NVR Logo
Napa condo conversion gets council approval
Marina Vista's 42 apartments to go condo for up to $395,000
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Save and Share Share


A divided Napa City Council will allow a rundown apartment complex in River Park to convert to condominium ownership, but the door is closed to any further conversions.
Marina Vista, consisting of 42 two-bedroom, townhouse-style apartments at 1003 Marina Drive, will get a total makeover before going on the market.

Units will be offered at between $345,000 and $395,000, with current renters offered discount prices of between $310,000 and $355,000, according to the permit approved by the city. The caps on sale prices are in effect for three years.
This is only the second condo conversion in city history. In September, the council approved the conversion of 38 apartments at Cadillac Flats on Soscol Avenue.

The window for condo conversions opened in 2005 when the rental vacancy rate topped 5 percent, a requirement for condo applications. Last year’s vacancy rate fell to just 2.6 percent.
The council approved condos at Marina Vista on a 3-2 vote after hearing neighborhood representatives praise conversion as a way to remove an “eyesore.”

A condominium association will do a better job maintaining the property than today’s out-of-town apartment owners have done, Theresa Heim said.

Condos would be a better fit for the neighborhood, providing more stability than renters who come and go, said Clay Parker, representing the South Napa Area Coalition.

The only dissenting citizen voice was that of Jenny Garcia, a single mom who lives at Marina Vista. “What happens to us if this does go through?” she said. “They kind of make it sound like we’re a problem or something, but we’re not.”

The council majority — Peter Mott, Juliana Inman and Jim Krider — said the conversion would offer needed ownership opportunities for Napa workers.

Voting no were Mayor Jill Techel and Mark van Gorder. Techel said the housing market today is far different than it was in 2005. The vacancy rate has dropped significantly, she said.

“For me this is not the right time,” said van Gorder, who said he was disturbed by turmoil in the housing market. “A lot of people are losing their homes. A lot of people are looking for rentals,” he said.

Attorney Kevin Teague, representing Marina Vista owners, said the poorest renters at Marina Vista would get $10,000 and assistance in helping them find a new apartment.

Others who moved in before the condo application was filed with the city will get six months free rent, he said.

It could be a year or more before reconstruction starts. The seven buildings will be done in sequence so there will not be a mass displacement of tenants, Teague said.

The apartments will be remodeled inside and out with essentially all new kitchens, bathrooms and carpeting. Units will get new windows, patio doors, heating, air conditioning, landscaping and patio slabs, as well as upgraded stucco and roofs.

Council members expressed skepticism that the market would support the proposed sales prices. A year ago there were few condominiums available under $350,000. Today there are more than a dozen, Mott said.

If the condo application were turned down, it’s likely that the owners would upgrade the waterfront development, then charge substantially higher rents, several council members said. That’s what he would do, Mott said.

Two elderly residents are guaranteed lifetime occupancy, while eight other units will be priced to ensure that average income people can afford them, Teague said.

This is more price protection than currently exists at Marina Vista, Inman said.

7 comment(s)

Paddy wrote on Feb 8, 2008 12:31 PM:

" I watched these procedings. The main point was the complex is dilapidated and needs repair. With the money they'll need to spend the rents would have to increase sharply to pay for it. Why not make them condos? Current tenants are going to be nicely taken care of. Section 8 tenants really need to understand the government and property owners can't be responsible for them forever. Can't afford Napa? Try Sacramento. "

disgusted wrote on Feb 8, 2008 5:14 PM:

" Try Sacramento? What kind of ridiculous solution is that? i wonder..how manu of the holier than thou citizens of this county spouting this kind of rhetoric are actually true Napa citizens and were born here as are many of the low-income tenants of this valley. "

JMB wrote on Feb 8, 2008 9:39 PM:

" Um, so what happened to the talk about affordable housing? Some of us in Napa are not rich, if anybody's gotten that memo. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Feb 9, 2008 4:01 AM:

" "The law, in its majestic impartiality, forbids both rich and poor from sleeping under bridges." In the eyes of the City Council majority, these soon-to-be homeless 'bums', living in 'eyesores' must then driven out of town. And (you deeply touched by the plight of the poor) City Council majority ... where are the building permits for "Habit for Humanity" to create affordable housing ownership opportunities as you destroy existing affordable housing ownership opportunities? What a bunch of morally bankrupt hypocrites and developer stooges. ~Ruff "

boots wrote on Feb 9, 2008 8:23 AM:

" Here is how you do it if you want to become a home owner: Get a JOB. And really you must get two. You will need to work at least one part time job ( in addition to a regular job) for a while to make it happen.

I am single and never made more than $50,000 in a year. But being frugal, watching your credit score and saving a bit each month makes it possible .....cry me a river section 8 is good for a while but feeding off the tax payers does little for your pride or place in life! "

glenroy wrote on Feb 9, 2008 10:06 AM:

" This is very good news for the renters who can convert to ownership for not much more than their rent. These units have been in disrepair for many years now which has adversely affected the value of the surrounding properties....good for every body...but most particularly the ‘hourly workers’ who deserve at shot at a piece of the pie, along with the mental stress that goes with improving ones financial situation.
"

disgusted wrote on Feb 9, 2008 3:53 PM:

" $50,000 a year is not low-income honey,but good for you! Way to contribute to society. However, there is no need for such a condescending attitude over those that don't. Owning your home does not mean you are a harder worker or better than those that don't. "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy