Board grants preliminary approval to large Maple Avenue remodel, requests broader parcel clarity and landscaping revisions
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The board granted preliminary approval, 3–2, for a remodel and second‑story addition at 748 Maple but several commissioners asked the applicant to address unresolved issues affecting the entire parcel including the rear apartment/garage condition, access easement dependence, driveway and tree removal, and landscaping choices.
The Carpinteria Architectural Review Board on July 31 voted to grant preliminary approval for the Burgess‑Burke residence remodel and addition at 748 Maple Avenue, while several members warned the project relies on unresolved conditions at a rear structure and on-right‑of‑way easements that will affect neighbors.
Staff described the proposal as a 1,916‑square‑foot addition to an existing 997‑square‑foot house for a total of 2,913 square feet, including a new single‑car garage on the front lot, replacement of the front porch, a second‑floor addition and new exterior finishes (horizontal siding, shake shingles, stone porch columns and a gray composite roof). The project entails a new driveway apron that would remove one jacaranda street tree and reconfigure access; staff noted certain portions of the existing house currently encroach into required setbacks and that a conditional‑use modification would be required for structural work within those legally nonconforming areas.
Several board members expressed concern that the proposal relies on parking and access arrangements tied to a rear garage/apartment structure that remains in visibly poor condition. Commissioner comments repeatedly returned to whether the parcel should be considered in its entirety — including the rear building's maintenance and parking assignment — before advancing a front‑house remodel. Vice Chair O'Connor and other members said unresolved easement and code‑compliance history for the rear structure are matters that should be clarified with planning staff and through planning commission review.
Board members also questioned the scale of a proposed deep single‑car garage, the width of the new driveway apron, and the removal of a jacaranda street tree for vehicle access; several suggested pulling the garage and driveway back to reduce paved area and preserve street trees. Commissioners also asked for a more maintenance‑resistant plant list and cautioned about using species that require intensive upkeep or that are prone to decline in Carpinteria's coastal environment.
Despite those concerns, a motion to grant preliminary approval passed with conditions that the applicant coordinate final landscaping, driveway design and details for the conditional‑use structural work before returning for a final ARB hearing.
Votes at a glance Motion: Preliminary approval with comments about drive apron, tree removal, plant palette and need to clarify rear‑building status and easement dependencies. Outcome: Preliminary approval (3 in favor, 2 opposed).