Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings and Action Report 10-20-2021(HOA NAME) ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Findings and Action Report -1- Date: October 20, 2021 File No. Project Address: 860 Volante Drive Association Name: Rancho Santa Anita Residents’ Association Applicant Name: Eric Tsang Property Owner(s) Name: Ashot Sandoyan Project Description: Construct a new 1- story single family residence (SFD) on an 18,200 square foot lot. SFD includes 4 bedrooms, living room, dining room, family room, kitchen, wok kitchen, laundry room, cabana and swimming pool. SFD is 4,245 SF. FINDINGS Only check those that are apply and provide a written explanation for each The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Site Planning Principles and Neighborhood Context Guidelines. Explanation: The building footprint is within required setbacks and considers potential privacy issues of neighbors. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Forms and Mass Guidelines. Explanation: The building mass is consistent with our homes on the block. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Frontage Conditions Guidelines. Explanation: Is compatible with the existing on-site relationship to the street. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Garages and Driveways Guidelines. Explanation: The attached garage was moved slightly farther back from the street to provide great articulation to the front façade. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Architectural Styles Guidelines. (HOA NAME) ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Findings and Action Report -2- Explanation: Has a clear and distinctive architectural style that is consistent applied throughout the design. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Height, Bulk, and Scale Guidelines. Explanation: House is one story. The overall height was reduced by one foot to help preserve the rear neighbors’ view of the mountains. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Roofline Guidelines. Explanation: The roof plans including overhang, color, material gables and dormers are consistent with the chosen architectural style. The applicant agreed to a slate roof which will enhance the overall beauty of the house. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Entries Guidelines. Explanation: The front porch provides an inviting entrance The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Windows and Doors Guidelines. Explanation: The building facades are well articulated with window and door types complementary of the architectural style. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Articulation Guidelines. Explanation: The design avoids large expanses of wall plane. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Facade Details Guidelines. Explanation: Façade details consistently applied. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Colors and Materials Guidelines. Explanation: The design utilizes earth tones. (HOA NAME) ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Findings and Action Report -3- The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Accessory Lighting Guidelines. Explanation: The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Additions, Alterations, and Accessory Buildings/Structures Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed design includes a cabana The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Hillside Properties Guidelines. Explanation: NA The proposed project x is,  is not consistent with the Fences, Walls, Gates, and Hedges Guidelines. Explanation: Rear block wall was moved away from the property line and discussed with neighbors to the rear. The proposed project X is,  is not consistent with the Impervious Coverage and Landscape Areas Guidelines. Explanation: The design preserves the deodar tree located in the front yard. An arborist report indicates the tree is in good health and will be protected during construction. The amount of hardscape was reduced in the rear yard and will use porous pavers. ARB recommended and the applicant agreed to use 24 inch box podocarpus macophyllus for rear hedge. This plant is slower growing and the applicant is urged to maintain the height to help preserve the mountain views for the neighbors. (HOA NAME) ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Findings and Action Report -4- ACTION Pursuant to City’s Development Code Section 9107.20.050, a Site Plan and Design Review in the Homeowners Association Areas may be approved only if it is found that the proposed development is consistent with the City’s adopted Design Guidelines.  APPROVED X CONDITIONALLY APPROVED  DENIED Date of ARB Meeting: SEPTEMBER 16, 2021 Item continued pending final approval by Chair that ARB recommendations are incorporated ARB Members Rendering the Above Decision: AYES: Boehr, Chan, Eriksson, Huang, Fricke, Medeiros, Pappas NOES: ABSENT: Conditions of Approval: 1) Owner, project architect, contractor, neighbors who participated in this Hearing and a representative of the ARB shall have a preconstruction walk through prior to construction beginning. Reason for Denial: There is a ten (10) day appeal period for this application. To file an appeal, a completed Appeal Application form must be submitted to the City’s Planning Division along with a $600.00 appeal fee by _________ p.m. on__________________________. You will be notified if an appeal is filed. Approved designs shall expire in one year (_October 21, 2022_) from the effective date unless plans are submitted to Building Services for plan-check, a building permit is issued and the construction is diligently pursued, a certificate of occupancy has been issued, or the approval is renewed. The final plans must be consistent with the approved design (HOA NAME) ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Findings and Action Report -5- concept plans and any conditions of approval. Any inconsistency from the approved design concept plans may preclude the issuance of a building permit. An extension may be granted by the ARB or designee, or the Review Authority that approved the project for a maximum period of one (1) year from the initial expiration date. An extension can only be granted if the required findings can be made. Please note that acceptance of an extension request does not indicate approval of an extension. You may visit the City’s website at www.ArcadiaCA.gov/noticesanddecisions to view this document. If you have any questions regarding the above decision, please contact Greg Medeiros, ARB Chairperson at 626-833-0249, ranchosaarb@gmail.com. Thank you. c: City of Arcadia, Planning Division