Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 1a - HOA Appeal 211 Monte PlaceL� C'WFO'k Y�r Z-115 1POi "z STAFF REPORT ��lUni[y oSl ;o Development Services Department DATE: December 16, 2014 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Jason Kruckeberg, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director By: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator Prepared By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE HIGHLANDS HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION'S ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD DENIAL OF THE DESIGN CONCEPT PLANS FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AT 211 MONTE PLACE Recommended Action: Deny Appeal SUMMARY The subject design review was submitted by project designer, Mr. Kurt Von Hatten of KVH Design Group, for a new 6,967 square -foot, two - story, single - family residence at 211 Monte Place. On October 14, 2014, the Highlands Homeowners' Association's Architectural Review Board ( "ARB ") denied the proposed plans (Attachment No. 10). Mr. Von Hatten filed an appeal of the ARB denial on October 21, 2014 (Attachment No. 4). The Planning Commission, at its regular meeting on November 12, 2014, denied the appeal and upheld the ARB's decision. On November 13, 2014, Mr. Von Hatten filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision (Attachment No. 1). It is recommended that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny the proposed plans. BACKGROUND City Council Resolution No. 6665 sets forth the City's Single - Family Residential Design Guidelines (Attachment No. 7), and City Council Resolution No. 6770 (Attachment No. 8) establishes guidelines and design review procedures for properties within the five City- designated Homeowners' Association areas. On October 14, 2014, the Highlands ARB held a noticed public hearing for the proposed design concept plans for a new residence at the subject property, 211 Monte Place. By a vote of 3 to 0, with 2 members absent, the ARB denied the proposal based on the findings that the design is not consistent with the established design guidelines in the following categories: Site Planning, Massing, Scale, Facade Design, Details, Materials Appeal — HOA 14 -04 - 211 Monte Place December 16, 2014 Page 2 of 5 & Colors, Architectural Style, Streetscape, and Setbacks — refer to Attachment No. 2 for the ARB Findings and Action Report. The ARB commented that the proposed design is too massive for the neighborhood. They found that: the ten -foot (10') top plate heights for both floors are too tall compared to the neighbors that have eight -foot (8') plate heights; and that the house is too large for the building pad area and too close to the slope and retaining wall in the rear yard area, which results in a minimal amount of usable back yard space. A copy of the ARB meeting minutes is included as Attachment No. 3. The appellant /applicant and project designer, Mr. Kurt Von Hatten, filed an appeal of the ARB denial on October 21, 2014 (Attachment No. 4), and he rebuts the ARB findings that the proposal is not consistent with the established design guidelines. He states that the massing of the building is minimized by placement of the garage at the rear of the property, and that the setback of the second floor with the first floor roof structure extending across the front elevation also lessens its mass. Furthermore, he states that the proposed design does not include pre -cast concrete trim features, molding, or other similar details, which typically make new developments less compatible with the existing homes in a neighborhood. He also feels that the close proximity of the proposed building to the rear retaining wall should not be a concern since the subject property showed no signs of erosion debris in the rear yard after the recent heavy rains. The Planning Commission, at its regular meeting on November 12, 2014, considered the appeal at a public hearing and denied the appeal by a vote of 5 to 0 and upheld the ARB's decision to deny the subject design review. An excerpt of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting is provided as Attachment No. 5. The Commission found the design of the proposal to be inconsistent with the City's Single - Family Residential Design Guidelines and City Council Resolution No. 6770. At the Planning Commission meeting, the ARB provided supplemental information that had been prepared for a project at 276 Monte Place. This information (Attachment No. 6) shows photos of houses in the neighborhood, and their square footages. The sizes of the 23 homes on the list range from 1,622 square feet to 4,325 square feet. The ARB Chairman stated at the meeting that the subject plans have been revised from the plans the ARB reviewed and denied. The plans were revised to shorten the proposed house to provide a 3' -0" setback from the rear retaining wall instead of the zero setback as originally proposed. The appellant stated that this adjustment to the plans was in response to comments he received at the ARB design review hearing. See Attachment No. 10 for the Proposed Plans. On November 13, 2014, Mr. Von Hatten filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision Attachment No.1). He disagrees with the Commission's finding that the proposal is inconsistent with the established guidelines. Appeal — HOA 14 -04 - 211 Monte Place December 16, 2014 Page 3 of 5 DISCUSSION The subject property is a 30,949 square -foot, interior lot, zoned R -1- 10,000 &D; a single - family zone with minimum 10,000 square -foot lot sizes and a design review overlay. The property is currently improved with a 2,876 square -foot, two -story residence built in 1976 — refer to Attachment No. 9 for an aerial photo of the area and photos of the subject property and surrounding properties. The proposal is to demolish the existing residence and build a new 6,967 square -foot, two -story, single - family residence with an attached three -car garage. The proposed floor plan includes five (5) bedrooms, five (5) full bathrooms, and two (2) half bathrooms — refer to Attachment No. 10 for the Proposed Plans. The proposed architectural style is described as Contemporary Ranch with architectural features that include a flat concrete tile roof, vertical Douglas fir wood siding, and smooth stucco finish. The overall building height would be 27' -4" as measured from the average existing grade. A maximum height of 30' -0" is permitted by Code. City Council Resolution No. 6770 (Attachment No. 8) sets forth that any body hearing an appeal from the ARB's decision shall be guided by the following principles: 1. Control of architectural appearance and use of materials shall not be so exercised that individual initiative is stifled in creating the appearance of external features of any particular structure, building, fence, wall or roof, except to the extent necessary to establish contemporary accepted standards of harmony and compatibility acceptable to the ARB or the body hearing an appeal in order to avoid that which is excessive, garish, and substantially unrelated to the neighborhood. 2. Good architectural character is based upon the principles of harmony and proportion in the elements of the structure as well as the relationship of such principles to adjacent structures and other structures in the neighborhood. 3. A poorly designed external appearance of a structure, wall, fence, or roof, can be detrimental to the use and enjoyment and value of adjacent property and neighborhood. 4. A good relationship between adjacent front yards increases the value of properties and makes the use of both properties more enjoyable. The proposal is not consistent with the following elements of the City's Single - Family Residential Design Guidelines (Attachment No. 7): Site Planning: The location and design of the new building is not visually harmonious with the site and compatible with the character and quality of the surroundings; and the proposed building does not provide effective and varied open space around the residence. Appeal — HOA 14 -04 - 211 Monte Place December 16, 2014 Page 4 of 5 Massing: The proposal is not compatible in mass and scale to the surrounding buildings in the neighborhood; the side elevations lack articulation and modulation; the upper story of the building cantilevers beyond the first floor area and does not exhibit a lighter character than the base; and the vertical siding emphasizes the building's verticality. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project qualifies as a Class 3 Categorical Exemption per the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines as new construction of a single - family residence. Refer to Attachment No. 11 for the Preliminary Exemption Assessment. PUBLIC NOTICE Public hearing notices for this item were mailed to the property owners and tenants of those properties that are located within the design review notification area of the subject property on December 4, 2014. RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision. Approved .L Dominic Lazzar t City Manager Attachment No. 1 Attachment No. 2 Attachment No. 3 Attachment No. 4 Attachment No. 5 Attachment No. 6 Attachment No. 7 Attachment No. 8 Appeal Letter to the City Council ARB Findings and Action Form ARB Meeting Minutes Appeal Letter of ARB Denial Excerpt of the Meeting Minutes of the November 12, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting Supplemental Information Provided by the ARB Single - Family Residential Design Guidelines Resolution No. 6770 Appeal — HOA 14 -04 - 211 Monte Place December 16, 2014 Page 5 of 5 Attachment No. 9: Aerial Photo of the Area and Photos of the Subject Property and Surrounding Properties Attachment No. 10: Proposed Plans Attachment No. 11: Preliminary Exemption Assessment K. VH DESIGN GROUP ARCI- ITIECIL RAL DESIGN PRQECT MANAGEMENT 165E. 241h St, UniiD UPLAND, CA. 91784 Ph (909) 985-2552 Fax (909) 985 -2782 11/13/2014 To: CITY OF ARCADIA ATT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT HOA 4 -C)4 NOV 13 2014 WE WISH TO APPEAL THE DENIAL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 211 MONTE PLACE. WE DISAGREE WITH THE FINDINGS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTION'S PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT US, KURT VON HATTEN 165 E. 24TH STREET, UPLAND, CA. 91784 - PH. (909)985-2552 - FAX (909) 985-2782 - EMAIL kurt@kvhdesigngroup.com I kvhd(-signgroup.com 3)A'j-E : I /i3/ {+ 10 5351 &1 2,(0- - KVH DESIGN G R O U P ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PROTECT MANAGEMENT 165 E. 246St, Unit D UPLAND, CA. 91784 Ph (909) 985 -2552 Fax (909) 985 -2782 11/26/2014 To: CITY OF ARCADIA ATT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT We are filing an appeal for the, Planning Commission denial of the proposed residence located at 211 Monte Place. We disagree with the findings and have a response to what we heard at the meeting. 1. An issue that was asked of us at the Planning Commission meeting was "What is the coverage of the buildable pad area ". Our project is designed around the existing buildable pad area. No grading of the lot is proposed. We are submitting a plan with the calculations of what the coverage of the buildable pad area will be. We used the two neighboring properties along with ours to review. 2227 Canyon Road is the property to the West of us; LOT AREA = 19,952 SQ. FT. PAD AREA = 8,552 SQ. FT. HSE SQ. FT. w/ 400 SQ. FT. GARAGE = 3,626 SQ. FT. COVERED PAD AREA % = 4231/o 269 Monte Place is the property to the West of us; LOT AREA = 28,862 SQ. FT. PAD AREA = 11,387 SQ. FT. HSE SQ. FT. w/ 400 SQ. FT. GARAGE = 2,458 SQ. FT. COVERED PAD AREA % = 25.0% 211 Monte Place, subject property 165 E. 24TH STREET, UPLAND, CA. 91784 - PH. (909)985 -2552 - FAX (909) 985 -2782 - EMAIL kurt @kvhdesigngroup.com I kvhdesigngroup.mm LOT AREA = 30,265 SQ. FT. PAD AREA = 16,125 SQ. FT. 1 st FLR OF ESE SQ. FT. w/ GARAGE, PORCHES, ETC = 5,236 SQ. FT. COVERED PAD AREA% = 32.4% This coverage is the average of the two adjacent properties. 2. Drainage was another topic that was brought to the Planning Commission meeting. We are not proposing any grading, the drainage patterns that exist on the property are just that "existing ". Again we are using the existing pad area for the project. 3. At the Planning Commission meeting, we were pleased to hear the majority of the neighbors, who spoke, approved of the exterior elevation. An issue that was an obstacle for us, while we were in the design process, was the statement from the Architectural Board of the HOA. "Unless you reduced the size of the residence to be compatible to the adjoining properties ", "WE WILL DENY THE PROJECT ". It left us in an awkward situation. After the Planning Commission meeting we looked for some advice from the Planning Department and got some feedback on the proposed project. We feel that with the knowledge gained about the project, it will be enjoyed by everyone in the City of Arcadia. If you have any question's please feel free to contact us, Thank you Kurt von Hatten 165 E. 24TH STREET, UPLAND, CA. 91784 - PH. (909)985 -2552 - FAX (909) 985 -2782 - EMAIL kurt @kvhdesigngroup.com I kvhdesigngroup.com Arcadia Highlands Homeowner's Association Architectural Review Board Findings and Action Report File No.: U-2014-029 Date of Hearing; io114114 Project Address: 2u Monte Place Arcadia CA Applicant: Kurt Von Hatten KVH Design Group Owner (if different): Ken and Linda Ma Project Description: rebuild: 2 story home FINDINGS SITE PLANNING - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Site Planning Guidelines based on the home is set up against the retaining wall preventing access around the rear of the house. The project set up against a small retaining wall and at the toe of a steel? slope rising several hundred feet. Slope landscaping is native vegetation and vulnerable to wildfire. Fire protection of this project would be difficult,.. Storm water and debris flow is not illustrated in these drawings.. Neighbors indicated that sub'ect property has had historic mud slides. II. ENTRY- The proposed project IS consistent with the Entry Guidelines. 11I. MASSING - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Massing Guidelines based on the mass and scale is substantially larger than all adjacent homes. _ IV. SCALE - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Scale Guidelines based on the project proposes plates of io' for each floor. Neighboring 2 sto1y homes have K plates V. ROOFS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Roofing Guidelines. VI. FACADE DESIGN - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Facade Design Guidelines based on front fa ade is a5mmetrical, emphasizing size. VII. DETAILS - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Guidelines for Architectural Details based on few details are illustrated. Page 1 of 3 VIII. MATERIALS & COLORS - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Guidelines for Materials and Colors based on the proposal does not include quality material detailing such as brick IX. LANDSCAPE & HARDSCAPE - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Landscape and Hardscape. X. FENCES & WALLS _ The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Fences and Walls. XI. ARCHITECTURAL STYLE - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Guidelines for Architectural Style based on it lacks any definable architectural style. XII. STREETSCAPE - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Streetscape and Front of Dwelling Guidelines based on the second floor extends bond the first floor in several places and Ives a heavier appearance. XIII. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA & SETBACKS - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Minimum Floor Area and Setback Guidelines based on there is no flat rear yard behind a section of the house. XIV. GARAGES - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Garages. XV. AFFECT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES & NEIGHBORHOOD - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Affect on Adjacent Properties and the Neighborhood. ACTION Approved/ Conditionally Approved/ ZDenied 3 - a vote These Findings and Action were made by the following ARB Members of the Association at a meeting held on 10/14/14 at 211 Monte Place. Printed Name: John Uniack ARB Chair Signature: Printed Name: David Arvizu Signature: Printed Name: Guy Thomas Signature: EXPIRATION - If for a period of one (i) year from the date of approval, any project for which plans have been approved by the ARB, has not begun construction (as evidenced by clearing and grading and/or/the installation of a new foundation and /or by installation of new materials on a structure that is being remodeled) or has been unused, abandoned or discontinued, said approval shall become null and void and of no effect. Such project may be resubmitted to the ARB for renewed approval; however, the ARB Page 2of3 shall review the project as if it had not been previously approved in accordance with the current standards in effect. APPEALS - Appeals from the ARB shall be made to the Planning Commission. Planning Commission decisions on ARB cases may be appealed to the City Council. Said appeals shall be made in writing and delivered to Planning Services within seven (7) calendar days of the ARB's decision and shall be accompanied by an appeal fee in accordance with the applicable fee schedule adopted by resolution of the City Council. Upon receipt of an appeal in proper form, such appeal shall be processed by Planning Services in accordance with the same procedures applicable to appeals from the Modification Committee, except that noticing shall be consistent with ARB noticing. Page 3 of 3 File No: U -2014 -029 ARCADIA HIGHLANDS HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD (ARB) MINUTES Tuesday, October 14, 2014 At 211 Monte Place 5:00 p.m. st�t1p� 1. CALL HEARING TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL: III. OLD BUSINESS: Approved minutes of 2207 Canyon Road, IV. HEARING /REGULAR REVIEW OF 211 MONTE PLACE A. STANDARD OF REVIEW: Resolution 6770 and City Design Review Guidelines B. APPLICANT COMMENT: Kurt —design goes all the way to back retaining wall, garage is set back from front, second floor is set back from front of 1" floor C. PUBLIC COMMENT: Myna Evans — does not like view of sycamore in front April Verlato — cantilevcred 2" `� floor visible from front; 10' plates too high, everything on street is 8', no defined architectural style Lily — height overlooking house to South John Frame — concerned about height, how close house is to rear retaining wall, it's big compared to neighborhood. D. BOARD COMMENT: Guy: The proposed home is too big for the existing buildable pad. There needs to be a concrete wall at the rear to keep the mud from going through the house. "Do you want me to just rubber stamp the decision ?" John: This doesn't look harmonious and compatible. It doesn't look like anything in the Highlands. Plate heights are too high. 21' entry. Everything inside is big making everything outside look big. It looks like a box designed to fit setbacks. David: It's just too big. Everything inside is big so everything outside looks big. There is no yard space at the back of the house. E. ACTION: David: Motion to deny plans as proposed Guy: Seconds. Vote 3-0 to deny plans Advisement of appeals period. IV. ADJOURNMENT at 6:03 p.m. Attachment No. 2 IW 141 '06-AL / 7 l ° `l VH DESIGN GROUP ARCH ECTURAL DESIGN PROTECT MANA 165 E. 24th St, Unit RECEIVE UIf .AND, CA 91784 Ph (909) 98-5-2552 Fax (909) 95-82 OCT 2 l M4 10/20/2014 Planning Services City of Arcadia To: CITY OF ARCADIA ATT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT WE ARE FILING AN APPEAL FOR THE ARCADIA HIGHLANDS HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION ARCHITRECTURAL REVIEW BOARD, OF THE DENIAL OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 211 MONTE PLACE. WE DISAGREE WITH THE FINDINGS AND HAVE RESPONDED TO THE ITEMS THAT THE ASSOCIATION HAS LABEL AS "IS NOT" CONSISTENT. 1. THE SMALL RETAINING WALL IS EXISTING TO THE PROPERTY. IT WAS BUILT TO CREATE THE LARGE BUILDING PAD FOR THE PROPERTY. THERE IS A SMALL FLAT AREA THAT OCCURS BETWEEN THE WALL AND THE START OF THE SLOPE. THIS AREA AIDS IN THE CAPTURING OF DEBRIS FROM THE SLOPE. IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS AREA WAS CREATED FOR THAT REASON. THE NEIGHBORS THAT ATTENDED THE MEETING STATED THAT WHEN A MONSOON RAIN HITS THE AREA, LARGE STORM WATER RUN OFF OCCURS, BUT THAT IS TYPICAL OF ALL THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE LOCATED UP AGAINST THE HILLS. FROM THE LAST HEAVY RAINS THAT HIT THE AREA, THIS PROPERTY SHOWED NO SIGNS OF DEBRIS IN THE REAR YARD, WHILE THE MT. BALDY REGION HAD MAJOR MUD SLIDES. NO "MUD SLIDES" HAVE OCCURED ON MONTE PLACE ALONG WITH CANYON DRIVE & HIGHLAND VISTA DRIVE. ALL OF THESE STREETS ARE UP AGAINST THE HILL IN QUESTION. THE NEIGHBOR TO THE EAST STATED THAT HE CAN JUST ABOUT WALK OFF HIS GARAGE ROOF ON TO THE 165 E. 24TH S REEI, UPLAND, CA. 91784 - PH. (909)W,5 2552 - FAX (909) 985-27$2 - EMAIL - kurt@kvhdesigngroup.com I kvhde5igngroupxom SLOPE. PLEASE SEE SHEET SA 1.2 "ADJOINTING LAND USE SITE PLAN" IT SHOWS THAT BOTH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ARE BUILT AGAINST THE HILL SIDE. THE CITY OF ARCADIA FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS STRICK GUIGELINES FOR TYPE'S OF CONSTRUCTIN IN THE HIGH FIRE ZONE AREAS. WE WILL BE MEETING THESE REQUIREMENTS & RECIEVING APPROVAL FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THE OWNER'S OF THE PROPERTY HAVE REVISED THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE, THEY WOULD PREFER THAT A WALKWAY OCU URS AROUND THE STRUCTURE. 3. THE DESIGN PROPOSED HAS LIMITED THE MASSING OF THE STRUCTURE, ESPECIALLY AT THE STREET VIEW. WE HAVE PLACED THE GARAGES IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH CREATES A LARGE SIDE YARD SET BACK. THE GARAGES IS ATTECHED TO THE RESIDENCE & IS ONE - STORY, WHICH AIDS, IN NOT, IMPEDING ON THE NEIGHBORS. THE MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENCE IS TO THE REAR & CENTER OF THE PROPERTY. THIS HAS REDUCED THE SCALE OF THE STRUCTURE FROM THE STREET VIEW. ALONG WITH THE LONG DRIVEWAY TO THE REAR AT THE EAST SIDE THE MASSING OF THE RESIDENCE HAS BEEN REDUCED. 4. THE SCALE OF THE RESIDENCE HAS BEEN REDUCED GREATY WITH THE CURRENT CODE THAT EXIST'S IN ARCADIA. SEE SHEET SA -13, SECTION A- A. WE HAVE A SLOPE THAT EXIST'S ARE THE STREET. THIS PUTS OUR BUILDING BULK LINE STARTING 7-0" BELOW OUR EXISTING BUILDING PAD ELEVATION. WHAT THIS CREATES IS A LARGER THAN NORMAL SECOND FLOOR SET BACK. THE FRONT ELEVATION HAS A VERY NICE & VERY LARGE FIRST FLOOR ROOF STRUCTURE REDUCING THE SCALE OF THE RESIDENCE, ALONG WITH THE LARAGE SIDE YARD SET BACKS, THE FACADE IS GREATY REDUCED. 6. THE PROPOSED DESIGN IS A CONTEMPORARY RANCH STYLE RESIDENCE WHICH IS EXTREMELY DIFFERENT THAN THE MAJORITY OF THE STRUCTURES THAT ARE BEING BUILT IN, NOT ONLY THE CM, BUT IN THE HIGHLAND'S IT SELF.WE HAVE DEEP RECESSED ENTRY ALONG WITH DEEP RECESSED WINDOW WELLS WHICH WE HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BY LOWERING THE PLATE HEIGHT AT THE FRONT ENTRY AREA. WE HAVE STREAM LINED THE ROOF STRUCTURE TO ELIMATE A 165 E. 24TH STREET, UPLAND, CA. 91784 - PH. (909)98 2552 - FAX (909) 985 -2782 - EMAIL, kurt@kvhdesigngroup.com I kvhdesigi-igmup.com LOT OF HIP'S & VALLEY'S. PLEASE NOTE AS WELL, NO FLAT ROOF OCCURES IN THE DESIGN. THE SIZE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING PAD HAS ALLOWED US TO DEVELOPE A DESIGN UNDER OUR HEIGHT LIMIT WITH OUT THE NEED FOR A FLAT ROOF STRUCTURE. 7. PLEASE SEE SHEET AD -1A "ARCHITURAL DETAILS" NOTE THAT NO PRE- CAST CONCRETE TRIM'S, CROWN'S OR DETAIL'S OCCURS, WHICH REFLECT'S A MORE COMPATIBLE DESIGN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 8. FOR A CONTEMPORARY RANCH DESIGN WE ARE PROPOSING A BALANCE OF WOOD SIDING & EXTERIOR PLASTER WHICH BRING'S A RUSTIC FEEL TO THE STRUCTURE, BUT STILL ALLOWS A CONTEMPORY TOUCH FOR OUR MODERN WAYS OF LIVING. 11. PLEASE SEE SHEET'S A -2.0 & A -2.1 "ELEVATION VIEWS" WE BELIEVE THAT THE CONTEMPORARY RANCH DESIGN FLOWS THOUGH OUT THE STRUCTURE. AS STATED ABOVE, THE USE OF WOOD SIDING & EXTERIOR PLASTER LET'S THE DESIGN SPEAK FOR IT'S SELF. 12. WE BELIEVE WITH THE LARAGE SECOND FLOOR SET BACK THAT OCCUR'S IN THE DESIGN, THE LOWER ROOF STRUCTURE DOES NOT CREATE A HEAVIER APPEARENCE & THAT IT AIDS IN BEING MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 13. THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE IS DESIGNED AROUND THE EXISTING FEATURES THAT OCCUR IN THE REAR OF THE PORPERTY. WE DID NOT WANT THE MASSING THAT OCCURS IN THE MAJORITY OF THE STRUCTURES THAT ARE BEING BUILT IN THE CITY. PLACING THE 3 -CAR GARAGE IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AIDS IN THIS MASSING, WHILE IT DOES CONSUME SOME OF THE REAR YARD AREA, IT ALLOWS THE DESIGN TO FIT INTO THE COMMUNITY IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTION'S PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT US, KURT VON HATTED .� 165 E. 24TH SITZEEI', UPLAND, CA. 91784 - PH. (909)985-2552 - FAX (909) 985 -2782 - EMAIL kurt@kvhdesigngroup.com I kvhdesigngroup.com Minutes Excerpt of the November 12, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting 7. Homeowners' Association Appeal No. HOA 14 -04 — Denial of an appeal of the Highlands Homeowners' Association Architectural Review Board's denial of the design concept plans for a new 6,967 square -foot, two - story, single - family residence at 211 Monte Place. Appellant: KVH Design Group, Designer Mr. Kasama briefly introduced the item. Associate Planner, Tom Li presented the staff report. Chairman Falzone opened the public hearing and asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this item. Mr. Kurt Van Hatten, the project designer, responded. Chairman Falzone asked if anyone would like to speak in opposition to this item. The following responded: Mr. David Arvizu, a neighbor Mr. John Frame, a neighbor Mr. Carl Sigalos, a neighbor Ms. Suzanne Ligon, a neighbor Mr. David Ligon, a neighbor Mr. Peter Schade, a neighbor Ms. Karen Schade, a neighbor Ms. Elaine Parchar, a neighbor Ms. April Verlato, ARB Member Mr. John Uniack, ARB Chairman Chairman Falzone asked if the applicant would like to speak in rebuttal. Mr. Van Hatten responded. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Baerg, seconded by Commissioner Chiao, to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Lin, seconded by Commissioner Chiao to deny the appeal and uphold the Highlands Homeowner's Association Architectural Review Board's denial of the design concept plans for a new residence at 211 Monte Place. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Baerg, Chan, Chiao, Lin and Falzone NOES: None PROPERTIES WITHIN NOTIFICATION AREA SQUARE FOOTAGE LOT HOME I. 211 MONTE PL., ARCADIA, CA 9100ro .......................... .........30,950...........2,816 2. 269 MONTE PL., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ............................... 29,600.. - ....... .2,458 3. 213 MONTE PL, ARCADIA, CA 91006 ................................ 44,180 .............. 4,160 4. 2231 CANTON RD., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ......................... ..19,300 ....... ...... 2,011 5. 210 MONTE PL, ARCADIA, CA 91006 ............................... 19,490 .............. 3,212 6. 216 MONTE PL., ARCADIA, CA 91006 .. ............ .......... 66,600.._... ---- 4,325 1. 2233 CANTON RD., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ......................... 20,330 .............. 1,910 8. 2235 CANTON RD., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ......................... 40,510 ............. 2,428 9. 2211 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006.. ........23,880............2,591 10. 2213 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ........ 28,440 ........... 2,534 11. 2265 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ......... 21,920 ............ 2,309 12. 2210 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ........ 12,080 ........... 1,825 13. 2251 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ........ 32,930.. .......... 4,342 14. 2260 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ...... 13,800 ........... 2,542 15. 2256 HIGHLAND OAKS DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ... .... 35,530 ............ 2,354 16. 2251 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91 *Oro ........ 10,930 .... ....... 2,491 11. 2261 HIGLAND OAKS DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006... ........10,190 ............ 2,101 18. 2251 HIGHLAND OAKS DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ........ 14,010 ........... 2,482 19. 2241 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ......... 16,680 .......... 2,033 20. 2242 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ........ 13,410 ........... 2,302 21. 2231 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ......... 20,520 .......... 1,904 22. 2234 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 ........ 14,110 .............2,919 23. 2725 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 .........24,230...........1,622 I. 211 MONTE PL, ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT SOFT: 30,950 HOME SOFT 2,816 3. 213 MONTE PL, ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT SOFT: 44,180 HOME SOFT: 4,160 2. 269 MONTE PL., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT SOFT: 29,600 HOME SOFT 2,458 4. 2231 CANYON RD., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT SOFT 19,300 HOME SOFT: 2,011 5. 210 MONTE PL, ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT SOFT: 19,490 HOME SOFT: 3,212 1. 2233 CANYON RD., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT SOFT: 20,330 HOME SOFT' 1,910 6. 216 MONTE PL, ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT SOFT 66,600 HOME SOFT: 4,325 8. 2235 CANYON RD., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT SOFT 40,510 HOME SOFT: 2,428 5. 2211 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARGADIA, GA 51006 LOT 23,880 7 HOME 2,551 18. 2213 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARGADIA, GA 51006 LOT 28,440 HOME 2,534 II. 2265 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARGADIA, GA 51006 LOT: 21,520 HOME 2,305 12. 2210 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARGADIA, GA 51006 LOT 12,080 HOME 1,825 13. 2251 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT: 32,930 HOME w 4,342 15, 2256 HIGHLAND OAKS DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT: 35,530 HOME 2,354 14. 2260 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT: 13,800 HOME : 2,542 16. 2251 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT 10,930 HOME : 2,491 1l. 2261 HIGLAND OAKS DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT: 10,190 HOME 2,101 15. 2251 HIGHLAND OAKS DR., ARCADIA, CA 51006 LOT: 14,010 HOME: 2,482 19. 2241 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91006 LOT 16,680 HOME 2,033 20. 2242 HIGHLAND VISTA DR., ARCADIA, CA 91000 LOT 13,410 HOME 2,302 • y1 Z [I i .1�.jy��llk lip tl ,Y • `�J I 61 _ + �r F� - • J ,.� ,� ,fir fr `f }� x• �� �� r Slllg�e-Farn.U? Kcsidential DFAS I GN- GU'.,DEL INES mp tj ` Vol! 'r 4 40. — r— r At .4 nj! r � • r 6" 41 1 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION A. Applicability ................... ..............................3 B. Objectives ..................... ............................... 4 C. Issues ............................ ............................... 5 II. GUIDELINES A. Basic Elements Site Planning ................ ..............................6 Entry.......................... ............................... 8 Massing...................... ..............................9 Roofs........................ ............................... 11 Facade Design .......... ............................... 12 Detail........................ ............................... 14 Materials & Colors ..... ............................... 17 Landscape & Hardscape ......................... 19 Fences & Walls ..... ............................... 23 B. Architectural Style ........ ............................... 25 C. Additions & Alterations ............................... 33 D. Successful Application of the Guidelines ............. ............................... 34 III. DESIGN REVIEW A. Relationship of Guidelines .......................... 36 B. Scope and Authority ... ............................... 36 C. Design Review Process ............................. 36 IV. DEFINITIONS ................... ............................... 39 Sustainability Icon The leaf icon appears throughout this document to identify goals that will help reduce environmental impacts and promote a healthier environment. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 2 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES APPLICABILITY One of Arcadia's greatest assets is its attractive, well- maintained residential neighborhoods. In order to preserve the character of these neighborhoods and encourage high - quality residential design throughout the City, the Arcadia City Council has adopted these Single - Family Residential Design Guidelines. The guidelines are utilized during the City's architectural design review process to ensure the highest level of design quality, while also allowing room for flexibility in their application. The guidelines are "should" statements; they express the City's desires and expectations. Alternative design features may be allowed if consistent with the intent of the guidelines, or if such allowance will facilitate an innovative or otherwise preferable design concept. Architectural design approval is required for all exterior work requiring a building permit for single - family dwellings and accessory buildings. These guidelines also apply to exterior paint colors and materials to ensure compatibility and harmony with the neighborhood. City review and approval is not required prior to painting a structure; however, the use of exterior materials and paint color should conform to the standards set forth on page 17 of the guidelines. In the five Homeowners Associations (HOAs) recognized by City Council resolution, design review is conducted by each association's Architectural Review Board (ARB). However, these design guidelines apply to all single - family residences throughout the City. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 3 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Single - Family Residential Design Guidelines are to: 1. Provide guidance for the orderly development of the City and promote high - quality development. 2. Allow diversity of style while promoting the positive design characteristics existing throughout the City. 3. Encourage excellence in architectural design that: A. Enhances the visual environment and character of the community; B. Preserves and protects property values; C. Is sensitive to both the site and its surroundings; and D. Has been carefully considered and conveys a sense of balance, integrity, and character. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 4 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES The following are the primary design and development issues that are important to the community relating to new single - family development: 1. Mass and scale: Inappropriate massing and scale is a key issue as large, two -story homes are replacing smaller single -story homes throughout the City. 2. Front entry: Excessively tall or flat entry porches can have a towering or monumental appearance that is inappropriate for most Arcadia neighborhoods. 3. Garages: Street - facing garages tend to be uninviting and have the potential to dominate the front elevation of a house. 4. Architectural style and design: Many new homes lack a coherent architectural style, attempt to combine too many different styles, or have a style that is incompatible with the surrounding homes. 5. Additions and accessory buildings: Additions, as opposed to new homes, have their own set of design challenges. Poorly designed additions and accessory buildings can ruin the character of an existing home. 6. Colors and materials: The use of bright or strong paint colors and /or unnatural building materials can result in a house that looks out -of -place in a more traditional neighborhood setting. 7. Landform and tree preservation: Careless removal of mature trees and severe grading of hillside properties shows little regard for a site's natural attributes and degrades neighborhood character. Lack of detail and insensitive treatment of scale are common problems preventing new houses from fitting into established neighborhoods. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 5 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES SITE PLANNING Site planning involves the arrangement and relationships of walkways, buildings, open space, landscape and associated uses. How well a building fits within its site can determine the success of a project. An effective site plan should reflect the natural attributes of the site while maintaining compatibility with the neighborhood. The following are general guidelines for site development: 1. Natural amenities such as views, trees and similar features unique to the site should be preserved and incorporated into development proposals. 2. The location, configuration, size, and design of new buildings and structures, or the alteration or enlargement of existing structures, should be visually harmonious with their sites and compatible with the character and quality of the surroundings. 3. The height and bulk of proposed dwellings and structures on the site should be in scale and in proportion with the height and bulk of dwellings and structures on surrounding sites. Alternatively, projects should incorporate design measures to adequately mitigate scale differences. 4. The design of a new house should provide effective and varied open space around the residence. This corner house has an unusual informal approach at the street leading to a distant yard enclosure. Consistent front yard setbacks and building scale among neighboring sites create visual harmony. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 6 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Site Planning continued... The curving line of the driveway creates a unique point of entry while providing A porte cochere offers more than just useful shelter over the an opportunity to preserve the on -site trees. driveway; it allows the building mass to make a transition to the open space and to frame views deep into the site. DISCOURAGED: Aside from the prohibited tall entry, this house shows the unattractive effect of building to maximum code limits without modulating the building mass. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 7 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES ENTRY An entry consists of the entry door and its surrounding architectural elements. Front entries often serve as the primary focal point of a residence and should be carefully designed. The following are guidelines for appropriate entry treatment: The height of an entry porch should be in scale with the height and design of the building. 2. Front entry doors and decorative elements such as roofs, moldings, columns, posts, lighting, benches, and planters should be architecturally compatible with the style of the house. 3. Recessed depth of entry alcoves and projecting depth of entry roofs should be large enough, relative to the house, to provide the appearance of shelter. 4. Entry roofs should follow the same pitch as the adjacent roofs. Flat roof porches are generally discouraged. 5. There should be no vertical or architectural elements located above the entry that emphasizes the scale and massing of the structure. Above: Repeated structural forms and unfolding depth of approach combine for a powerful entry. Below: A simple vehicular approach is angled to the house, allowing the entry to terminate the view dramatically. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 8 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES MASSING The Zoning Code allows a certain building envelope for each site. Proper design is often needed to soften and refine that envelope, as addressed by the following guidelines: 1. New dwellings and additions should be compatible in mass and scale to surrounding buildings in the neighborhood and with the natural site features. 2. Design elements such as eave overhangs, textured wall materials, recessed windows and door openings, ornamental details, and landscaping are encouraged for visual interest and to help reduce the impact of building scale. 3. All sides of a structure, including those that are not visible from the street, should have adequate wall and roof articulation to minimize the building's visual impact. 4. The building base should visually anchor the building by appearing more massive than the upper stories. 5. The upper story of a house should exhibit a lighter character than the base, possibly by reducing floor area and building mass. The second floor should generally step back from the ground floor. 6. Cantilevered forms are generally discouraged, particularly when they are used without aesthetic justification. 7. Building elements that emphasize a structure's verticality are generally discouraged. 8. On corner lots, wall planes facing the street should be varied and articulated into modules that reduce the overall massing and scale. Architectural projections or indentations should be provided to avoid an uninterrupted flat wall. 9. Incorporating trellises, pergolas, covered patios, and other similar features can help break up the mass of a large two -story structure and are encouraged, provided that they complement the architectural style of the house. MMW Above: This residence uses roof articulation and a reduced second floor area to blend in with surrounding single -story homes. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 9 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Massing continued... Above and left: Many traditional Arcadia houses use understated massing effectively. These examples use simple, repeated roof forms to achieve subtle yet effective massing. Right: This design creates a layered approach: The arch leading to the courtyard, the angled tower expressing a focal point, and the porte cochere at the driveway. Left: This dramatic verticality is out of scale in a single - family residential setting. ["I Above: A large mass does not belong above the garage doors, nor does a tall mass on the second floor. It is out of scale with the dwelling. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 10 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES ROOFS The roof of a house does more than provide shelter from the elements; it helps define the architectural style of a residence. Below are guidelines for appropriate residential roof design. Roof design refers to roof materials as well as massing and form. 1. Roof plans and materials should be compatible with the architectural style and design of the structure. It should enhance the effect of the house's plan articulation by reflecting it in three dimensions (ridges, valleys, etc.) 2. Traditional roof forms such as gables, hips and dormers are encouraged. More severe roof forms such as domes, steep chalet gables and flat roofs are generally discouraged. 3. Dormers, cross gables, and other decorative roof features are encouraged, provided that they are an integral part of the overall roof design and work within the building's architectural style. 4. Combining two different roof pitches is discouraged. qhk� 5. Solar panels are encouraged provided they are not visible from the public right -of -way. Additionally, roofs should be used to screen all vents, flutes and skylights, and other similar features from public view. Bubble or dome - shaped skylights are discouraged. 6. Discouraged roof types include: built up and torch down roofs, rock roofing applied over an approved built up roof, corrugated metal and fiberglass roofing panels, standing seam and similar metal roofing panels, and gravel roofs. Above: Severe roof forms such as domes, steep chalet gables and a combination of roof forms as illustrated above are discouraged. Above: These dormers are not compatible with the roof line. The roof pitch is too low to provide a backdrop for them. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 11 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES FACADE DESIGN Facade design refers to the architectural features, details, and finishes of the front, sides, and rear of a building. The Arcadia homes to the right are part of a tradition that deserves to be protected. From the 1920s example at top to the 1990s example in the middle, the best Arcadia homes use interesting massing and careful detailing. Most attractive designs work within an established style, but that is not a City requirement. These homes also feature a balance, but not complete symmetry. 1. Facade treatment relevant to the house's architectural style should be carried throughout the entire house with each facade and any accessory structure. 2. Architectural features such as decorative moldings, windows, dormers, chimneys, balconies and railings, and landscaped elements such as lattices, can add detail to a facade and are encouraged as long as they respect the scale and dignity of traditional house design. 3. Large areas of flat or blank walls are strongly discouraged. 4. Garages should not dominate the street. If a garage faces a street, windows and other architectural detailing should be used on garage doors to reduce their blank wall impact and scale. 5. Symmetry in design can sometimes create a home that is monumental and too massive. The balanced effect created by symmetry can be achieved with a more subtle design approach. Features that break up the symmetry may consist of major massing elements or small differences in detail from side to side. 6. Large or prominent front elevation balconies are discouraged unless they are an integral part of the building's architectural style. 7. Two - story-high windows tend to emphasize the mass and verticality of a building and should be avoided. This is especially true of two -story window bays. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 12 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Fagade Design continued... Right: While these houses also show insensitive massing, they share a lack of interesting detail and a flat approach to facade design. Below: Excessive massing of the entry, two - story window bays, and inadequate articulation give this residence a looming appearance. Left: The garage door dominates the house despite the tall entry. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 13 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES DETAIL Architectural details are decorative or ornamental elements that can add visual interest and contribute to the design and style of architecture. Such details include porch columns, decorative door and window designs, exterior moldings, porch and balcony railings, roof overhangs, brackets, awnings, gutters and down spouts, fascia boards, steps and stairs, siding, gables and lighting fixtures. The following are guidelines for appropriate design and use of architectural details: Architectural details should be consistent with, or transparent to, the architectural style of the project. 2. Details with a false appearance, such as thin plant -on window shutters and foam wall ornaments and columns are discouraged. 3. Details that make a residence appear too ornate or monumental for its surroundings are strongly discouraged. Such details may include quoins, elaborate columns and pilasters, balusters, dentils, and keystones. 4. Windows and Doors a. For new structures, all windows and doors should relate to the selected architectural style. b. Window and door change -outs on existing structures should match the existing windows /doors for architectural consistency. Alternatively, all windows and /or doors should be replaced to complement the architectural style of the house. c. Windows should be recessed at least 2 inches from the exterior wall in new construction. Raised surrounds are not an acceptable substitute for recessed windows. d. Surrounds should be no wider than 4 inches, and should have a detailed profile rather than a simple rectangular or half -round section. e. Aside from a small number of picture windows, panes greater than 2 feet in width or height should be divided. True divided lites are preferable, but exterior applied muntins with a detailed profile may be allowable. f. High horizontal windows should be used carefully, if at all, since they tend to be conspicuously out of rhythm with other windows. A series of small square windows may be required as a substitute. g. Ornately carved and /or stained doors should not be used if they are so incompatible with the other building elements that they appear overly prominent. 5. Eaves a. Open soffits are encouraged using the rafter tails to express detail and rhythm. b. Fascia boards around eaves and gables should be narrow (no more than 6 inches deep). c. Excessive use of corbels or brackets should be avoided. If utilized, the placement and design of corbels or brackets should be carefully considered. 6. Chimneys a. Decorative chimney caps are encouraged if appropriate for the building's architectural style. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 14 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Detail continued... A. Interesting brickwork, hinges, windows, and roof treatment make the entry more interesting. B. This Modern Prairie -style house benefits from understated detailing and wide eaves. C. Lacy stucco texture and balcony design work well with the palms. D. The traditional details of this new home give it a timeless quality. E. A deeply recessed picture window with stepped walls and echoing arches of the porte cochere make an attractive facade. F. A small amount of detail goes a long way: recessed windows, beveled sills, pilasters, and stepped parapet at stairs. G. The details on the porch of an early 20th century house have lived through generations. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 15 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Detail continued... 0 Above: This house combines flat fascia boards, unattractive joined gables, an incidental entry opening and quoins with a false appearance. Above: A complete lack of detailed interest has created a house with the look of a stucco box. Above: This addition uses wide, flat fascia boards instead of the original house's finer detail. Left: Cornice detail that works well in narrow moldings becomes out -of -scale and incompatible when expanded to a major parapet treatment. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 16 Left: The large and L IM L uninteresting surrounds contribute to an appearance unbroken by any secondary .` roofs or other refining elements. Above: A complete lack of detailed interest has created a house with the look of a stucco box. Above: This addition uses wide, flat fascia boards instead of the original house's finer detail. Left: Cornice detail that works well in narrow moldings becomes out -of -scale and incompatible when expanded to a major parapet treatment. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 16 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES MATERIALS & COLORS Materials and colors not only contribute to a building's architectural style, but can also help tie a new structure to its surroundings. For new houses that are significantly larger than the surrounding homes, it is particularly important to reflect the materials and colors found in the neighborhood. The following are guidelines for appropriate material and color selection. 1. For new structures, repeating colors and materials found in neighboring homes is encouraged. 2. In remodels and additions, new materials should match those of the existing structure. Accessory structures should match materials, finishes and colors found on the primary structure. 3. The use of at least one strong accent material is encouraged. Too many exterior materials are discouraged because they can make a design appear too busy. 4. Natural materials are preferred. Synthetic materials for the building made to simulate natural wood and masonry are discouraged. Stone and brick veneer with a false appearance should be avoided. 5. Architectural design and exterior materials should be applied consistently on all sides of a structure visible from the street. Decorative front facade material should extend around the sides at least to an inside corner. 6. Stucco and plaster finishes should be consistent with the architectural style of the structure. The use of rough stucco finishes is discouraged. ___ � Left: High - quality materials such as smooth 'y ' =1 stucco, wood _ corbels, and pre -cast concrete moldings give �. this residence a look of permanence and integrity. 7. For most architectural styles, the number of colors on the exterior should be limited to a maximum of three, with an additional contrasting color for accent. A balanced color palette should be kept using the correct proportions between the subtler "base colors" and the brighter "accent colors" on each building. Buildings with large walls should have a subtle base color. The base color on smaller buildings or those with more elaborate detail can use slightly stronger tones. In general, the larger and simpler the house design, the more subtle the color should be to reduce the massiveness of large wall planes. Earth tones are best suited and are appropriate for most of the architectural designs found in the City. The use of strong or bright, unnatural colors, including the salmon and pink hues and the bright "white on white" color schemes for exterior stucco, wood siding, trim doors and shutters should be avoided. However, the use of contrasting, natural colors can be appropriate for accent use, such as for shutters and doors. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 17 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Materials & Colors continued... 8. Appropriate materials for walls and facades include stucco and wood lap siding, as well as more decorative materials such as stone, tile, split -faced block, and brick. The more decorative materials should be used as a base treatment only and not on the entire house unless appropriate for a specific architectural style. 9. Piecemeal embellishment and frequent changes in materials should be avoided. All facades of the home should utilize the same vocabulary of material and color. 10. Exterior materials and architectural details should complement each other. For example, heavy materials should appear to support lighter ones. 11. Material changes should occur in conjunction with changes in the plane of the facade to avoid a "tacked -on" appearance. Ip lm9rm 1pr 9 These roof treatments are discouraged by the guidelines: clay tiles on a composition roof and glossy roof tiles. 12. Exposed gutters and downspouts, unless designed as an outstanding architectural feature of the overall theme, should be colored to match fascia or wall material. 13. Natural clay tile roofs should be replaced with the same material. For repairs, remodels and additions, care should be taken in the selection of material and installation to match as closely as possible the color of the "aged" tiles. 14. The colors of natural roofing materials, such as clay tiles and slate, should be left natural. 15. Roofing materials with glossy surfaces appear unnatural and are strongly discouraged. " F Amended April 17, 2009 Page 18 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES LANDSCAPE & HARDSCAPE Landscaping is an important component of the overall design of a project. Even the most thoughtfully designed house will appear incomplete without adequate landscaping. For new residences and rebuilds, a conceptual landscape plan must be submitted during the design review process. A detailed landscape plan will be required during plan check. The following are guidelines for single - family residential landscape and hardscape: 1. Large planting sizes (24 -inch box or greater) are recommended for trees to make a new dwelling look established and soften the visual impact of a building's mass. 2. For a new residence, there should generally be at least two trees in the front yard, one of which should be drought tolerant. 3. Existing trees in good condition should be preserved whenever possible. 4. Landscaping should be layered, with low planting used in the foreground, proceeding back to the tallest in the background. 5. The use of decorative hardscape materials is encouraged in order to enhance the pedestrian and vehicular experience. Decorative hardscape materials include brick, flagstone, interlocking pavers, tile, stamped or colored concrete, and decomposed granite. 6. In order to promote "walkable" neighborhoods, a pedestrian path should be provided to the front door, separate from the driveway. Here a driveway and pedestrian path originate at the street in a complementary way. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 19 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Landscape & Hardscape continued... 7. Landscape planters lining driveways, walkways, and property lines are encouraged. 8. For aesthetic and environmental reasons, the use of impervious paved surfaces should be minimized when not necessary for vehicular or pedestrian access or recreational purposes. Permeable hardscape materials are encouraged. 9. Drought - tolerant and native plant species are encouraged; however, consideration should be given to the gradual transition of existing neighborhood landscaping. For example, rather than woody ground coverings and desert landscaping, more lush and finely scaled species are encouraged. W Water Conservation Tips 1. Use "smart irrigation controllers ", a device that automatically adjusts watering times in response to weather changes. Smart irrigation controllers use sensors and weather information to manage watering times and frequency. 2. Install an irrigation system that reduces wasted water from evaporation, overspray and water run -off by watering turf from the surface in a bottom -up model rather than the typical sprinkler /top -down model. 3. Use Low -Flow Drip, Bubblers, or Low -flow Sprinklers. 1 Above: Layered landscaping using native plants t : Left: Decorative N� � � � � hardscape materials such as brick pavers are encouraged 1 Amended April 17, 2009 Page 20 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Landscape & Hardscape continued... Residential landscape design should complement the architecture of the house. The design should also fit in with the neighborhood and the surrounding environment. Conserving existing, established plant materials is almost always the best approach. Borrowing from the existing plant theme and the environment makes the new design fit in. The new design should also group plants with similar water, nutrient, and sun needs so as to avoid any growth problems. ���h �1]��]��1►�rrl ►�relLl ��irq Recommended plants include the following, but additional selections are encouraged for variety: r denotes trees that need a large area for root growth) Canopy trees: Cinnamomum camphora (Camphor Tree) * Pistachia chinensis (Chinese Pistache) Platanus acerifolia (London Plane Tree) Platanus racemosa ( Califomia Sycamore) Quercus agrifolia (Coast Live Oak) Quercus engelmanni (Engelman Oak) Tpuana tipu (Tipu Tree) Ulmus parvifolia (Chinese Evergreen Elm) Specimen trees: Agonis fluxuosa (Peppermint Tree) Eucalyptus ssp. Ginkgo biloba (Maidenhair Tree) Olea europaea (Olive Tree) Pinus eldarica (Afghan Pine) Pinus pinea (Italian Stone Pine)* Flowering trees: Albizia julibrissin Rosa' (Silk Tree) Cassia leptophylla (Gold Medallion Tree) Cercis occidentalis ( Westem Redbud) - Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) Koelreuteria bipinnata (Chinese Flame Tree) Koelreuteria paniculata (Goldenrain Tree) Lagerstroemia indica (Crape Myrtle - multi) Malus Prainefire' (Prainefire Crabapple) Pyres kawakamii (Evergreen Pear) . go Prunus ssp. .. Tabebuia impetiginosa (Pink Trumpet Tree) Palm trees: Archontophoenix cumminghamiana (King Palm) Phoenix spp. (Date Palm) Washingtonia fififera ( Califomia Fan Palm) Washingtonia robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) Brahae edulis (Guadalupe Palm) Syagrus romanzoffrana (Queen Palm) Planting palette continues on next page.. Photographs, clockwise from top left: Coast Live Oak, Olive, California Sycamore, California Pepper, Mexican Fan Palm, Western Redbud, California Fan Palm, Silk Tree Amended April 17, 2009 Page 21 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Landscape & Hardscape continued... Shrubs: (* denotes value as screening plant) Arctostaphylos hookeri (Monterey Manzanita) Ceanothus griseus horizontalis (Carmel Creeper) Cistus spp. (Rockrose) Cotoneaster dammeri (Lowfast Bearberry) Lantana spp. Lavandula spp. (Lavender) Liriope muscari (Big Blue Lily Turr) Lavender Mahonia repens (Creeping Mahonia) Pelargonium ssp. (Pelatum) Rosmarinus officinalis (Rosemary) Salvia spp. (Sage) Santolina chamaecyparissus (Lavender Cotton) Trachelospermum jasminoides (Star Jasmine) Verbena ssp. 0', Rockrose Orchid Rockrose Salvia Vines: Bougainvillea ssp. Distictis buccinatoria (Blood -Red Trumpet Vine) Distictis laxiflora (Vanilla Trumpet Vine) Distictis `Rivers' (Royal Trumpet Vine) Jasminum polyanthum (Jasmine) Pyrostegia venusta (Flame Vine) Rosa cultivars (Rose) Thunbergia alata (Black -eyed Susan Vine) Low accent plants: Aloe spp. Hemerocallis hybrids (Daylily) Iris spp. Poker) Royal Trumpet Vine Bougainvillea Aloe Lantana Amended April 17, 2009 Page 22 * Escallonia ssp. Azalea ssp. (Azalea) Euphorbia characias `Wulfenii' Arbutus unedo (Strawberry Tree) (Mediterranean Spurge) Alyogyne heugelii & cvs (Blue Hibiscus) Euphorbia rigida (Silver Spurge) • Bamboo ssp. Gardenia ssp. Buddleia davidii (Butterfly Bush) * Grevillia ssp. • Camellia ssp. (Camellia) * Hibiscus rosa - sinensis (Chinese Hibiscus) Cassia splendida (Golden Wonder Senna) * Myrtus communis (True Myrtle) Ceanothus var. (Wild Lilac) * Osmanthus ssp. Cistus purpureus (Orchid Rockrose) Penstemon spectabilis (Showy Penstemon) • Cocculus laurifolius (Laurel Leaf) * Podocarpus ssp. • Cotoneaster ssp. * Prunus caroliniana (Carolina Laurel Cherry) Echium fastuosum (Pride of Madeira) * Pyracantha ssp. (Firethorn) *Rosa ssp. (Rose) Groundcovers: Arctostaphylos hookeri (Monterey Manzanita) Ceanothus griseus horizontalis (Carmel Creeper) Cistus spp. (Rockrose) Cotoneaster dammeri (Lowfast Bearberry) Lantana spp. Lavandula spp. (Lavender) Liriope muscari (Big Blue Lily Turr) Lavender Mahonia repens (Creeping Mahonia) Pelargonium ssp. (Pelatum) Rosmarinus officinalis (Rosemary) Salvia spp. (Sage) Santolina chamaecyparissus (Lavender Cotton) Trachelospermum jasminoides (Star Jasmine) Verbena ssp. 0', Rockrose Orchid Rockrose Salvia Vines: Bougainvillea ssp. Distictis buccinatoria (Blood -Red Trumpet Vine) Distictis laxiflora (Vanilla Trumpet Vine) Distictis `Rivers' (Royal Trumpet Vine) Jasminum polyanthum (Jasmine) Pyrostegia venusta (Flame Vine) Rosa cultivars (Rose) Thunbergia alata (Black -eyed Susan Vine) Low accent plants: Aloe spp. Hemerocallis hybrids (Daylily) Iris spp. Poker) Royal Trumpet Vine Bougainvillea Aloe Lantana Amended April 17, 2009 Page 22 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES FENCES & WALLS Front yard fences are frequently designed in a manner that breaks up the shared open space that defines a graceful residential street. Instead of enjoying the changing views of landscaped depth, the eyes of the street's visitors are stopped by the flatness of the fences. Implementation of the following guidelines will result in fences and walls that are more harmonious with the neighborhood. 1. Front yard fencing should be as open and simple as possible. 2. In general, overly ornate or light colored wrought iron fences should be avoided. 3. Decorative wood fencing is allowed in the front yard only if consistent with the architectural style and if fully painted or stained. 4. Fencing and wall materials should be compatible with the building and should be used to reinforce the architectural theme of the building. 5. Bare precision block is generally discouraged. For new residences, courtyard walls and walls along the perimeter of the property lines should be made of a decorative material that complements the residence, such as brick, stone, or textured concrete block (e.g. split -face, scored, slump stone). Plain concrete block with a stucco finish to match the residence may be an acceptable substitute. 6. On lots with existing walls or fences, new walls /fences should match or be compatible with existing walls /fences. 7. The use of clinging vines, shrubs, and trees to soften the visual impact of walls and fences is encouraged, especially when visible from the public right -of -way. Above: Layered outdoor space uses plants of varying heights along with building walls and outdoor walls and fences. Above: The varying heights and setbacks of this fence add visual interest and highlight the points of entry. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 23 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Fences & Walls continued... This wall that encloses a side and rear yard uses flat tile caps and stepped massing to accentuate the entry and complement the house's fine detailing. Above: The shared open space along the street benefits from both continuity and variety. Fences should blend into the landscape. These tall, unattractive fences have an uninviting appearance. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 24 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES ARCHITECTURAL STYLE Arcadia, like most other California cities, has a mix of architectural styles within its residential neighborhoods. Consistency of design features within traditional styles such as Ranch, American Colonial, Spanish, etc. has served Arcadia well because it has enlivened the City with variety while maintaining a distinctly traditional neighborhood character. In recognizing the value of architectural diversity, the City does not seek to dictate which styles are allowed, but rather to promote an awareness of what makes different elements work together. Strict adherence to a single architectural style is not required; however, combining too many elements from several divergent styles often results in an incoherent design. Generally, the City recommends choosing a single architectural style as a starting point in the design process. Positive design features from other styles may be incorporated if the various elements work together. Most importantly, the overall architectural style should be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Using similar features, colors, and materials found in nearby homes is encouraged. The following pages list some of the architectural styles found in and around Arcadia and their successful characteristics. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 25 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural Style continued... Traditional ranch combines characteristics of other styles in the City's guidelines. It has the straightforward massing and detailing of the Tudor /Cottage style, along with the rustic materials of the Craftsman style. Emphasis on the horizontal is important, and extension of the Traditional Ranch style to two stories dilutes its distinction from the other aforementioned styles. Ranch style is particularly characteristic of Arcadia's mid - century boom years, creating a comfortable suburban setting surviving to the current day and influencing the approach recommended for all styles. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 26 R A D I T 1 0 N AM Form: Simple, horizontal massing Modest entry expression — roof or alcove Roof: Shallow pitched roof — gable and shed Walls: Stucco or clapboard walls Windows: Wood window frames, or metal with recessed windows Details: Simple molding profiles Color: More contrast between roof and walls than between field and trim Traditional ranch combines characteristics of other styles in the City's guidelines. It has the straightforward massing and detailing of the Tudor /Cottage style, along with the rustic materials of the Craftsman style. Emphasis on the horizontal is important, and extension of the Traditional Ranch style to two stories dilutes its distinction from the other aforementioned styles. Ranch style is particularly characteristic of Arcadia's mid - century boom years, creating a comfortable suburban setting surviving to the current day and influencing the approach recommended for all styles. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 26 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural Style continued... — COLONIAL / AMERICAN L ' A D I T 1 • Form: Simple form, at least for major part of house Roof: Moderate to steep roofs — gable or shed Compound roof pitch (gambrel) part of tradition Detailed molding and cornice profiles Walls: Shingle or clapboard walls Windows: Moderate to broad frames Small panes Details: Small, finely detailed fascia boards, vents, and other details Details part of functional elements rather than applied Color: Pale walls; contrasting trim optional Dark roofs Colonial or American Traditional style uses plain massing and fine detailing. Wood is used for the siding, and fine millwork traditionally is used sparingly but efficiently for expressing detailed elements. Modest scale is important for that detail work, including semicircular vents, window trim, window panes and muntins, and fascia boards with open soffits. Simplicity is important in the roof form, principally gable or shed. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 27 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural Style continued... AIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Form: Low mass moderating two -story mass Arches (deep) Courtyards Arcades Pergolas Wide front balcony on Monterey variant Roof: Barrel tile roofs — shed, hip, gable Flat shingles or tiles on Monterey variant Shallow to moderate slopes (4:12 to 6:12) Heavy exposed dark beams Walls: Stucco walls Windows: Recessed windows w/ minimal frames Details: Decorative vents Iron accents & balconies Color: Pale walls customary Roof may be light, medium, or dark Brown or other rich trim color Spanish styles — Colonial, Mission Revival, and Monterey among other variants — emerged as the dominant style in Southern California during the 1920s building boom. Its adaptability to different building programs has made it a perennial favorite. The adaptability results from a few design characteristics. First is the use of large, simple massing components to achieve simplicity and drama. Next is the discreet use of well - placed, well- designed, and well- executed details. When combined with the simple massing, which would otherwise be dull, the details create an integrated design that is rich and expressive. Pergolas and other garden structures are also used to complement and mitigate the building mass. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 28 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural Style continued... The Tudor /Cottage style has nothing to do with limiting house size to what people think of as a cottage. It is a style that is concerned with creating comforting features that allow a house to be inviting and tasteful in an unpretentious way, no matter what size the house. The emphasis is on the roof, using steep slopes and /or low eaves to minimize wall height and emphasize the sloped roof as epitomizing home. Straightforward massing is also used, and details are also straightforward but highly visible, such as wide window trim, half- timbering, plain fascia boards, and simple exposed soffits. -M -W.�� -.: : -W Amended April 17, 2009 Page 29 • Form: Simple massing Entry expression may be modest Roof: Moderate to steep roof pitch Shed or gable roof Rustic tile roof Walls: Shingle, clapboard, or rustic walls Windows: Pronounced surrounds, wide or narrow Recessed windows Details: Simple detail; minimal ornament Half - timber expression (Tudor) Color: Warm colors with dark trim The Tudor /Cottage style has nothing to do with limiting house size to what people think of as a cottage. It is a style that is concerned with creating comforting features that allow a house to be inviting and tasteful in an unpretentious way, no matter what size the house. The emphasis is on the roof, using steep slopes and /or low eaves to minimize wall height and emphasize the sloped roof as epitomizing home. Straightforward massing is also used, and details are also straightforward but highly visible, such as wide window trim, half- timbering, plain fascia boards, and simple exposed soffits. -M -W.�� -.: : -W Amended April 17, 2009 Page 29 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural Style continued... The Craftsman style is a descendant of the Cottage Style and is particularly identified with California due to the influence of the Greene brothers in Pasadena and Bernard Maybeck in the San Francisco region. The rustic look of Craftsman architecture relies on a spacious exterior — great porches and overhangs — as well as use of stained wood, dark colors, and rustic supporting materials of river rock and rough brick. Massing can be very simple on a small Craftsman, which will likely focus entirely on its front porch and gable, or much more complex on a large Craftsman with variation of massing elements and angles. R�Pi r Amended April 17, 2009 Page 30 • Form: Prominent porches (two sides common) Large, often tapered, porch columns Second floor set in from first Complex massing on larger houses Roof: Composition or flat tile roofs Shallow slopes — gable; some shed Broad eave overhangs (12 to 42 inches) Carved rafter tails & brackets Walls: Shingle or clapboard walls (stucco alt.) Windows: Broad wooden window frames Fine division of panes, especially at top of window Details: Decorative vents Wood accents & balconies Tapered posts Clinker brick / river rock Color: Dark warm colors The Craftsman style is a descendant of the Cottage Style and is particularly identified with California due to the influence of the Greene brothers in Pasadena and Bernard Maybeck in the San Francisco region. The rustic look of Craftsman architecture relies on a spacious exterior — great porches and overhangs — as well as use of stained wood, dark colors, and rustic supporting materials of river rock and rough brick. Massing can be very simple on a small Craftsman, which will likely focus entirely on its front porch and gable, or much more complex on a large Craftsman with variation of massing elements and angles. R�Pi r Amended April 17, 2009 Page 30 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural Style continued... French design is distinct from classical in its application of a few distinctive features. Most characteristic are mansard roofs, which are always steeply pitched and either straight or curved. That curve is normally concave, but convex curves can also fit the style. Ornate metalwork is another hallmark, usually applied in a linear manner as balcony balustrades, or as fascia boards along eaves, but in some instances used structurally for columns. Used with restraint, French style works particularly well with classical and Spanish styles. In an eclectic neighborhood, it is the quality of the design rather than its feature set that allows wildly divergent styles to work together well, and French design is within that mix. :,gym Amended April 17, 2009 Page 31 Form: Symmetrical entry Terraced massing optional Roof: Flat tile roofs Steep slopes — mansard dominant Detailed parapets Walls: Stucco walls Windows: Recessed windows w/ minimal frames Details: Curved iron accents & balconies Thin, detailed moldings Decorative vents Color: Pale walls and trim; any shade for roof French design is distinct from classical in its application of a few distinctive features. Most characteristic are mansard roofs, which are always steeply pitched and either straight or curved. That curve is normally concave, but convex curves can also fit the style. Ornate metalwork is another hallmark, usually applied in a linear manner as balcony balustrades, or as fascia boards along eaves, but in some instances used structurally for columns. Used with restraint, French style works particularly well with classical and Spanish styles. In an eclectic neighborhood, it is the quality of the design rather than its feature set that allows wildly divergent styles to work together well, and French design is within that mix. :,gym Amended April 17, 2009 Page 31 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Architectural Style continued... Modern houses tend to emphasize strong horizontal and vertical planes, express layering of planes and spaces, and interweave interior and exterior spaces. Together, these design elements can produce compelling and dramatic effects. When introduced into a neighborhood of more traditional styles, however, modern houses often present too great a contrast or too little in terms of humanizing detail to fit their setting. Modern styles are encouraged if they involve the best characteristics of the style — the layering and indoor /outdoor interweaving — and avoid the visual conflicts with traditional styles that too often occur. Landscape screening, as an important component of both modern architecture and harmonizing differing styles, will be taken into special account in evaluating modern designs. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 32 ■ • - • nw"�'M • D E ' Form: Simple, horizontal massing Pronounced entry expression — roof or alcove Deep layering of wall and window planes Intermingling of exterior and interior space Roof: Flat roof, and /or shallow pitch — gable and shed Walls: Stucco or other smooth walls Windows: Wood window frames, or metal with recessed windows Details: Simple molding profiles Color: Subtle colors except optional fine accent lines Modern houses tend to emphasize strong horizontal and vertical planes, express layering of planes and spaces, and interweave interior and exterior spaces. Together, these design elements can produce compelling and dramatic effects. When introduced into a neighborhood of more traditional styles, however, modern houses often present too great a contrast or too little in terms of humanizing detail to fit their setting. Modern styles are encouraged if they involve the best characteristics of the style — the layering and indoor /outdoor interweaving — and avoid the visual conflicts with traditional styles that too often occur. Landscape screening, as an important component of both modern architecture and harmonizing differing styles, will be taken into special account in evaluating modern designs. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 32 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS The design guidelines up to this point apply to all projects. For additions and alterations, the City recognizes that the designer faces special challenges. The primary challenge is to integrate the new with the old, maintaining and continuing the best elements of the existing house. This applies to massing as well as detailing. Below are guidelines for additions and alterations. 1. An addition should be designed to look like part of the original house. All exterior treatments should match those of the existing house as closely as possible. 2. Second floors should be modest in relation to the first floor. This often involves setting the second floor walls in and keeping the top plate height shorter than the first story. 3. Porch additions should match the scale and architectural style of the existing house. In general, the eaves of the porch roof should align with the first story. 4. Alterations to an existing house that do not enlarge its floor area, such as replacement windows, doors, siding, or roof tiles, should be consistent with the building's architectural style. 5. Piecemeal alterations to the exterior of a house are strongly discouraged. Alterations to one elevation should be consistently carried out on the other elevations. 6. Refer to Guideline 4.b. on page 14 and Guideline 13 on page 18 for additional guidelines pertaining to additions and alterations. Above: This Arcadia home exhibits the positive results of a well - designed second story addition. Instead of having a "tacked -on" appearance, the addition is thoughtfully integrated with the architecture of the existing house. Placing the mass of a 2 -story addition behind an existing one -story house is generally encouraged, but it needs to be carefully coordinated. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 33 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES SUCCESSFUL APPLICATION OF THE GUIDELINES This section highlights three actual design review cases that demonstrate how careful implementation of the design guidelines can achieve very successful results. For each project, there is a "discouraged" front elevation, showing the project as originally submitted, and an "encouraged" front elevation, showing the project in its final approved form. The examples illustrate how roof and facade articulation, asymmetry in facade design, and /or a less elaborate architectural style can transform the appearance of a house without significantly reducing its size. Copyright Notice: The architectural drawings, including but not limited to the front elevation designs, contained in the Single - Family Residential Design Guidelines are protected under United States and international copyright laws and are the exclusive property of the City of Arcadia or its third party licensors. The drawings are provided in these Guidelines for reference purposes only and may not be copied, reproduced, republished, posted, transmitted, displayed, modified, sold, distributed or in any way used by you or on your behalf, in any form or by any means, including for the making of derivative works, without express prior written consent from the owner of each respective drawing. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 34 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Successful Application of the Guidelines continued... EXAMPLE 2 Discouraged Encouraged Copyright © 2008, OFA. All rights reserved. EXAMPLE 3 Discouraged Encouraged Copyright © 2008, Landtec Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 35 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES DESIGN REVIEW 2. Design concept review by the Development Services Department, as provided for in the code. This must be completed prior to the plan check procedure. Projects that A. Relationship of Guidelines require further discretionary approval shall be subject to final design approval by the appropriate body. The key to a successful residential project in Arcadia is to assure its compatibility with the surrounding dwellings in the neighborhood and, in the case of a building addition, with the existing building. Compatibility includes such terms as "architectural style, mass, scale, orientation, setback and architectural elements such as texture, color and building materials ". The Design Guidelines will be utilized during the City's review process to encourage the highest level of design quality and at the same time provide the flexibility necessary to encourage creativity on the part of project designers in response to existing site conditions. Proposals for a new dwelling or additions or alterations to an existing dwelling must follow a development review process set forth in the guidelines in order to complete site and building improvements. B. Scope and Authority The guidelines should be reviewed prior to beginning a project design. Design review consists of three steps: 1. Preliminary consultation between the project sponsor and the Development Services Department staff to discuss the zoning requirements and the Architectural Design Guidelines and criteria applicable to the site and use. Exception: Properties within City designated homeowners associations are subject to the Architectural Design Guidelines set forth in this document, but shall be subject to the review and approval of only the homeowner associations' architectural review boards. 3. Final design review occurs during the Plan Check process by the Development Services Department to ensure consistency with the plans approved during the design review process. C. Design Review Process 1. Stages of Review: a. Preliminary Consultation. Preliminary consultation shall be initiated by requesting an appointment with a city planner. b. Design Concept Review. Design concept review shall be initiated by an application submitted to the Development Services Department on a form approved and containing information required by the Development Services Director or designee. The application shall include such plans and materials required for adequate concept review. c. Final Design Review. Final design review of development plans shall be initiated within one (1) year Amended April 17, 2009 Page 36 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES of design concept approval by submitting plans to Building Services for plan check. b) By Regular Review by the Development Services Department, Community Development Division. The 2. Design Concept Review and Approval Development Services Director or designee shall review development plans submitted for design concept a) By Administrative Review. The Development Services approval within thirty (30) working days of receipt of a Director or designee shall have the authority to review completed application, and may approve, conditionally and approve the following types of improvements to a approve, disapprove or return plans for revisions. After single - family dwelling and /or accessory building(s) each submittal of revised plans, the City has thirty (30) subject to determination of compliance with the single- working days to review the plans. Within five (5) family Design Guidelines: working days after a decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant. (1) Roofing material (2) Window / door change outs / replacements / c) By Modification Committee, Planning Commission or additions City Council. Concurrent with the hearing of an (3) Fences / walls / gates application for a modification or other type of (4) Exterior finishes application, the Modification Committee, Planning (5) Patio enclosures, covered patios, trellises, Commission or City Council may approve, conditionally and gazebos on residentially zoned property approve or disapprove the design concept plans. (6) Minor first floor additions and detached accessory buildings on single - family zoned 3. Final Design Review and Approval property (7) Other types of exterior alterations as deemed The Development Services Department shall review the appropriate by the Development Services final design as part of the plan check procedure to ensure Director or designee compliance with the approved plans. The Development Services Department may approve, conditionally approve Review of the aforementioned improvements may be or disapprove said plans. conducted upon submittal of plans to Building Services or subsequent to plans being submitted for plan check. 4. Fee If the Development Services Director or designee determines that the proposed improvements do not Before accepting any application for design review or comply with the single - family design guidelines, the appeal, the City shall charge and collect a fee in an amount applicant shall submit for a regular review process as established by resolution of the City Council. In addition, set forth below. the applicant shall reimburse the City for all costs associated with design review performed by the City's Planning Services staff shall sign plans prior to architectural and landscape design consultants prior to final issuance of a building permit. approval of the design review. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 37 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES 5. Effective Date No permit shall be issued for any use involved in an application for design review until action on such application shall have become final by reason of the expiration of time to make an appeal (within 5 working days after the date of decision). 6. Expiration of Approval Design approval shall expire one (1) year following its effective date unless: a. A building permit has been issued and construction has commenced and been diligently and continuously pursued; or b. A certificate of occupancy has been issued; or c. The approval is renewed. 7. Extension of Approval The Development Services Director or designee or the body that reviewed a project may renew design concept approval or final design approval for a period not to exceed one year beyond the initial expiration date, upon determining that the findings made remain valid. An application for an extension shall be made a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the initial expiration date and shall be accompanied by payment of a fee in an amount established by resolution of the City Council. 8. Plan Revisions The Development Services Director or designee or the body that conducted design concept review of a project may approve changes to approved plans or in conditions of approval upon determining that the changes are minor and are consistent with the intent of the original approval. 9. Appeals a. Appeals from the Development Services Director's or designee's or Modification Committee's decision shall be made to the Planning Commission within five (5) working days of the decision and shall be accompanied by payment of an appeal fee in an amount established by Resolution of the City Council. A public hearing shall be scheduled not less than ten (10) calendar days or more than forty (40) calendar days after the filing of an appeal. b. Appeals from the decision of the Planning Commission shall be made to the City Council within five (5) working days of the Planning Commission's decision and shall be accompanied by payment of an appeal fee in an amount established by resolution of the City Council. A public hearing shall be scheduled not less than ten (10) calendar days or more than forty (40) calendar days after the filing of an appeal. 10. Enforcement a. Building Permits. Building Permits shall not be issued if conditions imposed under the Architectural Design Review Procedure are not satisfied. b. Conditions. Non - compliance with design review requirements that are included as conditions to discretionary land use approvals of the City such as conditional use permits, modifications and similar actions shall constitute grounds for the suspension or revocation of such approval. Amended April 17, 2009 Page 38 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES DEFINITIONS Alcove: A small area cut out of a larger mass, such as an entry porch Articulation: Use of different planes, surfaces, and forms to define an interesting and attractive building or component of a building Asymmetry: Different on one side than on the other Cantilever: A portion of a building extending out beyond its supporting wall or column Chamfer: A beveled corner which is formed in concrete work by placing a triangular or curved insert in the corner of the form. Clipped eaves: Eaves that have a minimal projection over the wall below Context: The character - defining surroundings of a site Dormer: A structure with walls extending up from a roof, typically housing one or more windows Eave: The extension of a roof beyond an Exterior wall, with no enclosed area underneath it Eclectic: Of mixed styles Elevation: A two - dimensional view of the front, side, or rear of a building or wall Facade: See Elevation Fascia: The board enclosing the edge of an eave Gable: A wall beneath the exposed end of one or more sloping roofs Guidelines: Regulations that can be required flexibly as appropriate to each project or situation Hardscape: Pavement and other ground treatments other than plant materials Integrity: Having enough consistency to be perceived as an "integral" unit Layering: Having different elements in different planes, forming layers, rather than a simple wall Mansionization: Building a house too big for its lot, or too ornate or formal in its appearance Mass: The overall perceived size of a building, affected by not only its dimensions but also the manner in which its walls, roofs, and facade elements are designed Mission or barrel tile: A half - circular roof tile that is used alternately face -up and face -down Modulation: Varying the depth and other characteristics of a wall or roof in order to improve its appearance through breaking up its length and mass Monumentality: The appearance of trying to appear too important or imposing for its context Muntins: Narrow strips that form a division between window panes Nested Gables: One gable placed beneath another, usually off - center Overdesigned: Too ornate for its size or surroundings Pilaster: A column (structural or decorative) that is placed against a wall Pitch: The slope of a roof, expressed in inches of rise against 12 inches run (as in 4:12) Porch: A prominent entry, including any roof above Amended April 17, 2009 Page 39 City of Arcadia I SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Porte - Cochere: A roofed structure, open on the sides, extending over a driveway Project: Any physical work upon a property requiring Ci +x/ approval Quoins: Large squared stones such as buttresses, set at tl angles of a building; the external corner of a building. S -tile: A roof tile attempting to simulate the effect of mission barrel tile with multiple curves Scale: Size relative to other portions of a building, landscape, surroundings, or to viewers Shed Roof: A simple roof of a single slope Site amenities: Benches, fountains, garden structures, and other items added to an open space to enhance its use and enjoyment Soffit: The underside of an eave Substantial: Having enough visual depth to appear visually ar structurally sound Surrounds: Ornamental projecting surfaces around a windc or door Symmetry: The same on both sides Underdesigned: Too simple to offer any interest to the viewe Amended April 17, 2009 Page 40 RESOLUTION NO. 6770 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING AND AMENDING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO REAL PROPERTY IN THE SINGLE - FAMILY HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ZONE AREAS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby repeals Resolution Nos. 5286, 5287, 5288, 5289, and 5290 and Ordinance No. 1832, and adopts this Resolution pursuant to Ordinance No. 2285. SECTION 2. In accordance with the Arcadia General Plan directive to protect and preserve the character and quality of its neighborhoods by requiring harmonious design, and to implement Arcadia's Single - Family Residential Design Guidelines applicable to the real property within the five Single - Family Homeowners' Associations that are zoned "D" as Architectural Design area, Architectural Review Boards are established for each Association and are hereinafter referred to as the "ARBs ". The five Homeowners' Associations and their Architectural Design Zones are: Arcadia Highlands Home Owners Association — "Highlands" Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners Association — "Upper Rancho" Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners Association — "Oaks" Rancho Santa Anita Residents' Association — "Lower Rancho" Santa Anita Village Community Association of Arcadia — "Village" The boundaries for each Association are depicted in Exhibit "A." The ARB for each area is governed by the corresponding Homeowners' Association Board for that area. 1 SECTION 3. In order to promote and maintain the quality single - family residential environment of the City of Arcadia, and to protect the property values and architectural character of such residential environments in those portions of the City in which the residents have formed a homeowners association, and to accomplish the purposes set forth in Section 7 there are hereby established the following regulations and procedures in which said associations may exercise plan review authority. SECTION 4. It is determined that each building or structure and its landscaping and hardscape on properties within each area should exhibit a consistent and cohesive architectural style, and be harmonious and compatible with other neighborhood structures in architectural style, scale, visual massing, height, width and length, and setbacks in relationship to site contours and architectural elements such as texture, color and building materials. To promote harmony and compatibility is not to promote sameness, uniformity, a specific architectural style, or a certain time period. It is acknowledged that architecture (and neighborhoods in general) evolve and change over time and this will be considered through the review process. The following standards and conditions are hereby imposed upon all properties within said areas pursuant to the zoning regulations of the Arcadia Municipal Code, and all those in ownership or control of property within said areas are subject to this Resolution. A. SITE PLANNING —1. Natural amenities such as views, and other features unique to the site should be preserved and incorporated into development proposals. 2 2. The location, configuration, and design of new buildings and structures, or the alteration or enlargement of existing structures, should be visually harmonious with their sites and compatible with the character and quality of the surroundings. 3. The height and bulk of proposed dwellings and structures on the site should be in scale and in proportion with the height and bulk of dwellings and structures on surrounding sites. Alternatively, projects should incorporate design measures to adequately mitigate scale differences. 