CCMIN012682 - Laserfiche WebLink

223 Mr. David Ash, 615 Orofino Court, stated he had concerns about individual owner- ship of the property; the plan does not provide adequate space for children; and the responsibility of the homeowners association. He stated he is not against develop- ment but is against this type of facility at this location. Mr. Ron Schneider, 650 Orofino Court, stated he had circulated a petition which was signed by 36 residents in the area, which read as follows: "The following citizens wish to advise the Pleasanton City Council that they object to the proposed ~mmobile home development proposed by Eo Jo Parrish on the Bates/Ultsch properties due to the anticipated adverse effects on the adjacent neighborhood and streets. Further, this is to advise that an Adult only Mobile home Park with controls such as are now established on adjacent property would be acceptable." Mr. Schneider stated he was concerned about last of control with individual lot ownership, and lack of open space for children. He stated he has lived in Pleasanton for eight years and had located at his present location because he felt it is a good location but would not want to live here if the project is approved. Mrs. Nancy Storch, 3193 Chardonnay, stated she had artended three of the presenta-~ tions made by Mr. Parrish, and felt there were many attractive features of the project, but that she and her husband also had several concerns about the proposal. She stated she felt a project of this type needed a manager as well as a homeowners association~ She stated she felt the single story units will fit in with the landscaping, and she approves of the gradual narrowing of Vineyard Avenue, and also agreed with the land- scaping on Vineyard Avenue. She stated she felt this is not an appropriate location for young families with children as there are meager recreational facilities and it is far to a school. She stated there will be no overall management of the grounds other than relying on the CC&R's and the homeowners association; that there is no meeting place provided for the homeowners association; and the project will be attrac- tive to speculators for low cost units and that there is no formal arrangement to insure that the homes will be owner-occupied. Mr. Parrish stated that most homeowner associations do not have clubhouse meeting rooms and usually meet in homes unless that is a neighborhood type meeting at which time some large meeting room in the community could be rented. He stated that the cost of building such a clubhouse would have to be added to the cost of the homes, as well as the maintenance of such a building. Mr. Parrish stated he felt there is adequate open space for children; that $200,000 is being expended in recreational facilities. He stated it is not anticipated that there will be very many young children living in the project, that most of the buyers will be older persons. Mr. Parrish stated that this project is creating approximately $400,000 in park dedica- tion fees, and with the East Bay Regional Park nearby he did not feel that there would be any lack of open space for children. He stated he felt that people should have the opportunity of owning land rather than renting it and that this is an oppor- tunity to allow this privilege. Mr. Hirst stated that the CC&R's and an active homeowners association can take care of and control the problems alluded to by the opponents relative to management of the grounds. Mayor Mercer read Mr. Griffen's letter into the record and allowed the applicant to respond to each concern. 6. 1/26/82