In a recent Glendale City Council meeting held on September 9, 2025, significant discussions centered around an appeal concerning a proposed residential expansion at 906 Whitehaven Terrace. The project, which seeks to add a two-story, 1,865 square foot addition to an existing single-family home, has sparked considerable debate among council members, city staff, and local residents.

The Design Review Board (DRB) had previously approved the project with five conditions aimed at addressing concerns about massing, privacy, and neighborhood compatibility. These conditions included reducing the overall scale of the addition, removing a proposed balcony, and enhancing privacy through landscaping. However, the appellants, who reside nearby, argue that the DRB's decision violated municipal codes and failed to adequately consider the impact on their properties.

During the meeting, city planning associate Eric Gee presented the details of the appeal, highlighting the appellants' claims that the DRB exceeded its authority and did not fulfill its mandatory duties. The appellants contend that the proposed addition would significantly alter the character of the neighborhood, which predominantly features single-story homes. They expressed concerns about privacy violations and the potential for increased shadowing on their properties due to the height and scale of the new structure.

The applicants, represented by architect Harry Acopian, defended the design, emphasizing that it complies with zoning regulations and is intended to accommodate their growing family. Acopian noted that the design has been modified to address neighbor concerns, including the removal of the balcony and adjustments to the roofline. He argued that the project would enhance the neighborhood's aesthetic and provide necessary living space for the family.

Public comments during the meeting reflected a mix of support and opposition. Some neighbors voiced their approval of the project, citing the need for modernized homes in the area, while others raised concerns about the potential loss of privacy and the overall impact on the neighborhood's character.

As the council deliberated, they considered two motions: one to sustain the DRB's decision with conditions and another to continue the matter, allowing for further review and potential revisions. The discussions underscored the complexities of balancing individual property rights with community standards and the importance of maintaining neighborhood character.

The council's decision on this matter will have lasting implications for the residents of Whitehaven Terrace and the broader Glendale community, as it sets a precedent for future residential expansions in the area. The council is expected to reconvene to finalize their decision, weighing the concerns of both the applicants and the appellants.