08 - Laserfiche WebLink

auto court gate and low walls with provided they do not exceed 60" in height. The Reddys have constructed the walls at 68"tall and capped it with an approximate 18" high light fixture. • Colors—As stated in the approval letter, colors and materials were not reviewed or approved when Reddys' plans were approved. There is a separate application for colors. This application includes the submission of color chips of all materials and surfaces. To this date, no application has been submitted. The ADC has no record of and does not know what colors currently exist on the home. The front of the home is currently painted a stark bright white and the rear with an assortment of 9 pastel colors. Per the Section V of the Architectural Guidelines (page 12 of the staff report) "Harsh contrasts of color and/or materials, illogical or inappropriate combinations are not allowed." Additionally, "stark white, bright pastels or bright intense colors in large expanses will not be allowed." • Conversion of the two-car garage to living area—Per Section V(g) At least a three-car garage is required. A four-car garage is recommended when the residence contains four bedrooms or more. Additionally, no glazing is allowed in garage doors. The space must be used as a garage and standard wood garage doors need to be installed. • Grading--The Reddys failed to follow the grading plans prepared by their own civil engineer. These plans did not show any grading outside of the building footprint. The Reddys not only graded beyond the footprint, but over common property boundaries. This altered the drainage patterns from their two neighbors creating a negative impact that must be corrected. • Gazebo—The ADC never approved the gazebo. There is no permit for construction of the gazebo. The location on the hill is visible from adjoining neighbors. It exceeds the maximum height limit and the columns and iron':op is out of character for the style of the home. • Rear iron garage door—The ADC did not approve the heavy iron door at the rear of the garage as noted in the Staff Report. The plans specified a standard wood door of the same design as the two garage doors in the auto court. This item was never a concession offered by the ADC. The Reddys have consistently failed to receive the necessary approvals for changes to the approved plans. Had they built the home approved by the ADC in June 30, 2010, we would not be here. However,the Reddys significantly altered the house during construction from the Monterey/Spanish Eclectic style that they originally agreed to build. If plans reflecting the current state of their home were submitted to the ADC today,they would not be approved. Therefore,we respectfully urge the Planning Commission to recommend Option 2 to have all outstanding items subject to review by the ADC. Option 2 allows the ADC to continue to do its work in ensuring architectural control in a way that has worked for the first 833 homes that were built in the Ruby Hill Community. 3