CCMIN031384 - Laserfiche WebLink

229 The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Mohr, Wood, and Vice Mayor Mercer NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor Butler ABSTAINED:Councilmember Brandes HearinE of objections by prope.rty owners to the pr?posed removal and abatement of nuisance caused by noxious or dangerous weeds growmng upon or in front of property owned by them in the City of Pleasanton Mr. MacDonald presented his report (SR 84:131) dated March 7, 1984, regarding this matter. Vice Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open on this item. No one in the audience protested the abatement of weeds by the City. Vice Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing closed. Councilmember Wood asked who abates the weeds along the railroad tracks. Mr. Klenk advised that the railroad property is listed on the survey and weeds will be abated by the City if it is not done by the railroad company. It was moved by Councilmember Wood, and seconded by Councilmember Mohr, that Resolution No. 84-129, after hearing no objections or protests, approving the Weed Abatement Program for 1984, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Mohr, Wood, and Vice Mayor Mercer NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor Butler MATTERS CONTINUED FOR DECISION Adoption of Ordinance No. 1128, approving..~heapplication of ~iagerman~ Black~ Cart- lidge, et al, for PUD (Planned Unit Development) Development Plan Approval for a Proposed Low Density Residential Project on approximateIV 25 acres located in the general vicinity of the northwest corner of Mohr and Martin Avenues (Intro. 2-28-84, 4-Ayes, I-No) Vice Mayor Mercer stated that Ordinance No. 1128 was introduced February 28, 1984, by a vote of 4-Ayes, i-No, and that it was now in order to adopt the ordinance. Mr. Ron Archer, Civil Engineer, 699 Peters Avenue, representing Messra Skinner and Combs, stated that the plan that was approved by Council at their meeting of February 28, 1984, had not been reviewed by Mr. Skinner and Mr. Combs until two days before the meeting, and they fee! the plan is premature. He requested Council to continue this item to allow adequate time for review by Messrs. Skinner and Combs. He added there are several unknown factors in the plan as presented, such as precise street patterns, land swaps, and various costs to individual property owners. Mr. Dean Wagerman, 2333 Martin Avenue, stated that Mr. Skinner and Mr. Combs have seen the plan three to six times as much as 60-90 days in advance of the last meeting and both were in attendance at the last City Council meeting when the plan was ap- proved, and that neither one spoke regarding this matter. He stated that he had not heard from either one since the last Council meeting and neither had Mike Cooper, the Civil Engineer. Mr. Wagerman requested adoption of the ordinance, stating that it could be amended later if Messrs. Skinner and Combs want to be included in the develop- ment plan at a later time. Mr. Bill Skinner, 3715 Mohr Avenue, stated he did not speak at the last Council meeting because staff and Planning Commission had recommended denial of the applica- 7. 3/13/84