subdivision map
converting existing apartments to condominiums prior to the incorporation of the City of West
Hollywood. The individual obtained a public report from the Department of Real Estate and let it lapse
and the appellate court held that by letting that lapse they could impose new conditions. Staff's
recommendation would be contrary to all vesting rights and all California law on vesting rights. They
have processed their units as condominiums and built them as condomin.iums. Staff acknowledges that
applying a condominium conversion ordinance to a1Teady mapped units has not been done in Northern
California but is common in Southern California. They are not aware of any jurisdiction other than West
Hollywood but would like to know if any other jurisdiction has attempted this approach. Applyin.g this
.ordinance to existing condominiUIrlS will generate a number of legal challenges. If the City were to
adopt the ordinance as recornlllended it would imply that the City could go back and change the terms
and conditions on any approval as long as the developer has not obtaÍIled their final public report from
tJ?{annin.g C01tr.mis.ri011.
~ukrfM""';.g
8
Jan""ry 11. 2005
.. '-'blc;> 6'/ If\
the Department of Real Estate. A public report is required to sell the units and IlOt a discretiorurry - D
approval. It is guaranteed if you comply with disclosure requirements, reserve requirements and the
format for the coIlditions, coveIlants and restrictioI1S requiTed by the State, The proposed ordinance
would damage Dublin's reputatioIl for fairness and reasol1abler¡ess. Dublin has always been perceived
to have rigorous and fair development standards. The development goal$ of the City have always been .
to achieve the highest standard of quality. He stated they did Ilot receive any notice to participate ÌI\ the
discussion of this proposed ordinance. They heard about it from another property owner. Mr. Rafauelli
stated he contacted the City Manager and he set up a meeting for them to meet with Staff. If they would
have been notified they could have easily gone to the California Department of Real Estate aJ1.d pulled
the public report. He stated that Staff did apologize and Staff did state they should have beeIl Iloliced.
Chair Schaub apologized for the mix up with the notice.
Mr. Rafanelli stated he appreciated that. He stated that Staff also apologized and felt it was sincere. In
conclusion if adoption of this ordinance as draWTI would ban the very f:lring the market needs which is
conversion of apartments to affordable ownership housing. It is rot consistent with California law and
would invite a lot of serious legal opposition. He was available for questions.
em. King asked if the Department of Real Estate report is ministerial and does not include a
discretionary element.
Mr. RManelliresponded yes.
- em. Kingcasked why he would not apply for the report tomorrow.
. Mr. Rafanelli stated they may but it takes 5-6 months to obtain it. In going through the process, they
- would Ileed to submit drafts of conditions, covenants and restrictions as well as property reports.
.
, On. King asked what the Department of Real Estate does with those documents.
"
Mr. Rafanelli said they look at them to see if they are reason.able. They also look at the disclosure
docuwents, the sale conb:acts, the terms and conditions of the sale contracts. VVhat ever the set of legal
docuro.ents used for the sale of those units and the running of the HOA are subject to the DRE review.
em. King stated thatit sounds discretiorurry.
Mr. Rafanelli said no it is not discretionary in a legal sense. They do not.h.ave the discretionary ability to
turn. you down.. They could turn you down if you are not willing to set aside a certain reserve to repair
the roof or if you are not willing to have the right disclosure documentation in a sales agreement. In a
legal seIlSe it is a ministerial review.
em. King said one of the obvious reasons for the proposal is to reserve a certain amount of affordable
rental units. It is based on a premise that rental rates are more accessible for middle in.come in.dividuals.
He asked if not having a certain. amount of reIltal units would rot be a benefit to an important dass of
people.
Mr. Rafenelli said the market is a much better way to determin.e what is needed. Currently there are
approximately 70 - 90% of units they have turned over Îr\ the last three years are £rom people that have
left to. purchase homes due to historically low rates. The market has been a clear way of deterrninin.g .
that.
œl<n,nÙIfJ curruni.rslcn
rRpeuIM'Me<ting
9
JanlUlry n 2005
"_../
. ,.¡!.'j
~I.' ' ~J t
Joseph Au, 46920 Aloe Court. Fremont stated he owns an apartment complex here in Dublin. He ")
attepded the ownership meeting in December. He would like Staff to clarify the number of u.nits that
will be affected by this ordinance. He asked the Planning Commission to not affect complexes with 20
unit~ or less.
. Chair Schaub asked if there were any other members of the audience that wished to speak; hear~g none
he dosed the public hearing. He stated the logical approach would be to discuss the ordinartces
(attachments 2 and 3) first. He does not believe that it is right to change the terms for the existing
property OWD.ers regardiess of whether it is legal or not legal. He would like to hear feedback from the
other Commissioners.
ern. King stated that is a legitimate concern but he is not as sympathetic. Qumging the land use
regulations is not a new notion and has been a very strong legal tradition in Califomia. He stated that it
is a stretch to ask the Planning Commission to reach a legal conclusion.
Cm. Biddle said that if they were built as condos and a condo map was issued for the property, why
weren't they sold as condos. It was advantageous to rent for awhile but now it is more advarüageous to
sell. Things change over a 20 year period and changes need to be made.
Cm. Wehrenberg stated that the City of Dublin needs to have a balance; and affordable housing is
important but agrees with Chair Schaub that it is not right to change the terms for the existing property
owners.
Cm. Biddle stated affordable housing is important. He supports the 30% approach which will take some
City intervention to establish affordable housing for the community.
.Chair Sçhaub said eveI1 with the 1,100 units, in 10 years a miracle will have to take place in building
rental units because it does not sound like the economics will make it happen. If the City wants to get to
30% by the year 2010, the City will need 2,200 more rental units. He asked for the Planning Commission
to suggest how to make and build more rental units. He asked if there was a consensus on removing
attachments 2 and 3 that would affect existing apartmeI1ts with Condo Maps as their recommendation to
COUIlcil.
Cm. King said for the minutes to reflect that he would have voted for. attachments 2 and 3.
Chair Schaub asked for discussion on attachments 4 and 5. He stated that if the City is going to adopt an
ordinance like this, it should affect all units regardless of size, which would be a modification to what is
proposed.
Ms. Ram stated that would require an amendment to the ordinance attachments 4 a.nd 5.
Cm. Biddle said he is opposed to that suggestion. There are two smaller apartment complexes one has S
units and the other complex with 20 units; then there is a gap with the next complex with 56 units, It
may be more appropriate to affect the complexes with more than 20 units.
Cm. King said he is inclined to go with 21 or more units.
Chair Schaub asked Staff if any of the property owners had any concerns about rent limitatioI1B.
~. Baker said there was limited discussion on that but no reconunepdation made.
œ&m:niTlB Cummis.sìon
'l{ffJ"f4r'ltl,I't"'g
\0
.7anwry 11, zoos
\1(1
Chair Schaub stated that the information the Commission received in the packet did not iderttify ,,; í- :> b \ \'1
implications to City revenue and wanted everyone in the audience to be aware of that.
Chair Schaub asked for discussion on the tenant relocation assistance plan. He said to his UXlderstanding
that 50% of the tenants are going to leave anyway. .
There was consensus that the Commission supports Staff's recommendation regarding the tenant
relocation assistance plan.
There was discussion on the Inclusionary Zoning regulations and agreement with Staff's
recommendation.
Cm. Biddle asked Staff for clarification with all the issues that deal with conversions such as defining
property, common facilities, and homeowners associations that are covered in State regulations.
Mr. Baker stated it is involved with both the public report and the CC&R's for the project which spells
out the ownership rights.
Chair Schaub asked if there was a way to make sure the folks purchasing one of these condos were
aware that as collective group they could form a11 BOA.
Ms. Faubion stated there various notices that the map act requires for condominium conversions to Occur
including a notice of intent to convert. The need for an HOA after the conversion could be irlcluded in
.. the mandatory notices.
Chair Schaub asked whether there needs to be any discussion on building code requirements.
em. Biddle stated converting these properties would not require any major construction changes that .
would require an updated code.
Mr. Baker said if there was work needed it would be requiIed to meet the =rent building codes. As far
ao the modifications to bring it up to current code, the ordinance as it i£written. would not require that.
Cm. Wehrenberg asked if that includes bringing them up to ADA requirements.
Mr. Baker stated to his knowledge, they would not be required to bring them up to ADA requirements
unless they were changing the parking lot or the walkways, etc.
Cm. King asked if they should impose a condition requiring the projects to be brought up to the ADA
requirements.
Chair Schaub asked Staff to look into the ADA requirements.
Ms. Ram stated she would like to speak with the Building Official and Staff will provide comments to
the City COUIlcil with the Commissions concerns regarding ADA requiIements.
Q¡air Schaub said he has no issue with the proposal for the Site Development Review.
Chair Schaub stated he believes they are ready to adopt the Resolution recommending adoption of the
ordinances, attachment 4 and 5. He asked whether it is in the best interest of the residents of Dublin to .
approve a condo conversion. He personally believes that the City should be involved with this.
œJ4nnine Commission
Œ.f¡¡u(,¡r :W"';1I{J
11
Jan",,'Y 1 J, 2005
'--'~. I 1~:1
'--/.+-'i (,~ i.
v ..
em. King said the intent of attachment 4 and 5 is to resist the pressure to convert apartments based on
the premise that the City has a good balance of affordable living units. He stated that a lot of cities in the
past have given a lot of lip service to requiring affordable housing. In the past developers could pay a
.certain amount of money and get out of the requirement and the City pats it'>elf on the shoulder for
doing their duty but the result is no affordable housing. There are people who want to live here that aré
important part of the community such as teachers and law enforcement. He believes that the City
should be taking a proactive approach.
Cm. WehIenberg stated that Dublin has done a good job with housing and bringing in the younger
families to afford homes. The condo conversion will also help.
Oair Schaub asked for a motion to adopt these orclirumces.
Ms. Ram said that the recommendation is to adopt the Resolution Atta.clunent 1 referring the ordinances,
attachments 4 and 5 to the City CoU11.cil with the noted amendm.ents.
Cm. King stated that the last paragraph on the Resolution refers to attachments 2 and 3 which needs to
be arnendedto refer to attaclunents 4 and 5.
em. Biddle said he is a little concerned with recommending 4 and 5. With the reconunendation of 4 and
5 the City is putting an awfully big dent in the rental market. What could be done to. recover from that
and how quickly?
Ms. Ram said the Planning Commission does have the ability to not approve a condo project and
recommend more apartment projects.
_Chair Schaub said as a Commission they do want to get to 30%.
Cm. Biddle stated that just because the Plamring Commission is adopting this recommendation for these
ordinances does not automatically approve each and every corlVersion at this time.
Ms. Faubion said that there are two ways to deal with apartment'>. If there is a condo project, it can be
evaluated against the Housing Element and at that point decide whether you want to approve the
condominium part or just the structural part of it.
On motion by Cm. King, seconded by Cm. WèhIenberg, by a vote of 4-0, with an amendment to only
affect projects with over 21 units, the Plaroring Commission adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 05 - 02
A RESOLUTION OF TIlE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE REGULATING TIlE
CONVERSION OF EXISTING APARTMENTS IN THE CITY TO CONDOMINIUMS
(P A 04-044 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE)
_
œr.nnin¡J Cmnmissûm
ŒJguf4, 'M"'in¡J
12
January 11, 2005
8.3
<::,10
P A 02-074 Adoption of a Historic Overlay Zoning District Ordinance and Design
Guidelines for the Dublin Village Historic Area - The proposed project consists of the
following components:
1. Amending the Zoning Map to create a new Historic Overlay Zoning District;
2. Adoption of arI Ordinance creating Chapter 8.62 of the Dublin Municipal Code which
contains provisioru; for establishmg Historic Overlay Zoning District Site
Development Review; arid
3. Amending Chapter 8.104 of the Dublin Muilldpal Code relating to Site Development
Review.
~ \\4
e
Ülair Schaub opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report
Kristi Bascom, Senior Planner presented the staff report and explained the background for the project.
For several years, the City Council has been considering how to take a :more proactive approach to
building the historic Dublin Village settlement area around Donlon Way mto a cohesive district to better
highlight Dublin's historic resources. In 2001, the City Council authorized Staff to. prepare a Sped£iç
Plan for the area, arid work has been done over the past two years to achieve this goal.
In January 2004, the City Council adopted a one-year development moratorium in the Historic Dublin
Village settlement area around Donlon Way, Dublin Boulevard, arid San Ramon Road which expires on
January 21, 2005. Alter the Council initiated the specific plan Staffbegarl w.orking with RBF Consulting
to develop the design guidelines for the Donlan Way/Dublin Village area. The design guidelines were
being developed while the specific plan was put on temporary hold. Staff decided to go with the overlay
zorring district which allowed Staff to apply a historic zoning designation to the area and design
guidelines applicable to the area in lieu of a specific plan.
One item to. note is that Staff is recommending that the boundary for the Dublin Village Historic Area .
"ánd Overlay Zoning District be revised from the original moratorium area boundary. Staff and the
Design Guidelines consultants agreed that the area should include only those properties with the closest
ties to the City's most relevant historic resources, and to indude those properties east of San Ramon
Road with limited historical significance would dilute the mtegrity of the district. The Heritage and
Cultural Arts Commission unanimously approved a recommendation to change the boundary area as
well.
Tnis project is divided up into 2 main components: the Design Guidelines and the three associated
Zorring Ordinance amendments to im.plement the Design Guidelines.
The goal to developmg the design guidelines will preserve and enhance those remairring historic
resources within the area and guide the design of future development to reinforce the historic quality
and improve public realm over time to Create a positive pedestrian experience and enhance the areas
image.
REF prepared a draft version of the guidelines that contained the following components:
Chapter 1:
Chapter 2:
Introduction, explanation of the purpose of the document arid how it shall be used
An overview of the original Dublin Village settlement area and vision for th.e future of
the area
Commercial and Mixed Use Guidelines (including architectural, site plamúng, signage,
lighting, andlarldscape guidelines)
Residential Guidelines (includmg architectural, site planning, lighting, and landscape
guidelines)
.
Chapter 3:
Chapter 4:
œJmninB C.ommissian
'R,mufó.r 9Il"ÞÛ'!J
13
January .11, 200;
·1\ ðG t\~
Chapter 5: Guidelines for Historic Resources (applicable only to those historic resources listed;
the O1apter)
Chapter 6: Streetscape and Public Space Guidelines (irlcluding guidelines for community gathering
spaces, streetscape furniture and amenities, and public improvements)
· Staff is proposirlg to adopt an overlay zoning district that will serve to implement the Dublin Village
Design Guidelines and provide the mechanism for ensurÎr1g compliance with that document. To
implement the design guidelines would require 3 different Zoning Ordin.ance amendments. There will
be a new chapter added to the Zoning Ordirumce titled - Historic Overlay Zoning District Site
Development Review. There will be an amendment to Amendment to Chapter 8.104 of the Dublin
Municipal Code (Site Development Review and an amendment to the Zoning Map to add an Overlay
Zonirlg Designation to the Historic Area.
In approving the Resolution (Attachment 3), the Planrrin.g CommissiOll willbe recommending that tl1e
City Council amend the Zoning Map to add an overlay zoning designation to the Historic Axea.
Ms. Bascom stated that the proposed amendments to Title 8 of the Municipal Code will provide a
suitable mechanism to implement the Dublin Village Historic Area Design Guidelines in the absence of
an adopted Specific Plan.
In conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
recommending Oty Council approval of the Dublin Village Historic Area Design Guidelines and the
following amendments to Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code: CreatiOIlof Zoning Ordinance Chapter
8.62, Hiswric Overlay Zoning District Site Development Reuiew ; Amendment to Chapter 8.104, Site
De¡¡elapment Review; and an amendment to the Zoning Map to add an overlay zoning designation to the
Historic Area.
· Cm. King asked what the plan is for the Dublin Sqúare Shopping Center.
Ms. Bascom stated that the City Council has authorized that an appraisal be conducted on the center as
well as a phase 1 environmental assessment.
Grt. King stated he has concerns about west Dublin and it getting refmbished. He asked if designating
the historical overlay district will give the Oty any additional legal powers.
Ms. Faubion stated that what is before the Planning Commission is a zoning action that identifies on
behalf of the Oty an area of interest and identifies a way to address futu.re development in that area. It is
not intended to be a national historic area.
em. Kirlg asked if there are any additional powers that the City could utilize to encourage change in this
area.
Ms. Faubion stated that Staff felt this was the best way to approach the situation at this point and not just
focus on the historic resources but what is around them as well.
Ms. Ram said should tl1e City Council d<?cide they want to make some public irlvestment in the area they
could do a Capital Improvement Project thxough the budget process to do some of the streetscape items,
which could encourage private investment.
· Grt. King stated the PowerPoint indicated a pedestrian friendly area. He asked if the Oty plans to make
the area pedestrian friendly.
rpr,,"";TI{J C"",múrioo
<RJ¡¡uÚ1.r fMettiTI{J
14
J4''''''ry 11, 20(>5
. '-"
.-",' .-.,
,J.- i...\;
\)
Ms. Bascom stated the vision for the area shows streetscape improvements but it will be at the discretion
of the Oty Council on how the resources will be distributed over the next few years.
\\q
Cm. Biddle stated that it is rather unfortunate that more of historic Dublin has not been preserved.
.
Ms. Bascom stated there were a lot of resources that were demolished just as late as the 1960's.
an. Wehrenberg stated that she feels the City is headed in the right direction.
em. King asked about the school house in East Dublin.
Ms. Bascom stated that is the Antone School House which is on the Wallis Property. There has been
discussion on moving the building but it is in fairly poor condition and the cost of moving it would be
phenomenal.
Chair Schaub stated it will gettricky to put some of those nice features in with six lane roads. It is not aJ;)
easy intersection.
Chair Schaub asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak.
Jim Devenport, oWIler of the Heritage Park Office Cer'lter stated that along with implementÍI\g some of
guidelines he would like to make a recommendation to allow for modem requirements which are
needed for retail and office er'lvirornnents. He would like to see enough flexibility in the guidelines.
Chair Schaub thanked Mr. Devenport and closed the public hearing.
On motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. King bý a 4~O the Plarming Commission u.nanimously .
adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 05" 03
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF P A 02-074, APPROVAL OF THE
DUBLIN VILLAGE HISTORIC AREA DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THE FOLLOWING
AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 8 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE: CREATION OF
ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 8.62, HISTORIC OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT SITE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW; AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 8.104, SITE DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW; AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP TO ADD AN OVERLAY
ZONING DESIGNATION TO THE DUBLIN VILLAGE HISTORIC AREA.
NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
OTHER BUSINESS (Commission/Staff Informational Only Reports)
ADTOURNMENT· The meeting was adjourned at 9;30 p.m.
.
Œ'ÚlMme com.missitm
<:1!.J¡¡UÚlr'MøtÞV:o
15
Jð.:t¡.tJ(1.ty 11, 2005
· ATTEST:
Planning Manager
·
·
Respectfully submitted,
PlaIU1Îrlg Commission Chairperson
"Ii'
C¡'"3" cJb \1'"
Ip(m,.nmg Commisricn
'R1¡¡w"r'M..ti"IJ
Jan"tl" 11, 2005
16
,\
)
etA: 1>. 1B
HANNA & VAN ATT A
Attorneys at Law
A PartnetsiUp ofProíessional Corporations
525 University Avenue, Suite 705
Palo Alto, GA 94301·1921
T.lopl1<mo, (ójO) 321·5700
F..,jmn" (6jO) 32 1-5639
www.b$flvan.rorn
.
John Þi;l1,J1 HannB.¡ fI ProfsE!:!;I!I;IJi.!!l! Corporation
De.vid M. V¡:!n Ana, ð Prcdenionsl CorpDrBtlon
E-MAIL: d.av1dv1@hs;nv.m,~;)TÏ]
January 5, 2005
Mr. J.ffBaker. Assòciat~ Planner
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Re: Proposed CondomÌ!¡ium Conversion Ordinance
Pear Mr. B1!ker:
We haw b""" provided with infoI'JIJation concerning th" proposed condominiU1ll conversion ordinance
proposed for the City of Dub !in. I understand that you have the responsibility forprepat~ngmarerial for review
by the City officials r~garding this propos~d ordinance. 'When we last spok~, you infonned me that no actual
language for the proposed ordinance has been written, and that the most up to date information on the subject
is that contained in th~ r~cent Staff reports to the City Council with po!icy recommendations regarding such .
proposed condomiD.Ìum oonversion ordinanoe.
On behalf of property own~rs in the City of Dub !ill, w~ are ~xpressillg conceITIE with particular aspects of what
is being proposed. We want to make it clear that we, and the parties that We repr~sent, are not, at th:is time,
objecting to the basic concept of a condominium conversion ordinance for the City of Dublin, applicabk to
rental apartrnent projects that are not already approved and developed ao condominium proj ects. However, the
brc:adth of the ordÌ!1anceraises concems, particularly as the discussion purPorts to impose additional
regulatjons on buildings that have already been approved as condOll1iniumprojects wh"" they were initially
cons1ructed and that had received subdivision approvals from the City as condominium proj~cts under the
Subdivision Map Act and other laws ""d ordimrrwes of the City. Such additional regulation of already
pennitted and developed projectB is inappropliate, legally improper and will deprive property owners of their
vested legal lights.
ill a potijon of the ag"nda stakmc:nt addressed to the City Council for its meeting of November 16.2004, there
is language which states "in order to conve¡,i an a.partment complex to for-sale condominiums, the property
owner must record a condominium =p, and obtain a public r~ort from the Department of Rea.l Estate
(ORE)." The statem"nt then continues 'stating" State Jaw provides that on1ythe Public Report vests to building
owners' rights to sell the units individually. Without the Public Report, the development remains subject to
new City ordinances. regardless of whether th~ building is already mapped."
ATTACHMENT q
~tl DIDúDt)'
e
)
)
''J:L
·'"ICJ
.,
ð¡.."
. u
lIe¡
JdfBaker
January 5, 2005
Page 2
·
This statement is erroneous and a misinterpætation of the pertinent State law. The statement, we believe, is an
att=pt to state the holding of the California Supreme Court in the West Hollvwood case (City of West
HcIiywood v. Beverly Towers, Inc., 52 Cal.3d 1184, 805 P.2d 329, 278 CaJ.Rptr. 375(1991).)
Th¡::re appears to be a misunderstanding of the background and intent of the West Hollvwood case. In West
Hollvwood. the deveJoper parties had obtained approvals of condominium conversions of existing buildings
ÍÌ"om the County of Los Angeles before the incorporaiion of the City of West Hollywood. The City of West
Hollywood, upon incorporation, then att=pted to impose new requirements on these condominium projects
that had been earlier converted. The projects involved in the West Hollvwood case Were not "new
construction" for which the County or the City had approved zoning. development permits, issued building
p=its or other land UEe and zoning approvals in additiœ to the subdivision map approval. This is a critical
distinction.
·
Where a condominium project has been approved under the City's land use, zoning and building laws and
pen11its, and the developer in reJiwce upon those approvals and permits has builtwd operated this project as
constructl:d. the· developer has vested rights to the project in accordwce with the la"'" and regulaiions t'hat were
in effect at the time the proj eet was approved and permitted. The City no longer has the1egal right to impose
additional restrictions. requÌIcments or regulations with respect to the operation or sale of units in that project
that were not imposed as part of the permitting of the project when it was approved for development.
The pmject operations and sales are no longer a matter of regulation ofthe City, exce:pt for regulations that
were in effect when the proj ect was. approved, or for imposition of generally applicable regulations required for
health and safety roasons. The fact that after such approvals Were obtained, the developer chose not to sell
som~ or all of the units in the project for a period of time is riot a matter that permits neW Cityregulations.~
The sale of units in an already approved and mapped project is not a conversion and not subject to city
regulation. A conversion oocurs where the oWI1e! of a building that is current1y zooed and approved as a rental
apartment property, without any ~ondominium approvals or map. applies to the City for approval of the
building as a condominium project und,.,- th~ Subdivision Map Act and th~ City's laws and reguJations. An
owner of a rental apartment property has the right to apply for a subdivision approval for condominium
pUIþoses for such an existing rental apartment building. This is what is knoWI1 as a condominium conversion.
Th~ statutes pertaining to cop dominium conversions under the Subdivision Map Act relatl: to and pertain only
to properties that have not vet beel1 so subdivid~d. Careful reading of the SubdiviBiOIlMap Act as itpertarns to
condominium conversions shoWE that the scope and intent of that law is to provick for notices and he..nngs and
p,-ocess with respect to a building that is 110t yel a condominium project. and for which no condominium map
has been approved. See Govemment Code sections 65090, 65091(a)(3), 66427.1, 66451.3 (b), 66452.3,
66452.5, 66452.8(b), 66452.9 and 66459 (only section 66459 applies specificaJJytc condominium projecta.fter
a final map has been approved and B¡;:pressly applies to right of tenants in existing buildings that are already
condominiums.)
·
Th~ West HoJJvwood case involved properties that Were rental apartments for which subdivision maps had
b~en obtained, and for which a final subdivision pubJic report had been obtained from the Department of Real
Estate. In this context, the developers had not gone through any zoning, land use or building permit
procedures other than obtaining a subdivision map for condominiwn pUIþoses. They had not constnlCted a
project in reliance of those permits. The West Holhwood case, although favorable to the converten, did not
pertain to the subdivision ofpmpeliy for which new constructioJ-1 WaS involved based upon pem:rits granted by
a city for a new condominium project. 111e factor of obtaining a public report fj:om the Department of Real
Estate may have been critical to the Court in West Hol1ywood as being one of the grounds for finding the
condominium converters had v~sted rights. But it clearly is not the. only factor, particularly when !hI:' proj eet is
one that was permitted for new constrocticn of condominium improvements.
\
,
, q~
,,/
o
\ 1"1
JdfBwœr
J ¡¡¡¡uacy 5, 2005
Page 3
.
The filing with the Department of Rea] Estate for Ii subdivision public report authorizes the sale of
Gondominiwn units to the public. It is a disclosure process, and is not clearly a discretionary filing for which
approvals JÌOl"n a lo~al government agency have been obtained. Once a final subdivi.ion map has been
obtain"d for a newly construeted condominiuxnproject, and the developer has expended funds on reliance on
the permits al,d the map, the jurisdiction of the City with respect to the sale of the units in that condominium
project nO longer exists. The City cannot impose further or additional conditions for this already permitted
property. It nO longer has jurisdiction for land use and procedures with resp"ct to the offrnng of sa " ofunita
in the Project under the l'Ù:ready approved permits and Subdivision Map Act.
The developers ofthese projects have vested rights in their approved condominiuxn projects based upon their
obta1!1ing of the developme!1t permits for the project, as well as tbe approved final Sllbdivision =ps, and
having acted in good faith in reliance on those p=its. Avc" Community Developers, Inc. v. South Coast
Regional Com. (1976) 17 Cal.3d 785,132 Cal.Rptr. 386, 553 P.2d 546. Although the Court didnotapply the
vested ¡~ghts doctrine of A vco in the context of We at HolJvwood. the doctrine of vested rights as discussed in
Avco and related caSeS is clearly applicable aì1d gennane wh= a developer has obtained pennits for new
oonstruction of condominium units under the City land use and zoning procedures, as well as obtai11ed a final
subdiviaion 1'!1ap for such a condomini= development and expended material funds in reliance on such
pe:rmits. This is true whether or not a Public Report has or has r.ot been obtai'!1ed from the Departn"lent of Real
Estate. The obtaining of a Public Report may be One indication of the obtaining ofpennit8 upon whicb the
d¿velope)" had relied, but in the case of a newly constructed condominium proj ~ct. it clearly is not the only
pefilit upon which the developer of such a project would have relied. .
We have been informed that the City may be relying on a subsequent West Hollywood case decided by the
"ppenate court in 2003. We do not believe that this subsequontcase changes the discussion stated above or, in- -- .
fact, applies to the issues at hand. In this subsequent case, CiTy ofWC1$t Hollywood v_ 1112 Investment Co.,
105 Cal. App, 4th 1134, 130 Cal. Rptr. 2d 168 (2d Dist. 2003), opinion modified on denial ofreh'g, City of
West Hollywood v.1112 Inv. Co., 106 Cal. App_ 4th 653c, 2003 VVL 457066 (2d Dist. 2003), the Dourt ruled
that thB exemption from the City ordinance requiring a conditional use permit for conversion, and imposing
"ent controls, was grounded on . holding that something snort of a vested right precluded the City from
imposing further requirements on the apartment owners. TIle court said that the right gained by the OWllerS by
virtue of the issuance of the public report, could expire or lapse upon the expiration of the public report. The
court found that the right of exemption expired beca\l!1e the. public report expired before the OWller obtained a
renewal. This s~cond West Hollywood case is not gemlane to our discussion. The vested rights of the
dBvelopers who built condominium projects under zoning and map approvals and building permits does not
rely 011 a public report issu~d by the Deportment of Real Estate.
With an due respect, we believe that the concept of adding existing condominium\ll1its to the "condonrinium
conversion ordinance" is a flawed concept. In addition, it deprives a property owner of the Jegal rights to sell
condominium units that were Jegally created for their properti~s. In addition, the processes that are proposed
for "condominium conversions" make no SertSe when applied to an existing property for which condominiums
have b(Oen previo\l!11y created.
.
e
e
.
j
)
en ðt \\'1
Jeff Ba1œr
January 5, 2005
Page 4
The City must distinguish between a project that is already zoned, permitted, mapped and completed as a
condominium project and a ccndominium conversion, which is the transformation of an existing rental
apartment building into a condominium project by an application for a subdivision map approval under th"
City's subdivision ordinances and th" Subdivision Map Act. Failure to do so will deprive property owners of
their legal and vested rights for whichthe property owners will be compelled to seek legal redress from the
City.
We appreciate your consideration of tbese points.
cc:
Mayor Janai Lockhart
Vice Mayor George Zika
Councilmember Kasie Hildénbnmd
Councilm"mber Claudia McCormick
Coul1cilm"mber Tony Oravetz
Mr. Richard Ambrose, City Manager
Mr. Patrick Moclder, Cross Creek LP
DMV:sm\BAlŒRI2.2!
Tel Wpwin60\CLIENTS\CRQSS CREEK-DUSUN\BAKERl.4.05.dœ
1'14: 6b W\
R£6ULAR ME£TJN6. - FEBRUARÝ 1. 2005
·
CWSED SESSION
A dosed session was held at 6:30 p.m.., regardirtg:
Conference with Lega,l Counsel
1. Al1ticipated Litiga,tion "" Initiation of lìJi$ation pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.9~subdivisionc (one pdte:n:tia.l case).
2. Anticipated Litig~tipn~ SlgnificantexPºs~reto litigalion pursuanttoGoverrunent
Code Section 54956.9~ subdivision b (one potential case) Facts and circumstances:
Government Code Section 54956.9(b) (l) (B): CIP Project # 95930.
A regular meeting of the Dublin City Council WlJ,s. held on Tuesday, February.1 ~ 2005, in
the Council Chambers ofthe Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at
7:00 p.m., by Mayor Lockhart.
..
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Councilmembers Hildenbrand, McCormick, Oravetz, Zika and Mayor
Lockhart~,
None.
..
·
ABSENT:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was recited by the Council, Staff and those present.
.. .-
REPORT ON CWSED SESSION ACTION
Mayor Lockhart announoed that there was no reportable action on Item 1. On Item 2,
the Council authorized (600-$5) the City Manáger to sign a "Delay Settlement and
Waiver" and change order for CIP Project # 95930 (Contract 03-17 McCrary
Construction Co.). The Council vdte was unanimous, 5~O.
..
CITY COUNCIL MlNUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 33
·
ATTACHMENT 2.
J-
qq 6\ \\c;
INTROt>UCTIONOF NEW.EMPLOÝtES
_7:02 p.m. 3..1 (700-10)
Three new employees were introduced, includi11$: Mark Lan~r, CifyBngineer; Frahk
Navarra, Senior Civil Engineer; and Craig Johnson, Building Permit Techniciah.
.
PROdLAMA'Ì'IQNRECOGNIZiINGALBER.TYBARRAFOR ACTSÖt HEROIsM
7:08 p.m. 3.2 (610:".õÖ)
On Sepwmþer 7, 2004;, wÞti1e drivitlS on the San ~teo Briclge, Albert Ybárra came u pM
anaccídent scene in Which two YQu11$ boys had ~l1ej(:Ótëd from their vehiç.le and,
álongwitlianaduLt male attel11.ptiog tQsavethèm,w¢re strL!$2¡'ling in the str0fl.? currents
of the San Franciscc Bay.. without hesítä.tiorì or thought for ills oWn personal safety, he
leaped into the Bay to help pull the adult and one öf the you~ boys to,safety.
Mayor Loékhart read and presented a proc1aniation to Albert Ybarra for his acts of
heroism in thè saving of two very valuable lives, and congratulated him for exemplifying
the definition of a true hero. -
Chief Thuman also presented a cerhfica.teöf recognition on beha.lf of the Dublin Police
.services. -
Mr. Ybarra stated he was thankful he 'was there to help ;ut. Patrick Harris and Salvadore
Dustin also helped.
.
CERTIFICATES OF RECOGNITION TO "'DUBLIN FIGHTERS" SOCCER TEAM
7:13 p.m. 3.3 (610-50)
Mayor Lockhart presented CertifiCates of Recognition to the "Dublin Fighters" soccer
team on their win in the Under 10 Division and for winning the District 3 DiVision CUp.
Team memþers include: Amancfu. Ga:rcia, Joanna Giron, Veronica Hì.$hsriùth, Maddie
Hirsch, Annie Jones, Al1ison Mitchell, Brittany Mitchell, Adrianna NUgen, OliVia Silva
and Jasmine Wong. Team Captains Rebecca Beásley and Julia Rogers Were à1so
recognized.
....'
.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLuME 24
REGULAR MEETING
Febru.ary 1,2:Ø05
PAGE 34
1M ""b \\'\
SAFELY SURRENDERED BABY LAW SB 1368
PRESENTATION AND CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION
OF A RESOLUT'ION AlITHORIZING THE CITY OF DUBLIN .
TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SAFE HAVEN PROGRAM FOR NEWBORNS
7:17p.m. 3.4 (585-10)
Alameda County Fire Chief Bill McCammon presented the Staff Report and advised that
the Safely Surrendered Baby Law (also known as the Safe Haven or Newborn
Abandonment Law) went into effect January 1, 2001, and authorizes the Alameda.
County Board of Supervisors to design.ate locations where newborns (less than 7Z hours
of age) mEl.y be confidentially surrendered by a parent or guardian having lawful custody
of the infant, without fear of criminal prosecutidn. The use of fire stationSa3 drop off
locations for newborns is part of a statewide effort to end tragic consequences of infant
abandonment.
Chief McCammon explained the process and the public education process that will be
used.
Discussion was held related to the 72 hours regulation and the timing for completing the
medical forms.
-
Chief McCammon stated they intend to accept any infant that is brought in. The mEl.in
focus will be on immediately dealing with the baby and a medical form can be filled out
later.
On motIon of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. McCormick, and by unanimous vote, the
Council adopted . . .
Fil:s0LUTlON NO. 10 - 05
AUTHORiZING THE CITY OF DUBLIN TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE SAFE HAVEN PROGRAM FOR NEWBORNS
+-
.
CONSENT CALENDAR
7:28 p.m. Iterns 4.1 through 4.6
On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Oravetz, and by unanimous vote, the Council
. took the following actions:
Approved (4.1) Minutes of Regular Meeting of January 18,2005;
CITY COUNCIL MIN1JTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 35
e
\1:>< ~ \'f\
Received (4.2 320·30) City Treasurer's Investment Report for the second quarter of FY
.2004-05, indicating the City's investment portfolio to be $106,385,851 (market value)
with funds invested at an average yield of 2.912% as of December 31,2004;
Adopted (4.3 600-50)
RESOLUTION NO. 11 - 05
APPROVING FREEWAY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH
THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CAL TRANS)
FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE I-S80/FALLON ROAD INTERCHANGE
Adopted (4.4 600-35)
RESOLUTION NO. 12 - 05
AWARDING CONTRACT 04-13 SHANNON PARK PLAY AREA RENOVATION
TO G & G BUILDERS INCORPORATED
($113,602 INCLUDING ALTERNATES 1 AND 2)
. Received (4.5 SSO-50) the Final Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2003-04;
Approved (4.6 300·40) the Warrant Register in the amount of $2,296,178.23.
.
PUBLIC HEARING - FA 02-074
ADOPTION OF AN HISTORIC OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT ORDINANCE
7:28 p.m. 6.1 (910.40)
Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing.
Senior Planner Krist:i Bascom presented the Staff Report and advised that this is the
second reading of an Ordinance which would approve the following amendments to TitJt
8 of the Dublin Municipal Code CDMC): Creation of Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.62,
Historic Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review; Amendment to Chapter
8.104, Site Development Review; and an amendment to the Zoning Map to add an
overlay zoning designation to the Historic Area.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 36
.
\c1- dþ W'\
Cm. Oravetz asked if any comments had been received following the first reading.
Ms. Bascom replied that she had received none.
Sue Hagan, owner of Dublin Creek Kennels on Donlon Way asked for clarification on
certain sections as they relate to her property; specifically, modification to site layouts,
parking fencing, etc. She questioned if she wanted to do landscaping, does this refer to
!U1y type of landscaping? Does she have to get a permit?
Ms. Bascom stated this property is unique in that it is both commercial and residential.
She would need to explain what she intends to do to the property and Staff would review
this. At the most, it could require a fee for a Site Development Review.
·
Mayor Lockhart explained that this is really designed for large office complexes. It
would be a good idea for her to call and let Staff know what she is doing. It shouldn't
turn into a big problem for her.
City Manager Ambrose stated it depends upon the extent and llilture of improvements; as
an example, if they were to put up some type of structure in the front yard that is not in
keeping with the ;historic district.
Cm. McCormick stated she agreed that paying a fee for putting in some junipers is
wrong.
·
Mayor Lockhart: closed the public hearing.
On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Hildenbrand, and by unimimous vote, the
Council waived the reading and adopted
ORDINANCE NO.4 - 05
ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 8.6Z OF THE DUDUN MUNICIPAL CODE
TO CREATE PROVISIONS FOR HISTORIC OVERLAY WNING DISTR.lCT
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, AMENDING CHAPTER 8.104 OF
THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW,
. AND AMENDING THE WNING MAP TO CREATE A NEW
HISTORIC OVERLAY WNlNG DISTRICT
.
CIT'{ CÜUNC!LMINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 37
·
\ t,? ~~ \\q
PUBLIC HEARING
.ADOPTION OF SPEED LIMITS ON GLEASON DRIVE .
BETWEEN TASSAJAKA ROAD AND FALWN ROAD AND
ON GRAFTON STREET BETWEEN GLEASON DRIVE AND ANTONE WAY
7:35 p.m. 6.2 (590-20)
Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing.
Public Works Director Melissa Morton presented the Staff Report and advised that this is
the second reading of a proposed Ordinance to establish speed limits for the newly
constructed portions of Gleason Drive and Grafton Street. The recommended speed limit
for Gleason Drive between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road is 40 mph. The
recommended speed limit for Grafton Street between Antone Way and Gleason Drive is
25 mph.
No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue.
Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. McCormick, and by unanimous vote, the
Council waived the reading and adopted
. ORDINANCE NO.5 - 05 .
ESTABLISHING SPEED UMITS ON GLEASON DRIVE
BETWEEN TASSAJARA ROAD AND F.AI1.ON ROAD AND ON
GRAFTON STREET BETWEEN ANTONE WAY AND GLEASON DRIVE
..
PUBLIC HEARING - FA 04-044
CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE REGULATING THE
CONVERSION OF EXISTING APARTMENTS IN THE CITY TO CONDOMINIUMS
7:37 p.m. 6.3 (430-20)
Iviayor Lockhart opened the public hearing.
Associate Planner Jeff Baker presented the Staff Report and advised that Ordinances were-
being presented for Council consideration which would regulate the conversion of
existing residential apartment units held in single ownership to for-sale condominiums.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE38
.
\...1.{ ~ \\"'\
Mr. Baker addressed the issues of:
A. Application of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance
B. Limitations on Conversions
C. Limitations on Rent Increases
D. Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan
E. Inelusionary Zoning Regulations
F. Tenant's Right to Purchase Units
G. Building Code Requirements
H. Site Development R.eyiew
In sununary, Mr. Baker advised that on January 11,2005, the Planning Commission
adopted a Resolution recommending that the City Council consider adoption of a11
urgency Ordinance and a non -urgency Ordinance, with modified language, to regulate
the conversion of rental apartments to for-sale condominiums. The Ordinance would
exempt projects with condominium maps from the provisions of the Condominium
Conversion Ordinance. Adopting an urgency Ordinance will ensure that the Ordinance
is in effect before the City takes action on the current subdivision applications. To enact
the urgency Ordinance, the City Council must determine that the conversion of these
apartments to condominiums might frustrate the City's goal and State law obligation to
adequately provide for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community. To
ensure that the Ordinance becomes effective in the event that the urgency Ordinance is
challenged, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council also adopt a
non-urgency Ordinance, which would supersede the urgency Ordinance <ipon becoming
effective 30 days after a second reading.
Mr. Baker discussed corrections and deletions that needed to be made to the Ordinances.
Page 3, Section 8.54.040 B 2. should be corrected to indicate "Rental/Ownership
Housing Ratio: The ratio that multiple-family units in developments of twenty-one (21)
or more rental units bears to the total number. . ." and page 11 should be changed to
read projects with 21 units also. On Page 12 sentences needed to be deleted from Section
3.
Cm. McCormick asked if there is just one project with 21 units.
Mr. Baker advised that there are two projects; one with 20 units and one with 8 units.
Vm. Zika commented we have a housing element which was approved by the State that
says we will have 30% rental. If we exempt 1100 units, we are violating our own policy
as soon as it's adopted.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 39
·
·
·
t ~r? .:1 II'
b
Mayor Lockhart asked if we have any information that says the nMs in our community
.is 30%7
Mr. Baker advised that that was the national average at the time our housing element
was adopted. We are currently at 25% of rental housing units now. If we built all multi-
family with apartment units now, we would be at 32%.
Ron Nahas stated they started developing here in Dublin in 1983 and they still own and
manage most of the projects. They all have condominium maps on them. The package
from Staff does not respond entirely and address condominiums that went before the
Planning Commission. More than fairness is involved. Until a public report is issued by
the State, the right to sell the units is vested. Crosscreek is working toward selling the
units. This was originally their project and they sold it a number of years ago. He
discussed case law and common practices used in Southern California. Substantial
reliance on approval is what they rely on. Two Ordinances are before the City Council;
one urgency to prevent Archstone tentative map. The public report is not issued for 6
months or more. He questioned how the City Council can make a finding of urgency.
He stated he has every confidence the City Council will agree with the Planning
Commission. There are some good valid legal reasons for not doing this. He reported
that their rents have been declining since 2001 andyacancies have-been rising. The
market is saying there are too many rentals and too few for-sale units. They are
concerned about whether their approvals received from the City are protected.
. shya~Taggarsi, representing Archstone-Smith requested conside~átion of several points.
He discussed policies that go against free market such as rent control in Santa Monica
and Berkeley. There is a reason why condominium conversions are the rage today. Rents
have plummeted over 30% since ZOO1. Condominium construction reduced to a trickle
in the 1990's. There is a pent up demand currently. Economic situations change all the
time. . He pointed out advantages of condo conversions such as providing affordable
housing to many. People are more interested in buying condos than losing their
apartment. The incremental property tax revenue is substantial. For every 500 units
converted, the City gets $1 million in property tax. This Ordinance represents a de facto
moratorium on condo conversions. Their intent is not to convert, but to get as many
entitlements as possible on the properties. The upside is far greater to the City than the
downside. He asked that the Council not adopt the Ordinance.
Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing.
Mr. Baker stated there was a question if they can separate the map piece from the condo
conversion permit. If we approved a map, you are no longer subject to the Ordinance.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 40
e
\b6 ~) \f\
City Attøt:rteyEIizabeth Silver state(i the Cityh1is notiç~whe,tl they WIUÜ. tq convert. If
\ you separate the map, as it is written.npw, it would11'trequire a condo permit. . If ybU
change the ordinance, the citywoulcin?t have notice if they sell the propfêrty. She .
disëusseclthe30% l'entaI requirement,
Cm. McC~rmic~stated she was hearing it is highly ùnlikdy wi will gette¡ 3Ö%~ sO Why
are w/'H1bl1i.g thiS? .. .... . , . .'; ..... '...
,', " . ., - "
Cme O.paYétz;state4 when it!terest~ð.tes ape l1i!$h,Peø;l¢ w&l1ttoreJtt; w4~i1 tJ1~X:# l8\.r,
they w'ii.i1ttobüy, We ..~ to l1avea percenµ¡¡Se ofaPartnlðP-ts in the éorilrriqV;ity :rclna.in
apartments. . .
Mayor I.ød1iliarlagrœd,.b1il.tst~:tedsheW£lSÏI't convinced of wha:fthe peoc'e:Ïlta$e n~ecis to
be. .
Vm. Zika commented Mi. Nahas seems to think there isn't an urgency, but we feet there
IS.
Ms, Silver explained the urgency ordinance which ties back to City Council action in
September t-o-adoptthe Resolu,tionofIntent to adopt these regulations and the situation if
projects were approved b¡¡:fore theordirumce takes effect.
I Vm. Zika discussed the fact that we have some applications to convert and if we don't
pass some Ordinance in the near future, these projects would be approved. e
Mr. Baker explained that, at this time, those applications haven't been deemed complete.
We still have a window in which a nOn ~urgency Ordinance can take effect before - 50
days from time it is determined to be complete.
Vm. Zika stated while he realizes we have some commitment to Mr. Nahas an4the other
600 units, things change in 20 ye<¡rs.. If we exempt these 1100. urits, we get no
afford9.ble units, or handicap units - we get :nQthing. If we pass wb,at the Plann,Î11$
Conm1Ìssion recommends, we violate the policy as soon .H1iwe pass it. Why not g;P about
our merry way and do nothing? He stated he realizes 30% may be high. He would be
willing to sit down and work on this figure. He would be willing to exempt them if we
could get some affordable and handkap units, We have a greate;r need for workforce;
units. We had to pass our Inclusicmary OrdinanceandJItat is why it eiists., Can we
come up with a win/win for everybody?
crrvcolJNcîL MINlfr'Es
VOLVME 24
REGUiLAiR MEE':J:'ING
FebJ1lilI7Y..,1;I··..~·90S
PAGE 4,1;
e
I b I 5"\ \\
Þ
Mayor Lockhart stated she was concerned about parts of this also. People rent homes
.every day for a variety of reasons. We can't lump these and make them fit into one little
package. The State of California has been struggling with people being able to own their
own homes. She talked about touring brand new units in Livermore where people could
buy cheaper than they could rent. They were designed for affordability. This could be a
wonderful opportunity for people in our community. We're acting like all these units are
going to be going on the market tomorrow and this may not be the case. She stated she
doesn't have an urgency fear about this whole issue. There are questions that haven't
been answered or concerns that haven't been thought completely through. She stated she
is not interested in challenging apartment owners in our community. She would like to
know what the actual need is in our community. It could be 30% or ZS% or 20%. She
also would like more conversation about the rights of tenants. There are too many
opportunities to take advantage of this situation. Every home doesn't have to be made
ADA accessible. It feels like we're stepping on people and she doesn't like this feeling.
The overall process doesn't feel comfortable.
Cm. Hildenbrand stated she is also uncomfortable with this. A lot of questions need to be
answered.
Cm. McCorrnick agreed that condos are a necessary part of our housing stock: After
reading this, she came in thinking 30% is the magic number. . Right away however, we
are out of sync. This is the national average and doesn't necessarily relate to our
. numbers.
Mr. Ambrose stated if we had a housing needs assessment wé- would have a better handIt
on this. HCD is the unknown. Staff doesn't think realistically you will be able to hold
30% as we build out. We need to review our housing needs assessment to come up with
our figure.
Mayor Lockhart stated it warrants the time to find out what is realistic for our
community. This Ordinance will affect a lot of people and whether they want to come in
and build in our community. If we put something out there that is totally unacceptable
to the apartment building community, we cut our own throats. \\That are our needs?
What can we do to meet those goals and still meet the needs of our business community?
Cm. Oravetz suggested the City Council do nothing right now. Leave things as is. If they
have agreements to convert, let them go forward. Put this on the shelf and bring it back
some other time.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 42
.
\~~ '\ i\,\
Vm. Zib felt we need to address this, but we need more data. If we start the conversion
process, we might get ourselves into a corner and panic. He wants to see some .
percentage of affordable units.
Mr. Ambrose summarized that the intent of the City Council is to take no action tonight,
but direct Staff to come back with a housing needs assessme1tt. If we come back and
determine that a condo conversion Ordinance is appropriate, we can move forward.
Vm. Zib suggested another option is to pass this and then fix it later.
Mr. Ambrose stated the City Attorney feels we ca.n apply the Ordinance to projects that
do not yet have a public report. We can't delay their projects. As soon as the
applications are complete, we have 50 days to process it.
Housing Specialist Julia Abdala stated there will be an item before the City Council
shortly referring to a housing survey. Consultants will design a tool to gauge different
types of needs of the community. This is a scientific survey. It will take the consultants a
few months to dothe survey and come back with the results.
