Attachment 06December 12, 2017
Statement for Appeal of Planning Commission Decision
26 Alpine Avenue
S-16-052 & ND-17-001
On July 26tti 2017, The Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission denied the above Architecture and Site
Application for a new single family residence on a vacant lot. Whereas the Planning Commission asked if It was
possible to re--design and improve the project, In our minds, the project's merits were already exceptional and
making a smaller home would not meet the owner's goals and objectives or make any significant improvement
to the project. It was not possible to move the residence to a different location on the lot due to the various
constraints on the lot.
On December 19tn 2017, the owner and I intend to present additional information and exhibits that will
demonstrate the process we have gone through in order to arrive at the current solution for the project. We
will demonstrate that alternative design concepts, while meeting the zoning code, have critical issues and
neighborhood impacts that would not meet the community's expectations for a design that is approvable. We
will demonstrate the extensive outreach to the surrounding neighbors in an effort to explain the proposed
design. We will also share the results of additional investigations that were performed to assure the enduring
health of a neighboring oak tree and assure the neighbor's views are preserved .
Due to the nature of this site, applicants are encouraged to creatively meet the goals and objectives of the
HDS&G. Additionally; this project is required to meet the a:>mmunity expectations outlined in the Residential
Design Guidelines as listed below:
• Homes will respect the scale and character of their immediate neighborhoods.
• Homes will maintain a friendly presence to the street
• Structures will be designed with architectural integrity with design and material consistency on all facades.
• Structures will be oonstructed with high quality materials and craftsmanship.
• Attention will be given to architectural details consistent with the individual architectural style.
• All aspects of the project will respect the natural setting and features of a site.
• Mature landscaping will be preserved whenever possible.
• Attention will be given to parcel landscaping that is sympathetic to the neighborhood.
• Homes will be designed with respect for the views, privacy and solar access of their neighbors.
• Drought tolerant and native plantings are ena:>uraged to reduce water consumption (see Appendix F).
• Structures will be designed to be energy and water efficient, constructed using building materials that reduce
resource consumption, and take advantage of renewable resources where appropriate.
The proposed project meets and exceeds each of the oommunity expectations listed above by creating a
project that has from the beginning, embraced these same expectations as the owner's project goals and
objectives. It is noteworthy that this project has undergone an Initial Study with a Mitigated Negative
Declaration that conduded as designed there were no negative effects to the environment. The Town's
Consulting Architect also reviewed the project noting that the project is "very well designed" and "the scale of
the home related to Alpine Avenue and other nearby homes would be complementary to the streetscape".
When a site exceeds a 10% average slope, the project must address particular sections in the HDS&G for Site
Planning -Grading, Drainage, Driveways and Parking as well as Geologic Safety and Site Retaining Walls. The
slope of the site also dictated that we prepare a Constraints Analysis to ensure that the residence is located on
the most appropriate area of the site. Whereas the proposed project has been located on the most appropriate
portion of the site, it also meets additional goals and objectives of the HDS&G not required for R-20 zoning.
• High quality project
• Designed to fit with and avoid site constraints.
• Minimize the potential for geologic failures, and floods
• Maintain natural appearance from all vantage points
ATTACHMENT 6
• Maximize open space
• Ensure development that does not dominate, but rather blends with the natural and built environment
• Conserves the natural features of the site such as vegetation, wildlife habitats, physical features,
natural drainage
Diagram of Constraints Analysis
An illustration of the results from the Constraints Analysis is shown In diagram above.
Various setback and easement requirements are shown within the dark gray shading and are considered
inappropriate areas for locating development. The majority of the existing trees are located within this area
will be retained and provide a natural frame that surrounds the proposed residence. Approx. 80% of the
protected trees will be retained as they are critical to maintaining the rural, natural and open character of the
site. Trees deemed to be in questionable health; not contributing to the physical character of the site; not
screening of the development; or potentially causing fire safety issues will be removed.
