The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 4 - Staff Report and Attachments 1 to 7 PREPARED BY: ERIN WALTERS 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: 02/23/2022 ITEM NO: 4 DATE: February 18, 2022 TO: Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Consider a Request to Remove a Presumptive Historic Property (Pre-1941) from the Historic Resources Inventory for Property Zoned R-1:8. Located at 33 Walnut Avenue. APN 510-41-007. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Jeffrey Siegel. PROJECT PLANNER: Erin Walters. RECOMMENDATION: Consider a request to remove a presumptive historic property (pre-1941) from the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) for property zoned R-1:8 located at 33 Walnut Avenue. PROPERTY DETAILS: 1. Date primary structure was built: 1890 2. Town of Los Gatos Historic Status Code: I- Historic and Intact 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 BACKGROUND: The Santa Clara County Assessor’s Database lists a construction date of 1890, typically indicating substantial construction occurred around that time. The 1990 Anne Bloomfield Survey indicates that the residence was constructed in the 1890’s and assigned a preliminary rating of “historic and intact” (Attachment 1). The Sanborn Fire Insurance maps show the residence on the subject property in 1895, having a consistent footprint through 1956 (Attachment 2). PAGE 2 OF 4 SUBJECT: 33 Walnut Avenue DATE: February 18, 2022 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPC Reports and Attachments\2022\02-23-22\Item 04 - 33 Walnut Avenue\Staff Report.33 Walnut Avenue.docx BACKGROUND (continued): The property has frontage on both Walnut Avenue and Wissahickon Avenue. The property contains a pre-1941 single-family residence and a new second story accessory dwelling unit (ADU) located above a detached garage and carport, all currently under construction/renovation. An investigation of Town records includes an ADU was approved in 1985 and in 1994 a Building Permit was issued for foundation work. On February 27, 2007, the Historic Preservation Committee (Committee) considered whether or not the work proposed to the pre-1941 single- family residence would be classified as a demolition. The Committee found that the rear of the home was an addition which was unsympathetic to the architectural style of the original house, and therefore the removal of the addition would not be classified as a demolition pursuant to Town Code (Sheet A0 of Attachment 3). In 2007, a Building Permit was issued for a 300-square foot first story addition and a 99-square foot second story addition and remodel (Attachment 3). In 2007, a Building Permit was issued for repair of terminate damage and dry rot at the front porch. In 2008, a Building Permit was issued to rebuild the detached garage and retaining wall. Recent Modifications to the Main Residence by Current Owner On August 22, 2018, and May 15, 2019, the Committee reviewed and approved plans for modifications to the subject pre-1941 residence for the construction of a new roofed porch, interior remodel, and exterior door and window modifications for the structure (Attachments 4 and 5). The proposed development plans included a second story addition to the front of the existing two-story house. The proposed second story addition was associated with a proposed expansion of an attached second story ADU. State regulations and the Town’s ADU Ordinance allow second story ADU’s to be constructed on an existing two-story residence through a ministerial review with an ADU Permit. On May 14, 2019, ADU Permit (D-19-004) was approved for the reconstruction and expansion of an existing second story attached ADU in the main residence. Modifications to the Detached Garage, Carport, and ADU by Current Owner On March 13, 2020, the Development Review Committee approved Architecture and Site Application (S-19-041) for the construction of an addition to the existing detached garage which exceeds 450 square feet and occupies more than 10 percent of the lot exclusive of building setbacks on a non-conforming property. On December 7, 2020, ADU Permit (D-20-017) was approved for a new detached ADU to be located above the expanded garage and new carport and the removal of the existing attached ADU in the main residence. ADU permit (D-19-004) for the reconstruction and expansion of an existing second story attached ADU in the PAGE 3 OF 4 SUBJECT: 33 Walnut Avenue DATE: February 18, 2022 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPC Reports and Attachments\2022\02-23-22\Item 04 - 33 Walnut Avenue\Staff Report.33 Walnut Avenue.docx BACKGROUND (continued): main residence was withdrawn. In July of 2021, Building Permit (B20-0951) was issued for a new detached ADU to be constructed above the expanded garage and new carport. Accessory structures and ADU’s on historic properties are not reviewed by the Committee. Technical Demolition of Main Residence by Current Owner On April 21, 2021, Building Permit (B19-0482) was issued for the construction of a new roofed porch, interior remodel, and exterior door and window modifications for the pre-1941 structure, per the approval by the Committee (Attachment 6). A demolition plan and signed Demolition Affidavit was provided by the property owner/applicant/appellant’s team acknowledging the Town Code’s demolition policy and process for historic structures. The approved project did not result in a demolition. On September 16, 2021, staff was informed by the property owner that more than 25 percent of the exterior siding had been removed from the front elevation of the main residence on Walnut Avenue. This resulted in a technical demolition of the pre-1941 historic residence. On October 7, 2021, the Community Development Director issued a Notice of Unlawful Demolition to the property owner. On October 11, 2021, the property owner filed an appeal of the Director of Community Development’s determination of demolition violation. On November 16, 2021, Town Council held a public hearing, denied the appeal, upheld the Community Development Director’s determination of a demolition violation and reduced penalty fees. The applicant is in the process of applying for an Architecture and Site Application for a Technical Demolition which will require review by the Committee. DISCUSSION: The applicant is requesting approval to remove the residence from the HRI and has provided a written request, research on the property and photographs of the site (Attachments 7). Should the Committee find that the structure does not have sufficient historic significance or architectural merit, the structure would be removed from the HRI and any proposed work would not return to the Committee. An Architecture and Site application is required for the unlawful technical demolition, and it would not return to the Committee. FINDINGS: A. Findings - related to a request for a determination that a pre-1941 primary structure has no historic significance or architectural merit. PAGE 4 OF 4 SUBJECT: 33 Walnut Avenue DATE: February 18, 2022 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPC Reports and Attachments\2022\02-23-22\Item 04 - 33 Walnut Avenue\Staff Report.33 Walnut Avenue.docx FINDINGS (continued): In evaluating a request for a determination of historic significance or architectural merit, the Historic Preservation Committee shall consider the following: 1. The structure is not associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the Town; 2. No Significant persons are associated with the site; 3. There are no distinctive characteristics of type, period or method of construction or representation of work of a master; 4. The structure does not yield information to Town history; or 5. The integrity has been compromised such that the structure no longer has the potential to convey significance. ATTACHMENTS: 1. 1990 Anne Bloomfield Survey 2. Sanborn Map Exhibit 3. Historic Preservation Committee Agenda, Minutes, and Staff Report of August 22, 2018 4. Historic Preservation Committee Agenda, Minutes, and Staff Report of May 15, 2019 5. Excerpts from 2007 Building Permit Plans 6. Excerpts from 2021 Building Permit Plans 7. Letter of Justification, Research, and Photographs -·--·--···--·--.... --. -----·-· ......... _. -. --··-··~·-· -·--~-----·--·-··---··--· ---... -·-·------···· .... , .... -.... ·-··----·-··---... --.- gLr)--ce~t.. t,..o ~~EGt6S> . rz,ao~'V) :\k3)t( J'o ~·t oou"£o L e>-( -::;oX l ~D . . ,. . .. .. ., '"' . 9· ....... ?-!":":1i.tn;:!..;C:."';';""'":r ~ ~' I \ \ \ . . . .. . ( ', . . . ' ··. · . .. ' . ', ·"' .··.·.· -.. .. ~ ~· . -. ·:. This Page Intentionally Left Blank 1895 33 Walnut Avenue 1895 ATTACHMENT 2 1904 33 Walnut Avenue 1908 33 Walnut Avenue 1928 33 Walnut Avenue 1956 33 Walnut Avenue 33 Walnut Avenue 1956 Page 1 of 2 TOWN OF LOS GATOS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING AUGUST 22, 2018 110 EAST MAIN STREET LOS GATOS, CA 3:30 P.M MEETING CALLED TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS (Members of the public are welcome to address the Committee on any matter that is not listed on the agenda. To ensure all agenda items are heard and unless additional time is authorized by the Chair, this portion of the agenda is limited to 30 minutes and no more than three (3) minutes per speaker. In the event additional speakers were not able to be heard during the initial Verbal Communications portion of the agenda, an additional Verbal Communications will be opened prior to adjournment.) CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION) (Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion. Unless there are separate discussion and/or actions requested by the Committee, staff, or a member of the public, it is requested that items under the Consent Calendar be acte d on simultaneously. Any member of the Committee or public may request to have an item removed from the Consent Calendar for comment and action.) 1.Approval of Minutes – July 25, 2018 OTHER BUSINESS (Up to three minutes may be allotted to each speaker on any of the following items.) 