Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Plan 514 N Alamar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Design Review Commission continues 514 N. Alamar site plan, asks for on-site arborist and materials board
Summary
The commission continued review of a proposed 2‑story house at 514 North Alamar Street after hearing concerns about tree protection, grading, visibility to neighbors and fence details. Commissioners required an arborist on site during construction, a physical materials board and coordination on a new privacy fence before returning.
The Design Review Commission on July 28 continued review of planning case SPR24-038, a proposal to build a new two‑story single‑family home on a landlocked parcel at 514 North Alamar Street, citing outstanding questions about protection of dozens of oak trees, slope/grade impacts and final exterior materials.
City planning staff summarized the project and recommended approval subject to conditions, noting the revised house is 4,975 square feet of livable area, complies with R‑1 standards and is intended to sit behind a front lot that the City of Alhambra already approved. “Staff recommends that the design review commission approve planning case number SPR24‑038 for assessor parcel number 5364025007 to allow the construction of a new two story residence subject to the recommended conditions of approval,” Christine (planning staff) told the commission.
Neighbors and nearby property owners urged careful review focused on trees, shadows and drainage. “That 12‑foot elevation along with 26 feet creates a presence that is 38 feet over and above us,” said Anne White of 1112 Alhambra Road, describing concern about how effective height is measured and the potential for increased shadowing on lower lots. Other commenters raised questions about drainage pits, mosquito abatement, sewer/pump requirements and long‑term visibility of a two‑story house from down‑slope yards.
The applicant said they reduced the second‑floor area from an earlier submittal, intend to protect the oak trees and propose a six‑foot solid metal privacy fence along the north property line. “We like the trees… it not only provides privacy for us, but also to our neighbors,” the applicant said, adding that tree heights were measured with augmented‑reality software and ranged roughly 26–45 feet.
Commission discussion focused on tree protection methods, verification of the arborist’s recommendations and the need for physical materials. Commissioners asked for: (1) the arborist’s full report to be provided and for the arborist to be on‑site to mark tree protection fencing and review construction methods before ground disturbance; (2) a physical materials board showing stucco, roof tile, fence samples and the garage/door colors; and (3) more detailed fence/footing details coordinated with the arborist and the city landscape architect so tree protection zones and fence footings do not conflict. Vice Chair Salo and others also suggested a story‑pole/flag exercise or similar on‑site visualization for neighbors, though staff said the city does not require story‑poles.
On a motion by Commissioner Chen and second by Commissioner Lopez, the commission voted 5–0 to continue SPR24‑038 to an unspecified date with the direction above and the requirement that the applicant work with planning, the city architect and the city landscape architect before returning.
