No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 5 I � 314pa C:j,ai 0� -'`� STAFF REPORT Development Services Department DATE: July 29, 2014 TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE APPROVAL OF SINGLE-FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. SFADR 14-26 AND OAK TREE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. THE 14-16 FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AT 1800 WILSON AVENUE. Recommended Action: Find that this project qualifies as a Class 3 Categorical Exemption from CEQA, Deny the appeal and uphold the approval of the design review, and Approve the Oak Tree Encroachment Permit. SUMMARY The subject applications were submitted by project designer, Mr. Robert Tong of Sanyao International, Inc., to build a new 6,025 square-foot, two-story, single-family residence at 1800 Wilson Avenue. The subject property is located within the Highlands Homeowners' Association. However, the design review application was processed by the City because the Architectural Review Board did not have a chairperson to process applications at the time. Planning Services approved Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-26 on April 17, 2014, based on the determination that the proposal meets the City's Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines and Resolution No. 6770. Due to a typographical error in the original approval letter, a revised approval letter was issued on May 27, 2014. The City received two letters of appeal on June 4, 2014. One was submitted by Mr. Ming Cheng Chan, and the other letter was jointly filed by Ms. April A. Seymour and Ms. Lori Gamez, to appeal the City's approval of the subject applications. It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold staff's approval of the subject applications. BACKGROUND In mid-November 2013, Mr. Ralph Bicker retired as Chairperson of the Highlands Homeowners' Association's Architectural Review Board (ARB) after 35 years of service. The ARB was unable to find a replacement until mid-February, 2014, when Mr. Glenn Oyoung assumed the position. During the three months from November 2013 to February 2014, when the ARB did not have a chairperson, the Development Services Department, with the City Attorney's advice, began to conduct design reviews for the projects within the Highlands HOA. It was critical for the City to process the design review applications because under Resolution No. 6770, "the ARB shall render its decision on a Regular Review Process application within 30 working days from the date a complete application is filed with the ARB; failure to take action in said time shall be deemed an approval of the plans, at the end of the 30 working-day period." The Development Services Department had been contacted in late November and December by a number of applicants that were ready to submit projects to the Highlands ARB. Unless the City processed the design review applications, the projects would have been approved by default, and there would not be an opportunity to review the architectural design of these proposals. Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-26 and Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-16 were initially submitted on February 13, 2014, and February 26, 2014, respectively. On April 17, 2014, Planning Services conditionally approved Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-26, based on staff's determination that the proposal meets the City's Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines and Resolution No. 6770. TRE 14-16 was approved on March 24, 2014. The approval letter for SFADR 14-26 was re-issued on May 27, 2014, due to a typographical error that stated an appeal fee of $540.00, instead of the correct fee of $210.00. The condition of approval is that the stone veneer on the second floor above the front entry shall be removed and replaced with a stucco finish to match the rest of the residence. On June 4, 2014, two letters of appeal were filed with the City. One was filed by Mr. Ming Cheng Chan, the other was jointly filed by Ms. April A. Seymour and Ms. Lori Gamez. The Planning Commission may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the appeal and also consider the Oak Tree Encroachment permit. The Commission's decision may be appealed to the City Council. DISCUSSION The subject property is a 16,070 square-foot interior lot zoned R-1-10,000&D. An aerial photo of the area and photos of the subject property are attached. The subject property is currently improved with a 1,722 square-foot, one-story residence with an attached two-car garage. Appeal of Approval — SFADR 14-26 & TRE 14-16 1800 Wilson Avenue July 29, 2014 — page 2 of 7 The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing residence and build a new 6,025 square-foot, two-story, single-family residence with three, attached garage spaces. The floor plan includes five (5) bedrooms, five (5) full bathrooms, a half bathroom, a library, a kitchen with a wok room, a dining room, a living room, a family room, and a home theater. The architectural style is described as Country French, featuring a smooth concrete tile roof, stone veneer, brick headers, stained-wood front door and garage door, and smooth stucco finish, as shown on the attached plans. Staff finds the plans to be consistent with the R-1 Zoning Code, the City's Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines (Guidelines) and Resolution No. 6770. Copies of the Guidelines and Resolution 6770 are included in the Planning Commission's agenda packet. The proposal is a two-story house within an area that consists mostly of single- story homes, except for the adjacent home to the north, which is developed with a 3,959 square-foot, two-story residence. To the south of the subject property, the ARB recently approved a 5,526-square-foot, single-story, single-family residence. Staff finds the proposed house to be effectively modulated and articulated to limit its mass. The second floor of the building is recessed from the first floor on the front and side elevations, and this minimizes its bulk. The overall building height is proposed at 28'-6" from the average existing grade, where a maximum of 30'-0" is permitted by Code. Staff found the stone veneer on the second floor to have a heavy appearance, and imposed a condition to remove the stone veneer on the second floor above the front entry and use a stucco finish to be consistent with the rest of the residence. APPELLANTS' COMMENTS Two appeal letters were submitted on the subject proposal. The first appeal letter was submitted by Mr. Ming Cheng Chan, a developer who finds the approval of this project to be inconsistent with the ARB's denial of his single-story proposal to the south of the subject property at 1760 Wilson Avenue. The second appeal letter was submitted by Ms. April A. Seymour and Ms. Lori Gamez. The letter pointed out procedural and design issues on this application. On procedural issues, the appellants state that the City processed the subject application when it should have gone to the HOA ARB for their review and approval, and that the City did not follow the proper procedures when reviewing the plans. On design issues, the appellants also pointed out size, height, bulk, entry, architectural style, landscaping, and obstruction of views to be of particular concern. The letter includes specific comments on the height of the entry porch emphasizing the verticality of the entry; stone veneer adding to the mass and bulk of the building, roof pitch is higher than those of the surrounding homes; and the overall building height of 28'-6" creates too much height disparity from the other homes in the area. The appellants obtained signatures of support from 23 other neighbors within this area to oppose this project. A copy of the appeal letter, with the additional signatures, is attached. Appeal of Approval — SFADR 14-26 & THE 14-16 1800 Wilson Avenue July 29, 2014 —page 3 of 7 STAFF'S RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Mr. Chan's concern is with the consistency of the ARB's decisions, and does not relate to any specific concerns or issues over the architectural design of the subject proposal. However, this design review and appeal process is to evaluate the architectural design of the subject proposal, and not on the fairness of the decision as compared to an ARB design review that was denied on the adjacent property. It is important to note that Mr. Chan's proposal at 1760 Wilson Avenue was denied based on an alternative design sketch being presented, and the revised project was subsequently approved by the ARB after a full set of architectural plans based on the sketch were presented. In response to the procedural issues, Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-26 was initially submitted on February 13, 2014, during the time period when the ARB did not have a chairperson in place to process design review applications. If the City did not process this application, this project would have been deemed approved by default after 30 working days (March 27, 2014) according to Section 5(E)(5) of Resolution No. 6770. In that case, neither the City nor the ARB would have the opportunity to comment on the architectural design of the proposal. Staff consulted with the City Attorney about this situation, and was advised that in the absence of an ARB Chairperson, the City should process these applications through the City's design review process. Under the City's design review process, staff sends a Notice of Pending Decision when it is determined that the design of the proposal meets the Guidelines and Zoning Code requirements. If any neighbor, or other interested party submits comments, they would be duly considered and forwarded to the applicant. If they are considered relevant and appropriate, the comments would be taken into account in formulating the decision, which would not be made before the expiration of the comment period. Staff received the two attached comment letters and an email in response to the Notice of Pending Decision for the subject proposal. The neighbors expressed concerns about the size of the proposed home, and how it deviates from the size of the existing homes. Staff invited the neighbors to review the plans of the proposal, and one of the neighbors was able to review the plans over the counter and commented that the design of the proposal was attractive. In response to the design issues, staff finds the proposal to be adequately modulated and articulated to minimize its mass. The second floor has a much smaller floor area than the first floor, which provides a lighter appearance on the second floor. Staff concurs with the appellants' comment about the inconsistency of the roof pitch of the second floor area above the entry, and therefore recommends a condition of approval to reduce the roof pitch over this portion of the building from 6:12 to 5:12 to be consistent with the rest of the house. The applicant is proposing to maintain the existing mature trees in the front yard area, which includes a 42" trunk diameter live oak tree, and an 18" trunk diameter sweet gum Appeal of Approval — SFADR 14-26 & THE 14-16 1800 Wilson Avenue July 29, 2014 — page 4 of 7 tree. The applicant is also proposing to plant two (2) 36" box London plane trees in the front yard area. Screening shrubs are also proposed along the side property lines to promote privacy. The screen shrubs will be approximately five to six feet tall when first planted, but will grow rapidly to provide screening along the side property lines. The second floor windows facing the sides are smaller in size and elevated from the finished floor a minimum of 60" to help protect the privacy of the adjoining neighbors. Staff finds that the subject proposal meets the City's Guidelines and Resolution No. 6770, and recommends approval of the proposed home with the conditions of approval as listed in this staff report. However, the Planning Commission may consider the following additional changes in response to the appellants' comments to further reduce the mass of the proposed design: 1. Recess the second floor area above the entry a minimum of 5'-0". 2. Lower the top plate height of the first and second floors from 10'-0" and 9'-0", to 9'-6" and 9'-0", respectively. 3. Remove the stone veneer on the first floor and replace with a stucco finish. 4. Reduce the pitch of the roof from 5:12 to 4:12. Oak Tree Encroachment The proposed development will encroach into the protected area of one oak tree in the front yard area, as shown on the attached Landscape Plan. Certified Arborist, Mr. Michael Crane reviewed the subject proposal and prepared the attached Arborist Report for this project. Mr. Crane finds that with protective measures, the proposed development will not adversely affect the health of this oak tree. The recommended tree protection measures are included as a condition of approval. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) staff has determined that the development of a single-family residence is Categorically Exempt per Section 15303 (Class 3) of the CEQA Guidelines. If the Planning Commission is to consider approval of the design review, the Commission should find that this application qualifies for the Categorical Exemption. PUBLIC NOTICE/COMMENTS Public hearing notices of this appeal were mailed on July 18, 2014, to the owners of those properties within the required notification area — see the attached notification area map, as well as to the appellants, the HOA President, and the previous and current ARB Chairpersons. Because this project is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the notice was not published in a local newspaper. An opposition letter to the appeal was submitted by Mr. McCallum, resident at 1730 Alta Oaks Drive. A copy of the letter is attached. Appeal of Approval — SFADR 14-26 & THE 14-16 1800 Wilson Avenue July 29, 2014 — page 5 of 7 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny the appeal of the approval of SFADR 14-26 and THE 14-16, and uphold staffs decision, with the following conditions of approval: 1. The stone veneer on the second floor above the front entry shall be removed and replaced with a stucco finish to match the rest of the residence, and the roof pitch of this area shall be revised to 5:12. 2. The applicant shall follow all findings and recommendations as listed in the arborist report dated February 2014, and amended on March 28, 2014. 3. The proposed project shall be developed and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and approved by SFADR 14-26 and THE 14-16. 4. The applicant/property owner shall comply with all City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access, public right-of-way improvements, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director and Development Services Director, or their respective designees. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval by the foregoing City officials and employees. 5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officials, officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or conditional approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or conditional approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 6. Approval of SFADR 14-26 & TRE 14-16 shall not take effect unless on or before 30 calendar days after Planning Commission approval of these applications, the property owner and applicant have executed and filed with the Community Development Administrator or designee an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. Appeal of Approval — SFADR 14-26 & TRE 14-16 1800 Wilson Avenue July 29, 2014 — page 6 of 7 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval of Appeal and Denial of Design If the Planning Commission intends to approve the appeal and overturn staff's approval of the proposed design, the Commission should move to approve the appeal and deny Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-26 and Oak Tree Encroachment Permit Application No. TRE 14-16, and state why the proposed design is not consistent with the City's design guidelines, and/or Resolution No. 6770, and/or that the Oak Tree Encroachments are not acceptable. Denial of Appeal and Approval of Design If the Planning Commission intends to deny the appeal and uphold staff's approval of the design, the Commission should find that the subject application is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), state why the proposed design is consistent with the City's design guidelines and Resolution No. 6770, and move to deny the appeal and uphold the approval of Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-26 and Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-16, subject to the conditions set forth in this report, or as modified by the Commission. If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the July 29, 2014 public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Thomas Li by calling (626) 574-5447, or send an email to tli@ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved b : AP! Jim ema Co --'unity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo of the Area Photos of the Subject Property Proposed Plans Neighbors' Comment Letters and Email Appeal Letter Arborist Report Notification Area Map Letter from Mr. McCallum One copy of the City's Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines and City Council Resolution No. 6770 are included separately in the July 29, 2014 Planning Commission agenda packet. Appeal of Approval — SFADR 14-26 & TRE 14-16 1800 Wilson Avenue July 29, 2014 — page 7 of 7 Site Address: 1800 WILSON AVE Property Owner(s): Bowden Development Inc. , lip 1#< Ipilk ske 1 off' 41 PIO;,44' ' ' .....WWW4r1i.*.' } 4 fix° ,000.,,, 400 um 40_ .. , r ill 1 r d I. et Property Characteristics I Selected parcel highlighted 8 Zoning: R-1 (10,000) f1 •^ •••, 14/ I General Plan: VLDR R-� `IP. ...- or at Lot Area (sq ft): 16,070 1 :r..l�Er1111 �`y •• s •• Main Structure / Unit(sq. ft.): 1 722 „a~• .��r• t:f Aso s r� ■fib EN �� id!: • �. ■■NE. ra S/ 4`■ Year Built: ice' . ... .. Er,�= wig iI go— a 1950 ,►` _■ ■■.■■ .•.Zir art ow ■1: ■ Number of Units: 0 Iii ... io.uw .-16.6.1 m imam �s eft�-4 51.1 mi. awe 8.41,0410 "irimi No 1 sirj swum Overlays m:p■ ■a-■■ cc �� �� •� 1 aN Parking Overlay: / An'� awl-MI,v�rss S g Y n a am i 1.11a ■e■ ■. �� i4at i • Downtown Overlay: n/a ,�1�1�1m �� It 02 M_gm _— __+ is • � Special Height Overlay: n/a ewe 111. .. _�ti�i, J'� i Architectural Design Overlay: D Parcel location within City of Arcadia 0 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for Report generated 22-Jul-2014 reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate,current, Page 1 of 1 or otherwise reliable. View of the subject property at 1800 Wilson Avenue r ,, V/I4 r r � j, 4rt y .. 7 � r „ tai 4t 'nR .. .� is T. . • { _'�3=� "�."°' T 'x - . -y > A 'a 4* S i - View of the neighboring property to the north at 1810 Wilson Avenue ,,,,; 4.j ,,,,.. ., 4* ,,' . x , . _.y.. View of the neighboring property to the south at 1760 Wilson Avenue .,,.. - u. v. .r 1 ' ir .,‘ -Ili ,L:,..._ too . , , y .0 . ............._____..0........ .__ _ .. I i 44<44 I 9eatt»Welnd•1ron91(WA 1.1 I" 'Y9'fl'tom vovIMyY'cow Is lnq wl9'399Z al*«? .:9 V3'VIavo iv • I Id I•^""°"• --.-41-6......- 3A11 NOS1IM 0081 i R '�NIl1/NOUVNN31N1 OdANVS "`'�, :,� 3Sf10H AIIWVd 310NIS a ! I! N I(I— s. 1 Ls_1 _ t cL'r crec �� � d is SSE Lo=sa al ql ig 1 r 1 i i. 6 4'eiae a fflilh � 1k!. '� p $ G56656 8g� si �•v 4 p d R ! ' g$ A �•6;; d�3AA g9Fj� 5. , 3;l'i a9 E EiE i g ril is -gi. _ $ ,RR � ,-F X6`3.11 i:i gg _ iii gamg • y�ri .°.1 sl li! 81'eame91 E I °"i"7 liillritIl , 'l:Is"s !FdaiWaaiRi E lie liii,1 11111, Bala 1 9 ;EP! 1,1i, h ;RX MI P 4/4711411vi-i'll =eI i X93 J1 !iiii l N050 ^ - " € I M ' �' I .T' •.Li J- .,� a �ee —i .. – g 1 J `rte � x . . . . . I g C ? i (h' �� TR____ , 1 4 '-'- 1'2 leo" .14 -I 0 8 ,, ,, in: „,-,1_____ wi x 9 � I _i ��I�.�' ��! a y}4ka @.a. p p . �,. rt, I, AP ' e 1 • I i a, 8 1 1 9 d "6H} /Igj 9 91 Zia I 1{\��.$� - � ! [9j p2 y Gg gBapgflp fg•' L, .i,�j�"� f • v p g N � �;12 d b 1 lE ��RtlH d I' }' M W 4�r ' Lt tlt .. } 0+ - o !o(D )Ce r[e , /111, 3� it egel l�I ill g pi 1 1 IL.3:_�i, ..�f_'k.__ i 1T O W !i hill pe p -4t wl ---- Y l $ G g,9 ;�I 3 is n(Xv Wye n u Irani C=1 -------- I EA exlid'l Hil IVEII EPPI i! !I!! tL �SETInw - 1:=11.1[J1 rp rc iR°4 1! 4 1:11 i i gi e q s$ G L. '=.N I1� 4IIII ILID_ii��' ill i - Immo_nvlomf t 1 . I ' ' ,1,;,\� zl '6 I II i li iv III°'off ,a'-o•9m ru"aona w �[I I'°"ta ir,. � g it 9 I yi � �Y §¢ I n 3s w ILA' W 4a i♦y J�y '/ �' ru,at y€ " 1 1 g 1: @9'1ill'iiii 1.1°1 I F s.: . ,-,,,i,ri ,i111, ---Ae , zjwi. , ./ ' -,/,......r" .'. !1 ..1,._,_-_ L -\/\/IT 6 I ' IrigilitlEihi;lhiiqiiiiigh:111414114/11$ I g1 a II li -y 7 i 8 ill 111; z ? Hz j z z z= 1 . .x' - a se - ; a " M ii i ( L1 "\. „''`�a ;"` 1- ' 'III • lei tllu!iiiiiiii e t tt i Qx Ei�lwW., i,(1 1• -- , ^Wl 111111112 1 �� � --L---- rl 1 l 11 9 !9i888l9 s Y ii { WIC N 6I i !- , 1 , -- — Ill I 0 .0-w-1 r"+r ➢ •• •• 1 awyn l.nl..•81.1-1.0.1)1•1 Yen wov�*won'owe rnow.s as[ .74� ?—4:4724".I V3`YIQV3HV• I ' I'�' r�A I .3AV NOSIIM 0081 § 1 :' . 3Sf1OH AIIWdd 3JNIS 'i 1 I Q.—.I �NI IVNOLLVNN31Nl OVANYS = I e'1iII°f : mi . ili I § i i9i - § !:1 41 1 Illigliiii i. I • Ili IePp •y� b i sl 9 i Il V E 8 i 1 yB!I"if lia ` 1^ iiil it ° it 3I s l` Q/d,1l"— 4 ill 11 lit-1.4" t i iill I .i!iiiI114; i. a ii i it 1 !K# p q y q of y @ i el e A c , § gey e e Mil I<iS i i 1 l i 1[ ;gl. 0 _ e 11. :zyg gdE§ E° • 4 81 4� b 111 :ii 16 1 PPP i °I I� it k $ ii d Q . iii r4E a P! pi 11. l i ! Eg la il;lei(eK eiig§°. is E@ I-1 1 1 i`i 4 ed .b I: yg eI■! xi i"e!F!1gpI� I1. a§ 1 9 � • 7 � A £ ° YYE � ��� �\ � � e �r I! �„ .2e� a,��p k." tl I § '§E � � �•'� ■� � . I 6 ;4 d!b` • 5 I� �y ai A � I � y d @ � lI - � i° l Q R �@_`6 Yy`41 2 r i!i 1 G vi 9 t l er 11`Q 11 eik Fig g I ICI Fal yi ii@ il@ EO BiE 1°i Ie 31i y O4"' e5iil i' v 3 cell 114 Bs@ f i i , ;pill 5 1 g. 2y 46 @ iliV ivit A @ b 5 is 1 11fy@{i @E /N � ar "y p p! ■ i`.6 �g1 ii i€'� EII !��I Fill .t"ci. hp x.i i PI f 1 y� _[1E1,E i dsi 1 0 0yy 1° ip,, i F b e t g� Q.a ey jj EE 1 104 9 v 9e $l i!IIl�y E pp @ 4 r i ■r iQ � �,@yE 1 a e�a. 9 q� yip � @ �' Ae i°= � � � ��vCk 1 se @� ri a �{@iG4 idk a.rr !ii. lie � � yQb � i IG 1 i ylyi � �� �i?e��i 4 6 id Qi ey �tl'� p-� �:e � � � z @a aBiG i e I'e e , p p p p s D it y I� g i lS 1 r° i i ii i` I ;�e iQy��g�llb p�i`a g ���� g�t�lyli�rii�4 11�y +���1=g6�e'�^.��{iifl������ ll�gsi'yllidd�e�PgBi �i�i ty y y�e� � �1���� dii�€ b�p7 b�it��vEt a§4�pyii Y fi ill i.� y @ te" 1 yy 1/1 i �'i i eye iaf it a 1 IV1� fiNi 1;E iii `fe if iiv y illi •@i ILy gli41;�i1C; 1 1,,Imil'ili 1 'g6'6p'6illiE'l 4 NI 1' 11 b h llE`1 lili"11 4 i `l�4�iq11611111"-"'Id''p igYiill�i'' 1-11"Q 1 V l t 3.��' C� 6 y g gQ[a g{ @ . _ �:W3g�ilil316 n I�il�i Ob0.r l II i Ii_ Gig 14 • i I q i l in' d II Qe g e b • pi Id i" '. @ i IG a l " § l § pEe S'g Es it vi i0 it 'g $ i $ i i e9 Pill !! r� al y q I i 11 e 'ill it g e l�y,pJ.E9!iiyei p1 ii e Ig` 6 i—: a e i 0104 P E € $ ii . S `l. I i A i § q ' b g S. e ge fe li 11 Qe Pot 4 e !Lei 6 e ° d y el! i !I. di°i IG �''§ ■A 1I !i k i'p $e ei II ���1 � 4s � ge 6 s 9 � }eQ 2I §@y 1 � �� � iY zI.. � y F � 4 s. 1 I4 li : I 4 F 'u i I /@8 I° i r F 4§ s a 8-i. i g cg R rc li@ 1! will wisp 1Q �1 ling! �pQ i�g I:il�� ��� e�� :I 1 ,1 i�#� WI� q��@ p9e �e� � 1 r� Sq � gir�}i'y r° �4n OA� � t Ifil ee ¢ � g gI 13'1 qi@ 4 I+ y S3b4 /11 ,01 . y °s it -gg4 s@ ill npi b. 1 i a filed:4 e—Its 6 . p!MiF g e/Oi ¢1 c'� �i�� i pp�""— 'eiip M g�'•g� Gifi{Sg iS . b(`1 i y � giy 1 �a p 6 § �� @ Qx $ !L el •re �te g— r>idy °Y 6l g e 1 gi i le ie �gQ ) 1I'G_Is l N @ i I'ri1aIiiy JI� i %1 1;4iiigir W 84 Ii 9i 1 Ii r I i 41i 41.11 i l ttTTIlE I Q I � 9 i i � � a2 Q 5 li s�ai I�. §g�tl � g.b �IIo '� illiiirii>iii �s:011I.I� !! Iiiiii ,gels Niiil 1iliiiii:h ltilligniridil?I�y ifillip� y� E�,a t aliliiih legliilih bill __ _ _ __ . _ P G 0 4 44400 R 4 64 0 i 4 4 04 4 Y 4 7 7!r 4 . 0 4 4 4 414 4 111111111 N -D ED 1 r i ., fi ., ,. !, ;.;i ',61 (ICI 1 11 P` .I I, %I g smo Simi■ I 1.I -Ililll ililleiii li 1 I Ii B ili i i i l i I 1111{11.1' 1 ©�li a•„ t ral --- r� i liai iiiryR��'yyi I I j •I I,. imellimlyanitiacii Z j j I "`!�= 1 I;iii j , hit (�� '! I MI'' Cp � ��:• lI_; I j I M1 iiiii © � lEi i , rlaVCB Ne4444�n.�■�� 1 F , © q II -- . ' � y II a y ___�� 1 !f au I II ii Ep 1 I g< 14 li j }� l- `�' i j s z r I I .t "J- _ J a G cc_ — Ig', r - - • El 7 g c f yl ti ' LL y I , I _1L_. : c% ° ;' I e -I' 11--11 : s.' re 0, =r 1 IN 1'.Y, r,....11 I I I 1• 4__, El '�i' Cp 7 �, 0 oe '■■l7a e � 03 EIIICE���r • ,.r, , In11.1 '4111 ❑ 1� r' � I ° _a--' tip �_s, 1-0 , ' .. CB ❑❑fill 1 1 i J�—a===aA -_/ • ��1IIIIIIi i ten �� i :IP I/11 q..1 i - x I Epp`1:11.IIIIC 41 tr°� ^" _ J i 1 i., 0 li , - i; oF „_, , t 4 - 1r4, 11 r❑ , 1■■.1M §r ill ' :3'�. EC? '° CFA Ep � � ��Ill III.mn..,, I! 1 gII ai '" y' a9gi ii a :II!9! N�S�M 008 I��� a -^.�"``.�"`�I 3��IWdA 3'1'JNIS i I!Ij a ^ � '.rorw tl�,q".sa.s. ■ g 9•°' � r€,. Ai 6949 0/4 AV D _ pCCG•G/ pI1VNt131N1 OY s�' °la, q r�q ape% ;�� gig q��!_ a ! •�yl•1VN • �i E I4t° 8 4 QQ� i-ai 4elt('li,�qq 4'd1 t, LQy�1�•i�°9 ti aI y ed2YSQgQ iii a 1S y a �� 6�' / E I i R Y�6gp��?c sett eE� {lIij1�-5�f1 i�i6 g% I Q. �q 41 e�l yq� pli�����A �t �6�-'r5° �- �4�`� }°.(!%Q tl�� *r ri��yy{1n t i�g�p t�k is y�%y`ip l� i 4 i 11�: i8 i ° n i ► qq@ 6 I' . 1 ; ;1° �i,�„ •f o t 1.r 9. i li In ! 9AF.,I1 plus �xlai gip!E liI �"lit I q eir Irl # !e i0 10 910rr 0�1 g1. l 1, r5 5 till I 9 P 1 b }•1� I} e Y I c! S �i A tFsty 1'169.9 E. e S 01.4P�� ^4 a i b` slit e r r b e e 1!�-r ie ,� � 6 � I Ii¢ � �e11111011 i! t'�I-9 ���q���. II ���a I � � �'%�.�� 8I ;�g��� 6 i�! 9 1191' lEI�i 2 1 Q qqI I b = ° e $°- t ! OW i!it ti ,i.:�l� $ ,} �I i°q.a �`�! 9� ! ��� �k8 I�rI�1�� 1 g� !Witt,q��� �t a R I'�E� !1.1111'143.04110.��_ % nK 4 i, E 8 i ' # •�II Ii% i e Ie2yp 9 e ! 1?4{ t t 5 5b 1�e�,,��i,.o� � q � 5 °�i�=� �b n},t� 5g� D 5 9e I g ° 4, �Q�� 5'ii'{r p� i�'��,r� �I i e�e 4{ i r1y I�1 = t � �ISi '�{ e I ! +'l%fill 1 1 i I� _iVs1011111 p1jliq`t4 iet94gR a i'9 4'11A q ttivt I i 4� °. 44``,111 1 � 14 611, 1 b.+ Iv li ti. 1t ¢�¢ '391 i �q -fi 2�p�Si� IS➢=I ivo t r ei+ 1 0'y c 4 ¢ p �{g i A��lii :11 j v!Ia�l��� brgg3'4�6 1��� 15 AE �,�F6����VA t'�Q1QRg4_�� S Iie�+rilt� �ceg� g�jci[�§��'a� �id��E���`1I�Q��1�9��4i68I��5ie'i!a i-145i11 ` 111Iti9IrI�9€t:$1141i( t I911iD(n �E�\il Vittii�tia1k lAt a e I %` r.1 1n Ii° y r° 5? 111 11110 is k R q g4 1. t i e �j �! �y gY v p Ba52I. 5 a x t 2e IEq 5�1 69i;�4§ 1 e Vit44 6 �9I��SII�t��d�������y��� � }'���3��i�Fl�l'1 ^ � o •^ A oq �I.y� �'`�'} � gt>: �945�1 , ' a S : °c 6 6N ii �i�lE�t R�i ��4�r°1�1 4�.p5¢�kl +ie�i�{� ��5�li l tii 9� %. IA a IIa I 1 . �l€�lli6� %e�9�II }+��y3li 1!�q9 k i; � Iqi%!�� Iir�%!� 'i l i I' =�9 I'i! �+�� Iiti!si`q I i III Qf E { q 1 I i{. 6 II i4 ep r 6i@ 04 1 41{%�i i� S{y �I I'•• Y f i 'Se L � � Y P�yQ - YR,.�'^. i�— 4 R X i a1 4 � q `1 9I R y � k 7 i � A � 1�i yaa� "" � ����'�g ;II::: S 6,a Bi I E@ �I4i 5 i� 21e %6b a y6k �li i�, E. fy6�}e� 1"�i ':R d yt� p ' 2�ti q�� Q .i t::::::Q� � i �@ 9 �ix ��� "e6��I 9il i �� -� �6] �b 6 y��'�sQ�Spu��•1�.'6% 'iY��4���'� ! I � �! �i� e 1 �' 4 11 °! �31� is Alai`�. la.0 I� � Ii ,� !�4g,�: y I!� es p qI ;•��t: za �i iy�Cj1q ��. ,< 1.110 .aa =1 a 5 A ci "�6A° 616 S9iyI S.1!=i_i.I. 1} k 1r 9 ,z { gl�l�kf�reIS61l�t . _ ti e 9 e55 c 1 Ie1 +2` n'2 b7 tIt::::::. i ` 14�€21�iefi „ i 4111111'bi -- b 1 9���n���, �•t� y ��(° I}�.�� �� i�b ICI h *p� '{rip�E�i61�^te G�ESa;lfi*• A � ((!''`��; t� Ai� 9 A i ��y9 �if ��S�`QQ A��p �6°ey���E� l��Il��9i�' i.z % FM % i yl y�l' 1 �I 1 I iii i I i�i25 1,6�1 i19 p a � f l`1 ' ` EI{t1i�i'1° it tiLlj:_4 kti-ki - (? __ —1— \■ 1 i I I ■ 1 I �I __ Vil ' :, 7_". , _ °en►� ■�� N C© a t a r ''.....1 \ A 1 `---" ■ ., cc,t i'l, ___ LE4 II Iv I \ ..._. lei ler, h lt '' tr i a ��I CID \---- s'\i° "- • III" 4111 gialin'- I°Li—Aril ■ 4I. oirli111 ,...13 z,cy...,,i, 1 it ,. _...,. Ma .;a.63iiisiall„11,4 ..6:2,:n _ °_, — ' 0-11 \ 1 � err as 1 ;; ,ul 1 %IL i took I 3:10410 ,,C1' ,�-- .`-ten 01051 .1 •-....' _— V 4G'4 4 aoo-wrlwlai•norsZ:t = vo'VIOVOZIV i 1 rrnYawva�w�oon-wwan�s�asvx r�r M •' + ..• �_ 3AV NOSIIM 0084 a ' .3N • ivnouvNaRu+l ,_--Na 3Sf10H V NOS IM 00 S Q OVJINVS a I a Ii 1 it ii 7I w xx®: a g f V D � G ,� B. 1 i ��,, � �;1 iI . = r 0 y i .ii 1 a1 11 ;''& ' ' it I ii § • .1 80001 i ill , Y t11 I 1 " !k''�� ! a I Itl a A S/4, 1� at 1 01:4•.'1 i `- I4 y QLL • F5/7 j f � ,1, , �,1 i t O 5 liar' 1 '1 Lli i" ?; A3 kw, tilt • i3 i V �i rM fx_ z.E}� 0 ,1 ° .!'i( f ill lit fill g 1 -Ei � n ' 1 1 1 t'e l " '''' t :1 869 = gig, t " n 1 il t ,;t ji ig 1 I Nip ti tlfl I9 ?,11 4 lbw, milli II P1141 ND r I — Ii I T U. =— II 11 h 1 litl ® i T —) 11 1 i _J .- - i 11 T 1 h r, -, i I 11 Niti T el ® t a 1 1 € s L ALT" a i o f ' Zia') it 11 if CD If, °`2 j1== �C© I C© o ', x,..14 �r-�-- ' , e 1,II eaT ' \V lE I 11 T — ' sB I II I II . ---' -_-- {�- ---®-- - _ - - -- I� 1 0 1 y 0 0111 al it IA 11 `I I --� .as = 8 == 11 ® II —a--- ® SI ,.!i e—, 1► 1I 11 I�CD I 11 i II le I L J 11 ,•� - .,,.. 11 I , �� LCD •LCD 1 e&Lin Isms nj.worm lws)wi ,�.�' y�\ y V�1 �/ • Y9'11'YOO1550 5P•>'5.O&5•Sury�.W.5-3995 1.''�.'.i.e YJ,VI CI 3 J �I • •9•ry••Idl•O••Pp•y• ;,ate-- "~ '3AV NOS1IM 008E '3NI'IYNOIlVN1131N1 5..,...�, 'S:•. _ 3$f OH A'IIWVd 31ONIS Q OV�ANdS = 4 ! $ — j F• Ilt, _F��in 1 I I s ��ii a )1 1 =mac !i �� um 1 § _1 _ = s - i �� •... j = ice_ :4 C _ �� } z .,00 • g 4 o wlit — wni r� ,a °Y1 iljt ww 11,1 �_ 6- r d F Y ffW i1�1�: ?;•? lei ' Z 1 5�� Iii ; Iws•3 i5 igg!3 I} ! Ej y2 ..,.. 1 1 Ilw/t " jl1i i it ■■ ,,��I w�� j\j _— `� 11 ,, j ,, lI� 9 ;'a . ... � j gilliiiiiirilaii*!- a is a a az i i� , I F1d i1� e , 0 j 12 C��oW � F ax . f II 1 ••E1 Z. 'I vied I '� . .W Du I 1 j '�i P` I ��� _ I rg II/i'fk '911 1 LL 1 i.,4`,1"-125,1. 1 111,B I. •EE11 �� 1 I,, �I 6 $ $63 1ygI �� 1 � � 0- I ! t t 3 t � _ 1 -... wow .1 11 li Iii !I li t 41ID t,118111:. h. -. . d laoY - i v.a f I --fir i ; I: yo,f a^7^' i • u..•o-•iJ.(1lZ ■ it }I , 1 ti kt: 1 tiii- . 1 r \' t � T T 1 — _ = '111 1.t } 1" 7 "j771'91 11•M••• : I YS n'90801% '0005'is•:101tS 3 113'VICIVOLIV 47 I •St••••Id ICOu•PI•ell• S.:•÷:■,..1r4V:r ....".° =.=..........-r4r:j ,,,.............--.1V, , .3AV NOS1IM 009 L 4:1( •-- 3snoH AlIVIVd 31ONIS i 1 i 1 1 •DNI-iNOolmill.Ni OVANVS -.4‘,...i-it..;-,Tra.,..TzlriE."--4:4 ' . 1 ---..9" . . L3 /11 HIT:.'.-.1."11.11. 1■:; 1;1 s M!mot ,(ill't I PA - - 111ii i•11 7 • I ii;:tre .,' s. .1 i 4111'11141 ___1 4'10411',. 1 1 •115 •ti-I,ilit. -.., II il 1: li ' VI illik-1 _,... . , i ••',,Ii 1114 ., - .1!1 ill II I:,I.. • 111111 ' i 1 (-;-,).ii 1 ..,1,.r.,...,....,,,- sl •. • 111 1 1 . II ''': I ilt • . _ ;, ' 111 .},..11 l!i •Inat H - 11 <71)1'i.'ill -El ' 4 11 - il',1 r • am 1 !,'!'. III 111.!,i.11 mingles: II 1 cim i 1 ' I I VI"Il;'' essEl I ■ 1 li iii' 1 11191_M, I . _ 1! 41 ill Ill II/ 421,! 1 11 1 1 1 IlliPil i r11111111,11.i, I -- -11 /111,1 iliiiitiii i" . 1, I --3. il. t t 1 I:II 9 ill'Illii Iii.Lg. e4„ r - • - . 4 Il irn..) on, ); ., Ili II 0-1111,,4 _ !I . , ,4 -111 11'1)11; emus ! . - 1 ','4 !I 19111 - 4 - ■ I ) 0 n , Imo„,..n 1 4 1 , z ,111 V Ily 1 iiiii I 1 :1 1 I -V, 1 r.. ilii 11 , IhIlliliiii, , - ',, -- E=,e, --! 1- , •-• 1 - a I!, 1 H cli2r,,, ,• ,„:,1 : • , , th , - 1 „; III II . I■Ii., ' ems' ; W * .. i lop I . . ill. - Till 11 ''' Ili III Ai Iii ,.. , . I -- 1 rmooll I :— I■L i I li r'1 11,4 1 , LIJ Ilin Igill,. I III 1' 111 ‘ i N---0,---,‘ ,. ommil 0 i ting ra 11111,;1'1111111.1 I 111111:' .---------11 Cn 1 e 1;111111!' 1' II!!11, '/F % olortlrumiNgl.___, 11 I 11, '111111' S.t,_ 11/1 , 1III 11! Irr. i 11 lliiir'r' I 41 ' ; - ; -a •1' .:/Th ' I I I Ifl• I L___ 1 11 1111.1. --4V - II . ,II MEM I; III • I 4, :Mini 'i '11.moot I. 0 G ; i, :plii 19.;.-I. I III; ' ''' 11\iii(11 il si ft-, . ■ , •I .11,1.i ,I"iii -.4 -1--z-i= -- .. . n • ; H n, .=,=, 1 • ;II; ;',.i n4Iti . . en --.-- -- ,4.3 vli -n, -) 11 ; I - HO), )1,1 . -, i I,t . n , . ; i)1 ( I I i. • 1 II 1 , , E ____ w s.,:‘,""'''Sp i 1 °"' ""°,.° 0:. Z:fr f ' $ NVId 3dVDSUNV1 3nVNOnunooel '0NI 'N0I53a 4t ; 1•,h dx 1VI11d33NO3 S332!1 OM/. '.sz '!;cam %.,;, .e 3Sf10HAIIWVd319NIS a 11111 6 7 b 20 ; CI -- 40011. A‘*11.'", 11-11 ' i g 4& .-..- ,....v.e....Vvrilimo!....ilk "1601.41 .1-‘.44-004.19. .•' 1 l ig .1,__ ._ ... ' � j bb h 8 k a i .ki ! R ; .! 11 41 til II t-ii itrier„.4,26.4417,,,e,:._ ,, Li il . 12. o iiii Piplifalv ikill Ili 15.1tt ;I5 i.' ._,.`iii ° l` . � ii i th '° ; I! ,P r i iii b ' . �� � .II< ql ;! 4 104.4 . I lirt. -Akftk,:iv' IV 4 � : !ice-? , 11! �e�-r r ,'VP� n� . pal • a <0.. 011ie tun%'' g i !- g 47 7 4,41AtioYIE,V.; ,-. ..', ' - Iii;,lh.rp-1-",, g R 4 1! II! il :1 I 18 s. a Y $/ f4,,64Ii A O t ,9 :5 1! 14 .A_ ,n W 1„, % .' t o looti.:„..,„,„„1400 , „:„.......0 ....:: ittv � ,,I. 'A�A AV i:t 1 11 P a ' IPA t § 14E1 VE F .2 II ti F i 90016 VO'VIUV�21V 1.11 L66L-EOE-9Z9:Hd bbsccniRW=•a `. e95TT9ton p1. Ili 96016 V3 VIA021NOW `' j'\'3AV NOSIIM 0096 e 1 '0A18 111H100 1'M ZI.Z `k`I t vx•n'avoaROmeu�o�eien t�' ~3Sf10H AIIWVA 310NIS M3N 1N3WdOl3A30 N3oMOS • {`g U mRRgR,L�YO.. Ikltioitl ! vR'e.evpu ••aui'saieiaossy 102[i I Id.?I__ �1 � M ! 4 J 3 93.00 4 ce �% I ■ �I gI _ �O�++ , N05'00'00"Wr a �� 1J IP art 4t t rte_ r �R e i �-. j B r. e aR ii� � I c Y I�i' 'i _ )( `I a YZ., ib! a g e 1 1.f Ar U o kr; ak 1 Li i <5 °'I DI I { A 141 m i�iE I�� f !