2-3-14 Logan 134 Loma AltaAppeal – 134 Loma Alta
7/22/2022
All mature landscaping stripped
Property left vacant and in disrepair
After home was purchased
For over a year
1
“Compromise is what binds people together. Compromise is sharing and conciliatory, it is loving and kind and unselfish.”
7/22/2022
We respectfully request the Town Council grant our appeal for Site Application S-13-049 and continue the project with specific direction for the applicant to:
Reduce the overall bulk and mass of the second story by limiting the length of the second floor to 27 feet while preserving the second story front and side setbacks on the current design.
We understand that this will likely result in additional square footage on the first floor extending further back into the lot, but we are amenable to this as a compromise solution as
long as the bulk of the additional first floor square footage is placed to the uphill side of the property toward 136 Loma Alta.
Maintain privacy both for interior and actively used exterior spaces for the adjacent properties by:
Requiring that all side windows on both sides of the upper story be obscured glass
Requiring that French Doors be used only on the first story, eliminating the need for the upper balcony.
Require that the detached garage with half-bath be deed restricted so that it is not to be used, rented or leased as a secondary dwelling unit.
2
Justification for Appeal
7/22/2022
ERRORS BY PLANNING COMMISSION OR FACTS NOT AVAILABLE
136 Loma Alta is NOT a two-story—It is one-story
The immediate neighborhood was misrepresented
The project WILL be the largest home in the imdt. neighborhood
The consulting architect’s letter is vague and inaccurate
The adjacent homes were remodeled without impacts
The Commission neglected the 1+2 story option
Story Poles gave false impression of change
Not all compromises agreed to were included in motion
Comparative Shadow Study overstates fence height
3
1. The Adjacent Home is a One-Story
7/22/2022
The home at 136 Loma Alta is a one-story house as defined by Town Code 29.10.020: “If the finished floor level directly above a basement or cellar is more than six (6) feet above grade,
such basement or cellar shall be considered a story.”
4
1. The Adjacent Home is a One-Story
7/22/2022
This confusion about the story height of the adjacent neighbor led to flawed conclusions by the Planning Commission regarding neighborhood compatibility. First, that the immediate neighborhood
included more two-story houses than is fact. Second, the story height of adjacent homes is to be considered when determining the appropriate height, bulk and scale of a project as well
as the techniques used to minimize visual impact of two-story homes. If the story height is misrepresented, then it would follow that the appropriateness of the height, bulk and scale
of the adjacent project is flawed.
5
2. Immediate Neighborhood not properly considered
7/22/2022
Staff provides a clear definition of which houses are to be included in the immediate neighborhood.
Design Guidelines: “The greatest attention will be given to the immediate neighborhood”
6
2. Immediate Neighborhood not properly considered
7/22/2022
The immediate neighborhood is predominantly one-story with 2 examples of 1+2 story homes.
Because the Planning Commission made this error and considered homes outside of the immediate neighborhood as precedent for the compatibility of a two-story home, it serves to follow
that this flawed premise led to further errors in evaluating the applicability of critical Residential Design Guidelines with respect to form and mass, height, bulk and scale, as well
as privacy and solar access.
7
3. The Proposed Design IS THE LARGEST in the immediate Neighborhood
7/22/2022
This error regarding the relative square footage of the project sets a dangerous precedent. While each project should be judged on its own merit, the entire process is focused on neighborhood
compatibility, which is essentially based on what already exists in the immediate neighborhood. Every time a project with larger square footage than its surrounding immediate neighborhood
is approved, it provides a potential justification for compatibility of future projects. It is not in the best interest of our community to allow the balance and visual unity of a
neighborhood to be changed based on faulty assumptions or incorrect information.
The PC staff report dated 12/11 (page 5) shows that Town staff recommended denial of the project due to its size and again noted that it would be the largest.
8
4. The Consulting Architect’s letter is vague and includes errors
7/22/2022
The Planning Commission should have more carefully analyzed the consulting architect’s assessments. They are vague in that they both use the term, “nearby” and do not recognize the immediate
neighborhood, they include errors, specifically misidentifying the number of stories for the home at 138 Loma Alta (which is in the immediate neighborhood), and they rely on incomplete
information because they were written prior to the story poles being erected.
138 Loma Alta is a 1+2 story home
9
5. Adjacent Homes Have Increased Square Footage without Negative Impacts
7/22/2022
Each of the adjacent homes had their square footage increased significantly in such a way that there were no negative impacts and the homes remained compatible with the immediate neighborhood.
Each used a different technique to do so, demonstrating that it is possible to preserve the unique character of a neighborhood and still make significant improvements to a property.
Unfortunately, the Planning Commission did not fully explore these alternative approaches with the neighbors at the hearings.
10
6. Why Not a One and Two-Story?
7/22/2022
One and two-story houses are different than full two-story houses in that a significant part of the square footage is one-story. This characteristic provides ways to mitigate and minimize
the negative impacts that a second story has on the adjacent neighbors.
For the proposed project, other than a one-story, a one and two-story home would be the most compatible design and the most consistent with Residential Design Guidelines in regard to
form and mass, height, bulk and scale, as well as privacy and solar access.
11
7/22/2022
Adding to the misperception about the story height of the immediate neighborhood homes, the project plan includes a streetscape that, although it is noted “no scale”, significantly overstates
the height of the two-story portion of the one and two-story at 138 Loma Alta, making it look more like a full two-story.
