HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.2 Condo Conversion
CITY CLERK
File DIIJ~QJ-r~:Jla
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 19, 2005
SUBJECT:
ATTACHMENTS:
RECOMMENDATION:
P A 04-044 Condominium Conversion Ordinance Regulating the
Conversion of Existing Apartments in tlIe City to Condominiums.
Report Prepared by: Je/f Baker, Associate Planner
1.
2.
3.
Condominium Conversion Ordinance
City Council Staff Report Dated February I, 2005
City Council Staff Report Dated March 1,2005 (without
attachments)
City Council Meeting Minutes (March 1, 2005)
4.
3.
4.
Open Public Hcaring;
Receive Staff Presentation and Take Testimony from the
Applicant and Public;
Close Public Hearing and Deliberate; and
Waive the Reading and Introduce the Condominium
Conversion Ordinance (Attachment 1) Rcgulating the
Conversion of Existing Apartments in the City to
Condominiums
The conversion of rental apartments to for sa1e condominiums has the
potentia1 to increase the value of each unit in a project. Additional
property tax revenue 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 units that convert, the sales
price of each unit, and the City's share of the property tax revenue.
The City collects between 13.66% and 35.38% (average of 23.97%)
of the 1 % property tax depending on the area of the city where the
property is located.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Implementation of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance will also
have an impact on Staff time in reJation to administering and
monitoring policy provisions. The impact on Staff time is discussed
in the imp1ementation sections of this Staff Report and the Staff
Report included as Attachment 2.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Background:
On September 7,2004, the City Council adopted a Resolution (Resolution #1&1-04) initiating proceedings
to adopt an ordinance regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the City to for-sa1e
condominiums. Following that meeting, Staff studied the various mechanisms for regulating
____________________________________.M_______________________________~w__________..__________________________
G:\PA#\2004\04-044 Condo Conversion ZOA \ccSI"4-19-Os.doc
COPIES TO:
In-House Distribution
Property Owners
Interested Parties
l"IEMNO.¡P. ').J
tJ
\ 15b LD
condominium conversions. This Study included a complete review of the Subdivision Map Act, City of
Dublin General Plan Housing Element and eondominium conversion ordinances ITOm different eities
throughout California, including the Cities of Livermore and Walnut Creek. Based on this Study, Staff
developed a series of poliey alternatives for the City Council to consider.
On November 16, 2004, Staff presented these policy ahematives to the City Council. The City Council
provided Staff with direction regarding the development of the proposed Condominiwn Conversion
Ordinance. The City Council further directed Staff to hold a mecting 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. Stafi"
utilized the feedback received at this meeting to further develop the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance.
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 I, 2005, the City Council held a public hearing and reviewed the Planning Commission
recommendation (Attachment 2). However, the City Couneil raised concerns ahout the proposed
Ordinance and directed Staff to do further analysis.
On Mareh 1,2005, the City Cowlcil reviewed a series of policy alternatives at their regular public meeting
to address the concerns raised at the meeting on February 1" (Attachment 3). The City Council provided
Staff with direction regarding key p01icy components and directed Staff to modifY the proposed ordinance
accordingly. This report focuses on the issues listed below that Staff was directed to review. The revised
ordinance is ineludcd as Attachment I of this Staff Report.
þ> Annual conversion limit;
þ> Continued tenancy period;
þ> Eligibility for relocation assistance; and
þ> Analysis of financial relocation assistance.
The City Council reviewed the remaining policy components but did not direct Staff to further modify
those provisions of the proposed ordinance. However, a complete discussion of the remaining policy
components of the proposed ordinance are included in the February I, 2005 City Council Staff Report
(Attachment 2) and the minutes ITom that meeting (Attachment 4).
ANALYSIS:
A. Annual Conversion Limit
Thc previous version of the ordinance preeluded conversions when the ratio of rental units to for-sale
writs in the community was 30% or less. At the March I, 2005 meeting, the City Council indicated
that it would prefer an approach that was not based on the rental-housing ratio. The Council indicated
a preference tor an annual eonversion limit.
Section 8.54.040.B.2 of the proposed ordinance wouJd limit the number of units converted per year to
10% of the total supply of multi-family rental units in developments of twenty-one or more units ("the
Annual Maximum"). If the number of units in a particular project exceeds the Annual Maximum, it
would be pennitted to convert, provided that no other projeets convert in that same year. Any excess
units converted would be subtracted ITom the Annual Maximum for the next year. If an accepted
2~l1;>
application does not exceed the annual limitation, a second application will not be accepted if the
additional app1ication would resu1t in conversions that exceed the annual maximum.
Ana(vsis: An annual limitation on conversions will avoid a scenario wherc a sudden increase in
condominium conversions decimates the City's rental housing stoek. The annual limitation will
pennit changes in the rental housing ratio to happen slowly, therehy allowing the City to use other
means--such as zoning more land for multi-family residential-to facilitate the development of more
rental housing in the community.
The City Council can, by increasing or decreasing the Annual Maximum, choose to establish an
appropriate amount of housing that is permitted to convert per year. The annual limitation can be
based on the City Council's perception of the community's needs.
Staffs revicw of condominium conversion ordinanees from other jurisdictions rcvealed that some
cities have placed annual limits on eonversions. Most cities with such limits utilize a percentagc that
ranged from 3% to 5% of the convertible rental supply. For example, the City of Albany permits 3%
and Walnut Creek pennits 5% of thc rental units to convert. The City of Santa Barbara permits the
conversion of 50 units annually. In each case, the annual limitation was based on the rcspeetive
council's perception of the community's housing necds.
The City Council may decide that an a1temative pereentage or a fixed number of conversions would
be more appropriate than the proposed 10% limitation. Therefore, Staff has prepared a series of
limitation a1tematives for the City Council to eonsider. The scenarios in Table 1 are based on the
conversion of a percentage of the existing 2,053 unmapped apartments that are subject to thc proposed
ordinance.
Tab
Ie 1 ~ Annua onverSlon of a Percenta2e 0 t e enta nIP
Convertible Number of Years to Reduce
Percentage of Converted Units Rental Supply
Rental Supply in Initial Year Below 100 Units'
5% 103 Units 60 Year¡;
10% 205 Units 29 Year¡;
15% 308 Units 19 Years
lC
f h R
IS
1y
* Does not include apartment projects bunt in the future.
If the City Council desires to use a different percentage than the 10% set forth in the draft ordinance,
Staff would revise the percentage set forth in section 8.54.040.B to reflect the percentage desired by
the City Council.
Alternatively, the City Council may prefer to establish a fixed number of units (as opposed to a
percentage of total rental units) that may be converted each year. The toll owing table illustrates three
conversion scenarios and how long it would take to convert all of the existing 2,053 unmapped
projects to condominiums.
Table 2 - Annual Conversion of a Flat Number of Convertible Units
Number of Units Years to Reduce
Converted Per Rental Supply
Year Below 100 Units·
100 20 Years
200 10 Years
300 7 Years
* Does not ine! ude apartment projects built in the future.
3°blv
The scenarios in Tables I and 2 above are based on the assumption that the maximum number of units
will convert eaeh year. These scenarios exclude existing mapped projects because they are exempt
ITom the ordinance. Also, these scenarios do not take into aCCOllnt new apartment projects that may be
developed in the future.
If the City Council desires to establish a fixed annual maximum, Staff would substitute the following
for the language in the Preliminary Application Process section of the proposed ordinance (Section
8.54.040.8.2).
"Conversion Would Not Exeeed Annual Maximum. The approval of the proposa1 would not
result in the conversion of units in excess of the Annual Maximum. The "Annual Maximum" for
the purposes of this Chapter shall be equal to _units. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the
number of units in a project proposed for conversion by itself exceeds the Annual Maximum, the
Community Development Director shall authorize the submittal of a Condominium Conversion
Permit applieation for the proposed project, unless the Community Development Director has
during that year authorized the submittal of a Condominium Conversion Permit application and
that authorization has not expired. If the Community Development Director authorizes the
submittal of an application to convert a project that exceeds the Annual Maximwn, the total
number of units in excess of the Annual Maximum shall be subtracted ITom the Annual Maximum
for the next year (and if necessary for each subsequent year)."
Implementation: A limited amount of Staff time would be required to calculate the current numher of
multi-family rental units and the percentage of units that would be eligible for conversion each year if
the City Council selects an annual limit hased on a percentage or specific number. Staff time would
also be required to track the number of conversions each year under either scenario. The cost of Staff
time needed to track conversions could be recovered through a Condominium Conversion Permit
application fee. The amount of the fee would be set fi.)rth in a future Resolution approved by the City
Council.
B. Continued Tenaney for Qualified Tenants
Section 8.54.110.C of the proposed ordinance requires property owners to provide each tenant with
one years' written notice of intention to terminate tenancy due to a condominium conversion.
Analysis: The Subdivision Map Act requires property owners to provide tenants with a 180-day
notice to vacate an apartment prior to tenninating a tenaney due to a condominium conversion. The
previous draft version of the ordinance required a 365-day extension for tenants that were age 62. or
older, disabled, living in an inclusionary unit, or living with minor children. However, at the March I,
2005 meeting, the City Council directed Staff to revise the ordinance and provide all tenants with a
365-day notice to terminate tenancy (Attachment 4). This one year notice will provide an tenants with
additional time to find housing within the community and reduce the potential negative impacts of
moving. The ordinance a1so provides tenants the flexibility to relocate during this period upon
delivering the property owner with a 30~days notice terminating the tenancy.
Implementation: A minimal amount of Staff time is required to implemcnt this policy. The property
owner is required to demonstrate that they have entered a binding lease extension or that the tenant has
refused an offer for an extension. The cost of Staff time needed to review this documentation could he
recovered through a Condominium Conversion Permit application fee. The amount of the fee would
be set forth in a future Res01ution approved by the City Council.
4 COLD
C. Financial Reloeation Assistance
Section 8.54.11 O.B and Section 8.54.11 O.D of the proposed ordinance requires the property owner to
provide a payment equa1 to 3 months rent to disabled tenants to help cover moving expenses. The
property owner is required to make this payment 15 days prior to termination of the eligible tenant's
tenancy.
Analysis: There are costs associated with moving and setting up new utilities. The Subdivision Map
Act does not require property owners to provide financial relocation assistance to displaced tenants.
Earlier versions of the proposed ordinance required the property owner to provide financial relocation
assistanee to all tenants. However, at the meeting on Mareh I, 2005, the City Council direeted Staff to
revise the ordinance to only provide disabled tenants with financial relocation assistance (Attachment
4). Disabled tenants may have ditTIculty moving their belongings on their own. Therefore, this
provision will provide financia1 assistance to those tenants that need the most assistance moving their
belongings.
The City Council further directed Staff to provide current average rental rates to assist the Council in
determining the appropriate amount of finaneial relocation assistance that should be provided to
disabled tenants. Staff surveyed the apartment communities in Dublin to obtain this information. The
survey revealed that the average rent for a 2 bedroom apartment ranges ITom $1,413 to $1,668 per
month. Therefore, the present average financial relocation assistance payment (equa1 to 3-months rent)
to disabled tenants would range ITom $4,239 to $5,004. If the City Council desires to establish
financial relocation assistance based on a different amount other than the 3~months rent set forth in the
draft ordinance, Staff would revise the amount set forth in Section 8.54.1l0.D to reflect the amount
desired by the City Council.
Implementation: A selfreporting proccss would be utilized and a minimal amount of Stafftime would
be required to implement this policy. The property owner would be required to notify each tenant of
their relocation benefits and provide Staff with a copy of the notice as dcscribed in Sections 8.54.050
and 8.54.110 of the ordinance.
D. Impact on Maps Currently Under Review:
The Planning Division is currently processing subdivision applications to create condominium units at the
following apartment projects. The Planning Commission is scheduled to take action on these applications
at its meeting on April 26, 2005.
Current Subdivision ADDlieations:
Iron Horse Trail Apartments (Dougherty Road)
Emerald Park Apartments (Hacienda Drive)
Total
117 units
324 units
441 Units
The proposed ordinance requires the owner of projects with maps recorded after September 7, 2004 to
obtain a Condominium Conversion Permit ITom the City. Therefore, both of the above referenced
projects would be subject to the proposed ordinance if adopted, and required to obtain a Condominium
Conversion Permit.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The California Environmenta1 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 tbund to bc exempt ITom the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), because it can be
Sz=oLÞ
seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed changes to the Municipal Code wil1 have a
significant effect on thc cnvirorunent.
CONCLUSION:
Apartment units provide a type of housing that is a key to a healthy diversity of housing stoek 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 ofrental apartments to for-sa1c condominiums and mitigate impacts to tenants.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staffrecommcnds that the City Cow1cil: 1) open publie hearing; 2) receive Staffs presentation and take
testimony from the applicant and public; 3) close the public hearing and deliberate; 4) waive the reading
and introduce the Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Attachment I) regulating the conversion of
existing apartments in the City to condominiums.
6 ~VJ
\ O()I z.. 9
ORDINANCE NO. - 05
AN ORDTNANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADDTNG 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 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 economie 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 rrom 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 economie. For
example, conversions may significantly affect the balance between rental and ownership
housing within the City, and thereby reduce the variety ofindividual choices of tenure,
type, price and location of housing. Conversion may also increase overall rents, decrease
the supply of rental housing for aJl income groups, displace individuals and families, and
disregard the needs of the housing market place.
D. Accordingly, the City Council 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 problems associated with condominium conversions, and to establish
requirements that must be ineluded 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.
127~~3.~
-1-
lo·L
4-IQ-05
ATTACHMENT /
727583.8
-¿ o-b \"2-'1
B. Provide a reasonable halance of ownership and rental housing in the
community and a variety of choices in the type and price of housing.
C. Estab1ish eriteria for the 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 relocatc 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 of rental
housing for very low-, 10w-, and moderate-income persons; and
F. Ensure that converted housing achieves a high degree of appearance,
qua1ityand safety.
8.54.020
CondomInium Conversion Dermed. 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 conversion of existing multiple unit
residential housing projects to any of the following, all as defined
in Civil Code section 1351 (a) a community apartment project, (b)
a condominium project, 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 pub1ic for any of the following
residential housing projects:
1.
Projects that had recorded subdivision maps for a community
apartment project, a condominium projeet, or a stock cooperative
on or before September 7, 2004.
2.
Projects in which none of the units have been occupied as renta1
units.
-2-
727583.8
3 ~ \-¿O¡
8.54.040
PrelimÙlary Applieation Process.
A. Preliminary Applications. Prospective applicants for Condominium
Conversion Permits shall initially submit a preliminary application on
forms provided by the City. Preliminary applications shall identifY the
owner or thc owner's authorized agent and the Jocation and number of
units in the building to be converted. The preliminary application shall be
accompanied by a prcJiminary application fee, the amount of which shall
be as set torth /Tom time to time by resolution of the City Council.
B. Department Review. The Community Deve10pment 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 Provided. 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 tè.)r conversion and
that 60 days have elapsed since the applicant made the last such
notification.
2. Conversion Would Not Exceed Annual Maximum. The
approval of the proposal wouJd not resu1t in the conversion of units
in excess of the Annual Maximum. The "Annual Maximum" for
the purposes of this Chapter shall be equal to ten percent (10%) of
the total number ofmultiple-tàmily units in developments of
twenty one (21) or more rental units in the City, as determined by
the City as of January I of each year. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, if the number of units in a project proposed tor
conversion by itself exceeds the Annual Maximum, the
Community Development Director shall authorize the submittal of
a Condominium Conversion Permit applieation for the proposed
project, unless the Community Development Director has during
that year authorized the submittal of a Condominium Conversion
Permit application and that authorization has not expired. If the
Community Development Director authorizes the submitta1 of an
application to eonvert a project that exceeds the Annual Maximum,
the total numbcr of units in excess of the Annual Maximum shall
be subtracted /Tom the Annual Maximum tor the next year (and if
necessary for each subsequent year).
Preliminary applications for each year may be submitted no earlier than
January I. Preliminary applications shall be processed in the order that
eompleted applications are submitted. If a preliminary application is
rejected because it fails to meet the requirements of subdivision B.I of this
Section, the preliminary application may be resubmitted. If the
-3-
727583.8
~Gb\--~(1
preliminary application is rejected because it fails to meet the
requirements of subdivision 8.2 of this Section, the preliminary
application may not be resubmitted unti1 no sooner than January I of year
following the preliminary application's submittal. In either case, the
resubmittal will not be entitled to priority over preliminary applications
submitted betwcen the original submittal and the rcsubmittal.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in 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 ofIntent 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.
8. The notiee shall be substantially as tollows:
"To the occupant(s) of [address]:
The owner(s) of this building, at [address], plan(s) to file an application
tor a Condominium Conversion Permit with the City of Dublin to convert
this building to condominiums, eommunity apartments, or a stoek
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 ofa
structure proposed tor conversion to condominiums, certain rights.
[signature of owner or owner's agent]
[date]
C.
In the event that the applicant is simultancously applying for a tentative
map and a Condominium Conversion Permit, the notice required by this
section may be combined with the notice required by Govemment Code
section 66452.9
-+-
727:'i¡;;3.8
':::J ò'b,-¡"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 evaluatc
issues related to maintenance of the property and consistency with prior site and
architectural approvals and, if necessary, require modifications to existing sitc
conditions. The applicant shall submit an application for Site Development
Review concurrently with the application for a Condominium Conversion Penllit.
The decision maker shall impose such conditions as arc necessary to require that
buildings, structures, fences, patio enclosures, carports, accessory bui1dings,
sidewalks, driveways, landscaped areas and uti1ity facilities are refurbished 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 aecompanied 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
construeted or installed, when the element was last replaced, the
approximate date upon which the element will require
replaeemcnt, the cost of replacing the element, and any variation of
the physieal condition of the element fÌ'om thc applieable zoning
and building code. The report shall identify each known defective
or unsafè element and sct forth the proposed corrective measures to
be employed;
2.
A report from a licensed structura1 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;
4.
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-
127!iR3.R
1.O O() \ -¿ .q
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 characteristics of the proj cet,
including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Square footagc and number of rooms in each unit;
2. Estimated sales priec range of units; and
3. Names and mailing address of all tenants.
D. A detailed 1ist of rents for each unit to be converted for the twelve (12)
months prior to the application;
E. Economic and demographic information regarding the current tenants as
required by the Community Development Director;
F. A Tenant Rc1ocation Assistance plan as required by Section 8.54.110;
G. A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) that
would be recorded and would apply to each owner of a condominium unit
within the project. The declaration shall include, but not be limited to,
pertinent information 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 maintenancc, and an indication of
appropriate responsibilities for maintenance of a11 improvements and
utility systems tor each unit. The city has the right to review and approve
the CC&Rs to ensure that (1) the appropriate conditions of approval are
inc1uded in them and (2) those provisions reflecting the city's conditions
may not be amended without city approval; and
H. Such additional information as the Community Development Director
deems necessary to ensure the compliance with this Chapter.
8.54.080
BuildÙlg Code Requirements
The building proposed for conversion and each unit within the bui1ding shall
comply with the current Housing Code as defined by se"iion 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
identity a11 items evideneed by the application or the inspection to be in
noncompliance with applicable building and housing standards. All such items
··6-
727583.8
Î D~ \-¿q
b
shall be corrected to the satisfaction 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
Condominium Conversion Pennit and before offering the unit for sale to the
general public, be required to provide tenants with an exclusive right to contract
for the purehase of the unit occupied by the tenant upon the same terms 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 of 90 days rrom the
date of issuance of the subdivision public report pursuant to section 11018 of the
Business and Professions Code, unless thc tcnant gives prior written noticc 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 publie report, the
applicant shall provide noticc to each tenant in the project of the fact that the
application for a public report wi11 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 oceupied by the tenant upon the same terms and conditions
that such unit will be initially offered to the general public or on terms more
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, and
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 hy mail
notity each tenant in writing that the public report has been issued and shall 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 issuanec of the public report, the
tenant's right to purchase granted pursuant to this section shall be extended for a
period equal to 80 days ITom mailing of the notification.
B. Affordable Units. If a tenant occupies an inclusionary unit pursuant to
the City's inc1usionary 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 inclusionary 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 UllÌt. Should the
City detennine that the tenant's household income is such that the tenant does not
quality 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
-7-
7275Iß.g
.g Db \í1, q
project not previously designated as an inclusionary unit to an
inclusionary unit in the income eategory of the unit purchased by
the tenant. The numher of bedrooms in the converted unit shall be
equal to or greater than the number of bedrooms in the unit
purchased by the teTIant.
2.
Ifthc City detcnnines 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
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. 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 the
tenant was previously rented.
8.54.100
Limitations on Rent Increases Pending Conversion. Rents shall
not be increased ITom the date of issuance of the Notice ofIntent 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 Real
Estate Commissioner pursuant to Business and Professions Code
section 11018, whichever occurs later. If the applicant withdraws
an application for a Condominium Conversion Pcnnit, this section
shall have no further effect.
8.54.110
Tenant Protections
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 conjunetion
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 that has a disability as defined in Section 54 of the
California Civil Code, that was a resident of the property both on the date
of the filing of the application for a Condominium Conversion Permit and
on the date of approval of the permit, and that does not intend to purchase
a unit in the conversion project.
--8-
727583.8
q GbI-z.Cj
C. Notice of Termination of Tenancy. Eaeh tenant of a project proposed
for conversion shall be given 365 days' writtcn notice of intention to
terminate tenancy due to the conversion. The notice shall indicate that the
tenant to terminate his or her tenancy upon 30 days' notice. The notice
shall also provide thc tenant with a summary description of the City-
approved Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan and information on where to
ohtain a copy. The notice shall also indicate that the tenant will be granted
a right to purchase the unit the tenant occupies. Eaeh person who becomcs
a tenant of a conversion project after the date of such 365 days' written
notice shaJl he 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 365 days' written notice prior to termination of tenancy due to
the conversion.
D. Financial Relocation Ass1stanee. The Plan shall include a provision that
requires the applicant to provide financial assistance equal to the rcot for
the three-month period prior to the filing of the application for the
Condominium Conversion Permit to any Eligible Tenant that re10cates
after the issuance of the Condominium 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 of365-day Notice of Termination of Tenancy period,
whiehever is earlier. Notwithstanding Subsection B ofthis Section, a
tcnant shall be deemed an Eligible Tenant and eligible for the financial
assistancc payment if the Condominium Conversion Penuit has not yet
been granted but 350 days have elapsed since the tenant was provided a
Notice of Tennination 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 whieh the applicant is legally
entitled.
8.54.120
Notifieation 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 shall be provided with a copy of the
Notiee of Intent to Convert prior to their execution of a lease. If
provided with such notice, prospective tenants shaJl not be entitled
to tenant relocation assistance provided to Eligible Tenants
pursuant to section 8.54.110.
8.54.130
Compliance with Inclusionary Zoning Regulations.
Condominium conversions shall be treated as "new residential
development projects" under and shall be required to comp1y with
the then-current Inelusionary Zoning Regulations in Chapter 8.68.
The decision maker shall inelude conditions in thc Condominium
Conversion Permit approval sufficient to ensure compliance with
-9-
7:n~K3.8
A.
\O~\-¿q
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
shall reeeivc a credit for the number of affordable units required at
the time the project was constructed. Any existing affordable units
within the project ereatcd pursuant to the City's Inclusionary
Zoning Regulations shall remain affordable units. Iffees were
paid in lieu of creating affordable units, the credit may only be
used to satisfY that portion of the obligation under the then-current
Inc!usionary Zoning Regulations that may be satisfied by payment
of fees in lieu of '-'Teation of affordable units.
By way of illustration, if at tbe time a 40-unit 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 and built a moderate-
income atIordable unit to meet the project's obligations under the
Inclusionary Zoning Regu1ations, then, upon the event of a
conversion of the 40-unit project, the converter would be entitled
to a two-unit credit against its Inclusionary Zoning obligations.
Thus, if the then~current Inclusionary Zoning Regulations require
that 12.5% of the writs be affordable and provide that at least 7.5%
of the units must be constructed, then the converter's Inclusionary
Zoning Obligation would be 3 units, which is 5 units minus the
two"unit eredit. One unit of credit would be associatcd with the
moderate-income affordable unit that would remain affordable. As
the other unit of credit was created by the payment of in-lieu fees
and is equal to 2.5% of the total units in the project, only one unit
of the remaining inclusionary obligation of 3 units could be
satisfied through the paymcnt of in-lieu fees. Pursuant to the
income-level allocations and rounding eonventions set forth in
section 8.68.030.B, the project's 3 affordable units are required to
be distributed to the three income categories as follows: I
moderate-income unit, I low-income unit, and I very low-income
unit. Since the existing unit is a moderate-income unit, the two
additional affordable units would have to be provided in the very
low- and low-income categories.
8.54.140
Development Standards - Utilities
Gas. Each condominium unit shall have a separate gas service where gas
is a necessary utility. If this provision places unreasonab1e economic
burden on the app1icant, the Building Official may approve an alternative
method.
-10-
727!i83.ß
)\ub lie'¡
B. ElectrIcity. Each condominium unit shall have a separate electrical
service, with separate meters and disconnects.
C. Telephone Company Aceess. The te1ephonc company serving the
location undcr eonversion shall have the right to construct and maintain
(place, operate, inspect, repair, replace, and remove) communication
facilities as it may ITom time-to-time require (including aceess) 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 be amended or tenninated without the
consent of the scrving telcphone company.
8.54.150
Findings Required for Approval
The decision maker shall not approve a Condominium Conversion Pennit unless
it finds:
A. That the proposed conversion is consistent with the General Plan and any
applicable specific plans, in particular with the objectives, policies, and
programs ofthc 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 conditioncd, conforms to th.e
requiremCllts of this Chapter.
C. That the approval of would not result in the conversion of units in excess
of the Annual Maximum, as defined in section 8.54.040. The Annual
Maximum shall be based on the year in which the Community
Development Director authorized the filing of a Condominium Conversion
Permit application. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the number of units
in a project proposed for conversion by itself exceeds tbe Annual
Maximum, the decision maker shall not rcfuse to approve application
because it would result in the conversion of units in excess ofthe Annual
Maximum.
8.54.160
Term and Lapse of Condominium Conversion Permit. A
Condominium Conversion Pennit shall lapse 1 year following the
date on which the pennit became effective, ifllie 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 Community Development Director finds that
thc 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 11018
--1]-
\-"J U \,70
t.- G ¡,~, I
authorizing the sale of the units proposed f()r conversion to the
public. Upon reecipt 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 puhlic
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 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 Waivers.
A. Authority to Waive or Adjust Requirements. The requirements of this
Chapter may be adjusted or waived if the property owner demonstrates to
the City Manager that applying the requirements ofthis Chapter would
take property in violation of the United States or California Constitutions.
A person seeking an adjustment or waiver shall apply to the City Manager
and provide such information as the City Manager finds is ncecssary to
determine whether applying the requirements ofthis Chapter would take
property in violation ofthe 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 Chapter 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 detenuination on the applieation and
issue a written decision. The City Manager's decision shall be final.
C. Adjustment or Waiver of Requirements. If the 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 obJigations undcr this
Chapter to the extent necessary to avoid an unconstitutional result. If the
City Manager determines no violation of the United States or CalitOO1ia
Constitutions would occur through application of this Chapter, the
requirements ofthis Chapter remain applicable.
Section 3: Effective Date. This Ordinanee shall take effect and bc enforced
thirty (30) days following its adoption.
n7sl:illl
-12-
\3cr¡£ rL8
Section 4: Posting. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this
Ordinance to he postcd in at least three (3) public places in thc City of Dublin in
accordance 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
A TIEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk
City Attorney
727:H:3.¡;;
·-13-
..
I L\- un z..q
C I T Y C L E ¡:r-K
File # D[7/]I3]!bJ-[6JfOl
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 1, 200~
Open Publie Hearing;
Receive Staff Presentation and take testimony ftom the
applicant and public;
Close Public Hearing and Deliberate; and
Waive the Reading and Ad.opt the Urgency Ordinance
(Attachmtmt 1) Regulating the Conversion of Existing
Ap:n1:ments in the City to Condominiums
Waive the Reading and Introduce the Non-Urgency
OrdÎnlll1ce (Attachment 2) Regulating the Conversion of
Bxistìng Apartments in the City w Condominiums
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 gcn~!ltl'd by establishing a
new tax basis with the sale of each unit. The: full clltent of the
financial impa.cts would be bllSCd on the number of oonvcrsions th!lt
occur. Similarly, the sale of an apârtment complex :&om one group of
investors to another could also create additional property tax revenues
for the City. Implementation of the Condominium Conversion
Ordinance will have all impaet on Staff time in relation to
adlnioì~fering and monitoring policy provisions. The impact on Staff
time is discussed in the implementation sections of this Stnff Report.
SUBJECT~
ATTACHMENTS:
RECOMMENDATION:
If
FINANCIAL ST¡\TEMENT:
PA 04-044 Condominium Conversion Ordinallce Regulating the
Conversion of Existing Apmtments in the City to Condominiums.
Report Prepared by: Jeff Baker, Associate Planner~
1.
2.
Urgency Condominium Conversion Ordinance
Condominiwu Conversion Ordinance (Non urgency
ordinance)
List of Oublin Apartments
City Coun¡.-il Staff Report (Dated September 7, 2004)
City Couneil Statflleport (Dated November 16,2004)
without attachments
Planning Commission Staff Report (Dated January 11,2005)
without attachments
Plarurin¡¡ Commission Resolution 05-02 Recommending that
the City Council Adopt 110 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 ftom David Van Atta Dated January 5, 2005
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
COPIES TO:
\~+
ATTACHMENT Ò'
____..______¡¡"III___...___...___··_···__..
G:\PA#\ln04\1W-D44 C..d. Con...ûo. zO....\«Ir ·H~.d.<
r
---- -- ----...ß"'7
ITEM NO.~
\ S- C>b \ L... O¡
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Apartmertt units provide a type of housing that is a key to a healthy diversity of housing stock in the
cOIIUDl.lnity. Apartments provide housing for all levels of aft'ordabiüty in the community and are II
valuable tool for providing work force housing_ Staff believes that the conversion of one or two of the
City's apartrn¡::nt communities could have a IllIIjor impa.ct on the diversity of the City's housing stock il'l
that it would remove ftom the market a significant percentage of the C}¡jsting 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, !he loss of these units would l.ikely decrease the vacancy rate, may
incroase rents, and this may in turn further exacerbate the City's shortage of affordable rental units. This
might cause a lasting imbalanee in the diversity ofbousing stock in the City.
In the past 10 years the City has sc<:n the development of approximately 1,500 residential apllItJrlent
units, for an overall total of approximately 3,172 units throughout the City. It should be noted that
approximatdy 1,119 of these units are already mapped for condominiwns but continue to operate as
apartment communities (Attachment 3). However, the California Depwimcnt of Real Estate (DRE) has
not issued a Public Report tor these properties. The Publie 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 reeeived a Public Report fium 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 rrom several existing apartment OWIICfS indicating their
intent to file subdivision docuroentSl to convert their proj ects to eondominiums. The City is currently
processing subdivision applications to convert the following apartment projcOts to for-sale condominiums.
Current Subdivision Aoolications
Iron Horse Trail Apartments (Dougherty Rooo) .
Arehstone- Emerald Park Apartmenbi (Hacienda Drive) -
Total
11 7 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 ..wsting apartments in the City to for-sale
condominiums (Attachment 4). Following that meeting, Staff studied the various mccl1an.isms for
regulllting condominium conversions. This Study ineluded 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 Q:t1 this
Study, Staff developed a series of policy alternativcs for the City Council to consider. On November 16,
2004, Staff presented thcsc poliey alternatives to the City Council (Attachment S). The City Cmmeil
provided Staff with direction regarding the development of the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance. The City Council further directed Staff to hold II meeting with the ownt;!r$ of apartments
within the City of DubJiß in order to infonn them of these policy recommendations and so]icit their
commenlq. On December 9,2004, Stl1.t'fheld a meeting with these property owners and other interested
parties. Staffutilized the feedback received at this meeting to further develop the proposed Condomi11ium
Conversion Ordinance. Feedback from the property owners is included in the iII1lÙysis section of this
Staff Report. On JiII1U!1f)' 11,2005, the PIannin¡ Commission adopted a resolution recommending that
the City Council adopt an urgeney ordinance and a non urgency ordinanee, which are included as
Attachments I and 2 of this Staff Report, to regulate the convernion of existing apartments to
condominium. The Planning Commission adopted the resolution after maldng several minor
modifications to the proposed ordinanee. A discussiun of the Planning Commission's COIll!fients and
modifications are presented in th., Analysis section of this Staff Report.
2~1+
I i..Q 0 I -z..-q
Proce.~fI: b
At the preseut time sbould u property owner wish to convert an existing apørlment complex to for-s¡),l~
eondonriniums, the property owner mllst record a Condominium Map and obtain a Public Report fì:om the
DRE. The applieation for a Condominium Map would be processed in accordance with State law 1mder
the Subdivision Map Act. Thc Subdivision Map Act contains provisions that require the property owner
to 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-eonversion ordinance. Statc 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, § 655BO(d». For example, a condominium eonver1iion ordinance
could limit conversions to maintain II balance of hous1'I\g stock and· could require the provision of
affordabte units under the City's Inelusionary Zoning Ordinance.
Botn of the subdivision applications rcferenced above would only be subject to the Condomlniwn
Conversion Ordinance if it is adopted before the City takes II.Ction on these subdivision maps. Ordinarily,
under the Subdivision Map Act, the City may only IIpply standards in effect at the tîme that lID. 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 eondominiurn-oonversion 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 Ordinance in effect on
the date the City approves or disapproves a tentative map (Gov. Code, § 66474.2(b)). The Sl.Ibdivision
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 sl.lbdivision applications referenced above had not been
d=cd complete.
Neighboring Jurisdictions:
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 provis;oM
which restrict tl1e conversion of apartments to condominiwns and provide relocation benefits to displaced
tenants. The following is a synopsis of the policy eomponents contained in these ordinances:
The CIty of LIvermore.'
· Application of the ordillW1ce: Projects with 2 or more units.
· Limitations on Conversions: The City Council must annually determine the maximunn numher of
apartments that arc permitted to convert.
· Limitations on Rent Increases: Rent increases are not permitted from the date a tentative map
applieation is filed until the tenant relocates.
· Relocation Assistance: All tenants receive finandal relocation assÎBtance equal to 2-months rent.
Seniors are offered rent controlled 1ifetime leases. Low and moderate income tenants shall be
offered a nrinimunn of a 3-year, rent controlled lease. Tenants wìth school aged children receive a 6-
month lewse el<tension.
· Building Code Requirements: Projects shall confonn to the appliCllble building code in effect at the
time the last building permit was issued.
· Site Development Review; Landscapillg and buildings shall bo ,eviewed by the PlWllling
Department and refurbished and restored to acbieve a bigh degree of appearance.
The Ciiy of Walnut Creek:
· AppHcation of the ordinance: Projects with 2 or more units.
· Limitations on Conversions: conversion is limited to no more than S% of the City's potentially
convçrtible rental stock in anyone calendar year.
· Limitations on Rent Increases: Rent inen:llscs are not permitted for a period of 2-yolII"s from the date a
3~\,",
t tati· I· . . filed ·th h . I í Õì_ \ L£í
en' ve map app Icatton IS W1 t e CIty. U
· Relocation Assi stance: All tenants receive financilll relol':ation a.ssistance equal to 2-months rent.
Seniors are offered rent controlled lifetime leases. Low and moderilte income tenants shall be offered
a minimum of a 3-year, rent controlled lease.
· Building Code Requírements: Projects shall confonn to the applicable building code in efftx-i at the
time the last building permit was is~ued.
· Site Development Review: Landscaping IIlld building:¡ shan be refurbished and restored to achÜ:ve II
high degree of appearance.
PROPOSED POLICY cOMPONENTS;
The following is a disC\l5sion of the key policy components of the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinanl':e. The discussion of each component includes an analysis of the poli~"y aJong with a discussion
of the feedback received at the meeting with the Property Owners and rooommCl1dation~ made by the
Planning Commission. In some imrtll1lces, the ordinance has been modified based on the feedback and
recommendations that Staffreccived. 'This analysis also iI1cludes a discussion of the impacts on Staff time
a..~ a result of implementing these provisions.
Á. Application of the Condominium Conversion Ordinanee
The following criteria would be used to identitY multi-family properties that are subject to me
proposed Condominium Conv¡m;ion Ordinanee:
·
Residential rental projects in which units have been occupied a..~ rental units (Attachment 1 -
Section 8.54.030);
Developments containing 21 or ml1re dwelling units under the same ownership that pre held
for lease to the general public (Attachment 1 - Section 8.54.020); and
Apartment projects with 11 recorded subdivision map on September 7,2004, would be exempt
from the Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Attachment I . Section 8.54.0.30).
·
·
Analysis: The conversi¡}n of units that have already been occupi~ could result in the displacement
of residents. Therefore, apartments would be subject to the ordinanee if they have already been
occupied. Tenants that would be displaced by conversion would be eligible to reeeive relocation
benefits required by the proposed Condominium Convmdon Ordinance a:J discussed in Section D of
this Staff Report.
The original rerommendation to include a provision to make all projects with 20 or more rental W1Ìt:;
subject to the Condominium Conversion Ordinance is consistent with the threshold that has been
established for the existing Inc1usiona:ry Zoning Regulations (Section 8.68). This would exclude
duplexes and small apartment buildings from the ordinance:. The 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 IuI.s been modified by the Planning Commission as
discussed below, to apply to projects with 21 or more units.
The requirement to obtain a public report from the DRE would make units that have already been
mapped for condominiums 5ubject to the proposed Condominium C'..onversion Ordinaru::é. The City
Attorney's Office's legal review concluded that only the Public Report vests the building owners'
rights to sell tbe 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 fur any units within the City that
have been mapped thr condominilJJ)1S. However, if all 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. hnplementation of thi~ provision would reduce the potential impact to these tenants.
4 cz> \ '"\
I~ r5b 12.C1
This approach to regulating the conversion of mapped apartments to condominiums is not currently
used by surrounding jurisdictions bl.lt is common in Southern CaHfornia. This provision has been
modified by the Planning Commission as discussed below, and would exempt existing projects with
Condomínium Maps.
Cily Cuunc:í! Meeting (11/16/04); The policy alternatives that wer~ pre5tmt~d to the City Council
included an alternative that would make existing projects with rccorded Condominium Maps subject
to the provisions of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance if the Department of Real Estate
(DRE) has not issued 8. public report for the project.
The policy alternatives that were presented to the City CQ\.Incil also ine1uded a recommendation to
apply the ordinWlC<;: to apartment projects with 20 or morc units. The City Council directed Staff to
prepare an ordinance that i.ncluðed both of these provisions.