� I iI r_ iiI._ Ia g; p i I11b �, i F 11" ►� y•C14 C'w 58F ei v�p b i iJ IYlYi I eI I % I ""e Z - 11 i '''I 1 alit =U a i� M••I r Qi g -p, E� ZQC R m l Dm ! 0iu v .$141 41; D { I 1�us. ° RnS fi ° E a k w SS �, p ,s s �� R , t 5a6 y! �l p II �a��1' '' ; ka �a v� �1 vi �� `� I EI i R �k i 1 riii Ri ' yzo 3aq `° _ 1 11 it d „ {I,g 1 I 1 g 00 Qi 1 t, r 11 j-k t, 6d ti R �� s l‘rl Q e?�� �` p�aiEiElfQ � ©©� u �4� r�'= k"'` k id'1I 6al..- aI QW'1glgird1 ®� I ei k_ "� >eT r-- •■y ;1—. �"a i iii iio 1111"11 ° @a 9' .. �I R k g ¢ i .:-� � i � y a '9. loge iiiP�.1 I �.RRe �• a F 3a 1- �IyI c,, �i`1 ,:tioQaax7c/jg � i �g z i �' �� I: $0s fr � ' ..II� I�� I�� �Piii�rYYY �i � ° 1 p I¢ :i, 5 S foe©Q©LLi C)® 8®®1®®®l°®® ��1'4«I� 1 ��v I - J'.. —f.1:b L.R V i%� Y csi i i i °�k ''IEEEEEE ,a Ra9 �� ��L�� g y '0:. s _g Ip $1 , -1),. '1' i 6 Q�� CO b i j ° - ` ek 0 4. g%i 1 R.'%• R� ��6Y�R a ki kY a i _ �� .; t _ n ale - I. i ��� RR R k �. I }f y 1 r\ 7 N 92 III ji� 6 €� Y gyyy G t 1IIfluI e : ::..�� R i\"" z I \ ° c ).- Q 6 Yp% �• En d k 1 c i 5 lR4 ? � per`' i e\ q 7 �F I i k 1 0 '4 _ '-'a' 4g ` tl J I k kg r r it _`I B b ; Q Q Y a Y a 4 C \ •^C �F I ti, - 11 / A �� I :ii c 3 °�" k z Ea _/I # [ t_0 ..° S s1 pips i 1 :ii i. 1 1 � : _ _ __�— , E Will� =, i gggQQ IA § G QR Y Ir..11 . , ,,, ..., t S z S S `S/�iti Ia b .. °g l g Gy S WI�SCN PVE E r i@ ° G E g 6 N• il r i g 4- r R p B I i / tail! 1..11,11 ? 1 Ngi I11k"° ° --- ----- \c-2-*--..— IX g ^• M ^ R i(t Y* I I i ;R a li Y th 1 tl b Y glx 0- Q gill a it `1 OR k k k R°ay �lal11 ill RII=� kjb11��b ill 6 1 li s "33 Ile�bll al ON'ig WI giQ' RlI �°10 RIr�o Rii 11111Iii`k II I ! b 1'Sigiig i 2 Pt n 1. 1101;1,1,11;i1 b1Ri B.B.14424:1'11. g i I id !IIE ""--"''' I 2g it igyrillii;- ,.if I a11Ffltaii 30 VA1 fair 1 i t 4 1 Apr08 14 12:29p Joe Scatchard 6263559881 p.1 gooWci01,1;6'- , . .111120141 u1. )1t rt. 1 n I it .,,AtcyL. i,eL)..00 Aq A00 /140 (4,_ ? 1 . .. .r.(C.a. _ ..,t4.L a.L.,cd./ T . . iec a .1.. .d. b amt IL, AILL.A4 1 i itfL . nu i Q if.hoti kg o(4 tO,c to 0 a V))-e- I .o.a4 e q 0 0 0 bal- ,„ : mai( (I pi, ok i)al fp),I.ga e(k 4,./f a,.:, d .110 igevyVt j4 (ii(Atli, " (20 t- An.142 q o,,,141,. .t4 t ,,q 0 UL4 / t110, 0(l� GC S L fir a'i L . n Ut. i � LL�1i a ( tt�t':. X ka.. kL0 a ,, � 0 , , ,, . to N,Lc.../Pti alai., a i.tof Gcnd (m :u.1r ( oL.L )LOiW <;• VPl7 ,.,14,/A pi o c 6 u . _ 6.9 eft.4AA 61 ,f. , lO to i,:(" jkattf pA.0 p2A , t•., A Aa.itd- 44,Di e o tou 10,4 ykaal 1141 . . ,,,+,,. (.1 d cr Kte fr k. al t -tiU to"tic It . 4L4214-k f&,. C ha/itiqz e.alt.' ke. fo d but.4toi zo ith,..tt IA,Ao o 11 to ',tea c N WL4 r I&iU 11,1- .,f ILL ( rn l G ,� t �l. J �t a i -- • .A-t-l , az ' It l acA(t, , ,` -t' J-- Q,Lik,b ykur, ti . S(lit,(12 (4,L(Ix_x/IQ pi4pvielame.,1,01.74,21(.e. LiJia1kq #0 62 al ow,,4( o; t.C•Z yiJa& ') i/ • 7 4 JMi LL ytO t a c 1, Ti-yda t c -4/1,0 to O • off .mu. a Alm, (L-6e, I A r. )1((tLe,Lic_• _),1 1 ear(,Ita,:'c(j.ioz.p)sss-9 8`i?; April 2, 2014 Dear Sirs: We are long time residents of the Highland Oaks area of Arcadia. For over 25 years we have felt that our neighborhood was safe and well protected by the HOA and the City's zoning standards. We live on Wilson Avenue and we are responding to the public notice about the 6,025 sq ft two-story home proposed for 1800 Wilson Ave. Everyone has the right to remodel and rebuild their home, but all this should occur in a way that preserves compatibility and community cohesion. The quiet and unique character of our neighborhood will be lost unless protective measures are adopted. We feel that new development should be compatible in size,scale and appearance with the existing beloved one-story California ranch style properties. We did an analysis of the average building size and floor area ratio (FAR) that exists on our block of Wilson Ave. Per LA County records,the average building size out of 34 lots is 2,630 sq ft. The average built FAR is 0.17:1. How can a City staff report suggest that a two-story 6,025 sq ft home is compatible with our neighborhood? The largest home on this block is 4,807 sq ft! We do not believe that that the proposed 6,025 sq ft family residence has any potential to increase property values in the neighborhood. It does have great potential to cause significant negative impact. Sincerely, Alan and Vonnie Stanchfield - 1811 Wilson Avenue Sheri and Carlos Bermejo- 1819 Wilson Avenue Tom Li From: Nan<gramanandy @me.com> Sent: Sunday,March 30,2014 11:43 AM To: Tom Li Cc: Sheri Bermejo;Alan Stanchfield;Sheri Bermejo;James Esther MD;Michelle and Jay Schatchard; Michelle and Jay Schatchard Subject: 1800 wilson Ave Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear Mr Li, Why have we been given only 8 days to comment on this 6,025 square foot monster to be built at 1800 Wilson Ave?Why have the immediate residents not been informed of this prospect sooner?I have inserted an example of a Country French Style home which is a little less than 6 thousand square feet and we need to know if the plans are of this magnitude.The second is a smaller size of the description of Country French. We have heard that the owner of the property is a developer and it is my feeling that developers are only interested in making money.Years ago the developer of a home at 1700 Wilson Ave.worked with the neighbors,even met with us at the site. Since then,it seems they stay hidden from the public until it is too late. It has been difficult living with noise,dump trucks,cement trucks etc. and the lack of parking due to the same. I am also concerned with the privacy of surrounding back yards especially if large trees are cut down.The owner and good neighbor at 1810 Wilson Ave.conceded to no windows on the North and South side of the house. AND ! Since when does a concerned neighbor have to pay a fee for an appeal of an administrative decision?I am afraid the citizens of Arcadia no longer have any say about what happens in their neighborhood. ki �^ N , �t... r i, 'T .,f r , C L t , ,i i r v$ Y with concern with our rights and privacy, Naneen Leavenworth 1818 Wilson Ave. 626-355-5151 G12 I (+ to : ctTy .0F_ AR ..t.LA ks : ( Boo vosoylAvE A1R t - 1Ev .i fe.t?.f..4.1- L° 2-5 Tr on 140.6 2. LOT 2 s PJ 5 mkt 44 21.1' - tq f1 WA-s y w Y 5 ciukl St 0 c F 25 ( )-\ \kLA G \A(.56 1 �- - -� Tate zr-r. 1eec fgodect RECEIVED JUN 0 4 2014 -1(43D W51) h INV Planning $arvicea CRAM M C-t C. Et & City of Arcadia C-1014- 144 41 RECEIVED May 29, 2014 JUN 0 4 2014 City of Arcadia Planning Services 240 W. Huntington Drive City of Arcadia Arcadia, CA 91006 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPEAL Re : 1800 Wilson Ave . Review No. : SFADR 14-26 APPLICANTS : April A. Seymour Lori Gamez I . PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 1800 Wilson Avenue is a west facing lot approximately 16, 162 sq. feet . Wilson Avenue has a slight curve at the area of 1800 Wilson Avenue . The property to the north is 1810 Wilson Ave . and sits approximately 8' higher than 1800 Wilson Avenue . It is two stories, approximately 28 feet high built approximately 20 years ago. The architectural style is Ranch. The property to the south is 1760 Wilson Avenue which is approximately 6 feet lower than 1800 Wilson Avenue 1760 Wilson Avenue currently is a traditional one story Ranch approximately 15' in height . 1760 Wilson Avenue is under architectural review for a new one story home . Due to development of adjacent properties, a survey of additional homes is required to ascertain the character of the neighborhood. 1746 Wilson Avenue, 1752 Wilson Avenue, 1760 Wilson Avenue, 1761 Wilson Avenue, 1800 Wilson Avenue, 1811 Wilson Avenue, 1818 Wilson Avenue, 1819 Wilson Avenue, 1826 Wilson Avenue, 1827 Wilson Avenue, 1834 Wilson Avenue and 1891 Wilson Avenue are all one story traditional Ranch homes, not exceeding 15' in height . 1 Wilson Avenue is a north/south street on a steep incline . These properties have mountain and valley views . Obstruction of these views will lead to decreased property values . Attached as Exhibit "A" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1746 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "B" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1752 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "C" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1760 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "D" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1761 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "E" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1800 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "F" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1811 Wilson Avenue. Attached as Exhibit "G" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1818 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "H" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1819 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "I" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1826 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "J" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1827 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "K" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1834 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "L" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1891 Wilson Avenue . Attached as Exhibit "M" to this Appeal is a photograph of 1810 Wilson Avenue . II . PROCEDURAL VIOLATIONS 1800 Wilson Avenue is located within the Highlands Homeowner' s Association. Plans were submitted to the City for this proposed residence on 02/13/14 . A decision letter was issued on 04/08/14 . The Highlands Homeowners Association has an Architectural Review Board of at least 3 members as required by City of Arcadia Resolution 6770 . In violation of Resolution 6770, the plans for this structure were not approved by the Highlands Homeowners Association. The purpose of the Architectural Review Board for and by the Highlands Homeowners Association is to preserve the character and 2 quality of its neighborhoods by requiring harmonious design and protect the property values and architectural character of such residential environments . III . DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS Pursuant to Resolution 6770, Section 5, Paragraph C, notification shall be deemed to include at least the two parcels on each side of the parcel subject to plan approval, the five parcels facing the subject parcel, and the three parcels to the rear of the subject parcel . Unusually situated parcels, those where a second- story addition or modification is involved, or where the slope of the terrain might impact additional neighbors, may require additional parcels to be part of the required parcels to be notified. A noticed scheduled meeting is required pursuant to Paragraph E, deposited in the mail to applicant and all property owners within required notification area not less than 10 calendar days before the date of such meeting. Proper notice and meeting was not provided by the architectural review conducted by the City. A written comment period was provided by the City to noticed neighbors . The City received written objections to the proposed design. No action was taken by the City to address such written objections . In the words of the reviewer within City Planning, by the time the notice of written comment period was mailed out, the reviewer had already made design changes to the plans and there were no comments that could be made to after an approval of the plans . In the words of the reviewer, the written comment period was a "courtesy" to neighbors to provide notice that a new home was going up. The reviewer looked only at the plans submitted and did not physically inspect or investigate the character of the neighborhood in which the proposed home was going into. The reviewer saw no pictures or renderings of any of the adjacent properties to determine the compatibility and harmony with existing structures . IV. INCOMPATIBILITY A. SITE PLANNING: The proposed project is inconsistent with the Site Planning Guidelines based on: 1 . The size and design is not visually harmonious and compatible with the character and quality of the surroundings . The massing and scale of this home in combination with the home to the 3 north and the proposed home to the south will cause excessive weight of this localized area of the street . The three (3) homes in unison will change the vary nature and character of the street . Combined, these homes will dwarf the other homes creating discord and inconsistency in the neighborhood. 