Map Act question

mpallamary · Post by **mpallamary** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:34 pm

Has anyone every heard of a Certificate of Compliance being issued for a single condominium unit? Also, has anyone ever heard of a situation where one condominium unit is deemed legal under the map act and the second not? Note we are dealing with a two-unit project. Has anyone every had one of two lots declared legal and the other not in a two unit parcel map?

Thanks

dedkad · Post by **dedkad** » Wed May 21, 2014 12:43 pm

Who would issue the Cert. of Compliance? If the condo unit was created with a condo plan through BRE, can the City or County really have a say in whether or not that unit was created legally?

Warren Smith · Post by **Warren Smith** » Wed May 21, 2014 12:59 pm

The recorded condominium diagrammatics and CC&Rs can be compared with the approved tentative for compliance purposes by the appropriate local agency.

The building plans would have to have been approved as well.

I'm not sure how one could be in compliance, and the other not ...

mpallamary · Post by **mpallamary** » Wed May 21, 2014 2:55 pm

Thanks guys! There are two units and I compare them to an egg. You can't have half an egg. All I can tell you is it was done and the forum prohibits me from sharing anything more than that. I have two condominiums side by side and one now has a COC and the other has a conditional COC requiring a map. I don't under stand it. As always, I appreciate the responses.

Warren Smith · Post by **Warren Smith** » Wed May 21, 2014 3:12 pm

Mike,

See if section 66499.34 of the SMA covers this issue. The last paragraph seems to work in the case of the issuance of a permit or grant of approval for development.

subman · Post by **subman** » Wed May 21, 2014 3:40 pm

I agree with Warren. If the local agency issued a building permit for development of two residential condominium units; the local agency MUST issue an unconditional COC upon request.

It may also be beneficial to show the two separate tax bills where the Assessor recognized the air space creation of the two units, created separate tax parcels and started taxing them as separate and distinct development units.

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Wed May 21, 2014 5:06 pm

Sounds like city of SD is at it again.

JoeC · Post by **JoeC** » Thu May 22, 2014 11:56 am

I dont understand. The PM created the single lot for condominium purposes and CC&Rs created the airspaces. The PM is the Cert. of Compliance approved by the Agency. Why would you record a separate PM for the one unit? At that point it wouldnt be a condo, how can you have a one unit PM? It would be like splitting your one parcel into one parcel.

Weird Stuff....

mpallamary · Post by **mpallamary** » Fri May 23, 2014 9:34 am

There is no Parcel Map. A Condominium Plan was filed in a grey period of the city's changing rules. The city was made aware of this project six years ago and they refused to help the owner. See 66499.36 SMA. For many years the city did not require any kind of map. PS, I did not mention the name of the city.

The city will not perform its duties under 66499.36.

Thanks all!

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Fri May 23, 2014 3:34 pm

PS, I did not mention the name of the city.

LOL, ok 3 guesses and the first 2 don't count.