Item 03 - 125 Wheeler Ave - Staff Report Exh.12-16T . H. I .S. DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT P.0.Box 1518, Los Gatos, CA 95031
August 12th, 2016
Tel: 408.354.1863 Fax: 408.354.1823
Response to Neighbor's 7 Page Letter
[From1Z9 Wheeler Ave]
1. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY: The Town's Consulting Architect is very experienced in
analyzing neighborhood compatibility and this is one of the reasons the town relies on his input in
situations where architectural design is concerned. His report states that the 11 house is well
designed and fits into the neighborhood"_ We have incorporated his suggestions into the plans. ·
2. SETBACKS AND PROPERTY CONTOURS: The property is essentially flat. Setbacks match the
neighborhood and with the small second story [let into roof] are entirely appropriate. In contrast,
129 Wheeler presents a full 2 story profile to 125 Wheeler -which we have had to design around.
3. CELLAR: As designed the lower level is a Cellar as defined by Town of Los Gatos and does not
count towards massing and FAR. Square footages were initially taken from county records. They
are now accurately shown on the NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY [Sheet C3]. They distinguish between
Floor Area and Cellar spaces both on this property [Floor Area: 2,586 Ft, Cellar: 1,481 Ft] and at
119 Wheeler next door [Floor Area: 2,500 Ft, Cellar: 2,110 Ft].
4. SHADOW AND LIGHT: The shadow used in the Representation by the neighbor shows a
summer pm shadow across the property of 129 Wheeler. This shadow is at 2 hours before sunset
[6:35pm]. The comprehensive Shadow Study shown in the Plan Submission shows that there is NO
SHADING for 12 months of the year before 3:00pm. I do not understand what is represented by
the graph when there is no shading on the neighboring property.
5. PRIVACY: All windows facing 129 Wheeler [with one exception] result in no Privacy issues
[garage, 2 cellar windows, 2 high family room windows]. Screening with modest shrubs would totally
remove any concerns here. The owner is prepared to make the bedroom window [diagonally across
from the master bath window at 129 Wheeler] obscured glass, if this continues to be a concern.
Alternatively they will relocate this window to the front elevation and embed it into the roof, if
the Planning Commission deems this more appropriate.
6. GRADING: Sheet C2 Grading Plan shows how the proposal has addressed drainage so as to
direct ALL runoff to street at the front of the property. This was done in part after discussions
with the owners of 127 Wheeler [flag Lot at the rear] where most water would otherwise run and
after looking at the adjacent contours. As·opposed to what occurs now, there will be no runoff to
the rear or to the sides. This has been fully reviewed by the Engineering Dept and will be
incorporated into the Construction Drawings.
During this entire design process we have worked with neighbors to address concerns and have
been able to mitigate most potential issues. It is clear from their letter that they just want the
house to remain in exactly the same place on the property that it is now. What they are requesting
would be unfair to both the owners [who would like a rear yard] and to the owners of 127 Wheeler
behind [who have said that they will object if we change our plans to such a design].
Thank you.
Tony Jeans
EXHIBIT 1 2
RECE,VED
AUG 15 _Z016
Wt-I OF LOS GATOS ~LANNlNG oMSION
This Page
lntentio11ally
Left Blank
Jocelyn Puga
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject
Jocel~
(
Dave Bohn <bohndave@gmail.com>
Monday, July 18, 2016 8:44 PM
Jocelyn Puga
(~
Tony Jeans; Shawna Bohn -wife ICE In Case of Emergency; Jeff Avilla
A follow up to our Concerns on the 125 Wheeler Ave. Proposed Plans
Clearly 127 and 129 Wheeler Ave. will be most impacted by this build project.
The following concerns have been addressed. We also support the current proposed position of the home on the
property.
Privacy:
We support the revised plans Tony showed us today (7/18) that moved the balcony into the roofline, and made
the balcony much smaller in that it won't be a very user-friendly size but would be more for light.
We support the proposed position of the house because it gives us much better privacy than the current home.