2 . The height and bulk of the proposed home is not in scale and proportion with adjacent homes . The proposed building is 28' 6" tall with a 10' top plate on the first floor. There is no mark identifying the height of the plate on the second floor. The other homes on the street have 8 ' top plates, are single story with a height not exceeding 15' . B . ENTRY: The proposed project is inconsistent with the Entry Guidelines based on: 1 . The height of the entry porch is not in scale with the height and design of the building. The proposed entry is taller than its width creating verticality. The side view windows are tall and skinny adding visual height . 2 . There is a cantilevered roof on the second floor directly above the entry repeating the vertical theme which is inconsistent with design guidelines . 3 . The depth of the entry above does not create the appearance of shelter. 4 . The roof pitch of the entry is 6 : 12 , while the rest of the building' s roof pitch is 5 : 12 . 5 . The arched window above the entry adds another element of verticality. C. MASSING: The proposed project is inconsistent with the Site Planning Guidelines based on: 1 . The second floor height creates massing which is disproportionate to other homes in the neighborhood. The height of the second floor creates a scale which dwarfs the other homes . The second floor appears as large as the first floor. The second floor room over the entry does not step back, thus adding to the vertical impact . 2 . The use of stacked stone veneer adds to the massing creating additional weight to the size of the home . 4 D . HEIGHT: The proposed project is inconsistent with the Height Guidelines based on: Due to the recent development and proposed new building to the south of 1800 Wilson Avenue, particular attention to the building' s height needs to be made . The three (3) homes' heights need to be carefully varied and stepped in order to keep harmony and unity with the primarily dominant 15' high structures on the street. The transition must be carefully managed due to grade changes between the properties as this will visually create additional height in comparison to the southern most property in relation to 1810 , 1800 and 1760 Wilson Avenue. The proposed 28' 6" will create too much visual disparity with existing homes . E . ROOF: The proposed project is inconsistent with the Roof Guidelines based on: 1 . It is unclear what is the architectural style of this proposed building, therefore it is difficult to determine whether or not the roof is consistent . 2 . The roof pitch is 5 : 12 while the other homes in the neighborhood are 4 : 12 . This difference will be noticeable and adds to the verticality of the proposed new building. F. FACADE DESIGN: The proposed project is inconsistent with the Façade Design Guidelines based on: 1 . As the architectural design does not reflect any recognized type, it is unclear what design elements are consistent . 2 . Some of the shutters are arched and some are squared creating inconsistencies making the façade appear to have no specific architectural style . 3 . The stone veneer is not compatible or harmonious with other homes in the neighborhood. As exhibited in the attached photographs, there is no other use of such façade treatment on neighboring homes . G. DETAIL: The proposed project is inconsistent with the Detail Guidelines based on: As described above, the details of the shutters, stacked veneer stone and brick work make the building appear busy. The stacked veneer adds to massing and verticality. The bricks are used vertically also adding to the vertical theme of the design. 5 H. MATERIALS AND COLORS : The proposed project is inconsistent with the Materials Guidelines based on: The use of natural, earth-toned colors appears to be consistent with other homes in the neighborhood. The inconsistency would lie with the lack of a defined architectural style . As noted above the stone veneer, brick and shutters appear busy. It is assumed the stacked stone veneer is multiple colors also adding to the appearance of a busy façade . I . LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE: The proposed project is inconsistent with the Landscape/Hardscape Guidelines based on: 1 . The three (3) flowering trees along the pool on the north fence line are Crape Myrtles which will not provide adequate screening as they are deciduous . 2 . The 15 gallon Japanese Privet and Carolina Laurel Cherry will not provide adequate screening. Due to the grade differences these traditional screens will be too short . They are typically 8- 10' tall however there is already an 8 ' grade difference between 1800 Wilson Avenue and 1810 Wilson Avenue . A plant material that will provide a taller screen is necessitated. 3 . The front entry and driveway specifications are ambiguous . The rendering reflects some type of pattern, however the specification identifies an acid-wash driveway with paver/flagstone band. The patterned driveway appears busy and if it is a stamped concrete will have a fake appearance . The driveway should be all one consistent style to reduce the concrete massing. J. FENCES/WALLS : Consistent K. AFFECT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES : The proposed project is inconsistent with the Affect on Adjacent Properties based on: 1 . There are many full sized windows and doors on the south elevation. Due to the grade difference this may be visible to the home to the south. Careful consideration in relation to the proposed new home for 1760 Wilson Avenue will be needed to address privacy between the properties . 2 . There is minimal articulation of the south side elevation creating a long flat wall . 3 . There is a two story flat blank wall on the north elevation that creates a visual unappealing mass . 6 4. The proposed height of this home will obstruct mountain views to the north for the home to the south (1760 Wilson Avenue) . 5. The proposed height will obstruct valley views to the south for the home to the north (1810 Wilson Avenue) . Iv. CONCLUSION The proposed building for 1800 Wilson Avenue violates the principles of harmony and compatibility as it relates to adjacent homes. It will create a visual "dwarfing" of adjacent homes. This proposal will cause a decrease in property values to the neighborhood. This proposal should be declined based on a lack of compatibility and harmony with the neighborhood. Respectfully Submitted, 04/1(\-e_ 7-1.; 1.J�� oti. -7 ve.By 11141*-/� ge,ry. �-p ttil ��San pt Jeri]. A. -ymour Avc/ /1614 Hi-, Oaks Dr. / ,1 he fr / AI 6a1L4 f'°/v /7 Name Address Vh/A,&t: /fie 1,eh2 -//e. By GPI LLY✓yV��vy NAadmderess E. Goodvret-i Ave. /6 ' / > fie / / 6 /s4y.� 7 4 . The proposed height of this home will obstruct mountain views to the north for the home to the south (1760 Wilson Avenue) . 5 . The proposed height will obstruct valley views to the south for the home to the north (1810 Wilson Avenue) . IV. CONCLUSION The proposed building for 1800 Wilson Avenue violates the principles of harmony and compatibility as it relates to adjacent hcmes. It will create a visual "dwarfing" of adjacent homes. This s. This proposal will cause a decrease in property values to the neighborhood. This proposal should be declined based on a lack of compatibility and harmony. OT6k Respectfully ca;n4 spectfully Submitted,% _ /0/ idd / By c4dwcatz..ctek l V/5> t 'v,_950 . die April A. Seymour 1614 Highland Oaks Dr. /Aeu -e./o /pig ,1 Sd 1 Avenue_ I By /44 Name 17 -2 Address 110 L \ 4 5 W is o v, Ca r IBS Qe rm _ ;..- �. � By 1Q � 1 IS 1Ah[s f ame /7C l /Xsp Address ,c! tr0 / 9371 ia 7447771/ /6//?7 )1,1Q)4.60 2,1cdtrb I'w3-3 &Aestakat ' t » 2Ci RAIsm eve • C{ IN 1•, ..1‘41"11- 7 °r rap. .�,y •;t iN EXHIBIT A Pik' � 1/� ! �. -• � �� ]� w , .4 • lki 1_i r, '.ter rt. lit - . Li___l a I EXHIBIT B y A I Si 1: lig' :, -4,„ a I c .• f- .:.1 EXHIBIT C -,.. -4‘ , '-4- ,•: "-4'-., ..„4 • $' ' . .,■141, ''T •• '''' ,,--':- - . -744?.:.• ' " • ',:Uri :-•i- .'- . .. ,:,..... •:_.: , , -, . .... ., .„ • -. t' . , . , , ' .' ,44,41 .' ' ,.• • f. .. . 0. '• :*. .r , • :: ..,•,..1, • - , • ••• , ../... .. .> P..*••-,i•- _, . . . :...• . or w -• .- #,.. ,..............__....,_„.„.......z.„.„.., _....„ .„.._,....,...._....,:_„,,,..,„,..•-•_:•,—..„••. . ,IY .:::.- 14 •,• :iiA74071.4i,,,o- -',' • •••'.--.•'•.-•.- ,!- -r=7. low.,.. „. ... A! I .. . . , -, - , • . . ..... . ' ''''',''''..`` - '' -',(...-,14::::.,,?.7e;',,g''.•'.''',,,",S:',■:',%''i;''',' ,r:', . • 101''''141%Sleit *Oh . , ,_•. ....... . .,....- ' EXHIBIT D .O y i • • • • artm EXHIBIT E y R., 4. •� ��' .,� `� ?cif• ° r yt " ' y p. ^ Y ,, . aH I1 '4 , 1 A r a �. '� 1 _ ___ , 2::t:', �.,; .. Sri :^.ate. ..; sz..,�a,i.,.."a _,�,. EXHIBIT F ffi v ti r �►, - !. o re'ogi` IOW EXHIBIT G f , • • • ,• - t ill� ' EXHIBIT H • i • EXHIBIT I 4' N N .;, � C, y f ... EXHIBIT J l ,J _'qa Olt V. , ro ... H4 r - r. 1+°P 'I-it . t z ' ' ,'< +• (F ,7 k t X , J + _ r -1 , • �Q y " ? _ '01 !' -.k 1e 7- _ -. x 'Z., " .s#-44-,,-....'7,-14" 1`.y .,r s .. £" tt= tr.rti .£ ..F � .� ?7 y,¢Lnj .7f } r7V'b$ r �Wt qty � 3iw If--',,4,-,),:4's xv � 1 -1 y'z'Y+-!f e ? {, ,. " h r� w tw�,„7; , .1:47 L--V4 : 'C.!<w� +` a Q z� %NT +- j, � Y .' ,r4 xfi '? , F� 0 •s.s,.i l t . T 7F ' y y ' -i. + r y ',. -- 'j.4'i" z ' t K'`'tt.. s w 1--4,1-' 'S gV� .. s r ', ; 74 44'= '' ...su ..-‘it:::' g3g r£ K c'" t yy e�d c. k. a ' :41.:1:, F , , - } V' 't W Z i. � 4 � �6 .k xi . i fivilt- , fix om a E� 2�,_ y � t r T � '� k a 4 ",'1..3%,417.,..,-,'',-- i.. .-,... .fi...,.r;. ,24.. ; ` -E -,�a�"4, ,::; TILI.,s sNI tr l � ."