1041 20th Street v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd. (2019)

Citation: 1041 20th Street v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd. (2019)
Parent Document: 1041 20th Street v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd. (2019)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2019-07-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4644132/1041-20th-street-v-santa-monica... ↗

Full Text

1,337 chars

6
uninhabitable, the costs for repairs to bring the building to a
habitable condition exceeded the maximum collectable rent, and
the owner would not be able to repair the property to habitability
in an economically feasible manner.
       At the hearing, a Board commissioner asked a Board staff
attorney to describe the effect of a Category C removal permit.
The two engaged in the following exchange:
       “COMMISSIONER []: Why don’t you walk through it with
me. What is the meaning of the Category ‘C’ removal at this
point?
       “[STAFF ATTORNEY]: It means that Mr. Corrigan can
rent these units for whatever he wishes. They are no longer
subject to rent control.
       “COMMISSIONER []: They go to market, they’re called
market rates, rental rates.
       “[STAFF ATTORNEY]: Right, right. If, in fact, he wished
to redevelop this property, the [R]ent [C]ontrol Board would sign
off on any development permit that came before it, the staff
would. We would settle it as a property that was not governed by
rent control.”6 (Italics added.)
      On October 14, 1993, following the hearing, the Board
granted 20th Street Owner a removal permit, and made the
following findings: “1. The subject property is uninhabitable . . . .
[¶] 2. The repairs necessary for habitability cannot be completed
in an economically feasible manner.”

Other Sections in This Document (69)

Full Text