Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings and Action Reportrcadia Highlands Architectural Review Board Findings and Action Report File No.: 0-021-2021 Date: 9/20/2021 Project Address: 1865 Highland Oaks Dr. Applicant: Vincent Chen Owner (if different) Chan Fong & Eva Lim Project Description: Demo of existing home and z story new construction FINDINGS I. SITE PLANNING - The proposed project IS consistent with the Site Planning Guidelines. The new construction is visually harmonious with the site and compatible with the character and quality of the surroundings. II. MASSING - The proposed project IS consistent with the Massing Guidelines. The proposed second story front setback from the first story breaks up the front massing to minimize the appearance of the second story from the street. III. FRONTAGE CONDITIONS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Frontage Condition Guidelines. Homes should not have significantly greater height at the front of a property than that of adjacent homes which this proposed project will not since the second story will be set back from the plane of the second stories of the adjacent homes and the roof pitch has been minimized to reduce overall height. IV. GARAGES & DRIVEWAYS - The proposed project IS consistent with the existing structure of the garages and driveways. The garage door will be a2 -car which will not overwhelm the street view of the home with garage and it is a 3 -car garage in order to meet the bedroom count requirements. The driveway will remain a circular driveway as is currently existing. V. ARCHITECTURAL STYLE - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines. The proposed project will be harmonious and compatible in architectural style with the neighborhood and have a similar feel to the design as other prairie style homes more recently constructed in the Highlands. VI. HEIGHT, BULK & SCALE - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines. The proposed first floor plate height of g feet and second floor plate height of 8.5 feet does consider existing plate heights established within the immediate neighborhood. VII. ROOFLINES - The proposed project IS consistent with the Roofline Guidelines based on the roof plan and material (concrete tiles) being compatible with the Highlands requirements. The roof plan is compatible with the proposed architectural style and design of the home. The pitch of the second story addition has been lowered in order to create less height and mass within the view of neighboring properties. VIII. ENTRY - The proposed project IS consistent with the Entry Guidelines. The entry is set back from the front roof line and is consistent with the architectural style of the home. IX. WINDOWS & DOORS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines. The window and doors are consistent with the quality typical of the neighborhood. The window material on the second story have been designed to minimize direct views into neighboring residences and outdoor spaces of neighboring properties. X. ARTICULATION - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines. The second story walls provide articulation that creates some visual interest to the second story. XI. FACADE DESIGN - The proposed project IS generally consistent with the Facade Design Guidelines based on the home's overall design. XII. COLORS & MATERIALS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines. The colors used on the exterior of the home will be an earth tone color pallet. XIII. ACCESSORY LIGHTING - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines. XIV. ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Additions and Alterations. XV. - HILLSIDE PROPERTIES - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines. The home is located in a hillside area and as such the massing, scale and setbacks have been contained to minimize potential view impacts on existing homes. XVI. - FENCES, WALLS, GATES, & HEDGES - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines and most of the materials are existing. XVII. LANDSCAPE & HARDSCAPE - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines. New landscaping will be added that does not block the adjacent properties from enjoying views of the surroundings. The applicant agreed to change the front yard retaining wall to be a maximum height of 24 inches tall. XVIII. FENCES & WALLS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Guidelines for Fences and Walls. IXX. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA & SETBACKS - The proposed project IS consistent with the Minimum Floor Area and has far greater setbacks than required. XX. AFFECT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES & NEIGHBORHOOD - The General Plan Land Use Policy LU -3.5 requires that, "new construction, additions, renovations, and infill developments be sensitive to neighborhood context, building form, scale and colors." The proposed project is consistent with the Single -Family Residential Design Guidelines. The proposed project does integrate design that mitigates the massing and scale issues with respect to the streetscape as well as adjoining properties. ACTION X Approved/ Conditionally Approved/ Denied These Findings and Action were made by the following ARB Members of the Association at a meeting held on September 20, 2021 via an in person hearing in front of the subject home. Members In Attendance -Vote: Dean Obst, ARB Chair - Yes Lee Kuo - Yes David Arvizu - Yes Patrick Cronin - Yes Signature: APPEALS The ARB's decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission and the City Council, in compliance with Section 9108.07 of the City's Development Code. Section 9108.07.020 of the City's Development Code states: Decisions of the ARB or ARB Chairperson on all matters specified in Section 9108.01.060 (Homeowners Association Architectural Review Board) and 9108.01.070 (Homeowners Association Architectural Review Board Chairperson) may be appealed to the Commission. Section 9108.07.040 of the City's Development Code states: An appeal shall be submitted in writing and shall specifically state the pertinent facts and the basis for the appeal. 1.Pertinent Facts and the Basis for the Appeal. The pertinent facts and the basis for the appeal shall include, at a minimum, the specific grounds for the appeal, where there was an error or abuse of discretion by the previous Review Authority (e.g., Commission, Director, ARB, ARB Chairperson, or other City official) in the consideration and action on the matter being appealed, and/or where the decision was not supported by the evidence on the record. Appeals filed by a City official, a Commissioner, or a Councilmember shall be exempt from the requirements of this Subparagraph. 2.Shall be Filed within 10 Days. The appeal shall be filed with the Department within io days following the actual date the decision was rendered. a.Appeals addressed to the Council shall be filed with Planning Services. 3.Accompanied by Filing Fee. The appeal shall be accompanied by the filing fee identified in the Fee Schedule. 4.Suspension of Action. Once an appeal is filed, any action on the associated project is suspended until the appeal is processed and a final decision is rendered by the applicable Review Authority.