Mr. Ambrose discussed moving forward with % identified and once we have our housing
numbers, we ca.n change it.
IvIayor Lockhart stated she will not support the original recommendation as she felt these _
people have been operating under an assumption for,some time. ..
Cm. Oravetz and Cm. Hildenbrand agreed
Vm. Zika again stated if we pass this as it exists, we violate the policy as we pass it.
Mr. Ambrose advised that the 30% housing number is not a policy, it is just a percentage
we had when we passed our housing policy. Do you exempt current maps? The
Planning Commission recommends that you do. He suggested the Council deal with this
issue and put this aside. You then deal with future applications. Those that have existing
maps should not be required to meet these requirements for affordable units. He
questioned if this is what he heard?
IvIayor Lockhart stated we have a commitment to affordable housing, but to go back and
tell people that ca.me to and invested in our community, to go back after the fact, we are
going to make them responsible for the new rules - this is almost like bait and switch.
This is not fair.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
. REGULAR MEETING
. February 1, 2005
PAGE 43
.
\ t,r¡ ç) \\
þ
e Cm. McCormick asked about tenants and fairness to them.
Mayor Lockhart stated she did not feel when people rent apartments that they expect to
live there for the rest of their lives. She stated she doesn)t think tomorrow all these units
wil1 have for-sale signs on them.
Cm. McCormick asked why not just exempt everybody?
Vm. Zika stated if you got in before 1990 you're exempt; otherwise you're not.
Mayor Lockhart made a motion, which was seconded by Cm. Oravetz to continue the
item for 30 days and give Staff an opportunity to look at some of the questions asked
tonight. Nothing is going to happen for at least 50 days. Maybe another alternative or
information on percentages can be reviewed.
Mr. Ambrose stated he understood the Council's primary and major concern is they don't
feel comfortable with the percentages. Staff should look at how much multi-family has
been built.
MayorLockhart requested a clearer picture of what we wiIl look like at build out.
.. Vm. Zika requested that we look at how do we get some workforce affordable housing
_ out of this. .. -
Mr. Ambrose stated there is a line of demarcation.
Mayor Lockhart added that we look at the difference between existing maps and what
might be planned in the future. What does this mean in the big picture at build out?
Mr. Ambrose stated we wil1 look at some opportunities for apartments to convel1.
Mayor Lockhart requested we look at some way for property owners to get the value out
of their apartments maybe without actually having the conversion permits. Look at mœ:-e
flexibility and a dear picture of what the future holds at build out with regard to make
up of current status with the different types of units.
Vm. Zika asked if we can get some affordable units out of the ones that have a map for
conversion.
CITY COUNCIL MINlJTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1) 2005
PAGE 44
.
'\þ C"¡ ~\Cj
t'\
Ms. Silver talked about the public report which allows them to sell the units. If the City
Council wants to subject Mr. Na.ha.s' project to the Ordinance, you need to apply the
Ordinance to projects that have no condo rMp. She discussed a Supreme COUti decision a
and stated she feels the City can do this. They disagree with this interpretation. This is ·
based on two cases out of West Hollywood. We believe the owner with a condo map
does have a vested right without a public report. This is a very technical area. of the law
and one about which people disagree. If we want to apply this to projects that have
maps, she stated they feel they can successfully defend this.
Mr. Ambrose stated they can water down the requirements and change any of the
conditions in the Ordinance.
Ms. Silver stated this is the first decision the City Council needs to make. The second
relates to the percentage of rental units. Other data could possibly support a different
percentage.
On motion of Ma,yor Lockhart seconded by Cm. Oravetz, and by unanimous vote, the
Council agreed to continue this item for 30 days and give Staff an opportunity to look at
some of the questions asked tonight.
.
RECESS
9:03 p.m.
MHyor Lockhart called for a short recess. At 9: 11 p.m. the mee~ng reconvened with all a
Council members present. -
.
EMERALD GLEN PARK PHASE III - CONTRACT 05-02 - AUTHORIZATION TO BID
9:11 p.m. 7.1 (600-35)
Parks & Facilities Development Coordinator Rosemary Alex presented the Staff Report and
advised that the 2004-2009 Capital Improvement Program includes funding for the
third phase of development of Emerald Glen Park. After a series of public workshops in
the Summer of 2004, the City Council adopted the Conceptual Plan for Emerald Glen
Park Phase III in August of 2004. The City's consultant, Carducci & Associates has
completed preparation of the plans and specifications for the project, which is ready for
bid.
Cm. McCormick discussed the bocce ball courts. She felt we should add the arbor.
CITI' COUNCIL MINlJTES
VOLUME 24
.;REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 45
.
llr b \\~
City Ma.nager Ambrose stated we will get bids on all the items. This will ultimately be
.the Council's decision.
On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. McCormick, and by unanimous vote, the
Council authorized staff to advertise for bids.
.
CONSIDERATION OF SUPPORT FOR LEGISLATIVE CHANGES
THAT WOULD AMEND TIlE AMERICANS WITIl DISABILITIES ACT (AD1\)
TO REQUIRE NOTICE PRIOR TO FIUNG A LA Wsurr
9:16 p.m. 7.Z (660-40)
Assistant City Manager Joni Pattillo presented the Staff Report and advised that based on
the information that was presented by Staff at the Janua.ry 18, Z005 City Council meeting
on the City of Morrow Bay's request to have cities throughout California support
legislativeamendments to the ADA, there were some additional follow-up items raised by
the Council that needed to be addressed prior to the Council taking any action on this
request.
eMs. Pattillo discussed Staff's res;onses to the follow-uP items.
In summary, Ms. Pattillo stated based on the additional findings from the follow-up
items, Suff recommended at this time to take the same approach as the League of
California Cities, which is to wait until the bill is fully developed and then follow-up
with the League of California Cities on its position on the bill and then bring this item
back to the City Council for consideration.
Cm. Oravetz stated he and Vm. Zika attended the East Bay Division meeting last week
and they got the same advice.
Mr. Ambrose stated Staff will bring this item back when the "spot bill" AB ZO is fully
developed.
.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
Febmary 1, 2005
PAGE 46
.
\I'þ ~
WI
APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP 8407 AND
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR ENEA PROPERTIES COMPANY. LLC
9:19p.m. 8.1 (600-60)
·
Public Works Director Melissa Morton presented the Staff Reportand advised that Enea .
Properties Company LLC is seeking City Council approval of Parcel Map 8407 and the
Improvement Agreement associated with the Enea project located at the southeast corner
of Amador Valley Boulevard and Vill~e Parkway. Parcel Map 8407 will subdivide an
existing parcel to accommodate a future office building and a future commercial/retail
center.
On motion of Cm. Hildenbrand, seconded by Cm. McCormick, and by unanimous vote, .
the Council adopted
RESOLUTION NÚ. 13 - 05
APPROVING PARCEL MAP 8407 AND IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
(ENEA PROPERTIES COMPANY, LLC)
.
APPROVAL OF FINAL RELOCATION IMPACT STATEMENT FOR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIF) PROJECT NO. 96852
DOUGHERTY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - HOUSTON PLACE TO 1-580
9:22 p.m. 8.2 (670-30)
"
·
Public Works Director Melissa Morton presented the Staff Report and advised that as part
of the Dougherty Road Improvements - Houston Place to 1-580 project, 4 businesses wil1
be impacted and subject to relocation. These businesses are: Miracle Auto Painting &
Body works, Gils's Body Works, All Glass and Smog Station.
A Relocation Impact Statement is required in order to identify the needs of the affected
business occupants, to discuss the relocation assistance available to the businesses, and to
identify commercial properties available for lease or sale that could accommodate the
needs of the affected businesses.
. Jeff GiI, Gil's Body Works, stated the relocation has been exp!B.ined very well. The supply
is another matter. Right now, there is no supply. Most of the questions are related to the
goodwill part of it. They have no answers for their employees. From noW until August is
a. .1011$ time. He stated another problem they have is down time once they find a location.
-
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 47
·
\\:1 1 w;
Jeff Jacobs, Miracle Auto paintin,g stated they understand they need to move. His shop
~as been there since 1972 when there was a Krrmrt there, their shop and a bunch of
.cows. They are now at the busiest intersection in town. Unfortunately, the City is not
making any room for their type of business. They have known about this for 7 % years.
The City has come up with nothing for goodwill or loss of business. His potential new
location in Pleasanton will have a quarter of the traffic currently passing his location.
His chance for doing this project is about over. He has 17 employees with families and is
very concerned. They want to continue in this area, so they have a potential location in
Pleasanton.
Wayne Abbott, Miracle Auto paintin,g stated with regard to building and moving they
have had their rights explained. What they request is for the City Council to request Staff
to move this thing into full gear to speed this up. He requested that the Council instruct
Staff and the Attorneys to pick up the pace.
Ralph Gil owner of Gil's Auto Body property, stated the business has been good to him.
They have a chance to save part of it. He requested that the City talk it over and save part
of it for him.
Denise Gil, Jeffs wife, stated their bves have been put on hold. They would like to have
things not put aside so quickly. If they could have answers to their dollar questions, they
would greatly appreciate it.
. ~yor Lockhart explairied that this has to do with Staff time and City Council meetings
because they have to make their decisions at Council meetin,gs. They understand that this
is a difficult situation. Were the demand and need not there to widen this road, we
would not be doing this if it were not necessary. She stated she hopes they realize Staff is
not dragging their feet, but trying to work toward solutions that work for everybody.
Cm. McCormick asked about comment that this is to be done by April and August of this
year. This was distributed to all the owners? Were there any objections noted?
Ms. Morton stated we didn't receive any written comments. We have weekly, sometimes
daily conversations with the property owners about the process. We have had a lot of
verbal comments.
Mr. Ambrose clarified that we have also been workin,g with the GUs regarding retaining
a part of their building.
.
CITY COIJNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1,2005
PAGE 48
1\1.( ~ \'f\
Ms. Morton advised that Staff met with Jeff Gil and discussed the actual setback and to
determine whether a cut and reface is possible. It doesn't appear to be possible. They .
would have to consider a new building.
Vm. Zika reiterated we hope to have a written offer this month and to be completed by
April.
On motion of Cm. McCormick, seconded by Cm. Hildenbrand, and by unanimous vote,
the Council adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 14-05
APPROVING FINAL RELOCATION IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR THE DOUGHERTY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
(HOUSTON PLACE TO 1-580) PROJECT
..
ST. PATRICK'S DAY PARADE FLOAT
9:41 p.m. 8.3 (950-40)
Assistant to the'City Manager Julie Carter presented the Staff Report and discussed the e
alternatives for the Council's participation in the annual St. Patrick's Day Parade.
Options for consideration included: Antique Cars; Alameda County's Antique Fire Truck;
Golf Carts; City Council Float; Walking; or other alternative.
Cm. Hildenbrand stated she likes the antique fire truck and would like them to be all
together in the parade.
Mayor Lockhart stated she votes for the fire truck. Cm. Oravetz agreed.
Vm. Zika stated he will be in Virginia visiting his grandkids.
By a Consensus, the Council agreed that they would ride in the antique fire truck in the
parade.
..
CITY COÜNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 49
.
I\S q \\~
EMERALD GLEN PARK WATER PLAY AREA RENOVATIONS
.9:45 p.m. 8.4 (600-30)
Parks & Facilities Development Manager Herma Lichtenstein presented the Staff Report
and advised that at the end of last summer, it was brought to the attention of the Parks &
Community Services Department that the resilient surfacing at the Emerald Glen Park
water play feature had failed. The surface has delanTIl1Jlted from the sub-layer and was
presenting a tripping hazard. At that time, Staff closed the facility to minimize potential
hazards: In order to repair the water play area at Emerald Glen Park, Staff is requesting
that funds be made available to complete renovation work prior to the summer of 2005.
Cm. Hildenbrand asked about the lifespan of the product they will use, Tot Turf.
Ms. Lichtenstein swted it has a 5 years warranty.
On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Oravetz, and by unanimous vote, the Council
approved a Budget Change in the amount of $61,930; waived the competitive bidding
requirement and authorized Staff to enter into an agreement with Robertson Industries
for an amount not to exceed $25,500; and authorized Swff to proceed with the
remaining project items provided the cost is within the towl avail~b1e budget.
.
. ESTABLISHMENT or NEW
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (Cm PROJECT, TRI-VALL"'EY TRIANGLE STUDY
9:51 p.m. 8.5 (590-80)
Public Works Director Melissa Morton presented the Swff Report and advised that the
establishment of the proposed Clr Tri~ Valley Triangle Study project will supplement the
current CMA funding for the Tri - Valley Triangle Study with local funds to cover the
additional cost to refine the travel derru.rnd and traffic operation.s models for the study to
reflect local traffic conditions within the study area. The purpose of the Triangle Study is
to develop a sequencing strategy for improvements identified in the Alameda Countywide
Transportation Plan for the I-580, 1-680 and Route 84 corridors. It will take 9-12
months to conduct the study:
City Manager Ambrose stated a great side benefit of undertaking this study is we can all
discuss what the true impacts are on our respective arterials using a common set of
numbers. Staff is to be commended. There has been a lot of work on behalf of Staff and
the Mayors.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 50
.
\\6 ell::, \\~
Cm. McCormick discussed and clarified the funding figures.
On motion of Cm. McCormick, seconded by Cm. Hildenbrand, and by unanimous vote, .
the Council established a new CIP Project and approved a Budget Clu.ìnge in the amount
of $58,500 to cover Dublin's share of the cost.
.
OTHER BUSINESS
9:59 p.m.
Vm. Zika advised that the Livermore Master Airport Expansion plan is back to square
one.
.
ADJOURNMENT
11.1
-
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned
at 10:00 p.m.
'.,
,
.
Mayor
A TIEST:
City Clerk
~
~
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
February 1, 2005
PAGE 51
.
\\,\
en en
'" ..... "" <n "" -"'" '" '" ~ ;:;:
CD CD
... ...
~ ~ ~ N
¡?1?;lCJ> :í? > .."GJ:r (') .." :;;: Z
""'"¡¡) 0> 0> 0>
e -1=(1»:.- ~gm??~6fm~~~ <II ;;¡. ! 3
~ ::> !!J ""
~ '" -0 Iii::> ::>C"gJ"-'''3 CD '" CD
<II"' ò-"& øC)n:: C":;::IEï b' ar
;::::¡!::J....,:=¡: 7,,;::¡.: J&-::r:;:l =:::1. ......, (þ @ a
CJg.:I:~ -0> w '-
~ >
!!J :!<" g >< ~ ".
~
_ <II () (") g (') 0:> 0> 0>
~ IE ,,-- g > G> ~ co 0> §- ¡
"0 G)u::J ~ Hi §-
a -0 <II ::>w '" 0 ~ CD
(5' ~ D. 3 ~3 ª- ~ CD "
"'~ " ¡;¡' " ¡¡¡-
Q. <II 11; 3 C" CD ¡¡¡-
::r =>.
::r"' Q. ~ .."w CD w Q: ¡¡ ¡¡¡ <iJ
w;;; -. » ¡¡ , S" 2: ¡¡¡
i~ ~ g, " =>
:::> ¡¡¡: ¡¡¡:
, w ¡¡¡:
" ¡¡) æ ¡g
3<0._ '" ..... '" > I
:&,"om. ~ ...., m " <n
::> ::> ~ 0, N ~ c:> ¡¡¡ .....
a;¡~et <.0 <II '"
i~(þ{IJ "
;r - <II !'if
"'w
;¡¡¡,ãf~g, ii! ;;a
S'Qim s: m
w~.gro c " 52
~ Õ 3 <II " ~
...8 [~ c. C
CD is' m
(D ~""D m , ~
~ 2~' (") <n Z
Z -< a: z 0 <n ....
-Q.<II 0 CD 0 " ~
<II <II
6" ....... CD -
;;:¡ ¡¡:: <0. ~
'"
03,z " c
-
5:8.9' o' ~
CD ~ m "
~æ-¡g m
..,1!r r-
-, Q. 0 0
o¡m '"'
s: <0. ."
» '""'~ m <:: _m :::> ;¡¡:
j,. " 8
. § 5 ê6 >< <0. .¡:j 5" m
~ ro ro ::r 3 Z
¡¡f-'õ , 1t CD
0;-0 ¡[ :;' '" ....
§' ~ -< 2l ¡¡;
Co CD , " ."
<0. I ¡¡¡ c: -'~
¡¡¡ .z .Sf <II 0> 0
'" ~ ~ :\0'1 ¡j}
5' s; '" '" c: 'W~~ ....
m ¡¡¡ 0 -0 <i1 ~I:\Ρ;:DI m
() 0 0 0 I·~ Z
ª -"'" :0 -"'" '"
~ ¡ j 1iGlI ....
<II CI?!;j' ",m ",!;j' en :\~izi ~
;;- '< -00> (") ¡~:.:;ÇQ.!
~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" ~ CD N '1!iíJI,
" Iii "Iii Iii £2..0 t, .
'" en 5 3 53 --3 .." ;\d~' t.IJ Z
S _=>
Q "'''¡;¡, "0 ¡;ra a ñ" :r .\" c C
g-.." \,,,,~ C"
.:¡ or 3!c 3!c '[ 3!<E>.. cr c::
ª owO" OJC" w "'" '"
!f ;¡ "=>= => = ::> 5' ::> !!! tD
~ - ::> ::>
5' < <iF !::
!: /5' CD Z
...
" :¡; tñ '" '" <n <n
<D ..... <.0 c:> ~ ..... b
0; w
"
~ <0. =æ :I:
::J" 0
3 w c
=;;
P- c '" ... ~ ¡ b <II
:¡; ... <n <.0 =æ "
'" 5" G)
'='
.. 8 m
0' 3 ;,¡¡: ;,¡¡: ,..
-'" <D 0 8- m
<= '" ~ ~ -"'" "" '" ¡g - (
::> '" ~ '=' '" '" :::j '"
w '" <D CD
is. ~ <>0 '" '-" e!. c:> '" , )1 '., m
a ~,7! , " ,
w CD CD -;
'=' I
.. ,
"" ~> ;,¡¡:- '" ,
~ '" - - o:Þ-. . '" c
~ ;..", ;..", <.0 ",,<0' go g\~",'1 '" C
i ...... <.0 ...... CD 0
. ... '" - ' <: ~ ;¿ ~! N "
am <> ,
CD <>
'" ,
to> - ~ i .... ~,h .',.
0, '" - '" ...., , ~~.
- '-" m 0 f
~ '" <0 <.0 '=' '" 0:> <.0 ..... -
...., w '=' ..... ."
'" '" !!!. ~;~i
."",J 3\
ATTACHMENT
".
..
"
=~mQ §-.I"ö~ðI
;¡;';J~ir;;,í!~'3: ~
5''''0'''~'''''-~
g"'Cr;:::3~3 UfMo9I
<003<0.."''''....'''
~1rr ~ (j¡ - (IJ ""t ~ 9'.
:;:. (") =' Q) tI:I (tI Q.. ~
O.....~3 3g¿::;1õõI';
¡¡¡-~ g¡ ~_. c: '" -. g
~.g CI. ...1, ~ U¡
p. 0 CI. g) =- 0'" s:.
"'"!ß¡¡:" ""<..~
[:::..,.'16 '16 '" ~
a::JU¡~Q.. Q.,a
iÕ'ID~ ~"8g(O
l1I~~m. m.m~m
c.. 0 ~-8 .g c.. CD !a.
§~~~ ~g~¡¡¡-
.?Ja·os. ;:a.~~a.
II! "'3"" 0.. c...""<- 0 5-
WI~~ gQ.§-cÐ
'" c..:;¡;" "" r::::!::=¡æ
~ !!) ~~ ~ 15;;: ".
U ~.~O o~"'O(')
.:2"w""" ..... (be.)
