Attachment 19May 23 , 2017
Mayor Sayoc and Councilmembers
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos , CA 95030
Re : 339-341 Bella Vista Avenue
Dear Mayor Sayoc and Councilmembers,
We are returning to the Town Council seeking approval of the design of our single -family home. We
received direction from the Councilmembers at the December hearing, and , as discussed below, have
made additional efforts to address the Council's direction.
Before discu ssing the new plan rev isions, we want to remind you briefly of the prior steps that led to the
upcoming June hearing. We own two legal and buildable parcels . Our two-home submittal was
recommended for approval by the Town Planning Department. In 2011/12, after hearing neighbor
input, we were given the following direction by the Planning Commission and Town Council , which we
implemented in in our initial one home submittal (which wa s also recommended for approval by the
Town Planning Department):
1) Voluntarily merge the two lots into one, and propose one home . We did that.
2) Mov e the house as far away from the town home s as possible. We did that.
3) Submit a plan that requires no exceptions or driveway variance , and meet the 15% driveway
slope rule. We did that.
4) Submit a plan that pushes the house down the hill, and utilizes the area within the mandatory
foundation to reduce the overall footprint. We did that.
5) Submit a plan that meets FAR . We did that.
6) Locate the drivew ay to the straightest part of Bella Vista and allow nose first vehicle e xits , to
alleviate safety concerns . We did that.
The Planning Commission was not satisfied with our initial single home design even though it
incorporated these recommendations and fully complied with all town zoning code requirements . Over
the course of three Planning Commission hearings , we made the following additional design revisions to
addres s Planning Commission concerns:
1) We lowered the north corner of the home from a height of 22' to 15 '.
2) We reduced the width of t he home on the north end from 20' to 14'. Thi s change reduced
the rear wall mass by an additional 120 square feet.
3) We reduced the length acros s the back of the home from 69 feet to 65 feet.
4) We added a turnaround in the driveway to allow cars to enter Bella Vista head -first.
5) We added additional landscaping and architectural detail to address Maggi Court privacy
and visibility concerns .
The Planning Commission denied our application on June 2 2, 2016. We appealed that decision on July
1 st, and had our initial hearing before you on December 61h . At the end of the Council 's deliberation, we
ATTACHMENT 1 9
were given direction by individual Councilmembers as to design changes we should consider. Those
suggestions and our responses follow:
2
1) Avoiding Tree Removal. Though we are retaining 21 out of 24 existing trees , the three trees
proposed for removal are larger in size and a Councilmember asked that we investigate whether
there was a location on the parcels where a house could be located without removing any trees.
This issue was initially raised in 2011/12. At that time, it was recognized that the middle oak
could be saved if the house was reduced in length, allowing two small homes to be built, roughly
35' in length each. Those two homes would be at the same height as the current proposal,
whether the lower level was occupied or not. Nobody wanted the additional mass of two
homes.
We've now reexamined the issue with a one home scenario. As shown on diagrams we will be
submitting, while physically we can slide the house to the north to avoid removing any trees,
doing so would create significant undesirable consequences:
a. The house will be more visible from and closer to 4 town homes instead of 1, because
our land is narrowest and has the fewest trees on the north end.
b. The driveway would meet Bella Vista directly on the curve ofthe road, which we were
instructed to avoid for safety reasons in 2011/2012.
c. The canopies of the nearest trees would have to be significantly undercut and a portion
of the canopy removed to squeeze the house in, which would put at risk the trees we
were trying to save with this design.
d. There would be no turnaround in this reduced footprint that has us pinched between
the minimum offset ofthe tree (which should be 12-14'), and the northern constraints
of the narrowing setback/building envelope.
The trees are in the middle of the building envelope. The alternative to saving the primary tree
in the middle of the lot is to build a home on each side of the tree, which we've already been
told nobody wants. We believe that the current location best balances all of the competing
concerns (visibility, privacy, safety and tree retention).
2) Best Location for the House. There was some discussion asking whether the house is sitting in
the best location. The primary direction we received from 2011/12 Town Council, Planning
Commission and neighbor comments were:
a. For neighbors on Maggi Court, move the home as far as possible away from Maggi Court
town homes.
b. For safety on Bella Vista Avenue, move the driveway to south end of site on the
straightest part of Bella Vista Avenue, and allow nose first car exits .
As discussed above, when we slide the house to the north we increase visibility from the
townhomes and decrease safety along Bella Vista . We cannot move the home to the south
without violating the side yard setback. If we pull the house up the hill it increases the
"towering" effect over the town homes . We cannot lower the house down the hill any further
because the current design already uses the maximum 15% driveway slope. For these reasons,
we believe that the currently proposed location best balances all of the competing concerns.
3) Reducing the Visibility from Downhill. As described above, the house is strategically located to
the south as far away from neighbors' bedrooms as possible, with the fenestration located to
3
avoid any direct views into neighboring windows and li v ing spaces . The bulk of existing trees
landscaping w ill further buffer privacy. The livi ng space layout was designed to be the least
intrusive and reduce bulk and mass w here it w ould be most v is i ble. W e are provid ing a m ore
detailed image of the landscape plan , showing the lower le v el screen i ng . The lo wer le v el is fou r
feet underground; the 4' to 8' and taller native plants will screen this le v el.
4 ) Modifications to Reduce the Bulk and Mass of the Home . At the December hearing, w e
provided diagrams showing a 4 ' reduction off of the north end of the house. Th is w as ne w
information, as we ne ver offered this redu ction to the Planning Comm issi on . Even w ith this
change , there was a general suggestion from Councilmembers to investigate further reducing
bulk and mass , and a specific request to consider removal of the garage . In the ne w diagrams
w e are submitting, we have addressed both issues :
a. We have reduced the garage from a 2-car garage to a 1-car garage, and located t he 1-
car garage toward Bella Vista. As a result, when vie w ed from Maggi Court the house
appears much shorter because rather than seeing the mass of the garage as an
additional level, all that is seen is the edge of the roofli ne of the receded garage.
b. We have reduced the north end of the house by another 2' (resulti ng in length being
reduced to 63 feet). This is the most we can take out of the length of the home and still
have enough room for the driveway turnaround . To see the impa ct of that change, look
for the white roof peak of the home on Bella Vista immediately to the left of the house
on Sheet A-2.0 in Design Options A and F.
Based on the information we previously presented to the Planning Commission , our appeal of the
Planning Commission decision, the information we previously presented to the Town Co uncil, this
further letter of justification, and the plans and diagrams being submitted, w e believ e t hat the To w n
Council ha s substantial evidence in support of Findings 1 and 3 for th is appeal. The To w n Coun ci l ha s
the authority to approve our new design (Design Option F) without referring it back to the Planning
Commission, and we ask the Council to do so .
Best regards ,
Dan and Deborah Ross
188 Villa Avenue
408-314-5626
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank