Laserfiche WebLink
<br />B.. MATTERS FOR COMMISSION'S REVIEW <br /> <br />There were none. <br /> <br />La.. Future Plannine Calendar <br /> <br />Mr. Swift advised that there is potential for a special worksh <br />September and asked the Planning Commissioners to review <br />possible dates. <br /> <br />8...h... Actions of the Citv Council <br /> <br />sometime in early <br />eir calendars for <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh inquired about the resolution of the extensio of Mirador and what <br />happened on the Ridgelands issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift stated that the Council voted to leave the extension of or Drive status quo, <br />which means the street will be open by the time the subdivision is mplete, but initiated a <br />General Plan Amendment that was then referred to the General Plan Steering Committee for <br />review of the Mirador connection to Bernal as part of the city-wide irculation element <br />review which they will be doing as part of the General Plan Update. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh inquired whether the Ridgelands agreement ith the City of Hayward <br />would be placed on the ballot or if only the General Plan Amendme t will be on the ballot. <br />Mr. Swift responded by saying only the General Plan Amendment is on the ballot. The <br />initiative includes the general plan language, basically as recommen by the committee, <br />with a few modifications. He noted that Alameda County approved e agreement in <br />concept. <br /> <br />B.&. Actions of the Zoninl!: Administrator <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh inquired if the installation of railroad tracks Z-93-122, Ed Churka, <br />for the Pleasanton Railroad Association) would in any way impact 0 future parking or future <br />use of the transportation corridor. Mr. Swift stated that the tracks ould go back where the <br />old ones used to be, in the center of the corridor. There is no parki g in that corridor now. <br />Alameda County has told staff numerous times they will not support that area for City <br />parking. <br /> <br />U Determination of whether second units are subject to the ocational requirements <br />of PUD-approved building envelopes according to the Sta Government Code <br />and City Ordinance. <br /> <br />Continued to 9/8/93. <br /> <br />~ COMMUNICATIONS <br /> <br />There were none. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1993 <br /> <br />Page 14 <br />