Exhibit 19 - Public Comments received between 1101 Wednesday November 11 2020 and 1100 am Friday January 8 2021From: James Lyon
Sent: Saturday, January 2, 2021 11:17 PM
To: Jennifer Armer; Joel Paulson
Cc: Rick Rutte; Kelly Luoma; Babak Homayouni; Bahar Masarati
Subject: Re: New design for 15 Loma Alta Avenue
Hello Ms. Armer and the Planning Commission:
Happy New Year!
I appreciate the Utopia Design and Construction hearing the concerns of the neighbors and
developing alternative exterior elevations at the direction of the Planning Commission. This is
definitely a step in the right direction. I have reviewed both alternative and based on the
neighborhood context and perceived execution, I feel the Craftsman style proposal is the
preferred and the more appropriate design for the setting. The change in roof pitch reduces
the bulk and mass and the change in exterior elevations to a Craftsman motif is fitting to the
bungalow enclave at the lower end of Loma Alta Avenue.
I would like to address some fine tuning to the design for consistency (I would highly
recommend the Planning Commission direct the Town Consulting Architect, Mr. Larry Cannon,
provide some final guidance and clarification for consistency) of the Craftsman design:
1. Consistent lighting on doors and windows: The color renderings (sheet 3.4) has consistent
lighting (preferred) on the Front and Panighetti Place elevation, while the line drawings (sheet
A3.1a) do not (redlines capture the renderings)
EXHIBIT 19
2
2. Sheet A3.1a calls out a Plexiglass railing – I believe this is a remanent of the prior design and
should be eliminate for the exterior elevations.
3. The Side Elevation fenestration is awkward and inconsistent with the Craftsman motif. A more
consistent fenestration would be a multi-lighted high awning window to provide light and
privacy to the two bedrooms and bathrooms. Further, some level of Craftsman lighting details
at the top of the large view windows would tie them into the overall design.
3
4. There are inconsistencies between the floor plans and elevations. As example - the floor plan
(living room) and front elevation shows a chimney, but the chimney is not shown on the side
elevation.
5. The sloped roof overhangs are inconsistent depth. The Side Elevation overhang is much larger
(2’10” from the roof plan or greater based on wall articulation) than any other overhang and
appears quite awkward.
Overall the design still has inconsistencies that should be addressed by the applicant and the
Town Consulting Architect. Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to the Planning
Commission including my specifics above as part of the Conditions of Approval.
Regards,
James Lyon
Cc: Rick Rutter, Kelly Luoma, Babak Homayouni, Bahar Masarati
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank