HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-09-01; City Council; 6602-2; Request for waiver- Mola Condominium Conversion0
: 66O3 " O UJu^j^
AGENDA BILL
., INITIAL;
AGENDA BILL NO
DATE: September 1, 1981
DEPARTMENT: Planning
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF PUBLIC FACILITIES FEE - MDLA CONDOMINIUM
CONVERSION PROJECT - CT 81-3/CP-149
STATEMENT OF THE MATTER:
This item is a request to waive the payment of the public facilities fee for the
Mola condominium conversion project (CT 81-3/CP-149) located on the east side of
El Camino Real north of Swallow Lane and north of Alga Road which was approved
by the City Council at its meeting of May 19, 1981. The applicant requests the
waiver based on the proposition that they are providing a low cost housing pro-
ject.
As the Council may recall, a condition was placed on the approval of the project
which restricted the initial sales price of the units from $49,000 to $64,000
for existing tenants and from $50,000 to $90,000 for unoccupied units. This
restriction was to apply for one year from the date of sale of each unit. City
Council Policy No. 17 states that an exception from the public facilities fee
may be granted for a low cost housing project.
The City Manager has already indicated to the applicant that he cannot recommend
that the fee be waived primarily because the project is not an affordable hous-
ing project as defined in the city housing element. Correspondence from the
applicant, the City Manager and the City Attorney regarding this matter is
attached for the Council's review.
One additional item should be pointed out. One of the reasons the Planning
Department changed its original recommendation to deny the applicant's request
for a condominium conversion permit for the project to a recommendation of
approval was because the applicant offered to subject the project to a condition
restricting the initial sales price. In other words, the sales price restric-
tion was a trade-off for other staff concerns regarding the design of the pro-
ject.
FISCAL IMPACT
If approved, the waiver would result in the loss of $55,296.40 in public facil-
ities fees.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
None required
RECOMMENDATION
It is recomended that the request for waiver of the public facilities fee in
conjunction with CT 81-3/CP-149 (Mola Development Corp.) be denied by the City
Council- DENIED
AGENDA BILL
September 1, 1981
PAGE TWO
ATTACHMENTS
1. Letter from Mola Development to Frank Aleshire dated
July 28, 1981
2. Letter from Frank Aleshire to Mola Development dated
July 14, 1981
3. Memorandum from City Attorney to Frank Aleshire dated
JulyS, 1981
4. Letter from Mola Development to Frank Aleshire dated
June 29, 1981
5. Copy of Public Facilities Fee Agreement dated February
5, 1981.
MOLA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION/808 ADAMS AVE, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIF 926487(714) 536-2547
6994 EL CAMINO REAL SUITE 211, CARLSBAD, CA 92OO8/(714) 438-1157
July 28, 1981
Mr. Frank Aleshire
City Manager
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: CT81-3/CP/149
Dear Mr. Aleshire:
I am in receipt of your letter of July 14, 1981. I would
like to ask that our application for waiver of the public
facilities fee for this project be presented to Council in
view of the extenuating circumstances confronting us on this
project. We feel the concessions made by Mola Development
Corporation in qualifying this project for a condominium
conversion in fact do qualify the project as "inclusionary"
or "affordable" housing. The critical distinction is that
although there might not be any discount to buyers beyond
the first year, Mola Development is absolutely restricted as
to what prices it can obtain at any time it sells its in-
ventory. The distinction is that the resale is restricted
for a period of one (1) year from the date of sale by the
developer. If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a
duck you must draw the inescapeable conclusion that in fact
it is a duck.
There is also a small piece of property to the north of
Swallow Lane that has been effectively rendered useless and
we would offer to dedicate this as a City park or other
facility in lieu of the requested fees.
If you still feel the public facilities fee is due then as
previously set forth we would request that you schedule
this matter for Council action so that the undersigned may
and plead his case. I would be happy to discuss
ymatter with you if you feel it necessary.
cc: Andy Barber
STATE CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE 335-113
V % >-y • \ f8^ • — "v• w-
1200 ELM AVENUE : @f***^J$^ - TELEPHONE:
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 P| ^^^ fl (714)438-5581
OWce o/ ths City Manager
Citp of Cartofc
July 14, 1981
Peter E. von Elten
Executive Vice President
Mola Development Corp.
808 Adams Avenue
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
• /'"
RE: CT81-3/CP-149
This is an answer to your request of June 29, 1981 to waive the
Public Facilities Fee. I am sorry that I cannot recommend that,
the fee be waived for the following reasons:
1. The fee applies to discretionary planning approvals.
Conversion of an apartment house to a condominium, is
clearly a discretionary action.
2. CP-149 is not an affordable housing project, as defined in
the city housing element because the discount to tenants does
not apply beyond the first year. We could, if you wish,
explore the possibility of some type of rent control or resale
price control mechanism if you are interested in qualifying
the project for affordable housing.
So the bad news is that I cannot grant your request . However ,
there is some good news.
The Public Facilities Fee for this project is based upon the? 1977
valuation of $2,764,820 which translates into $55,296.40.
