You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Ji, Eric
To: Argineh DerHartonian Galstyan
Subject: RE: 906 Whitehaven terrace
Date: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 8:43:00 AM
Hello,
Thank you; your comments have been received and will be forwarded to the Design Review Board members for the upcoming February 13, 2025, Design Review Hearing.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
From: Argineh DerHartonian Galstyan <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 12:14 AM
To: Ji, Eric <[email protected]>
Subject: 906 Whitehaven terrace
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Good Morning Mr. Ji
Hope all is well. I am the homeowner of 900 Whitehaven terrace. I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed second-story addition to 906 Whitehaven terrace.
This second-story addition will be encroaching on our privacy and will cause a nuisance to the use and enjoyment of our property. Specifically, the large second-story balcony will overlook our dining room, kitchen breakfast area and our backyard. Two of the three windows found on the west elevation will be looking into our dining room and kitchen.
Whitehaven terrace is a sloped street with primarily one-story track homes. 1066 Old Phillips and 1060 Old Phillips are included in the neighborhood survey list and should not be. These properties are not within 300 linear feet. This was confirmed with the Public Work Engineering Department and City Engineer Megin Razaei (please see attached).
Given this information,
there are seven one-story homes and three two-story homes in the neighborhood. One of these two-story homes is a corner lot (1071 Old Phillips) and the other is my home (900 Whitehaven), which is a cul-da-sac lot. The west side of my home faces the hillside, which is owned by the City Glendale. Please note that my house was originally built as a two-story home in 1974. The only other two-story home in the neighborhood is 915 Whitehaven which is located across the street from 906 Whitehaven. Therefore, I kindly request that you update the neighborhood survey list to reflect this accurate information.
Furthermore, the proposed plans for the remodel seem to be more akin to a new construction project rather than a traditional remodel. The proposed home's mass and scale are EXHIBIT 8
disproportionate to the lot size. The proposed home is significantly larger than the one-story homes on the east side of the current residence. Also, there are no contemporary farm style homes in the immediate vicinity or within the surrounding area. The proposed second-story addition with its large balcony will also be intrusive to the homeowners residing below them on Moorside. It appears the homeowner is trying to mega size his home and views at the expense of his neighbor’s privacy.
Please relay my concerns to the Design Review board. Thank you for your time and assistance.
Respectfully,
Argineh Derhartonian Galstyan
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 8
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Ji, Eric
To: Argineh DerHartonian Galstyan
Subject: RE: 906 Whitehaven building footprints for hearing on 2/13/25 Date: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 3:39:00 PM
Hello,
Thank you; I will have the images ready and shared during your turn to speak on the project item.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
From: Argineh DerHartonian Galstyan <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 1:41 PM
To: Ji, Eric <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 906 Whitehaven building footprints for hearing on 2/13/25
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Good Afternoon Mr. Ji,
My apologies for the redundant email, it appeared one of the images were not attached. I will be attending the hearing and would like the attached building footprints of 1066 and 1060 Old Phillips to be presented during the time that I speak. Please confirm the receipt of this email.
Thank you for your time and assistance.
1066 Old Phillips
EXHIBIT 8
1060 Old Phillips
EXHIBIT 8
Kind Regards,
Argineh DerHartonian Galstyan
EXHIBIT 8
From: Argineh DerHartonian Galstyan
To: Ji, Eric
Subject: Re: 906 Whitehaven terrace/photos to be presented at hearing 2/13/25 Date: Thursday, February 13, 2025 11:20:48 AM
Attachments: glendaleca_logo.png
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Good Morning,
Thank you for response. During the time that I speak I will ask you to please pull up the images/maps. To efficiently use my speaking time, please arrange the photos and maps in the following order:
1st reference: Panoramic photo of two-story track homes located on the sloped hill of Whitehaven terrace.
2nd reference: 2 Backyard photos, kitchen photo, then dinning room photo (in this order please).
3rd reference: Building footprint maps of 1060 and 1066 Old Phillips. 4th reference: 2 Master bedroom sitting room photos. One picture shows an armchair and then next photo is the close up view of the proposed roof from the same master bedroom window.
In total there will be 7 images and 2 maps.
Once again, thank you for time, patience and assistance. Looking forward to meeting you this evening.
Kind Regards,
Argineh DerHartonian
On Thursday, February 13, 2025 at 09:20:15 AM PST, Ji, Eric <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello,
I will have the 7 photos, and 2 images of the map shared on the screen during your speaking turn.
Please let me know if you would like them to be presented in a certain order or if you have any other questions or concerns.
Best regards,
EXHIBIT 8
Eric Ji | Planning Associate
Community Development
633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, CA 91206
P: +1 (818) 937-8178
[email protected] |
GlendaleCA.gov | Follow us!
From: Argineh DerHartonian <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2025 8:52 AM
To: Ji, Eric <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 906 Whitehaven terrace/photos to be presented at hearing 2/13/25
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Good Morning Mr. Ji,
Hope all is well. Please confirm that you will be able to show the 7 photos provided in the email sent yesterday at the hearing. If there are any restrictions please let me know asap. Thank you for your time and assistance.
Kind Regards,
Argineh DerHartonian
> On Feb 12, 2025, at 2:23 PM, Argineh DerHartonian <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> Good Afternoon Mr. Ji,
>
> Hope all is well. Please see attached photos depicting privacy concerns regarding the second-story addition with balcony.
>
> Please have these photos and the building foot print photos ready to be shown during the time that I speak. Thank you so much for your time and assistance. >
> Kind Regards,
>
> Argineh G.
>
>
> Backyard photos: Privacy concerns
EXHIBIT 8
From: Argineh DerHartonian
To: Ji, Eric
Subject: Re: Speaking time
Date: Thursday, February 13, 2025 3:17:26 PM
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Thank you for the information. I will ask for additional time.
Just a heads up, when I ask you to put up the photos, I will not stop to further discuss the photos and will continue to speak to make efficient use of my time. I am sure the staff can review the photos in depth at a later time if needed.
Thank you again for all your help.
Kind Regards,
Argineh DerHartonian
On Feb 13, 2025, at 1:58 PM, Ji, Eric <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello,
The speaking time is determined by the Chair of the Design Review Board - you may request for time extension at the hearing.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
<glendaleca_logo.png>
Eric Ji | Planning Associate
Community Development
633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, CA 91206
P: +1 (818) 937-8178
[email protected] |
GlendaleCA.gov | Follow us!
-----Original Message-----
From: Argineh DerHartonian <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2025 11:44 AM
To: Ji, Eric <[email protected]
>
Subject: Speaking time
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Hello Mr. Eric
EXHIBIT 8
My apologies for the additional email. Could you and the staff please allow me to speak for 5 minutes? With the multiple photos I am worried that I won’t be able to finish an addressing my concerns. Please advise. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Kind Regards,
Argineh DerHartonian
EXHIBIT 8
>
>
>
>
>
> Master bedroom sitting area photo depicting busy and disproportionate roof form and monumental entry.
>
>
> Kitchen breakfast area photos: Privacy concerns
>
>
> Dinning and formal living room: Privacy concerns
>
>
> Panoramic photo of two-story track homes located on Whitehaven terrace sloped hill >
>
>
>
>
From: Ji, Eric
To: Argineh DerHartonian
Subject: RE: 906 Whitehaven terrace 2/13/25 hearing aftermath Date: Friday, February 14, 2025 1:12:00 PM
Hello,
As the decision in last night’s hearing was to approve the project with conditions, there will be no further hearing for the project. The applicant is to work with staff on addressing the conditions of approval provided by the Design Review Board prior to submitting their plans for Building plan check. If the conditions are not properly addressed, the project may go back the Design Review Board for further directions.
If you would like to stay informed about the project, please let me know and I will keep you informed if the project is ever required to go before the Design Review Board or to the City Council.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
From: Argineh DerHartonian <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 11:19 AM
To: Ji, Eric <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 906 Whitehaven terrace 2/13/25 hearing aftermath
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Thank you for your response. When will the next DRB meeting be regarding the new revised plans? Several home owners in the area would like to know. Traditionally, there are cards given out at the end of the meeting to fill out, so residents can be kept in the loop regarding updates on the project.
