Glendale board approves remodel and addition at 1860 Verdugo Knowles Drive with conditions

The Glendale Design Review Board on Dec. 11 approved a remodel and addition to the single‑family residence at 1860 Verdugo Knowles Drive, with conditions to protect trees and require construction‑access coordination. The motion carried 4‑0.

Staff told the board the hillside lot measures about 18,543 square feet and currently holds a 1,602‑square‑foot house; the applicant proposes to expand the main residence to roughly 3,490 square feet and, with a junior accessory dwelling unit, a combined total the staff presentation identified as approximately 3,925 square feet. Staff said proposed demolition would remove about 41.12% of the existing house and that grading for the project is about 162.34 cubic yards. The site contains 18 on‑site coast live oaks and seven off‑site oaks; staff said arborist and geotechnical reports are on file and were shared with the board.

Project architect Alan Malikian said the addition is sited to avoid drilling into oak tree drip lines, that no protected oaks will be removed, and that the existing nonconforming two detached front garages are proposed to remain and be repaired rather than replaced. Consulting arborist Arsen Margosian told the board excavations will occur outside the drip lines, that on‑site monitoring and fencing will be used, and that he will serve as the arborist of record during construction.

Neighbors raised concerns during public comment about traffic and emergency‑vehicle access on the narrow street, the small size and future of the front garages, and the need for clear, enforceable protections for trees. Nancy Klein said she had been told the owner intended to demolish the small garages and asked for the plan to show the complete layout; Arman Kara, a property owner, denied plans to clear‑cut trees or remove the garages and said the crew observed the arborist’s guidance.

Board members who spoke in deliberation praised the quality of the design and the tree‑protection approach but emphasized ongoing neighbor outreach and construction‑management plans to minimize neighborhood disruption. Board member Simonian moved to approve the project with the staff‑recommended conditions; board member Welch seconded and the motion carried 4‑0.

Next steps: staff indicated building permits and subsequent plan‑check reviews (including public works and fire prevention) will follow; appeals of the DRB decision must be filed within 15 calendar days of the decision date.