With only three members able to participate, both Vice-Chair Miller and Member Jordan had to recuse themselves due to their proximity to the subject property at 2150 Starkey Ave. A lengthy discussion progressed for the proposed, new single-family home on one of Yountville’s smallest lots. The 3,301 square foot lot on the north side of Starkey Avenue presented issues for the applicant, Jake, and Kim Evans. Their architect Jarrod Denton felt he solved all design standards and still respected Old Town’s historical guidelines. And most importantly, achieve an approved design.
Interestingly enough, for such a small project at 998 sq ft (above ground) (1,100 + sq ft including the basement), all design standards were met for setbacks building height, two-story building max for block, and FAR (floor area ratio). Windows and doors, front porches, garages, driveway: all met the Old Town guidelines, saying something for a small lot in Old Town.
And this is where it gets interesting. The architect had his opportunity to explain his design. For those not aware, myself included, Mr. Denton has designed 23 homes throughout Yountville. He wanted to respect the historical guidelines and make this an approachable home based on the Greene and Greene designed gamble house in Pasadena, CA. Check out some pics here. I had to pull in tight on the renderings for this property to see some resemblance, and this Old Town design is definitely a modern interpretation of that style. And there is not a brick to be found on the Gamble structure. The reference to the current home and brick was a clinker brick that was popular with Craftsman-style homes but was not being utilized in Yountville. So the architect presented the project with McNear Tivoli face bricks on the entire lower level of the facade. The justification for this usage in Old Town was based on V Marketplace and RH Wine Vault. Mr. Denton explained the high level of design for this home, and this was not just assembling two boxes. There is attention to detail, and this home is grounded in traditional details.
The core concept for turning the house on the second floor, which resulted in the cantilever, is for daylight, and the skylight from the roof funnels the light to refract to the basement for a light well; if it was stacked, this would not happen. You see, there is a basement in this proposal with two bedrooms, a bathroom, and a workout room. And for those wanting to expand their homes or have a new build, I just learned a basement does not count to total FAR. An interesting idea for a small lot and one that drew concern from two Members given the high water table in Yountville. A Geotech report was obtained from the same company that completed the basement at North Block Hotel around the corner and showed no water and excavation concerns.
A subject briefly touched on was that this is a very small house, the height is “extremely low,” 24 inches from the grade with 2nd floor, 8 ft ceilings. Denton then stated, “compare to any other two-story house, this is lower and narrower and quite compact.” My perspective is that so much time was spent on Greene and Greene that not enough focus was given to present the Members with a correct feel for how small the home would be and its size relationship to the lot and the surrounding neighbors.
The Members held a very thoughtful discussion on the project, being respectful of Mr. Denton’s history with our Town and wanting to work with the applicants for a “beautiful design” for Old Town. Member Kim Cook stated, “… it is creative, would be beautifully built.” Member Piña struggled because it does not feel like Old Town and “fairly modern” for Old Town.
The five main points of concern, as stated in the Staff Report:
- The cantilevered section over the driveway. This type of “floating” design feature is not present in Old Town.
- The heavy building massing. The small lot, FAR allowance, the ability to have two stories, and a cantilevered building section contribute to a building massing, unlike most Old Town residences, which have low, rectangular massing.
- Use and intensity of masonry. While other residences in Old Town use masonry as an accent feature, the amount proposed for this residence makes it a dominant design feature, which is not common in Old Town.
- The municipal code states that “Every effort shall be made to blend in with the adjacent neighborhood (both sides of the block, including corner houses), rather than stand out as-unique or singular in style.” (18.20.010).
- In combination, these elements possibly create a “breakout design.” According to the municipal code, “New structures shall not reference outside architectural styles or breakout designs” (18.20.010). The term “breakout design” is not defined in the code, so this determination is a matter for the board.
Chair Michael Zagorsek gave a thoughtful, well-versed summation of concerns and reasons for not approving the project. When describing the design, he stated, “It then becomes a challenge of this particular group to create that balance of integration creativity conformity and the like.” He then went on to explain, “… It’s a question of proximity and variety, these are small lots, at any point on the street you are always going to see three and four houses at once. Some strive on variety, some on consistency. It’s a stronger, clear departure. Massing, materials, the structure.”
This is … “a spectrum challenge… somewhere along the spectrum… and where is that line and help steer the course of this particular Town”, said Chair Zagorsek.
The Members voted 3-0 to continue this project, not deny it. Planning Director Sandra Liston explained that by not denying the project presentation, the applicant could receive the feedback and continue to a date uncertain and re notice the project, not start over entirely.
As I have seen, it is the case with so many applicants coming into Yountville; the applicant stated the amount of money they have already put into this project and, while understanding the feedback, said, “… sounds like we are so off that a box is what we need to design.” The applicant knew these concerns going in. Staff met with the applicant’s architect and explained how many of the design features were not in keeping with neighborhood character and the Old Town design guidelines in the municipal code. While changes were made to the initial design to better conform to these guidelines, they were mostly minor in scope, so the concern remained.
All Members offered, again, their feedback on how this design could be successful moving forward. And Mr. Evans even asked what they could do to be offered “some variances.” There was a noticeable pause from all the Members and Staff. And as Chair Zagorsek stated, “(we will)… take Staff’s guidance in that regard.”
So, for now, the teal blue home circa 1895 will remain.