-„, 4. EXHIBIT K • 4 _Of .4k 4414 111 EXHIBIT L • • ifih■ � I I fix. EXHIBIT M b ,. Protected Tree Report: Tree Survey, Encroachment, Protection and Mitigation 1800 Wilson Avenue Arcadia, CA 91006 Prepared For: Mr. Robert Tong Sanyao International, Inc. 255 E. Santa Clara Street, #200 Arcadia CA 91006 Tel: (626) 446-8048 Fax: (626) 446-7090 Email: Sanyao888 @aol.com Prepared By: Michael Crane Arbor Care, Inc. P.O. Box 51122 Pasadena, CA 91115 Tel: (626) 737-4007 Fax: (626) 737-4007 Email: info @arborcareinc.net February 2014 Table of Contents Summary of Data 1 Background and Purpose of Report 1 Project Location, Description& Tree Ordinance 2 Observations &Analysis 4 Tree Characteristics&Health Matrix 5 Construction Impact Matrix 6 Findings 7 Further Recommendations. . 7 Appendix A-Photos 8 Appendix B -Protected Tree Construction Impact Guidelines 10 Appendix C - Soil and Root Protection Within the TPZ 16 Author's Certifications 17 Certification of Performance 18 Topographic Site Plan Pocket at back Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 SUMMARY OF DATA Total number of live Protected Trees on property including street trees located in the adjacent public right-of-way area 1 Total number of off-site Protected Trees with canopies (driplines) encroaching onto the property 0 Total number of dead or nearly dead Protected Trees on site 0 Total number of live Protected Trees to be preserved 1 Total number of live Protected Trees to be removed 0 Total number of Protected Trees to be relocated to on-site locations 0 Total number of Protected Trees to be impacted by construction within dripline (encroached) 1 Total number of live Protected Trees with no dripline encroachments 0 Total number of proposed mitigation trees to be planted on site 0 BACKGROUND & PURPOSE I was retained by the Project Manager, Mr. Robert Tong of Sanyao International, Inc.to be the consulting arborist for the planned redevelopment of the property located at 1800 Wilson Ave., Arcadia. There is a Protected Trees located on the property. The proposed construction may impact this tree and this report will serve to both notify the City of Arcadia Planning Division of the extent of the potential impacts as well as to inform the builder of the proper protection measures which must be taken in order to preserve it. As part of my preparation for this report I made a site visit to the property on 2014. I met with Mr. Tong at that time to view and discuss the proposed construction plans as they relate to the preservation of the Protected Tree. 1 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 PROJECT LOCATION & DESCRIPTION C G ranly eVIP Ave m I tom; Z ill r 9 ea ri Lcrdli'n D1 t� a uff I...., bl N Sierra Madre Blvd c s.* The property is approximately five blocks east of Santa Anita;just south of Grandview. Above map courtesy of Mapquest.com. The property consists of a one story single-family residence that appears to be in fair condition. The home will be demolished and the property redeveloped into a two story single family home. The landscape is maintained and is in good condition. The trees on the property, including the Protected Trees appear to be in good health and structural conditions. The landscape will be renovated and the Protected Trees will be incorporated into the new design; with cultural improvements that will benefit the health of the Protected Oak Trees. 2 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 -1'7 .xP,. �,t , r . ts CI -r w. ill t.. � 7 r % ' LV k.' ,-::,,,-.', " ' %,. , it'0*,,,. :+.tip J ' Y . -t , -,P 1 � r t t fir, This aerial view (courtesy of Google Maps) has been illustrated to show the approximate boundary lines (orange). The locations of the Protected Tree is numbered in yellow. City of Arcadia Tree Ordinance On January 21, 1992 the City Council adopted Ordinance N.o. 1962 recognizing oak trees as significant aesthetic and ecological resources and establishing criteria for the preservation of oak trees. The regulations(Chapter 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code)provide that the following oak trees shall not be removed,relocated, damaged, or have their protected zones encroached upon unless an Oak Tree Permit is granted: • Engelmann Oaks (Quercus engelmannii) or Coast Live Oak, California Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia)which have a trunk diameter larger than four(4) inches measured at a point four and one half(4 1/2)feet above the crown root, or,two (2)or more trunks meas uring three (3) inches each or greater in diameter, measured at a point four and one half(4 '/2)feet above the crown root. • Any other living oak tree with a trunk diameter larger than twelve (12) inches measured at a point four and one half(4 '/2)feet above the crown root, or, two (2) or more trunks measuring ten(10) inches each or greater in diameter measured at a point four and one half(4 %) feet above the crown root. 3 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 FIELD OBSERVATIONS & DESIGN ANALYSIS Refer to Site Plan located in pocket at back of this report,Tree Characteristics and Health Matrix on page 5, Construction Impacts Matrix on page 6 and Photos in Appendix A,page 8. The Protected Tree is located in the front yard area, surrounded by a circular driveway. The driveway comes within two feet of the trunk on its north side. Under the dripline,besides the asphalt driveway surface, is turfgrass. Despite the turfgrass setting the tree appears to be in good health and condition. Tree#1 —40" coast live oak: The existing driveway will be replaced. It will be slightly relocated from it's existing location so that more space can be provided between the pavement and the trunk. The new driveway will not encroach any closer than ten feet from the trunk. The existing turf within the dripline will be removed and the landscape will be renovated with an oak-friendly design. The footprint of the new home will be located outside the dripline. This is a further setback than the existing house,so rootzone impacts from excavating and compacting the new foundation area will be minimal. No pruning of the live crown will be required to complete the project. 4 .... 1011 2IgHI0 /.LOON 1100c1 o a o > v Q O N G •° 'C GOOD a ¢� w w AVD 1G QOOM d c a) 0 g ¢' i o 2IOOd �i r. 3 Q , z w 'IWW2ION x c }I7dgdlQ DIAL cc U W S— 1OOd; 0•,4 2 1DV IaAV o a .LNgSa2Id IJVINVG C v H I3 SNI UO ISVTSIQ F. U [— ›; [ i Z dS?IWIS O w K a. Q tea. 'IYYARION a a) w 75 U' M a2if1.LVWWI3AO o1 ►-+� G.14 VI o �yQ f1LVW t U -a Nf1OA CI § � J 0 rA F--� QhSd2Iddf1S v, N o v cn a NVNIWOQ-OD o U U°' - LNVNIIAIOQ X� E w DI2LL311AIYAIAS V alp � • DIIIIINIAIAS X P a cu (.Laad) o a g QV IdS I V IAV `O rn ° w .LHJI IH gIVI IXO2IddV `- a) 0 (Sf-IDNI) N W 'H L I}'IVIQ?INf1?I I o a z 7s E—+ a isb W U O V O g w p' 1I3fNif1NI 3g111 --■ o sjenouzaa goueiq ioj sin°Jo Ja3aiue!U z zpaarnbaa .�alaureip u! a 2 ° £ mil aaSae! slno Jo aaquznN o �a w, c H h %0£ paaaxa o; ;ou Suiunad 4t Q u o a a /0I P aaaxa 03 3 ou 3uquna d .• ` `c-4) o gpaa!nbaU u!unad oN 0 w• -U cd .- ' 1-3; 'b g 18 u -d paaanas JO pa/koala! aq o3 o b U mu! 3o0I je;o3 Jo % pa;euzi3sg v 0. ° auTId!Jp utg;inn an000 03 daap „9 a - a 5 H ueg3 ssaj 2utpea2 34 !I puot3!PPV ai VD c cA ul►iitc)(11.121 .10 1r. 1.uui121 a c 5 c• A d Tuna; woij (Him x £) amid 14,0 0 H low alp gaioaaua piny uoi;BnBaxa U W 'tuna; w0a3 HEQ X £ ;seaj ;B Jo ague sp a uIBUiaa HIM uo ;BABaxa• o c pc 0 ' H o r ¶una; cuoJJ HIM X OT ;seal 3B Jo o 0• a 00 aaue;slp a uUewaa pIM uoi;eneaxg — q) u;..• ° Z w a.1n4on.r3se.Ju! 2upstxa ,Cq pa.IaJJnq w gt 0 On s3oeduxi uoi�eneoxa aaa4M sapis z • 4 H Jn000 !um (aadaap Jo sagoui xis) w • 0 uol3LALOxa a.1a1M aaa3 Jo sapis Z a) 0U -° ° r, z ' NOILIUNOD o � 81 Z H Iz' „a_o) 0 ,.L , 9 1) H U `I' O WWI) 2IgLgY vIU )IN-[III.L N a, N o 4 ¢ b mi o .5 W •5 'd g 0 U `� V) 0 � ---' W � V k• 4 3 Z a H g 5 2Ig IN gg2I.L Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 FINDINGS As with many construction projects, soil compaction is the most preventable impact that will need to be monitored in order to provide reliable protection and long-term preservation of the trees. To prevent unnecessary soil compaction a protective fence must be installed around the Protected Tree before any demolition occurs. The goal is to enclose the largest possible amount of space underneath the tree so that the heavy equipment required for demolition and construction can be routed away from root zone. The recommended fence placement is drawn in dashed lines on the Site Plan of this report. The main haul route for the demolition phase and into most of the construction phase shall be the existing driveway. The removal of the hardscape and existing turfgrass near the Protected Tree shall be done by hand. No rototilling or other deep cultivation or grading shall occur within the dripline. The existing driveway surface located within the dripline can remain in place up until the time that the new driveway is built. The existing pavement will function as a protection against unnecessary soil compaction from vehicle and equipment traffic. In lieu of the existing driveway surface, a protective layer of mulch,gravel or road mats can be used for the haul route area within the dripline. Options for this is included in Appendix C Refer to the Construction Impact Guidelines in Appendix B for important general preservation measures concerning the different elements of this project. FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS • Prior to demolition the contractor and consulting arborist shall meet on site to make sure fences are properly placed and installed and to review the goals for the tree protection plan. The location of the protective fences are drawn with a dashed line on the Site Plan included in this report. • Tree Protection Zone fences shall be at least four feet tall and constructed of chain link fencing secured on metal posts. • The fenced protection zone may be altered during construction; however, any alterations of the fenced protection zone must be approved by the arborist of record. • Maintain the fences throughout the completion of the project. No staging of materials or equipment or washing-out is to occur within the fenced protected zone. • If any injury whatsoever should occur to any Protected or preserved tree, call the consulting arborist immediately. Timeliness is critical to being able to provide the best mitigation treatment for injuries. 7 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachmen 1800 Ave.Arcadiat and Protecti,on 91006 Plan Wilson Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 APPENDIX A—Photos ,�-A =.0-7t rr Cf " x $' *s ^w7 ;' ° & ,{3 s v' rZ.�. .-ywr �. �+'�. .`� 1� d x `�7 ''-o-r r r x r m"s � z �` +`"erg a � ,a"„ }• i'� w$ «'t ,X.- kk '''tii .. Y k •+t' k' J , ,. "' 4 4- '4' `'A.`4a Y'' 5j' 0 •VVj i e - s 4- ;, . 4 ''t, ." S r wy ': Atw. r #gar 5.. .o - `'`'s� . ,: ,mot. .?i. s‘" i t.r 1, A . r r ik i w ". -2-v 1° ,'1 .4 v., •� . } % FS ,4 h *Its. r 41 vf '< �� '.� .�: { ' e4',4# �'' g .. t. ak i PHOTO: The Protected Oak Tree is located in the front yard and is surrounded by a circular driveway. The design of the new home will have a front setback that is further from the tree than the existing one, which will minimize rootzone encroachments. The footprint of the home will be outside of the dripline so no pruning will be required to accommodate the roofline. 