CCMIN050200 - Laserfiche WebLink

and they have not received such a staff report. That doesn't rule out the possibility of funding, however. If the project is not funded, he wants the oppommity to resubmi/this application in the second round on June 15. One of the main components of the scoring is based on the approvals the project has in place. He was concerned that if the project is called for review by the Pleasanton City Council, it would be deemed that the approvals are not in place and that would affect their chance for funding. He indicated the company is open for input ti'om staff so long as it does not jeopardize the funding approvals. Mayor Tarver indicated he understood the situation with regard to approvals and the application for tax credits. But he felt the developer would know about the tax credits before the item appears on a Council agenda. if it does not get the funding and has to be resubmitte& it is possible things could be done to the PUD and its entitlemerits changed before it is necessary to resubmit. His response to concerns about risk to the project is that if it is a good project, there is nothing to worry about. It may be modified a little here and there to make it a betler project. Ite believed that if there is the will on Council and the need to do somctt~g, it should be on an agenda to discuss. Ms. Michelotfi said the Promenade project did not get tax credits because of the mount of affordability built into it. This developer has agreed to work with the City to go as far as it can in terms of design review and they are ready m proceed. She did not want m risk losing the project.. There were not three votes to put the item on the agenda. Ms. Dennis indicated she had been on Cotmcil when the 5A Rent a Space proposal came before Conncil and there was a lot of discussion and input from the neighborhood. They indicated they wanted the existing plan to go forward and preferred it te the storage plan. Then 5A put up a big sign to sell the property winch indicated it had approvsls. That has been them for a year or more. No comments have come from the public through the Planning Commission process and the only commenta she has heard after the workshop was from a person who had opposed the storage facility and agreed the proposed senior facility was fine. She believed the public is aware of this and there are no objections to the use. Ms. Ayala what the process would be to make design changes. Mr. Swil~ indicated that in order for staff to issue a building permit for the project, it must be consistent with the original approval. Minor changes such as a tree here or there can be done. Parking lot plans or a building footprint plan are rarely changed. Staff' usually reviews the windows and details not included in the original plan to make certain they are compatible with the final plan. In this instance, the original plan, in terms of building elevations, was lacking in clarity, so staff has discretion with respect to the exterior building elevations, windows, doors. patios, etc. If the issue is to remove one of the floors of the building, that is clearly not possible without a PUD modification process, including notification to the neighbors and/or a public hearing. That process is available if the applicant chooses to make modifications. It could be done within three weeks if it Pleasanton City Council 26 05/02/00 Minutes