RESO 2021-07_801 E. SANTA ANA BLVD.

Home Browse Search

Resolution No. 2021-07 Page 5 of 10 waiver from the allowable building type and architectural style is required. Landscape Standards (Waiver) Trees are required to be planted at the rate of one 24-inch box tree per 25 lineal feet of front yard. Due to site constraints, smaller than average lot width, and street tree requirements, no trees can be accommodated along Garfield Street. In addition, less than one tree per 25 lineal feet can be accommodated along Santa Ana Boulevard. Maintaining the required landscape standards for trees would result in the building being setback, an additional five to six feet along Garfield Street and Santa Ana Boulevard, resulting in a loss of parking area, common open space and residential units. Onsite Parking Standards The onsite parking standards for the project shall be reduced from 2.25 parking spaces per unit to 0.71 spaces per unit pursuant to California Government Code section 65915(p)(3)(a), which allows onsite parking at the ratio of 0.71 stall for one-bedroom units for a total of twelve (12) onsite parking spaces for the project, due to the affordability levels provided at the project and the unobstructed access of the project to a major transit stop within one-half mile. When analyzed cumulatively, the three requested concessions could be avoided if the project were designed on a different site, using a different site plan, or constructed using a different type of construction (steel-frame/Type I versus wood/Type III). If the project were designed with a multi-level parking and/or subterranean parking structure, or if the applicant used different building materials to construct a taller project, additional area on site would become available to provide open space and parking, and would allow the project to meet the required tree requirements. However, these changes would increase development costs and result in a project that would exceed the maximum permitted building height, resulting in the affordable housing project becoming financially infeasible due to the significantly increased financial implications of an alternative construction type compared to the relatively smaller scale of the project (17 residential units).