Laserfiche WebLink
<br />II. ITEMS HELD OVER FROM JUNE 9, 1980, CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />A. Condominium Conversion Ordinance--Further Discussion--Mr. Henry <br />stated this discussion was to develop guidelines for staff regarding <br />three specific areas of the ordinance: 1) Councilor Delay's concept <br />of waiving certain regulations for condominiums built since 1975; 2) <br />the $500 tax which is above administrative costs; and 3) how to treat <br />cooperatives. He stated that Jim Croteau, Planning, would discuss <br />Councilor Delay's proposal; Robin Johnson, HCC, would discuss the tax; <br />Tim Sercombe, City Attorney, would discuss cooperatives; and Betty <br />Niven and Robert Linz were available. <br /> <br />Jim Croteau stated the technical staff met and discussed these three <br />'areas. The presentation will make specific recommendations in some <br />areas and note pros and cons in other areas. The public hearing has <br />been closed on this item. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Croteau stated that Mr. Delay's proposal said that a specific <br />class of rental units newer than ten years and built after 1975 could <br />convert and be exempted from some parts of the ordinance. It was not <br />his intent to exempt them from specific tenant relocation requirements <br />listed in the ordinance. The proposed exemptions are: 1) conversion <br />rate formula; 2) $500 tax; and 3) warranty requirements, engineer <br />certification, and housing inspection. In regard to the warranty <br />requirement, engineer certification, and housing inspection, staff <br />feels there is no validity in exempting these newer units from these <br />requirements and, in most cases, it would be easier to fulfill the <br />requirements on newer units than it would be on older ones; the cost <br />would also be less on newer units. With regard to exemption from the <br />conversion rate formula, 1,400 units would be permitted to convert at <br />the start. If newer projects were exempted, staff feels it would <br />encourage older projects to convert since they would still be subject <br />to the formula limitations. Staff also feels newer projects would be <br />encouraged to convert if a ten-year deadline is placed on them. They <br />would probably try to convert within that time. <br /> <br />The formula permits a high number of conversions within the next <br />couple of years. Conversion may also be encouraged by the ceiling <br />which has been placed for the number of allowable conversions. By <br />placing a ceiling on the number of units allowed for conversion, as <br />the home builders brought up, a cloud is placed on future expecta- <br />tions investors have to deal with. Investors might choose not to <br />invest because of the uncertainty of whether or not they would be <br />allowed to convert at a later time. Staff recommends that the formula <br />be deleted. It could be included in the ordinance in an advisory <br />capacity and, in future years, this could be used as a basis for. <br />monitoring conversions on a yearly basis. The City is concerned about <br />conversion and about rental housing. If there were a crisis in the <br />future with too many proposed conversions, then the ordinance could be <br />amended to include a conversion formula. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />6/11/80--3 <br />