~~~~ ~ffl:~.œ
Q'lc...~¡;;: I:::ii.jOÕ
..~~:::!. 2_·"2..:1
g,<=>~~ ¡¡; ~~
§~I"~ ~ ~g¡,
gr",J.,01ID 9 c...fg
"" ¡¡;"'1: ~ '" ""
(tI~c:J: 0 ~
-<,~~O :::c c:";I:T
-~ :J AI m æ.. a
~§~~ ~ ~J5
m fi ê5 ~ ~ "g.::
8."0< -.,) m::
~~~~~ &; ::;-~
¡;;:.... N 0. .c '"
~r~~§ ~ ~!i
3......~ ~ m !:ÿ g
~~~~ ~~~ œs:
!!¡ ... c.1i - '" '"
£103-,...- Q ".12-
"",-8. =r ¡f~
U1 ª' ~ g¡ ....... ~
~¡¡;.. 0 ¡g,
~<i5'f. § l?go
5-~ 8 =. ~ (jj
æ~~ ~ ~-[
~ - "0 ~ a......
~.~~ ~ ~~
ffi tu.:2.: - ;;;r-..
~ ~ ell §.F' ~~
~ Q. 5'" ..... ~ CD
-3Q. ~ ~~
o..~ =?" "";
~ o' Q. (þ 1il.
w ::J ~ g ~
~~ ~ w~
g "" ¡¡¡ po a
39. .is ;!::<i5
CD ~ Q) g. Q,.
"i@ 5f ¡¡¡~
n' ~ ~ so
Jff Q.. ~~
"u,- ~ ~ 'P
[ -8:;: i
~ CD 'E
c::ï Q. º_....¡
Æ et frffi
.:¡ {!j go 9.
Q "2 <Ii"
e, <:<_5:
:=\- î!:î..g g
~ ~ ~cï
~ i$'" ~;;;;
f1) ~.....~
<=>
~
'-"
:;;:
m::tJL:J
-~'" '"
- "'0"
Ç) =-
~;::J'"::I
(E'
'-
'"
3
m
e>i
'"
<C
~
~
'-"
¡""
""
""'
'"
~
""
'-"
IJ'
"C
~
¡[
0"
"<
""'
<=>
~
<J>
c:
0"
8"
ët
m
D
en
"
....
'"
0>
<0
....
co
:t
....
""
....
'"
t:
""
...
to
'"
'iÞ
~
;;j
~
""'
;Þ-
"'''''
='13-0
6~ ~3'
",,"''''
o'¡;¡
"
"'[]
S'
'"
""
~
'"
¡;¡
'"
'"
""
:...
~
""
:...,
....
'"
0>
çr
¡¡¡
<>
¡[
0"
"<
""'
<=>
~
m
o
en
"
~
""
""
""'
""'
...,
""'
if:
~
a
~ï
'"
'"
6"
~
""
'"
en
""
'"
...
;g-::tIO:!;"::tIDZ:
rowEC1;IQ:lcI»
Ø)::::I0"D1~cr3
.." £- 3' I:D £- g: fP
~
,,¡?
00"
3 S'
",õ
'" '"
'"
c..
'-
'"
3
m
e>i
,5
""'
~
~
<;,n
'"
""'
IJ'
"C
¡¡¡
¡[
0"
"<
~
~
m
-g
$1
'"
c..
0-
'<
""'
""
""
....
m
D
(n
"
~
on
""
~
...
""
~
""
w
:5
to
~
""
""
co
'"
""'
""'
:...,
m
a
en
"'[]
....
to
....
'"
""
co
""'
...,
co
""
'-
'"
3
'"
'"
e>i
,5
"'[]:Þ
O~"'O
:1E.g ~.
"... ¡;:
!!¡~"
.,.,
""'
....
.....
~
'" ::J:
'-" <:J
m ::tI
co
m
;:
::J:
o
::tI
'"
~
0>
:;:
<:J
::tI
,
<:J
::tI
m
><
"C
'"
.<>
r0-
c.
!{
""'
<=>
<::>
....
S"
;r
'"
....
~
c:
~
c:
¡¡¡
m
D
en
"'[]
<J>
"'0
"'N
!J.o
~2.
" "
::!!<E!.
..
"
co
""'
0>
-<
::J:r:
0,
¿go
~:;¡
~
...,
""'
~:;:
_::J:o
0,,-
¿g
0>
...,
""
~;:~
00_
"""-0-
~"'O
'iiJ'"
0_,"
¿g'"
~
'"0:>
...,
....
.....
2-
e!.
\I~ ~
"{:;
¡¡¡
\ \")
I',,·,
·
~'T'
I'
"
I~"I'
I
·
:!:
o
'"
'"
z
'"
[TI
r
m
~ 0
[TI -4
Z -..::
-4
a
<D 'TI
~ ~
'" '"
" ,...
"
~ z
·
"·1
·
w ;;;;
i~
~~
-31
~~
=--
" '"
~~
....'"
~f
¡¡fa
'" "
§~
D> 0
:gro
cr 00
",,-0
~~.
.¡gif
<D"tJ
~~
" D>
"Si!.ro
~ ~Q)
'3'''
et~
-0 =0-
<D""
3D>
",,'"
'" D>
'" 3
g- )<1'
(6~
-<:
.g¡¡¡
¡¡¡g.
" '"
Q:~'
~¡¡¡
",'"
~§
0'3'
-D>
¡g-
s-16
",3
0;::0:
<: '"
i2..§
¡¡;-
",0
~ô
"'0
~ §
if
ef
e
z
c:
3
a
'"
...
o
.....
C
'"
¡;¡:
5'
~
'"
'"
'"
g,
;;>J
:t:
Z
<:I
ãJ
..c
~. ¡
3 ;;>J
'" :I:
'" z
!ri <:I
^
iJ;i§!
'l}
~
'0
0>
'"
^
"" '"
..... ""
ao ~
V
.....
~f::
"" ~
....
Co
'"
co
""
-....
0>
0>
~
Z
c:
3
1:1"
'"
...
c
'"
;:;
'"
ãJ
..c
c:
@"
e..
o
-
C
"
iW
to
c:
~
'"
"-
'"
...
n
o
'"
..
2"
!l
õ'
'"
~
-
¡r.
"'C
..
¡[
....
""
0> r-
~
g <
~ e..'"
õ~
;::1;"
~::E
"b
0>
'"
~~
:;:
.....0
....."-
0>'"
....!!!.
'"
....
'"
ao
0>
<II
....
g:
_'"
t;
ao
$".....
",s,
~!!!.
¡\q '\
\\~
,
~
"'»
[~
¡[~
~~
'" D>
~~
Q.3
!2:"g..
"'g
""",
8-
...1<
ª~
en::
(tI x·
'" <b
" "-
;c
~~
CI"~-
"'¡¡:-
¡¡¡'"
"-,,,
gro
""
5''''
(p' ~
","-
1615
~~
" <b
:Qõ'
~5"
"";¡¡.
i\f"
,,<0
" OJ
~~
0__
'"
""",
<b0
-""
~~
~""
-<D
~s::
;;:g,
o <D
~ii1
"'¡¡:-
g .
t;.¡
'5-""
*s::
... g,
¡Hi
~ .¡¡:-
"-~
;~
Q.b"
!!) "
"',
~~
",,,-
'" ~
-'"
!~ g;
~.:¡
<b
I'J. ¡;
~::E
"
~~ ~
=<D
¡ß¡ß
'" OJ
8:3'
5:¡ ~
!6ro
§ g¡
",,"-
"<",
co" ~
~~ g;
.;;:
"'
¡;¡-
!11.
g,,,,,
~~
~
o
""
'"
;;:
o
"-
'"
iiI
-
'"
¡;?
""-0
c:n~W
CDS
1:1"3'"
8'wc..
-::¡
.. -
.....
....,
~
""
en en
~;;?:::t:J§J~
en:::,o ;::go
¡r¡,.:¡::~qj ::;
'" o-=--.
'"
!D
'"
::¡
Ii¡
'"
'"
'"
8
~
~
<=>
""
""
~
'"
--<
'"
'"
--<
'"
'"
<:I
~-o
"'-
-'"
o::¡
"'" '"
3 '"
",e..
a.
w
.....
'"
"-'
'"
0">
""
"-'
m
~
'"
'-"'
w
'"
'"
....
.....
0">
'""
en
;:;
'"
~
z
..
3'
'"
S"
@
'"
2"
!l
c
;;J
<n
"'"
"'N
" 0
:;:",
ns"
"'tJ<D
--
'"
'"
<:
( )
~
~
r-
~
;;:
o
"'-
'"
...
!!\.
'"
~~
( ) 0
ii <
-'"
'"
~
æ:
'''
,~,. , :
~ ,~'i~l, , '
::t:i~', J
,!If,rr. ,';'!
'i,:i\~'
X.'.\~.'."
Ø.\i1it~
,·"1'·'.1·,
~~
è1 'Y
::t.:nm~'~
"II!·
"I~¡-
i.Y:i<\¡,',.
l'!!.'!
:þ ,'I .¡
o.41-c
",,0"'"
::i -0 =:
",,,,n
"'.:2-g
""
.....
'"
~
....
~
_::: ::;::
w" '"
!D~
'"
;:¡.
~§'
N '"
"'''-
_0
~~
'"
Of
"
Of
~
0">
'""
""
0">
io
"-'
m
x
"'"
'"
~
<=T
"<
"-'
'='
~
-<
'"
'"
en
"'"
"'N
£!.o
-'"
c=r :i"
"'tJ«:>
--
...
'"
....,
....
~
'"
g:
.....
<=>
~
'"
'"
'"
'"
~
<.»
<.»
<=>
....
<0
~
~
""
<=>
CJ>
;:;:
'"
""
z
'"
3
'"
:;
5'
'"
ê'
!l
c
;;J
~
~
,...
~
:r
o
c
'"
I;"
:¡¡
:r
"
'"
r
'"
;: "
'" ...
~ -<
~ 0
<0 "
<0 OJ
<0 C
" '"
" r
"
'" z
;;:
°
"-
'"
i
'"
~>
Q. C'"
"'0
àñi
'"
~
!!!.