2.33 Walnut Avenue Requesting comments on proposed modifications to the front porch of a pre-1941 property zoned R-1:8. APN 510-41-007. PROPERTY OWNER: Jeffrey Siegel APPLICANT: David V. Hernandez, Heritage Architecture PROJECT PLANNER: Erin Walters Nancy Derham, Chair Matthew Hudes, Vice Chair Robert Cowan, Committee Member Len Pacheco, Committee Member Tom O’Donnell, Planning Commissioner ATTACHMENT 3 Page 2 of 2 OTHER BUSINESS (Up to three minutes may be allotted to each speaker on any of the following items.) 3. 25 W. Main Street Requesting preliminary review of a proposal for exterior modifications and an addition to a contributing commercial building in the Downtown Historic Commercial District on property zoned C-2:LHP. APN 529-01-017. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Steve Leonardis PROJECT PLANNER: Jocelyn Shoopman PUBLIC HEARINGS (Applicants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the public may be allotted up to three minutes to comment on any public hearing item. Applicants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested/recommended for continuance are subject to the Committee’s consent at the meeting.) 4. 16940 Roberts Road Requesting approval to remove a pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory for property zoned R-M:5-12. APN 529-18-053. PROPERTY OWNER: Chang 2003 Family Trust APPLICANT: Josephine Chang PROJECT PLANNER: Jocelyn Shoopman ADJOURNMENT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, IF YOU NEED SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT THE CLERK DEPARTMENT AT (408) 354-6834. NOTIFICATION 48 HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING WILL ENABLE THE TOWN TO MAKE REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS TO ENSURE ACCESSIBILITY TO THIS MEETING [28 CF R §35.102-35.104] 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE REPORT MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING AUGUST 22, 2018 The Historic Preservation Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Special Meeting on August 22, 2018, 2018, at 3:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Nancy Derham, Vice Chair Matthew Hudes (arrived at 3:57 p.m.), Committee Member Robert Cowan, Committee Member Thomas O’Donnell, Committee Member Leonard Pacheco Absent: None MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 3:30 P.M. VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS None. CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION) 1. Approval of Minutes – July 25, 2018 MOTION: Motion by Committee Member Leonard Pacheco to approve the consent item. Seconded by Committee Member Thomas O’Donnell. VOTE: Motion passed 4-0-1, Vice Chair Matthew Hudes absent. OTHER BUSINESS 2. 33 Walnut Avenue Requesting comments on proposed modifications to the front porch of a pre-1941 property zoned R-1:8. APN 510-41-007. PROPERTY OWNER: Jeffrey Siegel APPLICANT: David V. Hernandez, Heritage Architecture PROJECT PLANNER: Erin Walters Committee Member Leonard Pacheco recused himself from this item. Erin Walters, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. PAGE 2 OF 3 MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF AUGUST 22, 2018 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPCminutes\2018\8-22-18 Mins.docx Opened and closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter. 3. 25 W. Main Street Requesting preliminary review of a proposal for exterior modifications and an addition to a contributing commercial building in the Downtown Historic Commercial District on property zoned C-2:LHP. APN 529-01-017. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Steve Leonardis PROJECT PLANNER: Jocelyn Shoopman Jocelyn Shoopman, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Opened Public Comment. Karen Delaney - Expressed disapproval of the current mural on the side of building. Closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. 16940 Roberts Road Requesting approval to remove a pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory for property zoned R-M:5-12. APN 529-18-053. PROPERTY OWNER: Chang 2003 Family Trust APPLICANT: Josephine Chang PROJECT PLANNER: Jocelyn Shoopman Jocelyn Shoopman, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Open and closed the Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter. MOTION: Motion by Committee Member Thomas O’Donnell to continue this matter to the September 26, 2018 Historic Preservation Committee meeting. Seconded by Chair Nancy Derham. VOTE: Motion passed 5-0. PAGE 3 OF 3 MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF AUGUST 22, 2018 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPCminutes\2018\8-22-18 Mins.docx ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 5:08 p.m. This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the August 22, 2018 meeting as approved by the Historic Preservation Committee. /s/ Sylvie Roussel, Administrative Technician PREPARED BY: ERIN WALTERS 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: 08/22/2018 ITEM NO: 2 DATE: AUGUST 16, 2018 TO: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PROJECT LOCATION: 33 WALNUT AVENUE. PROPERTY OWNER: JEFFREY SIEGEL. APPLICANT: DAVID V. HERNANDEZ, HERITAGE ARCHITECTURE. REQUESTING COMMENTS ON PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE FRONT PORCH OF A PRE-1941 PROPERTY ZONED R-1:8. APN 510-41-007. RECOMMENDATION: Review the proposal and provide comments on the proposed modifications to the front porch. BACKGROUND: A. Property Details 1. Date primary structure was built: 1890 2. Town of Los Gatos Preliminary Historic Status Code: I – Historic and Intact 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? No 7. Considerations required? No B. Comments The applicant proposes three modifications to the front porch: 1. Expansion of the existing front porch from six feet, eight inches to 11 feet, eight inches in depth to create a more useable space. The existing decking and floor structure would be replaced in-kind due to water damage. PAGE 2 OF 2 SUBJECT: 33 WALNUT AVENUE AUGUST 16, 2018 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPC Sheets\2018\Walnut33 -08-22-18.docx 8/17/2018 9:32 AM BACKGROUND (Continued): 2. Raising the roof of the covered porch from six feet 10-inches to nine feet tall to accommodate the existing eight-foot, four-inch front windows and provide visibility from the house and light into the house. 3. Modify the existing six-inch by six-inch decorative wood columns and guard rail with a square wood column design and a code compliant guard rail with a modified decorative pattern. Building permits are required for the proposed modifications to the front porch. Committee comments are requested to ensure the compatibility of the proposed modifications with the original structure and the surrounding area. The proposed development plans show a second story addition to the existing two-story house. The proposed second story addition is associated with a proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). New State regulations and the recent adoption of amendments to the Town’s ADU Ordinance allow second story ADUs to be constructed on an existing two-story residence with a ministerial review through an ADU permit. The applicant’s request, the Bloomfield Survey, existing photos, and the proposed development plans are attached. DISCUSSION: A. Considerations 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 of the application. Attachments: 1. Letter of Justification (six pages) 2. Bloomfield Survey (seven pages) 3. Photos of Existing Porch (five pages) 4. Development Plans (8 pages) Distribution: Cc: Jeffrey Siegel, 33 Walnut Avenue, Los Gatos, CA 95030 David V. Hernandez, Architect, Heritage Architecture, P.O. Box 8033, San Jose, CA 95155 To: Cc: HERITAGE AR CHITECTURE DAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECT P.O. &x 8033. Sanjose. C\ 95.155 VM: (408) 298-0998 C : (-JOB) 772-3502 Erin ~1. Walters, Associate Pl:mnff Town of Los Gatos Community Development Departmen t Sall}' 7.amowitz, Planning Manager R e: HPC H earing The Siegel Residence Front Porch Expansion/Repair 33 Walnut Avenue, Los Gatos, CA RECEIVED AUG 0 9 2018 TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLA NN ING D IV IS IO N August 09, 2018 Job No. 2018.07 This HPC review p acket is being submirted fo r discretionary review by Committee for approval of a front porch ex pansion and repair attached to a p r e-1 941 residence. not withi n a historic district, but whose fa<;:adc is considered of historical value. Scop e of Work/Justification: 1. Remove and reph!cc wM~ damaged decking and repair existing floor structure as necessary. 2. E xtend exis ting deck footprint an additional 5'-0'', within Front Setback Building Envelope, primarily on the frontage side of the reside n ce. 1bis will allow for a bes t us e of outdoor u,·i ng and greater d ear area s for furniture grouping on the p orch. 3. Rc.-build the roof to its existing slope in order to raise t he bottom of the roof bearing beam height from 6'-10" ab ove the residence subfl oor to 9'-0". By doing so, the 8'-4" tall wind ows overlooking the porch will obtain a greatly improved sightline to the vista beyond and increase natural li ght gain into t11 e residence. R ebuilding th e roof will all ow tl1e owner to address the necessary rnof coverage of the deck by way of deeper overhands as deemed necessary. Refer to interior view of porch photo attached. 4. Replace the existing partiall y turned 6x6 columns and 2'-3" high guardrail wi th new 6x6 square wood collllllllS and pedestal, along with a new code compliant guardrail with a decorative p attern favored by the owner. Refer to pho tos of existing guard.rail and column components . 