Appeal filed against modern two-story residence project near historic district
A group of residents has filed an appeal against a proposed home approved by the city’s Design Review Board in April that would cover a total of 9,000 square feet near the Ard Eevin-Highlands Historic District.
The two-story home — proposed by owner Zareh Issakhanian, who’s owned the vacant property since 2006 — would have 7,562 square-foot of residential space and 1,540 square feet for a garage. The project is located at 1732 Ard Eevin Ave., a hillside lot adjacent to the Ard Eevin historic home.
The appeal, filed by residents living near the project and local historic preservationists, contends that the project’s current modern exterior and large size is incompatible with surrounding historic homes.
At more than 7,500 square feet, the residence is much larger than the average home in the neighborhood, which is 2,852 square feet. There is only one other residence in the neighborhood that is similar in size.
Issakhanian said the residence’s size is reasonable and well within the city’s code, considering the more than 8-acre lot on which he is building. He added that the modern design “moves forward,” while maintaining the beauty of the area.
“This is vacant land. I’m not demolishing anything,” Issakhanian said in a phone interview Friday. “It is a dream home of mine that I’ve dreamt for many years...I’m not asking more than I’m allowed to build.”
The appellants also claim that the staff report recommending the project incorrectly relied on a mitigated-negative declaration, or MND, adopted by the city’s Planning Commission in 2010 for a previous project proposed by the same property owner. In that project, the property owner sought to divide the lot in two, a request that has since been abandoned.
According to the appeal, the 2010 MND “did not analyze the aesthetic and historic resource impacts of these design elements” in the historic neighborhood.
In a letter sent to the Design Review Board before the April 13 meeting by the Glendale Historical Society, Greg Grammar, the society’s president, wrote that the proposed project has changed “significantly enough” since the 2010 MND to to be considered a “major revision” and, under California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, a new environmental review document should be prepared.
However, at the start of the Design Review Board meeting on April 13, Chris Baghdikian, planner with the city’s Community Development Department, said there were no new impacts since the 2010 MND.
“The proposed area of construction is similar to what was initially reviewed and approved,” Baghdikian said. “Staff’s determination was the adopted MND would apply to the current project.”
Issakhanian said his attorney has done a review of what the appellants are claiming and found that they have absolutely no basis and will present that finding at the appeal hearing.
Appellant Judy Roa, who lives in the historic Ard Eevin home located near the project site, spoke out against the project during the public comment portion of the Design Review Board meeting.
“There’s a lot of community concern and support for them not doing the project in this way,” Roa said in a phone interview on Monday. “[The owners] should be considering where they’re building and put something more appropriate to the compatibility with the neighborhood up instead of what they’re doing.”
Nearly everyone who spoke during public comment portion of the April meeting opposed approval of the project with its current design for similar reasons argued in the appeal.
However, many said they did not oppose development on the site in general and said the design on its own is beautiful.
At the April meeting, the Northwest Glendale Homeowner’s Assn., represented by Philip Keller, opposed the project on its scale alone.
“We support the applicant’s right to build their dream home … but there’s a right that comes with it, a responsibility with that right to do so with a design that is compatible with the surrounding properties,” Keller said before the project was approved.
The appeal will be heard by the City Council, but no hearing date has been set. However, the group arguing against the project has hired a land-use attorney to spearhead the appeal, according to Roa.
Twitter: @JeffLanda
UPDATES:
2:10 p.m.: This article was updated to add comments from property owner, Zareh Issakhanian.
This article was originally published on June 8, 2:15 p.m.