Property Owner's Meeting (1219/04): Several. property owners expressed concern about applying
the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance to properties that have ¡¡!ready ptocesslld a Final
Map with the City. Thes~ property owners indicated that approval of their existing condominium
maps implied certain approvals from the City and that application of a Condominium Conversion
Ordinance would effectively reverse these approvals IWd devalue their properties. Staff also
received a letter prepared by David Van Atta on behalf of property owners in the: City (If Dublin
(Attachment 9). This letter argues that California law does .not permit the regulation of the
conversion of projet-1S wit1! approved Condominium Maps. The City Attorney's Office has
revicwed 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 AIm Apllflments requested that the ordinance apply to properties with 21 or
more units in order to exclude it fi'om the ordinance. The Evan Alan Apartments hilS 20 units and
has processed a Final Condominiwn Map but does not have II Public Report from the DRE.
The property owner(s) also expressed concern that they were not notified of the City Council
meetinli. held on September 7, 2004. II Willi at this meeting that the City Council initiatlld the
development of Ùle 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 oW1'\er(s) were:
inadvertently not sent a copy of the hearing notice. Staff hils updated the address list for the public
hearing noticcs 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/()5): The Planning Commission raised concern that applying
the ordinance to projects with approved CondomÍ1ùum Maps would reverse previous approvals that
were granted by the City. BiII!ed on this concern, the: Planning Commission recommended that the
City Council adopt a Condominium Conversion Ordinance that excludes existing projects wÎth
maps. There are six existing apartment projects, with II total of 1,119 units, with1n the: City of
Dublin that have recorded CondominÎWtl Maps (Attachment 3). The City approved these
Condominium Maps at the time that the original entitlemønts were granted for these projectB. Aß
noted above, these projects wOl.lld be exelnpt from the provisions of the proposed CondoJ'ninium
Conversion Ordinance. These projects are also exe:mpt from the condominiwn conversion
provisions of the Subdivision Map Act because they a.lready have existing maps.
The Planning Commission also took testimony from Mr. Josaph Au, owner of the Evan Alan
Apartments. Mr. Au requested that rhe ordinance apply to projects with 21 or mOrê units rather than
projects with 20 or more units as originally proposed. The Planning Cotn.nUssion directed Staff to
modity Ùle proposed ordinance to make projects with 21 or more units subject te the ordinance.
5Sb If
\q Db I "2.í
Therefore, the Evan Alan Ap:Jrtments would be exempt from the ordill1U1ee because it has 20 units
and an approved Condominium Map.
Implementation: Implementation of these policy components w(}1J1d not have a fiseal impact on
their own. However, Staff time would be required in order to implement the overall ordinanee,
B. LimiÚ1tiODs 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 pennitted if Ihe eonvmion reduces the total number of rental
units below 30% of the total housing supply.
Analysis; This provision sets clearly defined standards that can be used to determine if rental units
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, multi-fll.lIlily renlal units reprcsented
approximately 30% of the total housing supply. This ratio was consistent with the composition of
the nationwide housing supply at that time and CJlSures 1\ diversity of housing types to meet the
needs of different economic segments of the community. Implementation of this provision in the
ordinance would preserve a core stock of renta1 housing consistent with the housing ratio identified
at the time that the Housing Element was updated.
Cily Council Meeting (J 1/16/04): The policy alternatives that Staff presented. to the City Council
included a rec{)mmendation to require a 30% rental housing ratio in order to permit 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 Couneil also included a recommendation that
would require, as a prerequisite 10 conversion, that the City wide vacancy rate excecd 5%
(Attachment 5). The City of Dublin General Plan Housing Element (Appendix A, Dublin Housing
Stock) ind.icates that a vaclUlcy rate of 5% is considered idcal for adequate conswner mobj}jty and to
ensure that alternative housing is available for tenants that are displaced by conversion. The City
Council recommended that this provision bc included in the draft ordinanee.
Property Owner's Feedback (12/9/04): The property owners raised concern that the 30% housing
ratio identified in the Housing Element waS an arbitrary number and not based on an anulysis of the
needs of the community. These owners feel that condominiums also play an important role in the
community.
The property owners a1so expressed concern about requiring a 5% vacancy rlite as a prerequisite to
conversion. The owner's indicated that vacancies are at least purtially a reflection of the rents that a
property is eharging. Therefore, the vacancy rate can be manipulated by an increase or decrease in
rent. Staff also discovered a number of implementation issues associa.ted with this provision.
Vacancy nrtes are difficult to track. Professional vacancy reports do not typically track smaller
apartment complexes and would not necessarily give an accunlte representation of the overall
vacancy rate within the City. Staff could periodically survey property owners in order to detennjne
the vaclll1C)' rate. However, this would be a labor intensive task and it would be difficult 10 verify
the accuracy of the information that is collected. Based on the concerns raised by the property
owners and the difficulty in tracking vac¡mcy rates, Staff has decided to recommend against
including a vacancy requirement in the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Planning Commission Feedback (J/ll/05): As previously mentioned, the Planning Conunission
recomrnt'ndcd excluding exi~ting projects with Condominium Maps from the Condominium
6"t) \~
-zD vb) L'l
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 tho'J
residential permits is!!Ued were for multi-fwnily rental housing (excluding existing projects with
Condominium Maps). The ratio would increase to 25%, for the same period, if existing projects
with Condominium Maps were included in the caleulation. Therefore, no eonversions would be
pennitted until additional multi- fillIlily rental housing is constructed and the housing ratio exceeds
30%.
Staff also estimated the housing ratio when the City reaches build out. This analysis Wag done using
2000 Census data, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) projections, and the current
General Plan LlUld Use Map. This ratio is based on the assumption that all undeveloped parcels
with existing MediumlHigh and High Density Gcneral Plan Land Use designations will be
developed !IS rental units. However, it is W1likely that all of these parcels will lie developed as
apartments without any for-sale units. Excluding the existing projects with Condominium M!!ps,
multi-fwnily rental units are anticipated to represent a maximum of approximately 32% of the total
housing supply when the city rcaehes build out.
Condominiums help to providc a variety of ownership opportunities for different ewnomic
segments oftbe community. Staff believes that it would be undesirable to only build apartments to
the exclusion of for-sale-condominiums. Condominiums provide many first timo buyers with
!lffordable bomeownmhip opportunities. But, the construction of for-sale condominiums would
reduce the ratio of rental units below 32% of the total housing supply. For e¡¡ample. if half of the
undeveloped Medium/High and High Density parcels are developed as fONalc-condominiums the
ratio of multi-family rental units would equal 21 % of the total housing supply. Therefore,
condominium conversions would not be penI1itted because the ratio of :multi.family rental housing
would be b",l(lw 30% of the total housing supply. The Condominium Conversion Ordinance would
in effect prohibit thc conversion of additionlll rental units to for-sale-condominiums. However,
should the City Council wisb to set the housing ratio below 30%, they could direct Staff to modifY
the ordinance prior to adoption.
lrnpl~m~ntati'm: A minimal amount of Staff time would be required to calculate tbe current housing
ratio. Thc City IÙready collects the infol'!lurtion that is needed to calculate the ratio. The cost of
Staff timo needed to caleul!!te the ratio would be recovered through the pro application fee deseribed
in Section 8.54.040.A oftbe ordinance.
C. Limitations on R.ent 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.
appro,·aJ of the Condominium Conversion Permit or six months following tho issuance of!! public
report by the Department of Real Est!!te (DRE). whichever occurs later.
Ar¡¡;¡IY$is; Restrictin¡ 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 noticiug TCquirancnts of the
Subdivision Map Act and the proposed City of Dublio Condominium Conv~sion Ordinance. Rent
would be h",ld in place for a minimum of 6-12 months lmder this provision.
City Council Meeting (11/16/04); This provision was included in the policy recommendations to the
City Council. The City Council diTccted Staff to include this provision in the proposed
Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Property OwIIer's Meeting (Jl/9/04).- The property ownCTS did not express concern regarding this
~pecific provision.
7"b ,+
~\ öOl1.p¡
Planning Commission Meeting (1/11/05): The Planning Commission is in support oftlús provi~ìon
and did not direct Staff to m¡¡ke further modifications.
bTIpI/'mlJnt,ition: A self r"PÇlrtíng process would be utilized and a minimal amount of Staff time
would be required t.o implement this policy. The property owner would be reqWred to notifY each
tenant of the limitation on rent inereases and provide Staff with a copy of the notice as described in
Section 854.050.A of the proposed ordinance.
D. Tenant Relocation As5lstance PIon
Section 8.54.110 of the proposed ordinance requires the Applieant to implement a Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan. The relocation plan ,shall be prcpllI'Cd by the Applicant and indicate the
Applicant's commitment to provide tenants with the benefits required by the Condominium
Cot\version Ordinance. These benefits include finaneial assistance with moving expenses and an
extensìon of lease terms for qualified tenants.
Financial Relocation Assistance
Section 8.54.11 O.D of the proposed ordinance requires the property owner to provide each tenant
with a payment equal to 3 months rent to belp cover moving expenses. The property owner is
required to make this payment within 10 da~ of the tenant's waiver to purcha.se their existing unit.
Analysis: There are Cl)sts associated with the physical act of moving and settîng up new utilities.
However, the Subdivision Map Act does not require property owners to provide relocation assistance
to displaced tenlll"lts. The ordinancc requirement to pay moving eJ\penses is intended to reduçe the
financial burden that is plaeod on tenants a.s a result of the property owner's decision to convert and
the tena.n ts' subsequent need to relocate.
City Council Meeting (11/16/04): The policy alternatives that were presented to the City Council
included a recommendation to pay moving expenses ~ual to 2-months rent within 14-days of
relocation. However, the City Council directed Stat'fto require a payment equal to 3-months prior to
relocation. This provision has been included in the propOsed ordinance as requested by the Çity
Council.
Property Owner's Meeting (12/9/04): Còncern 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 th~
sho\Ùd be required to pay relocation expenses for tenants that would likely move regardless of a
conversion. They suggested that rcloeation 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 givcn year could be forced to move early as a result
of a conversion. These tenants will incur movini expenses that they might not have otherwise
incurred if the property was 110t cunverted. Many of these residents may nl,t have the financial
resources to pay mavins expenses. Therefore, Staff continues to recommend the fmancial rel()cation
assistance provision for all tenants.
Planning CQmmi.5siQn Meeting (1/11/05): The Planning Commission is in support of this provision
and did not direct Staff to moke furthl'r modifications.
1mplementation: A self r~orting process would be utilized and a minimal amount of Staff time
would be required to implement this policy. The property owner would be required to notifY each
8'1>\i
aÇ). ðì.---- 11_P¡
tenant of their relocation benefits and provide Staff with a copy of the noticc as dc:scribed III Seclróru;
8.54.050 and 8.54.110 of the drlÚt: ördinance.
Ümtu.ued Ten,,"cy for Qualified Tenants
Section 8.54.IIO.E of the proposed ordinanoe requires property I)Wt)c:m¡ to provide a 12-month
extension of tenancy to all eligible tenants beyond the 180 day period required by the Subdivision
Map Act (Section 66427.1(c). This 12-month extension shall be provided ¡fthe head of household
or spouse meets the following eligibility criteria:
·
Has attained age 62 or older;
Has a disability as defined by Section 54 Qfthe California Civil Code;
b a resident of a.o inclusionary housing unit; or
Is residing with one or more minor dependent children.
·
·
·
Analysis: There is a limited amount of housing that meets the need¡¡ of senior, disabled and low~
income tenants. For example, a disabled tenant may require an apartment on the ground floor.
Ground tloor apartments are harder to find and tenants may require an extended period of time to
locate ¡¡uch a unit. The Subdivision Map Act requires property owners to give teoants a ] 1m-day
noli\;(: to vacate an apartment prior to terminating a tenancy due to a condominium conversion.
However, l80-days may not be a sufficient amOlØ1t of time for a displaced tenant with special nccds
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 proeess. The 12-month extension included in the proposoo
CondoMinium Conversion Ordinance would provide these tenants with additional time to find
housing within the communíly and further reduce the potential negative impacts of moving.
City Council Meeting (1116104): The policy alternatives that were presented to tbe City Council
included a recömmendation to provide 6. 3-year lease extension to tenants that were seniors, disabled
or low income (Atta¡;wnent 5). However, the City Council expressed concern that a 3-year
e¡¡tension may be overly burdensome to property owners and result in discrimination against renting
to these tenants. The City Council recommended the 12-month extension that is included in the
proposed ordinance.
Property Owrwr's Meeting (12/9104)_' Thc property ow:ners 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 rupport of this provision
and did not direct Staff to make further modifications.
Implementation: A minimal amount of Staff time is required to implement this policy. The property
owner is required to demonstrate that they have entered a binding lease extensio() or that the tenant
has refused an offer for all extension. The cost of Staff time needed to revicw this documentation
could be billed to the Applicant on a timo and materials basis.
E. Jncluslonary Zoning Regulations
Section 8.54.] 30 of the proposed Condominium Conversion OrdillW1ee treats OOlldominium
conversions as new residential devt1lopment projects. As new residential development projects,
1hese converted properties would be required to comply with current Inclusionary Zoning
Regulations. The current lnclusionary Zoning Regulations require new developmenL~ to provjde
12.5% of the units as affordable (Section 8.68). However. if the project had complied with. the
TnchL~ionary Zoning Regulations in effect at the time the project was built, the converted project will
9'b'i
.9, ~ 0-, I 2..-9
only be required to make up the difference. Thus. if the project has complied with a S% inclus'tõ'nary
requirement at the Wnc it was constructed, then the conversion would be required to satisfY the
remaining 7.5% inclusionary obligation under the cxisting ordinance.
Analysis; The eonversion fu¡m apartments to condominiums could result in a substantilllloss of
market rate and affordable rental units. However, condominiums are ofteo seen as an affordable
form of homeownership. The conversion of apartments to condominiums will provide the
commwÜty with additional affordable ownership opportunities. In addition, the provision to require
converted properties to eonform to the InclusiotlllfY Zoning Regulations will make 125% of the
units affordable to a segment of the market that might not otherwise be able to purehllSc II
condominium unit.
City Counäl Meeting (1116/04): The policy Blternmives that were presented to the City Council
included a recommendation to require converted properties to comply with current Inc1usionary
Zoning Regulations. 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
crœ¡t for the portion of any affordable obligation that has already bflCll met. However, the
ordinances include a provision that gives property owners credit for in-lieu fecs that were previously
paid to meet their affordable obligation.
Planning Commission Meeting (II11/05): The Planning COmlIÙssion is in support of this provision
and did not dire:ct Staff to make: further modifications.
Implementation: 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, tills Staff time could b¡: billed
to the applicant on a time and materials basis.
F. Tenant's Ri~t to Purcbase Units
The proposed ordinill1ce (Section 8.S4.090.B) re:quires property owners to provide tenants living in
inclusiooary units with lID exclusive right to contract for the purchase of thCl unit occupied by the
tenant at the sales price set forth in the InclusioDIIfY Zoning Regulations based on the tenant's
annual household ineome.
Analysis: The Subdivision Map Aet requires propClrty owners to provide tenants with IIIl exclusive
right to eontract for the purchase of their existing unit upon the same terms and conditions that such
wdt wiU initially be offered to the gwerlll public or on terms more favorable to tho tenont.
However, the Subdivision Map Act does not address inelusionary units. The provisions of the
proposed Condominium Conversion Ordimtncc will provide tenants that reside in ÍnI.'Jusionary units
with the same preferential treatment that market rate tenants receive. The purchase price would be
based on the tenant's household inC<Jme in accordance with the lnclusionary Zoning Regulations
(S¡:ction 8.68). This could enable tenants that rcnt affordable units to purchase their cxisting u.nit at
an affordable purchase price and avoid being displl!Ct'd by the conversion.
City Cour¡çil MI!ßting (1/16/04).- The policy alternatives that were presented to thCl City Couneilon
November 16, 2004. included a recommendation to extend the right to purchase to inclusiollary
tenants at a price consistent with the Inc1usionary Zoning Ordinance. The City Council directed
Stafi"to inelude: this provision in the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
lO'b't
Prr;perty Owner's Meeting (/2/9/04)-' Staff discussed this provision with the property .g.~~t ~ C¡
meeting on December 9111. The property OW11eTS did Mt provide eomments to Staff regarding
changes to this provision.
Planning Commission Meeting (1/11/05): The Planning Commission recommended notifYing
tenants of the fillWlciaJ obligations of purchasing a wmiominium. This indudes the creation of a
homeowner's association and CC&R's thllf: specifY these financial oblig¡¡tions. Section 8.54.090 of
the draft ordinance has been modified based on this reconuuendation (Attachm~ts 1 & 2).
implementation: A substantial amount of Staff time could be required to implement this policy if II.
large number of units are permitted to eonvert at one time. However, this StafftÎme oould be billed
to the applicant on a time and materials basis.
G. Building Code Requirements
Section 8.54.080 of the proposed Condominium Couven;ion Otdinance requires converted units to
meet the bui1ding elide requirements in effect at the time of cons.truction. Any retrofitting or
remodeling work would be required to meet CUlTent 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 defincd by the Dublin Munieipal Code.
Analysis: Many existing residential dwellings, including apartments, within the City of Dublin were
bui1t prior to the current building code requirements. These dwellings are oonsidcrcd safe and
inhabitable SÙl.1ctures. Therefore, the City does not typically require costly retrofitting of these
properties to bring them up to curnmt building code requirements. Conversion of existing
apartments to condominiums docs 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 would be required to meet current building code requirements. The
Housing Code provides minimum standards for life safety. Existing apartments are required to meet
these current Housing Code requirements. Converted units would be required to conform to the
housing code at the time of conversion.
City Council Meeting (n /161(4): This provision was included in the pol\cy recommendations to the
City COUllcil. The City Counoil direl.-1:6d Staff 10 include this provision iß the proposed
Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Property Owner's Meeting (12/9/04): The property owners did not express ,",oncert1 with this
provision.
Planning Comm~¡.¡illn Meeting (1/11/05): The P1anning Commission directed Stllffto rcsoarob and
advise the City Council on tho foa.sibility of requiring eonverted projoots to meet accessibility
requirements under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Staff research 00 the federal
ADA requiren)(,nts ¡!j\d determined that the ADA is regulated by the Federal Govenunent not the
City. However, the State regulates accossibility requirements under the California. Building Code,
Title 24, and these standards are enforced by local jurisdietions. The accessibility requirements
under Title 24 are in general more stringent than the requirements under tho ADA. It should be
ooled that projects tha.t were built a.fter 1992 arc in substantial conformance with cumnt Title 24
standards. Staff has rcscarehed the feasibility and eoonomic issues associated with requiring
converted proj eets to meet eurrent accessibility standards under Title 24. These requirements apply
to the projcct site and !l8sociated buildings.
11"b'1
Site Accessibility: .05 Lib 12-'1
Title 24, like ADA, includes site design requirements to ensure that new projects are Il!òQcssible to
people wìth disabilities. In order for the project site to be accessible to people with disabílities, the
parking lot, walkways and other eommon 8rCa mU$l; meet maximu.m slope standards and provide
wheel chair access. Should the City Council decide to require existing projects tA:J meet current site
accessibility requiremcnts undcr Title 24, projects that were built prior to 1992 would requ.ire
modifications to the site design in order to meet these standards. The site modifications to thcse
projects would require a limited amount of work at a minimal COSt to the property owner.
Building Acce¡¡siblJit;JI:
Title 24 also applies to the design of the units within the aparbnCllt project. Current Title 24
standards for new construction require all ground floor units and 10% of the total units within II
project to be adaptable for accessibility to people with disabilities. In order to tx: conmdered
adaptable, these units must be accessible to people with disabilities including II. person in wheel
chair accessible, and the interior of the units must be designed to accommodate II wheel chair and
people with other disabilities. In order to acoommodate a wheel chair the door fÌ'llmes must meet
minimum width requirements, the kitchen and at lell$t one bathroom in eöeh adaptable unit must
meet minimum size requirements to ensure wheel chair maneuverabiHty and the kitchen and
bathroom must be designed with IIdjustable CQunt('lt'!l 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 whoel chair accesS to adaptable Unit8. The
kitchen and one of the bathrooms may need to be enlarged to meet minimwn size requirCltlents.
The kitchen and bathroom counters and Qabinets would need to be modified in order to be functional
for a person with disabilities. These modifications could be cost prohibitive and would likely
discourage: the conversion of older apartments.
The Planning Commission directed Staff to ¡nfoml the City Council of the feasibility ofmodifyíng
existing projects to meet cWTent accessibility standards. However, the Planning Commission did
not dircr;:t Staff to modifY the! ordinance. Therefore, should the City Council wish to require
converted projects to meet current accessibility standards undcor Title 24, the City Council could
dirC!et Staff to modity the ordinallce 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 II CÎty inspector
to review the property and the report would be billed to the property ownC1' on a time and materiaJs
basis as part of tho cost for a Condominium Conversion Permit. 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 fees.
H. SJte Development Review
Section 8.54.060 of the proposed Condominium Conversion ordinance requires Site Development
Review (SDR) conCIJrrent with a request to convert to condominiums. The SDR will allow the City
to eVlÙuilte the physical appearance of the property and requ.ire work to refurbish and restore the
project as necessary to achieve a high degree of appearance, quality and safety.
Analysis: A Condominium Map ¡s 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 example, the City could receive an application to convert an existing
apartment eomple:x with deferred maintenance that creates an eyesore within the community. This
deferred maintel1lUlce could include external painting and landscape maintenance to repair sparse or
overgrown landseaping. The SDR permit will provide the Plannil1g Commission with a mechanism
12~1+
8lt2 C5).... 2C¡
to evaluate the physical appearance of!he property and impose conditioru3 that require remedhrl' work
to maintain the visual appearance of the City of Dublin.
CI1y Council Meeling (1/16/04): Staff presented this policy alternative to the city Council for
consideration. The City Counci1 directed Staff to include a provision requiring II Site Development
Review permit in this ordinance.
Property Owner'of Meeting (1219/04): The property owners raised concern that the Sitc
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
architcctural approvals. The intent of this provision is not to reopen full site development review
but simply to onsW'e that the property remains in confonnance with existing approvals.
Planning Commission Meeting (//11/05): The Plwming Commission is in support of this provision
and did not direct Staff to make further modificl!.tÏons.
Implementation: Community Development Departrn~t Staff time would .be required to perform a
physieal inspection of the property and review proposed improvements. However, the cost of this
review wou]d be included in the application fcc for 8 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 lS061(b)(3), because it can be
seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed changes to the Municipal Codc will have II
significant 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 oue or two of the City's IIl'arttnetJt communities could
have a major impact on the diversity of the City's housing stock. in that it would remove ftom the market II
significant pen:tmtage of the existing rental units. In consideration of the potential impacts Staff hIlS
pr~ared 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 II, 2005, the Plmming Commission voted 4.0 to adopted a resolution recommending that the
City Council adopt an urgency ordinance and II non urgeney ordinance, with modified language, to
regulate the COlIYersion of rental IIplU'tl1\\I!\ts to for sale condominiums. The urgency ordinsncc and non
urgency ordinance are included liS Attachments I and 2 of this Staff Report. The ordi¡¡¡mce would exempt
projects with condominium maps fi'om the provisions of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Adopting an urgency ordinanee (Attachment 1) win ensure that the ordinance is in effect bafore the City
takes IlenOD on the current subdivision applications. Ordinances typically requirc two t¢adings before the
City Council and take effect 30 days following the second reading. However, the urgency ordinance
would take effect immediately after adoption. To enact thc urgeney ord.Í11IUJce, the City Council must
determine that the conversion of these apw1l1lents to cO!ldominiums might ftustrate the City's goal and
State law obligation to adequately provide for the housing needs of all economie seg¡nents of the
community. To ensure that the Ordinance becomC!J effective in the event that the W'gency ordinance is
challenged, the Planning Commission recontm.ends that the City Counci] also adopt a non urgency
ordinance (Attachment 2). The non urgency ordinance would supersedc the urgeney ordinlU1ce upon
becoming effective.
13~I,,\
RECOMMENDATION:
dÎ 6b 1 l--O¡
Staffrccommends that the City Council: 1) open public hearing; 2) r~ve Staff's presentation and take
testimony iÌ'Om the app1icant and public; 3) close the publie hearing and delìberate; 4) waive the reading
and adopt the Urgency Ordinance (Attachment 1) regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the
City to condorninil.1ills; IUld S) waive the reading and introduce the NOll-Urgency Ordinance (Attachment
2) regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the City to condominiums.
14 '01'"
.9ß ~ILc,
ORDINANCE NO. - 05
AN URGENCY ORDrNANCE 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 dûes have the responsibility to use the powers
vested in them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make
ad"quate provision for the housing needs of all economic s,,¡ments of the commuruty.
B. The City Council finds thllt conditions in the residential real =stllte mørket
have led to the increase in proposals to convert ex! sting multi- flUIJi1y reI1tBl projects to
condominiums !IIld other forms of multiple ownership and that the conversion of one or
two of the City's apartment communities eould hav" a. major impact on the City's
housing market, in that it wouJd remove from the market a significant percentage of the
existing rental units.
C. The City CouncH finds that the eonvorsion of residential structures from
individual ownership to eondominiums or any other form of multiple ownership interest
has the potential to create specific community problems, both social and economic. For
example, oonversions may significantly affect the blllanee between rental and ownership
housing within the City, and thereby reduce the variety of individual choices oftc:nure,
type, price and location of housing. Conversion may also increase overall rents, decrea:¡e
the supply ofrental housing for all income groups, displace individuals wd families, and
disregard the needs oftbe housing market place.
D. Accordingly, the City Council finds that the adoption of 9. condl?minium-
convtrBion 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 problems associated with condominium conversions, and to establish
requirements that must be inoluded in any conversion approval.
Section 2. Addition o/Chapter 8.)4. 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, Th'1! purpose of this Chapter is to;
A. Maintain a supply of affordable and market rate rental housing.
'121552.3
-1-
1~19.200S
127SS2.3
"2-~ 00 \ '2.p¡
B. Provide a reasonable balance of own~ship and rental housing in the
community and <I variety of choices in the type and price of housing.
C. Establish criteria for the eonversion of ~i9ting multi-family rental
housing to condominiums.
D. Reduce the impact of COllver sian on residents ofrental bousing that may
be required to relocate due to the conversion of rental housing to
condominiums.
E, Providf;J the opportunity for v<:ry low-, low-, and moderate-income persons
to participate in the ownership process and to maintain a supply of rental
housing for very low-, low-, and moderate-income pl!I'Sons; and
F. Ensure that eonverted housing achieves a high degree of appearance,
quality and safety.
8.54.020
Condominium Conversion Defined. A "condominium
conversion" means the cOrtversion of the ownership of the units In
a residential housing project cOIltaining twenty-one or more unit!¡
that are or were previously occupied as rental units mm a single
ownership to an ownership in which the residential units may be
s01d individually. Such condominium conversioJl8 may include,
but are not limited to, the conversion of existing multiple unit
residential housing projects to any of the following, all as defincd
in Civi1 Code section 1351 (a.) a community apartment project, (b)
a eondominium project, 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 applica.ble, an approved subdivision
map.
B Exemptions. A Condominium ConVefSiOIl Permit shall not be required
priQr to thc sale of individ1.ial units to the public for any of the following
residential housing projects:
1. Prôjetts that had recorded subdivision maps for a commUlÙty
apartment project, I co:ndomiDium project, or !I. stock cooperative
on September 7,2004.
2. Projetts in which none ofthe units havc been occupied as rental
\mÍts.
-2-
J~ 19. 200'
"-"1~S2..3
3D ~ \ 1.-0¡
8.S.U40
preumtnary AppUc:ation Process.
A. PreJlnùnlll}' Applic:ations. Prospective applieants for Condominium
Conversion Permits shall initially submit a preliminary application on
fOIms provided by the City. Prcli.nlli1ary 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 prelimÎnllIy 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. DepartØlent RevIew. The Community Development Director shall review
prelimiruuy applicl1tions for condominium conversions, The Community
Development Director shalllnlthorize 'the submittal of" Condominium
Conversion Permit application ifboth of the following criteria BI"e met:
1. Notice of Intent to Convert. Tbe applicant provides satisfactory
evidence to the Community Development Director that the Notice
of Intcnt to Convert required by section 8.54.050 was received by
all tenants of the project proposed for conversi on and that 60 days
have elapsed sinCe the applicant m.\lde the last such notification.
2. Rental/Ownership Housing Ratio. 'The ratio that multiple-family
units in developrnentB of twenty (20) or more rental units bears to
the total number of housing umtB in the City as a whole exceeds
thirty percent (30%). For the pmposes of this calculation, the units
proposed for conversion should be treated as hOWling units but
should not be 1reated IU rental unitB.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Condominiun1 Conversion Permit
application shall be accepted for projeets that propose to convert only a
portion of the units in an existing multiple unit residenüal project. The
Condominium Conversion Permit application shall be submitted no later
than 60 days following the Co=unity Development Director's
authorization.
8.54.050
Notiu of Intent to Convert.
A. At least sixty (60) days prior to submitting an applieation for a
Conùominium Conversion Permit pursuant to sectÎon 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.
8. The notice shall be substantially as follows:
"To the occupant(s) of [address]:
-::1-
Jmll.HIrY 19, 2oo:¡;
727552..3
3\t()\L--~
Theowner(s) of this building, at [address), plan(s) to file an application
for a Condominium ConveT$i¡,m Permit with the City of Dublin to convert
this building to condominiums, community apllrtments, or a stock
cooperative project. You will be provided with notice of each hearing
held by the City on tbe proposed coÍlv(lt'sion, 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 Munic:iplll Code may give you, as a tenant of a
structure proposed for conversion to condominiums, certain rights.
[signature of owner or OW71er '.1' agent]
[date]
C. In the event that the applicant is simu1taneowly 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
sec;tion 66452.9
8.54.060
Site Development Review Required.
Any condominium convemon &hllll also be subject to Site Development Re:view,
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 'nodificati[)ns to existing site
conditions. The applicant shall submit an applieation for Site Development
Revie:w concurrOlltly with thl;': application for a Condominium Conversion Pennit,
The decision maker shall impose such conditions as are necessary to require that
buildings, structures, fences, patio enclosures, carports, accessory buildings,
sidewa.lks, drivewa.ys, landscaped areas and l.Itility facilities are refurbished and
re~red Ii\$ necessary to ensure that the proposed conversion project is and
remains orderly and attractive.
8.!4.070
Condominium Applkation Requirements. An applieation for a
Condominium Conversion Permit shall be accompanied by the
following items:
A. A re:port on the physical elements of each structure Dud facility, which
shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
L A report detailing the condition of each elem.;mt of the property,
including fOWldation, structural, electrical, plumbing, utilities,
walls, ceilings, windows, rcereational facilities, sound transmission
of each bui1ding, mechanical equipment, parking facilities, and
appliances. Regarding each dement, the report $balJ state: to the
best knowledge or estimate of the applicant whl:I1 the element was
-4-
hD~ 19, :200'
nmJ.J
- ,
3~ Db \'Z-CI¡
constructed or installed, when the element was last replaced, tbe
approximate date upon which the element will require
œpJacement. the cost of replacing the element, and MY variation of
the physieal condition of the element from the applicable zoning
and building code. The report shall identify cII.I:h 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 011 ",a.ch
structure fIIld each unit WIthin the structure;
3. A report on the condition of the common area improvements,
including landsca.ping, lighting, utilities and streets;
4. A report on any kMWtl soil and geological oonditions regarding
soil deposits, rock fonnation. faults, groundwater and llllldslides in
the vicinity of the project, I:Ind a statement regarding any known
evidence of soils problems relating to the smwt.W"e. Reference shall
be made to any previous soils report for the site and a copy
submitted with the report; and
~. A statement of repairs and improvements necessary to refurbish
and restore the project to aclùeve II blgb degree of appearance,
quality and safety.
B. A site/development plan;
C. Specific information concerning the charact~stics of the project,
including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Square footage and Dumber of rooms in each I3llit;
2. Estimated sates price range of units; and
3. Names and mailing address ofall tenants.
D. A detailed list of rents for each unit to be converted for the twelve (12)
months prior to the application;
E. EClJl10mic Md demographic information regarding the current tenants as
rcquired by the Community Development Director;
F. A Tenant Relocation Assistance plan as required by Srotio!:\ 8.54.1 10;
G. Evidence that all eligible tooants entitled to special protection have been
offered lease extensions in accordance with Section 8.54.110.F.
H. A declaration of covcrwnts, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) that
would be recorded and would apply to each owner ofa condominium unit
-·5-
J_!)'I~,~(I(>¡
717m,!
withill the project. The declaration shall incJude, but not be limitod to,
pertinent infonnation regarding the conveyance of units and the
assignment of parking, an agreement for coIIlIIlon area maintenancc,
including facilities and landscaping, togeth~ with an estimate of any
initial assessment fees anticipated for maintenance, and an indiœtl() \ of
appropriate> resp,;msjbilities for maintenance of all improvements and
utility system:! for each 'W1it. 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
I. Such additional infonnation as the Community Development Director
deems nooesswy to ensure the compliance with this Chapter.
8.54.080
BuDding Code RequirementA
A building proposed for conversion, and each unit within the b1.lilding, shllil
comply at Ii minimum with all applicable building standaI-ds in effect at the time
of the last alteration, repair, relocation, or reconstruction of the bui1ding,
necessitating complianee with the building sta:ndards, or, if none, at the time of
first construction. Tn addition, the building proposed fOT conversion and f: ach unit
within the building shall comply with the cuzrent HO'Using Code as defined by
section 7.48 of the Dublin MuniciplÙ Code. The Building Official shall, if deemed
necessary, inspect the project. Upon completion of the inspection, if any, the
Building Official shaII identify all items evidenced by the application or the
inspection to be in noncompliance with applieable buildíng and housing
standards. All such items shall be corrected to the satisfaction of the Bui1dÌD.g
OfficiaJ, prior to granting the Condominium C.onvcrsion P=it.
8.54.090
Tenant's Right to Purehsse Units
A. All Units. The applicant shall, as a condition of II.ppl"OvlII of the
Condominiwn Conver'$Íon Pennit and before offllring 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 tenus and
conditions that llUeb unit will be initially offered to the general public or on terms
more favorable to the tenant The right shall run for a period of 90 days from the
date of issuance of the IlUbdivision public report pursuant to section 1101 g of the
Business and Professions Code, unless the tenant gives prior written notice ofms
or her intention not to exercise the right. At least ten days prior to the subnússion
of an applica.tion to the Department ofRea1 Estate for a pUblic report, the
applicant shall provide notice to each tenant in the project of the fact that the
appliclI.tion fur a public report will be submitted and that \Ipon the issuance of the
public report the tenant wî11 be granted !ill exclusive right to centrad for the
pw:chase of the unit occupied by the tenant upon the same tenus and conditions
that such unit will be initially offered to the general pubE c or on terms m() 'e
-6--
¡1InUM)l1~1 ;uI[]5
..... .
3~~ 12-'1
12m'.J
3~ ~ \"Z-D¡
favorable to the tenant. The notice shall further indicate the proj ect will be
subject to eonditions, covenants, and restrictions that establish Ii homeowners'
association to manage the project, that may re~trict bow thð property is used, and
that impose certain financial obligBtiOnJ on the owners of uoiw within the proj cot,
such as the payment of monthly homeowners' association dues. In addition,
within 10 days of the isf!Ul\I1cc of the public report, the applicant shill by mail
notify each tenant in I.Vriting that the public Jeport has been issued and shall in
writing grant the tenant the right 10 purchuc the unit as provided in this section.
If the noticc is not mailed within 10 days of the issufIIlce of the public report, the
tenant's right to purchase granted p1.lf5\UU\t to thi s seetion shall be extended for a
period equal to 80 days from mlliling of the notification.
B. Affordable Units. If Ii tenant OCC\lpie.q an inclusionary unit pursuant to
the City's incl\J.sionary zoning program, all of the provisions of Subsection A
shall apply except as otherwise provided in this Subsection B. The applicant ¡¡hall
initially determine the income category (t.e. very low, low, or moderate income)
under Section 8.68.030 at which the inclusionary 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 purcha.se the unit. Should the
City detennine that the tenant's household income is such that the tenant does not
qualify to purchase the unit within the income category at which it is offered, the
applicant shall:
J.
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 inclusionary unit to an
mclusionary unit in the ínco¡ne category of the unit purchased by
the tenant. The number of bedrooms in the convertC;ld unit shall be
equal to or greater than the n1.lffiber ofbeârooms in the unit
purchased. by the tenant.
2.
If the City detennines 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.c. very low, low, and moderate incomes), and
provided that then! we available inclusionwy units within the
project at. that income category, offcr the unit to t1te tonant at a
sales price that a unit iIi the tenant's income category could be sold
wderChapter 8.68, subject to the City's certification of the
tenant's qualifications to purchase the unit. If the tenant accepts
the offer, the available unit shall be designated as a.n inclusionary
unit at the income \:atcgory at which the unit purobased by the
tenant was previously rented.
8.:54.100
Limitations on Relit Inerease5 PcndJng Converdo l. Rents shall
not be increased trom the date of issuance of the NoticoofIntent to
-7-
JIII'4_i')'19,200:5
72·"':¡~.3
~ Eib \ 7.51
Convert pursuant to Section 8.54.050 until twelve months
fu Jowing the approval of the Condomini'WIl Conversion PC'IIIlit or
six months fol1owing the iSSWlllce of II public report by the Real
EstlÙc Commissioner pursuant to Business and Professions Code
section 11018, whichever occurs later. If the applicant withdraws
an application for II Condominium Conversion Permit, thi¡; ¡;ection
shall have no further cffec;t.
8.54.110
TenAnt ReloeatioD Anistance
A. Requirement. The applioant shall, & a condition of approval of the
Condominium ConvClI'5ion Permit, be required to implement the Tenant
Re1ocation Assistance: Plan that is approved by the City in conjunction
with the issuance of the Condominium Conversion permit The Tenant
Relocation Assistance Piau shall be prepared by the applicant and ¡;hall
indieate the applicant's commitment 10 provide the ten/lIlt benefits
required by this section.
B. Eligible Tenant. As used in t1ri¡; 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 thl:l
conversion project.
C. Notice of Termination of Tcn U1CY. Each tenant of a project proposed
for conversion shall be given 180 days' written noticc of intention to
terminate tenancy due to the conversion. The notice shall also provide the
tenant with It ~u=ary deseription of the City-approvoo Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan and infonne.tion on wbere to obtain a copY.
The notiec 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 oftbe notice ofinte.ntÎun to t=inate 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 financial assistance equal to the rent for
the three-month period prior to the filing of the applica.tion for the
Conduminiul11 Conversion Permit to any Eli&ible Tenant that relocates
after the issuance of the Condominium Conversion Permit. The financ:..ial
assistance payment shall be made IS days prior to the termination of the
Eligible Tenant's tenancy, iftbe Eligible Tenant prov:íd",s 1Qtice to the
applicant of the Eligible T~t's termination of the lease. or 15 days prior
to tho;, expiration of 180 days Notice ofTermÎnarion of Tenancy period,
.-$..
Jøu..,. 19'.2005
~2?!UJ
./'".l ~.I
...,.
3I.P ÕÖ\"1.- C1
whichever is earlier. Notwithstanding Subsection B of this Section, a
tenant shall be doomed an Eligible Tenant and eligible for the finaJ:JC:ial
assistance payment ¡fthe Condominium Conversion PCIIIlit has not yet
been granto::d but 165 days have elapsed since the tenant was provided 8.