The definition of LRDA (Least Restrictive Development Area} according to page 70 of the HDS&.G is the least
restricted areas on a property where development would have a minimal impact on the natural landscape and
environment. Whereas it is not required to locate development on a slope with less than a 30% grade, doing
so requires mitigation measures and a Slope Stability Analysis to assure the safety and welfare of the residents
and surrounding sites. A Slope Stability Analysis was completed for this project. Upon completion, this project
will stabilize the hillside, promote better drainage and create a sustainable project that benefits the
surrounding neighbors as well as the owners.
One of the primary goals of this project was to position the new development In order to limit view and privacy
impacts between the surrounding neighbors. This was achieved by positioning the residence as far away from
the lowest neighbor (Kronk & McNutt) and as low In elevation as possible for the highest neighbor
(Gieselman). Working with planning staff and the consulting civil engineer, the project has evolved several
times before arriving at the current design. Today, this carefully, designed project has resulted in complianc.e
with each and every one of the Town's zoning requirements and proposes mitigation measures that assure
neighbomood compatibility.
According to an Injtia/ StudyandMJttqatet!Neoative Dec/aratiQn completed by the firm of Kimley Horn on June
of 2017, nThe new building has been sited and designed ID minimize grading outside of the building envelope.
The proposed residence has been de5igned to be built into the existing hillside to minimize the development
footprint and to minimize the profile of the existing building from the surrounding area~
Several alternative designs were explored throughout the design process. Other solutions that reduce the
volume of excavation for this project required raising the building mass off the ground. Each of these
alternatives resulted in the "blocking of views• for the next door neighbors located at 36 Alpine Ave, Jon and
Krista Gelsleman. Alternative Designs A&. B shown below, illustrate what happens to the neighbor's views
when the residenoo is set on top of the existing grade.
Alternative Design A compares the existing cross section with an alternative building massing in green.
Alternative Design B illustrates what happens when the lowest floor (basement)is eliminated and repla<Ed
above grade. The result Is a "home on stilts" that blocks the views of the neighbors.
INDICATES 30' VERTICAL DISTANCE
FROM THE EXISTING GRADE
Alternative Design A
INDICATES 30' VERTICAL DISTANCE
srRUCTURAL SUPPORTS,
UNDERSIDE OF FLOOR &
UNENCLOSED WALLS
FROM THE EXISTING GRADE ,--.,. ..
FAM~LY
ROOM
n-""' ,,..,. .. 7 ·L._ __ ~~~~~~:..£..::!:.... _ ___:_:::........:...._!_..~
...... ', "'--,.... ~ l 0
(.,,.,. VIEW
~> lJ· ORIENTATION
~-·-= ; Jt _____________ _
-·-----·-GIESLMAN
BEDROOM MlH
RESIDNECE
Alternative Design B
The majority of the earthwork required for this project is within the footprint of the proposed residence · and is
defined as "excavation". Cut and Fill quantities that OCOJr outside the building footprint are nominal thus
meeting the goals and objectives of the HDS&.G for grading. This project proposes a maximum cut at the
driveway of 1 ft. with a maximum fill of 6 in. The maximum cut in the landscape area adjacent to the
residence is 2.5 ft. The total Cut and Fill quantity for this project is 89 Cf. A total of 1,331 Cf is proposed to
be trucked off site during the excavation for the foundation.
Whereas our initial minimal neighborhood outreach efforts likely caused this project to become adversely
characterized, the multitude of professional consultants has determined that this project is well designed and
fits well within the site and neighborhood contexts. Some neighbors have expressed discontent with the style
of the residence. The owners requested a design that fits the site and one that would be respectful of the
neighborhood seale. Jamming a traditional home (better suited for a flat lot) on this site Is untenable and
contrary to the Town's objectives and goals. I look forward to shari ng this amazing project with you on
December 19th, and believe that you approve this Appeal Application so that we can construct this historic
project.
Respectfully Submitted,
+~
Tom Sloan AIA
Principal Architect