2021
New residents, Chloe Chen and Bobby Porwal, submitted a preliminary design to rebuild their house with a second story addition or a raised roof. The CRC said that the design would not be approved based on view impacts and concerns about aesthetics and scale. Their uphill neighbors hired an attorney to send a letter objecting the proposal.
Slide to Compare Neighbor’s Original View vs. Rendering of Proposed Second Story Addition/Raised Roof
2022
Chloe volunteered to become a member of the CRC and submitted a formal request to remodel her home with a second story addition.
Her new uphill neighbors hired an attorney to write a letter to the CRC voicing their objection to the remodel application and referencing the violations of the Covenants and View Guideline.
After the CRC consulted with their own long-standing attorney who helped write the original View Guideline, they denied the remodel application with a 2-page denial letter referencing the following issues:
Scale of the proposed structure in comparison to surrounding neighbors
Effect of the proposed structure to uphill neighbor territorial views
Failure to make a significant change in height from initial review
Lack of harmony with style and size of adjacent properties
The unsuitability of a 2-story structure on that specific lot (located at the base of a hill with access through a privately-owned easement/roadway)
The homes in that area were constructed at a certain height in order to specifically protect the territorial views of the surrounding neighbor properties
Slide to Compare Neighbor’s Original View vs. Rendering of Proposed Second Story Addition
2023
Chloe became the new Chair of the CRC and her mother-in-law, Leena Porwal, became the new President of the SCA Board.
The SCA Board’s long-standing attorney retired and was replaced by one that Chloe recommended.
Under their new legal counsel, the CRC entertained approval of a Division 8 second story addition that would impact neighboring views, privacy, and property values, as well as dwarf adjacent houses. They provided the applicants with an initial feedback letter, asserting that territorial views of trees and rooftops are not protected by the Covenants, nor are views of the buildings that comprise the Bellevue skyline.
The neighbors whose views would be impacted by the Division 8 second story addition were enraged and worked with the Somerset Pride/Ambassador Committee to create a pre-submitted presentation for the full SCA Board. At the scheduled meeting, the Board refused to hear the report and voted to disband the Pride/Ambassador Committee. The SCA and CRC, under legal counsel, then sent a threatening letter to the community, warning people not to try to preempt CRC decisions.
The two past SCA Board Presidents, Charles Bofferding and Francis Brito (who were also serving on the Pride/Ambassador Committee), submitted their resignations from the Board in protest of the Board and CRC’s actions.
The Division 8 applicants revised their plans exactly as directed by the CRC and resubmitted their application. The CRC, with the help of their new attorney, approved the second story addition with a 52-page approval letter.
The CRC then unilaterally made the following changes to the 2016 View Guideline without any public input or notice:
Deleted “The Spirit of the Guideline - To preserve the views of a residence, the way they were, when the house was Built,” and replaced it with “The Purpose of the Guidelines: A working tool used to provide transparency and information to property owners and guidance for application of the Covenants.”
Deleted the concept of the View Line and all reference to it
The View that this Guideline is intended to preserve protect is the View that was observable above the View Line from the Observation Zone at the time the relevant Main Floor Living Space was Built.
Trees – Footnote, …an existing bush in a neighboring lot has been allowed to grow above the View Line, he/she can ask for the restoration of the View.
Living Space – Living room, dining room, family room, kitchen. Intention: interior public areas of a home where entertaining is done. Therefore, bedrooms, laundry room, bathrooms, closets, decks, entryways, and hallways are not included in the definition of Living Space.
View – Elements that comprise View in this definition are limited to Lake Washington, Lake Sammamish, Puget Sound, City, Mountain, and Horizon.
The changes reflect the CRC’s current stance that the View the Covenants are intended to protect is narrowly defined as only the elements (water, city, mountain, horizon), and does not include any territorial views of trees or rooftops below the elements. Even though this contradicts the 2022 CRC decision to deny Chloe’s request to remodel, the CRC is claiming that the View that the new View Guideline are intended to protect remains unchanged. Allowing multi-story houses to be built up to the lowest element will inevitably lead to oversized houses and overgrown vegetation consuming our views and chopping up our neighborhood.
Invasion of privacy and effects on property values are also of major concern. However, the CRC states that the Covenants do not mention privacy, therefore it is not protected nor considered in their decision. They maintain that they must balance a homeowner’s right to construct vs. a homeowner’s view rights, even though the original intent of the Covenants was to preserve views and prevent homes from being uncharacteristically taller than its neighbors and protrude upward from the ridge line.
In 2023, the Board and CRC spent $16,815.99 on attorney fees, which far exceeded the budget for legal expenses presented at the Annual Meeting. Our membership dues are being used to pay for legal advice on how to limit our view protections, yet the CRC claims that they are serving the community’s best interest…
Slide to Compare Neighbors’ Original Views vs. Rendering of Proposed Second Story Addition