Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings and Action ReportRancho Santa Anita Property Owners’ Association ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Findings and Action Report -1- Date: October 30, 2025 File No. 302 Project Address: 1044 Fallen Leaf Road Association Name: RSAPOA Applicant Name: Benjamin Voong Property Owner(s) Name: Benjamin Voong Project Description: New home FINDINGS Only check those that are apply and provide a written explanation for each The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Site Planning Principles and Neighborhood Context Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines. The proposed project is,  is not consistent with the Forms and Mass Guidelines. Explanation: New proposed residence is consistent with guidelines. The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Frontage Conditions Guidelines. Explanation: New residence abides by required setbacks and frontage Recommendations. The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Garages and Driveways Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed garages and driveways conform with Design Guidelines The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Architectural Styles Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence has inconsistent window, door and railing design in the front with the overall architecture of the house, which the homeowner has agreed to rectify Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners’ Association ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Findings and Action Report -2- The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Height, Bulk, and Scale Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines The proposed project is,  is not consistent with the Roofline Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines The proposed project is,  is not consistent with the Entries Guidelines. Explanation: New entry abides by the Design Guidelines The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Windows and Doors Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines The proposed project is,  is not consistent with the Articulation Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines The proposed project is,  is not consistent with the Facade Details Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Colors and Materials Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners’ Association ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Findings and Action Report -3- The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Accessory Lighting Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Additions, Alterations, and Accessory Buildings/Structures Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Hillside Properties Guidelines. Explanation: Not applicable The proposed project  is,  is not consistent with the Fences, Walls, Gates, and Hedges Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines The proposed project is,  is not consistent with the Impervious Coverage and Landscape Areas Guidelines. Explanation: Proposed residence abides by the Design Guidelines 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  CONDITIONALLY APPROVED  DENIED Date of ARB Meeting: OCTOBER 30, 2025 ARB Members Rendering the Above Decision: Sanjay B. Kucheria (Chair), Diana Nee (Vice Chair), Shahnawaz Ahmad, Sudheer Donthineni AYES: 4 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners’ Association ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Findings and Action Report -4- Conditions of Approval: Upper floor front center windows, front balcony railings and main entrance door will be coordinated with the rest of the front façade from a design cohesion perspective. 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 $728.00 appeal fee by 5 p.m. on May 26, 2025. You will be notified if an appeal is filed. Approved designs shall expire in one year 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 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 the ARB Chairperson at rsapoaarb@gmail.com / 818-389-9131. Thank you. c: City of Arcadia, Planning Division