|
Resolution No. 2022-xx
<br />Page 5 of 10
<br />The MEMU regulating plan requires that publicly-accessible
<br />open space be provided along main street-facing façades.
<br />Because the project has frontage on only one street,
<br />meeting this requirement would result in the building being
<br />pushed back significantly from First Street and would render
<br />almost the first 1/4 of the site’s depth unusable for building
<br />area, resulting in the developer reducing the number of units
<br />or reducing the square footage for private or common open
<br />space area. Moreover, in order to maintain the current
<br />proposed unit count, the developer would be required to
<br />construct additional levels, resulting in a different type of
<br />construction (steel-frame/Type I versus wood/Type III),
<br />further increasing development costs. If the publically
<br />accessible open space standard were applied as written, the
<br />result would be a significant loss of units and parking area.
<br />Pushing the building back would also reduce the contribution
<br />to creating a more urban, walkable environment. The
<br />Applicant intends to compensate for this reduction by
<br />providing ample private open spaces for each unit in the
<br />form of patios, balconies, and roof decks.
<br />Section 2. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City
<br />and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies,
<br />authorized volunteers, and instrumentalities thereof, harmless from any and all claims,
<br />demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, referendum, and other proceedings (whether
<br />legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative
<br />dispute resolution procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and
<br />such other procedures), judgments, orders, and decisions (collectively “Actions”),
<br />brought against the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents,
<br />departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to
<br />modify, set aside, void, or annul, any action of, or a ny permit or approval issued by the
<br />City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and
<br />instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City) for or
<br />concerning the project, whether such Actions are brought under the Ralph M. Brown
<br />Act, California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivision
<br />Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure sections 1085 or 1094.5, or any other federal, state or
<br />local constitution, statute, law, ordinance, charter, rule, regulation, or any decision of a
<br />court of competent jurisdiction. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to
<br />approve the legal counsel providing the City’s defense, and that Applicant shall
<br />reimburse the City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the
<br />City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any Action
<br />brought and City shall cooperate with Applicant in the defense of the Action.
<br />Section 3. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
<br />(CEQA), the recommendation is exempt from further review pursuant to Section 15 162
<br />and 15168 (EIR No. 2018-15/State Clearinghouse Number 2006031041) of the CEQA
<br />6/27/2022
<br />Planning Commission 2 –13
|