CC MIN 1971 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

172 Mr . James Hinson, 459 Neptune Drive , spoke in opposition to the application , He expressed concern as to lack of enforcement by Leslie Properties and Swartz of the Restrictions and Covenants , particularly as it related to landscaping, noting laxity in his neighborhood . Mr . Coleman Johnson , Leslie Properties , responded relative to landscaping requirement , that Swartz is the owner of the land and that Leslie Properties was in no position to enforce the covenants . Mr . Norris felt that Council should take the position of instructing Leslie Properties to enforce the covenants so that the whole area would have a more finished appearance . Mr . Littell commented on the fact that while his dock was approved by the Design Board, many of the others were not . He also criticized the landscaping . Mayor Bury suggested he would be available for a guided tour , noting that he had observed, along with weeds , an attractive residential area, and Mr . Littell indicated he would gladly offer such a tour to Mayor and others of the Council . Councilman Henderson inquired as to who were members of the Design Board, and Mr . Coleman Johnson named William Rodgers , William Moore , and Bob Dodd . He indicated they were not involved in landscaping . Mr . Clay Shank, 540 Compass , felt it would be desirable for the homeowners and Leslie to work more closely together relative to enforcement of landscaping maintenance . Mr . Jack Cooper , 461 Starboard, stated he was one of the first buyers , and indicated opposition to putting lower priced housing in a prime area . He felt the statement by Leslie representative earlier in the meeting that units were selling faster than they were being built was inconsistent with Swartz statement that due to economic conditions it was necessary to build cheaper homes . Mr . Grant Ross , 465 Trident , questioned whether it was up to the builder or Leslie Properties to enforce deed restrictions . Coleman Johnson , Leslie Properties , explained that , as he understood it , they had restrictions on the property at the time it was subdivided and sold . Then Swartz or American Housing would have to file their own restrictions with the Real Estate Commissioner . He understood that to save time , both builders utilized the deed restrictions and covenants Leslie had placed on the property . They became involved in the mailing of the restrictions and covenants , he said, because too often the builders fail to do so , and they felt an obligation for the homeowners to be informed . Mr . Reid Gustafson , Stanley C . Swartz Company, indicated they had reviewed the letter submitted at the meeting by the Directors of the Redwood Shores Homeowners Association , and generally agreed with the conditions . He felt it basically would be for the homeowners to enforce condition No . 3 relating to landscaping, but were willing to give them the tools to enforce . He indicated they hope to have an active building program in Redwood Shores during the next year, but needed the support and cooperation of not only buyers , but of the homeowners there . He hoped there could be a harmonious solution . In the discussion, it was estimated cost of installing docks would be $1 , 000, and that the change in plans , resulting in corrections of curb cuts would amount to about $400 per lot and would be absorbed in the cost of the houses . There would be no necessity to relocate utilities . Mr . Gustafson responded to question by Council concerning deposits on homes prior to the moratorium on insuring of loans by FHA and VA, indicating that they lost most of the