Laserfiche WebLink
Resolution No. 2021-xx <br />Page 5 of 10 <br /> <br />waiver from the allowable building type and architectural <br />style is required. <br />Landscape Standards (Waiver) <br />Trees are required to be planted at the rate of one 24 -inch <br />box tree per 25 lineal feet of front yard. Due to site <br />constraints, smaller than average lot width, and street tree <br />requirements, no trees can be accommodated along Garfield <br />Street. In addition, less than one tree per 25 lineal feet can <br />be accommodated along Santa Ana Boulevard. Maintaining <br />the required landscape standards for trees would result in <br />the building being setback, an additional five to six feet along <br />Garfield Street and Santa Ana Boulevard, resulting in a loss <br />of parking area, common open space and residential units. <br />Onsite Parking Standards <br />The onsite parking standards for the project shall be reduced <br />from 2.25 parking spaces per unit to 0.71 spaces per unit <br />pursuant to California Government Code section <br />65915(p)(3)(a), which allows onsite parking at the ratio of <br />0.71 stall for one-bedroom units for a total of twelve (12) <br />onsite parking spaces for the project, due to the affordability <br />levels provided at the project and the unobstructed access of <br />the project to a major transit stop within one-half mile. <br />When analyzed cumulatively, the three requested <br />concessions could be avoided if the project were designed <br />on a different site, using a different site plan, or constructed <br />using a different type of construction (steel-frame/Type I <br />versus wood/Type III). If the project were designed with a <br />multi-level parking and/or subterranean parking structure, or <br />if the applicant used different building materials to construct <br />a taller project, additional area on site would become <br />available to provide open space and parking, and would <br />allow the project to meet the required tree requirements. <br />However, these changes would increase development costs <br />and result in a project that would exceed the maximum <br />permitted building height, resulting in the affordable housing <br />project becoming financially infeasible due to the significantly <br />increased financial implications of an alternative construction <br />type compared to the relatively smaller scale of the project <br />(17 residential units). <br />Section 2. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act <br />(CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was <br />City Council 2 –14 3/22/2021