Staff Report.44 Bayview
PREPARED BY: SEAN MULLIN, AICP
Associate Planner
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMITTEE REPORT
MEETING DATE: 12/16/2020
ITEM NO: 8
DATE: December 10, 2020
TO: Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Preliminary Review of a Request for Demolition of a Presumptive Historic
Residence (Pre-1941) and Construction of a New Single-Family Residence on
Property Zoned R-1D Located at 44 Bayview Avenue. APN 510-44-020.
Property Owner: Pamela Hook. Applicant: Jay Plett, Architect. Project
Planner: Sean Mullin
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider a preliminary review of a request for demolition of a presumptive historic residence
(pre-1941) and construction of a new single-family residence on property zoned R-1D located at
44 Bayview Avenue.
PROPERTY DETAILS:
1. Date primary structure was built: c. 1922 per County Assessor’s Database/Bloomfield
2. Town of Los Gatos Historic Status Code: +, historic and intact, worthy of special note
3. Does property have an LHP Overlay? No
4. Is structure in a historic district? No
5. If yes, is it a contributor? N/A
6. Findings required? Yes
7. Considerations required? No
DISCUSSION:
The applicant is requesting a preliminary review of a proposal to demolish portions of the
existing residence, relocate the remaining street-facing portions of the residence, and construct
first and second story additions to the residence. The proposal would likely result in technical
demolition of the existing residence and construction of a new residence.
The applicant proposes to demolish the majority of the existing residence while preserving the
front facade, which would be relocated approximately three feet forward on the property. A
PAGE 2 OF 3
SUBJECT: 44 Bayview Avenue
DATE: December 10, 2020
N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPC Reports and Attachments\2020\12-16-20 Special Mtg\Item 8 - 44 Bayview\Staff Report.44 Bayview.docx
DISCUSSION (continued):
new two-story residence with a basement would be constructed behind the relocated front
facade. The proposed basement would be located under a majority of the residence while the
proposed partial second floor would be set back from the front of the main floor, stepping into
the residence to provide articulation and distribution of the second-story mass. A proposed
front elevation showing a mix of stone and wood elements has been provided with the
Development Plans, but does not include full details of the exterior materials (Attachment 5,
Sheet A-5). Through staff, the applicant has indicated that the proposed residence would be
finished with painted wood windows, three-inch wood lap siding to match the existing, seven-
inch smoot wood lap siding in the gable ends, stone cladding at the base of the residence, and a
composition roof.
The front of the house would project approximately three feet into the required front setback.
The applicant intends to utilize a section of the Town Code that allows for a reduction in the
required front setback when a main building on an adjacent lot(s) projects into the required
front setback. Staff will verify whether this section of the Town Code is applicable upon review
of the required Planning application.
The proposed work would likely result in a technical demolition because portions of the
residence would be removed exceeding the limitations of the Town Code. Unless the portions
proposed for removal are not original to the structure, demolition would require a
determination that the structure is not significant or that demolition is necessary f or the proper
restoration of the structure. Depending on the preliminary feed back provided, t he applicant
may make a request for a determination when the project returns to the HPC under a Planning
application for a formal recommendation to the deciding body.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant is seeking preliminary feedback from the Committee on the proposal. The
proposed project would respond to the feedback and return under an Architecture and Site
application for a recommendation to the deciding body.
CONSIDERATIONS:
A. Considerations
Sec. 29.80.290. Standards for review.
In evaluating applications, the deciding body shall consider the architectural style, design,
arrangement, texture, materials and color, and any other pertinent factors. Applications
shall not be granted unless:
PAGE 3 OF 3
SUBJECT: 44 Bayview Avenue
DATE: December 10, 2020
N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPC Reports and Attachments\2020\12-16-20 Special Mtg\Item 8 - 44 Bayview\Staff Report.44 Bayview.docx
CONSIDERATIONS (continued):
For pre-1941 structures, the proposed work will neither adversely affect the exterior
architectural characteristics or other features of the property which is the subject
ofthe application.
B. Residential Design Guidelines
Section 4.9 of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines offers recommendations for
additions to historic resources through reference to Section 3.9 (Attachment 2).
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Photo
2. 1990 Bloomfield Survey
3. Sanborn Map Exhibit
4. Section 3.9, Residential Design Guidelines
5. Development Plans