Please let me know what needs to be filled out in order for us to be informed about the proposed project.
Thank you for your time.
Kind Regards,
Argineh DerHartonian Galstyan
On Feb 14, 2025, at 12:44 PM, Ji, Eric <[email protected] > wrote:
Hello,
Unfortunately, once the public comment portion is closed and a decision has been made, no further comments will be accepted by the Design Review Board.
If you wish to appeal the Design Review Board’s decision, you must submit an appeal application and pay the associated fee of $2,084.00 within 15 days of the decision date (from 2/13/2025 to 2/28/2025). The appeal will be reviewed by the City Council during a Council hearing. You may indicate the specific conditions you wish to appeal on the application form.
Please review the appeal application form and code section before proceeding:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/74238/638458280171970000
Chapter 30.62 APPEALS
If you require any consultation or assistance with filling out the application, please let me know.
To apply, please click the link below and enter in the search bar “Appeal of Planning Decision” and click on apply to proceed.
https://glendaleca-energovweb.tylerhost.net/apps/SelfService#/applicationAssistant? sectionName=All&showTemplates=false
<image001.png>
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
<glendaleca_logo.png>
Eric Ji | Planning Associate
Community Development
633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, CA 91206
P: +1 (818) 937-8178
[email protected] | GlendaleCA.gov | Follow us!
From: Argineh DerHartonian <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 8:29 AM
To: Ji, Eric <[email protected]>
Cc: Martin Galstyan <[email protected]>
Subject: 906 Whitehaven terrace 2/13/25 hearing aftermath
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Good Morning Mr. Ji,
Hope all is well. Thank you again for all your help yesterday, I truly appreciate your continuous follow up and concern. The opposing party has a few questions as to what the next steps are. From my understanding, cards were suppose to be given to fill out in order to be kept in the loop for the next meeting. I know the agenda was approved with several conditions. However, can the approved agenda with those conditions be appealed? Or do we have to wait to see what the revision is going to look like? Do we have 15 days after yesterdays hearing to appeal? What are our rights as citizens?
Also, my husband Martin Galstyan asked a question that was not addressed by the board. We kindly ask that the Design Review Board members provide clarity about what was conveyed by my husband yesterday.
The following was said:
Adding a second story to a home situated on the view side of a sloped street is not an easy task.
Many have tried on the same side of the street, but were unsuccessful.
The previous owner of this property (906 Whitehaven terrace) actually sold the home within 2 months of purchase at a loss due to the fact that they were unable to add a second story.
Another example is 914 Whitehaven that was purchased in August 2020 and sold September 2021 due to the fact that they were denied a second story addition. In fact the current homeowner of 914 also tried to add a second story and was rejected and had to settle on a facelift.
Such a large home on a lot this size is virtually non-existent. I tried to locate a home with a FAR of 32% and similar characteristics as the proposed home in the immediate area, but was not successful.
“ I respectfully ask you, what makes this project the exception? “
I know the board members are very busy, but we would appreciate an answer. Please forward this email to them. As always, thank you for your time and consideration.
With Gratitude,
Argineh DerHartonian
From: Ji, Eric
To: mike michaelian; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Letter and photos
Date: Friday, February 14, 2025 3:42:00 PM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
Hello,
The fee is per application and not per person filing the fee.
Best regards,
From: mike michaelian <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 3:40 PM
To: [email protected]; Ji, Eric <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Letter and photos
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Please clarify...
Does the $2084.00 fee per person filing appeals? Or if a group of neighbors appeal, does the $2084.00 cover the entire group making the appeal?
On Friday, February 14, 2025 at 03:00:06 PM PST, Ji, Eric <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello,
If you wish to appeal the Design Review Board’s decision, you must submit an appeal application and pay the associated fee of $2,084.00 within 15 days of the decision date (from 2/13/2025 to 2/28/2025). The appeal will be reviewed by the City Council during a Council hearing. You may indicate the specific conditions you wish to appeal on the application form.
Please review the appeal application form and code section before proceeding:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/74238/638458280171970000
Chapter 30.62 APPEALS
If you require any consultation or assistance with filling out the application, please let me know.