NQtice of Termination of Tenancy. A tenant is not entitled to financial
assistance pursuant to this subso::ction if the tenant has been evicted for just:
eause or has not made rental payments to which the applicant is legll.lly
entitled.
F. Continued Tenaney f )r Tenants Entitled to Speelal Protection.
1.
Speeial Protection. An eHgJ'ble tenant is entitled to "special
protection", eg defmed in this Section 8.54.110, if the head of
household or spouse satisfies one or more of the following criteria:
heg attained age 62; has a disability as defined in Section 54 of tbe
California Civil Codl.' Code; is residing with one or m(lfe minor
dependent children; or is a n:sident of an inclusionary housing unit.
2.
12-Month Extenøion of Tenancy. The applicant shall be required
prior to the issuance of the Condominium Conversion Permit to
demon.~trate that either (a) it has entered into agreements with each
eligible tenant entitled to special proteetion 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 termø in effect on thl.' date of the mailing of the Notice of
IntenttD Convert pursuant to section 8.54.050 until twelve months
following !hI.' rod of the 180-day period pursuant to section
8.54.1 10. C or (b) the eligible tenant has refused the offer of such
an extl.'nsìon.
8,54.120
Notification of New Tenants. All prospective tenlUlts of a proj ect
for which a Notice ofIntent to Convert has been issued to tenants
pursuant to section 8.54.050 shall be provided with a copy of the
Notice of Introt to Convert. If provided with such notice,
prospective tenants shall not be entitled to tenant relocation
assistance provided to tl.'Illlnts pursuant to section 8.54.11 O.
8.S4.130
Complianee with Inc1uslonary Zoning Regulations.
Condominium convetSions shall be treated as "new residential
development proj acts" I.Inder and .mall be required to comply with
the then-current Inclusìonary Zoning Regulations in Chapter 8.68.
The decísion maker shall include CQßdWoI)S in the Condominium
Conversion Permit approval sufficient to cnsure compliance with
th", provision.~ of Chapter 8.68. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if
the: project Wll..~ required to comply with the Inclusionary Zoning
Regulations at the time the project WIIS constrUcted, the project
-9-
¡"'_¡~..oo,
12'1552..3
, -31 vc> -z... q
shall receive a credit for the nwnber of affur<iable units required at
the time the project was con~tnlCtcd. If fees were paid in lieu of
c¡'cating the affordable units, the credit may only be used to satisfy
that portion of the obligation under the then-current Inclu5ionary
Zonin!! Regulations that may be satisfied by payment of fees in
li~ of creation of affordable wits. By way of ilustration, if a.t the
time a 20·unit rental project was cònstructed, t:ho Inc1usionary
Zoning Regulations required 5% of the units in the project to be
affordable, and the d~el oper paid fees in lieu of constructing one
affordable unit to meet the project's obligations under the
Inolusjonary Zoning Regulations, then, upon the event of a
convorsion of the 20-unit projoct, the converterwo1.l.ld be entitled
to a one-unit credit against its Inclusionary Zoning obligations.
Thus, if the then-current lnelusionary Zoning Regulations require
that 12.5% of the units be affordable and provide that at least 7.5%
of the units must be construeted, then the converter's Inclu.síomuy
Zoning Obligation would be 1.5 units, which is 2.:5 units minus the
Dne unit eredit. AE. the on~unit credit was created by the payment
ofin~}je\l fee..~ and is equal to 5% oftbe total u.nits in the project,
the remaining inclusionary obliSation could not be sati ¡fled
through the payment of in-lieu. fees.
8.54.140
Development Standards - Utilities
A. GIIS. E~h condominium unit shall have a separate g8.8 service where gas
is a neoessary utility. lftlris provision places WlIeasoIll.ble economic
burden on the applicant, the Building Official may approve an alternative
method.
B. ElectrleJty. Each condonùníum unit shall ha.ve a separate electriœl
service, with separate meters and disconnects.
C. Telephone Company Accen. The telephone company serving the
location under conversion shall bave the right to COtlstroct and maintain
(place, operate, inspect, wpm. replace, and remove) communica.tion
facilities 8-~ it may from time-Io-time require (inclu.ding 8.oocss) in or upðn
any portion of the common area. including: the intmor and exterior of the
buildings as necessary to maintain communication senice within the
. project. This provision may not be amended or tennim.tcd without the
COnBent of the serving telephone company.
8.54.150
Findingo Required for Approval
The decision maker shall not approve a Condominium Conversion Permit unless
it finds:
-10-
JañUl.ry1S1.1.00's
727~S2,3
3'6~ Il-S
A. That the proposed conversion is consistent with the Gc:nei-lll. PIM. and any
applicable specific plans, in particular with the objectives, policio:s, IWd
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, oonronns to the
requirements of this Chapter.
C. That the mtio that multiple-family units in developments of twenty (20) or
more rental units bears to the total number of housing un¡t~ in the City as a
whole exceeds thirty percent (30%). For the pU.I'p08eS ofthis calculation,
the units proposed for conversion should be treated as housing units but
should not be treated u rental units.
8.54.160
Term. and Lapse of Condominium Conversion PernUt. A
Condominium Conversion Pennit shall lapse I year following the
date on which the permit became effrotive, 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 conv=ion to
the public. The permit shall be extended for a period of not more
than one year, if the Community Development Director find.~ that
the applicant is dHigent1y pursuing but has not yet reccived a
subdiVision public report from the Real Estate Commissioncr
pursUlLllt to Business and Professions Code section 1101!!
lIuthorizlng the sale of the units proposed for conversion to the
public. Upon receipt oftbe subdivision public report :fìom the Real
Estate Commissioner authorizing the sale of the units proposed for
conversion to the publie, the Condominium Conversîön Permit
shall be automatically extended so long as the subdivision publie
report remains in effect.
8.54.170
Action. The decision maker for Condominium Conversion
Permits shall be the Planning Commission. The Planrring
COIDnUssion shall hold a public hearing, and after the public
hearing is cloSed may, by resolution and based on evidence in the
public record !II1d the findings above approve, conditionally
approve, or deny a Condominium Conversion Permit.
5.54.180
Adjustments aDd Waivers.
A. Authority to Waive or Adjust Requirements. The requirements of this
Chapter may be adjusted or waived if the property owner demonstrates to
the City Manager that applying the requirements ofthis Chapter would
take property in violation of the United States or California. Constitutions.
A person seeking an adjustment or waiver shall apply to the City Manager
-II'
bl1~I)"I9',.20D'
-
301 ùb \ ?-C1
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 Californil!. Constitutions.
B. Conddention and Decision. In making a determination on IIIlIIPpliclltion
to adjust or wllive the requirements oHills Chapter, the City Manager shall
consid~a11 relevant evidence submitted by the appliçant. TIle burden
shall be on the appliçant to demonsw.te 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 IUld
issue a writtc!1 decision. The City Mooager's decision mall be f1118l.
C. Adjustment or Waiver of Requirements. If the City Manager, upon
legal advice provided by the City Attorney, determines that the applicåtion
of the provisions of this Chapter would take property in violation ofthc
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 Managerdeterm.ines no violatioIl of the United States or California
Constitutions would occur throush allplicatibn of this Chapter, the
req\lirements of this Chapter remain applicab1e.
Section 3: Effective Immediatelv. This ordinance is adopted as an urgency
ordinance pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code section 36937, to take effect
immecüately, and is for the immediate preservation Qfthe public pcuce, health and
welfl\I"e. The facts constituting the urgency are the following: This ordinance applies to
condominium conversion¡¡ that have not recei ved.all governmental approviÙs 1)ecessary to
sell individual units, including a. pub lie report rrom the Department of Real Estate.
Should a converter receive a subdivision rcport from the Department of Real Estate
before this ordinance becomes effective, the converter could evade the application ofthis
ordinance. Sirnilar]y, under the Subdivision Map Act, the City may only app1y standards
in effect at the time that an application for a tentative subdivisiort map is deemed
complete. However, if the City initiates proceedings by resolution and publishes a public
notice containing a description sufficient to notifY the public of the nature of the proposed
change in the zoning or subdivision ordinances, the City may apply the ordinance enacted
or instituted as a result of the proceedings that are in effect on the date the local agency
approves or disapproves the tentative ¡nap. The City adopted such a resolution on
Scptember 7, 2004. If Ii converter were to receive a BUbdjvision approval before this
ordinance became effective, it could evade this ordinance. If a converter were to evade
the application of this ordinance it would thereby ITustrate the City's intent to (a)
maintain a supply of affordable and market rate rental housing; (b) provide a reasonable
balance of ownership and rim-tal housing in the community and a variety "f choices in the
type and price ofhoUliing; and (c) establish ¡,Titeria for the conversion of =xi sting multi-
famí1y 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
727552.:3-
··12-
;JUU!lry 19.2:005
-,
.......
'-\0 Db I "Z- 'ì
to condominiums; and (e) provide the opportunity fur very low-, low-, iLIld m\)derate-
income persons to participate in the ownership process and to maintain a supply of rental
housing for very low-, low-, and moderate-income per~on¡¡; and (f) ensure that converted
housing achieves a high dcgrec of appearance, quality IUId 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 Dublin in
acoordlltlce wìth Section 36933 of the Government Code ofthe State of California.
Section 5: Automatic Repeal. This ordinance shall be automatically rep=alcd
upon Ordinance No. _ -05 becoming effective.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this_ day of
,2005.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
727 l.
-\3..
J~.ry19.~
..-'>:..i
. . '"
1..\\ ~\L1
ORDINANCE NO_ - 05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADDING CHAPTER 8.54 TO THE
DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) RELATING TO
CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS
The City Council ofthe City of Dub Un does hereby ordain as follows:
Section 1.
Findings.
A. State law provides that cities have the responsibility to usc thc powe¡;:;
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
condomirùums and other fonns of multiple ownership and that the èOI1version of one or
two of the City's apartment communities could hllvc 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 crMte 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 ofindividua1 choices oftenuN,
type, price and location of housing. Conversion may also increase: overall rents, deereilSc
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 Couneil finds that the adoption of a condominium-
eonversion ordinW1ce is necessary to limit th~ irnp;¡çts on the community of
condominium conversions, to provide guidelines for the City to evaluate the economic
and social probletml assoeiated with condominium conversions, and to establish
requirements that must be included in any conversion approval.
Sectio112. Addition of Chapter 8.54. Chapter 8.54 is hereby added 10 the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance to read as follows;
CHAPTER 8.54 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION REGULATIONS
8.54.010
Intent. Thc purpose of this Chapter is to:
A. Maintain a supply of affordable and merket rate rental housing.
127!!).!
-1-
¡~Ill,lõ;\ry 19,2()()j
727583.3
,-rD
L\ 1.. Gb \1-<1
B. Provide a reasonable balance of ownership and rental housing in the
community and a variety of choices in the type and price of housing.
C. Establish criteria for the 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 relocate due to tbe conversion ofrcntal hous.ing to
eondominium.s.
E. Provide the opportunity for very low-"low-, and moderatE>-income persons
to partkipate in the ownership process and to maintain II supply ofrootal
housing for very low-, Jow-, and moderate-income persons; and
F. Ensure that converted housing achieves a Wgh degree of appearance,
quality and safety.
8.~4.0Z0
Condominium Convenl(lß Defined A "condominiwn
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 whieh the residential units may be
sold individually. Such condominium conversions may include,
but are not limited to, the conversion of existing multiple unit
fC8idential housi¡¡g projects to any ofthe following, all as defIned
in Civil Code section 1351 (a) a community apartment project, (b)
a condomiDium project, and (c) a stock cooperative.
8.54.030
Condominium Conversion Permit
A. Permit Requ.ired_ No condomÍIlium oonv~iol1 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 Exl!mptiorn. A Condominium Conversion Pennit shall not be required
prior to the sale of individual uni1S to the public for any oftbe following
residentilll housing projects:
1. Projects that hod recorded subdivision maps for a corrununity
apartment project, a condominium project, or a stock cooperative
on September 7,2004.
2. Projects in which nOlle of the units have been occupied as relltal
WJits.
-2-
.rJmWY 19, 2005
?27~liH
...
y ~ 9J \?.-C¡
8.54'()40
Preliminary Applical10D Proce...
A. PreUminary Applications. Prospective appliClUJ.1s for Condominium
Conversion Permits shall initially submit a preliminary app1ication on
fonns 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, Thc preliminary application shall be
accompanied by a preliminary application tee, the amount of which shall
be a:;¡ set forth £rom 'lime to time by J:esolution of the City Council.
B. Department Review. The Community Development Director shall review
preliminary applications for condominium conversions. The Community
Development Director shall authori~e the submittal of a Condominium
Conversion Permit application ifboth of the following criteria are met:
1. Notiee of Intent to Convert. The applicant provides satisfactory
~idence to the Community Development Director that the Notice
ofIntent to Convert required by scotion 8.54.050 was received by
all tenants of the projœt proposed for conversion and that 60 days
have elapsed since the applicant made the last such notification.
2. Rental/Ownership Houling Ratio. The rat; 0 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 parccnt (30%). For the purposes of this calculation, the units
proposed for conversion should be treated as housing Ut'Iits but
should not be treated as rental units.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Condominium Conversion Perm.it
application shllll be accepted for projects that propos\': to convert otúy a
portion of the units in an existing multiple unit residential project. The
Condominium ConvedJiOfi 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 II
Condominium Convmion Permit pursuant 1:0 section 8.54.070, the
applicllJ1t shall provide notice substantially in the fOJl1l ourlined in
subdivision B to each tenant in the project proposed for conversion.
B. The no'lice shall be substW1tially 1\$ follows:
"To the occupant(s) of [addre.ss]:
-3-
lõ10lnwy 19.200'
727:583.;\
....
4-L\- L5b \ 2-'1
The ownc:r(s) of this building, at [adare$$]. plan(a) to file W1 application
for a Condominium Conversion Pennit with the City of Dublin to convert
this building to condominiums, commu.uity apartments, or a stock
cooperati \Ie project. You will be provided with notice of each hearing
held by the City on the proposed conversion, W1d you IuIve 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 II tena.nt of a
structure proposed for conversion to eondominÎums, certain rights.
[signature QfQwJl(ir '" Qwner·;' agent]
[date]
C, In the event that the applicant is simultaneously applyinø for a tentative
map and a Condominiwn 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 Requtred.
Any condominium conversÎon shall also be subject to Site Development Review,
puT$t.Iant to Chapter 8.104, to provide the City with a mechanism to evaluate
issues related to maintenance ofthc property and consistency wîtb prior site and
arebitectural approvals and, if necessary, require modifieations to cl\isting site
conditions. The applicant shall submit an application for Site Development
Review concurrently with the application for a Condominium Conversion Permit.
The decision maker shall impose sneh conditions as are necessary to require that
buildings, structures, fences, patio enc:losures, carports, accessory buildings,
sidewalks, driveways, landscaped areas and utî1îty facilities .vc refurbished and
restored as nccessary to ensure that the proposed conversion project is and
remains orderly and attractive.
8.54.070
Condominium AppUcatlon Requirements. An application for a
Condominium Conversion Permit shall be accompanied by the
fol1owing items:
A. A rl;lp(lrt on the physical elemcnts of each structure and facility, which
shall include, but not bc limited to, the following:
1. A report detailing the eondition of each element oftbe property,
including foundation, structural, electrical. plumbing, utilities,
walls" ceilings, windows, reereatioIlal facilities, sound transmission
of ~ building, mechanical equipment, parking faciJitîes, and
appliances. Regarding each clement, the report shall state to the
best knowledge or estimate of the applicant when the element was
-4-
.1.._'9.2005
727583.3
. ,
'-'
~S" 0-0 IL-~
constructed or installed, whrn the element was last replaced, the
approximate date upon which the element will require
replacement, the cost ofrepla.cing the element, and any variation of
the physieal condition of the element from the applicable zoning
and building eode. The report shall identify each known defective
or UIL~afe element IIIId set forth the proposed corrective measures to
be employed;
2. A report !Tom a licensed struotuml 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, li¡hting, utilities and streets;
4. 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 ohoils 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 repairs and improv¡ments necessary to retUrbish
and restore the project to achieve II high degree of a.pp.::arance,
quality II1ld sllfcoty.
B. A site/development plan;
C. Specific infunnation concerning the characteristics of the project,
including, but not limited to, the following:
I. Square footage and number of rooms in (:ft-Ch unit;
2. Estimated sales price range ofunitsj 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 information regarding the cuuent tenants as
required by the Community Development Director;
F. A To:mant Relocation Assistance plan as required by Section 8.54.110;
G. Evidence that an e1igihle tenants entitled to special protection have been
offered lease extensions in acoorda.nœ with Section 8.54.11O.F.
H. A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) thllt
would be recorded aDd would apply 10 each owner of a condominium unit
-5-
JID\]BryW'.2!JO"
727583.3
. . v
'-\ \D ~ \-z'l
withill the project. Thc declaration shalJ include, but not be limited to,
perti¡¡ent information regarding the conveyance of units end 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 indiearion of
appropriate responsibilities for maintenance of all improvements and
utility systems for each unit. The city has the right to review and approve
the CC&Rs to enSW'e that (1) the appropriate conditions of approval are
included in thel'n 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 ensW"e the compliance with t}¡is Chapter.
8.54.0110
BuUdipg Code Requirements
A building proposro for conv'=fSiQn, IUId each unit within the building, shall
comply at a minimum with all applicable building standards in effect lit the time
of the last alteration, repair, relocation, or reconstruction of the blJilding,
necessitatin& eompliance with the building standards, or, ¡fnone, at the time of
first construction. In addition, the building proposed for conversion and each unit
within the bnilding shall comply with the clJlTent Hou.qing Code as defined by
section 7.48 of the Dublin Munieipal 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 a.pp!icatÎnn or the
inspection to be in noneompliance with applicable building and housing
standards. All such items shall be corrected to the satisfaction of the Building
Official, prior to grauting the Condominium Conversion Permit.
8.54.090
Tenmt's Right to Purchase Units
A. An Units. The applicant shall, WI Ii condition of approval of the
Condominium Conversion Permit and before offering the unit for slle to the
general publie, be required to provide tenants with an exclusive right to cont:rnct
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 II period of9O days ITom the
datc OfiSSUW1Ce of the subdivision public report pursuant to section 11018 of the
Business and Professions Code, unless the te¡¡lUJt gives prior written notice of his
or her intention r1Üt to exercise the right. At least ten days prior to the submission
of an applicatiòn to the Department of Real Estate for a public report, the
applicant shall provide notice to each tenant in the project of the 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 exclu.sive right to eontract fur tbl;':
purchase oftbe unit occupied by the tenlll1t upon the same terms and conditions
that such unit will be initially offered to the getleral public or on terms more
-6-
]u¡gary J'W. 200S
72"'3.)
~~:L
L\ -¡ ~ \7...-'1
favorable to thç tenant. The notice shall further indicate the project wjJ1 be
subject to conditions, covenants, and restrictions that establish II homeowners'
association to manage the project, that may restrict how the property is U8W, and
that impose certain finaneial 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 issuanee ofthc public report, the applicant shall by mllil
notify each tenant in writing that the public rqwrt has been issued and shall 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 this section sh.aI1 be extended fQr a
period equal to 80 days ITom mailing of the notification.
8, Affordable Units. If a temmt occupies an inclusionwy unit pursuant to
the City's inc1usionary zoning program, an of the provisions of Subsection A
shall apply except as otherwise provided in this Subsection B. The applicant shaH
initially determine the income category (i.e. v=ry low, low, or moderate income)
under Section 8.68.030 at wlúeh tho inclusionary unit is being rented to the tenant.
The applicant shall thereupon offer the unit to thc tenant lit the sales price that a
l1IlÌt 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 þùrchase the unit. Should the
City determine that the tenant's household income is s\lCh that the tenant docs not
qualify to purchlllle the unit within the income ¡;ategory at which it is offered, the
applica.nt shall:
I.
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 inclusionary unit to an
inclusionary unit in the income category of the unit purchased by
the tenant. The number of bedrooms jn the converted unit shall be
equal to or greater than the number of bedrooms in the unit
purchwed by the terwnt.
2.
If the City detcnninC8 that the tenWlt'S household income is such
that it meets one of the other income lJa.tegories set forth in Section
8.68.020.D (i.e. very low, low, and moderate incomes), and
provided that there are available inclusionmy units within the
projeet at that income category, offer the unit to the tenant at a.
sales price that a unit in the tenant's income cll'tegory could be sold
under Cha.pter 8.68, subject to the City's certification of the
tenant's qualifications to purchase the unit. If the tenant accepts
the offét, the available unit shall be designated as an inclusionary
unit at the income category at wlúch the unit pllrchascd by the
tenant ww previously rented.
8.54.100
Limitations on Rent InereflSel Pending Conversion. Rents shall
not be increased ÌÌ'om the date of issuance of the Notice of Intent to
-7-
lollw:ll)l J9,.200S
7:27:51!1:!..'
1.1
L\ ~ Db \ I.-'ì
Convert pursuant to Section 8.54.0S0 until twelve months
following the approval of the Condominium Conversion Permit or
six: months following the issuance of It 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 Ii Condominium Conversion Permit, 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 CondomJnium ConvcrsionPen:nit. The Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and shall
indicate the applicant's commitment to provide the tenant bonefits
required by this section.
B. Eligible Tenant. As used in this section, the term "eligible tenant" me:ans
any tenant who was a resident of the property both OD the: date of the filing
of the application for a Condominium Conversion Permit and on the date
of approval of the permit and who does not intend to purchase Ii unit in the
conversion project.
C. Notiee of TennÎD.atlon of Tenancy. Each tenant of a project proposed
for conversion shall be given 180 days' written noti¡;;e of intention to
tc:nuinate tenancy dne to the conversion. The notice shall also provide the
tenant with It summary deswption of the City-approved Tenant
Relocation Assistance Plan and information on wh~e to obtain i1 copy.
The notice shall also indÜ:ate that the tenant will be granted a right to
purchil8e the unit the tenant occupies. Each person who become:s a tenant
of a conversion project after the date of such 180 days' written notice shaLl
be given i1 copy ofthe notice of intention te> terminate tenllfu:ybc:fure
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
œnverSlOn.
D. FiD.unci.1 Relocation Aulsf lnce. The Plan shall incJude a provision that
requires the applicant to provide financial assistance equal to the rent for
the three-month period prior to the filing of tho application for the
Condominium Conversion Permit to any Eligible TemUlt 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
Eligible Tenant's tenancy, if the Eligible Tenant provides notice to the
applicant of the Eligible: Tenant's tennination of the leas!:::, or 15 days prior
to the e1\piration of 180 days Notice of Termination of Tenancy period,
--&-
'UI\I~19,1MS
72155,.]
L.\ý Ub \ '&C\
whichever is e¡¡:rUer. Notwithstanding Subsection B of this Section, a
tenant shall be deemed an Eligible Tenant and eligible for the financial
assistance payment ¡fthe Condominium Conversion Pennit has not yet
been granted but 165 days have elapsed since the tenant was provided a
Notice of Termination ofTenancy. A tenant is not entitled to fi 'J<WCÌ<ll
assistance pursuant to this subsection if the tenant has been evicted for just
cause or has not made rental payments to which the appHcant is legally
entitled.
F. Continued Tenancy for Tenants Entitled to Special Protection.
1.
Special Protection. An eligible tenant is entitled to "specia.l
protection", as definod in this Section 8.54.110, if the h=-:! of
household or spouse satisfies one or more of the fo l10wing criteria:
has attained age 62; has a disability as d"fined in Section 54 of the
Califumia Civil Code Code; is residing with one or more minor
dependent children; or is a resident of an -inclusionary housing unit.
2.
12-Month Extellsion ofTcnøney. The applicant shWl be required
prior to the issuance of the Condominium Conversion Permit to
demonstrate that either (a) it hll8 cntere4 into agreeml:llts with ~ch
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 854.050 until twelve months
following the end of the ISO.day period pursuant to section
8.54.1IO.C or (b) the eligible tenant hlUl refused the offer of such
an extension.
8.54.120
Notification of New Tenants. All prospective tenants ofaprojeet
for which a Notice of Intent to Convert has been issued to tenants
pursuant to section 8.54.050 shall be provided with II copy of the
Notice oflntent to Convert. Tfprovided with such notice,
prospective tenants shall not be entitled to tenant relocaticn
assistance provided to tenants pursuant to section 8.54.110.
8.54.130
Compliance with Incluslonary Zonina Regulations.
Condominium conversions shan be treated as ''new residential
development projects" under and shail be required to comply with
tbe then-current Tndusionary Zoning Regulaticns in Chapter 8.68.
The decision maker shall include conditíons in the Condominium
COJ]v~sion Permit approvs1 sufficient to CI1SW"C compliance with
the provisions of Chapter 8.158. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if
the project was requlied to comply with the Inelusionary Zonina
Regulations at the time the project was construeted, the project
--9-
J.it'lu.8¡Y 19,200S
7Z7~~~~
I
svabl"Z.-0
. shall receive a credit for the number of' at'tordable \Wits required !It
the time the proj ect was construt.:ted. If fees were paid in lieu of
creating the affordable units, the credit may only be used to satisi)'
that portion of the obligation under the then-current Inclusionary
Zoning Regulations that may be satisfied by payment of fecs in
lieu of cn:ation of atlOrdable units. By way of illustration, ¡fat the
time a 20-unit rental project was constructed, the Inclusionary
Zoning Regulations required 5% of the =i15 ita the project to be
affordable, and the developer paid fees in lieu of constructing one
affordable unit to meet the project's obligatiotas under the
Inclusionury Zoning Regulations, then. upon the event of a
conversion of the 2a-unit project, the converter would be entitled
to a ont- unit credit against its Inc1usionary zoning obligations.
Thus, if the then,cU1TCJ:lt Inclusionary Zoning Regulations require
that 12.5% of the units be affordable and provide that at least 7.5%
of the units must be constructed, then the converter's Inelusionary
Zoning Obligation would be 1.5 units, which is 2.5 units minUB the
one unit credit. As !he ¡me-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 eondomini1.lßl \Wit shall have a separate ¡;:as service where gas
is a Tlccessary utility. If this provision places unreasonable economic
burden on the applicant, the Building Official may approve 1111 alternali ve
method.
B. Elel:trlclty. 'Each condominimn unit shall have II separate eleßtrical
service, with separate meters and disconnects.
C. Telephone Company Access. The telephone rompany serving the
loeation under conversion sha1l have !he right to const:r1.lct and maintain
(p1BCC, operate, inspect, repair, replace, and remove) communication
facilities as it may ftom time-to-time require (including access) in or upon
8J1.y 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 be amended or terminated without the
consent of the serving telephone company.
8.54.150
FindIngs Required for Approval
The decision maker shall not approve a Condominium Conversion Permit unh:ss
it fmds:
-10..
,1'iltk1~19,2005
'7:115113.3
51~ 2-ç¡-
A. That the proposed conversion is consistent with the General Plan and any
applicable specific plll!1s, in particular with the objectives. p01icies, and
programs of the Housing Element of the Genenù Pbw. designed to provide
for the housing needs of all economie segments of the community.
B. That the proposed conversion, fI8 conditioned, conforms to the
requirements of this Chapter.
c. That the ratio (hat 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 ca!CUIRtiQD,
the units proposed for conversion should be treated !IS housing units but
showd ¡jot be treated as rental units.
8.54.160
Term and Lapse of Condominium Conveniol1 Permit A
Condominium Conversion Permit shall lapse I year following the
date on which the permit becDllle effective, if the applicant hili! not
yet received a subdivision public report fiom tbe Real Estate
Commissioner pursuant to Business and Professions Code slllotion
1101 g authorizing the sale of the units proposed for conversion to
the publie. The permit s1uù1 be extended for a period of not more
than one year, if the Community Development Director finds 1hat
the applicant is diligently pursuing but has not yet received a
subdivision public report from the Real Estate Commi$$ioner
pursuant to Business III1d Professions Code section 11018
authorizing the sale of the units proposed for conversion "to the
public. Upon receipt ofthc subdivision public report from the Rw
Estate Commissioner authorizing the sale of the units proposed for
conversion to the public, the Condominium Conversion Permit
shall be automatically edCIldod so long as the subdivision public
report rem ains in effect.
8.54.170
Action. The decision maker for Condominium Conversion
Pemrits shall be the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission shall hold a public hearing, and after the public
hearing is closed may, by rC501l1tion and bascd on cvidence in tho
public record and the findings above approve, conditionally
approve, or deny a Condominium Conversion Permit.
5.54.180
Adjustments and Waivcrs.
A. Authority to Waive or Adjust Requirements. The requirements of this
Chapter may be adjusted or waived if the property owner demonstrates to
the City Manager that applying the requirements oftbis Chapter would
take property in violation of the United States or California Constitutions.
A DICTion seeking an adjustment or waiv« shall apply to the City ManagdT
-11-
JBJlUIIQ'19,:%(IO"
.,.
52ðb I ~c¡
and provide such information as the City Manager finds is neccssary to
determine whether applying the requirements of this Chapter would take
property in violation of tho United States or California Constitutions.
B. CODslder.don IID.d Decision. In making a determination on an applic.ation
to adju.~t or waive the requirements of this Chapter, the City Manager shei!l
consider 11.11 relevant evidence submitted by the applicant. The burden
shall be on the appliclltlt to demonstrate the applying the requirements of
this Cahptcr would tllke property in violation of the United States of
California Constitutions. The City Manager, upon legal advice provided
by the City Attorney, will make a detennination on the application and
issue a written decision. The City Manager's decision shall be final.
C. Adjustmvnt or Waiver of Requirements. If the City Manager, upon
legal advice providcoù by the City Attorney, determines that the application
of the provisions of Uùs Chapter would take property in violation Qf the
United States or California Constitutions, the requirements of this Chapter
shan be modified, adjusted Qf waived to reduce the obligations under this
Chapter to the extent necessary to avoid an unconstitutional result. If the
City Manager determines no violation of the United States or California
Constitutions would occur through application of this Chapter, the
requirements 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 Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this
Ordin .IIQC to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in
accordance 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
727jU.3
-12-
JII~II),200s
ATTEST:
City Clerk
'727583-.3
5-3 Df::; \ "2--q
·..13-
'illlYiJT}' 1~, 200S
·
;;-
o
o
C'\I
~
:Þ
c:
o
~
'õ
""
.~
~
!
Q::
'c:t
Q,.
'<
2
-
~
eQ
::)
a
~~ð~~S5~2::
C1I)N ("1-
:t -
(\)
TI ~
D Ü ~
Q) 0 ;;,¿ '~
,~ D<: Q) 0
o ~ Q) (\)
IV '- ;::J
~ ~ U..c:::
C U ~ 0
C -1 0 C
o D..... 0
:¡;zu....uo
g4ì"'¡-Ol./)
uOOC'")Q>.
o....c........¡-
....cor--.,I'--I'--
"
:It
.g
c
{3
.c:
¡
GI
E ã)
o ~
Z 0
>< -1
t~
E D
8~
(I.)
IV ~
,¡; D
o
-uTI
'- 0
o 0
~ }¿
o .....
..... 0
V)C1..
('")0
NO
('1 ('")
I'-- I'--
VI
.....
Q..:!
II'> <{ is
õ..", .l'i~:;)
<{õ.Jd a.~'õ
,!; « a. <{ :J ...
:Õ~<"B~.8
B ~ § 0 0 E
c:u<3:o~
o c:3:Z
-o~C(\)~õ
OOQ).....~
~ Ö ~ 0 ~..2
6Y Co 1"2.9
" ,
v
I:OO...¡-coCOr-...MI.()O"'~
0;) N ...¡- '>0 r-... co ...... 0.. \C)o I~
("")NC'")....N....C") -
NO")
-0"0
~.?;
a:J a:J
>- >-
Q) Q)
0"5
»
... ...
o 0
-c1J
o 0
E E
«
II')
Pñtõ
I'-- ......
(\)
~
ü ~
Q) TI ';::
U 0 0
000
õ: ~ '0
t: C C
Q) .2 (J)
~ õ 'g
IU:r:
4ì00
§~~
.},L J::!
... c.
ð? .-(
~ :2 ~ VI
'" c.. 0 .,; ::I .....
"2<Qjã.~~
IV>-E<....J
.É ( ) UJ -c ¡:: '0
..... ë o.,g¡ ¡.':::
8.>~o()Q)
<{oo3:¡:¡E
~'81ii§E!I
~E'£~(\)c
<{<.<8Æe
c:
o
U
-
~
o
i
3t
TI'O"O
008-0
oOe::C
œ œ 0
€€5œ
è!> ( ) E ~
..&::..coO
OJ OJ D<: ïJ
:) ::I c VI
o 0 0 VI
OQV).Q
~~88
('\/'<t......co
'0 '>0 r-......¡-
't3
III
C
:Q
E
o
u
VI
Vlë.d:~
"2<šš
J!!E~'õ'õ
Q t 0 "- ...
<00-,8,8
OO-DEE
i::; « 0 :::. :::.
~ a't::Z Z
.:.;:cQ)--
'- '8, Õ .E .E
~V)~~~
r;- C:. "'" - ,'zp
~...) ~t) I '-1
CITY CLERK
File #
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 7, 2004
SUBJECT:
ATTACHMENTS:
RECOMMENDATION:
r;yØ
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
BACKGROUND:
Public: Hearlng- PA 04-044 Adoption of Re801ution initiating
Proceedings to Adopt an Ordinance ~egulll.tjng the Convmion of
Existing Apartn1«Its in the City to Condominiums
(Report Prepared Þy.. Itri Ram, Planning Manager)
1.
Resolution Initiating Prm:oedings to Adopt *ft Ordinance
Rc¡ulatin¡ the Conversion of Exlrt.tna ApllIt:ments in the City
to Cond.omlrdmns.
Notice of Public Hearing to Consider 1.nitilltinl Proceedings
to Adopt a Condominium Conversion OrdinIInoe.
Copies of Sections fiom the 1990 Housing Element,
, Copi¢s of Sections from 1M 1999 - 2006 HOIl&ing Element.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Open Public Hearing:
Receive Staff Presentation:
Question Staff IIIId the Public;
Close Public Hearing and Deliberate; and
Adopt Re:solution Initiating J>roceedings to Adopt an
QrdinJmce Regulatin¡ the Comrmion of Existing ApBrtmmts
in the City to Condominiums
No fu¡ancial impact at this time.
State law provides that clti~ have the responsibility to me the powers vested In t111~m to facilit.;¡te the
improveme1'lt Dnd development of housing to make adequate provision for the hOU5ing needs of all
t:~nomic segmcnt5 (;If the co=nunity. (8...... Gov. Code, § 65580(d),) At the Itlcal1evel, cities impJc:ment
'Ute housing law policiea through the adoption oftbe HousÏI¡¡ ElWlonts of their Genc:raJ Plans, which
eJemont5 are reviewed and œrtffied by the: state's Departm=nt of Housing and Community Development
("HCD"). (See oov. Code, §§ 65583, 65585.) An10ng othl'.!' things, Housing Ekmcnts must contaÎJI a
statement of the community's gor.J.s, objectivea and policies related to the maintenance, preservation.
improvement, and develop111ent of housing Blong with an aetJon program to ir.o.p1ement these goals,
objectives and policies. (See Gov. Code, § 6~S84(b)-(c).)
._..____~~~________..._~.....____..............__.______.__.w~~_____.~~·__········~··-~---~·----_·~--_·~-~--
G:\PANC004\Do1.o.u CODdo Coo""'¡on ZO¡\"""",,,·7.04,OOC
COPIES TO: .
In-House DIBtrlb...Uon
50<50 rz.S ..
The City's 1990 Housing Element Included several polioies that enr;:oura¡¡ed and suggested acti~n¡¡ toV
ensure: the availabilîty of rental housmg. One poHcy required that large multifamily projects include II
rental compoMnt for II five.-year tJme period. Another policy required the monitoring of the IIVIIUabiiity
rental hOUSing and, if monitoring disch/sed that it was neœss&ry, the enactment of Ii condominium·
oonver¡¡iol1 ordinance (Attachment 3). At the time of the adoptlOll oCthe 1990 HousilJg EI=t, there
wu II concern that, becau;e !here were no condominiums or apartments. wuicr development. it WftS
possible that applications would be submitted to convert existing apartments into condomimmns.
On June 3.2003. the City Couno.II approved the City of Dublin Housing Element (1999 - 2006) ("the
Current Housing Element"), IInd the State Department of Housing and Community Development certified
it on July 11, 2003. The CUrrent Housing Element eliminated the program that I'CIQuÏt8d the monitoring of
the availability of ~l housing and potential enaetment of condominiwn-cooverdon ordinance.
reasoning that !here was little likelihood that existing rental hOWling property owners would =nv~ their
ptapetcles to condominiums, It conclmh:d that conversions were unlikely because of the strong demand
for rentll1 housÎßg in Dublin coupled with the development of numerlms cOfldominiums (induding 1396
condOminium !JJÛts then.cu=ntly under conSlruction) that wouJd tend to satiify the demand for
condominiums. The Curremt Housing E1ement IIlso noted that the City would usess the need for a
condominium-conversion ordinance each Û/DB it updates the Housing Element (Attadu:nent 4).
Since the adoption of the CUrrent Housing Element, conditions in the housing market have changed
mMkedly. The Community Development Department has noted that the mcidencc of condominium
conversion projects in other communitiM is increasing, In addition. Staff has receivcc:l mmy question:¡
from pœsib e investors and purchasets of existing apllrtmeJtt communities about the City' Ii requirerœnrs
in relation to =dcminium coDversions; Staff believes that the increase in coDdominiunt-ecnversion
activity due to the folloWÎtlg faeton:
· Higher vacancy rates for apMtments as more and more people Ml'e able to qualify for loans for
homeS due to JOW<:.T interest rues; .
· An incrtascd market for ccndominiums in the area;
· The ability of the property Dwner to maximize profit by Bellina units rather then renting them,
In the past 10 ¡relIT!! the City has seen the development of approximately 1,500 residentill1 apartmcmt uniu.
for am overan: total of appro¡;;i¡nat:e1y 2,800 units throughout the City. It should be noted that
approximately 1,119 of these units are already mapped for condominiums and would not be subject \0 tho!:
condominium COJlverslon ordinance or the City's Incluslonary HouaJng Ordinance. Additionally. if all
t.he$e .mitt converted. the ratio of apartments to owncflihíp units would be greatly reduced..
The remaining apartment units p\VVide a typ~ pf hDUling WI is a kO!:y to a healthy divo\:rsity of housing
~tock. ill the COJDnlunity. Apartments provide housing for III! levels of affordability in th~ COnu\1umty and
B.J'ß a valuable tool fOt" providing work force housing.
In the past seven IIIQlJthS, Staff has r=ceived inquiries :&om seventl existing ¡md potential apartment
dtwclopnwnts of their intent to flle :;ubdivision documents tg convert their projects to condominiums.
These possib1e projects inolude:
Ex ìstiQf P1'OiecrA
Iron Hone Trail Apartm(: lt.s (Dough~y Road) -
Archstone Apartments - Emerald Park ( Hacienda Drive) .
