My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN090595
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
CCMIN090595
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:54:18 AM
Creation date
5/20/1999 11:33:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Lum replied yes; there is also homeowner association fees for maintaining the park <br />area and the tot lot. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked if their costs were paid by a conventional homeowner association, how <br />would the costs correlate? <br /> <br /> Mr. Lum commented that it depended on how well-managed the maintenance program <br />was. A well-managed program could be less expensive, depending on who does the work. <br />Some of the savings would be realized because the association would not have to pay prevailing <br />wages and would not have to let contracts like the City does. There was a concern that the <br />landscaping not be left with the homeowners association because experience has shown that <br />homeowners associations do not maintain the area and the costs go up for repairs. This area was <br />specifically put into a district because of concerns about the area. Them are advantages and <br />disadvantages to the two approaches. By having the City provide the Lighting and Landscape <br />District, there is greater assurance that a certain standard of quality will be maintained through <br />that process. With a homeowners association, it can get lesser rates for the work, but it does <br />require effort to make sure things are organized. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr commented that there are general complaints from the public about using <br />assessment districts to get around Proposition 13. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked that the landscaping go in early in the project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lure replied that the developer had an obligation to install the landscaping along with <br />the improvements in the subdivision. The developer has a one year maintenance responsibility <br />when the landscaping is completed. As the homes are sold, the residents will pick up the cost <br />of the maintenance. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked if the homeowners are noticed of that before they buy the home? <br /> <br /> Mr. Lure stated the homeowners are being told of the assessment as part of the material <br />provided to them upon sale. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver opened the public hearing. <br /> <br /> There being no speakers, the public hearing was closed. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Mohr, and seconded by Ms. Dennis, that Resolution No. 95-102, be <br />adopted, confirming the engineer's report, and levying the annual assessment for Lighting and <br />Landscape Maintenance District 1995-1, Moller Ranch. <br /> <br />09/05/95 -10- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.