The current home previously owned all of our properties which explains why it sits farther back on the lot. If
there were never a home on this lot, and it was a new development, the des~ contour positioning of the home
would give as much area as possible to have a bigger back yard and provide as much privacy as possible from
the front of 127 Wheeler Ave. You can see 111 Yosemite Way as following a similar contour as the 125
Wheeler proposed plans. We also understand the concerns of 129 Wheeler Ave. for privacy, and would want
125 Wheeler to remain in its current position if we owned the 129 Wheeler property.
Drainage/Grade*:
We met again with Tony today (7/18/16) and he assured us that the grade will remain in the same state it is now
approximately 1' below our property line. •As long as this is true on the approved plans , we support it and view
it as an improvement because they are going to instal a smnp pump that does not currently exist.
Lastly, we strongly agree to have the dying pepper tree removed at the front of the property. There are large
dead portions leaning against the utility pole that appear to pose a danger to people/cars passing by. There is
also a redwood in the rear of the property that is dying and hopefully can be replaced with another tree.
Thank you for addressing our concerns.
Best,
Dave and Shawna Bohn
127 Wheeler Ave
1
RECEIVED
JUL f 8 ?016
WN Or LOS GATOS ~~NING DlVlSK>M
EXHlBIT 1 3
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
125 WHEELER AVE
BODY COLOR
STONE TRIM
WINDOWS & TRIM
ROOF
White
RECEIVED
JUL l9 20 16
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISIO N
EXHIBIT 1 4
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Shirley & David Maxwell
136 Wheeler Avenue
Los Gatos, CA 95030
(408) 356-7896
July 29, 2016
Dear Planning Commission,
I've lived on Wheeler Avenue for almost 48 yrs. I've not only seen the changes
on Wheeler Avenue, but all around Los Gatos.
I was surprised when I saw the plans for 125 Wheeler. My husband and I are
wondering how a plan that would impose such a huge bulk and massively
oversized house to our beautiful neighborhood would be allowed. We are also
curious if there is any consideration for neighbors on flag lots who already
suffer from housing close to their property lines.
I would think being thoughtful of a house design and size that would impact
what the neighbors have to look at every day would be one of the
considerations made by the architect and owners when drawing up the plans.
Estelle and Adam at 129 Wheeler Ave, bought their dream house and within a
short time found out their new neighbors plan to completely overshadow them,
obscure their view and invade their privacy.
Allowing this plan will totally transform our neighborhood and begin a decent
into the kind of housing density that is uncharacteristic in our area. We ask you
to please reconsider these plans.
Sincerely,
Shirley & David Maxwell
EXHIBIT 1 5
RECE\VED
JUL 2 9 ZOi6
OWN OF LOS GATOS
i PLANNING DIVISION
To: Los Gatos Planning Commission
Re: 125 Wheeler Avenue proposed home
From: Kathryn Morgan, 142 Wheeler Avenue
RECEIVED
AUG 11 2016
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISIO N
I welcome new neighbors, the Avillas, at 125 Wheeler Avenue and acknowledge
their right to build a new home.
However, I must protest that the proposed home there violates several
thoughtful, carefully crafted policies of the Los Gatos 2020 General Plan
Community Design Element and needs to be substantially redesigned, scaled
down, and mitigated in order to fit into our neighborhood and avoid serious
negative impacts on us.
I. "Policy CD-1.1 Building elements shall be in proportion with those traditionally in
the neighborhood ."
A. The first houses in the Wheeler Avenue neighborhood were 136 and 142
Wheeler Avenue, modest Craftsman bungalows.
136 Wheeler, even after a second story addition, is now tl.502 sqtia-re feet with a
16.5% FAR. My home at 142 is directly across the street from the neighbor 2
houses away from the applicant but is not even included in the streetscape photo
in Sheet C3 of the 125 Wheeler plans. ~42 Wheeler is 103'6 square feet with a
fl.2% FAR.
The applicant proposes a 2586 square foot home with an FAR o'f 32.6% (not
counting the cellar, which is larger than either their first or second flo·ors) and has
an attached 394 foot courtyard. It is legal to make this "unfinished basement"
into habitable space.) This is not counting the garage or covered porches, which
would be over 11,000 square feet total.
B. Another traditional house on Wheeler Avenue was 160 Wheeler. Even after
remodels and a second story addition, it is tl.336 square feet and 13.1% FAR.
C. Next came 141 Wheeler at 1620 square feet, 7.2% FAR.
These houses are the "traditional" homes on Wheeler Avenue.
The others houses on Sheet C3 of the applicant's plans, the Neighborhood
Context, are not on Wheeler Avenue or violate the General Plan's Community
Design element just as the proposed home does. One lot contains condos, which
should not be compared to single family residences. 127 Wheeler was built
(against Town Attorney's policy) on a flag lot jammed in behind 125 and 129
Wheeler and looms over them at an angle .
Policy CD 2.1 : "Building setbacks shall increase as mass and height increase." The
proposed side setbacks are at the absolute minimum of 8 feet. One of them is just
6 feet. As often happens, against stated Town policy, there is no proposed
increase in setback due to the proposed mass and height of the house .
CD Policy 3.4: "Encourage the use of landscaping such as trees, large shrubs, and
trellised vines to mitigate the effects of building mass, lower noise, and reduce
heat generation."
Landscaping does help mitigate to some extent the effects of a building; but it in
no way really mitigates the effect of a 28 and a half foot high, 2,586.03 square
foot building built 8 feet away.
Please look at the plans for the proposed house, on Sheet Cl, Site Plan . On
either side of the house, in the proposed 8-foot and 6-foot setbacks, are indicated
5 conceptual, unspecified trees or shrubs which appear to be 2 feet in diameter
maximum. And these shrubs could never grow bigger than that because gravel
walkways are shown to take up much of the setbacks. So the elevations of the
proposed house which would impact neighbors the most could not even begin to
be "mitigated" by landscaping .
Policy CD 6.1: "Reduce the visual impact of new construction and/or remodels on
the Town and its neighborhoods." The story poles make it very clear that the
visual impact of this building on the neighborhood would be very great.
Policy CD 6.4 : "New homes shall be sited to maximize privacy, livability ... should
not create significant ecological or visual impacts affecting ... other properties."
Action CD 7.1: "Conduct a study to research increasing yard setback regulations to
include considerations for building height, and update the Town Code as
necessary." I understand that the staff is often so busy with current applications
that there is l ittle time to evaluate the impact of those proposed buildings, but
the proposed study to research increasing yard setback regulations is long
overdue .
The proposed home also violates the "Single and Two Family Residential Design
Guidelines:
Introduction: "While many of the changes in home size and fashions have
evolved over a fairly long time frame, the recent economic prosperity of the San
Francisco Bay Area and the increased desirability of attractive communities
located near employment centers have stimulated more rapid changes in
residential architecture . Larger homes with Great Rooms, cellars, home offices,
media centers, and large master bath suites are increasingly common . Given the
limited number of undeveloped lots within the Town, much of this growth is
occurring as additions to older and smaller homes or as demolitions and new
home construction on lots within older, established neighborhoods.
''The Town recogn izes and welcomes the need for change, but desires that
change occur in a manner that is respectful of the scale ... of the community's
individual neighborhoods ... These guidelines contain a clear statement of
commun ity expectations ... "
So the proposed house must be considerably smaller in order to "be in proportion
to those traditionally in the neighborhood ." It should not be reduced a token
amount-as with the usual "concession", a "reduction" in roof height from 30
feet to 28 and a half feet. It should be by a significant amount that actually helps
the neighborhood . Most helpful might be to:
1. push the side setbacks much farther away from the property line.
2. 'Reduce and locate the proposed house so that its shadow and the
amount of sky it cuts off from its ne ighbors' views are significantly
reduced.
3. Locate and size windows, in consultation with the neighbors, so that
they have minimal impact upon the neighbors.
4. Landscaping should be specified to be of a size and type that would
greatly mitigate the impact of the building.
The Site Plan shows replacement trees to be 15 Gallon or 24 inch box,
which seems like a good start. When the building permit is applied for,
a qualified staff member could ensure that landscaping is adequate to
greatly mitigate the impact of the building on the neighbors on either
side, in back, and on the street. That staff member could decide if a
once common stipulation in these cases should be enforced, that the
great majority of the trees be evergreen, so that their mitigation is in
force all year round .
Conclusion : This application is for virtually the largest house possible-plus full,
legally habitable basement . The proposed house may fit into a neighborhood of
standard-width streets and all large homes with minimum setbacks . Yet the
Planning Commission and Town Council have thoughtfully put into place carefully
written policies to help ensure that more such inappropriate homes are not built
in our established neighborhood with a narrow street and tradition of smaller
homes .
Thank you very much for your careful consideration.
Kathryn Morgan, 142 Wheeler Avenue