8 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 ,i i �2 j ,. q y m- �... . ,_ V_f.y ..; s 4 t mgor or ABOVE: The north entry of the circular driveway. The existing driveway will be replaced. It will be built further from the trunk. BELOW: The south half of the driveway is well clear of the trunk. The turf will be removed from the dri.line and renovated with an oak-friendly landscape. ova. _ x~ ;�."-. 'fi 9 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 APPENDIX B - Protected Tree Construction Impact Guidelines Size and Distribution of Tree Roots—Taken from Arboriculture, Integrated Management of Landscape Trees Shrubs and Vines. Harris, R.W., Clark,J.W., Matheny N.P. Prentice Hall 2004. Roots of most plants, including large trees, grow primarily in the top meter(3 ft) of soil (see figure below). Most plants concentrate the majority of their small absorbing roots in the upper 150 mm(6 in.) of soil if the surface is protected by a mulch or forest litter. In the absence of a protective mulch, exposed bare soil can become so hot near the surface that roots do not grow in the upper 200 to 250 mm(8 to 10 in.). Under forest and many landscape situations,however, soil near the surface is most favorable for root growth. In addition, roots tend to grow at about the same soil depth regardless of the slope of the soil surface. Although root growth is greatly influenced by soil conditions, individual roots seem to have an inherent guidance mechanism. Large roots with vigorous tips usually grow horizontally. Similar roots lateral to the large roots grow at many angles to the vertical, and some grow up into the surface soil. However, few roots in a root system actually grow down. M: 7 ove tie flirov1411 `, Depth In It. Depth In meters 3 - - 1.0 6 - - 1.5 FIGURE In mature trees,the taproot h either lost or reduced in size.The vast majority of the root system is composed of horizontally orietrted lateral roots. 10 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 The importance of soil Soil supports and anchors tree roots and provides water,minerals and oxygen. Furthermore, soil is a habitat for soil microorganisms that enhance root function. A soil's ability to sustain tree growth is largely determined by its texture, structure (bulk density), organic matter, water and mineral content, salinity, aeration, and soil-microbe abundance and diversity. Soil physical properties Soil texture—the relative proportion of sand, silt and clay, is important because it affects water—and nutrient-holding capacity, drainage and aeration(gaseous diffusion). Soil structure is the arrangement of individual soil particles into clumps(aggregates). The net result is the formulation of larger voids between the aggregates which serve as channels for gaseous diffusion,movement of water and root penetration. Unfortunately, soil aggregates are readily destroyed by activities that compact the soil (increase bulk density). When this occurs, gaseous exchange,permeability, drainage and root growth are restricted. The influence of the organic matter content of soil properties is quiet significant. Its decomposition by soil organisms releases substances that bind soil particles into larger granules, which improves both soil aeration, and drainage. In essence,the breakdown of organic matter improves water—and nutrient-holding capacity and reduces bulk density. Furthermore, it is the primary source of nitrogen and a major source of nitrogen and a major source of phosphorus and sulfur. Without organic matter soil organisms could not survive and most biochemical processes in the soil would cease. Soil aeration,the movement and the availability of oxygen, is determined by both soil texture and structure. In general, compacted and finer soils, due to a higher proportion of small pore spaces (micropores),tend to drain slowly and hold less air than coarser, sandy, or well-structured find soils. Water retained in the small pores displaces oxygen and inhibits gaseous diffusion. The availability of soil water is largely determined by the size of the pore spaces between the soil particles and the larger aggregates in which water is held. Most of the water in the larger pore spaces drains readily due to gravitational forces. A relatively thin film of water, which is readily available to plant roots,remains following drainage. Much of water held within the smaller pore spaces resists uptake by plant roots because it is held tightly on the soil surfaces. Plant roots require an adequate supply of oxygen for development. Injury or dysfunction results when oxygen availability drops below a critical level. Root respiration is the first process to be restricted, followed by disruptions in growth, metabolism, nutrient and water uptake, and photosynthesis. Furthermore,the accumulation of high levels of 11 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 carbon dioxide,produced by the roots during respiration can also impair root function. Reduced soil aeration resulting from soil compaction, flooding, excess irrigation, or impervious pavement favors the development of crown rot(Phytophthora root disease). It also inhibits mycorrhizal fungi that enhance water and nutrient uptake and resist root pathogens. The forest floor under a canopy in most undeveloped forests and woodland settings is typically covered by a layer of fallen leaves and other woody debris. It is usually cool, shady, well-aerated, and relatively moist—conditions that favor normal root growth. When the natural leaf litter is removed and when a tree's lower canopy is pruned up to provide clearance,the absorbing roots in the upper few inches of the soil experience higher soil temperatures and increased desiccation due to direct exposure to sunlight. Minimizing the Effects of Construction and Development on Tree Root Systems Activities that injure roots or adversely affect the root zone should be avoided or kept as far from the trunk as possible. Design changes or alternative building practices that avoid or minimize construction-related impacts should be considered and proposed when applicable. Soil Compaction Soils are intentionally compacted under structures, sidewalks,reads,parking areas, and load-bearing fill to prevent subsidence, and to prevent soil movement on slopes. Although unintentional, soil within the root zone of trees is often compacted by unrestricted foot traffic,parking of vehicles, operation of heavy equipment, and during installation of fill. Compaction destroys the soil's natural porosity by eliminating much of the air space contained within it. It leaves the soil hardm impenetrable and largely unfavorable for root growth. The soil's natural porosity, which allows for water movement and storage, gaseous exchange, and root penetration, is greatly reduced. Consequently,root growth and tree health suffer. Soil compaction is best managed by preventing it. Bulk density is used to describe a soil's porosity, or the amount of space between soil particles and aggregates. High bulk densities indicate a low percentage of total pore space. Pavement Paving over the root systems of trees is another serious problem because it reduces the gaseous diffusion and soil moisture. Most paving materials are relatively impervious to water penetration and typically divert water away from a tree's root zone. Cracks and expansion joints do,though, allow for some water infiltration into the soil below. Of greater concern, is the loss of roots from excavation to achieve the required grade, and the necessary compaction to prevent subsidence. Once the soil surface is compacted, a 12 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February base material is then added and compacted as well. With that done, the surface can th la n be paved. Thus,pavement within the root zones of trees can damage roots and create unfavorable soil conditions. One alternative to minimize pavement impacts is to consider placing the pavement on the natural grade over a layer of minimally compacted base material. To reduce sub-grade compaction, consider using reinforced concrete or asphalt over a goetextile blanket to help stabilize the soil. On-grade patios or paving that covers more than one-third of the tree protection zone (TPZ) should be constructed using permeable materials that allow aeration and water penetration. Soil under permeable surfaces should not be compacted to more than 80 percent. Excavation and root pruning Excavation within the root zones of trees should be avoided as much as possible. The extent of root pruning(selective)or cutting(non-selective) should be based on the species growth characteristics and adaptive traits,environmental conditions, age,health, crown size, density, live crown ration and structural condition of the tree. The timing of the root pruning or cutting is another important consideration. Moderate to severe root loss during droughts or particularly hot periods can cause serious water-deficit injury or death. When root pruning/cutting is unavoidable, roots should be pruned or cut as far from the trunk as possible. Cutting roots on more than one side of a tree should also be avoided. Root cutting extending more than half-way around a tree should generally be no closer than about 10 times the trunk diameter. Recommended distances range from as little as 6 times trunk diameter(DBH) for young trees to 12 times trunk diameter for mature trees. The size of the TPZ should, however, be increased for over mature and declining trees and species that are sensitive to root loss. The minimum distance from the trunk that roots can be cut on one side of the tree without destabilizing it, is a distance equal to about three times the diameter(DBH) of the trunk. Roots severed within that distance provide little or no structural support. Root pruning or cutting distances from the trunk should be greater for trees that lean and/or those growing on shallow or wet soil. In cases where the proposed grading will adversely affect trees designated for retention, special attention should be given to proper root pruning and post-construction care for injured trees. Where structural footings are required for foundations,retaining walls, etc., and roots larger than 2 inches in diameter will be impacted, consider design changes or alternative building methods. When excavation within 5 times trunk diameter is unavoidable, roots greater than 1 1/2 inches in diameter should be located prior to excavation and then pruned to avoid unnecessary damage. Hand-digging or use of a hydraulic or pneumatic soil excavation tool is the least disruptive way to locate roots for pruning. Although mechanical root pruners make clean cuts, they are non-selective. A backhoe bucket, dozer blade or 13 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 trencher will typically pull,rip or shatter the larger root, causing additional damage toward the tree. Once the roots that interfere with the structure being built, e.g., foundations, footings,retaining wall,curbs, etc., are exposed,they should then be cut perpendicular to their long axis using a hand-saw, `carbide-tipped chainsaw' or sharp ax, depending on size. Roots that are pruned in this manner