CCMIN010687 - Laserfiche WebLink

355 the position of the City Attorney - the homeowners are to be a part of a home- owners association under the conditions of the PUD that was approved on the whole parcel. The parcel was subsequently subdivided and a different number of homes built but it was all a part of the original PUD. Mayor Mercer asked whose responsibility was it to let the purchaser know the perimeters of what they are buying. He stated the City has those records made public to the pur- chaser but it is not the responsibility of the City to notify the purchaser of this information. Mr. Stansell stated that it is his interpretation that this entire project was to be under one homeowners association, not two separate homeowners as- sociations. Mr. MacDonald stated that was the original contemplation of the PUD. Mr. MacDonald stated he felt if the City gets some minor repairs done in the Twelve Oaks area and get the situation up to a certain point to where the annual maintenance, which is not a major burden, can be done so that the City is not facing long term down-stream continuous flooding and liability situa- tions. The storm that happened this last year was the twenty-five year flood and that happened without having some of these corrective actions so again the City has to get over a little hump and get people to start maintaining it on a regular basis. It may not be all that hugh of a down stream problem if the City can get the first step taken. Mr. Stan Hegg, 8018 Dorothea Court, stated that when he bought his proper~ ty he specifically asked the sellers whether this was a part of any homeowners association and he was assured that was not the case; this was a separate por- tion and he had no rights to the nice rolling hills above him and he had to settle for the lower territory. He felt this was misrepresented to him. He emphasized Mr. Stansell's point that the homeowners above them are eager to point that it is not their fault, that the developer did this; according to the title, although Mr. Boatright may have been the general partner and the principle in this, that many of the current residents of this area are also title owners and members of the Twelve Oaks Development Company, so while they say the developer did it, they are in fact the developer. On the issue of whether or not the lower homeowners should retroactively establish a lower Twelve Oaks homeowners association or annex the lower Twelve Oaks area to the upper Twelve Oaks area, this seems a very thorny issue. There is now legal and financial responsibility without any of the perks; he is down at the bot- tom getting the upper homeowners runoff water and he has to pay to divert it. Mr. Hegg stated that 11 or 12 people have bought this large parcel, carved out the nicest part of it, dumped their drain water on the people below and mis- represented what they sold to the people who come in below - he did not think they should be bailed out at this point and have the City put its stamp of approval on a plan to make the injured parties pay for it. Mr. Hegg stated that while talking about the responsibilities of this greater homeowners as- sociation, he sustained over $10,000.00 worth of damage of water and mud damage last winter. His pool was filled with several cubic yards of mud, leaves and rocks, his drainage system was clogged with filth, his garage flooded with mud, landscaping washed away, and it sounds nice that he can be relieved of this in the future for $180.00 share of this repair work. He stated he would go along with that if he can get the Upper Twelve Oaks people to share in his $10,000.00 damage on a prorata basis. Mr. Hegg stated he fa- vored Alternative 2 or 4 set forth in the staff report. He felt the existing homeowners association has on record the responsibility as owners of this area and common area, they are responsible that the PUD specifications be carried 10 - 1-6-87