5. A n y graphics rela ted to th e future work of an ADU at the fr ont of the residence is not to b e considered for the purposes o f this rev iew. T he ADU r eview is fo ll owing a different tract for approval by staff. Submi;~ bt ( ( Q___ Davi~1~hi:: ) Heritage Architecture A1chitect of RecoEd Page 2 cont aim the O\\·ner's ju s tification for this scnpe of work. Please see a.rra.che.d documenl. SaIIy Zarnowitz Los Gatos Planning Dept Sally, Thanks again for all your guidance in helping to develop our proposed a rchitectura l plans for adding the ADU to the upper floor facing the front street. Our goa l is to create an inviting livable space that will offer plenty of light and views that are possible from living on the second floor with sweeping views of the mountains and surrounding area. Having French doors and a walkout deck on the upper part of the front porch will create an attractive aesthetic from the street, and will bring a dditional light into the house and pleasant exterior views. This is also in keeping with the neighborhood where quite a few homes have this same feature including 151 Hernandez (deck faces onto Wissahickon), 7 Walnut Avenue, 3'81 Pennsylvania (deck is on top of the garage facing the street), 45 Glenridge (similar archi t ectural style), 125 Tait (being built right now), and 220 Wilder are some illustrative examples. l have checked with several of my neighbors on Walnut Avenue and all are completely fine with the propose d addition as describe d . At the same time, we are planning on r<esolving several design defects of the existing front porch which include 1) flooring is sloped away from the house making it awkward for poop1·e batandag, 2) f\o(i)ring is in poorcoHd>ition as a resuit ·offuH exposur.e to rains from a lack-of adequate roof protection, 3),porch roof siopes excessively down blocking views and light that would otherwise come into the tall front windows, and 4) depth is shallow limiting the usability of the porch. Unlike my prior house on Pine Avenue where the front porch was a wonderful, livable, space to enjoy the front yard as it was 11 feet deep. Thanks again for your eairlier gurdance and supp-ort in hetping us to complete the design approval process. We are excited about undertaking_ the work that will improve the aesthetics and functional use of the house. Sincere ly, Jeffrey Siegel Proposed Porch Design Improvements in Context of Historic Preservation f:te&t!fU1E o Anne Style Residence at 33 Walnut Avenue References: AUG l 6 2018 1) A field guide to American Houses, Published 2014 by Virginia Sav'MfJN OF LOS GATOS McAlester PLANN ING DIVI SION 2) The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, 2017 Revised by Anne Grimmer 3) Los Gatos Guidelines for Historic Preservation 4) Consultation with Anne Grimmer, Architectural Historian for the Technical Preservation Services Department of the United States Park Service 33 Walnut Avenue, built in 1890, is an example of a Queen Anne style residence with minor spindlework detailing. With a hipped roof and lower cross gables, together with a wrap around porch, the house displays multiple elements of an 1890 era Queen Anne. The house is not located in a historic district though is considered by the town of Los Gatos to be historical on account of the year that it was built. History of the House: While built in 1890, multiple alterations have been made to the house over the intervening years including: 1) Roofing material -wood shingles replaced with composite material 2) Addition of second story ADU toward the rear of the house in 1986 3) Construction of a new two car garage in 2008 replacing a historic structure that could not be adapted for todays modern lifestyle 4) First floor alterations including addition of 250 square feet by pushing out the rear exterior walls of the house altering both size and shape 5) Full interior redesign and reconstruction in 2008 including removing interior walls, changing bedroom locations and sizes, adding windows and doors, creating a great room, adding a bathroom, and changing the interior flow of the house, al o n g with all new plumbing, electrical, and HVAC 6) Multiple landscape changes over time including adding a stone retaining wall and patio in the rear, with steps and gate out to the newly constructed garage Curing the Porch Design Defects: While many improvements have already been made over time, the one re maining and much 'needed alteration is the improvement of the front porch to address specific design defects tha t has caused safety, lighting, and sustainability issues. To be clear, this does NOT mea n changing the character defining featur e s of the porch, which include wrapping around the front and front-side of the house and the use of stylized v e rtica l suppo rts a nd detailed railing design. The design defects, which include shallow depth, overly pitched flooring, low profile roofline that obscures light and interior visibility, missing roof protective overhang, and ab~ence of a south facing weather barrier, altogether negatively impacts the sustainability, safety, and functional use of the front section of the house. Weather exposure to the front of the house, and a dark front interior are problems that are worth solving while respecting the historical integrity of the Queen Anne style. In addition, the front steps have proven to be a safety hazard as multiple guests have now slipped and fallen when walking down the steps. This stems from the exposure of the steps to the elements, combined with their shallow foot depth and steep pitch. It is desired to extend the porch roofline to cover and protect the steps from the elements to create a safe environment. This is in keeping with the Queen Anne style of architecture as evidenced in photos in the book A Field Guide to American Houses page 361, image 11. The desired porch improvements to address these existing problems include: 1) Deepening the porch from its current six feet to 11 feet, which is in keeping with the legal setbacks. Given the gaps in the weave style and low height of the existing railing, this will significantly improve the safety of using the porch, while allowing far more light to enter the tall front windows, and provide much needed protection from the strong west blowing winds and rains that assault the front (and side) of the house given its east (and south) facing exposure. 2) Slight change to the front porch railing to a tighter weave design for improved safety and stronger vertical supports with sturdier base. 3) Adding a transparent protective shield to the left side of the porch protecting the south exposure from wind-blasted rains during the winter months (as many other historic homes in Los Gatos currently have) 4) Raising the gutter eave height of the porch roofing, together with adding a porch roof overhang, as required for both lighting improvement and for protecting the front porch flooring and front siding of the house from the seasonal rains which continues to cause damage. 5) Reducing the existing pitch of the porch flooring to create a shallower pitched surface. Its current pitch creates a floor surface that is somewhat precarious to stand and walk on, particularly for the elderly or anyone that's tall. 6) Extending the porch roof over the front stairs as a safety feature. The front stairs are continually rained upon by environmental elements including water, bird droppings, and tree leaves. Altogether this has created a dangerous and slippery surface. Two guests have now slipped and at times fallen from these stairs and it's highly desired to create an environment for safe ingress/egress of the house while reducing legal liability. A key question to answer: The key question that arises when considering these proposed changes -is whether they constitute a character-defining feature change, or whether the character-defining features of the house can be preserved while making the required adaptation. To answer that question, we have turned to multiple sources, including those published, as well as consulted directly with the author of the Department of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties -Anne Grimmer. Anne's guidance in considering and answering this question has directly informed the proposal being submitted to the Los Gatos Historic Committee. Rehabilitation defined: Rehabilitation is defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions, while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. Maintaining the Queen Anne style of the porch while incorporating the adaptation needed to address the design defects is the intention of this proposed project. Guidance from Anne Grimmer: It has been determined, after consulting in conference with the architectural historian and author of the Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings that the proposed changes to 33 Walnut will not create a 'character-defining change'. In fact, these guidelines state under Alterations -some exterior and interior alterations to a historic building are generally needed as part of a Rehabilitation project to ensure it's continued use. But it is most important that such alterations do not RADICALLY change, obscure, or destroy character-defining spaces, materials, features, or finishes. Anne noted that the porch related issues stem directly from what she calls a 'design defect', which can be intelligently addressed while preserving the character-defining features of the Queen Anne style. She gives the example of the firehouse that is down the street from her office in Washington DC, and is also cited as an example in the guidelines. The opening of the building, based on its original design, could not accommodate todays modern fire trucks, and so the opening was enlarged as an adaptation to today's needs, while preserving the building's style. According to Anne, "the tall front windows of your house (at 33 Walnut) are indeed a character defining feature, as is the style of the wrap around porch. But it's not unprecedented to see porch rooflines that hang so low as to block light and visibility. These should be considered a design defect, not a character-defining feature of the house. Raising the roofline to cure this defect would be considered a reasonable adaptation in the same way that enlarging the opening of the fire station down the street, to accommodate today's larger fire trucks, improved the functionality while still retaining the historic nature of the building itself. " For th is example, Anne referenced page 150 in Standards for Preservation & Guidelines for Preserving Historic Buildings. Anne views the front porch of 33 Walnut as similar to the firehouse example. She notes that making the improvements by addressing the design defects benefits the house and its livability, while preserving its true character-defining features (wrap around porch, tall front windows, detailed railing) of the Queen Anne architectural style. In other words, she sees the proposed improvements (roof height, porch depth, roof overhang, wind barrier) as an intelligent adaptation that would be barely discernible from the street, and not a radical change. We look forward to hearing the historic committee's assessment of these proposed changes, as a means of intelligently addressing the design defects that have caused problems in safety, livability, and maintenance. Respectfully ... Jeffrey Siegel, homeowner of 33 Walnut Avenue Jeffrey Sieget '"'"'-n l IC.