My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 06/27/84
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1984
>
PC 06/27/84
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2017 10:30:07 AM
Creation date
4/26/2007 4:42:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
6/27/1984
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 06/27/84
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />June 27, 1984 <br />Page 6 <br />Bob Anglin, 5229 Springdale Avenue, is a real estate broker and addressed the 'public report'. <br />A pink report has been issued by the Department of Real Estate. A pink report allows a <br />reservation for a home (a white one allows a sale). The Department of Real Estate has been <br />in contact with the association's management. They are preparing a reply now and they <br />probably won't issue it until they get a reply. Commissioner Wilson asked if the report was <br />pink because of the roofs. Mr. Anglin stated that the townhouse homeowners have called <br />to the attention of the Department of Real Estate the roof problems in their portion of <br />the development. Commissioner Wilson asked Mr. Anglin what the response of the Contractor's <br />Licensing Board was. Mr. Anglin said he was not personally involved in this. Commissioner <br />Innes asked about the Consumer Affairs. Mr. Anglin said he was not personally involved <br />with this either and that perhaps another member of the Board could address this matter. <br />Commissioner Wilson asked Mr. Anglin if he has checked into the cost of repairing the roofs. <br />Mr. Anglin said they actually have to tear the existing roofs apart and rebuild them. They <br />sent plans and specifications to 10 firms and only two bids were received. They plan on trying <br />to get more bids. <br />Jack Mehan, 5336 Brookside Court, reiterated that all previous negotiations had been done <br />with the people at Stoneson because it was felt they would take care of the problem. This <br />is the reason they are late in filing grievances with the Contractors' Licensing Board and <br />other agencies. They should have taken these avenues nine years ago but had faith in Stoneson <br />for resolution. <br />Aida Hap, 5258 Riverdale, addressed the $6,000 assessment to each unit. She said this was <br />put to a vote. Stoneson had 86 votes in the matter and the new units would not be part of <br />this assessment. They are putting the burden on the existing homeowners. The roofs are <br />badly designed. The same architect was used in some units in San Francisco and the roofs <br />are leaking at those units. She felt the primary responsibility of the Planning Commission <br />in this matter is to protect the health, safety and welfare of Pleasanton and if Stoneson <br />is granted approval to sell the new model homes, the Planning Commission would put 24 <br />more units in jeopardy of leaking roofs. Commissioner Wilson indicated that all of the <br />units do not leak and one cannot assume that the new units would. <br />Commissioner Innes asked about the number of votes which Stoneson had concerning the <br />formation of an assessment district. Ms. Hap explained that there were 149 occupied units <br />at the time the vote was taken. Stoneson has the right to vote until June 1985 or the homes <br />are occupied. According to the bylaws they still can vote and they voted for the assessment. <br />She indicated that Stoneson had 86 votes. <br />Chairman Doherty asked for clarification regarding the 149 votes. He asked if the 86 votes <br />of Stoneson were in addition to or part of the 149. Ms. Hap stated they were in addition <br />to the 149 votes. <br />Judy Damerval, 5381 Springdale Avenue, felt that the application for a sales office should <br />be contingent upon City resolution of the previous bad design and construction errors. She <br />said that fortunately she has a new roof. Chairman Doherty asked how her repairs were <br />funded and how much monetary damage was done. Ms. Damerval indicated that her insurance <br />company has paid her claim including $16,000 for walls, floors and ceilings in her home. <br />She had the ability to protect some of her furnishing having removed everything which would <br />become damaged by water during the time of the leaks to her roof. She indicated there <br />was $25,000 for repairs plus a roof and now she is faced with a $6,000 assessment. Chairman <br />Doherty asked if her insurance company will help her with this charge. She said she hopes <br />they will. Commissioner Wilson asked about other people having insurance. Ms. Damerval <br />said it just happens she had a special coverage on her plan and most of the other people <br />do not. <br />-6- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.