117 units.
324 units.
. -~, ,.~ '.
';:", '..
~I . ,.'.... ".
..' ,. ~
51f5b \"2-q
-
New Proiects
Avalon Bay Apartments (Transit Center)-
305 unitø
Staff believes thai. the conversion of onc; or two of the Cit3" s apartment communities could have a major
impact on the diversity of the City's housing stock. in that It would remove. from the maJket II signifICant
percentage of the existing Tt:ntBl units. If sold rather than rented, the units would no lcmger be ava.ilable to
n. segmem of the community that is not in a position to pUId1aie such units. 1n addition. the 1000s (If these
units would likely decre~ the vacancy rate and acoordingly tend to increase rents, and this would tend to
further exacerbate the City's shortage of affordable rental unit&. This might cause II lasting imbalance in
the diversity of housing uoek in the City. In addition, conversion of apartments without addressing aI] of
the policy Igsues would be in conflict with the assumptions that forml!!lilhe bas;:is of the City's HOU$h1¡¡;
Elen'umt.
At the: present time should I property owner file a request fOf D. oondom1nium conversion, the RPplicatlon
wDl11d be processcd 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 before they
arc placed on the market for sale to the general public. State law pcmnits the City to ex.pand upon th=se
basic requirements through the adoption of a C(JI)dom1nimn-conversion ordinance. For example, II
condonûniwn-conversion ordinaoce could limit conversions to maintain I balance of housing stock and
cou]d require tho provision of af'fordab]e units under tho City's Inolualona.ry Zoning Ordinance.
Because. of market conditions, Staff believes that it is importSnt to begin the: devdoprm:nt of 8
condominium-convenion ordinlnøð. Ai. th~ are many dJfferent mechmisms for regulating conversions
in effect throUghout ilie state, City Staff believes it appropriate at this time to explore the various options.
This study and the eventual drafting would take an unknown amount of time, bllt Staff anticipates having
an CJrdibance ready to present to the City Council within 6 moJIths.
Staff is concerned that while !he condominium-conversion ordinance is under development, a subdivision
app1îcation might be filed to convert an e;\Cistin¡¡ lII~ent C'.Ornplex to condominium¡¡. Fol' the reascms
indicated above, such a conversion could potClnlialJy have 11:1) Impact on thc City's ability to provide
housing for &II economic segments in the community.
Thus. if the City Council detemrincs that 8 convorsion of apmments to condominiu~ ml¡ht negatively
impact the City's goal and State law obJigation to adequate1y provide for the boulÎnS needs of all
economic segrnent.9 of the community, Staff recommends that the City Council adopt th¢ attached
Resolution initiating procee<lings to adopt a condominium·conversion ordinance. The Resolution is
designed to prevent those that file subdivision appJioarions to convert exi~tins apllrtment.!l to
condominiUIIn; or other forms of owneuhip mal pcn:nlt the sale of individual units m,m avoiding the
pending condominlum-conversion ordinanc\:', Ordinarily, under the Suþ¡j,ivision Map Act, the City may
only appJy standard!: in effect at the time that an appJication for a tentative subdivision :map i$ deemed
complete. (Gov. Code, ~ 66474.2(a).) However, jf the City initiates proceedings by resolution nnrl
publishes a public notice oontainin¡: a de¡¡crÌption sufficient to notify the public ,of the nature of the
proposed change ÎI:1 the zoning or subdivision ordinances, the City may apply the ordinance enacted or
instituted æ a result of the proceedings thaI arc in dftct on the tl.ate the local agency approves or
disapproves the tentative map. (Gov. Code, ~ 66474.2(b).) 'Ibc City published the appropriate notice as
required by Govenunont Code section 65090 (AttachmeI1l 2) and, in addition although not required by
hlW, provide(¡' mailed notice [Q aU the ownCf!l of apartments in the Chy. The attached Resolution would
take the formal step ofinitiatirlg pl'()CCedings.
:s£ Líb\i4'
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff reOOltlmDndS the City Council Open Public Hearing; receive Staff prsAentation; question Staff and
the Public; close ~~ Pub1ie Hearing and deliberate; and adopt Resolution (Attachment 1) initiating
proceedings to adopt an Ordirumce n:gul~ting the convmsion of existing apartments in the City [0
Condonûniumø
..,
RESOLUTJON NO. .04
~~
REsoLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
INITlA TlNG PROCEEDINGS TO ADOPT A.N ORDINANCE REGULATING THE
CONVERSION OF EXISTING APARTMENTS IN THE CITY TO CONDOMINIUMS
WHEREAS, State law provides that erne¡¡ have the responsibility to use the powers vested in
them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adcqua.tr; provision fOr 1;þe
housing needs of aJI economic: segments of the community; and
WHEREAS, !It the IQcallevel, cities impJemr.:nt statc hoUling law policies through the adoption of
the HOU8Íl1Ji1 Elements of their General Plans, which olements IIItIl'tI'Vicwcd II11d approved by the slate's
Departromt ofHous1ng and COImnurrity Development ("HCD'')j and
WHEREAS, among other things, Housing Elements must oonta.in a lItatement of the community's
goals, objectives and policies related to the maintenance, preservation, improvem~t, and development of
housing lionS with an action program to irnpll:!IIUnlt these goals, objectives and policies; and
WJlJ!iREÃ8. the City' $ 1990 Housing Element inclllded several policies thaI encouraged and
51Iggeøtcd actioDI tç. 0I1Nt'C the avr.l1abillty of rental housing, ip"¡udinS It poli~ that required the
monitoring of the availability ofrental housing and, if morritoring diac1osod that it was nCCC$sary, the
enactment of II condomÌDium..convlII"sion ordinanoe; and
WHEREAS, in aœordance with :rtate housing law, the City ad...pted its.. 1999-2006 Housing
Element (''the GurrentHoU!ling Elcmcnf') in June 2003, and it was œrtifiai by HCD on July 11,2003;
811d
WHEREAS, the Current Housing Element e1imiDated the program that requlred tho monitoring of
the a.vrrilability of rental housing Imd potentIal enactment of condomin.ium-oonvemion ordinance,
reasoning that there was little likelihood that exi9tiDg rental housing property owners would convert their
properties to condominiums due to the strong demand for rental bousing in Dublin and the developmðDt
of condominiums (inel'Udin¡ 1396 condominium units =tlyunder construction) to satisfy the demand
for condøminimns; and
WHEREAS, the Current HóusÎng Element further indil;!lIted that the City-WOUld utes! the need
for a condominium-conversion ordinance each ti.t:ne It updates the Housing Element, If the need ari8es;
and
WHEREAS, since the lUioption of the CUrrent Housh\¡ Element, oonditions in the housing muket
ha.ve changed markedly, and the Community DcvwQJI1IIent Department hIi.s noted that the incidenoe of
condolIIinium-conversiollprojects in other cormnun.ities is jnCI'MSÍng; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin believes that the fonowing market conditions have led to !hI/!
. increase in,proposals to convert existing multi-family rental projects to condominiums:
ø. The higher vacancy rates for apartments lIS more and m.ore people are able 10 qua1ify
for loans fQr homes due to historically low intmst rates;
~:\PA#UODorol.c.l4 ¡;anœ eon_kr1ZOA\"",lOfiIII i1IH.04.DOC
· lcOCðP-0
,
b. The ÎDOJeased market for condominiums in the o:rea.; and
c. The ability of the property owner to maximize profit by $ellÎD¡ units. rather than tenting
them.
WHEREAS, in the past: ten years, tht City hilS deve:Jopoo over 1500 TMidcntial apllJ:tmClt units
for an overall total of appro:r;imately 2,800 1Jß.it¡¡ ,throughout the: City. These units and the other rental
\lIIÌtB in tho provide a typo ofhouelng that is one of the keys to providing for the bouins Dccda of all
coonomic segmont!l of the community; .and
WlIEREAS, rentallJD.its provide: housin¡ for persons in all income:: lovots. and they IIfC II vaIUDble
tool for providin,g workforce housing; and
WHEREAS, the wnversì.on of one or two of the City's apartment communities could have a
rnajor impa.ct on the City's housing market, in that it would rmnove from the maritet a significIW
perœntage of the existing rental units; and
WHEREAS, ifunit5 IIIQ BOld rather t:hllD.l'CIII.tcd, tb! lIDits would no longer be available to B
$qttIent of the community that is not in II position to pu1'Chase such units; and
WHEREAS, the loss ofthes= Wlits wo1.Ùd likely dec:reue the vacancy rate and accor&ugly teind to
increase roots, and this would tend to further exacerbate the City's shortage of affordable I'CIßtw unítl¡ and
WHEREAS, due to these changes in the :mm1œtplago !II1d their potential cODsequences on the
City's ability to provide for the housing need~ of all economic 81'g1Dents of the community, the
Community Deve1opmc:nt Depllrtmet'1t has begun the development of a condominium-wnversiDn
ordinsnce; IIDd
WHEREAS, the apprOval of the conversion of existing residential apartment units to
condominiums Dr othBl" forms of (IW lership that permit the units to be sold individua11y, during the period
in which the City is considtring the adoption of II. condominium-cooversion ordinnnce, could frustrate the
City's efforts at providmg for the housing needs of all uconomlç segments of tile community, because it
would fm11t in the ;mIovat of units ftom the City's inventory of rental \U1its &vailable to thoS8 at lower
income levels and beœnse it would tend to increase the rents of tboøe rental units that remain; atJ.d
WHEREAS, to prcvt:nt these goals from being ftustrated, the City desifœ initiate proceedinB~ to
adopt a condominium-conversion ordinance and desires to pla.ce potmtial subdividm on notice pumuant
to Government Code section 66474.2 of the City's intent to adopt a condominhw-conversion ordinance,
the effeçt ofwbich will be to permit the City to apply the condomiwwn-ØonvenlÍOJ:! ordinance if it is in
effect on the d4te the Çily approves or disapproves the tentative map.
NOW TllItREFORE, THE CITI'TOUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
A. Initiation of Shidr of PotlmtlaJ Adoption of CondooninÏum-COl1venioll Ordbl.anee.
Staff is hereby direct.¡:;d to study the potential adoption of a CCII.'IdominilUll-conveNioD ordinance and. if
detmled necessary due to existing conditions in the City and the marketplace, present JUCh an ordin.mce to
the Planning Commiss1on and City COlmcil for potential adoption in tho rnlllUUU' requ.irod Þy law. This
resolution shall constitute, under suòdivision (b) of section 66474.2 oftbe Government Code, the
~
/pI ù6 ¡-;)c¡
initilltion of proceeding¡¡ to adopt an ordinance that regulates, rcnrict¡, or prohibits the oonversion of
c:~isting residentiaJ apartment units held in Ii s:ingle ownership, in whlltever fonn, to oonoomlniums or
othl.'f funus of ownership that permit the units to be sold Individually.
B. NOtlficatiOD to Subdividen of Intent to Apply CODdominium-Convenion Onlmuee.
N01witbstmditL¡ subdivision (8.) of section 66474.2 aflbe Government Code, the City intends to apply the
condominium-conversion ordinance a.doptlld as II result of the ~jngs initiated by this Resolution to
all app1icati.ons fOf approval of tentative maps and veøtlng tentative maps that hll.vl'J not been doomed
oomplete as of the date of this Rœolution.
c. CompUanœ wIth CallfOr:aJR EDvironinental Quality Act. This ordinance is not II.
"proj~" wi1hin the meaning of Section 15378 of the State CEQA Glridelines, becau$e it has no potential
for resultin¡ i:c pbysicli chrm¡e in the environment, directly ar ultima\~ly.
D. SevernbWty. If any provision ofthia-crnfuwlce or the epplìcation lhereofto lII1yp=n or
circumstmcI is held invalid, thl mnailldcr of the ordinanco, including tbo application of IlUch part or
provislQII to other paBOns Of cimDnstllnccs shllll not be IIff¡s¡:t!ld thm:by ønd shall continue in full force
III1d effect. To 1his end, provisions of this ordÌDllncc arc: 5everable. The City Council hereby declures tbllt
it would bav~ pus~ Nclt BIIClion, subsection, subdivision, paraaraph, 5l11'1tenoe, clause., or phra~e hereof
irrespective of the tilot thllt anyone or more sections. $UbSfi otJOI16l, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences.
clausos, or pbræes be beld unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable:.
PASSED, AFPROVED and ADOPTED tbia 7th day of Beptcmber 2004.
AYES:
NOES~
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
City Clerk
:3
/o-¿.vbl?'1
CITY OF DUBLIN
100 Civic Plaza, DubUn. C8l1fomla 94568
Websl.: htlp:/I\wiw.ci.dublin.ca.us
NonCE OF PUBLIC BEAJUNG
The City of Dublin City Cow1ci! 'Will hold II public hr:a;ing and take aotion 00 tho fontl\lVing project:
PROJECT:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
PA 04-044 AmeDdment to tll.e Dublin MlIlIIclpal Code
Rcsoh.1tiw. Initi,ling PrtIceadmgs to Adopt an Ordinance :Rq¡ularing the Conversion
of Ex.iliting ÁplrtmetltJ in the City to Condomlniuma. The specific çon1.lmt of the
OrclilliUICC that w11l be CM:IIt\UllIy propo5ed to City CQIIIlCil is prGimtly unknown. A
pl"'Qpg.cd ordlnuce will be drafted aikr tbOJou ih S11>dy of the i lsue by the
Couunllllity Dcwelopm$ftt Department and by other City dopartments. At present, it
¡¡ antiçipatcd tbat the 0rdiI3anœ wouJd regulate, ~d, and, j¡¡ some cases, prohibit
the oon'\l1 l'lion of existing residential apartmoffi unitt bold In I lingle ownership, in
whatever fom!, to Çondgminjuml or other forms of ownerahip that pcnnillhe writs to
be sOld individually.
LOCATION:
Citywide
ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW:
ThiB projcct ha5 boom rOUÞd to bo Exempt from the Califoroia EDviromncmtøl Quality
Act (CEQA) purl!\Wltto SMtion lS06ICbX3).
APPLICANT:
City of Dublin
PUBLIC HEARINGI
A public bwing will be held before the City CO\IIlci! on Tuesday, Sepœmber 7, ZOO4 at 1:80 pm .in the Ci¡y Council
Chamb..-s, 100 Civic Platt, Dublin. AJry interested pçnon roay aw<m and be beard on tbh m'lttM. If you c:hall=p tho
abo:w=-delcribcð action it!. court, YD] lmIy be limited to raising <mI.y !holO jJSUfl5 YDII or other persons nlisc:d lit tlto public
hearin¡ described ÍD this nDti~. or in written oorresp¡mdœœ delivered to the City of DubliD lit, or prior 10, thB public
hcarin¡.
The proposed ptQjeçt Îs aw.ilsble for review at the City Office, 100 Civic Plaza. DubliD. Ca1ifomÎlI. If youhave any
qucstiDns or c=ts. p1IiUII CD J,t¡Wt the Comnnmity D....clDpment Deparllncnt at (925) 833-6610.
1m Raw, ATCP
Planning Manager
D.,ed: AUR\loI 25, 2004
Publion"¡: AuSUol 2S, 2004
....... CO<Ie (1125) . City Manager 83306650 . CIty CoImcll 833-6650 . PO/SOIIIIeJ B3306605 . J>o""""'¡" D""olopn>OII' 833 -6650
Fin...... 833.6640' Public WrnblEngll1ðt'lt'i.ng 833-6é30 'Pllks &; Clmuuvni1y Scrvi.",. 833-6645 . Poli.. 833-6670
PIIIOOJn¡¡/Code Row""""...! B33~610' Blrild~8 ~ 833-6620 - F;re Prevenb<>n B..- B33~
/p 3.ób 1?'7
Re.I-ev~"" ì $~'-TI"""'S
or:
C~TY OF DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN
HOUSING E1LEMEN'r
A DO P T B D BY:
œHE CITY COUNCIL
PEBRUARY 11, 1985
REV I S B P B Y:
THE CITY COUNCIL
JaNE 11, 1990
--
~he Ho~sinq El.ment is ~ revision Qf Volu~e 6
of the General Plan as adoptc:u1 by t11&
city council on February 11. 1985
Pol~cy Objective:
Qusntified
Otljec::tlvliIl
!t>t.L 50 I£!.
Encourage development of affordable
h~asing by private organi~atio~s not
pri~arily enqageo in housing
con~truction or ~anagem.nt
90 units (affordable to low and
moderate income hou~.hQlåø)
Action Unc1ertl:!ken: Incluaion of "Semi-pUbliC use"
definition in the General Plap that
allow:;! housinq
Actions to be
undert.aJC:en:
Financing:
Implementing
Respo!lsibili ty:
Time Frame:
contact owners of semi-public
prop~rty to inform them of this
policy; and grant addit10nal
1ncentiv9i iuch as reduced 51te
design standards, priority processing
and tee reductiona
Minor administrative co~t to City (A)
Planning Depa~tmant
1991 (adopt incentives) ~nd 19i2
(contact owners)
E. Requite a percentage of uni~s in large mult~-family
projects (i.e., p~cj~cts with mo~e than 10 units) b.
rented for a specified periQd of time. The difficulties
of first-time home buying make rental units the only
affordable hou5ing for many mode~ate income households
that do 'not have the assets to make a qown-payment on a
home. Other households may ch05è to rent for other
reasons.
Policy Objective:
Action Needed.1
FlnanciJ19:
Insure avallaDility of rental units
in Dublin
Require that a minimum of 10' Qf the
units in large multi-family projects
be maintained as rental unit. tor Ii
period of five years.
No cost to City
55
Financing:
Housing Authority fund
administrative cogt to
-
I..P'S ó6 120
anl1 mln.o¡:-
City (A and D)
Imple1Xlentation
Responsit>iU ty:
Housinq A~thority and Planning
Department
Tillie frame;
Ongo!ng implementat!on
I. Monitor AvailaÞility of Rantal Ho~a1ng. If deemed
necessary, cQuaider enactment of condominium conversion
ordinance. Only one cpndominium converøion ~roject has
been approved by the City. The develope~ did not follow
through with implementation of the project.
Policy Obj.otivø:
Assist in maint8.ining rental stock
åS housing affor4able to mod~rata
incOMe Dublin households
Actions to be
Undert.aken:
Financing:
Implementa.tion
Respon!!ibllity:
Time Frame:
Afte~ an application for a
condominium conversion i. r~c~ivad by
the City, eval~ate the City-wide
rental vacancy r~ts; pasa a
condominium converaion ordinanoê, if
nece..ary
Minor a~mlnistrative cost to City (A)
,'., ,
Planning Department
Ongoing implementation
J. Require evidence of developer effort to receive public
financiAl AssiatanoB for purpose of incl~ãlng below
marke~ rat.e units in proposed projects; and aS$ist
developers in obtaining information on available
programs. The range of available state and federal
programs designed to inçrea.e housing affordabillty
varies ~rom year to year. ~o insure that developer!! are
participating in a~propri4te programs when po!!~lbl@, the
City will rsquire evidence that developers of multi-
family housing have inv8eti~Ated program availability and
are using available assistance whenever possible. To
radu~e the burden on developers created by this
requirement, the City will prepare a. packet of
information on available programs, including a list of
agen~y contact persons rQ~ponBlble for program
implementation. This informa~lon will be given to
developers as early as p08s1~le in the project approval
process. This requirement wi1l apply only to developers
of projects that contain 75 or more multi-family units.
58
~l - _I
(pl.p 6b /2_1
~e. \tvA....-ï - .s~c".¿.,.., oI,
City of Dublin
. .
p,~ . ': J. r f'
--' ...:..iíii"". ., .... ~ ...~ ..... ."",.-
-
Hoúsing Element
(1999-2006)
Adopted by the Dublin C1ty CQuncft on June 3, 2003
Resolution No. 113-03
(Approval of Housing Element)
Resolution No. 114·03
(Âdopt1on Of Negative Declaration)
Certffied by the State Department of HoU$\n¡ and Community Oev~loptne"t July 11, 2003
.
- '
l.P1 6)..., J ~q
CITY 01" b-6BLIf<
110USIN; ILIiM!NT CHg.o.~OOÇ)
t. Monitor "va¡¡..bility of rental housing. 1£ deemed nt:OcliIiaIY. oonsidcr C11~ of the
eondDminium ~aion ordinance. The City has approved only onc condorolnium
gonveníon projeot. The developer did not fullowtbrough with implcmenUltiOll of the project.
Policy Objective!::
Actionø m be
UIJdClt8k~II:
Fmanoinf¡:
1n:p1emeD!alÍon
Roap<>mibi1i\f:
Tin3$ Fra!lle~
Achlevcnw;uts;
I
Auiøt Î:II.lnlÛßliiniDg m1.t8I SI(Jd< " hllU.ing .trordabJe It> modllrlltc-iDço¡¡;¡;:
Dublin boum.olda
A!œr on appli<aüøll far a condominium eon"""sion i. ",o"'''cd by \he Cil}',
evallUl'IC the ç ty.wi4e ~I vacancy rate; pass , :.:ondominium COI1yeJ: ¡i""
~, t!'I8o.,,""Y
MinGr adminiø\l'1ltive CIISI 10 lb. City
Colllmunity n..,.loprnm1t Dcp&rtmCnt
ODJ:OÚ\¡ in1plememaliw1
A oondominium conwnlon ordilw3co was I!CVCT adopted becan." the Cit¡ doea
!lat bdift'C ibat thoro iI a =-...1 need £"I ..,ch an ordimuJce. There ¡" Iitt1c
like1Jlwod !bat Cxilting nnW hondng property O\'\I1>eI'S will convert thei¡-
¡m>peotIies !Q o~ due to t!e: strong oJemsond fur muaI ¡Q""Wø In
Dublin II1d the doveJo.pmmt of ccmdominiums 10 "ans;y the dOlll811<1 for tbù type
ofbo1lSi1lJ .
There"", =!:I1t1y 1,396 çondomilliumllLllÓcr çon.lroction in the City. Th.
City wffi asses. th. need for.a callcIomilliwn cDnvenion ordinmc e cad! tmJc it
updates tbe HousiDg ffiemeDt it a :neI!d mlCl.
,.
IB
CITY CLERK
Fila #
1- ß ð)... 12.î
AGENDA STATEMENT tV -V
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Novèmbèr 16, Z004
SUBJECT:
P A 04-044 Presentation of Policy ReeoDUllClldatioBI for the
Proposed Condominium Conversion OnUnl.ee.
RejXJ" Prepar,d by: Jt/fBalœr, AssCJciate PlaIDIl!r ~
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
City Council R=soluti.on 181-04, Jnitiating Proceecings to
Adopt an Ordinance Re;gulating the Convpon of Existing
Apartments Î.1l the City to Condominiums.
City Counçil Staff Report dated September 7,2004, without
attachme:!lts.
2.
RECOMMENDATION- --- 1'1..-
. /\?VI
Provide direction to Staff on policies that should be consicl.ered as
part of the Condominium Cpnvexsion Ordinance.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
No fina.nciaI impact at this time, 1mplementaûon of the
Condominium ConveIsion ordinance will have an impact on Staff
time in relation to monitori-n¡ policy provisions. The impact on
Staff time is not cwrently ktiow:n. Fmthcr analysis of this impact
will be presented to 1lui City Counoil at the time the p.oposed
Ordinance is presented.
.-
BACKGROUND:
On Scptember 7, 2004, the City Council adopted a Resolution (Resolntion #L81-04) initiating proceeding:¡
to adopt an ordinanœ regulatln¡ the conversion of ~xi8ting apartments in the City to condominiums
(Attachment I). Foliowing that meeting, Staff has studied the various mechanisms for regulating
condominium conversions. This study inøludM a complete rc:view·of1he Subdivision Map Act, City of
Dublin Gm=a.I Plan Housing Elemen1 and Condomini\Jm Conversion Ordinances from fifteen dü:Ierent
cities throughout Calif()rnîa, includins the cities of Livllrmore and Walnut Creek. Based on 'this study
staffhas developed a s~ries of policy altenWives fD1' the City Council to consider.
l'roce¡¡¡¡:
Impllm1entation ()f a Còt¡domilliwn Conversion Ordinance will include the development of a new chapter
in the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinanee f01 Condonµmwn Conversions as well AS related amendments to
the existing Inelusionary Zoning Reg¡Ul!.tions and Site Development :RevIew chapters of the Zoning
Oniimmce (Chapters 8.68 and 8.104). FOllowing this policy discussion, statTwilL p~1Ire a ðrnft ordimm.ce
for rllview at public hearings before both the Planning Commission and City Council.
...,,-..----------
-------..-..-----..-..............-----..----
COPIES TO:
In-HOuse DlstJ:'lbution
r..\PA*\20 )4\,(þ4-04f, CDndo COJl\ler.slol\ ZOA.\«f.rl1-1G-04.DOC
¡¡:, Gò 12,Q
The followin¡ is a. list of ¡oals that Staff has used as a fra.mework for developin¡ policy altematiV<ls. These
goals wore deriwd from the General Plan Housing Element and the R.cIso1utiol'l I:rdtiating proceedings to
adopt an ordirumce re¡ulatin¡ the conver&i.o¡¡ of cxisting IIp.mnll:mli iD the City to condominiums. These
goBls help to ensure the creation of policies that arc consistent with the City of Dublin Genernl Plan
Housing Element. .
ANALYSIS:
CorlltominJ.um Cl1nversil1rJ Policy Goals:
I. Maintain a supply of IÚfordab!ø end market rate rental housing.
2. Provide a reasonable balance of ownership and rental housin¡ and II varlety of choices in the type and
price af housin¡.
3. Establish criteria for the conversion of existing muhi-family rental housing to coÞ.dominiuw.
4. Rcdul\c the imp~ of eonve:rsion on resident!! in rental housing who may be required to relocate due to
the. conversion ofapartmEmtS to condominiums.
S. Ensure that convwd housing acbieves a high degree ofappeanwce, quality and safety.
Based on the a.bQve ¡oals. Staff has prepared policy categories that: would be includec1 in a CondQ¡ninium
Conversion Qrdinarn:e. ThCst categories are presented with a Staff recomm=ndation and an alt=m:lve
CJlItion.
Subdivisjon Map Act:
The Subdivision Map Act provides some protection for certain groups tlmt may be affected by
Condominium Conversions. How!;vo;r, State Housing Law provides that citics have the responsibility to
use the powers vested in them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make
adequate provisions for the housing (leed5i of all econoniIcsegments of the çommunity (Gov. Code, §
65S80(d». Staff's recommeIldations would build from and augment the proVi!iODS of 'the Subdivision
Map Act. .
A. Condominium ConVl!rsion Ordinam:I
1. Applieat:ion of the Cond/)mll1lum Convcl"llon OrcUnance
Staff Recommendation: The fol!Qwing criteria VIIOUld be used to identifY properties that Me
subj oot to the proposed CondDtninium Conversion Ordinance:
· Multi-family residential development.¡ CQIltaíni.ng 20 Or more dwelling units under the ume
ownership that are held for lease to the ¡e:nera! pu.blic.
· Multi-family residential ren1al proje.cts th.t have received a release of oc¡;¡.¡panoy.
· Multi.family residential rental projects that have not reccived Ii public report ftom the
Department of Real Estate (reglltdless of whether or not they have a recorded condominium
map). .
Anoly"".- The prm'ision to make all projeots with 20 or more rent¡¡J unit!l subject to the
Condominiriln Conversion Ordmance is consistent with the threshold that has been established for
the Incluslonary Zoning Regulations. Implementation of this recommendation would exclude
duplexes and small apartment buildings from the ordinance. The Alders Apartments is the
smallest apurttnont building in the City with only f units. The Evan Alan Ap&rtm=:tu is the next
smallest with a toW of20 units. "1Û Cb z9'
Incorporating into the ordinance the recommendation requiring a public report frO.In the DRE
would have the effect of making units t\W;have been mapped for condominiwns subject to the
Condominium Conversion Ordinance:, in moil if not all cases, In order to CODvert an apW'tment
complox to £Or-Bale <:ondominiums, the property owner must ~c:ord 11 condominium Map and
obtain a PuÞ¡¡c Report from '!be Department of~al Estate (DRE). State law provides that only
the Public Report vosts the building owners' rights to sell the units individually. Without ~
Public Report, the development remrili1s subject to new City Qrdinances r=glU'dless ofwbether the
building Is already mapped,
The City has relellSed OOOupUlCY of approximately 3,1 n multi-fÐrni1y rental units tliroughout the
City. It should be noted. that ¡¡pproKimately 1,119 of these units aß already mapped for
condominiums. The DRE ha& not iswc:d a Public Report for any units that have been mapped for
condominiums. If all ,of thel!C unit. were converted, the ratio of apllJ'b:nents to own=-ship uni1s
would be gœø.ùy reduced and a 8!.gnifl.cant number oftena.nts would be d]s¡¡1atèd. InlpleIl'l.!mtation
oftbis provision would reduce the pot~ntial impact to thèse tenants.
FisCallmp(lct: Implementation of this recommended policy 'WOuld not have an imp'act on its' own.
However, depenWngl;l1l the Qveral1 policy direction there will be a different amount ofStrJftirne
dedicaWd to the implementation of thl! ørdinllnCC. This analysis would be brought forward to the
City Council with the draft ordinance,
A1ternative Recommendation: The Condom.inium Convers.ion Ordinonce would be applicable
to mul1i-family residentia1 developments CQntllining 3 Of more dwelling units under the &ame
ownership. All o!hl;lr recommc:nded provisions listed above would also be included.
Anàlysis: Thi s would include all eX:isting apartment proj ects within the City of Dublin but this
would continue to exclude duplexes from the convorsion ordinance.
Fiscal Impact: Implementation of this policy win not bav\': on impact on its own. However,
depending on the overall poliey direction there. will be a differllllJt l\11lount of Staff time dedica.ted
to the jmple11l~tation of the ordinance. This BIUll.ysis would be brou¡bt forwud to the City
Council with the thaft ordinance.
2. Limitatiom on Conversions
The lirnite.tìons listed below would be utilized by the City 10 evaluate requests for conversion of
multi-family ren1aJ property to condl;l¡nilÛ\.Iß\s:
Staff ReeommendøtloDI Condonúnium conversions would only be permitted if the minimum
number of rental units within the City of Dublin e¡æeeds 30"10 of the total housing supply and the
average citywide vacancy rate OVŒ the previous year cxcO¢ds 5% within the City of Dublin..
Conversion cannot reduce the total number ohental units below 30% of the total housing supply
¡¡nd cannot reduce the vacancy rate below 5% 115 estimated through St¡¡fl'reYÍew.
Analysts: Thl5 provision sets clearly defined standards that can be used to determine jf 1'ental units
Ny be converted to condonùniwn units and continue to preserve diversity in the< housing stock.
When the General Plan Housing ElemMt was updated in 2000, there WQI"Q 9,597 residentiallU1its
within the City of Dublin. Multi-family rental umt!S repre~ætod 2.9il or approximately 30% of
the total housing supply. This was consistent with the composition of the nationwide housing 71 '>j
supply at that time. Implementation oftbis provision in th= OrdiNnCe wou1d p:reser'\le e. core stock I -¿"i..
of rental bÇJ~ipg consistent with the housing ratio irn,ntified in the Housing Element.
The City of Dublin Housing Element (Appendix A. Dublin Housing SUJok) indicates that a
v¥ancy rate of So/. j¡; çonsidered idePl for IId.Þqua1o COt\II'UI11C1' mobility and choi~. A vacancy rate
below 5% indicates a sÚ'OnS ~nUÙ market with limited availability. A vacancy rate that is greatter
than S% would indicate 80me excess availability of housing within the City of Dublin. This
provision would help to ensure the availability of alternative housing for residents that are
displaced by conversion. However, implementation of this alternative could limit future
conversions based on the housing and vooancy ratios withIn the City.
Fiscal Impact: A IJrinimal amount of Staff time would be reqWrcd to obtain the current h01.lSi:nS
ratios and vacancy rates; however, this time could be charSlld to the Applicanl
Alternative Recommend_don: Cond.ominium convel'llion$ would only be permitted if the
minimum number of rentlll units within the City of DlI,blin ~c~ 25% of the total housing
supply and the Ilverage cityWide vacancy rate over the previous year exceeds 5% within the City of
Dublin. ConvlI1'!Iion CllDUot reduce the total nUtl:lber of rental units below 25% of the total housing
supply e.nd caDIl()t reduce the vacancy rate below 5%.
AnalysIs; The ratio of rental howang hag changed since the General PIIU:I. HOusing Element was
updated in 2000. As of October 2004, tho City has iSS'Qed or finaled buildin¡ pennits for 15,447
reaidcntial units. Approximately 25% of the residential pennits that bJ¡.ve been issued m:re for
multi-family rental housing. This alternative would ensure that the rental housing supply as a
pl:fcentagc oftbe total housing supply would not dropþolow the CUf7Mt ratio.
Fiscal Impact: A mininla.l amount of staff time would be required to obtain the cwrent housing
ratios and vaCl\l1ey rates; bowev=r. thi$ time oould. be chmged to the Applicant
3. Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan
A Temmt Reloçation Assistanco PllIr\ shall be prepared by the Applicant to indioate how the
Applicant willll&sist tenants who will be displaced in &ccuring decent, safe, sanitary and affordable
repÍlu.:=ent housing OQt h!gh¡;r in cost ÜWI tÞe rent of the existing unit beina converted. Staff
recommends that, at II- minimum. the relocation assistance plan in¡,;lude rnl1Ving expenses /Jßd M
e1!;te!ISÍon ofkase terms as discussed below.
a. Moving Expenses
Staff R~ommenddioD! Payment of moviDj expenses equal to 2 months nmt to all tenants
who .reside in the property at thl: time that the "Notice: of Intent to Con.vert" is iSSIlM pursuant
to the Subdivision Map Act (SlIC:tion 664~2.9) Dr the alternative notice required by the
Condominium Conv¡::rsion Ordinance for projectS that already have final condominium maps.
Pa.yment ¡¡hall be made within 14 days of relocation. However, any tenant who 1mninate5 II
lease: prior to receiving a nntice to vacate from the property owner or is in arre:m of rental or
leasehold payments, unless withholding psyment is legally allowed, shall not be entitled to
relocation benefits.
A>ullY~'iç: The payment I;)f moving eKpenøeK iK intomded to reduce the financial burden thilt i~
placed on teni1D.ts 85 a rcsuh of the property owner's deci¡¡ion to convert and the teIUU1ts' "./-) :1
subsequent need to reloca'[e. This money will help to defray the cost of physically moving and / ';'-'.'V
related moving expe'llSCs. The Subdivision Map Act does not require property owners 10 i b
provIde relocation assistJmcc to displaced tenPnts.
Fiscal ¡"'pael: Dcpendwg on the policy direction and ImplomcntBtion procedures tlwre will be
a different anJmmt of Ste:ff time dedicated to the implementaüon afthis ordilW1Oe provision.
There is a possibility that some type of self-reporting procedure could be implemented that
would minimize Staff monitoring time, F1.Irther æmlyris of '!ÌJe l.tIIOunt of Staff lime will be
included w~ the ordinance is brought bllCk to the City Council.
Alternative Recommendation: Payment ofmovins expenses IIqual to 2 months rent onJy to
tenants that are seniors (age 62 IU1d above), permanently disabled teniUlU end teDan1s that
reside in affordable units lIS defilllld by "the City of Dublin l11oluslonary Zoning Ordinance
(Section 8.68).
A7Jalysis: The payment of moving expenses to this seleçt group of tenønts will help 10 reduce
the financial burden fDr those tenants that pre likely to have the most difticu1ty relocating and
are least able to b~ar the costs associated with moving. 'Tho SubdivisiOn Map Act does not
requÍM property owners to provide relocation assistance to displaced tenants.
Ftsca/lmpact: Dopending on the policy diredion and implementation procedures thm will be
8 different 8tIlount of Staff time dedicated to the implementation (If tbis ordinance provision.
There is a possibility that some type of self·reporting procedure could bel implemented that
WDuld miJrlmize Staff monitoring time. Further analysis of the amount of Staff time will be
included when the ordinance is brought back to the City Council.
b. Lease Agreements
Stllff RccommcødatiOD: Staff recommends inolusion of the roIJowing provisions in the
Condominium Conversion Ordinance:
A. Rælt will not be increased from the date of issuance of a "Notice of Intent to Convert"
pursuant to the Subdivision Mill' Aot (Section 66452.9) or or the altem2tlve notice required
by 'the Condominium Conversion Ordimmce for projects that already have fmal
condominium maps, whichcva: 00CU[!i first, until 6 months following the reeeipt of a
public report ftom the Department of Rcw Estate, or the tenant purchases a w¡jt or
relocates to other accommodations, whichever OQÇurs first.
B. Provide lease/rent¡¡! agr=ent c:xkn5ions of no less '!han 3 ye¡rn¡ to all tetlJ\tlts that are
seniOl'l! (age 62 and IIbove), permanently disabled tenants and tenants that reside in
affordable units as defmed by the City of Dublln Inclusionary Zoning OrdillWlCe (Section
8.68). The 3-year extension shall start from the date of iSsuance Df the public repon frDm
the Department DfRea1 Estate (DRE), Annual rent i.octews during this 3-year period may
not exceed 75% of the latest avcra¡e annual rent increase of the residential rent cQmponent
of the Cons\IIDlilr Price Ùldelt.
C. Extend leases/rental agreements to families with children m grades K through 12 for a
miniœum. of I year &om the date of issuance of a public report :from the DRE.
Analysts: The Subdivision Map Act requires :property ownor, 10 !jive 6 mornhs notice of
intention to convert priar 10 terminating tenancy due to the conversion, and the: CondominiUIII i - / "..l
Conver$Ìl)n Ordh:IIUlce would require II similar nctioc prior to submis!dOD. of an application to) j
convert & þroject that has already been mapped for COndo:m.iniU1115. However, there is & limited '5b) 2: ¡
amount of housing that meets the needs of ~or, wsa.bled and low-income tenants.
Im.pJcmcntation of St3ff'a rccornrru:ndation would provide thesc 1ellants with additional time 10
find hCl1,1sing within the community and furthI:' reduces the pot~tiaL negative impactS of
moving. .
Providing tenants with school age children. a l-year extensiQn will help to avoid moving during
the school year and disropting the education process. Resttictln¡ the ability 10 raise rent will
li.mjt the potential fo~ PTOpcmy owners to ¡;ncoumgt tenants to vacate unitli and avoid the
noticing requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and paymen1 of relocation assistance
required by the City of Dublin Condominium Cunvorslon Oniinance. Rent would be held in
plllee for II niliIimuro of 6-12 months under this provision.
Fiscal Impact: Staff time will be required to enforce these provisions. Tbe amount of Staff
time will be d(:temlined a.s the draft ordinance is dev=loped. Further analysis of the amount ot
staif1ime will be determined when the. ordinance is brought back tn city Council.