To apply, please click the link below and enter in the search bar “Appeal of Planning Decision” and click on apply to proceed.
https://glendaleca-energovweb.tylerhost.net/apps/SelfService#/applicationAssistant?sectionName=All&showTemplates=false
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
Eric Ji | Planning Associate
Community Development
633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, CA 91206
P:
+1 (818) 937-8178
[email protected] | GlendaleCA.gov | Follow us!
From: mike michaelian <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 2:55 PM
To: [email protected]; Ji, Eric <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Letter and photos
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
There has to be an appeals process. The information presented yesterday wasn't even correct, as I show in the attached document.
I want to know that my privacy concerns are properly addressed before the Board approves anything.
On Friday, February 14, 2025 at 02:51:53 PM PST, Ji, Eric <[email protected] > wrote:
Hello,
As the decision was to approve the proposed addition with conditions, the revised plan will be reviewed under staff review and will not be going back to the Design Review Board. If the applicant and the owner refuses to comply in addressing any of the conditions of approval set by the Design Review Board, then staff will refer them back to the Board members for another hearing.
Best regards,
Eric Ji | Planning Associate
Community Development
633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, CA 91206
P:
+1 (818) 937-8178
[email protected] | GlendaleCA.gov | Follow us!
From: mike michaelian <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 2:48 PM
To: Ji, Eric <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: RE: Letter and photos
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Then I would expect a follow up public hearing on the revised plan? Yahoo Mail - Email Simplified
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 2:39 PM, Ji, Eric
<[email protected]
> wrote:
Hello,
While I can confirm to have received the letter, the public comment session has been closed and the decision has already been made by the Design Review Board to approve the project with conditions during last night’s hearing. As such, no further comments will be received for the project at this point by the Design Review Board.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
Eric Ji | Planning Associate
Community Development
633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, CA 91206
P: +1 (818) 937-8178
[email protected] | GlendaleCA.gov | Follow us!
From: mike michaelian <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 2:33 PM
To: [email protected]; Ji, Eric <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Letter and photos
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Hello Eric,
Please see attached. Can you please respond with verification that you received this. I want to have this entered into the record and used as criterion for the review Board to evaluate revisions to the proposal for 906 Whitehaven.
The applicants are not giving the Board the full story on privacy impacts to the neighbors, and in fact came off as very dismissive of the neighbors concerns yesterday.
Thanks,
-Mike Michaelian
On Wednesday, February 12, 2025 at 08:27:33 PM PST, Ji, Eric <[email protected] > wrote:
Hello,
Thank you; your comments have been received and will be forwarded to the Design Review Board members for tomorrow’s Design Review hearing.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
Eric Ji | Planning Associate
Community Development
633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, CA 91206
P:
+1 (818) 937-8178
[email protected] | GlendaleCA.gov | Follow us!
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 8:23 PM
To: Ji, Eric <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Michaelian <[email protected]>
Subject: Letter and photos
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Hi Eric,
I've attached a letter explaining our opposition to the project on 906 Whitehaven. My husband and I will also be there at the meeting tomorrow to voice our concerns, but please make sure the members making the decisions see this letter and photos before the meeting. Please confirm that the attached letter opens.
Thank you.
Susan and Mike
These are our trees I circled referred in the letter. The other tree is my neighbors as you can also see their fence behind it. He's claiming his property line comes down that far which it doesn't. If you follow the fence in a line it's clear where his property starts, which is well above the our large tree which I explain more in the attached letter.
>
We are writing to express our concerns regarding the proposed remodel of the property
located
at
906
Whitehaven.
The
owner
is
planning
to
add
a
second
story,
including
windows
and
balconies,
as
well
as
extend
his
deck
out
six
feet.
While
we
understand
the
desire
for
homeowners
to
improve
their
property,
we
believe
these
changes
will
effectively
eliminate
our
privacy
and
diminish
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
We
oppose
a
second
story
addition,
balcony
as
well
as
a
deck
extension.
It
is
intrusive
to
our
privacy
as
well
as
the
privacy
of
our
neighbors.
Currently, the house is a single-story structure, and we have enjoyed a reasonable
level
of
privacy
in
our
own
yard
and
from
our
bedroom
and
bathroom
windows.
The
proposed
remodel,
however,
would
leave
us
exposed
to
direct
sightlines
from
their
new
second-story
windows
and
balconies,
fundamentally
changing
the
nature
of
our
home
environment
and
degrading
the
quality
of
our
life.
We
would
lose
all
privacy
from
both
our
bedroom
and
bathroom
windows.
Not
only
will
our
second
story
rooms
be
affected,
but
we
would
lose
all
privacy
from
our
backyard,
living
room,
family
room,
and
kitchen.
Our
private
and
tranquil
spaces
will
have
no
amount
of
privacy
from
their
deck,
second
story
rooms
and
balconies
causing
our
family
extreme
stress
and
anxiety.
Additionally,
the
deck
extension
could
result
in
more
noise
and
further
disruption
of
our
outdoor
space
and
privacy.
Furthermore,
we
are
worried
about
the
weight
and
size
of
the
new
planned
pool
that
might
compromise
the
hillside
and
cause
great
destruction
if
the
new
deck
and
pool
fail
to
hold.
These
are
very
serious
and
valid
concerns
any
homeowner
would
have.
There are mistakes also made in the Staff Report that was sent out for the meeting.
Under
Privacy
it
has
been
checkmarked
“yes”
when
it
should
be
“No”.
Both
“consideration
of
views
from
“public”
rooms
and
balconies/decks”
and
“Avoid
windows
facing
adjacent
windows”
should
both
be
checked
because
they
both
clearly
violate
those
issues.
Our
windows
directly
face
their
proposed
plans,
plus
our
views
from
our
rooms
even
the
ones
downstairs
will
have
no
privacy.
We also wish to address an issue with the property line. The plans presented appear
to
show
an
incorrect
property
boundary,
and
the
large
pine
tree
in
question
is
actually
located
on
our
side
of
the
property
as
well
as
the
small
pine
tree
next
to
it
that
we
have
been
growing
for
4 years
now.
We
have
lived
at
this
address
since
2011,
and
the
previous
neighbor,
before
the
current
owner
purchased
the
property
at
906
Whitehaven
in
2018,
always
asked
for
permission
from
us
to
trim
our
mature
Pine
tree.
Furthermore,
the
original
owner
of
the
neighboring
house,
as
well
as
the
previous
owner
of
when
we
purchased
our
property,
both
consistently
referred
to
the
tree
as
being
mine
and
on
my
side
of
the
property.
This
long-standing
understanding
between
neighbors
has
not
been
reflected
in
the
current
plans,
and
we
would
appreciate
this
matter
being
clarified
before
any
type
of
construction
is
even
discussed.
Additionally, I would like to highlight a series of troubling incidents involving
our
tree
and
property.
Around
2020,
the
neighbor,
who
now
intends
to
build
a
second
story,
began
cutting
our
large
pine
tree
without
permission.
At
the
time,
this
neighbor
had
three
mature
pine
trees
on
his
own
property
giving
us
full
privacy,
all
of
which
were
cut
down,
drastically
degrading
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
He
then
started
cutting
our
pine
tree
on
our
side,
and
I
had
to
immediately
intervene
and
ask
him
to
stop.
Several
healthy
branches
were
removed,
which
severely
impacted
the
privacy
I
had
previously
enjoyed
and
also
disfigured
the
tree.
When
I
confronted
him,
he
claimed
he
was
unaware
that
the
tree
was
on
my
property.
I
informed
him
that
the
area
starting
right
behind
the
tree,
as
well
as
the
tree
itself,
was
on
my
side
of
the
property
line
and
I
have
always
had
access
through
my
gate
on
the
hill
into
my
yard.
A week later, his father came to our door and asked if they could trim some of
my
tall,
healthy
shrubs,
which
provide
critical
privacy
for
our
yard.
I
refused,
explaining
the
importance
of
these
shrubs
to
my
privacy.
Despite
this,
he
and
his
father
proceeded
to
have
their
landscapers
cut
the
shrubs,
and
I
had
to
again
intervene
to
stop
the
trimming.
I
was
forced
to
call
the
police,
and after their investigation, the authorities instructed the neighbor to refrain from
cutting
any
further
vegetation
on
our
side
of
the
property.
This
series
of
their
actions
resulted
in
the
destruction
of
several
of
my
healthy
green
shrubs,
as
well
as
significant
harm
to
the
pine
tree
that
once
provided
us
with
privacy.
Furthermore, we would like to note that the single-story house next door to the property
in
question
previously
tried
to
build
a
two-story
house.
The
city
did
not
approve
that
plan,
and
the
owners
ultimately
sold
the
property
and
moved
to
a
different
location.
I
believe
this
further
emphasizes
that
adding
a
second
story
to
the
current
property
would
not
be
in
keeping
with
the
scale
of
the
neighborhood.
Beyond our personal concerns, we also feel that this proposed remodel is out of
scale
with
the
surrounding
homes.
The
size
of
the
house,
especially
with
the
proposed
second
story,
seems
disproportionate
for
the
neighborhood
and
lot
size
and
may
set
a
concerning
precedent
for
future
developments.
Additionally, my neighbor, who has experience in architecture, has pointed out an
error
in
the
plans.
He
states
the
following;
Specifically,
the
line
of
sight
shown
on
page
A101,
"site
section"
is
misleading.
When
corrected
and
expanded,
it
becomes
glaringly
clear
that
the
addition
will
provide
a
wide-open,
unobstructed
view
of
the
downhill
neighbor's
backyards,
pool
areas,
and
even
the
interior
rooms
of
the
houses-including
bedroom
and
bathroom.
This
only
heightens
the
concerns
regarding
the
loss
of
privacy,
especially
in
such
intimate
areas
of
our
homes.
We kindly ask that you take these points into consideration during your review
of
this
proposal.
We
are
hopeful
that
the
city
respects
both
our
privacy,
peace
and
the
overall
character
of
our
community.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Please feel free to reach out
if
you
need
any
additional
information
from
us.
Michael and Susan Michaelian 849 Moorside Drive, Glendale 310-977-7793
From: Syuzi Tovmassian
To: Ji, Eric
Subject: 906 Whitehaven Tr.
Date: Thursday, February 13, 2025 9:34:15 AM
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Hi Mr Eric Ji,
My name is Syuzi Tovmassian and I own the property on 855 Moorside Dr. in Glendale. I was recently notified of a proposed remodel plan of my neighbor’s property at 906 Whitehaven Terrace. This house is located directly above my property and I am very concerned about their plans to not only add a second story to their home, but also a 6ft deck extension. Their backyard currently faces directly into my backyard.
As it is, I have limited privacy in my backyard. With this extension and addition of a second story, I will have virtually no privacy in my backyard in addition to my family room and kitchen, which is directly facing this neighbor’s backyard. I have three young children so we spend a lot of time in our backyard and pool. With this extension and remodel, I will feel incredibly uncomfortable to be using our pool and even our family living room due to how much closer the neighbor’s visibility will be of my property and personal space.
I respect residents/homeowners looking to build and beautify Glendale, but not at the expense of our privacy.
Although I’m not sure either my husband or I can make it to the hearing tonight due to work (he is a physician and on call at the hospital) and childcare, I hope that you will take my concerns into consideration in disapproving this plan.
Thank you,
Syuzi Tovmassian
855 Moorside Dr
Glendale, CA 91207
Sent from my iPhone
From: Syuzi Tovmassian
To: Ji, Eric
Subject: Fwd: 906 Whitehaven Tr.
Date: Thursday, February 13, 2025 6:57:07 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Syuzi Tovmassian <[email protected]>
Date: February 13, 2025 at 9:34:11 AM PST
To: [email protected]
Subject: 906 Whitehaven Tr.
Hi Mr Eric Ji,
My name is Syuzi Tovmassian and I own the property on 855 Moorside Dr. in Glendale. I was recently notified of a proposed remodel plan of my neighbor’s property at 906 Whitehaven Terrace. This house is located directly above my property and I am very concerned about their plans to not only add a second story to their home, but also a 6ft deck extension. Their backyard currently faces directly into my backyard.