6. Why Not a One and Two-Story?
12
6. Why Not a One and Two-Story?
7/22/2022
Because the Planning Commission did not recognize the clear distinction between a “two-story” and a “one and two-story” home in their deliberation of neighborhood compatibility, they
struggled to find a compromise, even though they acknowledged that the adjacent neighbors were negatively impacted. The neighborhood is predominantly one-story homes and the only two
exceptions are one and two-stories. There is a compromise about which information was readily available that is workable, acceptable and compatible: a one and two-story, where the
upper story is limited in length and substantial side and second floor setbacks are maintained.
13
7. Story Poles told a False Story
7/22/2022
Mr. Prolo used comparisons of the photos of the story poles from the original design to the revised design to display how much the design has changed. The original story poles were
erected to include the eaves and the revised story poles do not, resulting in a visual change that is approximately 2 feet greater than the actual change. Although the way the story
poles are now properly installed, to use them as a visual comparison is deceptive.
14
8. We Request Compromise to Remedy Negative Impacts and Increase Neighborhood Compatibility
7/22/2022
The requested compromise conditions are reasonable, workable and equitable. They will make this new home more compatible for the immediate neighborhood and prevent the dangerous precedent
that is of concern for so many of the neighbors. They are also based on the suggestions provided by the applicant’s own architect, who has designed an attractive home, and we are confident
that he will be able to incorporate these changes to create a design that allows Mr. Prolo to retain a comfortable backyard area without sacrificing all of the light, privacy, and sky
views for the adjacent neighbors.
Reduce the overall bulk and mass of the second story by limiting the length of the second floor to 27 feet while preserving the second story front and side setbacks on the current design.
With the bulk of the additional first floor square footage placed to the uphill side of the property.
Maintain privacy both for interior and actively used exterior spaces for the adjacent properties by:
Requiring that all side windows on both sides of the upper story be obscured glass
Requiring that French Doors be used only on the first story, eliminating the need for the upper balcony.
Require that the detached garage with half-bath be deed restricted so that it is not to be used, rented or leased as a secondary dwelling unit.
15
KAREN EVENDEN
7/22/2022
FURTHER UNDERSTAND THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS WITH REGARD TO SOLAR ACCESS ON THE NEIGHBORS AT 132 LOMA ALTA
MORE INFORMATION ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY and OUR REQUEST
16
7/22/2022
Example of a room that will lose solar access
First-story height
Second story height
17
Current proposal eliminates most of the solar access on this portion of our house
7/22/2022
And the difference between the one and two story is significant, especially in relation to the windows, and most markedly in the winter when solar access is at a premium
18
Solar access is eliminated throughout the year
7/22/2022
Even on the longest day of the year when the sun is highest in the sky, shadow is cast over this side of our house
The length of time the shadow is cast over our home increases for every other day of the year
For many months this side will receive virtually no direct sunlight at all
19
Correct immediate neighborhood analysis changes outcome
7/22/2022
Loss of solar impact was acknowledged by three commissioners:
“It is very troubling to the neighbor to the left, 132, when you look at the visuals of how you would just have no solar access for that home” Commissioner Sayoc, Dec 11, 2013
“…and we do have one home that will be more impacted that any other in the neighborhood and that’s what makes it a very difficult decision for us” Commissioner Smith, Dec 11,2013
“I’m very sympathetic to the neighbors down slope, the Evendens” Commissioner Bourgeois, Dec 11, 2013
Impact of solar access would be given more weight, in line with the design guidelines, as the decision was based on the incorrect immediate neighborhood analysis
Town of Los Gatos Design Guidelines state in section 3.11.1:
“Minimize shadow impacts on adjacent properties. Locate structures to minimize blocking sun access to living spaces and actively used outdoor areas on adjacent homes”
As Lezli has outlined earlier, on several occasions, the Commissioners used the incorrect immediate neighborhood analysis as a basis for their decision, and thus did not give sufficient
weight to the fact that the proposal does not meet the Town of Los Gatos Design Guidelines. In addiition, we have shown by placing the windows on the diagram, that the impact is even
greater that what is shown in the original diagram. This visual looks rather like the situation we are finding ourselves in.
20
Massing on the second floor also impinges on our privacy
7/22/2022
Town of Los Gatos Design Guidelines; Section 3:11:2
Our outdoor dining area
21
Our neighborhood
7/22/2022
Full of character
Proximity to schools
Proximity to downtown
Sense of community
Refer back to Lezli’s analysis. Talk about why we bought here.
22
Sum of Mr. Prolo’s requirements incompatible with neighborhood
7/22/2022
Requirements
Big yard
Full 2-story
Large covered porch
All bedrooms on same floor
Large double garage with bathroom attached
Overmassing on second floor
This is a list of requirements, that Mr. Prolo is not compromising on, does not describe any of the houses in the immediate neighborhood. And, implementing this list would have a detrimental
impacting on the existing homes in our neighborhood. It creates the overmassing on the second floor, and this overmassing is incompatible with the immediate neighborhood, eliminates
solar access to downhill neighbor, and creates privacy concerns for both adjacent neighbors.
23
The solution
7/22/2022
A one and two-story home
2nd story length no greater than 27”
Rear limit of 2nd story no more than 57” from front property line
All side and front setbacks proposed on 12/11/13 maintained
Bulk of additional first floor square footage placed on the uphill side of the property
Side windows on upper story be obscured glass
No French doors on upper story
Detached garage & half bath be deed restricted
Talk about how we are looking for a fair and reasonable compromise. Current proposal does not achieve this…….
24