Alternative ReçomlØendat1olll The: following are altemative provisions for consideration in
the Condominium Conversion Ordinance. Either one or both of these provisions could be
implemented with tb.e Staft"reconunendations listed above:
A. Provide I lease/rental agreement extension of no less than ] year from the date of issuance
of the public report from the DRE to all tenanb¡ that are semoN (age 62 and above),
permanently disabled tenanœ and tenants that reside in affordable units as defined by the
City of Dublin Inclusionary ZoDing Ordinance (Section 8.68).
B. Permanently disabled or low-income tenants that II!'C also senior! shall reœi'VC: a lifetime
lease in which rent increases are tied to the Cpr. All other recommended lease provisions
liated above would also be ¡¡¡eluded.
Analysis: Implementation oftbese provisions would provide additioru¡J pro1~ion¡ tb&t øre not
requíred by the Subdivision Map Act for tenants that are considered to be'difficult to re1ocðte;.
Tht lease extension will pro~ide tenants that are .seni01'8, disabled or living in affordable units
with 6 months more time to relocaæ than provided by the Subdivision Map Aet.
Implementation of this provision would enable certain tcmlPts to avoid relocation alto Jether
beeauiiC of the difficulty in finding repllWement housing and physically rooving.
FiscD/Impact: Staff time will be required to enfof¢t'J these provisions. The amount of Staff
time will be determined &5 the draft ordi.nan~e b developed. Further analysis of the amount of
sœff time will be determined when the ordinance is brough.t back to City Council.
4. Bulldlnll Code Requirements
. The follow!n¡ recornmcnda.tions addre~ the a.ppliç:ation of building code requirements to
condominium conver~io[\5 ~
Stlltr RWOlUwondation: Converted condominiums 8hall b~ noquired to meet the building code
requi~u in effect at the time of construction. Any retrofittin¡ Dr remodclin¡¡ work shall IDCo:;' ~ I L! :1
1.\1Jtf'etIt buildin¡ còdé requirements in effect a.t the time buiJdin¡¡ permits I1rI: issued for the work. ,¡ , ~)
¡de¡
Analysis: Many existing msidcntial dwellings, including apartments, within the City of Dublin
were built prior tQ the cmrent building coele rcquimnents. These dwellings are cOll$idered safe
Imd Inhabitable structures. Therefore, the City doe¡ not typically require costly retrofitting of these
propmes to brillg them up to currerrt building code requirements. Conversion of existing
apartments to condominiums does not subsmntially change the use of these structures in II way that·
would l'IU\kc them le9s safe or inhabitable. However, II\lY remodeling or retro fittin¡¡ work that the
property owner performs would bI: requiTed to meet current building code requireøu':11ts.
Fl$~allmpact: Noœ, The property owner would be required to obttÙn a builcUng permit for
retrofitting work. The cost of building inspections is included in the building permit fees.
Altetoative R6Commendatlon: An converted condominiums shan be retrofitted to the standards
required of Dew residentiw condominiums as rcqu!Jcd by the Building Official.
Analysis: Ex.twin retrofitting would bC! required for many old~ properties in ardllr to bring
them up to current building code requirements. This is an expensive proposiûon that would likely
discollrage the conversion of older apartment complexes that were not built to ClllTetlt
condominium standards.
Fiscal Impact: None. The property owner would be required to obtain ð building permit for
retl'of!tti1lg work. The cost of building inspections Is included in the building pemllt fees.
B. Iur;:ILtdom.ry Zoning R.e¡u1"tiODS
The following are rccom:mendatißns regarding tœ application af Inclusionary Zonblg and the
purchllse of below market rate rental units· in developments that are converted to fur sale
condominiums.
I'
1. Application of Includonary Zoning
Staff Recommendation: Amend the Inelusionary Zoning Ra¡ulatioDs (Seoti011 8,68) to require
multi-ñuni1y rental projects that are subject to the condominium conve:r&.ion ordinance to provide
12.5% of the total number [)f dwelling units within the development &s afford¡tb~ purchase units if
they have not already obtained a þublie report from the DRE.
Al1alysl$: Approximl!tely 29% of the rental units within the City are located in properties where a
Final Condominium Map has already been recorded. ConvcrsÎlm of these rental units eouId result·
in a mbstantialloii of market rate and affordable rental units. This provision would 'require
p10pcrty owners to provide affordable ¡mits at the time of conversion regardless of whether or not
a Final Condominium Map has bf:en recorded on the property. This is fIJI innovative approach to
providing :indusionary housing with condooninium conversions thai is not· currently IISCd by
surrounding juri~dictions.
Fiscal Analysis: Staff time will be required for Stllff to impJement and monitor the Incluslonary
Zoning Regulations on all newly converted condonrlniums.
~
Alternative R.eccnnmendalionr Amend the Inclusionary Zoning R.l=gulations (Section 6.68) to . .
requu:e condominium projects with 20 or möf~ W1Ïtg t? p;ovidl; 12.5% of ~~ 'total number of> ~i; ìQ
dwellmg units within the development as affordable umts If a Final Condomllllum. Map has not . D
been recorded on the property. /2'1
Analy$ir: As previously discussed, approxilIlil\ely 29% of the rental mrlts within the City are
IlXIuod in propenills whe~ a Final Condominium Map ha¡¡ aI...,ady been recordC(\, These
properties would not be subjec:t to inclusionary zoning under this proviii.Ïon. HOW':lver, properties
1hat do not have f . recorded Final Mllp would bc trnbject to inclusionit)' zoning and contribute to
the supply ofaffbrdable purchase WlÎts within the City.
FfsCQ.l Analysis: Staff time will be required to ImplemClrt and monitoI the Incluslonary Zoning
Regulatiol1ß on those developments that have not already recow.ed a Final Condominiw:n Map.
2. Purçbast of Existing Below Market Rate Unit!
ScaB Recommndlldonl Tenants that reside in affordable units ¡¡¡; defin=d by the City of Dublin
Inclusionary Zoning Ordinlmce (Section 8,68) shllll have the right of first refusal to purchase their
cun=t unit at Wl affordable ptI1"cha8e price in accordance with the provisions oftJ:u¡, Inclusionary
Zoning Reguln1iom and the City of Dublin' $ "Laypersons Guide to loolusionary Zoning OrdlnWlce
Regulations" .
AMlytjs: This provision wouJdhelp to reduce the Impact of relocation on low-inc::rnne tenants and
provide them with preferential treatment In the purc:hase process, The Subdivision Map Act does
require property owners to offer t~ants an exclusive right to purchase his or her respe¡;tive unit at
market rate. However, implementation of this provision would enable 1enaDts living iZI aff'ordablo
units to purchase their ex.isting unit at an affordable purchase pric:e ealc:p1ated based on the
Im:lusionary Zrmingrequirements. .-
Fiscal Anal~i&: Sta.ft'time will be required to verify that low-income .tenants receive the right of
first refusal. Additional stoff timr: will be required in order to verli'y the household's eligibility for
these newly converted units.
Altern.tin Recommendation: Offer below market mte pl.l1'Chue urûts to '!.he general public
without preference to the existing affordable tenants.
Analy.ds: Implementation of this provision would mirror the requirements of the Subdivision Map
Act. No special preferences would be given to existing tenants Jiving in lnc1usÎofUII'Y rental units
that WIlDt to purebuo 811 1nclllSionary fOT sale unit. All e;dstini tenants would be offered the right
of ftrst refusal to purçhase their unit at market rate based on the rf!,!uirements of the SlIbdîvislon
Map Act. Tenants currently living in Tncll.lsionlll)' rental units thl>t wish to purchase an
Inclus.ionary unlt would have to choose from the units that ar~ available at the I:nclusionary price.
The:se te:nants might have to move 110m their I;Xisting utlit.
Fisc,,! Ana!ysì.r: Staff j6 already verifYing h(lusehold eligibility for ß¡¡jsting for sale housing.
Additiorml Staff time would be required for those newly oonvert~d units.
t. Site DevelDpment Review
íl.oúb /2<9
A Condominium Map h roquired iþ. order to convert an exiating apllrtment complex ~
..ondomJn:iums. However, the map process does not provide a ml!chanitm to eva1ua.te the physical
appelll'llllcl} of a prop=rty. For cxampJc, the City could rcccive an application to conve;rt an existing
apartment oomplex with deferred maintenance that creates an eyesore within the ooaununlty. This
. deferred maint:enø.nce could include e¢maI painting and landllC8.pe ma.int~ to repair spæse Qr
ovetgl'Own landscaping. A Site Development Review Pennit would provide the City with a
meehMism to evaluate the phyti6!1.! appelU'ance of the property .BI1d require modifioations. The
following me reccmmendatiollS regarding thi" application of a Site Development Review Permit to
condominium. conversions.
Sta1f RecolDlÞêll.datlon: Bach main building, Stn1CM1!, fence, paiio enclosure, carport, accessory
building, sidClwalk, cIrlvcway, 1~9Capt'd area and uûlity shall be refurbished. and restored as
neceuary to achieve a high degree of appearance. quality and safety.
Analysts.' This provision will provide the City C01.mcil with thi" ability to require property owners to
perform deferred ma1ntcnaUce prior to Mnvemon. This will help to maintain the visual a.ppeanmce of
the City of Dublin. AD amcl.1dm¡;nt to Include ¡;ondomIDlum convers:loIll> in the Site Development
Revilo'w ~Io'ct c>n of the Zon!n¡ Ordinance (Soction 8.104) would be :required in order 10 h:nplm'lcnt this
prov1siDn. .
Fi:,:cal ImpaCT: No financial. impact. Community Develcpment Dep:mment Staff time would DC
reqcired to perfOIm a physic!] inspection of the property Imd review proposed iInprovcments.
HoW\':ver, the Applicant would be required to apply for 1\ Site Development Review Application and is
then charGed on a time ang materials basis.
Alternative Recommendation: Require the properij' owner to establish a reserve fund jn excellll'of
. DRE requl1ements for ongoing maintenance oftbll property.
Analysis: Condominium. associations are required to CStabli5h budgets and Te!IerVe funds for ongoing
mwnt:enlll1cc, This provision would only require adl1itional funds be set !!Side for such repairs.
However, it does not require the existing property own~ or the n~ly =ated coruiominiwn
!!S!IOCiation to perfoIm maintenance I1Ild repBirs. Therefore, multi.family developments could convert
without perlonning improvements.
Fiscal Impact: No financial impact since no Botian would be requír~ of S1a:tf.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council provide climctloD. to Staff on polieies tha.t should be consigered. a.~
part of the Condominiwn Conversion OrdJnance.
11 C5b I z5L
AGENDA STATEMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 11, 2005
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC HEARING - PA 64-044 Cundomlnium COJlVèrllon
OrdJnaDl:e ^.{I /'"
(J!(!port prepared by: Jeff Bu.ker. A.sSQciQle Plu.Plner)1..:>(Y
ATTACHMENTS~
1. Resolution Recommending that the City Council Adopt III!
Ordinance Re¡ulating the CODVl,!!sion of Exí~ting Apartments
in the City to Condominiums.
2. Urgency Condominium Conversion Otdhlance
3. Condominiwn Conversion Ordinance (Non urgency
ordinlWce)
4. Alternative Urgency Condominium Convet!lion Ordinance
5. Alternative Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Non
urgency oniinlnce)
6. Notice ofPl.lbHc Hellring to Consider Initiating Proceedings
to Adopt IS Condominium. Convl!!'Sion Ordinance.
7. Ust of Dublin Aparlments
8. City Counoil Sl.II.ffReport (dated SeptCJl1ber 7, 2004)
9. City Council StatrReport (dated Novlmlbe116, 2004)
without B.ttachment~
10. City Council Resolution 181-04, Initiating Proceedings to
Adopt an Ordinance Regulating the Conversion ofExistmg
Apartment¡¡ in tho City to Condominiums.
11. City Council Meetinll Minutes of November 16, 2004
RECOMMENDATJON:
I. Open public hearing;
2. Receive Staff' Pr~entati.on;
3. Question Staff, AppliC811t and the public;
4. Close Public. HeaIÎnglWd Deliberate: md
5. Adopt Resohltiotl. (Attaclunen.t 1) Rc::commcnding City
Council Adopt an ordinance Regula1ing the Conversion of
Existing Apartments in the City to Condominiums.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
B"ck¥roulId:
On September 7, 20Q.4, the City Council adopted 1.1. Rcsolutiotl (Rcsolution 1¥181·04) :initiating prooeedin¡s
to II40pt an orditlanoe regulating the conversion of existing I!.partmcnts in the City to fbr·¡¡we
condominiums (Attachment 10). Following that meeting. staff studied the various mechaním¡s for
regulating condominillm conva:;ions, This Study included II complete review of the Subdivision Map
Act, City of Dublin General Plan Housing Element and Condominium Conv~ion Ordinances from
different cities throughout California, including: the cities of Livennore II!1d 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 the$1I' policy alternatives to the City Council (Attachment 9). The City Council
provided Staff with direcûon reogarding the. development of the proPOlled Condominium Conversion
Ordinance. The City Council further directc:d Staff to hold a meeting with the oWners of apartments
COPIES TO, PAPil"
G ~\p A'N\2004\04·()4.4 CO!'IOO Çonv~oo. ZOA \p,srl"1 ..oS.dOl;
v
.thj ..._ Ci. f D bl' . -..... - fo h f th I· _..I" Îdß ¡?b ! lCt,
WI n """ ty 0 U 1n 111 .......et' to In !'t!l t I':m 0 c:sc pO ICy rcoomrr.."....abons an so [Clt ulC1r
oommc:nu. On December 9, 2004, Staff' held a meeting with these property o~ers and other interested
parties. Staff utilized the feedback received at this meeting to further develop the proposed Condominium
Conversion Ordinance (Attachment!; 2-5). F"edbaçk from the property ownm is included in the analysÍä
section ofthi> Staff Report.
Apartment units p:rovide a. type of housing that is 1\ key to II. helÙthy diversity of housing stock jfi the
community. Apartments provide housing for all levels fJf a£fordøbUity in the community and are a
val\JJ!ble tool for providing work force housing. Statfbelieves that the conversion of one or two fJf the
Cj!y'$ ap¡ø1;mwt communities could have a major impact OD the diversity of the City's housing skJck in
that it would remove &om the market II 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 thai is DOt in a position
to purchase wch W1Îts. In addition, the I08S of these units would likely d!!Crease the vacancy rate, may
mcreøe rents, md this may in turn further ~bate the City's shortage of ¡affordable rental units. This
might cause a lasting imbll1ance in the diversity of housing slOck in the City.
In the past 10 yellt'li the City hils seen tbedevelopme:nt of appro¡¡;imately 1,:500 residential apartment
units, for an overall totol of approximatcly 3,172 units throughout the City. It should be noted thllt
approximately 1,119 of these units are alr"ady mapped for condominiwns but continue to operll.tc ØI;
apartment communities (Attachment 7). However, the CIIlifomia Department ofReat Estate (DRE) h:!.s
not issued a Public Report for th=se properties. The Public Report vems the property owner's right to sell
the units individually. These apartment oommunities remain subject to new City ordinances until the
property OWIII!l' has received 11 Publio Report &om the DRE. If all of tht::lle> units converted, the ratio of·
IIpll!1m{!nt$ to OW11BrBhip units would be greatly reduced.
In the past seven months, Staff has received inquiries ftom several existing apartment owners indicating
their intent to file subdivision documents to convert their projects to condomilUwns. The City is cUlTently
processing subdivision applications to convert the following apartment projects to for-saIe condominiums.
Current Subdivi¡;ìQJI AøølicatioI1ll
Iron Horse Trail Apartments (Dougherty Road) -
Archstone - Emerwd P!I!k Apllrtmcnts (Hacienda Drive) .
Total
II 7 units
324 units
441 Units
Prøcess:
At the prc:se:nt time should a property owner wbh to convert IIIl existing apartment wmplex "to for-sale
condominiums, the property owner m~ recfJrd a condominium Mnp and obtain Ii Public Report ftom the
Department of Renl Estate (DRE). The application for Ii Condominium Map would be processed in
accordance with State law under the Subdivision Map Act. The Map Act cont¡¡jn¡¡ provisioll5 that rec¡uir\"
the p:roperty owner to give notice to tenants and gives tenants the right to purchase their cxisting Wlits
before they are placed on the mBI'Ket for.sale to the general public. Stftte law pcnnits the City to e:o;pand
upon these basic requirements through the adoption of a condominium-oonversion ordinanca State law
provides that cities have the responsibility to UJe the powers vested in tbero to facilitate the improvement
and development of housing to make adequate prClviaion for the housing need~ of all economia segments
of the community. (See Gov. Code, § 65S80(d)). For example. a condomíniwn convCll'sion ordinance
¡;auld limit conversions to maintain a bahll1cc of hou$\ng st(Jck and could n:quire the provision of
affordable units under the City's Inclusionary Zoning Ordinmce. .
Both nf the subdivision applications n:ferenced Ilbove would only be subject to the Condomitliwn
Conversion Ordinance ifit is adopted bafore the City takes action on these subdivision maps. Ordinarily,
under the Subdivision Map Act, the City may only apply standards in effect at tbe time tluit an application
for a tentative subdivision map is deemed complete (Gov. Code, § 66474.2(a». However, the City
Council adopted a Resolution initiating proceedings to adopt a eondominium-convcmon ordinance
2
^ /\L I ~?C.I
Îv¡ ~U' >---
(Attaehment 10). This Rcsolution was designed to prevent thoge that file subdivision applications to
convert existing apartments to condominiums from avoiding the pending condominium-conversion
ordinance. The Resolution permits the City to ¡¡pply tile Condominhun Conversioo Ordinance in effect on
the date the City approves or disapproves a tmtative map (Gov. Code, § 66474.2(b». The Subdivision
Map Act requires the City to take ac:ti(\n on maps within 50 days of deeming an application complete. At
the time: that !big StJ!ff Report WI\! prepared, the rnbdivi8ion applications referlmCed above had not been
deemed complete.
NfI;,hborlnt{ JurÎ9åJ"tion8:
Cities throughout Cø.lifornia have adopted Condominium Conversion OrdinlUlCl;l in eluding the cities of
LJvmmoR and Walnut Creek. Both of1be5e cities adopted conversion ordinanocs that contain provis:ions
which fCstrict the convcrs.ion of apartments to condominiumø and provide relocatiOll benefits to displaced
tenants. The fol1owing is a synopsis of the policy cmnponents contained in thei!le ordlnlmces:
The Cil)l ojLivermore:
· Application of the ordinance: proj ects with 2 or more units.
· Liroitations on Conversions: The City Couneil must annually determine the maximum numb=- of
apartment:> thllt are permitted to convert.
· Limitmion$ on Rent Increases: Rent increases are not permitted from the date a tentative mHp
application is filed until the tenant relocates.
· Relocation Assistance: All tenants receive financial relocation I\!sistancc equal to 2-months rent.
Seniors are offered refit controlled lifetime leases. Low and mode'fate income ten¡u¡n; shall be
offi:red 8- minimum of a 3-year, rent controlled lease. Ten¡¡n!:s with school aged clilldren receive iii 6-
month lease extension.
· Building Code Requir~ents: Projects shall conform to the appücaòle builòíng eode in effect at the
time the last building permit was issued.
· Site Devdopment Review: Landscaping and buildings shall be reviewed by. the PllII1IIing
Department and refurbished and restored to achieve a high degree ofappeanmce.
The City of Walnut Creek;
· Application of the ordinance: Projects with 2 or more units.
· Limitations on Convmiotl8: Convcaion is limited to no more than 5% of the City's potentially
convertible rental stock in anyone calendar year.
· Limitations on Rent Increases: Rent incn,ases 8R; not p(:I'ITlitted for a period of 2-years ftom the date a
tentative map application is filed with the city.
· Relocation Assistance:: All tenant:> rc:c=iv= fmancial relocaHon assistance equal to 2-months rent.
Seniors !U"C offered ront controIJed lifetime leases. Low and modemte income tenants shall be offi:red
a minim\U11 of a 3-year, rent CQ[ '\r(>lIed lease.
· Building Code Requiremi:tlts: Projects shall confonn to the applicable building code in effect at the
tíme the last building permit was issued.
· Site Develöpment Review: Lands~aping and buildings shall be refurbished and rcst01'OO to achieve 8
high degree of appearance.
ProprJtself poUt!)! Compollent.v:
In considemtion of the potential impacts from conversion St.ff ha.s pr~ared a Condominium Con versiol>
Ordinance to regulate the conversìon of rental apartments to for-sale condominiums. The key components
of the proposed Condominium ConversIon Ordinance are as follows;
· Applíeation of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance
· Limitations on Conversions
· Limitations on Rent Increases
· TCIlilIlt ReloClrtion Assistance Plan
3
·
Inclusionary Lanius Regul!ltiollS
T enlWt's Right to Purcha.so Unhs
Building Code Requirements
Site Development Review
ßoq)z" '=t-
I
·
·
Smffrecommends that the City Council adopt the attached Urgency Condomir:ri\Ull Cl;mversiQu Ordinance
to ensure that it is in dfott before the City takes action on the current subdivision applications
(Attachment 2 or 4). ApprovaJ of an ordinance typically requires two readings before the City Council
and then takes effect 30-days following the semnd reading. However, the City Council mll-Y cause the
Ord~çe to tll-ke effect immediately by adopting it as Ill! urgency ordinanœ if the City Couneil
determines that the conversion of these ¡¡p¡U1ments to condominiums might ftustrate the City's goe1, end
State law obligation to adequately provide for the housing needs of aU ccononric segroen1:$ of the
c:ommunity. There is the potential that the urgency ordimmco QlJuld be chlllengeci. Tb~Qre, Staff
recommends that the City Council also adopt a non urgency Condominium Conversion Ordinance
(Artac1unent 3 or S). The non urgency ordinance will provide the City wi'th a backup ordiDam;e in tbe
event that the urgency ordinance is challenged.
A.NALYSIS;
The following is a dillcussion of the key policy components of the proposed Condominium Convlmiion
Ordinance (Attachments 2-'). The discussion of cach c0111ponent includes an analysis of the policy a.long
with associated conunents rece.ived at the meeting with the property owncra, IIIld a dJscussion of the
financial impacts of implementing these provisions.
A. Application of the Condominium Conversion Ordiuance
The following critcrla would be used to identify multi-family properties that arc subject to the
proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance:
·
Developments QlJntainlng 20 or morc dwellin¡ units under the same ownership that IIJ'C held
for leø.se to the generø.l public (Attachment 2 - Section 8.54.0l0);
Residential rental projectS in which umts have: been occupied a¡¡ rental units (Attachment 2 .
Section 8.54.030); I\nd
Projects that have not received a public report trom the Department of Real E$tate (Attachment
2· Section 8.54.030).
·
·
A/lQlyyjy; The provision to make all projects with 20 or more rcntø.l UDitB subjllCt to the
Condominium Convasion Ordinance is consistent with Ihe thniosholå that has been established for
\he existing inclusionw:y Zoning Regulations (Section 8.68). This would exclude duplexes and
small apartment 'buildings from \he ordinance. The A1del'i Apartments is the smallest apartment
buildin¡ in the City with only S units. The Evan Alan Apartments is the next smallest with a total of
20unitll.
The conversion of units that have ø.lrcady bllell occupied could Te!lUlt in the displacement of
residents. Therefore, apartments would be subject to the: ordin8l1Qe if they have already been
occupied. Tenants that would be displaeed by convernion would be eligible to receive relocation
benefits r~uired by the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance. '
The requirement to obtain a public report from the DRE wou1d mllke units that have ø.lreBdy been
mapped for co\1dominiums subje<:t to the proposed Condominiwn COIIvomon Ordinance. State law
provides that only the Public Report vesls the building owners' rights to sell the units Individually.
Withoul Ùle Public Report, the deve10pment remains subject to new City Clrdinl\nce5 regllTdlcss of
whether the building is already mapped. At the time thai this Staff Repon wu preparl'd, the DRE
4
21 Ub. i ~¿PI
bad not i~sucd a Public Report for any units within the City that have been mapped "for
condominiums. However, if all of these units w,,", converted, the ratio of apartments to owncrship
unjt¡¡ would be greatly reduced and a significant number of tenants wOl.lld be displaaed.
Implementation òf this þrovisJoo would reduce the potential impact to these tenlUltS. This approac:h
to regulating: tbe wnversion of mapped .apartments to (;ondomini\llns t]¡1It is not curn;ntJy used by
~urroun¡: in¡ jwisdictions but is common in Southern California.
The City Council rcoommended inww:1ing the províaion 115 described above in the Condominium
Convet'!:ion Ordinane:e.
p,.oþerry Owner',\" Fe.e.db~ck; At the meetinu held with lhe property own=n¡ on Do:ocember 9, 2004,
sove:ral. of the owners expressed conc=J about applying the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordinance t(l 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 from
the City 4Ild that application of II Condominium Conversion Ordinance would eft'ectiveJy fCvt:r5e
these approvals and devalue their properties. Additionally, one property owner requested that the
ordinance apply t() properties with 21 or more units in order to exclude the Evan Alan Apartments.
The Evan Alan Apartments has 20 units and has processed a Final Condominium Map but does not
have II Public Report iÌ"om the DRE. The property owner(s) also expressed concern that they were
m.t notified of the City Council meeting, held on September 7, 2004, in whio;;h the City initiated tbe
development of the proposed ordinance. The City sent a publie hearing notice 10 the leBBing offiee
at each property advising them of the City COWlcil hearing. However, the property owner(s) were
inadvertently not sent II copy of hemin¡¡ notice, Staff has updated the address list for the public
hearing notices to include each property owner. All property owners were sent II. notice advising
them ofll}e Planning Commission hearing on January 11,2005.
Staff has prepared an alternative ordinance (Attaclunents 4 & 5) that would exclude: properties with
;m approved· condominium map OOm the comrr.:n;ion ordinance. This alternative ordinllnce is
available mould the PllIJU1ing Cotmnission decide to recommend to 'the City Council the approval of
a Condominium Convernion Ordinance that excludes properties with approved condominium maps.
Fiscallmpact; [mplernentation of these policy components wOllld not have at! impact on thei:r own.
However, Staff time: would bc required in order to implemen.t the overa.ll ordinance.
B. Limit_tlolIl OD ConversioDI
Section 8.54.040 of the propos~ CondominiW11 Conversion Ordinance would permit convI;TSions if
the minimum number of ~ta1 units within the City of Dl.Iblin exceed!! 30% of the total housing
supply. Convem;ons would not be:> permitted to n:.!u"e the total number of rental units below 30% of
the total housing supply.
Analysis; This provision sets clearly defined standards that em be used to determine if rental units
may b~ converted to condominium units and continue to preserve diversity in the hOU£Ìog 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 approx.im&tely 30% of the
total housÎn8 supply. This ratio was consistent with the cumpoliition of the nationwide bomcing
supply at that time and ensures a diversity of housing types to meet the needs of different economic
segments of the community. Implementation of this provision in the ordirumcc would prœet'Ve s
core stock of rental housin¡: consistent with the housing ratio identified in the HOU$ÎDg ElemllIlt.
The ratio of existing rentaJ housing has changed since the Ocneral Plan Housing Element was
updated in 2000. As ofOctcb-er 2004, the City has issued or iinaled huilding permits for ]5,447
resid=tiaJ units. Approximately 25% of the residential permits that have been issued were for
5
.g z...Db I z/1
muW-family rental housing. Therefore, no condominium conversicms would be pe:rmitt<:od unUT
additional multi-family rental units are ¡:onstruct=d and the ratio of these units ex.Ceeds 30% oftbe
total housing suppl)'.
Staff has estimat=d the City's housing ratio at built out utilizing 2000 CengOS data, Association of
Bay Area Gove:nunants (ABAO) projections, and the current General. Plan Land Use Map. Multi-
family rental units arc anticipated to represent' a maximum of approxÛDately 36% of the total
h01J8Îng supply when the eity is fully built out. This ratio is based on the assumption thad all
unð-eveloped pan:els with existing Medium/High and High Density Gen(:f8.] Plan Land Use
designations will consist of rental units. However, it is likely that for-sale condominiums will be
built on some of these parcels. The construction of for-sale CODd!;lrnini1l111S rather than rental
aparlInE:tlts would th<!:l'efore reduce the ratio öfrental unit!! below 36%. The ultimate housing ratio
will effect the ability of properly ownllTS to wnvurt 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 prc:rcquisite to çonvçp¡ion that the City wide VllCaDcy rate
exœ~ 5% (Attachment 9). The City of Dublin General Plan Housing Element (Appendix A,
Dublin Housing Stock) indicates that a vacancy ra.te of S% is considered ideal for ad~uate
consumer mobility and to ensure that altema'live housing is available for tenants that are displaced
by conversion. The City CO\mcîl recommended that this proviøion be included in the draft
OTdinance. However, Staff has discovered a number of impJcmentatiøn issues assoeiated with tIllE
provision. Vacancy rates arc djffi¡;¡¡lt to traok. Professiona.l vacancy reports do not typically track
smø.lIer apartment complexes and would not necessarily give I\fI accurate representation of the
overall vacancy rate within tbe City. StJiff could periodically survey property owners in oroer to
determine the vacancy rate. However, this would be a. labor intensive task and it would be difficult
to verify the accuracy of the information that is collected.
Property Owner's Feedback.' The property owners indicated that vacancies are at least partially a
reflection of the rCIl'ts that a property is charging. Therefo~, the vacancy rate can be manipulated by
an increase or decrease in rent. Based on these concerns IIIId the diffiC\1lty it! traclcing vacancy rates,
Staff has decided to recommend against including a vBcancy reqWreffil31t in the proposed
Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Fiscnl Impact: A minimal amoUnt of Staff time would be reqwred to calculate the current housing
ratios. The City already collects the Î11foTmolltion that Is needed to caJculate the ratio. The cost of
Staff time needed to cal.culllte the ratio would be recovered through the pre application fee d.e~c;:ribed
in Semien 8.54.040,A of the ordinance.
C. Limitations on Rent IUI:J'el.leJi
Seotion ¡¡.54.IOO restricts rent inc.rea¡;es tram the date the property owner provides each 1enant with
a Notice of Intent to CenYCrt pursuant to Section 8.54.050 until twelve month¡ following the
approval !;If the Condominium Conversion Permit or six months following the issuance of a public
report by the Department ofRe.a.1 E5tate (DRE), whichcv~ OC(:UT!l later.
Analysis: Restricting the property own~'s ability to raise rent wi1J limit the potential for property
owners to encourage tenants to vacate early ill order to avoid the noticing requiremen~ of the
Subdivi6ion Msp Act and the proposed City of Dublin Condominium COJ:lvenion Ordilllmce. ReIlt
would be he]d io plllce fur II minimum of 6-12 mon~ W1der this provision. The Ciry Counoil
directed Staff to include this provision in the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
PrIJperty 0»1111/1' 's Feedback.' The property owners did not express concern reglU'ding this speeifie
pr<'lyj¡jon.
1\
'B 3 0b \ "2('(
Fiscal Impact.' A sclfreportin¡¡; process would be utilized and a minimal !Ul1Qunt øfSU¡fftim; wØwa
be required to impkmc:ut th.i5 policy. Th~ property owner would be rcqUiTCld to nøtify each tC¡¡iIllt of
the limitation on rent increases and provide Staff wi1h a copy of the notice WI described in Section
8.54.050.A ofth~ proposed ordinance.
D. TeDant RelocatioD Ani8tlD~e Plan
Sootion B .54.110 of the proposed ordinanoe req\JÎrl:8 the Applicant to implement Ii Tenant
Re]ocation Assistance Plan. The relocation plan shan be prepared by the Applicant and indicate the
Applicant's ¡:nmmitment to þrovide tenant~ with the benefits required by the Condominium
Conversion Ordinanoe. These benefits include fimmc::ial assistanoc with [!loving expenses and an
extension oflcase terms for qualified tenants.
Fintlncial Relocation Asst.'lJtllltll
Section 8.54.11 O.D of the proposed ordínwce requires the property owner to. provide oach tenant
with II pllyment ec¡u.a1 to 3 months te1'It to help cover movin¡ expenses. The property owner is
required to make this payment within 10 days of the telitlnt's waiver to purchase their existing unit.
Ana(ys¡s: 'The Subdivision Map Act does not require prop=rty owners to provide relocation
assistance to disp)¡¡çed tenants. However, there are ¡;osts associated with the physical act ofmovin¡
arid setting up new utilities. The payment of moving expenses is inœndlXJ to mince the fina.ncjal
burden that is placod on tenanta !18 a result of the property owner'li decision to convert IIIld the
tenanb' subsequent need to relocate.
The policy IIlternatives that were presented to the City C01.U1ciJ on November 16, 2004, includllCi a
recommendation to pay moving expenses equal to 2-months rent within 14-days of reloca-tion.
However, the City Coundl directed Staff to require II payment equid to 3-mnnths prior to relocation_
This provision has been included in the proposed ordinllllce as requesU!dby the City Council.
Property Ow"..r's Feedback: Concern wøs nigecJ by the property ownen¡ regardiIlS the requirement
to provide financial relocation BSsistance. Several property owners. that were prescot at tbe meeting
staled 1hat the annual tenant turnover \1!.te was between 50% and 80%. These property OW1\en: do
not felll that they should be required to pay reloeatiO!l expenses for tenlU1t$ that would likely move
rcga:rdll:Ss of II çonversion. They sugg~ted thll± relocation benefits be limited to longtime tenants.
However, as demonstrated by these property ownBrS, 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 mov, -
early as a result of II conversion. Th.ese tenafits will incur moving ex.penses that they mi£ht nQt have
otherwise inCillTed it'the prop=rty was not converted, Many of these resident. mliY not h4Vt! the
financial resources to pay moving expooses. Therefore, Staff continues to recommend the financial
reloca.tion as.i.tlll1cc provision for 1111 tenlUlts_
Fiscal Impact: A self reporting proooss would be utilized and a minimal amount of Staff time would
be required to implement this policy. The property owner would be required to notify each tenant of
their relocation benefits and provide Staff with a ooPY of the notice as described in Sections 8.54.050
and 8.54.110 of the draft ordinance.
Contjnu~d Tenancy fQr QUfllifwd n",øntf
s.ccti(}n 8.54.1] D.E of the proposed ordinMce require~ prcperty owners tc provide a 12·month
e'X.Lensioll of temUlûY to all eligible tenants beyond the 1 &0 day period required by the Subdivision
Map Act (Section 66427.1 (c). This 12-month ex.tension shan be provided if the head ofhoU$Chold
or spouse meets the following eligibility criteria:
7
'23 <t 0b I Z-- O¡
· Has attained age 62 or older;
· Has EI disability as defin¡:d by Section )4 ofthe California Civil Code;
· ls Ii resident of !} inclusionary hou~ing unit; or
· Is residing with one or more minor dependent children.
Analy8i...~: There is ¡¡limited amount of housing that meets the net:ds of senior, disablod nnd low-
income tenants. Por example. a disabled ten!lIlt may require IIU apartment on the ground floor.
Ground fJoor aparnnent£ are h!lfder to find and it may require an extended period of time: to lo~te
such a unit. The Subdivision Map Act requires property OWnCI'S to give tenants a 1 'SO-day notice to
vacate an apartment prior to terminating a tenancy due to a condominium convm¡on. Howcve'T,
lBO-days TTlay not be e. sufficient amQunt of time for a displaced tenant with special needs to find
suitable replaeemenl housing in Dublin. Similarly, the 12-month extension for families with school
aged children wiJl provide them with flexibility to schedule their move and potentially avoid moving
during the school ye!IT and disrupting the edueation process. The 12-mO'llth extension included in
the propo~d Condomirrlum Conversion Ordinance would provide these tenants with additional time
to find housing within the community and further reduce the potentiw negative impacts of moving.
The poHey a1temlltives thaI were presl!IJted to the City Council, included II reconunendatioD to
provide a 3-yEllll" lease ~tensioD to tenants that were serums, disabled or low income (Attachment
9). However, tbe City Council expressed conc(.:[11 that a 3-year extension May be ovorly burdensome
to property owner!; and result in diserimination against renting to these tenants. The City Council
reoo¡mncndcd the 12·montb extension that is included in the proposed ordinance.
Property Owner's Feedbatk: The property owners agreed thll.! II 3-year lease ex.tensjon was
burdensome and also questioned the need to provide any type: of time extension.
Fjscallmpact: A minimal iLIIlO11nt of Stllff riml: is required 10 implement this polky. The property
owner is required to demonstra.w that they have oo.tered a binding lease extension or that the tmant
has refused an offer for an extension. The cost of Slaff time needed to review this dooumentation
could be billed to the ApplioMt on a time and mll.!erials basis.
'E. IDclu.lonary ZoniDg Replat10DI
Sectíon 8.54.130 of thl: proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance treats condominium
conversions as new residential development projects. As new residentla.] development projects,
tbese converted properties would be required to comply the 1nclullionsry Zoning Regulations. The
current Tm::lusi011I1I)' Zoning Regulations require new developments to provide 12.5% of the UIlitli as
affordable (Section 8.68). However, if Ihe project had complied with the Inc1lli1ionary Zoning
Regulations in effect !It the time the project was built, the converted project will only be requirc:d to
milk., up the difference. Thus, if the project has (;omplied with a 5% inelusiou8JY requirement at the
timo it was conslructed, tben the conversion would be required to satisfy the remaining 7.5%
inclusiona.ry obligabon under the existing ordinance.
A.nalysi3: The conversion ft'om apaTtn1ents to condominiums couJd result in a substantial loss of
market rate and affordable rental units. However, condominiums arc often seen as an affordable
form of homeownership. The oonversion of I1pllrtI11ents to condominiums will provide the
community with ilddjtional affordable ownership opportunities. In addition, the provision to require
converted properties to confotm to the Inclusioruuy Zoning Regulations will make 12.5% of the
units affordable to a seament of the market that miglIt not otherwise be able to purchase a
oondominium unit.
The policy al1ernatives that were presented to the City CQuncil, i!lcluded a. recommendation to
8
tl615! I ,}1
o c¿_ -
require converted properties to comply with current Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. The, l,;ity
Counci] directed Sw.ff to i!Jclude this provision in the proposed Condominium. Conversion
Ordinance.
Property Owner's Feedback.. Staff di¡¡cussed this provision with the property owners at the meeting
on December 9"'. The property owner's comments WI':I'e limited to receiving credit for the portion of
any affordable obligation tha1 has already bllCTl met.
Fiscal Analysis: A substantial amount of Staff' time could be required to implement this policy jf a.
large-number of units are permitted to convert at one time. However, this Stsfftime could be bi11cd
to the applicant 00 a tOme ¡md materials basis.
F. Tenant's Right to PuTthase UnIts
The proposed ordinance (Section 8.54.090_8) require!: property owners to provide telliwts living in
inclusionary units with an exclusive right to contract ftlr the purchase of the UlIit occupied by tlIe
tenant at the salœ price set forth in the InclusiollHI)' Zoning Regulatir.ms based on the tenant's
annual household income.
Analysis: The: Subdivision Map Act requires property ownen¡ to proYide tBnlUltll with an exclusive
right to contract for the purchase of their existin¡ W1it upon the SBIIlO terms and oonditions that such
unit wi!! initially be offered to the general public or on temJs mOte favorable:: to the tC'OIU1t.
However, the Subdivision Map Act does not addrC$S ln~lu~i.:mary units. The provìsioM of the
proposed Condominium Conversion Ord3nanoe will provide tenants that reside in inclusioDaly uoiLs
w:ith the same prefc:rerltlaJ trel!tment that market rate tenants receive. The purol1ase price wou1d be
based on the tenant', household inc:ome in accordance with the 1nctusionary Zoning Regulations
(Swtion 8.68). This could enable tenants that rent affordable units t() purchase their existlflS unit at
an affordabl e purc.hase price 8I1d avoid being displaced by the conversion.
The policy al1ematives that were presented to the City Council on November ]6,2004, included a
recommendarion to extend the right to purchllSe to ÌI1clusionaty 'teruIl1ts at a price consistent with tbe
InclusionaT)' Zonin¡ Ordinance. The City Council directed Staff 10 inc1ude this provision in the
proposed Condominium Conv=r¡¡ion Ordinance.
Property Owner's Feedbadc: Staff discussed this provision with the:: property owners at the mc::c:ting
on December 9"'. The property owners did not provide:: comments to Staffregurding changes to this
prOVISIOn.
Fiscal Analysis: A subirtantial amount of Staff time could bc required to implement this po1icy ifa
laTge number of units aœ pemtitted to conven at one time. However, this s.tafftime could be biUed
to the applicant on a time iIlld materials basis.
G. BuDding Code Requirements
Section &.54.0&0 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 colie requlrem~æ ÌI1 effect at ¡:be time
that buildin¡ permits were issued. Converted Wlits wO\lld ¡¡Iso be required to meet the CWTcut
HOusjDg Code as defined by tlIe Dublin Municipal Code.
Ar¡aly$i$: Many existing residential dweIHngs, including apartmeuts, within the City of Dublin were
built prior to the C\l1'ren! building code requirement!!. These dwðUings are considered safe and
inhabitable struc:tures. Therefore, the City d()es not typiCIIlly Tcql.lin: costly retrofitting of these
9
6¡', I 29r
'3w ~'. _,
pr<>perties to bring them u.p to Curn:rJt b1Jillling code roqu.irem"nl$. Conversion of ""isuug
apartments to condominiums doC's not ~\IbstWlt¡.al1y change the use of these mu.ctures in a way wt
would make thcm1 Jess safe or inhabitable:. However, any remodeling or retro fItting work that the
propl'Tty owner performs would be required to meet current building code requirements. Housing
Code provides basic safety requirements. Exislli1g apartments are required to meet tbese cum:nt
Housing Code requirements. Converted units would be required to ønfonu to the housing code at
the time of conveJ1 j on.
The City Courwil discu8sed this policy component at the City Council hellring on November 16,
2004. The City Council directed Staff to include in the ordinance a provision that rcquira; buildings
to be in conformance with the Building Code at the time that the units were constructed. St!ifr
discl.l"",d this provision with thl: property owner!;.
Propet'ty Qw11er'$ Feedback: The propcrty owners did not express concern with this provision.
FisMllrnpact: None. The ordinance requires the property OWllef to provide the City with a report
on the condition of each struCrute and any variation in the code requirements. The cost for II. City
inspector to review the property and the report would be billed to the property owner on a time and
materials basis as pari of the <;<.1st for a C.ondominium Conversion Permit. The property owner
would be required to obtain a building permit for retrofiUin¡ work. The cost of building inspections
is in¡;lw::Ied in the buiIlling permit fees.
H. Site ~elopment Review
Section 8.54.060 of the proposed Condominium Conversion ordinance requires Site DeveJo¡:nnent
Review (SDR) ooneummt with II. request to convert to condomÙliums. The SDR will allow the City
to evaluate the physical appearance of the property and require work to refurbish and restore the
project w; necessary to achieve a 1úgh degree of appearance, quality and safety.
Analysis: A COIl dominium Map is required in ord;:r tg convort an existing apartmlmt complex to
condominiwns. However, the map proces.! does not provide a mechanism to evaluate the physÎœl
appearance of a property. F or example, the City could receive an appUca1ion to COllVer! l1li existing
aparttn...t cOInp]"''' with defe....sd mainten....c.. that create. an eyesore within the community. nù.
deferred maintenance could ioclooe external painting and landscape maintenance to repair sparse or
overgrown landscaping. The SDR permit will provide thePlsnni.ng Commission with a mechanism
to evaluate the physical appcaraD.ce of the property and impose conditions that require remedial work
to maintain the visunl appearance of the City of Dublin.
Staff p~sentod this policy alternative to the City Council for consideration. The City Council
directed Sta.ffto include a provision roquiring a Site Development Review pennit in this ordill8nCe.
Property Owner'$ F¡,¡edback: The property owners raised concern that the Site Development
Review process might provide the City with the arbitrary power to make modiñcations beyond
simply rehabilitating the property. However. the 1angua.ge in the proposed ordinance limits the
City's evaluation to mailJte:l1Imœ and conformance witb prior site and architectural approvals. The
intent of this provision is not to reopen full site development rmew but simply 10 ensure that the
property remains in conformance with existing approvals.
Fiscal Impact: Community Development Department Sta.ff time would be reqUÍIc:d to pe.rfonn a
physiçal jnspeçtion of the property and review proposed improvements. However, the cost of this
review would be included in the a.pplication fee for II Conclominium C.onversion Permit,
10
'ßíú{) L -¿ c¡
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The California Environmental Quanty Act (CEQA). together with the State guidelines :m.d City
envirolJm!!l1tøl :regulations require that certain projocts be reviewro for environmental impacts and that
enviromnental documents be prepllJ'ed. This project 'has been found to be ex=mpt :&om the California
E1lVironmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), because it can
be seen with certllit1ty that there is no possibility that the proposed changes to the Municiplll Code will
have a signifìlòa.!Jt effect on the enviromnent.
CONCLUSION:
Apartment units provide a type of housing that is a key to II healthy diversity of housing stock in the
cl;>mmunity. !Staff believes that thCl conversion of one or two of the City's apartment communities could
have a major Impact 011 !be diversity of the City's housing stock in tbat it would remove from the market II
significant percenta¡e of the ~¡sting renta.! unitJ5. In consideration of the potential impacts Staff has
pnpared the attached Condominium Conversion Ordinance. The proposed ordinance woold regulate the
conversion ofrenta1apartments to for·¡¡alCl condominiUfl1$ and mitigate relo<;;L1:ion impacts to tooants.
As previously discussed, Staff has prepared two alternative versions of the Coooominium Conversion
Ordinance for consideration by the P!âJltling Commission (Attachments ¡·S). Attachments 2 and 3
contain a provision that would make a project with a cond"minium map subject to the: ordinance if the
D~partment of Real Estate (DRE) has not isslled a public report. Attachment 2 is 81'1 urgency ordinance
and Att¡¡¡;hment 3 is II non IIrgency ordinance. AttachmenIs 4 and 5 are included should the Planning
Commission decide to T"eCOmrnond adoption of 1111 ordinlilnce that exempts proj1.'CU wjth condominium
maps regardless of whether or not the DRE hIlS issued a public report. Attaclunent 4 is an urgency
ordinanœ and Attachment 5 is a non urgency ordinance.
Staff recommends that the P]a.nning Commission recommend to the City Council adoption of both an
urgency ordinance and a non urgency ordinance (Attachments 2 and 3 or Attachments 4 and 5). The
urgency ordinance would t<lke effect immediately and ensure that the ordinance is in effect before the City
takes !!Clion on the current subdivision appliœtions for condominium conversions. The non urgency
ordinance will provide the City with a backup ordinam:e in the event that the urgency ordinance is
challenged.
RECOMMENDATION;
Staffno",omtlll!l1ds the.t the Planning Commission: I) opom publie hearing; 2) receive Staff presC'I\tlltion; 3)
question Sttfl' and the pubJìc; 4) close the public heæing and deliberate; 5) adopt a resolution (Attaclunant
I) recommc: )dip& that the City Council adopt a resolution adopting an ordinance regulating the
conversion of existing apartments in the City to condominiums. .
O;\P'A.'2004\.04-ù44 CooM CClD....'rlion ZOA \pÇIrl.U-oS.d.oC!
11
'Óß 0[) 17fl
RESOLUTION NO. 05-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOM..~ENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE REGULATING
THE CONVERSION OF EXISTING APARTMENTS IN THE CITY TO CONDOMINIUMS
(PA 04-044 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE)
WHEREAS, State law provides that cities have the responsibility to use the powers vested in
them to fucili1ate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for the
housing needs of all eeonomic sogmM.t8 ofthe community; 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 COIIWIUnity Development ("HCD"); and
WHEREAS, among other things, Housing Elcme/'lts must eontain II. 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; IlIId
WHEREAS, the City's 1990 Housing Element included scveralpolieies 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 disc10sed that it was nl:Cl;ISsary, the
enactment of a condominium -conversion ordinance; II1\d
WHEREAS, in a.c¡¡ordance with state housing law, the City adopted its 1999-2006 Housing
Element ("the Current Housing Element") in June 2003, and it was certified by HCD on July 11, 2003;
and
WHEREAS, the Current Housing Element eliminated the program that rt.'q uired the monitoring of
the availability ofn:ntal housing WId potential enactment of condominium-ÇQnversion ordinance,
reasoning that there was little likelihood that existing rental housing property ownws would convert their
properties to condominiums due to the strong demand for rental housing in Dublin and the development
of condominiums (inelading 1396 condominium units currently under construction) to satisfy the demand
for condominiums; and
WHEREAS, the Current Housing Element further indicated that the City would assess the need
for a c\Judominium-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 the housing market
have changed markedly, and the Community D~elopment Departmen1 has noted that the incidcnce of
condominium-conversion projeots in other communities is inereasing; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin belíeves that the following market conditions have led to the
increase in proposals to convert existing multi-family rental projects to condominiums:
'ßq ~1"1~C¡
a. The higher vacan¡:y rates for apartments a:; more Wid more people are able to qmllifY
fur loans for homes due to historically low interest mtcs;
b. Thc inCNlUled market for condominiums in the area; and
e. The ability of the property owner to maximize profit by selling units rather than renting
thmn.
WHEREAS, in the past ten years, the City has developed over 1500 ~sid\'J!1tìal apartment units
for an overall total of approximately 3,172 units throug1Jout the City. These units and the other .-ental
units in the provide a. type of housing that is one of the keys to providing for the housing needs of all
econornk segments of the community; and
WHEREAS, rental units provide housing for pCf'!lons in all income levels, and they are a valuable
tool for providing workforce housing; wtd
WHEREAS, the IòOnversion of one or two cfth", City's apartment communities could have a
major impact on the City's housing market, in that it would remove fiorn the market a significant
pcreentage 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 vacancy rate and accordingly tend to
increase rents, and this would tend to further <:Ixacerbate the City's shortage of affordable rental units; and
WHEREAS, conversion of apartments to condominiums could result in displacing existing
tenants; and
WHEREAS, tenant relocations that result ftom conversion 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
low-income tenants; and
WHEREAS, the Subdivision Map Act docs not provide a mechanism to evaluate the physical
appearance of a property: IIDd
WHEREAS, the City could receive an application to convert an existing apartment complex with
deferred maintommce that creates an eyesore within the community; and
WHERE AS, II Site Development Review permit would allow the City to evaluate the physiCIII
appearanee of the property and require work to refurbish and restore the project as necessary to achieve a
high degree of appearance, quality and safety; and
WHEREAS, due to these changes in the marketplace wtd their potentia1 consequences all the
City's ability 10 provide for the housing needs of all economic segment9 of the community, the
Community Development Department has beeD considering the development of a condominium-
conversion ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the approviÙ of the conversion of existing residential apartment units to
condominiums or other fonns of ownen¡hip thaI pennit the units to be sold individually, during the period
2
n.Ot)).... I 2 (~
'1 -u I I
in which the City 1145 beQIJ developing a condominium-conversion ordinance, could frustrate the City's
efforts at providing for the housing :need~ ~}fan economic segments of the community, beclWBe it would
result in the removal of units !Tom the City's inventory of rental W11ts available to those at lower income
levels and because it would tend to increase the rents of those rental units that remaifi; <tt\d
WHEREAS, to prevent these goals from being frustrated., the City Couneil adopted Resolution
181-04 to initiate proceedings to adopt II condominiwn-convcrsion ordinance and to place potential
subdividers on notice pursuant to Govemmmt Code section 66474.2 of the City's intent to adopt a
condominium-conv~ion ordinance, the effect ofwbich will be to permit the City to apply the
condominiwn-conversion ordinance if it is in eflect on the date the City approves or dj~approves the
tentative map.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has developed II condominium-
conversion ordinance to regulate the conversion of apartm~ts to for sale condominiums and mitigate the
impacts to residents that are displaced by conversion; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held II pub1 it hearing on said Condominium Conversion
Ordinance on January 11, 200S, tor which proper notice was given in accordance with California State Law;
and
WHEREAS, the ordinance 15 intcndo:d to comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Map
Act, regarding the provision and regulation of converting apartmenl5 to for sale condominimns and the
Housing Element (1999-2006) of the Dublin General Plan, related to maintaining a diversity ofhou~ing
stock in the City ofDub1in; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a properly noticed public hearing on this project
on January 11,2005, and did reeommcnd Ordinance XX-OS to the City Council to regulate condominium
conversions as stated in the Ordimmce; and
WHEREAS, tho Planning Commission at its January 11, 2005, meetil1g did hear and use its
independent judgment and consider all said reports, recommendations, md testimony hereinabove set
forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Dublin Planning COlDmission does
hereby find that, the ordinance is consistent with the Subdivision Map Act, General plan Housing EJement
md all applicable Spe<::itic Plans; and, this ordinance is not a "project" within the meanjnB of Section
15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potentilll for resulting in ph}'5ical change;n the
environment, directly or ultimately; and, recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinance to
regulata the conversion of aplltlments to condominiums in B.CCOrdance with the Ordinance in Attachments
2 and 3 of the Staff Report f(IT P A 04-044.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this J I'" day of January 2005.
AYES:
em. Schaub, Biddle, Wehrenberg, and King
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
3
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
q ÚÒI7- Of
Planning Conunission Chairperson
4
qz. c});;' O¡
Œ'rannin¡¡ Commission ~inutes
"
CALL TO ORDER
A regular 1nI;!etingof the Cty of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tue5day, January 11, 2005, U1
the Council Chamber, located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioner King; Jen Ram, Planning Manager; Jeff Baker. As!3OCiate Planner, Charity
Wagner, Assoçiate Planner; Kristi Bascom" Senior Planner; Kay Keel\- City Clerk; and Maria Carrascu,
Recording Secretary.
ADDmONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA
Jeri Ram, Plannmg Manager stated there are revisions to the agenda and Oral Comml.ltlkations will be
addressed before the Minl.ltes of the previous meeting. She introduced Mayor Lockhart.
ORAL COMMUNICATION -
Mayor Lockhart welcomed the three new Plaru1ing COl1UIÙssioners and thanked Cm. King for hi!;
continued service. She explained to the Commissioners t:h;.t they will be participating in something that
Is very Important to the corronunity. There will be a lot of opportUIûties to look at a variety of projects
and ro""epbI em how to improve the conununity. She 10018 forwllrd to the! Commission's observatiOIUl,
idellð and commurlicating to the Council their visjotl for the community. She thanked them for
volunteering and serving the community in this capa.ctty.
6.1 Swearing In of New Plannins Commissionen
Ms. Ram introduced Kay Keek. City Clerk.
Kay Keck, City Oe!I'k swore in the new Plarming CoIlUJlissioners - Bill Schaub, Donald 1IiMI", and
Doreen Wl!1trenberg.
6.2 Election of Officers for Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson
Ms. RaUl expIairled that nominations for ChaiIperson IInd Vice-ch¡¡lrpergon always take place at the first
meeting in JIU'IUIlry. She opened up the meeting for nomina.tions for Chairperson.
On motion by em. Biddle, seconded by Cm. Wehrenberg by a unanimOus vote, the PI¡¡nnmg
Col111l1ission elected Cm. Schaub a. Chairpl!r801'l.
Ms. Ram asked 0Iai:r Schaub to <.'O!'Itinue with the election for Vice Q¡¡¡lrperson.
Chair Schaub entertained a motion for a Vice Qwirpet:iOn.
On mctiOtl by em. Wehrenberg, 2nd by Chair Schaub and by un¡uÙIno~ vote, the Planning Comtnisslon
elected Cm. Biddle as Vice Cha.irperson.
Chair Schaub thimked the members of the audience for their patience.
J:L'tfl.tl(!j.~ 11/ 2UOJ
~(_.ricn
<I(fg.¡;'r fM..ti"l/
q~ ~ 1,-)(':
Ms. Rilm stilted that if iIllyone wishes to speak (lll any of the items (lll the agenda there ar~ l.6!ue speaKer
forms locaœd. on the table under the GeneriÙ Plan lJIiIp.
Ms. Ram. took another roll cilll.
Present: Commissioner's Wehrenb..rg; Biddle; King; and Clairperson Scbaub.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS - The minutes of the previous Pl.aming Couuni58ion Meeting
were continued to the January 25, 2005 meeting.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.1 P A ()4.Q58 Kids Learning Center - Conditlol\¡¡], Use PI!IIlÛt for a Large Family Dayeare
The proposed proje<:t is B request for a Conditional Use Permit applicatiun for a large
family dayeare in a si:nglE!-family home located at 7029 Tory Court in Dublin. The
applicilnt currently opE!ratE!s a small family dilyçare ilt this location and proposes to
E:xpand the operation. The property is zoned R-l Single-Family Residential and the
General Plan designation is Single-FalIÙly ResidE:ntial. Large family daycilre bomes (up to
14 children) are permitted in this zoning distTkt upon approval of II COllditional Use
Permit.
Chair 5c;haub opened the public hellring and asked for the staff report.
Charity Wagner, Associate Planner presented the o>taff report and explained that the Applicant is
requestirtg approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a Large Family Daycare (up to 14 children) ÌJ'1 a
single-family home located at 7029 Tory Court. The standard operating hOllrs for the;, dayc.ue are
Monday - Friday from 7';00 a.m. to 5;30 p.m. The Large Family Dayçare will have two full-time
employees <:onsisting of th.. Applicant and her daughter-in-law. A. indicated. in the attw:lu!d written
statement, the Applicant wants to increase the size of the day care to allow lor her to çare for her
grandchildren and to help meet the need for Want care in the community. The Applicilnt intends to care
for up to 4 infants and 6 to 8 toddlers. The City has not reœived any complaints regarding the emting
daycare operation.
Staff visited the site ß1'ld determined that noise impacts to surrounding residenœs wou1d be minimal.
The project sile is an interior lot surrounded by single-family hoIl\C!8. The Gty's Traffic Engineer
determined that the tTaffic impacts of the proposed Large Fanùly Daycare home would be minimal and
that no Traffk Impact F~ is required. Pick up and drop off tllnes will be primarily in the mornmg ¡md
evening hours, but the number of children being served is few enough that there should not be a great
conœntTation of vehicles to and from the house at any partiçular 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 req1ÙIed to provide :;even (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 shurtage of tluee (3) off-street parking spaces.
The Applicant will utilize the parking spaces in the garage and thi! employee (daughter-in-law) will U$e
one of the parking spaces in the driveway. There is one parking space in the driveway and two (2) on-
stTeet parking $paces available in front of the house for parents to Wle when they are dropping off and
g,'M1"I! ÇOIMIísrion 2 '.I''''''''Y 1 J. 4005
OI.!t1atilrlMmi"fJ
q~ ¿: :".' ;')
pickmg up their ehildren. Parking studies have been p:repared for previoWl Large Family Day<'Ìtre -
Conditional Use Permits. The8e parking studlæ h¡¡ve demOMtrated that it takes approximately six (6)
l1l.inute(ò to drop-off or pick-up a child. Because of staggered drop-off and pick-up times. the
combinatiOfl of available on-street and off-street parking should be sufficient to serve the proposed
daycare use.
Condition 6 has beeninc1uded.ln the resolution and. requires the operator to submit a copy of the State of
California Department of Social Services License Permit for the operation of a Large Family Daycare
Home for verification purposes, prior to establishm(!1'\t of the use.
Ms. Wagner explained that notices were sent to property ownerA within a 300-£oot radius of the project
to advise them of thi/¡ re<¡uest for a ConditionalLJse Permit. staff received an email and" ph()nc call
from neighbors that are in favor of the project.
Staff believes that the proposed Large Family Daycare Home would have Urni red impacts to the
surrounding neighborhood regarding noise, traffk, and parking. The lacility will be properly lke1'\Sed,
and no complaints have been received about the existing Small Daycare Home that would lead. Stalf to
believe that expandirlg the use would be problematic. srn:, concluded her presentation.
Roy Stanley, Applicant stated he was ava.i!llble to answer any qUe!itions the Planning Comm1~sion may
have.
On. Wehrenberg asked Mr. Stanley if he was in agrl!eD'lent with the conditions of approval and SlaWs
recommendation.
Mr. Stanley responded yes.
Omir Schaub asked Mr. Stanley how long they operated their current daycare.
Mr. Sta11ley stated they have operated their current daycare on and off since 1975. He explained that lriB
wife operated a daycare when their dtildren were I1ttle as well as teaching in presçhool for about 10
years.
Chair Schaub darified that the approval. of the daycare is for a pennit in land use.
Mr. StalÙeY stated he understood ~hllt.
Chair Schaub asked if there were any other speakers on the Issue. Hearing none he clo!;ed the public
hearing and asked for a motion.
Cm. Biddle stated thllt the Stanley's 1wve demonstrated th\'!y have operated It I9Uccessful daycare. The
City has not received. any comp:Iairlts from surrounding property owners and there is a need for
daycares In the corrununity.
Cm.. Wehrenberg stated that she reviewed the sib:! and was concerned about the parking. After
reviewing the site she felt there was adequate parking and it appears to be II wÎJ1-win situation.
Chair Schaub asked for a motion.
On motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by em. Wehrenberg, by a vote of 4-0, the Planning Commisslon
unanimously adopted
œ671fJ.i:ng CClm.'missitJ~
It.fIJIlÚr'Meai"ß
.!
J~"".fJf 11, 2005
q5~\'¡:' ,\
v -
RESOLUTION NO. 05-(\1
A RESOLUnON OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A REQUEST FOR. PA 04-058 KIDS LEARNING HOME DAY CARE CONDmONAL
USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A LARGE FAMILY DAYCARE HOME
AT702!1TORVCOURT
8.2 P A 04-044 Condo Conversion Ordin"...,e - Amendment to the Dllblin Municipal Code
Resolution recoIIU1"U!I1ding that the ctty ColIndl adopt an ordÌ1'la1:\l;:e regulating the
conversion of existing residential apartment lllÚts held in a single owner!lhip, in whatever
from, to condominiums or other form:¡ of ownership that permit tlIe UlÛœ to be sold
individually. The ordinance would provide criteria for the Plaruúng Commission to
regulate, restrict and in some cases, prohibit the future conversiçm of existirlg res.idelltial
apartment UIÙts; evaluate the physi<;al app4'arance of the property b",ing converted; and,
mitigate the imPIU:ts to tenants that are displaced by such a conveJ5ion.
Chair Schaub opened the public hearing and asked for tlœ staff report.
Jeff Baker, Associate Planner presented the staff report and explained that the project is for a
proposed Condominium Conversion Ordmance regulating the conversion of existing residential
II.partment units held in a single ownership, in whatever form, to con.dominiums or other forms of
ownership that permit the units to be sold individually. The ordinance would provide criteria for the
P1anrùng Coromillsion to regulate, restrict and in some cases, prohibit the future conversion of existing
residential. apartment UIÙts; evaluate the physical appearance of the property bemg converted; and,
mitigab! the impacts to tenant'! that are displaced by such a conversion.
Mr. Baker stated that state law provides that cities have II. responsibility to facilitate the development and
make provisions for housing to meet the needs all economic segments of the conununity. Oties
implement housing law policies through the adoption of the Gene-ral P1a.n Housing Element. The
Housing Element for the City of o".blin contain& statements of goals, objectives and policies related to
the maintenance. preservation and development of housing. The current Housing Eb!ment requires the
City to aSsess the neE!d fOJ: a condominium conversion ordinance with each updaœd housing element.
Aparhrlent units provide a type of housing that is a key to a healthy diversity of housing stock in the
community. Aparhrlent5 provide housing for all levels of affordilbility in the community and a.re II
valuable tool for providing work force housing. Staff believes that the conversion of one or two of the
Oty's apartment communities could have a majOJ: impact on the diversity of the City's housing stock ìn
that it wou1d remove ÍTom the market a significant perœmage of the existing rentallllÚts. If sold rather
than rented, the unit'! would no longer be available to a segment of the community that is not in a
position to purchase such lllÚts. In addition, the loss of these units would likely decrease the vacancy
rate, may increase rents, and this may in turn further exåCl'<I'bate the CIty's shortage of affordable rental
units. This might cause a lasting tmbalance in the dIversity of housing slock in the City.
In the past seven months, Staff hu received inquiries from several existing apartment owners indicating
their intent to fill! subdivision documents to convert thl!ir project.!! ro condominium~. The City is
currently processing subdivision applications to convert the following apartment projects to for-sale
condominiwns.
ilJúNfIin¡¡ (,'omm/mcm
~u(¡¡r¡\{m#Ig
4
,?.u.ry 11, 20Q5
CUIrent Subdivision Applications
Iron Horse Trail ApartmentB (Dougherty Road) -
ArchstDne - Emerald P.uk Apartments (Hacienda Drive) -
Total
q/f) ,', J"' <~
:ÞO... ,\.. '
·v V
117 units
324 unit!¡
441 Units
On Seph!mber 7, 2004, the City Council adopted a Resolution (Resolution #181~04) initiating proceedings
to adopt an ordinance regulating the conversion of existing apart:menta In the City to for-sale
condominiums. Staff studied the various mechanisms for regulating ~ondomi11iuD1 conversions. T1ùs
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 Uvermore and Walnut Creek. Based on this Study, Staff developed II series of
policy alternatives for the aty Coundl to coruâder. On November 16, 2004, Staff presented these policy
. alterrnltives to the City Council. The City Council provided. Staff with direction regarding the
development of the proposcd Condominlurn Conversion Ordinance. The City Council further directed
Staff to hold a meciing with the owners of apart:m.ents within the City of Dublin in order to inform th¡.m
of these policy recommendatiOJ1s and oolicit their co:r:nments. 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 p1"oposed Condominium Conversion Ordin!ItICe.
In deve10ping the ordinance, Staff developed a list of policy goals based on the General Plan Housing
Ekoment and the resolution that initiated the pro~eed:íngs to adopt an ordinance.
1. Maintain supply of affordable & market rate rental housmg.
2. Provide balance of ownership a.nd rentl\l housing.
3. Establish criteria for conversiofl of existing multi-farnily rental housing.
4. Reduce impact of conversion on residents in rt.>ntal housing.
5. Ensure converted housing has high degree uf appearance.
In consideratioo of tÞe pC't<,ntia1 impacts from conversion Staff has prepared a Condominium
Conversion Ordinance to regulate the conversion of rental apartments to for-sale condominiUIIlli.
Mr. 'Baker explained in cLrtail each of the key componen1s of the proposed Condominium Conversion
Ordirumœ "5 follows:
·
AppIka tion of the Condominium Ccmversicm Ordinance
Umitatioos on Conversions
Limitations on Rent h1creases
Tenant RelocatioIl Assistance Plan
IncIusionary Zoning Regulatiom
Tenant'!! Right to Purcha.~e 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 bclore the City takes action on the current subdiv¡"ion application.
(Attachment 2 or 4). Approval of an ordinance typically requires two readings before the City Council
and then takes effect 30-days following the second leading. However, the City CoW1Cil rn¡¡y cause the
Ordinance to take effect immediately by adopting it as an urgency ordinAnce if the City Council
determiI1es that the conversion of these apartments to condomIrU.ums might frustrate the Oty's goal and
State law obligation to adequately provide for the housillg needs of all economic segnumΠof the
community. There is the potential that the urgen<::y ordinance could be challenged. Therefore, Staff
rtfimtti1lg çollUJrisri<m
'l,Moúr fM....i"ll
,
!Jl1nu:sry 11, 200J
Q11),\ r.: i)
recommends that the City Council also adopt a non urgency Condominium Conversion Ordina~e
(Attaçhment:l or 5). The non urgency ordinlUlCe will provide the City with a bad.up ordirumce in the
event that the urgency ordinance is challenged.
Staff believes that the conversion of one or two <Jf 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 nw.rket a sig:tri.ficant
percentage of the exi...ting rental units. In considetation of the potential impacts Staff has prcpated the
attached Condourinium Convet8Íon Ordinance. The propooed ordimmœ would regulate the conversion
of rental apartments to for-sale condominiums and mitigate relocation impacts to tenants.
As previously discussed, staff ha~ ptepared two alternative versions of the Condominium Conversion
Ordinance for consideration by the PlarmiDg CommiMion (Att~hm¡,nts 2-5). AttachmenbJ 2 and 3
contain a provæion that would make a project with a condominium map subject to the ordinance if the
Department of Rea! Estate (DRE) has not ¡'¡sued 1\ public report. Attachment 2 is an urgency ordinance
and Attachment 3 iIiI a non U.\'gency otdinance. Also there Is a provil;ion to make all projects with 20 or
more fl!ntal unit!! subject to the Condominium Conversion Ordin~ which:iB consistent with the
tltteshold that has been established for the existing lnclusionary Zoning Regulations. Attacluncnts 4 and
5 are included should the Plwning Conunission decide to recommend adoption of an ordinance that
exempts project~ with condoIIrinium maps regardless of whe:thet or not the ORE has issued ¡II publk
report.
Statfhas received a letter from the law firm ofHarma & Van Atta in oppOtilition to the Condo Conversion
Ordinanc:;e which would impose additional regulations on buildings that have already been approved as
condominium projl!ct.s when tcitia11y eonst:ructed and that had received subdivision approvals from the
City as eondominium projects W1der the Subdivision Map Act.
Stalf recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council adoption of both an
urgency ordinance and II non urgency ordinance (Attachments 2 and 3 or Attachments 4 and 5). The
U.\'gency ordinance would take effect immediately and ¡,name that the Qrdinance is in effect before the
City takes action on the current subdtvision applications for condominium conversions. The non
urgency ordinance wß1 provide the aty with a backup ordinance in the event that the UIgençy
ordinance is challenged. He stated he was available for any questions the ColTID'Ii£sion may have.
em.. King asked what the distinction is with the combin<:-d ordinances, attachments 2 !lnd:l oW"....d to
attachments 4 and 5.
Mr. l'aker stated that attachments 2 and 3 are Ii pair and would make existing projects with condo maps
to subject to the Qrdinance if they do not have a public report from the Department of Rea1 Estate.
em.. King asked about the ordinanees which are atta~ts 4 and 5.
Mr. Baker stated that attachments 4 iII1.d 5 WQuld IrI<'M existing projects with condo milps exempt from
the ordinance.
Cm. King asked Staff if they ate sU.\'e the statement on page 4 is correct which states that State law
provides that only the Public Report vests the buildlr1g Qwners' rights to sell the units individually.
Kit Faubion, Cty Attorney explained that the City Attorney's offi1:e l"<¡!Viewed a number of cases 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.
Q!(4n."Îft{JCo""""......
~ul4r 'lit"",..,
6
J.,,""ry II, 2QOJ
Cm. Biddle asked for c1iOrification On what is Ii condo map.
qß (:6 r"Î
Ms. Paubion stated that II condominium map is a tentative map under the Subdivision Map Act for
<::ondomiIriwn purposes. The Sub( j~ Map Act is regulated by the State. The process of establishiIlg
a condominium is that a œntativc map is filed with the City which allows multiple owrtefship
opportunities. The map is usually labeled tentative map for øndominium purposes, which is usuatly
called a condo map for ease of reference. The City will process it accordmg to its su.bdivision regu1ati01'l3
and on,çe the Qty approves it, then it goes on to the State process. The map 1('1 proœ!lSed through the
City in accordance willi ~ubdivisi.on regulations. The applicant llIen must file a request for a public
report wit the Depilrlu1ent of Real Estat\!.
em. Biddle asked what the State Real Estate Report entails.
MIS. Faubion stated she does not know exactly what the document contains but it ba5ically identifies the
ownership and it is necessary to be issued to the DRE before a property can be sold. The City goes
I:hrou¡¡h ilt; pto<:ess, the ilLpplicant goes through a process before it is a final mndomiI1ium map tben it
goes on to the State. Until the final report is issued, th" developer cannot sell the UIÙts.
Cm. Biddle asked if the proC\!ss by the State and the process by the City <::QuId rnn concurrently or are
they sequentillL
Ms. Faubion responded they would be sequential; llie City first than the Slate.
Chair Sc;þ¡oub asked whether the 1,119 units that do have condo maps were approved by the City to be
condominiums.
Mr. Baker stated yes.
01air Schaub stated there are 1,119 units that are in the renlal m¡orket today which would not be part of
the rental market if they would have been sold as condos.
Mr. Baker said that additional units <::QuId have been <::OMtructed it those units were not in the market as
rental units.
em. Biddlo¡! asked Staff 1£ they know when those c:ondo maps were applied fOT.
Mr. Baker ~Id to his knowledge !:he condo maps were done when the units were cONtructed which has
been Toughly OVE!r thE! l¡¡¡;t 10 to 12 years.
em. Biddle astu.d if therO! was any effort made to get the report from the State.
Mr. Baker stated the report has a life to it which could be renewed, but Il'WIy property owners would not
have that report If they were holding properties as rental units.
On. Wehrffi'lbefg üked for clarification on tho¡! 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 ..alIe'!d 01'\ Mr. Rafanelli who wished to speak on the item.
Øim.,"B COl1lllli.<rW.
'k.r¡¡u!4r'Muti"ß
7
January,/1, 2WJ
q O¡ i6
! "~I ,":,
" "
Ron Nahas, 1 Bate/¡ Boulevard, Orinda. stated he wp\lld Ii1u;! to spo;>ak before his partner Mr. RafaIJelli. He
explained that they have developed and owned property In Dublin since 1984. He stated that of the
1,119 units spøk<m of they have built 1,083. He stated that the ordinance and the presentation is
ilising<\"nuOUB. Effectively this ordmance is a ban on condominium convel'Sfons and not 1IIl mdinanee to
regulate them. The cunent ratio of rentals in the City of Dublin 1& ,about 25% which have not at! bæn
built. Until that ratio rises to 30% no ccmversioruo "'ould be allowed. He asked ",hat problem is this
ordirum.œ trying to fix. He would argue that conve1"5loru; Mt: n",ç"s~ry and desirable at this moment ill
tho2 housing market. The price of fOf·SlÙe housing Is soaring at 25% a year and rents On rental housing
have been falling since 2001. The artificial constrlÙl\t 011 the move:ml!!'lt of rental units mto for-sa ¡¡
housing does not work. Such restrictions simply uansfer costs from one person to another. San
Francisco has been doillg it for years and it has the most unaffordable 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
mearili1g at all with regard to the aHordability or the avaiIabìlity of rental h0U5ing. When the Housing
Element was adopted the ratio was slightly more than 30% and because it was slightly more than 30% in
theoty condominium conversions at that time would have be..n allowed. He stated that when the
Housing Element was adopted in 2000 the averag<\" vacancy rate for the apartments they own and
manage was less than 3% and rents were rising at over 6% a y",,,,r; both indkat:ing that there was a
SÞ.ortiig", Qf r<:ntù housing. Tn 2004, rental housing is Qnly 25% (,f the housing stock so in Ihoory 1.111.der
this ordinance, no OIle would be allowed to convert 1UI apartment. He OOIltinued to state that the
vac31'lcy 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. Conversion would have
been allowed when there is a shortage of apart:ments and banned when there is a surplus of apartments.
He stated that the staff reports indicates there are minimal fiscal imp¡¡cb bu.t he would argue that there
are huge fi5cal impacts for thl! Dublin tax payers. Converting an apartment to a for-salc unit is a tax
windfall for the City, the County and the School District Real Estate Tax recdpt upon sa.1es will double
or tripII'!. The two projécts that Staff is anxious to get an urgency ordinance adopted to stop these
proje<:ts from converting cowd contribute an additional $800,000 a year in tax revenues to thl! City, the
County and the School District. There Is a proper rol.. for the City irl encourAging affOJ'dab1" housing -
the City could reduce its fees. In ~gard to eonverslons the City could focus on fure!! things. There
should be a review of the quality and condition of common Improvements, an orderly marketing plan
with adequate notice to tenant!;, and disabled tenants and occupants of below market rate units need to
be protected. The City should not transfer its obli&atlofl for affordable housillg onto the back of
apartment owners.
Mark Raienelli, 1 3i1~ Bou~vard, Orinda stated he disagrees with the City Attorney. He stated that
attempting to apply this ordinance to E'XÍst:ing condominiums Is not COllsÍ5ænt with California law. They
proc:essed 1,083 units IS cOlldon1iniurns 1IIld built the units as condornWuIlUi. They recorded final
subdivision maps and condomJrúum. map'" on all the units. The City Staff recommendation i~ relying
u.pon one Clllie involving th.. City of West Hollywood where an owner filed a subdivision map
converting existing apartments to condominiums prior to the Incorporation of the City of West
Hollywood. The individual obtained a publû; report from the Department of Real Estate and let it lapse
and the appellate court held that by letting that lapse they could Impose new conditions. Staffs
recommendation would bé contrary to all vesting rights and all California law On vesting rights. They
have processed the!r units as condcm1Íniums and built them as condominiums. Staff acknowledges that
applying a eondominium conversion ordinance to already mapped units hll.$ not been done in Northern
C;ilifomia but is cornman:in Southern CaUfornia. They are not aware of any jurisdiction other than West
Hollywood but would Uke to know 1£ any other jw:isdictlon has attempted this app~cl1, Applying this
ordinance to existing condominiums will generate a number of legal challenges. If the City were to
adopt the ordinance as rec:o:mme1'lded it would imply that the City could go back and chaIlge the terms
and conditions on any approval as long as the dl!Vf!loper has not obtailled their final public: report from
<l'&....'"ø Co>mi<si...
II(rqrÆu- 'MuliR¡J
8
!J."""'Y 11, 2W5
/00 óQ-1:J.0
the Department of Real Estate. A public report is required to sell the units and not a discretionary \
approval. It is guaranteed If you comply with disclosure requirements, reserve requirements and the
format for the conditiol1B, covenants and restrictions required by the Smte, The proposed ordJnarlœ
would damage Dublin's reputation for fairness and reasonableness. Dublin has always been perceived
to have rigorous and fair development standards. The development goals of the City have always been
to achieve the highest standard of quality. He stated they did not receive any notice to participate in the
discussion of this proposed ordinance. They heard about it from another property owner. M.. Ra£anelli
slated he C'Ontacteo;l the Ot}' Manager omd he set up a meeting for them. \Q meet with Staff. If they would
have been IlDtîfied thl!}' could ha.ve easily gone to the California Department of Real Estate anð pulled
the public report. He stated thatStaif did apoIogUe and Staff did state they should have been noticed.
