Laserfiche WebLink
<br />DRAFT MJNUTI<~S Page:\ <br />City of Sa!) Lr:andro City Council_and San LcaneJro Redevclopnl~nt Agency Joint Meeting-:::JallUllry 16, 200?_. <br /> <br />Vice Mayor Grant expressed coneem regarding reducing the amount of public review for <br />condominium conversions, noting that a large number of such conversions could <br />potentially change the character of a neighborhood and create impacts on infrastructure <br />and services. She stated that she would not want to suppol1 the change. Vice Mayor <br />Grant asked if the proposed amendment regarding the FAR would apply to all zoning <br />districts. Ms. Pollart conlJll11Cd that it would apply citywide. <br /> <br />Mayor Santos commented that the Zoning Code amendment was requested by the BZA <br />due to the inundation of applications [or condo conversions. I-Ie noted that he has been <br />contacted by a number of individuals in the Mul1()rd Gardens area that are interested in <br />building condominiums on their propeliies. Mayor Santos commented that he believed <br />the amendment would result in greater oversight due to changes to the process. <br /> <br />Council member Starosciak conclmed with Vice Mayor Grant regarding the issue of <br />community input on condo conversions. She pointed out that the General Plan focuses <br />on neighborhood character, and she expressed concern that the case of eondominiurn <br />conversions is drastically changing the character of Mulford Gardens. Councilmember <br />Starosciak cornmented that she feels this trend conflicts with the General Plan and that <br />the increased density would strain the city's infrastructure. She asked that the Council <br />remove Section 5-2424 for further consideration. Councilmember Starosciak <br />commented that she [eels there is a windfall of applications because they are lucrative, <br />and the easier the process is the more applications the City will receive. She suggested <br />looking into increasing developer fees and impact fees in order to recoup the costs of the <br />increased densi ly resulti ng from these conversions. <br /> <br />Councilmember Stephens asked if the conversion from rental units to condominiums <br />would actually result in greater density. Community Development Director Hanson <br />Hom indicated that a condo conversion docs not grant any greater density than the <br />current zoning allows; however, it could be an incentive for a person to undel1ake a <br />project. <br /> <br />Mr. Ham noted that all projects go through site plan review, and it is during this review <br />that the change in the character o[ the neighborhood would be addressed. He indicated <br />that administrative review docs not eliminate public input, and there are noticing <br />requirements and a hearing process. Mr. 110m noted that if a project is deemed to be <br />controversial, it would be referred to the BZA. The BZA recognized that condo <br />conversions for four or Cewer units everywhere in the City except the RO District arc <br />already handled administratively, and the amendment would allow condo conversions in <br />the RO to be handled in a manner consistent with the rest of the city. Mr. 110m <br />indicated that condo conversions arc like any other residential project and arc subject to <br />development fees and other requirements. He pointed out that while the General Plan <br />supp0l1s maintaining the existing zoning and character o[ the area, many parcels ;n the <br />RO District are allowed to have up to three dwelling units. Mr. Hom suggested that the <br />Council may want to consider down-zoning in order to preserve the current character of <br />the area. <br />