Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDec. 14 2016 Continuance Hearing Minutes 1321 Oakwood Dr.Minutes of Arcadia Highlands Home Owners Association, Inc. Architectural Review Board Meeting Wednesday, December 14, 2016 1321 Oakwood Dr. Arcadia California The meeting was called to order by Chairman Suzanne Ligon at 6:35 pm. Architectural Review Board Members (ARB) present were: David Arvizu Suzanne Ligon Jon Conrad Gina Truex Lee Kuo The Chairman explained that this was a Continued Regular Review Hearing of 1321 Oakwood Dr. where the main concern of the prior meeting was to reduce the mass. The Chairman also stated the criteria of the ARB being Resolution 6770 and the City of Arcadia Single Family Residential Design Guidelines and that the ARB uses these guidelines to determine harmonious and compatible design in order to protect and preserve the character, quality and property values of the neighborhood. She pointed out that only comments relating to this would be addressed at the hearing. Applicant, Robert Tong, provided an overview of changes made since the prior meeting:  FAR allows 45%, this design is 31.4% (Prior plan was 34.2%)  Back patio roofing was removed which reduced the mass and improved the view for adjacent properties. With that and other changes 520 sq.ft. decrease in total structure.  Square footage reduced from 5,322 sq.ft. to 4,968 sq.ft. - a 370 sq.ft. decrease (FAR allows 5665- plans under max FAR by 654 sq.ft.)  Roof height reconfigured and reduced fromA18’8”AtoA17’8”Avs.AexistingAofA16’10”  ThisAhouseAhasA60AftAfrontageAwithAanotherA20’Aarticulated back 20’6”Afrom front façade. 80 ft total but the articulation reduces massing as seen from the street. The existing home has 80 ft. total frontage with no setback/articulations.  Side yard setbacks increased from 10ft (required) to 11 ft on both sides.  Rear property Fence moved to property line to create room for easement.  PlateAheightsAremainedAatA10’ but the 30 ”eavesAplusAguttersAvisuallyAreduceAtheAplateAheight.A Members of the Board were then asked to comment or ask questions of the applicant. Mr. Arvizu asked for clarification of what specific purpose exists for plate height of 10 ft. Agreed that there can be different opinion but was concerned about how allowing 10 ft. plate height creates design creep in homes where there would be visible nonconformity with surrounding homes. Highland Oaks has more typically 8-8.5 plate heights. Mr. Tong responded that 10 ft. plate height allows more flexibility with interior design, better air circulation and that the plate height was mitigated by factors such as slab vs. existing raised foundation andA30”AeaveAdesign.AMr.A rvizu confirmed that this was a preference and not a necessity and that his focusAonAplateAheightAisAonAdesignA“creep”AandAnotAhavingAthisA10Aft.AplateAbecomeAaAstandardAwhenAinA some cases it would be disruptive to harmonious neighborhood. Mr. Arvizu also brought up the interior coffered ceiling heights of 11 ft. Mrs. Ligon pointed out that according to Res. 6770 the ARB can only address exterior design and cannot render decisions or comments regarding the interiors. Mr. Conrad expressed that this roofline is better than having a two story and commended keeping the design to a single story home. Mr. Kuo pointed out that the front elevation roofline appeared different from the prior design and Mr. Tong confirmed that removing the roof over the back patio reduced the massing and roofline design as seen from the front. Ms. Truex asked for clarification regarding the windows and the concrete sill. Mr. Tong showed a sample of the aluminum clad window that would be used and discussed the City requirements for a recess. Board questions were closed. Hearing opened to public comment. Adjacent neighbor raised concerns regarding that most homes in the area are 3000 sq ft and this is almost 5000 sq.ft.; that a two story home on one side and now an increase to this homes roofline would reduce his view of the mountains. Rear neighbor asked for clarification with respect to the rear fence and view of the back of the house. Mr. Tong addressed her concerns and confirmed that a 6 ft. vinyl fence would be solid and tan colored and explained that they could not do a wall because a footing would be required which would threaten the Oak tree on her property as well as the Oaks on subject property. He clarified that the rear fence was moved out of the easement and to the actual property line which would be further away from her property than shown on prior plans. Public comment was then closed. The Board was then called upon for further comments and discussion, after which a vote would be taken. Mr. Kuo commented that guidance should be centered on massing and scale vs. pure focus on plate height. The revised design with porch roof elimination and reduced square footage reduced massing. He further commented that he would prefer a smaller home but the design is within FAR and massing concerns appear addressed with these changes. He understood how difficult it can be when surrounding homes change (addressing neighbor concerns) and the HOA has not seen anyone build a new home smaller than what existed beforehand and believed the changes represented a suitable compromise. Ms. Truex commented that it would be nice if the home could be moved forward slightly for view purposes for adjacent neighbor but the City requires a setback on the street that prevents this type of change. She felt the overall design improved with the changes made. She mentioned having the hedge on south side maintained at the height of 6 ft. wall to maintain neighbors view. Applicant and owner took special note of that. Mr.AConradAcommentedAthatAtheAtallerAplateAheightAdoesn’tAaffectAtheAlookAgivenAtheAoverallAdesign,AandAaA one story is certainly preferred than a two story in this regard and for neighborhood impact. Appreciated the neighbor’sAconcernsAregardingAviewAimpactAbutAdifficultAtoAunderstandAviewAissuesAwithoutAstandingA and looking at it and view can be impacted by growing trees just as easily as a new build. Mr. Arvizu restated concerns about plate heights. Most Highlands plate heights are 8-8.5 ft and the primary issue an increase in overall plate heights would create disjointed lines in the neighborhood. Preferred height consistent with what has existed and have compromised for some up to 9.5 ft. Believes Mr. Tong did a good job mitigating concerns with respect to this property, but would be more sympathetic if there was a well defined structural need for 10 ft. plates. VeryAconcernedAaboutAtheA“creep”AfactorAandA the wrong message being communicated that the HOA will approve this plate height anywhere in the area. Also stated that City Code and ARB guidelines do not have view protection as a decision to be addressed by ARB. No legal basis for the ARB to judge view protection. Mrs. Ligon stated that this traditional design fits in well with this neighborhood and surrounding homes. And the fact that it is single story reduces the impact it could have otherwise had. She also stated that plate heights should be considered on a case by case basis and not allowed on all homes simply because it has been allowed on others. In this instance the wide street and 70 ft setbacks of these homes from theAstreetAcombinedAwithAtheAarticulationAofAtheAfrontAfaçadeAandA30”AextendedAeavesAandAaddedAguttersA result in a minimal impact of plate height visually. Before closing Board Comments Mr. Arvizu expressed to Mr. Tong appreciation for the changes and the home’sAdesign,AbutA10AftAplateAheightAisAaAcaseAbyAcaseAevaluationAforAtheA RBAasAourAchairpersonAmentionedA in keeping with Res. 6770. In this case it appears okay but would appreciate designs with reduced plate heights. ARB comments were closed. Motion was made by Chairperson Mrs. Ligon to approve the new plans of 1321 Oakwood Drive. Mr. Kuo seconded the motion and the plans were unanimously approved. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting was adjourned at 7:28 pm. ____________________________________ Suzanne Ligon, ARB Chair