CCMIN060578 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Levine advised that under the Residential Allocation Program Guidelines Council had~decided not to allow changes on an application after the deadline for accepting the applications, but because this was the first time around and being unfamiliar with the process, clarifications were allowed where necessary. The application of The Housing Group could have been considered if they had made the change before the staff report was prepared. Mr. Chapman stated that staff cooperated in every way possible and that he agreed with staff comments but he did feel his application should be given consideration as he felt the policy was not clear, and also since he did not receive written notification in time to meet the deadline. Councilmember Brandes stated he felt this issue of no project being able to receive more than 80 units was made clear at the Residential Allocation Program orientation meetings and at the Planning Commission meetings on The Housing Group design review application. Councilmember Butler stated he felt this issue was not clear to everyone and since this was the first consideration under the Residential Allocation Program that maybe some allowance should be given for this fact. After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Brandes, and seconded by Councilmember Kephart, that Project 78-14, The Housing Group, be excluded from consideration under the Residential Allocation Program Selection of Projects because it did not meet minimum number of units by the deadline for acceptance. The roll call vote yes as follows: AYES: Councilmen Brandes, Kephart, Wood, and ~yor Mercer NOES: Councilman Butler ABSENT: None 78-15 -- Stoneson Townhouses-Tract 3150 Larry Bartelson, MacKay & Somps, representing Stoneson Development Corpora- tion, stated lie had no questions regarding the staff report. 78-16 - Kismet Construction No one spoke regarding this project. 78-17 - Rousseau - Tract 3297 George Oakes gave background information regarding this project, stating that all underground improvements had been completed several years ago and that he could not architecturally change the design of the project now. He stated he felt Council was morally obligated to allow him to complete this unit, con- sidering previous approval and actions that had taken place. Council asked staff how the design points were determined for this project. Mr. Harris stated he felt this project was not as high a quality of features as some other projects and was a very standard design. Mr. Swift explained the points allowed for Traffic Circulation using the planned routes from this project to the freeway and route to the Central Busi- ness District via Santa Rita Road. Council discussion ensued regarding the application of the Residential Allocation Program to projects that have been partially completed. 4. 6/5/78