Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout Findings and Action - Conditional ApprovalArcadia Highlands Homeowner's Association Architectural Review Board Findings and Action Report File No.: 0-010-2019 Date: 124/2019 Project Address: 85 E. Grandview Ave. Applicant: Georgie ajer Owner (if different) David Gren Project Description: Ground floor addition to existing single story house FINDINGS 1. SITE PLANNING - The proposed project IS consistent with the Site Planning Guidelines as it includes preserves the existing mature oak trees. The height of the structure is minimized with the addition to the single story versus adding a second story. The height is further minimized due to the change in roof pitch to a less slope than the existing roof structure. II. ENTRY - The proposed project IS consistent with the Entry Guidelines. The proposed change to the entry design will make it more compatible with the style of the house and provide the appearance of shelter from the streetview of the house. III. MASSING - The proposed project IS consistent with the Massing Guidelines. Retaining a single story structure minimizes the overall mass of the home and the addition provides wall and roof articulation. IV. ROOFS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Roofing Guidelines based on the roof plan and material (concrete tiles) being compatible with the Highlands requirements and the architectural style and design of the home. The additional will include reducing the pitch of the existing portion of the structure that runs North/South so that the peak is set further back from the West edge of the structure to soften the appearance of the roof from neighboring parcel. V. FACADE DESIGN - The proposed project IS consistent with the Facade Design Guidelines based on the home's overall design, use of color and traditional design elements. VI. DETAILS The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Architectural Details. The details are high quality and are consistent with the architectural style. VII. MATERIALS & COLORS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines Page 7 of VIII. LANDSCAPE & HARDSCAPE - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines as discussed in the Site Planning section (Findings Section 1). The landscaping plan includes the removal of the palm trees in the Northeast corner of the lot that inhibit views of the neighbors. The plans, as presented, included the removal of the 3 palm trees just to the South of the driveway, along the Eastern edge of the parcel. The 3 palms are to be retained. IX. FENCES & WALLS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Fences and Walls. X. ARCHITECTURAL STYLE - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines as the elements added to the facade of the home further enhance the existing character and original design. XI. ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Additions and Alterations as discussed in the above referenced Massing (Findings Section 111). The replacement windows, doors, siding and roof tiles are consistent with the building's architectural style. The addition will reduce the pitch of the existing portion of the structure that runs North/South to be more consistent with the front portion of the house. X11. STREETSCAPE - The proposed project IS consistent with the Streetscape due the enhancements proposed to the existing single story structure. XIII. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA & SETBACKS - The proposed project IS NOT consistent with the Minimum Floor Area and Setback Guidelines. Although a portion of the proposed project has a setback of less than that required from the North lot line, the proposed modification is for a modest sized structure with a lower and articulated ridgeline from the main portion of the structure and therefore no exception is taken to the proposed modifications. XIV. GARAGES - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Garages. XV. EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS & APPEARANCE - refer to above referenced comments. XVI. AFFECT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES & NEIGHBORHOOD - The existing architecture style of the home will be preserved with the additions to the structure. The overall height of the Northern portion of the structure, where seen by neighboring parcel, will be slightly reduced and the ridge will be set further back from the West edge of the structure to soften the wall like appearance of the roof from the neighboring parcel. The landscaping plan includes the removal of the palm trees in the Northeast corner of the lot that inhibit views of the neighbors. The conditional approval is based on the change being made that is referenced in Findings Section VIII above. Page 2 ofW ACTION — Approved/ X Conditionally Approved/ Denied These Findings and Action were made by the following ARS Members of the Association at a meeting held on June 24, 2019 at 85 E. Grandview Ave., Arcadia, CA Members In Attendance -Vote: Dean Obst, ARB Chair - Yes Signature: David Arvizu- Yes Lee Kuo - Yes Sunny Padival - Yes Dean Obst EXPIRATION - If for a period of one (z) 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 --urrent standards in effect. APPEALS - Appeals from the ARB shall be made to the Planning Commission. Planning Conunission 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 A.RB'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