Chair Schaub apologized for the mix up with the notice.
Mr. Rafanelli stated he appreciated that. He stated that St¡,£f 11100 apolQgized and felt it was sincere. In
condUllion if adoption of this ordinance as drawn would ban the very thing the market n~ds which is
conversion of apartments to affordable ownership housing. II is not consistent with CaJifornia law and
would invite a lot of serious legal opposition. He was available for questions.
Cm. King asked if the Department of Real Estate report II/ ministerial and does not indude a
discretionary element.
Mr. Rafanelli responded yes.
Cm. King asked why he would not apply for the report tomorrow.
Mr. Rafanelli stated they may but it takes ~6111Dl1ths to obtain it. In going through the process, they
would need 10 submit drafts of conditions, covenants and restrictions as well as property reports.
Cm. King asked what the Department of Real Estate does with those docwnents.
Mr. Raflln!!lli said they look al them 10 see if they are reasonable. They also look at the disdosUTe
documents, the sate contracts, the terms and conditions of the sale contrilCts. What ever the set of legal
documents used for the sale of those units and the running of the MOA are subject to the DRE review.
Cm. King stated that it sounds discretionary.
Mr. Rafanelli said no it is not discretiorwry in a legal sense, They do Ilút have the diBCretionary ability to
twn you down. They could turn you down if you arc not willing to set aside !I certain re8erve to repair
the roof or if you are not willing 10 have the right disclosurl! documentation in a sales agreement. In a
legal sense it is a ministerial review.
an. King said one of the obvious reasOIIJ for the proposal is to reserve a certa1n amolUtt of affordable
rental units. It is based on a prenùse that renlt1I rares are more accessible for middle inC'Om.e individuals.
He asked if not having a certain amount of renmt units would not be a benefit to an important class of
people.
Mr. Rafenelli said the market is a much better way to determine what js needed. CUITently there are
approximately 70 - 90% of units they have tumeo;l over in the last three years are from people that have
left to purchase homes due to historically low rates. The market has been a dear way of determiI1Jng
that.
œMøøflljl c.'tnmlliuI<>ø
1II:",.¡;"",...11IjI
9
JdnNCJ7)' I t¡ ;lrJu5
/¡{\ I {'"T. . , ,', \ ~(.
'V,;''·..., ,!(," ':
Joseph Au, 46920 Aloe Court, Fremont stated he owns an apartment complex here m Dublin. J.;'
attended the ownership meeting in December. He woukllike SUlff t<;> <;Iarify the number of units that
will be affmed by this ordirumce. He asked the Planning Commission w not affect complexes with 20
units or less.
Chair &:haub allked. if there were any other members of the audience that wiahed to speak; hearing none
he closed the public hearing. He stated the logical approach would be to disc:uss the ordinilI1Ces
(attadunents 21U1d 3) first. He does not believe tha.t it is right to change the terms for the existing
property owners regardless of whether it is legal or not legal. He would lilœ to hear feedback from the
other CCllnnulll!lÌoners.
Crn. KIng stated that Is a legitimate cO!lœm but he is not H sympathetic. Changing the .land uae
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.
em. Biddle said that if they were built as condos and a condo map was ÌIIsued fOr the property, why
weren't they sokl u condos. It was advantageous to rent for awhile but now it Is more advantageous to
sell. Things ehange oVer a 20 rear period ;md changes need to be made.
em. Wehrenberg stated that the City of Dublin needs to have a ba1aru:e; and affordable housiJlg 18
Í1nportant but agrees with Chair Schaub that it is not right to change the terms for the existing property
owners.
em. Biddle stated affordable housmg is important. He !;\lpports the 30% approach which will take some
City intervention to establish affordable housing for the community.
Chaix Schaub said even with the 1,100 1mits, in 10 years a miracle will have to take place :in building
rental unih; because it does not sound like the economics will make it happen. If the City WlU'lts to get to
30% by the year 2010, the City will need ~O more reJlta1 units. He asked. for the PliU'U'llng ComnûB8ion
to suggest how to make and build more rental unit!¡. He asked if there was a consensUS on removtng
attachments 2 and 3 that would affect existing apartments with Condo Maps as theix recommendation to
Council.
Cm. King said for the minutes to reflect that he would have voted for attachments 2 and 3.
Cl1air Schaub asked for di8tus:;ion on attachments 4 and 5. He stated that if the City :is gomg to adopt aJl
ordtnarlce like this, it should affect all units regaTd1es8 of size, which would be a modification to what is
proposed.
Ms. Ram statEd that would requíre an amendment to the ordirumce attachments 4 and 5.
em. Bid.dle said. he:is opposed to that suggestion. There lII"e two 8"",ller apartment complexes one has 8
units and the other complex with 20 units; then there is II. 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 :inclmed to go with 21 or more units.
Chair Schaub asked Staff if any of the property OW11erS had any concerns about rem IimitatiOIl$.
Mr. Baker said there was limited discussion on that but no recommendation made.
<Pf4.Ifi"B Ccmm/ssfc.
!(J¡¡""r ':Iúeti"B
10
,'January i', 200,5
/o?- Db !~~
Olair &:haub 5tated that the information the Commission received in the packet did not identify
Imp).lç¡¡t;iOfl$ to Çlty r~enue and wanted everyone in the audience to be awaN of that.
Clair SclIaub asked for di8CU5sion on the tenant relocation aS5istanœ plan. He said to hi~ understanding
that 50% of the tenants.are going to leave anyway.
There was consensus that the Commission supportli StII.ff'1I recommendation regarding the tenant
relocation assistance plan.
There was discussion on the Inclusionary Zoning regulations and agreement with Staff' B
recommendation.
em. Biddle asked Staff for clarification with all the issues that deal with conversions such as defining
property, COmmorl facillties,and homeowners associations that are covered in State regulations.
Mr. Bak8r stated it is involved with both the public report and the CC&R's for the project which spells
out the owneJ'ship rights.
Chair Schaub asked If there was a way to make sure the fo1ks purchasiIlg one of these condos were
aware that as collective group they could form an HOA.
Ms. Paubion stated there various notices that the map act Mquire.9 fú1' condominium conv<!TsionB to occur
indudlng II notice of intent to ccmvert. The need for an HOA after the conversion could be included in
the mandatory notices.
Chair SclulI1b ø.sked whether there needs to be ¡my discussion on building code requirement:>.
em. Biddle stated converting these properties would not :require any major construdi<m changes that
would require an updated çode.
Mr. Baker said if there was work need.ed. it would be required to meet the current b..1i1ding cudes. As far
as the modifications to bring it up to current code, the ordinance as it is written would not require that.
em. Wehrenberg asked if thatindudes bringing them up to ADA requirements.
Mr. Baker staled to his knowledge, they would not be required. to bring them up to ADA requirements
unless they were cl1al1ging the parkillg lot or the walkways, ett.
Cm. IGng askeel if they should impose a condition requirh\g the proje<:ts tel bl! brought up to the A 0 A
requirements.
Çhair Scltaub asked Staff to look into the ADA requirements.
Ms. Ram stated she would like to speak with the Buili:Iing Official and Staff will provide comment!! to
t:læ Qty Council with the Corruni~sions concerns regarding ADA requireIru!ntli.
Chair 5c:haub said he has no issue with the proposiÙ tor the Site Dl!Velopment Review.
Chair Schaub stated he believes they are ready to adopt the Resolution recomwending adoption of the
ordinances, attachment 4 and 5. He asked whether it is in the bIJst interest of the residents of Dublin to
approve a condo conversion. He personally believes that the City should be involved with. this.
'Pfgøø.ittg COIIImissam
~'I1u"r'MH"",
11
:¡OU""» 11, 2005
)03 v1,)·Q
em. King said the intent of attachment 4 and 5 is to resist the pressure to convert apartmfiJnt~ based on
the premise that the City has a good balançe of afford.. ble living umb;o He stated that a lot of çtlÎes in the
past have given a lot of lip service to requiring affordable housing. In tM pa.st developers could pay It
certain amount of money and get out of the requirement and the City pats itself on the shoulder for
doing their duty but the result Î5 no affordable housli1g. There are people who WilDt to live here that are
import:iUlt part of the community 5uch "'5 te<1cl1ers and law enforcement. He believes that the City
should be taking a proactive approach.
em. Wehrenberg stated that Dublin has done a guod job with housing and bringing in the younger
fanúIies to afford homes. The condo conversion will also help.
Otair Schaub asked for a motion to adopt these ordinances.
Ms. Ram said that the rec:ommendation is tp adopt the Resolution Attachment 1 referring the' ordinances,
attachments 4 arid :; to the City Council with the noted amendments.
em. King stated that the last paragraph on the Resolution :refers to attachments 2 and 3 which needs to
be amended to refer to attachments 4 and 5.
Cm. Biddle said he is a little conC21'ned with recommending 4 and 5. With the rec=dation of 4 and
5 the City is putting an awfully big dentm 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
reconunend more apartment projects.
Otair Schaub said as a Commission they do want to get to 30%.
em. Biddle stated thø.t just because the Pliuming ConurUssion is adopting tbls recomm.el\ð;ition for these
ordirlances does not automatically a.pprove each and every conversion at this tin1e.
Ms. Faubion saId that there are two ways to deal with apartmenæ. If there is a condo project, it can be
evaluated against the Housing Element and at that point decide whether you. wanf to approve the
condorrúnium part or just the structural part of it.
On motion by Cm. King. seconded by Cm. Wehrenberg. by a vote of 4-0, with an ftmerldment to only
affect projects with over 21 units, the Planning Commission adopted
RESOLlTI'ION NO. 05 - 02.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING TIlAT THE cm COUNCIL AOOI"T AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE
CONVERSION OF EXISTING APARTMENTS IN TIlE CITY TO CONDOMINIUMS
(P A 04-044 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE)
--
-.-
---
œfd.....1Ij Com-'"
'8JØUfilr fMM1III
]2
Jan""" iI, lOQ5
6.;1
I04G:b I 1../:1.
P A 02-()74 Adoption of a Hif/torit OVerlay Zoning Dilitrict Qrdin.anC'e and Design -
Guidelines for the Dublin Village Historic Area - The proposed project c;onsist~ of the
following components:
1. Amending the Zoning Map to create a new Historic Overlay Zoning District¡
2. Adoption of an Ordinance creating Chapter 8.62 of the Dublin Murùcipal Cpde which
contaJm provisicms for establishing Historic Overlay Zoning Dl8trlct Site
Development Review; and
3. Amending Otapter 8.104 of the DublJn Municipal Code relating to Site Development
RevWw.
OIair Schaub opened the public hearing and asked for the staff rep(¡rt.
Krist! Bascom" Senior Planner presented the staff report ¡mç! explained the background for the project.
For several years, the City Council has been COI15idering how to take a more proactive approach to
building the historic Dublin Village ~etl:!ement area around Donlon Way into a cohesive district to better
highlight Dublin's hÎ8taric reSOUlC<!S. In 2001, the City Council authorized St¡¡£f to prep....e ... SpociHc
Plan for the area, and work has been done over the past two years to achiwe this goal.
In January 2004, the City Council adopted a one-year development moratorium in the Historic Dublin
Village settlement area around Don.loo Way, Dublin Bou1~ard, and San Ramon Road whkh expires on
Jarwary 21, 2005. After the Council :initiated the speciljç pl!U1 Staff began working with RBF Consulting
to develop the design guideIineslor the Donlan Way/Dublin Village area. The design guidelines were
being ç!eveloped while the specific plan was put on temporary hold. Staff decided to go with the overlay
zorUng district which allowad Staff to apply a historic zoning dffiignation to th.. area and design
guidelirœr; applicable to the area in lieu of a spedfic plan.
One item to note is that Staff is réC:omrt'lendin& that the boundary for the Dublin VilIap;e Historic Area
and Overlay Zoning District be revised from the original m<»"lItorium area boundary. Staff and the
Design Guidelines consultants agreed that the area showd indude only those properties with the clooe¡;t
~ to (:hli' Ci.ty' ~ most relevant historic resources, and to include those properties east of San Ramcm
Road with lilIÚted hi¡;torical significance would dill1l:ê thl! integrity 01 the district, The Heritage and
Cultural Arts. Commis¡;ion unarúmously approved II recomm.endation to change the boundary area as
well.
This project:iB divided up into 2 main <::omponents: the Design Guidelines and the three associated
Zoning OrdiJlance amendments to implement the De8.ign Guidelines,
The goal to developing the design guidelines will pr~erve and enhance those remaining lústoric
resources within the area and guide the design of fume development to reinforce the historic quality
and !m.prove publi.c realm. over time to Create a positive pedestrian experience and enhance the areas
image.
RBF prepared a drilft version of the guidelines that contained the following components:
Chapter 1: Introduction, explanation of the purpose of the document and how it shall be used
Chapter 2: An overview of the original Dublin ViUage settlement area and vision for the future of
the area
Chapter 3: Commercial and Mixed Use Guidelines (including architectura.1, site plannirlg, slgnl\g~,
lighting, andlmdscape guidelines)
Chapter 4: Residential Guidelines (including architectural, site planning, lighling. and landscape
guidelines)
O!f.rmi11f1 Com~
'kIP'" !1ofNriøg
13
:p.n.." 11,2005
Chapter 5:
Chapter 6;
Gu'd ,,-- f LT'_ . R (Ii ble nl th h· 105 ób I ~2d in-
1 eu..u..s or .....tonc esowces app ca 0 y to ose IIItonc reSO\lJl:e. .....""
the ChapteI)
SINetscape and Fllblic Space GuIdelines (indudlng guidelines for commUIlÎ.ty gathering
spaces, streelsœpe furniture and amenities, and public: improvements)
Staff is proposing tc adopt em overlay zoning distrid that wlll serve to implement the Dublin Village
Design Guidelines and p:rovi<:Ù! the me<:N.nism for ensuring compliance with that document. To
implement the design guidelines would require 3 different Zoning Ordinance amendments. There will
be a new chapter added tc the Zoning Ordinance titled - Historic Overlay Zoning District Site
Development Review. There will be iU'\ amel1dment to AnIf!ndment to Chapter 8.104 of the Th1blin
Murrlcipal Code (Site Development Review arid an amendment to the Zoning Map to add an Overlay
Zoning Designation to the Historic Area.
In approving the Resolution (Attachment 3), the Planning Commission will be recommending that the
Oty Council amend the Zoning Map to add an OVE!rlay zoning designation to the HistoriA: Area.
Ms. Bascom stated that the proposed ¡nnendrnents to Title B of the Mun1cipal Code will provide a
suitable m.echanism to imp!.om\mt the Dublin Village Historic Area Design Guidelines In the absence of
an adopted Specific Plan.
In conclusion Staff recommends that the PlaMing Commission reconunend to the Dty Council
recommending City COUI1Cil approval of 1he Dublin Vi11a.ge Historic: Area Design GuidelineB II\nd the
following amendments to Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code; Creation of Zoning Ordinance Chapter
B.62, Historic Overlay Zoning Diswt Site Develupment Review i Amendment to Chapter 8.104, Site
Deuelapment Reviflll; and an amendment to the Zoning Map to add an overlay zorring designation to the
Historic Area.
Cm. Kmg asked what the plan is for the Dublin Square Shopping Center.
Ms. BaÐCom stated that the City Council has authorized that all appraisal be conduded on the cenwr as
well as a phase 1 envirorunenta1 assessment.
Cm. King stated he has concerll8 about west DublÛ"1 and it gl!ttmg refurbished. He asked jf designating
the historical overlay district will give the aty any additional legal powers.
Ms. Faubion stated that what is before the Planning Commission is a zoning action that identifies on
behalf of the City an area of interest and identifies a way to address future development in that area. It is
IIOt intended to be a national historic area.
em. Kíng asked if there are any additional powers that the City could utilize to encourage change in this
area.
Ms. Paubian stated that Staff felt this was the best way tc approach the situation at this point and not just
focus OIl the historic resources but what is around them as well
Ms. Ram said should the City Counc..iI decide they want to make some public investment in the area they
ç.;mld do a Capital Improvement Project through the budget process to do some of the streetscape items,
which could encourage private Investment.
Cm. KJng- stated the Power Point indicated a pedestrian friendly area. He ¡wked if the City plans to make
the area pedestrian £ri¡¡ndly.
Œ'fd"",'''II '....111,;..;...
1l.1¡j*iilr9t1"'Í1tt1
14
J."''''7 11, 2005
101..0 6ò/7'1
Ms. Bascom ~tated the vision for the area shows st:t~ape improvement:! byt it will be at the discretion
of the City Council on how the r"'50urces will be ilisbibuted over the next few yei'rs.
Cm. ~iddIe stated that it is rather ulÚortuI'la.te that more of historic Dublin has not been preserved.
Ms. Bi\8Com stated there were a lot oI resources that were demo1ishedjust as laœas the 1960's.
Cm. Wehrenbl!rg stated that she feels the City is headed in the right direction.
Cm. King a!lbd about the ~hool house in East Dublin.
Ms. Bascom stated that is the Antone School House wlùch is on the Wallis Property. There has been
discussion on moving the building but it if; in fairly poor condition and the cost of mov:ing it wOIÙd be
phenomenal.
Chair Schaub stated it will get tricky to put some of thoS€ nice features in with six lane roads. It is not an
easy intersection.
Chair Schaub asked if anyone in the audieru:e wished to speak.
Jim Devenport, owner of the Heritage Park OffICe Center stated that along with implement:lrlg some of
guideUnes he would like to make a recommendatic-.n to allow for modern requirwwrtt!l which are
needed fc-.r reta.i1 and office environments. He would like to see enough flexibility in the guidelines.
Chair Schaub thanked Mr. Devenport and dosed the public hearing.
On motion by Cm. Biddle. sei::onded by Cm.. King by a 4-0 the Planning Commission unalÚmoWily
adopt>ed
RESOLUTION NO. 05 - 03
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNOL APPROV At OF PA 02-074. APPROVAL OF THE
DUBLIN VILLAGE HISTORIC AREA DESIGN Gl1IDELINES AND THE FOLLOWING
AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 8 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE: CREATION OF
ZONING ORDINANCE CHAYTER 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.
~~~g--......
NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None;
OTHER BUSINE~ (ConunÎ55ionjStaff Informational Only Reports)
ADIOURNMENT - The meeting WB5 adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
~""i1W c-rnì.rsùm
«HJ_9of.mi>lg
IS
.7a...,,'Y 11. 2005
10 7 cS[; ( z. (1..
Respectfully submitted.,
Planning Commission Chai1'person
ATTEST:
Planning MilIUlger
<fIf<1,""¡., c--
~!Muti1te
16
","."ry 11, 20QJ
IDS 661 zJ}
...
HANNA & VAN ATTA
Attorneys at Law
A Parmerlhip of fI¡-ø&:.IiQC\,11 CgrplJ'l'auon.
525 University Avenue, Suite 705
Palo Alto, CA 94301-1921
Toloph""", (ti~O) J~ -:i700
F",,;m;lo, (650) a;¡'I"':¡6J~
www.hø1....II..I..cam
Jon" PI "I Ho"no, a Prof"".ln.,.1 Corporation
De-vICI M. Van Anll, I!I F'rotl!løll:)n.II GorþCJføtion
E..MA II..; davidvl@hanv¡m.com
January 5, 2005
Mr. JeffBakcr. A~sooiaœ .Planner
City ofDubhn
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Rc; Propo;;ed Ccmdominium Conversion Ordinance
Dear Mr. Baker:
We have been provided with infonnation conceming the propo;;ed coodmniIlium conversioo ol'dinance
proposed for the City ofDu1:>!in. I U1\derat:a!'ld that you have the responsibility for preparing material for review
by the City officials reg:arding this proposed ordinance. When we last spoke, you informed me that nO actual
lImgu¡¡.gdor the proposed ordinance has been writtw, and that the most up to date informatioo DIl the subject
is that contained in the recent Staff reports to the City COW1eil with policy recommendations regarding su-ch
proposed çondominium conversion ordinance.
On behalf ofyroperty owners in the City of Dublin . we ere expressing CDIlcerns with pÐJ1icul8.l' aspects of what
is being: proposed.. We want to n111k~ it clear that we, and the pames that we represent, are not., at this time,
objeoting to tho basic concept of a condominium CDIlVQIS;on ordinance for the City of Dublin, applicable to
rental apartment projects that are not already approved and developed as condominium projects_ However, the
breadth of the Ct"dinançc r!li.e, cnncerns, parriculady !IS the discussion pmports to impose additional
regulations on buildings that have already been approved lIS condornini\lmprojects when they were initially
conS1.rocted and that had received subdivision approvals from the City Wi condominiwn projects under the
Subdivision Map Act and other laws and ordinances of !hi: Ci1y. Such additional regulaticrn of already
permitted and developed projects is inapptopriate, legally improper and will deprive property owners of their
vested legal rights.
In a portion ofthe agenda statement addressed to the City Council fpt its meeting of November ] 6,2004, there
is 1angu.age which stat.cs "in ord", to convert WI apartmenr complex to for-sale condominium!;, the property
ownc:r must rec<>rd " condominium map, end obtain a public report from the Department of Real Estate
(DRTI)." The statement then continl.leB stating "St..~ law provides that only the Pubhc R"Port yes ¡; to buildin¡¡
owners' rights to seIJ the units individuaIJy_ Without the Pu-blic Report, the dev<; opmen.t remains subject to
n= City ordin!lnces, regardless of whether the building is already mapped."
fJ)/\ (i{)1 ¡ ;od. QIO(¡l)r{'
I (1.1: /" ,';,
Dr 1.1.1, . "
U -
J "if B.,ker
January $, zoos
Page 2
Thi. statenmlt is =neO\l(i and II misintaprcta.tiOO1 of the pertinent State Jaw. The 6latemc:¡ t, we beIÜ:;vc, is an
attempt to .tate Ule holdin¡¡ of the California Supreme Court in the West HollYWood CII.&C (City of West
Hollywood v. Beverly Towel's, Inc., 52 CaI.3d 1184, 80S P.ld 329, 278 Cal.Rptr. ~75 (1991).)
Thcre appews to be., misunderstw1Wn¡¡ of the background aud intent oftJ:¡ç West Hollvwood case. In ~
HollYWOOd, the den10per pa.rties ha.d obtained approva15 of condominium conversions of existing buildings
from the County of Los Angeles before the il1c:orporl.tion of tbc City of West Hollywood. The City of West
Hollywood, upon incorporaticm, then attempted to impose new reqwrmIltllts oMhese ccmdominium projects
that had belm earliOl' ecmvertM. Th.e projects involved in thcWest Hollvwood case w=re not "new
construction" for which the County or the City h.ad approved zoning, dr:velopment permits, issu.cd building
ptmrits 01' oth!;7 land use and zooin ¡ a.pprovnll: in addition to the mbdivision map approval. This is a critical
distinction.
Where a c""dominium project has been approved under the City's land use, zoning and building laws and
permits, and the develope.¡ in reliance upon those approva1s ""d permits has builtlWd operated this proj ~ot ali
constrUCted, the developer ha~ vested rights to the proj cct in accordance with the la_ and regulation¡¡ that were
in effect at the tUne the project waS approved and permitted. The City ne ¡""gel" has the legal right to impose
additional rostrictions, requirements or T¢g\llations with respect to the opel1l.tion er sale of units in that project
that were not imposed as pm of the permitting of the project when it WaS approved for development.
The project operations snd sales are no longer a matter of regulati(l1l of the City, except fOf regulations that
were in effect whm1 th.cproject was approved, or for imposition of p/!!'slly applicable regula.tions required for
health and safety reaaons. The tàct that after such approvals were obtained, the developer ahose not to sell
some or all of the units in the prQiect for a period of time is riot a matter that permits new City fegulstion.s.
The sale of units in IU' ø1M...ðy approV<:d and mapped p-oj oct is not a conversion BJ1d not subject to city
regulation. A co\wcrsion occurS where the OW11et" ofa building that is c=tlyzoned and approved as a rental
apartment property, withollt lUly condominium approvals or map, applies to the City for approval of the
building as a condQrniniwn project under tIJ.e Subdivi.iQn Map Act and the City's law¡; and regulations. An
owner of¡¡ rt"Jlltel npll11mt"Jllt property haG the right to apply for a subdivision approval for condo1ninium
purposes for such an existing rental npllI'1:ment building. This is what is known as ¡¡ con<1orniniumconv=ion.
The statutes ptrtaini"gto Mndomwum conven:ions under the Subdivision Map Actre1a1l:to and pertain only
to properties that have!illt..:æî beom sO subdivided. Careful reading of the Subài.visiOl'l.Map Act as it pertains to
condominiul:tJ conversions shows that the scope and int<21t of that law is to provide for notice, IUId hearings and
prQOeSS with respect to.. buildin¡¡ tbt js ngtyet a "ondgminium proj~t, and f(lr which nO c0I1dominium. map
has been approved. See (J(wem_nt Code seetions 65090, 65091(0.)(3),66427.1,664513 (b), 66452.3,
66452.5, 66452.8(b), 66452.9 and 66459 (only section 66459 applies spccificallyto condominiuro projec\ aficr
a final map has bero apprQved and expressly applies to right oftc!18llts in existing buildings that are already
condominiums.)
The West Hollvwood case invoJved. properties that were re11ta1 apartmmls for which subdivision maps had
been obtai'ned, and fer which.. final ¡;ubdivision public report had heen obtained from the Depsr1mentofReal
Estate. 10 this c""text, the developers had not gone through any zoning, land use or 'building pemrit
procedures other than obtainin¡¡ a subdivision map for eondotniniwn purposes. They had not COÐstructed a
project in reli"""" of those pennits. The West Hollvwood ,,'""c, although favorable to tbe converters, did not
pertam to the SUhdivision ofpropeny forwh1ch new oonStl"Uction was involvecl. based upon permits granted by
a city for a new condorniniwn proj~t. The façtor of obwnin a public report from the Department of Real
Estate may have been criti",,1 to the Court in West Hollywood as being one ofthe ¡¡:roUnds for finding the
condominium converters had vested rights. But it c1eady is not the only factor, pPl'tiou1ar1y when the proj~ is
one that wa.s permitted for new construction of condmniniUIJ;1 improvements.
11066179
Jeff Baker
January 5, 2005
Pag~ 3
The filing with the DepaTlnlomt of Rcal Estate f()!" Ii subdivision public "'port allthorizes the sele of
condominium w1its to the public. It is a disclosure process, and is not clœrly a discretionary fiHng for which
approvl11s from a local government agency have been obtained. Once 11 final Bubdivision map h.... b=
obtained for a newly constructed condominium project, and the developer has ex.pended funds on reliance 00.
the permits and fue map, the jurisdiction of the City with r""¡Ject to the 11111e of the units in that c<>ndC1ll1iniuIII
project no longer exi sts_ The City cannot impose further or IIdditioo.li1 conditions for this a\l'Mdy permitted
property. It nO longer h.... jurisdiction for land use and procedures with rer:pect to the offering of sale ofW1its
in the Project Ul1derthe alrœdy approved p=nits and Subdivi~on Map Act.
Thc developers of these proj ects have ve!<ted rights in their approved condominium projects based upon their
obtaining of the development pemUts for the project, as well as the approved final subdivision maps, and
lmvif\g acted in good faith in reliance on those p=nits. Aveo Community Developers. Inc. v_ SQut/¡ C{)a.~1
Regi()naJ Com. (1976) 17 CElJ..3d 785, In CaI.Rpt:r. 386, 553 P.2d 546. Although the Court did not apply the
vested rights doc1:rÎne of ~ in the C011text of West Hollvwood. the doctrine ofve,gted rights a¡¡ discussed in
AYN and related cases is clearly applicable and lIeJT11ane where a developer has obta.ined permi1S for new
construction of condominium units WJdcr the City hwd u.se and zoning procedure!, as weIJ 118 obTained a "final
subdivision map f()!" such a condominium development and expended material tlmds in reliance on such
permits. Thi s i; true whe1hcr or not a Public Report has or hu not been obtained fronl the Department of Real
Estate. The obtainin8 of a Pl\blic Report ¡my be one indication of the otltaining of permits upon which the
developer had "f'¡¡ed, but in the COBe of a n~ly con;tructC!d eondo\nil1ium project, it clearly is not the only
p=it upon which the develop.... ohuch a proje"t Would have relied. '
W,:: have been infon:ned tha.t the City may be relying on a SlÜ.,sequcnt West HolI~ood case dccided by the
appellate court in 2003. We do not beHeve that thinubscquent "ue changes the disc\J.Ssion ¡¡t¡¡tOO above or, in "
fact, applies to the iSEucs at hand. In this subsequent case, elly of We.11 Hollywood ¥. ¡ ¡ 12 InWSlment Co.,
105 Üll. App. 4th 1134, 130 CaI, Rptr 2d 168 (2d Dist. 20(3), opinion modified on denial ofrdJ'g, Cily tif
Weill Hollywood v_ 1112 Inv. C,,_, ] 06 Ca!. ApI'. 4th 653c, 2003 WI..457066 (2dDilrt. 2003), the court ruled
that the exemption from the City ordinanc" requiring a. conditioruù. use pennit for conversion, a!!d imposing
rent controls, waS ¡¡rounded on " holding that somethÎng short of a vested right precluded the City £Tom
imposing further requirement.s 011 the ..portmect owners. The court ...id that the ri¡ht g..ined by the O'MlcTS by
virtue of the issuance of the pub lie report, could expire or lapse U.pon the explra. tîon of the pub! ic report. The
cou.rt found that the right of e1l:emption expired because the public report expireà before the owner obtained II-
rt:newal. This second West Hollywood case is not germane to oW' di8cuuion. The Vl'sted rights of the
developers who bui1t condominium projrots under ooning and m&p approvals and building permits does not
rely on "public report is.'iUed by the Department cfRea1 Estate.
With all due respect, we believe that the concept of ad ding C1I:Ü;ting condominium unit~ to the "condominium
conversion ordinilllcc" is a flawed concept. In additioo, it deprives" prOperty O\\mer oftbe legal rights to sen
condominium units that were 1egally created for theirpropertics. In addition, theprO<\esses that are proposed
for" condominium conversions" make no sense when applied to an existing property for which condominiums
have been previously created.
\ /II úb I '2.Ji
~
Jeff Baker
J¡muary 5, 2005
Page /I
The City must distinguisb between II project tbat i! already zoned, permitted, mapped and completed 115 a
condominium project and II condominium conversion, which is the transfonnation of an ""i&ting rental
a.partment building into II condominium project by iI!1lJpplicai.ion for a subdivision m¡¡p approval under the
City's Bub~ivi"ion cmJinllllces IIIld the SubdivisiO ' Map Act. Failure to do so will deprive property oW!len"S of
tbm ¡"pI ¡md ".ato:d rights for whi<;;h the property owners will be compelled to seek leaal redress :&om the
City.
Wr-, appRoGÍ&te your COIlsiderntioo (If th""" points.
cc:
Mayor Jan.et Lockhar1:
Vice Mayor George Zika
Counci1member Kasie Iiî1denbrnnd
Councilmember Claudia McCormick
Councihrember Tony Oravetz
Mr. Richud Ambrose, City Manager
Mr. Patrick MQclder, Cro.. Creek LP
DMV"mIBAKER12.21
T'\Wpw;nóO\CllENTSICROSS CREEK-DUBLIN\lJAKRRI.4.0Mo:
/I z,ùþ l-zf1
CITY CLERK
Fl!. " nl!lrDra.;!5l~
.
ÁGENDASTATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL M£ETING DATE: March 1,2005
SUBJECT:
P A 04-044 Condominium Conversion ordina1:lce Policy
AltemÐ:tives for RegulatiDg the ConveOOon of Existing ApBrtmenu
in the City to Condominiums.
Rl<fJOrl PrepQrf d by; J¡iffBaker, Associate Plannel'
ATTACHMENTS:
1. City C6uncil StúfJteport (February I, 2005)
2. City COUJlci1 Meeting Minutes - February I, 2005
3. Housing mmœnJ; -:- Table 40
RECOMMENDATION~ _ ()(" Provide direction to. Staff on policies that shoUld be e<mSiðered as
/\ t/V""' part of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance., '
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: No financial impact at this time. Implemectation ofa condominium
conversion ordinanoo will have 8 potential impact on the City's tax
reYetIIIIIIi md will aløo have an impact on staff t:iJne in relation to
moDitorin¡ policy provisions. The i¡npact on ÙI:'( revenùe and staff
time is not currently known. The tù1l extent oftœ :6nancial impal:ts
would be based on the number of oonvcrsiom that ocoor. Fmther
analysis of this impact will beprescnted to tbeCity Council at the
fune the proposed Ordinønce is presented. ,
. 'PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
On September 7,2004, the City Council adopted a. Resolution (Resolution #1 8 1"()4) iWtia.ti:ng proceedings
to adopt au ordinance regulating the conversion of existing apartments in the City to for-sale
condominiums. Following that meeting, Staff studied the various mccbanisms for regulating
condominiUIII. conversions. This Study iP.c1uded a complete :review of the Subdivision Map Act, City of .
Imblin Gel1Iftl Plan Housing Elcrmlmt and condombrium conversion ordinances ftom different ciöcs
tbrol1ghout ClI1ifomia, including the Cities of Livermore and Walnut Creek. Bued on this Study, Staff
dov!llopcd £I serles of policy altema.1ive8 for the: City Council to consider. .
On November 16,2004, Staffpresentc:d these policy aJtema.tives to the City Council. The City Council
provided Staff with direction regarding the development· of the proposed Condoroinium Conversion
Ordiumœ. The City Councilfurtber direct=<! Staff to hold iI. :meeting with the owners of apartments
within· the City of Dublin in order to in£o1111 them of these policy I'OCiOmmends:tions and solicit their
comments.
, ,
On December 9, 2004, Staff held a meeting with these property owners and other interested parties. Staff
~%ed the feedback received at this meeting to further develop the proposed Condominium Convmion
Ordinance.. '
--
--------.,....---
-""---
.-
--..-
e
COPIES TO:
In~BouSé Distribution
PrClperly Owners '
)Db~
ATTACHMENT 3
G,\pAØ\%004\U.044 CoIOdo CM"""¡.. z,oA. \...~-I-O!j.DOC
. ... . 11::- ÚÌì \ 2... q
On Janwuy 11, 2005, the Planning Comm.if¡sion adopted II. resolution reoommcnding tha'1' the City Council
adopt an urgOll.C)' ordinance and II non urgcn¡;:y ordinance to regulate the oonvcnion of existing apartments
to condominiums.
On February I, 2005, the City Council held I public hearing and revil'Woo the Planmng Co11U1.1.ission t
reco11U1.1.er1dation (Attachment 1). However. ·the City Council raised concerns about the proposed
Ordinanoe and directed Staff'to do further analysis (Attachment 2). The fonowing is a summary of the
concerns raiseè by the City Council; . .
» &Plòrc the posaibility of l'equiring projects with Witing Condominium Mips. but no Public
Report, to provide Inc1usionary Housing;
). Explore ways to allow apartmmt owners to obtain II CondolUÎniwn Map without ¡ssuing II
Condominium Conversion Permit; .
). Provide additional justifloll.tion for the prohibition. on conversions unless rental hoUsing equals
30% of the housing unit$ in the comm1mity. .. .'
o Provide II c1e= understandm¡ oftbe Housing Elmnent and the impll.Cts of OOIlversions on
the provisions of the Housing Element; .
o Provide build out projections to provide II. better understanding of what the housing supply
will look like in the future;
o Look at what percentage of the housin¡ stock in the City should be rental housing in the
. fUtWeö and
). Build flexibi1iiy in10 the Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
This staffnport ~ta!ns additional background inÏonuationand a scrÎes of policy altema.tivcs to address
the concerns raised by the City CoW1oil. .
CondoDdnium Conversion Stenariol
t
Staff thought it would be useful to i11ustrate the application of the· proposed condominium conversion
·orcUnanc:e to the fullowing scenariO$. Based on what Staff has beard :fi:om the property owners, Staff'
bolicves that there are three distinct types of conversion scenarios.
. .
Scenario I - Projecœ that were built and approved with a Condominium Map but currently operate as
rental apartments. . . .
. The owner could be required to obtain a Condominium Conversion Pmmit:&om th~ City if they do
not aheady have a Public Report unless they e¡anestabIish that they have obtamed a vested right to
sc:>ll the units individually.
Scenario 1- Projects held under a single ownmihip that currently operate as rental apartments without
a Condominium Map and wi8b. to convert to for sale condominiums. .
· The owner would need to seek çproval for a Condominium Map under the Subdivision Map Act
and ,. Condominium Conversion Permit froin the City In order to convert from rental apartments
to for sale cøndominiums. The owner coold seck both approvals at the slttlle time.
Scenario 3 - Projects held 1IDder It single owntnhip that wish to obtain It Condominium Map but
contin~ to op~ate as rental apsrlment$. It is unclear what pu¡poBe thie lJerves, but the representative
from the Archstone Apartments has indicated that the map, even without the Condominium
Conversion P crmit, creatl!.li additional value.
· .' The owner could apply for a Condominium Map for these projects and at a later date obtain II
Condominium' Conversion Permit. .
.
. The follQw:iug are three key decision points for the City COI.mcil to coneider in reviewing this staff r~ort.
I) Is there a need to adopt It condominium conversion ordinance; 2) Should the ordinance apply to
2 .
projcct6- with ~sting Condominium Møps; and 3) Should the City oatabUsha housing ratio and limit
convcrsionsiftheratioi8notmet. " '.. ',' ntl òb/z9
Application of 8 Condominium Conversion O,..lin....1!e to PrOjects that Have a ,Condomtnlum Map
, but Have Yet to Receive 8 PllbUc Raport '
It ApartmeNt PrÒjects ~tU!xlsdllg ComJ~minium MIlJ'S '
One of the con1roversial aspects of the próposed con\lomiDiUm conversion ordina.nce. that WI!$ presented
to the PIIIl1IÜng Commission but notrecommc:ndc:d to the City Council has been its proposed application
to projects thllt have been previomly mapped ai condominiumB but that have been oper.a.tedas rental
projects under a sin¡le ownership. In order to convert an apartment complex to for-sale oondominjums
and be able to sell the units to individulll buyers, II property owner must, in aadition to recording a
Condominium Map" obtain a Public Report :&'om the Department of Re& Estate (DlŒ}. Bl!!!oo on two
appella.te (:IISe8 involving West Hollywood's condominium conversion onI.inatlce, the City Attomrry
concluded that the City OO'Uld apply a condominium conversion ordinmoeo to projects that 'J:I.<tve already
been mapped uWess such proj ects have Public Reports. The City of Laguna Hills, provides an example of
II. city that adopted a. condominium conversion oroWlWcc that applies expressly to mapped projects that do
not havtJ i Publio Report. The çitiesof Citrus Hmp, Paci:lìcå, Scotti Valley, md Sunnyvale have
. ordinances applicable to p:rojects without a Publio R.eport booause they require a use permit in addition to
the approwl ofuubdivisionmap. ..