\... I Unr\L Mi.:> I VN. I d/nne. 23£oomf iE.£d ARCHITECTURAL/CULTURAL SURVEY LOS GATOS RESEARCH (415> 922-1063 2229 WEBSTER STREET SAN FRANCISCO. C A 941 I 5 I I File a ddress __ 3..__.S~:..._c_'.V_.-·_A°"_·,._,._v_' ·_-I ____ _ PARCEL MAP INFORMATION Parcel # 5/C ·4/-007 Lot size : 5 -0 front ft. x /IPO ft. deep Lot shape: Re ctangle./' L __ Rectangle with small rear jog___ Other __________ _ Locat i on: N S E w./" side of LA/ St Ave ·/ Other ------ distance to cross st: /(p ~ ft. N __ s_L E __ W __ from fk_rn.o,..,...J e.-z. at NE NW SE SW corner of ----------- HI STORIC INFORMATION ON PARCEL MAP Old tract or subdivision nameb'k .,., iZ)1e ?r/;. Old Block # 3 Old lot # ~ -------I FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION (handwritten in red) Preliminary rating -1-Estimated age /'B 9C/<? # storie~ Alterations ---------~----------------------------- Other ---------------------------------------~ COUNTY ASSESSOR--PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS (paste on copy) Page __ EFFecti ve date ___ _ OWNERSHIP SHOWN ON MAPS Source Name ----- Blk Book ' Source Date !1891 ' 1 1908 1,1941 Survey ----1 Source Page Location of property, or Lot Old ·tract/block/lot Size Owner Name MISCELLANEOUS PHOTOS: Roll/ fram e # ~~:.. t ti National Register listed date ----------County Inventory 1979 -------------Town of Los Gatos: Designation __ Recognition __ District Name ---------------- Previ ous Survey '/'900 CA r? I g '1o A f6 ) Gebhard : page # illustration page # 5~ l..Ua.(11 ~.1 --q----- EVALUAT O~ D/t~ C• /'B&ff {sa ... ) , . . Co ntr i buto~ . . Dis t n .ct Non-contrib Ea rliest kn wn - Own e r _ Resid e n t _: (P~. /13.o) Con tex t (S ): • - i ·/ . " din.~ !Bloom{u.tJ. ARC!UTBC~~~~-SURVBY RAMS RBSBARCH ARCHITECTURAL HISTOR' C41 5 l 922· 106 ~ 2229 WEBSTER STREE1 S A N FRANCISCO. C A 941 1 ! .... (per•on, l:11alld i a 9, ortuai aatloa, etc)~:--~---------------------------- 1dr•••e• a••ocia t e d with .._._,?....-3._W~_a.._/._..,_v_-I ____________________________ _ ae l e va nt d a t e•s COM tr~_Ct ion. ____ • birth. ___ • death. ___ • Other. __________ _ :r. DIUC'IORY SBAJtCH (City Din c:tori••; county Dlie e t orie•, Telephone Boolul , •ociety direetori••· e tc.) - Y•ar Book N•-/cla•••••..,. ., __ ..,,_~ T-<--•--1--u •••(----~• .. --_ .. _. ··--• •-• ... _,A••-\ 5JD V.a I ;f. t.H-. ~ ~ P..u..d_ /;<..) """--. CJ...) <Ma '/ -b;// e tv) ..L,, t:J <!:/C'.'1 h 3~c..u- t~6 ,... ?b...J ·"' ( .• BIOGRAPHICAL ISIUICR, indexe• 6 other a lp~tical li•tinq•. (1n&ti1 l 1 d t t l Ma rk •x• (in fd .or 'I ' (aotbiag f oand) a t ••eh •oarce you try. L b t Undta9e below. Los Gatos Library : California History Center, De Anza College : City directories (name & street index) ~-Biographical file ~-Historic Collection Index (green boxes) ~-Photo collection . ~-Thompson & West, 1876 (bio index) --Pen Pictures , 1888 (bio index) ~-Sunshine Fruit & Flowers, 1895 (bio ~-Guinn, 1904 (bio index) i ndex) ~-Sawyer, 1922 (bio index) San Jose Historic al Mus e um : ~-Great Regi~ters (of voters) Indexes ~-Bruntz, Hist'y of .LG, 1971 (bio index) ~-Extended index to Bruntz Photo collec tion Bi o index of Munroe Frazer, 188 1 (Survey box) Photo c ollection (2 boxes) Other s ources: __ Indexes , Cal i forni a Historical ~t'farterl y Los Gatos Museum (Forbes Mill): State Library Information Index (fi che) Death records by year State Li brary-S.F. Newspaper I nd E1x -'.(") Funeral rec ords (i ndex c ards to big books) Photo collection u:r . LIST ALL REPEltB!IC!;S FROM ABOVE . Fi nd the m. Copy good •t eri a l fa att a ch . Or copy below if only a f ew word•. Or e xpla in why not r •l •v a nt (••· wrong per•on). ~ Continue d on Re v e r ie ile a ddrH• .3 $ Ufa /n U ...f PUBLUHD AIB>UllC.IMH'l'8 ARCHITECTUI<AL SURVEY BUILDING RESEARCH sources __ Mill _Bulle tin __ CA&Blll __ Call _chron __ DPB __ Bd...AB __ IX __ lie-_PCA Othe r ARCHITEC TURAL HI STORY 1 51 9 2 2 · 1 063 2229 S TER S TREET SAN FRANc.::;c o . C A 9411 5 Volume Da te Page __ _ Nature of a nnounceme nt: __ c o ntra ct notice __ Notice of comple tion ___ BP i aaued ___ Photo __ Blev/aketch/rend'g ___ Floor plan ___ Arch't/cont•r pub ___ Rea l eat Copy exa ctly: ~ Builder/Contractor Architect/Ensin11r Location Naturt of work coat BUILDING PERMIT~ --.... --. >ource 1 Permit te9ia t e r Pr•• • .. .. or . . . ·-Applica tion Humber OTRBll SOUR.CB (a pecify thoroughly) SAlllBORR MAPS Va c. or Vol/ dif . ~ .2!n bldq Add re a a /'8 '16> /P 1"«.;. . '2..1 -~I W - /1tJc/ ~ ,. ,..., l'i/'6 17 ,, '!?3 \j.) (:1 ') ~ oat• Color : yel, pnk, ora nge blu,gry r e en 7 UH / Owner lfo . o! " ~ Loca tion W1 llailL. a dd rt a a Patchea No. of Ye a/ lllo. of Height b a y ...!!!.L No !$2£i•1 -1tta.l. window D ;J I 5 · e 1 7: ,..:?,.I "' Builder/ Arch't/ contr . & engin'r address & address Description 'Pc.Re t+ Differt ncea from today in: ~ Storie ! Footprint '1lrdf .J re--~ r /Initia l• Date of work ""'iti Bldg' a width/ d e pth/ he ight ale Exterior Mate rjal• date Initia ls Date Date of Describe or sketch constr . plan . · . . . I'· t • . · .. . . . " . . . . . ., ...... . . . PO< w ~d.? f:{;:.:Je l-J [) o D Eo oN "'~ u.,~ 1 N / N) E:e) "YL. . Co\...-£>$~~ o t '~ \5bC.J(, Jf'b~l\ ~ !('t..-0ort . 10~ I 1Lrr ca"'b t.-c.H...J6 '2""60 . ~obhl) ~-JG){~ -(o ~1'( bt'YO[O l ~'t S'D )( i 1:D . . . \ . . . ' . .. " . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .·: . · .. :· . . . .· ... · . ' . ·" . . . . ·. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . ,• .. ' .. ..... . ., . . . ,, ' •' . . . . ... ·. . . . . . ;' . ·. . ~ ' .. ·.· . ·. . . . . . ~-:. . :' .. . . . . ... . . ,' .. . ,• ' , . . .. . · ., .. . : . . . .· : . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . ' .... . . . . . ' . ... . . .... •, . ' . '• ... ( Survey S t r e e t: I " I /) () I'""/'-) r\ ~ ( •.• ./. .... ~ ::? ;; LA..l t-, ,\"..-·?·! -L.·v~ '· lJ_':\ -'>i'\' 1 \~ House Number :_.,_~_-______ _ D / ;;c, / . . . ,· Con s truction ate: Bstimated . i...Q_!: S ourc e 1 • ...:.;_' _, .:...:.',,-"-, ;...; __ ':..."-·-·-------------- ~t yle :· -------------.:---------~--/---::~-( > .. 1_.)( .i /t [lv -i.e./} f'!'ve-,-,/( · .-._?-: f.f?/._~,.-1 t'?v~. '-I /):..,.l ., I'resent Ovmers: () (} ~ l'hone: -------\'!illing to work with survey comrni ttee? Rental? NoY-._yes _ Te no..n ts name : -------------1 hon e : Absentee -owne rs ma iling addr e s s : Best time to co ntact owner : Tenant: ( :' History (inclu d e d a tes, even ts i and pers ons associated with site when knov,m ) l ,., .J . ' ..... L-• ' •• ...... ·,~ ./..( , '" I : •rJ' '. : ; ~' ) ~· ' I • ; /'/'· ,-~.,.,li :: ~~:]ii, .. : t .... , . • ... \ '. I .. ,, : ; : t. : :.· / '\ ,1 ; .it' I I '! -·, i· 'l J t· I J I ( j I I , i. ii·• .. '.:·. ·1.J)r':1 I tf ; . ! w ./ ) ~ . : ._ / { •; (I Architectural Hi story ( identify information source and year of cha nge) Origina l: Ad ded : Remode led; I•' ,. r .--: ... ; : -. ' I . . . . . ~ ~ .. ~ , .. \ t .. , .. ; ;"" L ) :..· .. ' 1: I : ; ·'.) ..... ,-' 1. •, .7 .. '· .: \ . I ~"; : ~i I!,~ ! ,· ~ ••• ! • \._,. \. . ; l I ·~ , 'f l "') I . ~ f: ' f\' .Jr\ J.) ,··. r A'' ii.-( ._. \ . ,. ,, .l ' " ' :, 11 ,..._ .... /t. f , ... 0:.\1; j '••,.I I . • i . l 1 I I ,' ! . ' f' If .~.. ; . '~ . -r 4:-.("> r-....... ..; ' ~.. -,,... .-..J-• .a.. -. ... ..... ,. . .,,,. ---- THE .AUTHOR RUTHERFORD MONTGOMERY would rather write than do anything else in the world. Most of his fifty-three books are about animals and the wilderness he knows so well. As a boy, Mr. Mont- gomery would listen to the tales told by hunters, and his favorite sport then and now is going into the woodland and sitting quietly on a log, ob- serving the children of the Wild. He is a watcher, not a hunter. Mr. Montgomery was born in North Dakota, and taught sChool for ten years in Wyoming and Colorado after graduating from Colorado Agri- cultural College. He saw service in the United States Flying Corps in World War I. Later, he was a county judge in Colorado· and held state offices there. He now lives in Los Gatos, Cali- fornja.. * * * ' < - YEllOW EYE! By RUTHER.FORD MONTGOMERY Illustrated by Farrel/ Collett _, . . y \ ... •......_ . . ·' " :1 .. \ .. . i I I · 1 I .· · . ,·, .1 - " ••• #6 ....... " .. -~. X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX X WALNUT AVENUEWISSAHICKON AVENUENAIL ( T. B. M.) ELE. 1 0 0. 0 0 X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX X WALNUT AVENUEWISSAHICKON AVENUENAIL ( T. B. M.) ELE. 1 0 0. 0 0 P.O. BOX 8033, San Jose, California 95155 C: (408) 772-3502 VM: (408) 298-0998E-mail: dvhernandez@pacbell.netDAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECTHERITAGE ARCHITECTUREHERITAGE ARCHITECTURE OLFCA E O FIHACNR HGSAESNR C-24801LIDICVA STDATAV DATE 3 / 31 / 19 RENEWAL E DE AR TI TCEAZERINDNSIEGEL RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION33 WALNUT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 8 168804 A1.1 N ATTACHMENT 4 P.O. BOX 8033, San Jose, California 95155 C: (408) 772-3502 VM: (408) 298-0998E-mail: dvhernandez@pacbell.netDAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECTHERITAGE ARCHITECTUREHERITAGE ARCHITECTURE OLFCA E O FIHACNR HGSAESNR C-24801LIDICVA STDATAV DATE 3 / 31 / 19 RENEWAL E DE AR TI TCEAZERINDNSIEGEL RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION33 WALNUT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 4 84402 A2.1 N P.O. BOX 8033, San Jose, California 95155 C: (408) 772-3502 VM: (408) 298-0998E-mail: dvhernandez@pacbell.netDAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECTHERITAGE ARCHITECTUREHERITAGE ARCHITECTURE OLFCA E O FIHACNR HGSAESNR C-24801LIDICVA STDATAV DATE 3 / 31 / 19 RENEWAL E DE AR TI TCEAZERINDNSIEGEL RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION33 WALNUT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 4 84402 A2.2 N P.O. BOX 8033, San Jose, California 95155 C: (408) 772-3502 VM: (408) 298-0998E-mail: dvhernandez@pacbell.netDAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECTHERITAGE ARCHITECTUREHERITAGE ARCHITECTURE OLFCA E O FIHACNR HGSAESNR C-24801LIDICVA STDATAV DATE 3 / 31 / 19 RENEWAL E DE AR TI TCEAZERINDNSIEGEL RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION33 WALNUT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 4 84402 A2.3 N RIDGE RIDGE (E)RIDGE RIDGERIDGEVALLEYVALLEY(E) VALLEY (E) HIPVALLEYV A L L E Y HIP HIP H I P (E) HIP(E)(E)(E) (E) (E) (E)(E) (E) 4:12 ROOF PITCH 8:12 RIDGE RIDGE(N) RIDGEVALLEY(N) VALLEYVALLEYVALLEY HIP HIP( N ) ( N )(N) RIDGE(N) RIDGE (N) VALLEY(N) VALLEY(N) HIP(N) HIP (N)(N) HIP(N) VALLEY(N) VALLEY(N) HIP(N) RIDGE SLOPING ROOF SHALLOW CRICKET ROOF PITCH 8:12 MATCH (E) (N) 4:12 (N) DECK EXTENSION (N) PORCH P.O. BOX 8033, San Jose, California 95155 C: (408) 772-3502 VM: (408) 298-0998E-mail: dvhernandez@pacbell.netDAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECTHERITAGE ARCHITECTUREHERITAGE ARCHITECTURE OLFCA E O FIHACNR HGSAESNR C-24801LIDICVA STDATAV DATE 3 / 31 / 19 RENEWAL E DE AR TI TCEAZERINDNSIEGEL RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION33 WALNUT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 4 84402 A3.1 N P.O. BOX 8033, San Jose, California 95155 C: (408) 772-3502 VM: (408) 298-0998E-mail: dvhernandez@pacbell.netDAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECTHERITAGE ARCHITECTUREHERITAGE ARCHITECTURE OLFCA E O FIHACNR HGSAESNR C-24801LIDICVA STDATAV DATE 3 / 31 / 19 RENEWAL E DE AR TI TCEAZERINDNSIEGEL RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION33 WALNUT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 4 84402 A4.1 P.O. BOX 8033, San Jose, California 95155 C: (408) 772-3502 VM: (408) 298-0998E-mail: dvhernandez@pacbell.netDAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECTHERITAGE ARCHITECTUREHERITAGE ARCHITECTURE OLFCA E O FIHACNR HGSAESNR C-24801LIDICVA STDATAV DATE 3 / 31 / 19 RENEWAL E DE AR TI TCEAZERINDNSIEGEL RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION33 WALNUT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 4 84402 A4.2 P.O. BOX 8033, San Jose, California 95155 C: (408) 772-3502 VM: (408) 298-0998E-mail: dvhernandez@pacbell.netDAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECTHERITAGE ARCHITECTUREHERITAGE ARCHITECTURE OLFCA E O FIHACNR HGSAESNR C-24801LIDICVA STDATAV DATE 3 / 31 / 19 RENEWAL E DE AR TI TCEAZERINDNSIEGEL RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION33 WALNUT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 4 84402 A4.1 P.O. BOX 8033, San Jose, California 95155 C: (408) 772-3502 VM: (408) 298-0998E-mail: dvhernandez@pacbell.netDAVID V. HERNANDEZ, ARCHITECTHERITAGE ARCHITECTUREHERITAGE ARCHITECTURE OLFCA E O FIHACNR HGSAESNR C-24801LIDICVA STDATAV DATE 3 / 31 / 19 RENEWAL E DE AR TI TCEAZERINDNSIEGEL RESIDENCE REMODEL/ADDITION33 WALNUT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 4 84402 A4.2 Page 1 of 2 TOWN OF LOS GATOS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING MAY 15, 2019 110 EAST MAIN STREET LOS GATOS, CA 4:00 PM MEETING CALLED TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS (Members of the public are welcome to address the Committee on any matter that is not listed on the agenda. To ensure all agenda items are heard and unless additional time is authorized by the Chair, this portion of the agenda is limited to 30 minutes and no more than three (3) minutes per speaker. In the event additional speakers were not able to be heard during the initial Verbal Communications portion of the agenda, an additional Verbal Communications will be opened prior to adjournment.) CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION) (Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion. Unless there are separate discussion and/or actions requested by the Committee, staff, or a member of the public, it is requested that items under the Consent Calendar be acted on simultaneously. Any member of the Committee or public may request to have an item removed from the Consent Calendar for comment and action.) 1.Approval of Minutes – April 24, 2019 2.62 Ellenwood Avenue Historic Resources Inventory Removal Requesting continuance to June 26, 2019 for approval to remove a pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory for property zoned R-1:12. APN 510-20-068. PROPERTY OWNER: Lisa and Case Swenson APPLICANT: Kurt Simrock PROJECT PLANNER: Azhar Khan Continued from April 24, 2019 Matthew Hudes, Chair Robert Cowan, Vice Chair Tom O’Donnell, Planning Commissioner Nancy Derham, Committee Member Len Pacheco, Committee Member ATTACHMENT 4 Page 2 of 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Applicants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the public may be allotted up to three minutes to comment on any public hearing item. Applicants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested/recommended for continuance are subject to the Committee’s consent at the meeting 3. 407 University Avenue Historic Resources Inventory Removal Requesting approval to remove a pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory for property zoned R-1P. APN 529-07-041. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Ravi Todi and Sudha Hisaria PROJECT PLANNER: Sally Zarnowitz OTHER BUSINESS (Up to three minutes may be allotted to each speaker on any of the following items.) 4. 33 Walnut Avenue Preliminary Review Requesting preliminary review of a proposal for exterior alterations to a pre -1941 single- family residence on property zoned R-1:8. APN 510-41-007. PROPERTY OWNER: Jeffrey Siegel APPLICANT: David V. Hernandez PROJECT PLANNER: Erin Walters 5. 268 Los Gatos Boulevard Preliminary Review Requesting preliminary review of a proposal for exterior alterations to a pre -1941 single- family residence on property zoned R-1:D. APN 532-36-022. PROPERTY OWNER: Werner J Wiechmann APPLICANT: Firoz Pradhan PROJECT PLANNER: Azhar Khan ADJOURNMENT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, IF YOU NEED SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT THE CLERK DEPARTMENT AT (408) 354-6834. NOTIFICATION 48 HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING WILL ENABLE THE TOWN TO MAKE REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS TO ENSURE ACCESSIBILITY TO THIS MEETING [28 CFR §35.102-35.104] 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE REPORT MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING MAY 15, 2019 The Historic Preservation Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Special Meeting on May 15, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Vice Chair Robert Cowan, Committee Member Nancy Derham, Committee Member Thomas O’Donnell Absent: Leonard Pacheco, Matthew Hudes MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 4:00 PM VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS Jefferey Siegel – Presented a copy of his letter to Town Council promoting adoption of the Mills Act. CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION) 1. Approval of Minutes – April 24, 2019 2. 62 Ellenwood Avenue -- Historic Resource Inventory Removal MOTION: Motion by Committee Member Thomas O’Donnell to approve the consent calendar. Seconded by Committee Member Nancy Derham. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 3-0-2, Committee Member Leonard Pacheco and Chair Matthew Hudes absent. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. 407 University Avenue Historic Resources Inventory Removal Requesting approval to remove a pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory for property zoned R-1P. APN 529-07-041. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Ravi Todi and Sudha Hisaria PROJECT PLANNER: Sally Zarnowitz Sally Zarnowitz, Planning Manager, presented the staff report. PAGE 2 OF 3 MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 15, 2019 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPCminutes\2019\05-15-19 Mins.docx 6/28/2019 11:11 AM Owner presented the reasons for his request. Opened and closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter. MOTION: Motion by Committee Member Thomas O’Donnell to approve the request to remove from the Historic Resources Inventory. Seconded by Committee Member Nancy Derham. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 3-0-2, Committee Member Leonard Pacheco and Chair Matthew Hudes absent. OTHER BUSINESS (Up to three minutes may be allotted to each speaker on any of the following items.) 4. 33 Walnut Avenue Preliminary Review Requesting preliminary review of a proposal for exterior alterations to a pre-1941 single- family residence on property zoned R-1:8. APN 510-41-007. PROPERTY OWNER: Jeffrey Siegel APPLICANT: David V. Hernandez PROJECT PLANNER: Erin Walters Erin Walters, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Applicant presented the proposed project. Opened and closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter. MOTION: Motion by Committee Member Nancy Derham to recommend approval of the proposal. Seconded by Vice Chair Robert Cowan. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 3-0-2, Committee Member Leonard Pacheco and Chair Matthew Hudes absent. PAGE 3 OF 3 MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 15, 2019 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPCminutes\2019\05-15-19 Mins.docx 6/28/2019 11:11 AM 5. 268 Los Gatos Boulevard Preliminary Review Requesting preliminary review of a proposal for exterior alterations to a pre-1941 single- family residence on property zoned R-1:D. APN 532-36-022. PROPERTY OWNER: Werner J Wiechmann APPLICANT: Firoz Pradhan PROJECT PLANNER: Azhar Khan Azhar Khan, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Applicant presented the proposed project. Opened and closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter. MOTION: Motion by Committee Member Nancy Derham to recommend for approval of the proposal. Seconded by Committee Member Thomas O’Donnell. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 3-0-2, Committee Member Leonard Pacheco and Chair Matthew Hudes absent. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:56 p.m. This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the May 15, 2019 meeting as approved by the Historic Preservation Committee. /s/ Jocelyn Fong, Administrative Assistant This Page Intentionally Left Blank PREPARED BY: ERIN WALTERS 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: 05/15/2019 ITEM NO: 4 DATE: MAY 9, 2019 TO: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PROJECT LOCATION: 33 WALNUT AVENUE. PROPERTY OWNER: JEFFREY SIEGEL. APPLICANT: DAVID V. HERNANDEZ, HERITAGE ARCHITECTURE. REQUESTING PRELIMINARY REVIEW ON PROPOSED EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS TO A PRE-1941 PROPERTY ZONED R-1:8. APN 510-41-007. RECOMMENDATION: Review the proposal and provide comments on the proposed exterior alterations. BACKGROUND: A.Property Details 1.Date primary structure was built: 1890 2.Town of Los Gatos Preliminary Historic Status Code: I – Historic and Intact 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? No 7.Considerations required? No B.Comments Previous Review On August 22, 2018 the Historic Preservation Committee reviewed and approved modifications to the front porch as described below: PAGE 2 OF 4 SUBJECT: 33 WALNUT AVENUE MAY 9, 2019 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPC Sheets\2019\Walnut33 -05-15-19.docx BACKGROUND (continued): 1.Raising the roof of the covered porch from six feet 10-inches to nine feet tall to accommodate the existing eight-foot, four-inch front windows and provide visibility from the house and light into the house. 2.Modify the existing six-inch by six-inch decorative wood columns and guard rail with a square wood column design and a code compliant guard rail with a modified decorative pattern. Second Story- Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) The development plans show a second story addition to the existing two-story house. The proposed second story addition is associated with an approved Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). New State regulations and the recent adoption of amendments to the Town’s ADU Ordinance allow second story ADUs to be constructed on an existing two- story residence with a ministerial review through an ADU permit. Current Proposal The applicant proposes the following first story and second story exterior modifications to the structure: 1.First Floor a.Replace the existing front door with a new beveled glass front door (east elevation); b.Add a transom window above front door (east elevation); c. Replace one double hung window with three taller double hung bedroom windows (south elevation); d.Add a single double hung window to the master bathroom (south elevation); e.Replace two double hung master bedroom windows with two taller double hung windows (south elevation); f.Replace master bathroom and bedroom double hung windows with taller double hung windows (south elevation); g.Add a transom window above the existing master bedroom french doors (west elevation); and h.Add new French living room doors (north elevation). 2.Second Story Rear (non- ADU living area) a.Add a second story covered patio (north elevation); b.Add french doors to proposed covered patio (north elevation); c.Add one double hung bathroom window (south elevation); and d.Enlarge a portion of the south elevation to accommodate an expanded closet (south elevation). PAGE 3 OF 4 SUBJECT: 33 WALNUT AVENUE MAY 9, 2019 N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPC Sheets\2019\Walnut33 -05-15-19.docx BACKGROUND (continued): The applicant has provided a scope of work and a letter of justification in Attachment 1. The applicant’s proposed scope of work includes a proposed new carport along Wissahickon Avenue (Attachment 1). The Historic Preservation Committee does not review accessory structures and staff has not yet reviewed the proposed carport to determine if the proposed location, height, or size meet the Town’s Zoning Code. Building permits are required for the proposed modifications. Per the applicant the proposed project does not result in a technical demolition. Committee comments are requested to ensure the compatibility of the proposed modifications with the original structure and the surrounding area. The applicant’s request, the Bloomfield Survey, existing photos, and the proposed development plans are attached. DISCUSSION: A.Considerations 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 of the application. CONCLUSION: The proposal is being referred to the Committee for its input and recommendation on whether the proposed alterations are compatible with the original structure and the surrounding neighborhood. Should the HPC find merit in the request, the proposal could be approved by the Community Development Director and processed with a Building Permit, and the project would not return to the HPC. Attachments: 1.Scope of Work/Letter of Justification 2.Bloomfield Survey 3. Photos of Existing Porch 4.Development Plans N:\DEV\HISTORIC PRESERVATION\HPC Sheets\2019\Walnut33 -05-15-19.docx PAGE 4 OF 4 SUBJECT: 33 WALNUT AVENUE MAY 9, 2019 Distribution: Cc: Jeffrey Siegel, 33 Walnut Avenue, Los Gatos, CA 95030 David V. Hernandez, Architect, Heritage Architecture, P.O. Box 8033, San Jose, CA 95155 ATTACHMENT 1 This Page Intentionally Left Blank This Page Intentionally Left Blank ATTACHMENT 3 This Page Intentionally Left Blank ATTACHMENT 4 This Page Intentionally Left Blank ATTACHMENT 5 ATTACHMENT 6 Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Property: 33 Walnut Avenue Subject: Request to Remove a Presumptive Historic Property (Pre-1941) from the Historic Inventory Enclosed: 1)Historical accounting of changes made to the property since built 2)Diagrams showing what has already been permitted 3)Photos of what has already been built under the HPC approved permitting 4)Justification for removal of a pre-1941 property from the historic inventory Resources consulted: -Anne Bloomfield Survey -Oral history account from long-established neighbor -Prior permitted plans filed by Oveyssi detailing changes -Prior HPC review documents -Built environment - Historical artifacts remaining of the original roofing frame in attic History of Property Since Built: Unlike other lots in the neighborhood, 33 Walnut fronts onto two streets - Walnut and Wissahickon. This means that changes made to the rear of the Walnut-facing home are clearly visible from Wissahickon, and vice versa. There is no way to ‘hide’ exterior structural changes from viewing by either of these two streets. Early Era: 33 Walnut started off as a small, one-bedroom cottage, not unlike the small one-bedroom homes to its neighboring immediate left and right, but since then has undergone successive waves of alterations and expansions by multiple owners over time, leaving to today resembling little of its original design. It was constructed around 1890 (exact date not definitively documented) in the Queen Anne style that was popular at that time, serving as a summer home for its first residents, Don and Joan Glod. There is some reference to a William and Maybelle Peed who appear to have purchased the cottage in the 1920’s, and changing it before selling to the Montgomery family. This is likely when the fireplace was removed with the advent of electricity brought to Los Gatos. The property was later sold to Rutherford and Eunice Montgomery in 1948 where it became their primary residence. Rutherford was an author of children’s books and raised his family here before passing away in 1985. During the time that the Montgomery family lived here, extensive modifications were made to both the interior and exterior of the house to make it suitable to raise a growing family. On the exterior, the rear of the house was enlarged by adding a glassed-in rear porch along with further expanding the footprint by adding a room adjacent to the kitchen. Later, following his death in 1985, a second-story addition was built on top of the enclosed rear porch with exterior staircase extending into the rear of the yard, not visible from Walnut Avenue. This second story was significant in changing the roofline while adding mass, becoming the second significant modification to a family residence that began as a small, single-story, Queen Anne styled cottage. Oveyssi Era: Following the death of Eunice Montgomery in July 2006, the house was sold to Michael Oveyssi who devoted nearly two years on its third major modification further expanding the footprint and changing both the interior and exterior of the house. His intent was to expand and modernize the house before flipping it, but due to the 2008 housing market downturn, kept it as a rental property until selling it its current owner in ATTACHMENT 7 2016. It was during that extensive rebuild by Oveyssi that the entire interior of the house was gutted, the footprint further enlarged, and interior space reconfigured and restyled. This expansion included demolition of the rear porch before newly constructing roughly 500sf onto the back of the house, plus expanding the second-story living space. This second story expansion completely altered the roofline transforming it from the small shed dormer into a three-gabled profile that added high interior ceilings and enlatrged living space. This expansion also entailed first demolishing the rear facing exterior staircase built by the Montgomery family and then building a new exterior staircase and landing onto the north-facing side of the house that offers views into neighboring properties to the North. This dramatically transformed skyline is prominent when viewed from Wissahickon and also from Walnut when approaching the house from either the South or North. During this time period, all windows were replaced with modern, dual-pane windows including the addition of arched windows that starkly deviated from the original Queen Anne cottage. What originally began as a small one bedroom, one bath, approximately 889sf summer cottage has been transformed into a two-story 2620sf sprawling five-bedroom, four-bath family residence. The once-small summer cottage no longer remains. In addition, in 2008 Mr. Oveyssi demolished the historic tin-clad structure facing Wissahickon, replacing it with a modern-day, ranch-style two-car garage transforming the appearance of the property from that frontage street. The one area left untouched by all prior owners throughout its life was the wraparound front porch. Unfortunately, after decades of neglect exacerbated by damage inflicted by storms approaching from the east and southern exposures, the front porch was structurally compromised. Rotted decking, failing structural beams and weakened foundation created an unsafe condition. The stairs were replaced by 2x8 slats of rough lumber before the property was placed on the market by Oveyssi in 2016. The residence was then sold to the current owner in October 2016 in this compromised condition. Present Era: A once-upon-a-time, small, single-story Queen Anne cottage with small tin-clad horse shelter bears no resemblance to the existing lot now housing dual, two-story residential structures. The brew of demolitions, alterations, and additions over the past century was recently perpetuated with the complete demolition of the badly deteriorated front porch. The newly constructed porch differs in size, depth, roofline height and distinctive radius corner contributing to the improved structural integrity of the house. Concrete and steel have replaced old wood support structure. The porch changes, as approved by the HPC in 2019, retains a Queen Anne architectural style. But burdened with conforming to modern-day seismic and safety codes, it nonetheless is an abandonment of the historic materials, original construction methods, and low-slung railing design; that are among the tests for being designated historic. While the house already differed in every respect (shape and size and height) from the south, west, and north elevation views, it now differs from the east elevation view as well. As part of that permitted renovation, engineering specified a structural reinforcement of the front (East facing) house wall. This required removal of the siding to attach tie-downs to foundation four feet below and to add vertical framing members to the thinly-built front wall frame. The town code disallows removing more then 25% of the front wall of a historic house, and while the wall itself was structurally reinforced, not removed (only the siding removed in order to reinforce the wall), the town staff interprets the language of the code to mean excluding even the removing of the siding. This runs contrary to the interpretation by the property owner, builder, and architect and resulted in the property owner being assessed a fine and the property assessed as a technical demolition of the entire house. Carriage House – living space above detached garage: Most recently, beginning in 2021, and continuing into early 2022, the two-car, single-story ranch-style garage, facing Wissahickon, has been transformed into a two-story structure that contains an 800SF residence over a three-car garage. While growing the housing stock (ADU) for Los Gatos, and providing EV charging for three electric vehicles, the tall structure dominates the skyline from both Wissahickon and from the rear windows of the main residence. The newly-built structure is visible as well from Walnut Avenue given its mass and towering height, amplified by its high topological position on the lot. The roofline sits about thirty-seven feet above Walnut Avenue making it impossible to miss from any viewpoint. In summary, little about the property at 33 Walnut, when viewed from either Walnut or Wissahickon looks anything like the small summer cottage and accompanying tin-clad horse shelter that once stood. Today’s Request of the HPC: Today, the request is before the HPC to remove the extensively altered residence from the historic inventory. It simply fails to meet the tests of being historically significant by state or local standards, and should therefore be removed from the historic inventory. With decades of successive changes to both the residence and the entire lot, nothing about the house actually meets the state or local tests for historical preservation. The information provided below to the HPC clearly shows that the property does not meet the criteria of the state or local policies and regulations for designating a historic property. The information describes in detail that the property has not contributed to the cultural heritage of California, is not associated with an important person of history, has lost if any existed, significantly distinctive architectural characteristics through many alterations, demolitions and expansions, and does not yield important information for history. Enclosed are diagrams, previously approved by HPC and permitted in 2021, that showed the pre-existing and permitted changes to the main residence. The front porch work has been largely completed, with a new concrete and steel foundation, flattened roof, and steel posts that provide structural integrity to both the porch and front wall of the house. Remaining for completion is adding the new porch decking, railing, and skirting. Changing Character of Walnut Avenue: Unlike streets in the Los Gatos Historic Districts, Walnut Avenue is an eclectic and rural street (no sidewalk improvements) sporting a mixture of architectural styles and ages, with the most recently built, in 2010, home located two lots to the north in a faux-craftsman style ranch home. To the immediate south is a small, single-story, single-bedroom Spanish-style house. Directly across the street at 32 Walnut Avenue is a 1900- built house previously removed from the historic inventory and now scheduled for demolition, to be replaced by a two-story residence of far greater mass and livable space. Walnut Avenue is not in a historic district. The residence at 33 Walnut Avenue, in its original form, would have more closely resembled these neighboring, small homes in size and scale. Lot Layout Differs: In addition, the layout of structures on the lot, which has an elongated shape of 50 feet wide and 160 feet deep, has undergone significant change. Where once stood a tin-fabricated horse shelter facing onto Wissahickon, not sits a two-story Carriage House with new residence sitting over a three-car garage. As a result, the site bears little resemblance or feel to when the main residence was built on the lot. In summary, the changed layout of structures on the lot, the building mass-to-lot ratio, and the changed size, shape and mass of the original residence, together with the newly built, seismically sound front porch has collectively transformed the lot and dual residences into property that bears little resemblance to what was built around 1890. That cottage has disappeared under the successive waves of substantial changes made over the decades leaving nothing that the state of California would consider historic. California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR)2 The California Register of Historical Resources is “an authoritative listing and guide to be used by state and local agencies, private groups and citizens in identifying the existing historical resources of the state and to indicate which resources deserve to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change” (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1[a]). The criteria for eligibility to the California Register are based on National Register criteria (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1[b]). Certain resources are determined by the statute to be automatically included in the California Register, including California properties formally determined eligible for or listed in the National Register. To be eligible for the California Register as a historical resource, a prehistoric or historic-period resource must be significant at the local or state level under one or more of the following criteria: 1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; The property at 33 Walnut Avenue, once a small, Queen Anne styled single-story cottage, is not associated with events that contributed to the broad patterns of local or regional history, nor the cultural heritage of California. Neither is it located in a historic district of town. 2) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; The subject property has no known historic relevance related to people or events. Prior owners were not prominent in the community nor in local, California, or national history. 3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values The original, small summer cottage was designed in the Queen Anne style, accentuated most prominently by its shallow depth porch with low-slung roof and dangerously low railing height as the porch sits six feet above the surrounding grade. The cottage has evolved over the decades into a two-story residence that is nearly twice the size of the original with different proportions, massing, roofline, and a character-defining wraparound front porch that while built in the Queen Anne style appearance-wise, bears no historic relevance to the original porch due to state-mandated utilization of modern materials and construction methods. Demolitions in front and back, additions in front, back, and second-story plus major remodeling using modern materials makes the residence not distinctive of a historic type, period, region or method of construction. It does not represent the work of a master or possess high artistic value. 