That amount will be due upon recordation of final map,
The. accessory buildings have not been valued in calculating the
fee which means no extra charge for the modifications you are now
making. Also, no park in lieu fee will be charged for CT 81-3.
On CT 79-28 a Park Fee of $23,000 was paid in addition to a
$54,000 Facilities Fee. The $23,000 will be refunded to you by
Engineering Department.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
FRANK ALESHIRE
City Manager
FA:gb
cc: City Attorney
City Engineer
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 8r 1981
TO: City Manager
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: CT 81-3/CP-149 MOLA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
You have requested that we answer Mr. von Elten's letter of June
29, 1981 requesting an exemption from the public facilities fee.
Because the request involves policy decisions, we are providing
you with some information upon which to make the policy
decisions and request that you provide us with direction prior
to making the response.
Frank J. Mola, President of the Mola Development Corporation,
signed a Public Facilities Fee Agreement for CT 81-3/CP-149 on
February 5, 1981. For some reason that agreement was not
processed according to the Council policy and has been sitting
in the Engineering Department. Our information is that the
agreement has now been processed and is in the City Clerk's
Office. Pursuant to the Council policy a determination of
exemptions should be made at the initial stages of the project,
not after the project has been approved by the Council.
In answering Mr. von Elten's specific pointsr which he believes
indicate that the project is not subject to the public
facilities fee, we provide the following comments:
1. The fact that Policy No. 17 was issued and became effective
on August 29, 1979 is irrelevant in the case of an apartment
conversion to a condominum. The fact that the project was
approved and under construction as an apartment project is
irrelevant because the public facilities fee is being paid
on the conversion to a condominium. We have case law which
supports the imposition of fees on condominium conversions.
To be exempt from the public facilities fee requirement
because the project was approved and constructed prior to
the effective date of the Council policy the project would
have to remain as apartments.
6
City Manager -2- July 8, t98T
2. In order for the exception for low cost housing to apply the
City Council must find that the project is consistent with
the Housing Element of the General Plan and that such
exception is necessary. The Council may impose conditions
with regard to low cost housing to ensure the continued
availability of the housing to low income tenants and if the
Council finds that the project is not being operated as a
low cost housing project the fee which would otherwise be
imposed shall become immediately due and payable. In the
present situation the applicant voluntarily limited the
initial sales price of his project to a certain level.
However, after one year, this price restriction is removed
and the project is no longer a low income housing project.
It would appear inappropriate to set a precedent that the
public facilities fee would be waived for projects which
will not continue to provide low cost housing.
3. With regard to Mr. von Elten's statement regarding accessory
improvements, it is our opinion that the public facilities
fee is paid for conversion of the apartments to condominiums
and not for the addition of accessory structures that are
necessary to bring the apartment project into conformity
with the condominium ordinance. The sections that Mr. von
Elten cites with regard to accessory structures do not apply
in this instance. Section 6(b) applies only to mobilehoree
parks. Section 6(c) applies to discretionary approvals for
minor additions to existing projects, not to projects
which were converting to from one use to another use,
4. The equitable considerations that Mr. von Elten cites in his
final paragraph of the letter would equally apply to every
development in the City and I find nothing unique in the
considerations that Mr. von Elten has stated.
We have attached three pages of the Public Facilities Fee
Agreement for this project. We hope that providing this
information will assist you in making the appropriate policy
decisions. Once those decisions are made, if you choose to have
us respond to Mr. von Elten's letter, we will be happy to do so.
JR., City Attorney
By_
City Attorney
DSH/mla
Attachment
.. ..
MOtA DEVaOPM£NrCORPORATK3N/3O8AOAMSAVE, HUNTJNGTON BEACH CAlf
• (V;june 29, 1981'"•
y «jVjjrf^jiiA.w.iJr » 1; 3T<SXuC .«:X.A,S.
'''^^!< City Manager
ITY OF
M, 1200 Elm Avenue
^FjSfc• Carlsbad, CK 92008-y> '^jijflWMrva ^ • •* • • ,,', "'^$i&&* i ••-.''- - h\::e: - CT81-3/CP -1.49
ft///*- ^ &&P *> •
<) ' • ~
"••'<K*-t •'
M -•* f-'.-' , -.Jit^/
Dear M<r
Our co^any wan rouontty granted apprcv^J by the Cor.1 abaci
City Council to convert an existing 80 unit cspertinent pro-
ject into coitCiomin Lnrns. The property is generally Joeated
on tliss east aldo oi: El Camino Real, south of Swallow Lane.
Conditions of approval for this project are descr.ibcd in
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1787. The intent of thif=
letter is to question the determination that, we must: pay a
Public Facilihifjs Foe as per Council Policy fjtatement No. 1?
which became effective August 29, 1979, It is our belief
'that we are not subject to paying the PuhJie Facilities Fee
for this particular project due to tlu~ fo3.lowing rea.^om;:
\
Policy No, 17 xvas issued anct j^ecaine effective
Auges'fc 29, 1979-after the Ki-'i>;]ect project \vas
approved and under construe{>on.