4. The design of a new house should provide effective and varied open space around the residence. B. STREETSCAPE — The developed subject property, when viewed from the street, should blend and be harmonious with the other structures and landscaping on the street. This includes and is not limited to setbacks, structural mass and scale, height, roof forms, facades, entries, building materials and everything that can be seen from the street. Each neighborhood or street has an established streetscape that defines its character. Streetscape characteristics should be considered by new projects. C. FLOOR AREA — The space contained within the boundaries of the property, including any open porch, open entry, balcony, covered patio, trellis, or garage, whether or not it is an integral part of the dwelling, shall NOT be considered in computing the square footage contained in any such building as measured from the outer faces of the exterior walls in computing the required minimum floor area of a dwelling. Village — 1,200 square feet of ground floor area if 1 story in height, or 1,300 square feet of floor area if 2 stories in height, at least 900 square feet of which must be on the ground floor. Lower Rancho — 1,400 square feet of ground floor area if 1 story and not less than 1,000 square feet on ground floor if 1'/2 or 2 stories Upper Rancho — 2,500 square feet of ground floor area. Attached covered porch, balcony or garage shall be counted at .5. Highlands — 1,600 square feet if 1 story and not less than 1,200 square feet on ground floor if 1 Y2 or 2 stories. Oaks — 2,000 square feet of ground floor area, except 1,800 square feet in Tracts 14656, 13544 & 10617, in which no one - family dwelling shall be erected or permitted which contains less than 1,800 square feet of ground floor area. D. FRONT YARD SETBACKS — If a dwelling with a larger front yard than the minimum required by the underlying zone designation exists on a lot on either side of the subject property, the ARB shall have the authority to require a front yard setback for the subject property equal to at least an average of the two adjacent front yards. Village — Underlying Zoning Lower Rancho — Underlying Zoning Upper Rancho — Minimum 50 feet Highlands — Underlying Zoning Oaks — Minimum sixty -five (65) feet from the front property line, except that Tract 13544 shall be not less than sixty (60) feet, Tracts 13345 & 11013 shall not be less than fifty -five (55) feet, and Tract 14656 shall not be less than fifty (50) feet. E. SIDE YARD SETBACKS Village —10% of lot frontage, and not less than 5 feet Lower Rancho — 10% of the lot frontage, and not less than 10 feet 4 Upper Rancho — Minimum 15 feet Highlands —10% of lot frontage, and not less than 6 feet Oaks —10% of lot frontage, and not less than 10 feet F. REAR YARD SETBACKS Village — Minimum 25 feet Lower Rancho — Underlying Zoning Upper Rancho — Minimum 40 feet Highlands — Underlying Zoning Oaks — Minimum 35 feet G. CORNER LOT SETBACKS (STREET SIDE) Village — Underlying Zoning Lower Rancho — Underlying Zoning Upper Rancho — Underlying Zoning Highlands — Minimum 15 feet from side street for Tracts 10725, 13367, 14626, 15285 & 16920. Oaks — On a corner lot, any detached garage shall be located a minimum of twenty (20) feet, at any point, from the side street property line. H. FRONT OF DWELLING — For all HOAs, any dwelling on the lot should face the front lot line. Exceptions for good cause may be granted through the review process. I. GARAGES — No carports allowed. Village & Lower Rancho — Garages shall not dominate the front elevation, and should be set back from the front facade or located in the back yard. 5 Upper Rancho — No garage door shall be allowed to face the public right -of -way within the front 150 feet of the property. No garage door shall be closer to the street than the dwelling (Lots 1 through 20 of Tract No. 13184 shall be excepted). Corner lots shall be evaluated on a case -by -case basis. Highlands — Underlying Zoning Oaks — A detached garage shall not be located less than 150 feet from the front property line, except for Tract 11013 which shall be 140 feet and Tracts 13345, 14656 & 13544 which shall be 125 feet, and in no case shall the garage be closer to the front property line than the main dwelling. Front facing garages are strongly discouraged. J. EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS — Materials used on the exterior of any structure, including without limitation, roofing, and walls or fences greater than 2 feet above the lowest adjacent grade, shall be compatible with the materials of other structures on the same lot and with the other structures in the neighborhood. K. EXTERIOR BUILDING APPEARANCE — The appearance of any structure, including roofs, walls or fences shall be compatible with existing structures, roofing, walls or fences in the neighborhood, inclusive of landscape and hardscape. L. AFFECT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND NEIGHBORHOOD — The impacts on adjacent properties shall be addressed, including impacts on privacy and views. First story and second story elements should be designed and articulated to reasonably address these issues, and windows and balconies shall be located to reasonably protect privacy and views of surrounding homes and yards. M. TREES — City Planning staff must approve the removal of any Oak Tree or construction of any improvements under the drip line of Oak Trees. C.1 N. ANIMALS — Wild animals, sheep, hogs, goats, bees, cows, horses, mules, poultry, or rabbits shall not be permitted or kept. SECTION 5. No structure, roof, wall or fence greater than 2 feet above the lowest adjacent grade, shall be erected, placed or replaced unless approved by the Plans for the erection, placement, or replacement of any structure, roof, wall or fence, showing the precise location on the lot of the structure, wall or fence, shall be submitted to the ARB. No structure, roof, wall or fence shall be erected, placed or replaced except in exact conformance with the plans approved by the ARB; however, any fence or wall between adjacent properties not within the front building setback or street side setback area is subject only to review by the City. Specific requirements of the ARB for proper consideration of an application are listed on the Short Review or Regular Review Applications. The provisions of this requirement shall not apply if the project consists only of work inside a building that does not substantially change the external appearance of the building. A. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD — The ARB shall be empowered to transact business and exercise powers herein conferred, only if the following requirements exist: 1. A formally organized property owner's organization exists in the applicable area described in Section 1. 7 2. The organization has by -laws adopted that authorize the establishment of the ARB. 3. Said by -laws provide that only property owners can be appointed to and serve on the ARB. 4. Owners have been appointed to the ARB in accordance with the by -laws. 5. A copy of the by -laws and any amendments thereto has been filed with the City Clerk. 6. The ARB shall designate a custodian of records who shall maintain said records and make them available for public review upon reasonable request. 7. Permanent written records of the meetings, findings, actions, and decisions of the ARB shall be maintained by the ARB, in accordance with the City's records retention policies. 8. The ARB's decision on a Regular Review Process shall be accompanied by specific findings, based upon a reference to supporting facts, setting forth the actions and decisions. 9. Only ARB members present at the meeting can participate in making the decision. 10. Any decision by the ARB shall be made by a majority of the entire membership of the ARB, and the ARB members who considered the application shall render the decision. 11. A copy of the ARB's findings and decision shall be mailed to the applicant within 7 working days of the ARB's decision. E. 12. All meetings of the ARB shall be open to the public in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Open Meeting Law). All aspects of the Brown Act shall be adhered to by members of the ARB. This includes, but is not limited to proper posting of meeting agendas, noticing requirements, no discussion of matters outside of public meetings, etc. B. POWERS OF THE ARB — Pursuant to Section 3 and Sections 4A through 4N, and through the specified review process, the ARB shall have the power to: 1. Determine the compatibility with the neighborhood of the mass, scale, design and appearance of the proposed project. 2. Determine and approve appropriate setbacks. 3. Determine whether materials and appearance are compatible with the neighborhood. 4. Determine the impact of the proposed project on adjacent properties. 5. Subject to compliance or consistency with the City's Municipal Code, any of the conditions set forth in Sections 4A through 4N may be made less restrictive by the ARB if the ARB determines that such action will foster the appropriate development of a lot and will not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of the adjacent lots and the neighborhood and would not be inconsistent with the provisions and intent of this Resolution. 6. The ARB shall have the power to establish requirements concerning project applications and procedures for review for the purpose of exercising its duties, subject to review and approval of the City. Copies of such requirements shall be kept on file with the Planning Department. �9 C. NOTIFICATION STANDARDS FOR REVIEW PROCESS — For the purpose of conducting design review, required notification shall be deemed to include at least the two parcels on each side of the parcel subject to plan approval (subject parcel), 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, and this is to be determined by the ARB Chair or designee. The required notification shall not include properties outside of the HOA area or commercially -zoned properties. An example of the required area of notification is set forth below, although the required notification may vary case -by -case: 4 Street 01 Subject Parcel 4 Street Required Notification Area Parcels included in 'Required Notification Area" as related to Subject Parcel D. SHORT REVIEW PROCESS PROCEDURE 10 1. The Short Review Process may be used by the ARB for any single -story remodel or addition where (a) the design is compatible with the design of existing structures on the subject property and neighborhood; and (b) the design is in harmony with the streetscape of the neighborhood. The ARB Chair or designee shall have the authority to approve the following specific Short Review Process items: yards • Single -story remodels and additions • Detached accessory structures — new, additions to, and /or remodels • Fences and /or walls in and /or facing (i.e., visible from) front and street side • Hardscape, landscaping and structural elements in front and street side yards, including without limitation, swimming pools, spas, fountains and other water features • Fences, lights, and other features related to tennis courts, sports courts or other significant paved features • Mechanical equipment • Roofing 2. The ARB is not required to hold a noticed, scheduled meeting for the consideration of a Short Review Process application. 3. If the ARB Chair or designee determines that the proposed project is not a cohesive design, not in harmony with the neighborhood, or might have an adverse impact on the neighborhood, he /she may require that the application be processed under the Regular Review Process procedure. 11 4. The ARB Chair or designee shall render a decision on a Short Review Process Item within 10 working days from the date a complete application is filed with the ARB Chair or designee; failure to take action in said time shall be deemed an approval of the plans, at the end of the 10 working -day period. E. REGULAR REVIEW PROCESS PROCEDURE The Regular Review Process shall be used by the ARB for review of (1) any new home construction, (2) any new or expansion of a second story, (3) any significant change in architectural style of an existing building, and (4) all projects that are not eligible to be processed by the above Short Form Review procedure as determined by the ARB Chair or designee. 1. The ARB is required to hold a noticed, scheduled meeting for the consideration of a Regular Review Process application. 2. The applicant shall provide to the ARB all documents required by the application. 3. Notice of the ARB's meeting shall be deposited in the mail by the ARB Chair or designee, postage prepaid by the applicant, to the applicant and to all property owners within the required. notification area of the subject property, not less than 10 calendar days before the date of such meeting. 4. Any decision by the ARB shall be made by a majority of the entire membership of the ARB, and the ARB members who considered the application shall render such decision. 5. 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 12 to take action in said time shall be deemed an approval of the plans, at the end of the 30 working -day period. F. EXPIRATION OF ARB'S APPROVAL — If for a period of 1 year from the date of approval, any project for which plans have been approved by the ARB, has not begun construction (as evidenced by clearing and grading and /or the installation of a new foundation and /or by installation of new materials on a structure that is being remodeled) or has been unused, abandoned or discontinued, said approval shall become null and void and of no effect. Such project may be resubmitted to the ARB for renewed approval; however, the ARB shall review the project as if it had not been previously approved in accordance with the current standards in effect. G. LIMIT ON ARB'S POWER — The ARB shall not have the power to modify any regulations in the Municipal Code. The ARB may, however, make a recommendation regarding modifying such regulations to the City staff, department, commission or board that will be considering any such modification request. SECTION 6. Appeals from the ARB shall be made to the Planning Commission. Said appeal shall be made in writing and delivered to Planning Services within 7 calendar days of the ARB's decision and shall be accompanied by an appeal fee in accordance with the applicable fee schedule adopted by resolution of the City Council. Planning Commission decisions on ARB cases may be appealed to the City Council. Upon receipt in proper form of a completed appeal from the ARB's decision, such appeal shall be processed by Planning Services in accordance with the same 13 procedures applicable to appeals from the Modification Committee, except noticing shall be consistent with ARB noticing. A. STANDARDS FOR ARB DECISIONS AND APPEALS — The ARB and any body hearing an appeal from the ARB's decision shall be guided by the following principles: 1. Control of architectural appearance and use of materials shall not be so exercised that individual initiative is stifled in creating the appearance of external features of any particular structure, building, fence, wall or roof, except to the extent necessary to establish contemporary accepted standards of harmony and compatibility acceptable to the ARB or the body hearing an appeal in order to avoid that which is excessive, garish, and substantially unrelated to the neighborhood. 2. Good architectural character is based upon the principles of harmony and proportion in the elements of the structure as well as the relationship of such principles to adjacent structures and other structures in the neighborhood. 3. A poorly designed external appearance of a structure, wall, fence, or roof, can be detrimental to the use and enjoyment and value of adjacent property and neighborhood. 4. A good relationship between adjacent front yards increases the value of properties and makes the use of both properties more enjoyable. SECTION 7. The City Council finds and determines that the public health, safety and general welfare of the community require the adoption of this Resolution. It is determined that the various land use controls, and property regulations as set forth herein are substantially related to maintenance of Arcadia's environment, for the 14 purpose of assuring that the appearance of structures will be compatible and harmonious with the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties. Design controls and aesthetic considerations will help maintain the beauty of the community, protect property values, and help assure protection from deterioration, blight, and unattractiveness, all of which can have a negative impact on the environment of the community, affecting property values, and the quality of life which is characteristic of Arcadia. It is further determined that the purpose and function of this Resolution is consistent with the history of the City and continued efforts through various means to maintain the City's land use, environmental, and economic goals and to assure perpetuation of both the psychological benefits and economic interests concomitant to an attractive, well maintained community with emphasis on residential living. All findings and statements of purpose in related resolutions which pre- existed this Resolution or prior covenants, conditions, and restrictions constitute part of the rationale for this Resolution and are incorporated by reference. SECTION 8. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid by the final decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof be declared invalid. 15 SECTION 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this 3rd day of January, 2012. ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stephen P. Deitsch City Attorney 16 Exhibit "A" Map and Descriptions Homeowners' Association Areas 1) Arcadia Highlands Homeowners' Association — "Highlands" 2) Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners' Association — "Upper Rancho" 3) Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners' Association — "Oaks" 4) Rancho Santa Anita Residents' Association — "Lower Rancho" 5) Santa Anita Village Community Association — "Village" 17 Highlands The area north of the commercial properties fronting on Foothill Boulevard, south of the northerly City limit, east of Santa Anita Avenue, west of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District property, extending to the east end of Sycamore Avenue. Excluding those properties located in Tract 15073 (1500 to 1538 & 1503 to 1537 Highland Oaks Drive) and 1501 Highland Oaks Drive and 307A, 307B, 307C & 307D East Foothill Boulevard. Upper Rancho The property bounded on the south by the centerline of Foothill Boulevard; on the west by the east line of Michillinda Avenue; on the east by the centerline of Baldwin Avenue; and on the north by the City limits. Oaks Beginning at a point at the intersection of the centerline of Baldwin Avenue and the centerline of Orange Grove Avenue; thence easterly along the centerline of Orange Grove Avenue to its intersection with the centerline of Oak Meadow Road; thence southerly along the centerline of Oak Meadow Road to its intersection with the centerline of Hacienda Drive; thence westerly along the centerline of Hacienda Drive to its intersection with the centerline of San Carlos Road; thence southerly along the centerline of San Carlos Road to its intersection with the centerline of Foothill Boulevard; thence westerly along the centerline of Foothill Boulevard to its intersection with the centerline of Baldwin Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Baldwin Avenue to the point of beginning. Beginning at a point at the intersection of the centerline of Oak Meadow Road and the centerline of Orange Grove Avenue; thence easterly along the centerline of Orange Grove Avenue to its intersection with the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue; thence southerly along the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue to its intersection with the easterly prolongation of the southerly property line of Lot No. 76 of Tract No. 11074; thence westerly along said easterly prolongation and said southerly property line to its intersection with the westerly property line of Lot No. 76 of Tract No. 11074; thence southerly along the prolongation of said westerly property line to its intersection with the centerline of Foothill Boulevard; thence westerly along the centerline of Foothill Boulevard to its intersection with the centerline of San Carlos Road; thence northerly along the centerline of San Carlos Road to its intersection with the centerline of Hacienda Drive; thence easterly along the centerline of Hacienda Drive to its intersection with the centerline of Oak Meadow Road; thence northerly along the centerline of Oak Meadow Road to the point of beginning. 18 Beginning at a point at the intersection of the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue and the easterly prolongation of the southerly property line of Lot No. 76 of Tract No. 11074; thence westerly along said easterly prolongation and said southerly property line to its intersection with the westerly property line of Lot No. 76 of Tract No. 11074; thence southerly along the prolongation of said westerly property line a distance of 65 feet; thence easterly along a line parallel to the southerly property line of Lot 76 of Tract No. 11074 to its intersection with the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue a distance of 65 feet to the point of beginning. Lower Rancho Area #1 Beginning at a point on easterly line of Michillinda Avenue, said point being the southwesterly corner of Lot 36, Tract No. 15928; thence easterly along the southerly boundary of said Tract No. 15928 and Tract No. 14428 to a point which is the northwesterly corner of Lot 12, Tract No. 15960; thence southerly along the westerly line of said Lot 12 and its prolongation thereof to its intersection with the centerline of De Anza Place; thence southerly and easterly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Altura Road; thence southerly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Hugo Reid Drive; thence easterly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Golden West Avenue; thence northwesterly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Tallac Drive; thence easterly along said centerline to its intersection with the easterly line of Tract No. 13312; thence northerly and easterly along the easterly and southerly boundary of said tract to the southeasterly corner of Lot No. 1 to its intersection with the easterly line of Golden West Avenue; thence northerly along said easterly line to its intersection with the southerly line of Vaquero Road; thence easterly along said southerly line to its intersection with the easterly terminus line of said Vaquero Road; thence northerly along said easterly line to its intersection with the southerly line of Lot 17 of Tract No. 11215; thence easterly along said southerly line to its intersection with the easterly line of aforementioned Tract No. 11215; thence northerly along said easterly line and its prolongation thereof to its intersection with the centerline of Colorado Street; thence westerly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Altura Road; thence southerly along said centerline to its intersection with the easterly prolongation of the northerly line of Tract No. 17430; thence westerly along said northerly line to its intersection with the easterly line of Michillinda Avenue; thence southerly along said easterly line to the point of beginning, said point being the southwesterly corner of Lot 36 of Tract No. 15928. Area #2 Beginning at the northwesterly corner of Lot No. 62 of Tract No. 12786; thence southerly along the westerly line of said Lot and its prolongation thereof to its intersection with the centerline of Hugo Reid Drive; thence easterly along said center line to its intersection with the southerly prolongation of the easterly line of Tract No. 14460; thence northerly along said easterly line to its intersection with the northerly line of said tract; thence westerly along said northerly line to its intersection with the westerly line of said Tract No. 14460; thence southwesterly along said westerly line, and its southwesterly prolongation thereof, to its intersection with the northeasterly corner of We Lot No. 61 of Tract No. 12786; thence westerly along the northerly line of said tract to the point of beginning, said point being the northwesterly corner of Lot 62 of Tract No. 12786. Area #3 All properties with that area bounded on the west by Baldwin Avenue, on the north and east by Colorado Street and on the south by the southerly tract boundaries of Tract Nos. 14940 and 15318. Santa Anita Village Beginning at a point on easterly line of Michillinda Avenue, said point being the southwesterly corner of Lot 36, Tract No. 15928; thence easterly along the southerly boundary of said Tract No. 15928 and Tract No. 14428 to a point which is the northwesterly corner of Lot 12, Tract No. 15960; thence southerly along the westerly line of said Lot 12 and its prolongation thereof to its intersection with the centerline of De Anza Place; thence southerly and easterly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Altura Road; thence southerly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Hugo Reid Drive; thence easterly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Golden West Avenue; thence northwesterly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Tallac Drive; thence easterly along said centerline to its intersection with the easterly line of Tract No. 13312; thence southerly along the easterly and northerly lines of Lots 11 through 19 of said tract to be northeast corner of said Lot 19; thence easterly along the easterly prolongation of said Lot 19 to its intersection with the northwesterly corner of lot 74, Tract No. 12786; thence easterly along the northerly line of said tract to the northwesterly corner of Lot 62 of said Tract No. 12786; thence southerly along the westerly line of said lot and its prolongation thereof to its intersection with the centerline of Hugo Reid Drive, thence easterly along said centerline to its intersection with the northeasterly prolongation of the easterly line of Tract 12786; thence southerly along said easterly line and also the easterly line of Tract No. 12104 to the southeast corner of Lot 129 of said Tract 12104; thence westerly along the southerly lines of Tract No. 12104, Tract 11688, and Tract No. 11932 and its westerly prolongation to its intersection with the centerline of Cortez Road; thence northerly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of distance a 150' more or less to a point; thence northerly to a point on the northerly line of Portola Drive, said point being 140' westerly from the northwesterly corner of Portola Drive and Cortez Road, thence northerly to the southwest corner of Lot 28, Tract 11932; thence northerly along the westerly line of said tract and its prolongation thereof to its intersection with the centerline of Balboa Drive; thence westerly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Sunset Boulevard; thence northwesterly along said centerline to its intersection with the southerly prolongation of the easterly line of Michillinda Avenue; thence northerly along said easterly line to the point of beginning, said point being the southwesterly corner of Lot 36, Tract No. 15928. 20 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS: CITY OF ARCADIA ) I, JAMES H. BARROWS, City Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certifies that the foregoing Resolution No. 6770 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 3rd day of January, 2012 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Amundson, Segal and Kovacic NOES: Council Members Chandler and Harbicht ABSENT: None 21 ity Clerk of the City of Arcadia LJOTA11tiram, MISSA Site Address: 211 MONTE PL Property Owner(s): CHIANG,CHIEN CHENG AND HSU,LI FANG Property Characteristics Zoning: R -1 (10,000) General Plan: VLDR Lot Area (sq ft): 30,949 Main Structure / Unit (sq. ft.): 2,876 Year Built: 1976 Number of Units: 0 Overlays Parking Overlay: n/a Downtown Overlay: n/a Special Height Overlay: n/a Architectural Design Overlay: D Selected parcel highlighted 0 Parcel location within City of Arcadia" This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for Report generated 06- Nov -2014 reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, page 1 of 1 or otherwise reliable. Neighboring Property across the street to the south at 2231 Canyon Road 3/32 " - F -0" ADJOINING LAND USE SITE PLAN 1/16' = P -0" NO PROPERTIES TO THE REAR EXISTING MOUNTAIN HILL SIDE UP TO CHANTRY FLATS ROAD ADJOINING PROPERTIES - ELEVATIONS 3/32 " - V -0" O O 1/811= 1' -0" PLANUNG LEDGEND SCRUBS XG SCSI TREE OLIVE TREE MISC MP 7S 1 GAL MOw ME REMAIN EG EXISTING GROUNDCOVERTO ON EXITING SLOPE, RESIXIN CLEAN AND REPLACE AS NECC VEGETATIONTO REMAIN PHOTO FROM MONTE PLACE PHOTO FROM CANYON ROAD 2227 CANYON ROAD - NEIGHBORS TO THE WEST 211 MONTE PLACE - SUBJECT PROPERTY NO PROPERTIES TO THE REAR EXISTING MOUNTAIN HILL SIDE UP TO CHANTRY FLATS ROAD PHOTO FROM MONTE PLACE PHOTO FROM DRIVEWAY 269 MONTE PLACE - NEIGHBORS TO THE EAST PHOTO FROM MONTE PLACE PHOTO FROM CANYON ROAD 2227 CANYON ROAD - NEIGHBORS TO THE WEST PHOTO FROM MONTE PLACE PHOTO FROM DRIVEWAYS 269 MONTE PLACE - NEIGHBORS TO THE EAST u �'� PHOTO FROM MONTE PLACE PHOTO FROM DRIVEWAY 273 MONTE PLACE 276 MONTE PLACE 270 MONTE PLACE 2231 CANYON ROAD NO PROPERTIES TO THE REAR EXISTING MOUNTAIN HILL SIDE UP TO CHANTRY FLATS ROAD <c E m s SH- SA -1.6 WOOD 51DIN6 Yq/ 5TUCCO GANT-LVR FLOOR DOOR THRESHOLD DOOR HEAD WOOD 51PIN6 NDN. 5ILL-51VIN6 21 IA— DOOR JAMB WOOD SIDING 27 NPN. JAMB N1 WOOD 510'65(7, IIN 4 RR NDN. 5ILL FLAT TILE RAKE TO WALL FLAT TILE ROOF TO WALL (-,-\ FLAT TILE ROOF RIDGE WINDOW JAMB ROOF RAKE 06 FLAT TILE ROOF VALLEY (—, Ems Mu =�Yl A7= NPN. HEAD FLAT TILE ROOF NOOD 51DINS AT SRADE(-;- —Q» 12� x WINDOW FLA5HIN6� »� 28 WINDOW TO WINDOW rm ,u 24 Xrefxref\xtb_30x42.dwg WEEP 51-PEED AT STUcjGO n, FLAT TILE ROOF EAVE -7N - ql TT FLAT TILE RAKE TO WALL g FLAT TILE ROOF TO WALL /--'� AD-1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1/81, - 11.01, pot air", MW-MMMMIC�l SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1/4 p_0" SSS�i SOUTH (FRONT) ELEVATION M",-O" WEST (POOL) ELEVATION lw-F4, 1­1111T MATCHWOODSIDI- "",DW_,_j" S WICT-OODSI'O�C.'SISTA.TM.T��AI.�.TT.� S DIT11110-sli 1 DICO'ATIII CO'OSIO"'SIST-TMTASH'O'D ST 'IST.D _ — — TH. D.C-ATII. — APPIAI.CrA.D 1— TIIIIATIOI IISTII Pll IIIACTIII S IISTICTI-S Co'_ D_ DW_DS . 1" STOC.Ho. r I MOMM.. T POII—THA—I.ISH I COAT —I-P—.—... D—DS —11 -STICT-H SH UNTH I .. DMT"ATH TH AT So"ITS -D—I-� 01.-l.-T.—.D-;ID'-P . P�OIID.IIAI..01..IIDI.�Pl.�01.�PII—ODSH.IHI.� A.DT.DMCTT LATH 'I'.IIHI � --- -- . --s 1' CO'OSIO' "SIST-T -TAI —'PSC'ID 11IM-1-- 11 CO.OSIO. —IST-T -TAI SADDI. 11-- 1 :TII EAST (DRIVEWAY) SIDE ELEVATION 1/4" - F-O" ILILLIELLAACTS-III, 1111IL'.. .... ..... ... .... ............. C-DIP, C-P,.Y CAT P-PPE-1, "AIR.-PAR"ARE-111- PLASTER P UNN EWTS 6129 UTIC TAUPE C. .... EUT, C", ED EPETA, LL A LRET, 'LETR, S AT S .. ITS "D CEILIN"' OVER 6' "NUTE PRIIIDE2LAIE.1l.UILDIN�=11'UIPLLDII 'I'SITEATTINE -1 -ID SIDINT ARIUND CIRNER PC RECESSED - 9 EATERTIR CESPENT PLASTER 11 ESTANDED METAL LATE ["'LATE LATE AT ECTERT'R S .. ITS . CEILIN CS I' C . " . SIT RESISTAPUT ISSUAL -EPSCED lNIlUll-AEllE CRACE . 2 A .. PC INCRETE SEE DET. LS "AD 1 . - 1 11 Cl.lSIlN RESIST-T ISSUAL SADDLE lLAS.INT AT CLUERPE, SEE DETAIL 1, AD 1 12 CIRRISCIN RESISTAPUT ISSUAL R111 PC -1 � PETAL ILASTUND I' 'CESS ED 12 CIA C' RR'SIlN RESIST-T EPETAL I�ILEIENPD IENT W, CUST. 'LAS.I ED AT RECESS SEE DETAIL AD REAR (NORTH) ELEVATION 1/4" - F-O" / he PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) 1. Name or description of project: Homeowners Association Appeal No. HOA 14 -04 2. Project Location — Identify street 211 Monte Place address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7 112' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 3. Entity or person undertaking A. project: B. Other (Private) (1) Name Kurt Von Hatten (2) Address 165 E. 24`h Street, Unit D Upland, CA 91784 4. Staff Determination; The Lead Agency's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the Lead Agency's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. ❑ The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. ❑ The project is a Ministerial Project. C. ❑ The project is an Emergency Project. d. ❑ The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. e. ® The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: 03 — New construction of a single- family residence. f. ❑ The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: g. ❑ The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis: h. ❑ The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency. Name of Lead Agency: Date: Oct. 24, 2014 FORM "A" Preliminary Exemption Assessment Staff Thomas Li, Associate Planner Attachment No. 8