There currently arc 5 apaI1mc:nt cDmplexes with approximately 1,063 units thll.t hi.ve been mapped lIS
condommhullS but are operated as rental apartment communities. The DRE Ìl!!I not issued II Public
R/::¡)Qrt fur these properties. The City Attorney has revicwed the letters prepared by attorneys for the
property owners and. beüeves that the City can.· enact a: conversion ordinance that would require II
condomînium conversion permit from the City prior to. thcs.e unite being sold to the public as individual
units. If the property ownm believe that they obtained a vested rl¡ht to proceed with the sale of the
. in. dividual units at the time they built and mapped. their projocts, they can present the City with evidence
to tMt fact at the time that they wish to prooeed with convem.OQ. . .
If the City.Council desires, as discussed :in more detail below underalte.matives, it coUld choose to revise .
the condominium conversion ordinllDce to include only limited. regulations for projects that were aln:ady
mapped. For example, Counci1member Zika s¡,¡.ggestcd that the condominiUI:ll conversion ordinance b.e
written to pernrlt already mapped projects to OODVort but reqW'e them to provide Inc1u9ionary Units. This
would be done by requiriDg such projects to obtain a condomimum conversion pennit, bu.t it could
exempt such projects from the requircm1e:nt 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 oonsidered when deten:nining if llheady mapped projects should
be subject to the condolninium conversion ordinance. The owneIS of the 5 mapped projects believe th&t
they recolved ontitleme:at.s from the City to establish condominium. umf$ and that application of 1\
condomiDi"um convemoD ordinance would effective1y reverss these approvaIs. While the City Attl>mey
has detemrined that there is a legal basis, theissue of fairness remains when apply II conversion orclli1anoe
to these properties.
A.pø11mtmt Owners that Wish to Obtain II Condomi1l'_ Møp but ConfÙl.ue to Opil'atØ Apartments
Borns apartment owners may wish to obtain II Condominium Map but continue to operate their property
88 rental units. Thç proposed ordinance allows an own=: to obtain II Condominium Map aDd later obtain
a Condominium Conversion permit ftom the City. This two-step process would, for example, allow the
owners of the Arcltstone apartment projectsl to obtain II Condon:rinium Map but defer getting. a
. condomini"um conversion permit and selling the units individue.lly at a. later date, This is Scenario 3
above.. . , . ,
3
. .
RellSoninz Behind the UrgenCJ' O,dh.IUICI . . I 5 t)}-, r2..~
InitilÛly, the Staff proposed 1111 urgcm~ ordinance to ensure that projoots that rccc:i.vc condillnfl1íum maps
bcføre the ordinanee becomes effective erelÚbject to the OÌ"dinance. Tbismpl)0Y measure wu to ensure
out of an abundance of caution that the granting of a condominium map approval does not somehow vost
the Converter's rlgbts to proceed with the inclividua1 sale of Units without complying with the ..
condominium. conversion ordinance, However. we think: that the risk is sufi'iciently &ligh ,-given the .
West Hol1ywood decis~thø.t the City Council does not need to adopt the ordinance lIB an Urgency
ordinance, with the und.efstandmg thàt projects that have ø1feady.been mapped and that subsequently _
receive a public report, which we understand takes e.boUt 6 months, cöuld vest their rights to sell
individua.! units by obtainin¡ a. public report, .
Radanle for Why Staff RecoDUl1eJlded a ProbIbidon OD Convenlons Unlet' ReDta[ Bontlnll>
Equals 30% of the HOUlIng Units in the Community
Qenerm Pltm Houahtg Ek1llent
State law provides that cities have the responsibility to use the powers wøted in them to faCilitate the
improveml"-nt Imd deVelopment of hoUlin¡ to m!Ú«! iWeqlU.lte provision for tho housing needs of aD
economic SC~lIl1ts of the oommunity (Gov. Code, § 65580(d)). At the locallovel, the City of Dublin
implements State housing law policies through the adoption of the General Plan Housing E]ement, wh1ch .
was reviewed .and certified by th! State's Dllpartment of Housing and Community Development
(HCD)(Gov, Code, §§ 65583, 65585). Among other things, the Housing Element contains a statement of
the commurrlty'ø goø.ls, objectives and policies related to the mamtenanc=, preIIl.'J1'VII.t!on. improvon¡.ent,
a.nd development of housing .along with an action program to implement these goals, objectives II11cl
policies (Gov. Code, § 655804(b)-{c)). On 1uno 3. 2003. the City Council approved tho City of Dublin
Housing Element (1999-2006), and the State Depmment of Housing and Comniunity Development
. certified it on Ju1y 11, 2003.
Preservation of Housing; .
The current Housing Element eliminated ihe programs:&om the 1990 Hmising Element that required the
City to monitor the availability of rental housing and potentially enact a condominium conversion
ordinance. The Housing Element concluded that convcmions were unlikcly because of the strong demand
for tel!tal housing in Dublin coupled with the development ofnumi:wus cóndominiums that would tend to
satisfy the demand for condominiums. In fact, multi-family rental property represented approximately
30% of the total housin¡ supply when the current Housing Element was :rmparod. But, the Ho11SÙlJ¡;
Element did not establish a target housing ratio or require the City to adopt a policy to me!ntam a carte.ln
poicentage of rental units. Therefore, it wou1d not be a violation of the current Housing El=nent for the
City to permit the conversion of existing apartments to forsale condominiums. Notw:ithl!tanding·tba.t fact,
the City bas tho authority under State law to adopt an ordinance to r=gu1atc condominium convCITsiona if
the Council believes thIIt such an ordinance would be beneficial.to the City, .
. .
Regi()naJ HOll$ing Needs."
The cuirent Housing Eloment also CO!1tairispoliciel related to the devel.opmCllt of housing hUed on Out
regional housing needs. The Astociation of Bay Area Goverrunen.ts (ABAG) is the Council of
Oov~e;nt~ authorized under State h w to idœtify ~xi~ting and future housing needs for the City,
ABAG preparw Ii regional housin¡ allocation plan in 1999, caned the Regional Housing Needs
Determination (RHND). This plan assigQ.S the City 1\ shareofthc region's new housing oonstructiooneed
t!1iough 2006, The housing needs are then broken into income cø.tegories (i.e. very low, low, moderate
md above modr¡rate income), but do not specifY rental versus ownership housing needs. The City uses
this needs !Ûlocation to identify measures (policies and ordinanees) that are consistent with these new
construction goals. The City must also identify areas with the potential for residential development to
meet the REND (Attachment 3). It was anticipated that Ii substantial pOrtion of the City's affordable .
obligation wOu1d be met with rental units. But, the Housing Element does not require the City to adopt
policies tö regulate tents or restrict condominium conversions. to comply with housing göa1s. For
4
example, MIa may increase over tim~and. eventually exceed affordable Inc:om~ levels. Similarly,
. ~ b..'flØt owners ooùld convert their 1mi.ts to condominiUlrnl and reduce the. supply ofrental71~I2.- q
The City w!l1·prepare a new Housing ElI!ImCllt in 2006 whm the cumnt Housing Ele:ment eXpmJØ~e
.. .. new Housing Elocrumt will address the preservation ofhousJng and apl!!'tm.ents will Coi1tinue to playa role
in providing a diverse h()u¡¡¡ing supply. A Dew RegionJÙ Housing Needs Detmcination will be prepared
. by ABAG and included in the updated Housing ElemCD.t. The new Housmg Blement will need to be
certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development,
The City II CUI'1'eDtly processing twocondominiumsubdlvision applications Wi has received inquiries
from sev=ral othe:r apartmom owners indicating their intent to filesubdívision dc-C'Jtml'!lJts to. oonvert tbw.
projects to condomi:aiums. The conv=:sion of cxisq apw1i:m:nts tl'l condominiums win reduce the
number ofapllI'lmmts and thereby reduce the cüversity of the housiD¡ wpply. 'IbJ..J'OlO. Staff is
CODCc::med that the City may have a difficult time ¡etting the new Housing Element certified if apartment
projects continue to convert to condominiums and significantly reduce the supply ofrcnta.! units.'
Rent-.!. Housing R.tio
To assist the City Cowç ] in detemrlning the appropriate percoutage of I'tIntal housing at which to prohibit
condominium conversions. Staff ca1cu1ated the cutTen! mtio· of exilting mu11i-family housing that is for
aa1e and for rent. This information is included in Table 1 below. .
Table 1 - Ratio of MaltI-F.ødly Rental vs; Ow..erlhip Housing
Total Multl-Famlly
. Houalng Unlta
Mutti-Fllmlly
Rental Units ..
. Percentage of
Total aMull:l-
11l1l1'I1 Units
60%·
411%^
MultI-Family
OWnfInJhlp Un""
.. a ParoanÞ,. .
of Total MultJo
Fsmi Units
40%·
56%^
.
Multl-FUll1 H"~ln .. of' 20011 6393
Multl.II.ml HølJ!llng .. of 2005 6393
* 1,063 mapped apartments included as rental units
^ 1,063 mapped apll11:ments included as ownership units
.
Staff II.!so oalculat~ the ratio of multi-family rental units and multi-fanrily ownership units as a
percentage of the ~ housing supply in 2000. currently. and at build out under the General Plan. Staff
uwmed thElt a11 undeveloped parcels with existiDg McdiuÌn/High and High DQflSÎty General Plan Land
Use designations 'Will 'be developed as multi-f8mily projects. A oombination of existin¡ approvals and
projection inform.ationñ'om property owners wu used to detemrinewbiCh parcels would be develop'cd as
rmtaI and ownership housing, Staff used tho iDfonnation fro!n Tabie I toemmate bousin¡ types for
parcels where future devclopmo¡1t inibr.1nation was :cot available (assum.es that mapped projectl remain.1I8
rental units). Table 2 and table 2a provide A comparison of these hOU!!ing Iatios,
Table Z - Housin& Supply RatiOl
Multl-Fllmlly . ulll.'amlly
Total Housing Rantal Unit8 all ownelSfllp Unlta
II PllfC8ntagll of as a Percentage
Units Total H0U5in9 of Total Housing
·Unlta· . Un! .
Houel Ratio at Year 2000 591 30% 10"Ao
CUrTllnt Høuø1n Ratio 15447 215 1
Prø RIItIo III BuIld Oul 2 85 20% 21%
. .·1ncludc:s the 1.063 existing apart1Ì:lentprojects with Condominium. Maps .
5
· T.bk 2. - BOWlin. Supply Rados I tÎ, fu ,11-1
(lISsumes ,all mapped projeots (1,063 units) convert to QOnð.ominiums B.t build out) - U
Current Housim¡ Ratio
II'roJ.otIod RatIo at Build Out
15,447
27.385
Mul1l-famlly -
Rental Units- 811
, 8 Percentage of
Total Housing
Untts*
18%
H'o/.
Multl-famlly
own....lllp Units
.. a Perøantaga
of Total HOlUllnll
Units
23%
25%
I
T~I Houalng
U~1ta
The build out projections shown in Tables 2 and 2a indicate that multi·family rental units will deorease as
a pcrceritagc of the housing stock while the percerrtageof multi-family own!'f1!bip units will increase.
MuJti-famíly ownership units, suoh 211 condominiums and toWDhousClS, ar; typically considered to provide
II more affordable owncirsmpopportunity than single-family homes. Theieforc. the projected increase in-
- condominiums and townhouses will provide increased homeownerøm.p opportunities for the community.
BIlt, the anticipated decrease in rental units wi11 result in fcwer housing optionli for people who Ire not in
- .
a position to purclmse II. prop51:y.
HaU1fing Need.J Survey
StRff discussed the development of a Housin¡ Needs Survey with the Housin¡ Division and a
representative ftom. the consulting firm (Cotton, Bridges and Associates} that pNpllred the City's C:UII"ent
Housing Element. Housing needs vary by oornm'lJDity and there is not a aI_method for determining
those n=ds !III they relate to a tárget ratio of rental housing.
The Housing Division will be oonducting a Housing Needs Surwy this spring end expects to ha.ve the
:results by J~ of this year. The intent of the survey is to provide justiDcatiOl1 fur complying with the
programs ide.o.tified in the ourrent Housing Element or for cIetemili1ina that a given. program is not
Deo~sary. However, the survey could include an IISSessmcnt of the types of housing that are D~ed or .
desired in the =muøity, aut, the results of this survey would be based (In the peT$oM1 pref=rences of .
thll residenm and business owners, and would not reflect the actual ratio of housin¡ that is needed for the
City. ' .
The consultants at Cotton, Bridges and Associates find that housing mHos are not the best measnre of II.
oommunity's housing needs., lnøtcad, they prde.r to look at income levels and determine if people are
locked out of the honi.eownership market because ob disparity in prices and income levels. For ClXElttlpIe,
(\ housing unit is typically conBidered &ffordable ifhousing expenses represent less 1:h8n 30% (lfb-ousehold
inc:ome. .. DIIta wJ:úcl1 shows that some households are spending mol'tl fi:UU1 30"10 of income indic:ates a .
shortage of affördabk housing. Census data indic:ate that affordable housing is the type of houging in
shortest Supply.in the City of Dublin. . Apllrtments are often considered one of the most affordable types of
housiD¡. Therefore, the oonversion of apartments to COndOminiUlIUi will reducø the number of apartments
that are available in th= community and furthtx" compound the shortage of affordable housing. The
affordable hous~ shorta¡e could be IIddressed by requiring converted projects to comply with the City of
Dublin's Inclusionary Zocing RegW.ations (Zoning OrdinanC:1I Section 8.68) rather than limiting.
conve:rs:ions 'lJaslld on II. set housing ratio (See alternative C,2 below).
POLICY ALTERNATIVES
Staff has prepared the ~ollowing series of policy alternatives to as~istthe City Council in providing
dù'ection to Staff' on: the dt'Ve1opment of a condominium eonver!iiOl1 orr'HnAnce. These alternatives are
separatlld into the foliowfug decision points; 1) Is there a need to adopt a condominium conversion
ordinance; 2) Shou1d the ordinanc:e apply to projects with ex,isting Condominium. Maps; and 3) Should the .
City establish.. housing ratio and limit CO!Iversions if the ratio is not met.
- ,
6
It
It
e
A. Is there a Need to Adopt a CondomillhaDJ CODvenlon Orc:UnIlD"? ·'1 £ ù' 1"2- CJ .
The City Council could cleat not to take action on It condominhim converSion ordinancPat this time.
In this cae, !be City Council could direct Staff to postpone the item indefinitl!ly, or re·evaJuate the
need. for a condominium. conversion ordiDance in one year. . .
Di3c/Ø,to1'l:
1"h.a City would continuo to rely only on the provi$ions the Subdivision Map Act to regulate the
CÇlI)version ofU11IIlllpped projeot!l if the City CoUbcil· elects· :not to adopt a condomintum copversion
ordinance at this !±me. The State regulates condOminium conversions 1hrougJi the Subdivision Map
Act aIJd these standards are enforced by local jurisdietionssuch as the City of Dublin. The
Subdivision Map Act provides technical requiren:lents for the preparation of maps, and requires basic
noticing to terumts and requires property owners to o:ð'er existing tenants the right of first refusal to
purchase their unit utmarket rates. However, the Map Act does not provide a me"hAni,:rm for the City
to evaluate the housing balance wi1hin the oomm'UI)ity, nor does it· require the propmy OwntIT to
mitigate the Impa.cts of conversion to the commUDity by met1iods SlId! as providing affordable housing
for low income housf:holds or relocation BSsirrtance to tenants wboll.Te displaced by the conversion. If
the Council does decide to postpone co:!1side:ration of this item, it should be aware that projects that are
aheady mapped could vest their rights to sell. individual units by obtaining a public report.
B. ·ShouId the City Adopt an Ordinaace thaÚt.equlrea ProJec:tI with Existing Condominium Maps
but No Public: Report to Obtain aCondondnlum COI1verslon Permit']
'The Council· can defi.nll "condominiUm conversion" in a mannm- that would . apply to projects that
already have.ñnal. conclo1'Qinium. maps but no pubJic reports. Such 81'1 ordinance would require the
owncT of sucl1 projects to obtain a condominium convmion ptmnÏt from the City. .
If tho Council wishes to adopt such an ordinanCl.:, the ordinance could prohibit the issuance of
condominium conversion permits UnleSs the: rental. housin¡ ratio is less than 30% (or II differeD.t
amount set by the Coundl). It cou1dalsQ require the property owner to provide InclusioIllU')' Units
Mld provide certain tenant protections. .
Dt,CU3Sion:
Tbse !D'C approiimately 1,063 rental apartments within the City of Dublin that have already been
mapJ'ed as Condomini:ums but have not received a Public Report from the D~Brtment of Real Estate.
If all of these lJ11its were converted, It large number of apartments would be eliminated from the
market ønd a signifiolWt number of tenants could be displaced: Requirin¡ projects to comply witb the
City's Inclusionary Zoning rl!gu1ations would help to reduce the shonase of affoi-dablebousing and
ht>lp an underserved segment of the community. Similarly, relocation assistance would reduce the
burden on tenants that are displaced by conversiOns. In addition to requiring & target housing ratio be
met, the. City Cotmcil couJd require converted projects to meet ~ Inclusionary Zoning
requirements or require property owners to. provide certain protections fur ton!d1ts, or, the Council
could require both. .
C. Should then be B guu.wg Ratio that Limits Conversions? If so, what should that Ratio Be?
1. Idmtify a Target ~ousing R4tio and Limit Conversions if the Ratio is not Met.
a. Adopt the Prop03ed Ordinance as Recommended by the Planning Com:rmÚion,
As explained in the previous· sWf report, this wou1d prohibit conversions of lmm'lf'ped
projects whfl!1'l the rental housing ratio is less than 3()ð1o, It would also require the property
. ownc:r to provide Inc1usionary Units B.nd provide certain tenllnt prÓtections. .
1
. . .. . ' . IIOf 6-b 1"29
b. Choos~. /in Appropl't.attr 'I'a1"~t HOllJing RMio OthW' than 3D%. and ,Ulfiit ConversiaM Until
the Housing Ratio is Met. .
. As the City is exercising itspolioe and TD!ring power, it Olin choose to establish. any ratio it .
deems hl'l';OpÚllte. . This ratio can be based on the City CO\U1cil'iI perception of the
cOmmunity's needs without using . study to establish the ratio. FOJ' ~ple, rental
apartments are estimated to reprcilent approximately 20% of the bowing supply at build out,
assw:rñng that the wsting mapplld projects remain as rental units. This tltio drops to 16% if
the =Dating mapped projectil convert. Therefore, the CitY COlIDW could decide to set the
housin¡ ratio lit either 16% or 20% to mirror the build out projection¡.
2. Require Conversion:; to ProWie InclWliQnluy Units and Tlmant ProtectiOl'/J without Limiting the
Number a/ConversioM. .
CODVœ:8Ïoœ would be required to provide lnc1usionary Units and provide certain t:erumt
protections as desoribed ÚI the· Ordinllnce that was recommended ~ the Planning Commission.
These measures would benefit the community and help to mitigate the impacts of conversion.
. \ , '
This alternative would not place any liri1i~ons on the property owner' 51 ability to convert a rental
complex to for sale condominiums. TM marketplace would control the supply of rental and
ownerahip housing within the City. In theory, the market would self wlj1.lSt to meet the demlmds
. of the community. Additional lIputmen1a might ~e built durin¡ periods· of strong demand for.
rentals. Similarly, condominium conversions nright 0= during periods of weak rental demand
in order to provide a balanced bousing márket. The City would not regalatc conversions to
maintain II core stock of rental bousîng for the ~UlÙty under this alternative. .
3. Establish /i1I Annual Limit on th~ Numool' 0/ UnifJI that Ca71 Be çC)71:verted.
As the CJty Council' is exercising its police md zoning powa, it em choose to establish the.
amount of housing that, b permitted to convert pet" yea: that. it deems appropriate. .The permitted
amount of convertible bousin¡ can be based on the City Council's pexcep1ion of the oommunity's
noeds. For example, II. limit of ZOO conversions per year. would require approximately nirietem
yoars to convert all existing apartmmts, under the unlikely scenario that they all wish to convert.
.
This IÙtemative would avoid a scenario where a sudden increue in ,condominium conversîons
decimates the City', :t'mtal housing stock. Under this altcmative, chang=; in the rental housing
røt!o wouJd, happlm more slowly thereby allowing ~ City to use other means----Ðuch as zoning
more land for multi-family rcsidentiaJ-to ensure that there is adequate rental housing in the
oommUlÙ~. ' .
RECOMMENDATION:
Staffreoqmmtmds that the City Council provide: StaffWithclireoûon regarding the policies that should be .
C011$idClJ'ed II part of the Condominium Conversion Ordinim:e.
.
B V't; 'ß
I L.O ðbl2..-Q
RECESS
8:11 p.m.
Mayor Lockhart called fora short recess. At 8:18 p.m. the meeting reconvened with 11.11
Councilmembers present.
.
CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE POLICY
.ALTERNATIVES FOR REGULATING THE CONVERSION OF
EXISTING APARTMENTS IN mE CITY TO CONDOMINIUMS
8:18 p.m. 7.1 (430-20)
Associate Planner Jeff Baker presented the Staff ~port and advised that on February 1,
2005, the City Council held a public hearing and reviewed the Planning Commission
recommencl8.tion regarding condominium conversion. At that meeting, the Council
raised concerns about the proposed Ordinance and directed Staff to do further analysis.
The Council would consider policy alterna.tives to regulate the conversion of existing
residential apartment units held in single ownership to for-sale condominiums and
provide direction to Staff on policies that should be considered as part of the
Condominium Conversion Ordinance. The three key decision points for the Council to
consider in reviewing this Staff ~port included: 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 housing ratio and limit
conversions jf the ratio is not met.
Cm. Oravetz asked if the apartment build -out ratio included the Camp Parks scenario.
Mr. Baker advised that it did not.
Vm. Zika asked if the City could require all that other medium and high density
properties within Dublin be converted to apartments only if the City found out that it
would not meet an appropriate balance between rental and ownership units if the units
with an existing condo map were exempted from the proposed Ordinance.
City Attorney Silver advised that she would need to research whether the Council could
adopt a policy that allowed only the construction of apartments in the medium-high,
high density land use areas, but in general, yes the Council had the authority to require a
mix or a ratio of the remaining lands available for multi-family housing, as between
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March 1, 2005
PAGE 87
ATTACHMENT c(
1"2-1 öö I '- 'ì
apartment and condos, rental vs. ownership. The Council had the authority pUrsuant to
the police power to regulate land use, and the Council was required by state law to adopt
a general plan and a housing element. The housing element law says that the Council is
supposed to provide for different types of units, including apartments. Therefore, the
Council had the authority to regulate future units as they are built as to whether or not
they are ownership units or apartment units. She would want to do further research to
be able to specifically answer that question, and to provide more guidance to the Council
if it were interested in that approach.
Vm. Zika asked if the City, under existing laws and Ordinance regulations, could legally
deny any apartment complex the right to convert, whether it had a condo map or not.
City Attorney Silver advised that the City could not deny the right to convert. The
Council could enact a Condominium Conversion Ordinance that regulated the
conversion. It may require the provision of affordable units to ensure that there were, as
part of the conversion process, some units affordable to persons of moderate, low, or
very-low income. The Council could place a limit on when the conversions could occur.
'I11.e Council could regulate, but not prohibit completely, the conversions.
Vm. Zika asked if a Contractor who did not have the foresight to get a condo map, but
built to the same standards as a Contractor with a condo map, would be able to presume
that they would be able to convert.
City Attomey Silver advised that they would not be in the same category. There were
some projects in the City that were approved and built as condominium projects that do
not have public reports. In her opinion, the Council could, if it wished, apply the
Condominium Conversion Ordinance to those projects. Projects' that were approved as
apartments that happened to have been built to condo standards would be subject to the
ordinance, if adopted, just like a project that was built to apartment standards.
Cm. McCormick referred to the statement in the Staff Report which said that the City of
Laguna Hills adopted a Condominium Conversion Ordinance that applied expressly to
mapped projects that did not have a public report and asked if that ordinance had been
challenged.
City Attorney Silver advised that the Laguna Hills ordinance had been adopted within the
last couple of months and had not been challenged to her or Staff's knowledge.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March 1, 2005
PAGE 88
I z.. 7- Db I "Z-C¡
Cm. McCormick asked if it was possible to have an ordinance for projects that were built
as apartments and did not have a condo map, and a separate set of conditions for those
that were mapped.
City Attorney Silver advised yes, the Council could adopt an ordinance that applied to
projects that were un~bui1t, projects that were already built as apartments and wished to
convert in the future, and projects that were built as condos and are operated as
apartments but do not have public reports. Different standards could be applied to each
to tailor it to those different categories.
Joseph Au, Fremont resident, submitted a speaker slip which indicated that he did not
wish to speak, but wanted the following comment entered into the public record: "In the
public hearings I requested that the ordinance apply to projects with 21 or more um/s.
There were no negative remarks rega.rding this request from the public and staff. I wish
the City Council to take notice that the Planning Commission directed staff to modify the
proposed ordinance to make the projects with ZI or more units suq!ect to the ordinance."
Shaym Taggarsi, representing Archstone"Smith, owners of Iron Horse Trail and Emerald
Park Apartments, advised that they fall into the category of apartments that were
currently operated as apartments. They would like to have a condo map and the option
of convert, but do not necessarily have an immediate plan to convert. A11y ordinance that
is a defacto moratorium on condo conversions would be. detrimental to the community as
the City would Jose some of the VeJ"j benefits that it hopes to attract, such as affordable
housing. The City wouJd be better served if it reviewed and approved conversions on a
case~by-case basis after negotiating mutual beneficial terms between the City and the
Developer. He referred the letter that he had submitted to the Council prior to the
meeting and advised that it included a matrix showing the positive attributes of
conversion under their proposal.
Mark Rafanelli, condominium project owner, advised that it was important to note that
even a modified threshold of 30% to 25 to 20% would still represent a ban on
conversions. If you look at the Jast 1,873 residential units that have been approved by
the City, approximately 11 % have been designated as apartments. ObviousJy that
exacerbates that ratio even more than the assumptions of the Staff in terms of build-out
in terms of what has already been approved. Nobody win build apartments in Dublin
without making sure that they are legally condominiums unless it is a subsidized project
at this point. It wiJ[ be difficult to improve that ratio unless the City takes some
affirmative steps to encourage rentals or require them as part of a rezoning. The other
issue is what is the City doing to provide affordable for "sale housing? There is a huge
gap in terms of affordable for "sale housing, which conversions would help satisfy. In
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March 1, 2005
PAGE 89
I z..3 ðòl -z.,9
terms of the legal issues involved, he strongly disagreed with the City Attorney and would
say that the Staffs solution to this problem was basically to go back and take aWay
existing approvals. The Staff Report was not 100% candid or objective. Their projects
were processed and approved pursuant to a planned development rezoning process with
approved tentative maps and final subdivision maps that were approved by the Dublin
Planning Commission and the Dublin City CounciL They approved the CC&R's and
condominium plan, and they filed those final subdivision maps. They were also required
to build, pursuant to a Residential Condominium Guidelines, which required additional
parking for condos, additional open space, and additional storage. They were even
required to make disclosures regarding Camp Parks conducting exercises in their rental
agreements and in their sales documents when they sold the units. The City
acknowledged that, not only were they approved condominiums, they acknowledged that
they were going to rent them and had the right to sell them. They have operated on that
assumption and have represented that condition to partners and lenders over the years
and, in his opinion, represented the ultimate in proving vested rights. He is certain that
Staffs position in advising the Council that they have the legal right to apply this
ordinance to their project was tenuous at best. The City's legal position, if it were
correct, would overturn the entire field of vested property rights in the State of
California. The attempted application of this ordinance to their existing condominium
projects violates every standard of fairness.
Michael Foley, San Ramon resident, advised that he addressed them as a concerned
citizen and as a professional land surveyor. While he spoke as an individual, he spoke
with the voice of over 2,000 survey professionals who were members of the California
Land Surveyors Association (CSLA). The Executive Board of the CSLA had reviewed the
proposed ordinance and expressed concern that it may not be in concert with state law
or the Subdivision Map Act. CSLA Executive Board was concerned about the possible
adoption of the portion of the proposed ordinance affecting existing condominium
projects as it violated the Subdivision Map Act. The CSLA would maintain a close watch
on Council's action re1atedto this ordinance.
Mayor Lockhart suggested that the Council separate some of these issues during
discussion. The one major decision would be to decide if the ordinance would include
maps already in existence or not. In her opinion, in a pure point of fairness, she did not
believe it was a good thing for the City to go back and take people that already have
condominium maps. Those businesses with the map in place right now should be
exempt from any discussion the Council might have about what needed to be regulated
in the future, including limits on the number for units for conversion. If the Council
chose to tackle this issue, it should be with those who are coming into place and coming
online in the future, so everyone comes in knowing what the rules were.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March I, Z005
PAGE 90
2-Y ðb 12-'1
Cm. Oravetz concurred, stating that if there was a Condo Conversion Ordinance it
should start from this day forward.
Cm. Hildenbrand agreed.
Vm. Zika disagreed and stated that the City had J:'l'lB.de a commitment to the State and to
the City's General Plan Housing Element. Pari of that commitment was affordable rental
units. If a third of the rental units were taken off the market, it would violate the
Housing Element. The residents in the 56 units of Cross Creek Apartments were told they
had to move because the owners wanted to convert the condos.
Mayor Lockhart advised that the residents received a standard letter that has to be sent.
The State had the wording on that letter. Anybody who wants to even apply for a map
has to send that letter. It did not mean that in 90 days those people had to be gone.
The Council discussed separating out the issues and agreed by stTaw vote to first discuss
the issues of 1) if an ordinance should be written and, if so, 2) what elements should be
included. The issue of whether or not to include the five existing condominium maps in
the ordinance would be set aside until later in the discussion.
Cm. l\Æ.cCormick stated that a Conversion Ordinance was necessary to regulate the
process in which future developments converted to conversion.
Cm. Oravetz stated that a Conversion Ordinance was not needed. Converting apartments
to condos would be the best way to provide affordable homeownership. An option would
be to come back in one year to evaluate the issue.
Mayor Lockhart stated that the ordinance could limit the number of future conversions
per year instead of trying to gage a percentage.
Cm. Hildenbrand stated. that an ordinance should be created. because she was concerned
about getting the lnclusionary units. Limiting the amount of conversions would be a
good idea, as well, excluding the existing condo mapS. .
The Council and Staff discussed various scenarios regarding the housing ratio.
City Attorney Silver stated that it sounded like some of the Councilmembers were
discussing the option to include a requirement for conversion, regardless of whether or
not there was a number of units of per year that could convert or a percentage, that
when a project was able to convert it would require compli.ance with the Inclusionary
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March 1, 2005
PAGE 91
I Z£;c'Ò I 2..4
Zoning Ordinance. If the Condominium Conversion Ordinance required compliance
with the Inclusion/u')' Zoning Ordinance was required, the Inelusionary Zoning .
Ordinance currently ineluded some flexibility in that it allowed an applicant to propose
an alternate method of complying with the requirements, if the Council found that it met
the objectives of the Inelusionary Zoning Ordinance. It might need to be tweaked if the
Council wanted to do that in a Condominium Conversion Ordinance, but a standard
would need to be set and then allow variations from that standard with certain findings.
Notice to people would have to be provided as to what the standard was, so they lmew
going in. Changes proposed by the Applicant could be possible if the Council made
findings.
Mayor Lockhart stated that this scenario provided the flexibility that she was looking for.
Cm. McCormick suggested that the proposed ordinance contain three elements: limit
conversion; have Inelusionary units in the housing element; and have the protection for
tenants whioh Council decided upon in an earlier Council meeting.
Cm. Oravetz agreed.
Mayor Lockhart agreed and suggested more extended notice than the 90 days, such as a
year.
The Council discussed the notification requirements and agreed that all residents needed
a one-year notifioation, except those who move in after the year notice had been given.
Those tenants needed to be told at the time of lease.
Vm. Zika asked when the one-year notification time period would begin.
Cm. McCormick asked if the applicants would have a conversion permit from the City of
Dublin.
City Attorney Silver advised that part of the draft ordinance was set up to provide for the
process of applying for a condo map for those projects that do not have it. If the Council
decided that the ordinance would not include those who already had condo maps, it
would have a two-step process: 1) apply for and get a condo map approved, and Z)
apply for and get a Condominium Conversion Permit from the City.
Mayor Lockhart asked when "day one" would start if the Applicants were required to
give a one-year notice to tenants.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March 1, 2005
PAGE n
\ 2.J..o 0b 1'z.C¡
Vm. Zika noted that, if an Applicant was limited to the number of condo conversions per
year, some sort of mechanism would need to be set up to notify the appropriate tenants at
the appropriate time.
Mr. Baker noted that there were several opportunities to provide notification: 1) when
the Applicant submitted for their map application, as the Map Act required them to
notify tenants 60 days before they file a map with the City; 2) when the map was
approved; 3) when the public report was issued by the Department of Real Estate; or 4) at
the approval of the Condo Conversion Permit.
Mayor Lockhart advised that it seemed best at the approval of the Condo Conversion
Permit.
Mr. Baker advised that there were several provisions in the proposed ordinance that were
recommended by the Planning commission, and asked the Council to direct Staff as to
which provisions it wanted to include. The Commission recommended a Site
Development Review permit to aHow Staff to evaluate the maintenance and upkeep of the
building and require and refurbishing or restoration.
Vm. Zika stated that this issue was approved in principal by the Council already.
Cityl\.1anager Ambrose advised that the Council had previous discussed this; however, it
sounded as if the Council wanted to revisit the issue. Although he was not certain that
there was consensus, it sounded as if the Council would like to look at an ordinance that
limited the number of conversions, required some level of lnclusionary units, and
provided some level of tenant protection. If those were the three areas that the ,Council
would like to see covered in the ordinance, the Council could attempt to go through them
tonight, or Staff could reorganize the staff report to relate to those three issues and bring
it back to the Council.
Mayor Lockhart agreed that it was a good idea to bring back the three elements, and
expressed concern about the Site Development Review being required. These would be
homes going onto the market, and would have to be in good shape for someone to buy it.
The City does not require SDRs for all houses going on the market.
The Council and Staff discussed requiring SDRs for condo conversion.
City Ma.rlager Ambrose indicated that there might be areas to look at as a result of
converting something from one use to another use. Another reason might be to make
certain that the Applicant was still in compliance with the existing SDR.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March 1, 2005
PAGE 93
I '2.:Î "D J G.J;
The Council discussed and agreed by consensus that it would be important for the project
to be brought back into compliance before it was converted.
Mr. Baker advised that the section regarding the tenant's right to purchase included a
provision which required that tenants living in affordable units be offered the right to
purchase at the affordable price. In other words, iTlake it one of the Inelusionary units.
The Council discussed this issue and agreed that it was a good idea.
Mayor ~ckhart asked the Council's opinion on limitations on rent increases pending
converSion.
The Council discussed the issue and agreed that 12 months was reasonable.
Mayor Lockhart asked the Council's opinion on tenant relocation. In her opinion, a
year's notice and a rent freeze constitutes tenant relocation.
Vm. zika concurred.
Cm. McCormick agreed, except for those who needed special help, such as disabled,
elderly and families with children.
Mayor Lockhart stated that it should be limited to the disabled. There were enough other
existing programs for seniors and families.
The Council discussed the suggestion to limit financial relocation assistance to disabled
tenants.
IvIr. Baker advised that the proposed ordinance included a definition of "disabled tenant,"
which could be further refined.
The Council discussed the issue and agreed to bring it back for further discussion, and
directed Staff to bring back a range of what the units were being rented for.
IvIr. Baker elarified that the Council was directing that all tenants would get a one-year
notification, and only disabled tenants would receive financial assistance as welL
The Council concurred.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March 1, 2005
PAGE 94
122 00 1'"2. ~
Mr. Baker advised that the Planning Commission asked that Council look at whether
units should be brought up to current ADA standards. It is not currently included in the
ordinance, but in was in the staff report.
City Manager Ambrose advised that the issue that may be of considerable expense.
Mayor Lockhart stated that was something a homeowner could do if they needed to.
The Council concurred that the units did not need to be brought up to current ADA
standa.rds.
City Manager Ambrose asked if the Council wanted Staff to bring back the issue about
the number of units per year, and include some options for discussion.
Vm. Zika indicated that a decision could not be made on that until they knew what the
ratio should be.
City Mat11iger Ambrose advised that one of issues if the number of units were limited, is
would it be done citywide or a percentage of a particular project.
Mayor Lockhart stated that it should be citywide because the whole goal was to start
developing a history of how many of those do get built each year or being able to have
some control over looking at Dublin's needs for the future based on how it would work.
It is a control element if there was a known number every year. If those numbers were
getting converted every year, it would be easy to tell where we were.
Cm. Oravetz agreed that it should be citywide.
City Manager Ambrose advised that it could be both.
Vm. Zika questioned whether limiting the number of conversions per year per project
would negatively impact the bigger projects that wanted to convert.
The Council discussed the issue and directed. Staff to return with different scenarios of
limiting conversions, as well as talk to some of the project owners regarding the potential
impacts.
Mr. Baker agreed that Staff would do some additional analysis.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March 1, 2005
PAGE 95
...---..--.....
\Z-C\ DbILC1
l\1a.yor Lockhart noted that the Council needed to return to the first question and decide
about the five properties that already had their condo maps.
Mayor Lockhart made a motion, which was seconded by Cm. Hildenbrand, to exclude the
five properties that had existing condo maps from the proposed Condo Conversion
Ordinance.
Cm. McCormick advised that she agreed in principal with the fairness issue, but
expressed disappointment that the Inclusionary units would be lost. It is a huge project
and would add significantly to the for-sale affordilble units. The City had been too
committed to affordilble housing to let this go away. Perhaps the City should negotiate
with those who have maps.
City Manager Ambrose advised that those property owners felt that the fairness issue still
applied. They thought they went through all of the entitlements that the City required of
them at the time that they had their development approved, and built their project. From
their perspective, they feel that requirements were being added that should not be added.
Mayor Lockhart stated that the five properties should be excluded because they do have a
map and were pJa.ying by one set of rules, and those were the rules that they would like
us to honor and allow them to stay in business or change their business by the word we
gave them at the time they deve1op"'...d their project. Even by excluding the properties
with existing condo maps, there would still be the positive affect of having putting more
affordilble for-sale units on the market that were not previously anticipated.
On motion of Mayor Lockhart, seconded by Cm. Hildenbrand and by majority vote (Vm.
Zika and Cm. McCormick opposed) the Council excluded the five properties with
existing condo maps from the proposed Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
.
DOLAN PARK PLAY EQUIPMENT PROPOSALS
10:00 p.m. 8.1 (600-35)
Parks & Facilities Development Coordinator Rosemary Alex presented the Staff Report and
advised that, in January 2005, Staff distributed a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the
Dolan Park Play Equipment Replacement Project. Proposals were submitted from
Playgrounds by Design, California Sports and Recreation, David O'Keefe Company, and
Kompan ranging in price from $40,288 to $48,921. At its February 14,2005 meeting,
the Parks & Community Services Commission recommended the play equipment
proposed by California Sports and Recreation.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 24
REGULAR MEETING
March 1, 2005
PAGE 96