typically regenerate new roots from near the cut. Roots exposed by excavation should be protected from exposure to sun and desiccation. Exposed roots that can not be covered with soil by the end of the day should be covered with moistened burlap or similar material. Roots can generally be cut in a non-selective manner when excavating near of beyond the dripline. Ripped, splintered or fractured portions of roots however, should be re-cut. The damaged portion should be removed using sharp tools. The cut should be flat across the root with the adjacent bark intact. Wound dressings should not be applied to pruned or damaged roots except when recommended for disease, insect or sprout control. The best approach to avoid water-deficit injury following root loss during the growing season is to provide ample irrigation. Irrigation should be considered prior to, during, and after root pruning. Watering schedules should also consider local soil conditions, climate,topography,time of year, species adaptability, extent of root pruning and tree health. If possible, irrigate the tree 7 to 10 days prior to excavation so that there is an adequate reservoir of soil water. Water can be delivered to large construction sites via water-tank trucks and applied directly to affected trees or stored nearby in plastic tanks. On relatively flat terrain, a 6 to 8 inch soil berm at the tree's dripline should be constructed to act as a watering basin. On steep terrain, soaker hoses should be used. They can be placed across the slope or spirally around the trunk, from about six feet away to the dripline. In addition, a two to four inch layer of wood chip mulch should be applied to as much of the root zone as possible to retard soil water loss. Pruning foliage to compensate for root loss is not supported by scientific research and likely to result in slower recovery. Fertilization to stimulate root growth is generally unwarranted and may be counterproductive. Trenching within the Tree Protection Zone Trenching for underground utilities should be routed around the TPZ. When this is unavoidable,trenching within the TPZ should be done by `hand' or using a pneumatic or hydraulic soil excavation tool, carefully working around larger roots. Roots larger than 1 '/2 inches in diameter should not be cut. Dig below these roots to route utilities or install drains. A combination of tools can also produce satisfactory results,for example, a skillful backhoe operator under the arborist's supervision can dig down several inches at a time and detect larger roots by `feel' (resistance). At that point, as assistant can expose the root and dig around it. In this manner,the backhoe can then continue extending the trench though the TPZ. Tunneling(boring)through the TPZ is the preferable alternative. For most large trees,tunneling depth should be at least 36 inches. Tunneling should begin at the edge of the TPZ,but no closer than a distance equal to one foot of clearance for each inch of tree DBH. Tunnels should also be offset to either side 14 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 of the trunk. For trenching that extends only part way into TPZ,consider trenching radially to the tree trunk, as this is less harmful than tangential trenching. All trenches made within the TPZ should be backfilled as quickly as possible to prevent root and soil desiccation. Managing Root Injured Trees Root-pruned trees should be monitored for symptoms of water-deficit injury for a specified period following root pruning. Irrigation should be considered prior to, during, and after root pruning. Irrigation schedules should consider local soil conditions, climate, topography,time of year, species tolerance, extent of root pruning and tree health. Grade Change: Fill Soil Fill soil placed within the root zones of trees can have an adverse effect,particularly if the soil is compacted to support a structure or pavement. Soil compaction reduces aeration and water infiltration. Fill soil, die to textural changes, can also prevent water from penetrating the original soil layer below where the roots are. Furthermore, soil placed against the root crown and lower trunk can lead to root disease problems, especially if the soil near the trunk remains moist during the summer from irrigation. Alternatives to placing fills over roots zones shall be considered and proposed as appropriate. 15 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 APPENDIX C - Soil and Root Protection Within the TPZ If traffic cannot be kept outside of the TPZ for the entire duration of construction, actions can be taken to disperse the vehicular load and protect the roots,minimizing soil compaction and mechanical root damage. These include: 1)Applying 6 to 12 inches of wood chip mulch to the area. 2) Laying 3/4-inch thick plywood or 4x4 inch wood beams over a 4+inch thick layer of wood chip mulch. 3)Applying 4 to 6 inches of gravel over a taut, staked geotextile fabric. 4) Placing commercial logging or road mats on top of a mulch layer. Stone, geotextile, and mulch exceeding 4 inches thick will need to be removed from the TPZ once the threat of soil or root damage has passed. 5c: I 1�1 � � R f f4, 3i4"plywood • 4+inches or Ii 6-12 inches of mulch ', )tit■- ol mulch 4"x4"lumber 7* t4. 9 i ,i Geotextdte t! r%'Ft 4-6 rnc:hes Logging or ,• is • Fabric ( 1 of mulch road mat ! "- 4-6 inches }' '' it , of gravel ', " ti `sv c ' - -• I,r 16 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 AUTHOR'S CURRENT CREDENTIALS H I +-+ . .4Z1 1 O < ii 2 ei Q �+ E t p IH P. 1 1 1--, .Z. i 4:::" ., , .. g 1 F. ., 0,,,,, 'C' i ri I V.. ... t , 1 4 .10 •;„,., F. s! iI V i' 03 v O t k :•. `d a i 1 Ai I + •. F }l W t, 7:1, 4.• . '. .. - -,. Y.. Y . Y NX, f =. y s a s„+>F'�' !-- W ° _� Y —"' •C ,rs V. Immosisir 41 In G R I - O. �� f V & c w z r i F U 6. W r --,... WN st 1"r -,a a. W a P. V C%1 U �, -1 � Q 0 E a , L n _J+nZ< 0 .7' ‘6 a ..e. ;to~ tarn %° (� VOQ �0 ca a2aa 1 17 Protected Tree Report: Survey Encroachment and Protection Plan 1800 Wilson Ave.Arcadia,91006 Michael Crane,RCA#440.February 2014 CERTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE I, Michael Crane, certify that: • I have personally inspected the tree(s)and the property referred to in this report and have stated my findings accurately. • I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. • The analysis, opinions, and conclusions stated herein are my own and are based on current scientific procedures and facts. • My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices. • No one provided significant professional assistance to me, except as indicated within the report. • My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party not upon the results of the assessment,the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any subsequent events. I further certify that I am a member in good standing of the American Society of Consulting Arborists and the International Society of Arboriculture. I have been involved in the field of Horticulture in a full-time capacity for a period of more than 20 years. ---% / ✓ ---, Signed: Registered Consulting Arborist#440; American Society of Consulting Arborist Board Certified Master Arborist#WE 6643B; International Society of Arboriculture Licensed California Agricultural Pest Control Adviser#AA08269 February 14, 2014 G� i C Date: mega i f tpsMA it (.IfN�LTpw ti �wlttt�b' 18 • ./. . I . 0 -@ ..._...,N.., f gill 2-1 v 0 k 11104 0 ID g t 0 V co g 1 I -g en F 1 il ... 7 co ! I 1... . f 29 r, (5 ...... . E 0 tN F3 z ,r--- N., 9.-= or s g it ? g t 1 Is 15 fr _ 1,.. to,' i-; a Htu° - --- — . .. -: 11 Pda .2 =.p V" da vra 1 ts § I C ....O 7:11 .4c oo, 4– — e, = In V r,.. w--- g t .1 ja F SI i-- CU .12£ "Z ca) P 8 Q/ L. , X 1 11‹ ?Er° IbIS 0 It Vkri tkri ' 4 r- = to :1. 14.• 141 VII = 1 (1) el a. PI ....- ---...,,,..._ Tr--; 8_ 0 2 . .§. CE, lwr 04 Irr, LrT 1 cs 1 ,F-- ■ 0- L's 92 . 12w2 0 PI ■V;t:t,_. IUi0 P 69=-4-- ... Co 7-=-• Vr' 'i--- LISI1 ... , m , I *a– `C- . ,---- 4-"a 0 al(w ood Ave r L2 0 o s 0 July 23, 2014 Mr. Ed Beranek, Chairman Arcadia Planning Commission Dear Ed: I am writing about the Highlands Home Owners Assn and its ARB and the hearing your commission will hold on Friday,July 29th. I would like to make several points so I'll briefly state each. 1. My wife and I have lived in the Highlands almost 42 years. 2. I understand there are about 850 homes in this area and that, as of July 16th, only 65 were members of the Assn. There have recently been two special meetings of the Assn and each were attended by 20-25 people. 3. During these meetings new members of the ARB were elected as were two officers of the Assn. The new members of the ARB do not represent my views regarding the purpose of the ARB or what is an appropriate home in the Highlands. The ARB members feel strongly that two-story homes do not fit the Highlands. Two story homes have been allowed in Arcadia since the city's founding 110 years ago. And there have been two- story homes in the Highlands for at least 50 years. one just three homes north of ours. I believe the city resolved this issue many years ago. Why is this issue even being discussed? 4. The members also do not like "off shore"money coming in, buying homes and no one living in them. How this has anything to do with architectural review is something I simply do not understand. 5. A former chair of the RB recently was complaining that your commission and the Council approving a home with a"small living room and a huge master suite." He thought this design was completely wrong and was upset that the design was approved. I wonder what leads anyone to presume to have the right to design the interior of any home? 6. About 5-6 weeks ago three different ARB members held two meetings, one immediately after the other,to discuss two proposed projects on my street. Some new, current ARB members raised all sorts of complaints in a very emotional way and were so completely out of order with their language that one ARB members spoke up and said he was not going to take this abuse any more and he resigned on the spot. I understand another ARB • member resigned the following day and the then ARB chairman also resigned a few days later. The current ARB members, led by April Verlato have been completely disrespectful to many of us and are so determined to have their way that they have caused a lot of emotion and now some residents are upset with their neighbors. 7. It seems like the members of the ARB have gone way beyond architectural review into areas where they have no business. What gives them the right to judge the ethnicity of a property owner, where the money for the construction is coming from, the size of someone's master suite, encroachment of the drip line of oak trees, etc. 8. It is my understanding that in the United States homeowners have certain property rights and overly aggressive individuals cannot override these rights I urge the Planning Commission to approve these projects. Thank you for your kind consideration of my thoughts. Sincerely, Bruce McCallut m' 1730 Alta Oaks Dr. Arcadia, CA 91006-1701 RFCF:IVED JUL 2 3 2014 Planning Ser':!ces • City of Ar cucn i