Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Remodel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DRB approves major remodel and additions at 18266 Ransom Road; board eases cantilever restriction with privacy and lighting conditions
Summary
The Glendale Design Review Board approved a remodel and additions at 18266 Ransom Road that convert and expand a mid‑century residence into a contemporary design, while directing staff and the applicant to limit nighttime light spillover and to study privacy impacts of a proposed cantilevered seating area.
Get email alerts on the Residential Remodel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Glendale Design Review Board on Feb. 27 approved a remodel and additions at 18266 Ransom Road that will update a 1955 ranch‑style residence to a contemporary design, add roughly 1,203 square feet of living area, and alter exterior materials and roof form, subject to conditions addressing a cantilevered deck element and exterior lighting.
Staff described the two‑lot site in the El Miradero neighborhood as totaling about 43,784 square feet, with an existing 4,769-square‑foot house, a substandard three‑car garage and an in‑ground pool. The proposal will remove the existing roof and construct a lower flat roofline consistent with the new modern design; the flat roof was described in staff materials as slightly lower than the existing gable roof. No grading is proposed and staff noted no anticipated impacts to the site’s single indigenous coast live oak, though public‑works urban forestry flagged two scrub oaks adjacent to the driveway and added conditions to update the landscape plan and obtain an indigenous‑tree permit.
The remodel adds a 634‑square‑foot first‑floor addition and a 569‑square‑foot second‑floor addition, for a total of 1,203 square feet of additions. Staff recommended conditions to reduce the height of an 8‑foot side gate to align with surrounding walls, to pull back a proposed cantilevered lower seating area so it follows the down‑sloping topography and reduces privacy conflicts, and to reduce exterior lighting to avoid spillover. The design includes permeable pavers in the driveway, screening for trash and mechanical equipment and a roof patio above the remodeled garage intended to reduce bulk.
The architect, Aram Alajajan, and project team said they had coordinated with city staff and that the lighting fixtures proposed were intended as architectural wall washing and low‑level down lighting; the team requested flexibility on the lighting condition, saying fixtures were intended to highlight architectural forms and not to create glare. Dozens of callers and neighbors phoned or submitted cards; public comment at the hearing was strongly weighted in favor of the remodel and owners said they had worked with arborists and the city on tree protection.
Board members said the project design generally met the guidelines for the modern style and praised the team for limiting grading and for retaining natural hillside vegetation. Several members expressed concern about the cantilever and lighting; after discussion the board voted to approve the project but modified staff’s recommended language so the cantilever may remain if the applicant demonstrates there will be no adverse privacy impacts on the neighbors or, if there are impacts, that they can be mitigated. The board also asked the applicant to work with staff to refine the lighting plan so it highlights architecture without creating light pollution or spillover onto neighboring properties.
The motion, as amended, approved the project with the staff conditions plus the board’s clarifications (study and mitigate privacy impacts of the cantilevered seating area; restudy the lighting plan to avoid excessive spillover while allowing architectural accent lighting; update landscape with existing trees and obtain indigenous‑tree permit; lower the 8‑foot side gate height as requested). The motion passed 3‑0 (motion by Board Member Welch; second by Board Member Halajian; Chair Koskonian, Welch and Halajian voted yes).
Staff docketed the item as Designer Review Board case PDR004199‑2024. The decision and conditions will be posted at glendaleca.gov; any appeal must be filed as provided in DRB procedures.

