CCMIN010687 - Laserfiche WebLink

353 you did the work negligently. If they claim the City should have done more work in that case we are not liable; to that extent the answer is No the City is not liable. There is not a major liability exposure to the City for trying to solve the problam. Councilmember Mohr asked Mr. Stansell his opinion about forming a single homeowners association for the entire PUD. Mr. Stansell stated at this point you are paddling up stream. There are people who have purchased these lots with no knowledge that this was possible. Seeing the potential main- tenance and costs nobody will want to get involved that is not legally respon- sible or legally forced into it. The people on the easterly side are not di- rectly affected by any of the run off. Mr. Stansell stated he has one more question - he made a statement, per- haps it was an assumption, his interpretation of the report is that this proj- ect was looked upon from a development standpoint and soils engineering stand- point as one solid piece, is that correct? Mayor Mercer stated that is cor- rect. Mr. Stansell stated that in the report it states "in conjunction with the Gloria Court subdivision, Gloria Court was dedicated as a public street, no homeowners association was created, no CC&R's permit City enforcement". He asked how that was allowed to happen - how Mr. Boatright was allowed to sell off the properties. These properties were not only developed but finaled with no one ever checking to see that this situation existed, that the PUD asked for. This co-harmonious interaction between the upper and lower is confusing to him as well as why the soils engineers recommendations in their entirety were not completed. Mr. MacDonald stated that he had the opportunity to ask Mr. Boatright that question and Mr. Boatright stated he talked to the Planning Director about filing that lower subdivision without going through the process of creating a homeowners association; exactly what happened in that conversa- tion is not clear because the former Planning Director does not remember that conversation. In any event, that kind of unilaterial amendment to a PUD could not happen - maybe the Planning Director said Mr. Boatright could apply for it, but in fact no application was ever received. Mayor Mercer asked if it is the City's responsibility to insure that when Mr. Stansell comes in to buy a lot from the "developer", all of this informa- tion is given to Mr. Stansell. Is this the City's responsibility or is it the responsibility of the Department of Real Estate, or whose responsibility is it- that of the developer? Mr. MacDonald stated the City is responsible for having all of that information available as a matter of public record so that when anyone buys a lot they can find out what the zoning is, and is subject to the City's zoning, whether or not the developer tells the buyer about it. The City does not know who the purchasers are, therefore cannot give the informa- tion; if anyone is responsible it is the developer. Councilmember Brandes stated the staff reports states as a alternative to having one homeowners association, the lower homeowners could form their own association if they chose to. If they were to choose to combine together and form their own lower homeowners association would they then be in compliance with the PUD. Mr. MacDonald advised they would be, provided they complied and did their share of the work. Mr. Stansell asked if it was each of the homeowners responsibility to find out whether or not they needed to form a homeowners association or supposed to be a part of the existing homeowners association. Mayor Mercer stated that is - 9 1-6-87