As it is, I have limited privacy in my backyard. With this extension and addition of a second story, I will have virtually no privacy in my backyard in addition to my family room and kitchen, which is directly facing this neighbor’s backyard. I have three young children so we spend a lot of time in our backyard and pool.
With this extension and remodel, I will feel incredibly uncomfortable to be using our pool and even our family living room due to how much closer the neighbor’s visibility will be of my property and personal space.
I respect residents/homeowners looking to build and beautify Glendale, but not at the expense of our privacy. Although I’m not sure either my husband or I can make it to the hearing tonight due to work (he is a physician and on call at the hospital) and childcare, I hope that you will take my concerns into consideration in disapproving this plan.
Thank you,
Syuzi Tovmassian
855 Moorside Dr
Glendale, CA 91207
Sent from my iPhone
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Thompson Company
To: Ji, Eric
Subject: Re: 906 Whitehaven Terrace Project
Date: Thursday, February 13, 2025 7:03:54 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
I couldn’t get through the call. Would you please read the email I sent earlier On Feb 13, 2025, at 9:12 AM, Ji, Eric <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello,
Thank you; your comments have been received and will be forwarded to the Design Review Board members for tonight’s hearing.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
<glendaleca_logo.png>
Eric Ji | Planning Associate
Community Development
633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, CA 91206
P: +1 (818) 937-8178
[email protected] |
GlendaleCA.gov | Follow us!
From: Thompson Company <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 11:54 PM
To: Ji, Eric <[email protected]>
Subject: 906 Whitehaven Terrace Project
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Dear Mr. Ji,
My name is Aramais, and I have been residing at 1113 Kildonan Drive for the past 37 years. I originally built this house on the lot. I would like to voice my concern regarding the project located at 906 Whitehaven Terrace. First off, the mass and scale of this property are not congruent with the surrounding homes located in this street. This is not a modest addition. The addition proposed is too large and overshadows the rest of the homes located around it. All the homes adjacent tend to be single-story and are located on generally smaller lot sizes.
In addition, the roof line is extremely busy and does not follow the natural topography of the slope of the street coming down from west to east. As you drive down Whitehaven Terrace, Old Philips Road, even Kildonan Drive, the highest point of the home is always towards the highest point of the street and continues to slope downward.
One of the beautiful things about our hillside neighborhood is that there is a sense of tranquility and proportionality as you drive through the streets because the homes are scaled in proportion to their location and lot size. If approved, 906 Whitehaven will disrupt that. I strongly oppose the addition of a second story and recommend a single-story redesign of the project to veer away from the modern farmhouse theme. I have yet to come across a modern farmhouse design in this area. The design is better suited for Encino and Studio City. Please present my email to the design review board at the hearing tomorrow at 5pm.
Thank you for your time.
From: Thompson Company
To: Ji, Eric
Subject: 906 Whitehaven Terrace Project
Date: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 11:54:41 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Dear Mr. Ji,
My name is Aramais, and I have been residing at 1113 Kildonan Drive for the past 37 years. I originally built this house on the lot. I would like to voice my concern regarding the project located at 906 Whitehaven Terrace. First off, the mass and scale of this property are not congruent with the surrounding homes located in this street. This is not a modest addition.
The addition proposed is too large and overshadows the rest of the homes located around it. All the homes adjacent tend to be single-story and are located on generally smaller lot sizes.
In addition, the roof line is extremely busy and does not follow the natural topography of the slope of the street coming down from west to east. As you drive down Whitehaven Terrace, Old Philips Road, even Kildonan Drive, the highest point of the home is always towards the highest point of the street and continues to slope downward.
One of the beautiful things about our hillside neighborhood is that there is a sense of tranquility and proportionality as you drive through the streets because the homes are scaled in proportion to their location and lot size. If approved, 906 Whitehaven will disrupt that. I strongly oppose the addition of a second story and recommend a single-story redesign of the project to veer away from the modern farmhouse theme. I have yet to come across a modern farmhouse design in this area. The design is better suited for Encino and Studio City. Please present my email to the design review board at the hearing tomorrow at 5pm.
Thank you for your time.