Policy Wo. 17 provides severe;.! exceptions f 3 oiu
payment of the Facilities Fee. The policy states
that the City Council may gir.nt an exception from
the) fee for a low cost housing project when the
City Council attaches conditions or limitation?.
on tha rent or income levels of tenants. TIP-.a
condition of approval, there i« a limitation on
the sales prices for this conversion which was
Imposed by the City Council and which we agreed
to. Sales prices for this project will be re-
stricted from $49,900 to the $90,000's.
T f
swre COKHWCICSS uCEfist ajs-ro
Mr. Frank Aleshi
City Manager
,CITY OF CARLSBAD
page 2
uuU
We are planning several major improvements to the pro-
ject as also dieated by the conditions of. approval and
we feel" these improvements to be "accessory18 improvements
which are not subject to a Facilities Pee. Accessory
improvements avo identified under Section 6B and 6C of
Policy No. 17 ..... i v*
, -We. respectfully* request you to examine this Matter and
-provide us with your decision as to payment of the fee.
We have gone to great lengths, and expense, to in-provc
the quality of life at the/ subject project, and we
sincerely hope i;he payment of a Facilities Fee wi31 not
'be an'.additiona I" financial burden for our company. 3f '
: you have-: any questions regarding the contents of this
• letter, or re^ulco additional information, please do not
hesitate to- convict mtj at any
SinceraKy,
Pe^er E. von Elf-.on,
Executive Vic:o ^ces
.ftfV.l
• r
«.* v, -"* Heir t, W
recording return to:.• - f
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Ave.
Carlsbad, CA 92005 AGREEMENT BETWEEN DF.V£LOPER-OWN£R
AND THE CITY OF CARLSBAD FOR THE
'.. PAYMENT OF A PUBLIC FACILITIES FES
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 5th day o£ FEBRUARY
19 81 t by and between -CITY OF.CARISBAD R .
MOLA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
(name of developer-owner)
a CALIFORNIA CORPORATION .hereinafter referred to as
(Corporation, partnership, etc.)
"Developer", whose address is 808 ADAMS AVE. :_LM...,_
(street)
RP&PM P.AMF 92648 : ^ r and THE CITX OP
(City, state, zip code) .
CARLSBAD, a municipal corporation of the.State of California,
hereinafter referred to 'as "City*, whose address is 1200 Elm
Avenue. Carlsbad,: California, 92008.
•
" . * -
* *
•• ' W I T N E S S E T Hs* •
WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of the real property described
• *
on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part of this agreemenfcr
hereinafter referred to as "Property"; and
WHEREAS, the Property lies within the boundaries of Cityj
»
•and ' ' .
WHEREAS, Developer proposes a development project, as followst.
.'AH 80 UNITS AIR SPACE CONDOMINIUM DIVISION LOCATED ON THE '.
EAST'SIDE OF EL CAMIMO .REAL NORTH OF ALGA ROAD. .
7
on said Property, which development carries the proposed name
Of N/A AT THIS TIME. _ : _ : _ _
and is hereafter referred to as "Development" ; and
WHEREAS, Develeper filed on the 5th ' ^aY o£ .fE.RRUARL.-. t....... •
• 19 81 i with the .City a request for 80 UNIT CONDOMINIUM _
CONVERSION.
(hereinafter referred to as "Request1*; and
' «* :
WHEREAS, the Public Facilities Element of the- City General
*
Plan requires that the City Council 'find that all public
; facilities necessary to serve a' development will be available
concurrent with need or such development shall not be approved
.(said element is on file with the City Clerk and is incorporated
by this reference; and .
• *-
'WHEREAS, Developer and City recognize the correctness of
Council Policy No. 17, dated August 29, 1979, .on file with the City Clerk and
Incorporated by this reference, and that the City's public facilities and services
are at capacity and will not be available to accommodate the
additional need for public facilities and services resulting
from the proposed Development; and . . • . .
WHEREAS, Developer has asked the City to find that public
*. facilities and services v/ill be available to meet the future
needs of the Development as it is presently proposed; but the
Developer is aware that the City cannot and will not be a*ble to
make any such finding without financial assistance to pay for
•
Liich services and facilities; and, therefore, Developer proposes
' ' . ' 2. '.'.•-
/o
• .IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement is executed in San Diego
County, California as of the date first written above.
DEVELOPER-OWNER:CITY OF CARLSBADr a municipal
corporation of the State of California
By.City Manager
CORP.
(Title)
. ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
, .
ebgUary—2_j 1.98 I
£ laid State, personally appeared.. . . f-R£UM&~J.,
known to me to be thJTPS Ident p^..;^nl anc|_ f
known to me to be the Secretary of the corporation that executed the within instrument,
and known to me to be (he persons who executed the within
instrument on behalf of the corporation therein named, and ac-
tknow'edgod to me that such corporation executed the wilFJi
instrument pursuant to its by-laws or a resolution
directors.
WITNESS my hand
Wt&t
ILA SHARONlCA
R must
^ _ I. » M U f I
P(in:ipnl Office .In
' OKANGECOUNTY
My corninission cxpi/es 11-I6-3-
Name gyped or Prinrcd)
(«'t«no^id t.»l)