4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation. The site is not near or part of a historic site and has been graded for construction and landscaping. It is unlikely to yield information important to the history or prehistory of the area. The building that stands today is mostly recent construction and cannot yield important information from history. Finding: The property at 33 Walnut Avenue does not meet the criteria to be listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. For a resource to be eligible for the California Register, it must also retain enough integrity to be recognizable as a historical resource and to convey its significance. Although the property at 33 Walnut Avenue is not found to be historically significant, a comparison to the original design and fabrication reveals the building to have been substantially altered and does not meet the criteria for retaining integrity. Integrity: Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. To be listed in the National Register of Historic Places, a property must not only be shown to be significant under the National Register criteria, but it also must have integrity. The evaluation of integrity is something of a subjective judgment, but it must always be grounded in an understanding of a property’s physical features and how they relate to its significance. Historic properties either retain integrity (convey their significance) or they do not. Within the concept of integrity, the National Register criteria recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, in various combinations, define integrity. To retain historic integrity, a property will always possess several, and usually most, of the aspects. The retention of specific aspects of integrity is paramount for a property to convey its significance. Determining which of the aspects are most important to a particular property requires knowing why, where, and when the property is significant. The following defines the seven aspects and how they combine to produce integrity. A rule of thumb is to consider whether the original owner would recognize the building and how it once functioned. There is no question that the original owner would fail to recognize the small cottage that he built over a century ago. SEVEN APSECTS OF INTEGRITY3 Location: Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. The relationship between the property and its location is often important to understanding why the property was created or why something happened. The actual location of a historic property, complemented by its setting, is particularly important in recapturing the sense of historic events and persons. Except in rare cases, the relationship between a property and its historic associations is destroyed if the property is moved or partly demolished. The property is not located in a historic district. Design: Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. It results from conscious decisions made during the original conception and planning of a property (or its significant alteration) and applies to activities as diverse as community planning, engineering, architecture, and landscape architecture. Design includes such elements as organization of space, proportion, scale, technology, ornamentation, and materials. A property's design reflects historic functions and technologies as well as aesthetics. It includes such considerations as the structural system; massing; arrangement of spaces; pattern of fenestration; textures and colors of surface materials; type, amount, and style of ornamental detailing; and arrangement and type of plantings in a designed landscape. The present design in form, space, structure and style differs from what was originally built in 1890. When viewed from all four elevations, the modifications don’t resemble a small, single-story cottage nor its original style. Setting: Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Whereas location refers to the specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place in which the property played its historical role. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its relationship to surrounding features and open space. Setting often reflects the basic physical conditions under which a property was built and the functions it was intended to serve. In addition, the way in which a property is positioned in its environment can reflect the designer's concept of nature and aesthetic preferences. The physical features that constitute the setting of a historic property can be either natural or manmade, including such elements as: - Topographic features (a gorge or the crest of a hill); - Vegetation; - Simple manmade features (paths or fences); and - Relationships between buildings and other features or open space. These features and their relationships should be examined not only within the exact boundaries of the property, but also between the property and its surroundings. This is particularly important for districts. Where once there was a small Queen Anne styled cottage and a tin-clad horse shelter on a wide-open lot spanning two streets, today there are two residential structures co-existing on that lot eliminating any sense of openness. Both structures are quite visible from Walnut Avenue and Wissahickon. These two, large massed buildings are a complete departure from the small cottage first built on the lot. Due to vastly higher topology of Wissahickon, the Carriage House looms large overshadowing the primary residence. When viewed from Walnut, the Carriage House is quite visible with its rooftop towering some 37 feet above the street grade of Walnut Avenue. Materials: Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. The choice and combination of materials reveal the preferences of those who created the property and indicate the availability of particular types of materials and technologies. Indigenous materials are often the focus of regional building traditions and thereby help define an area's sense of time and place. A property must retain the key exterior materials dating from the period of its historic significance. If the property has been rehabilitated, the historic materials and significant features must have been preserved. The property must also be an actual historical resource, not a re-creation; a recent structure fabricated to look historic is not eligible. Likewise, a property whose historic features and materials have been lost and then reconstructed is usually not eligible. While it would have been nice to have preserved the historic, original railing and lathed wooden posts on the front porch, modern building codes imposed by the state and local authorities pre-empted that option. Seismic and human safety factors trumped preservation of historical materials. Workmanship: Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure, object, or site. Workmanship can apply to the property as a whole or its individual components. It can be expressed in vernacular methods of construction and plain finishes or in highly sophisticated configurations and ornamental detailing. It can be based on common traditions or innovative period techniques. Workmanship is important because it can furnish evidence of the technology of a craft, illustrate the aesthetic principles of a historic or prehistoric period, and reveal individual, local, regional, or national applications of both technological practices and aesthetic principles. Examples of workmanship in historic buildings include tooling, carving, painting, graining, turning, and joinery. The workmanship methods used to build the original front porch were dramatically different from modern building methods that must take into account seismic and other factors. These factors that shape modern building codes prevailed over reconstructing the porch based on original construction and design methods. Likewise, most of the construction methods and materials used throughout the many structural changes to the house differ from how homes were constructed in the late 1800’s. Feeling: Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character. For example, a rural historic district retaining original design, materials, workmanship, and setting will relate the feeling of agricultural life in the 19th century. Due to changes in building mass, altered roofline, removal of historic elements including fireplace/chimney (before electricity was added), original windows and doors, complete reconfiguration and remodel of interior spaces, changed proportion of multiple physical structures to land, and the inability to reuse front porch historic materials due to safety and structural factors, there is little feeling elicited of a historic period in time. A five-bedroom, four-bath, two-story residence feels entirely different than a small cottage with open land behind it. Association: Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character. Because feeling and association depend on individual perceptions, their retention alone is never sufficient to support eligibility of a property for the National Register. There is no known association of the property with any historic event or person. The aspect of association cannot be applied because no event or person of importance is associated with the property. CRHR SUMMARY: The 1890-91 dated architecture, embodied in a small Queen Anne cottage, was remodeled and enlarged first in the 1920’s by the Peed’s, then again in the 1940/50’s by the Montgomery’s, again in 2007/8 by Michael Oveyssi, and finally again in 2021 by the present owner. Over this succession of changes, every aspect of the house has changed. Given the sweeping breadth of these successive waves of changes over the decades, little remains of any historic aspects of the original, small one-bedroom, one-bath cottage. The small neighboring one-bedroom house to the right, at 41 Walnut is a good reference point to grasp what the original house would have looked like, other than the front porch distinction. The feeling of the lot as shaped by the views of the lot and beyond, from inside the residence, the proximity to another large, two-story structure that looms large above the original residence, creates a feeling far removed from a once-small cottage on a wide-open lot with unobstructed views of the surrounding mountains when first built. Transforming a single-story small cottage into a larger footprint, two-story house caused a loss of integrity. After the 2007/8 remodeling and the additions to the original house, there was further loss of integrity. Of the seven aspects of integrity, not even the aspect of location is present given how dramatically altered the layout of structures on the lot is today. The design has changed, historic materials have been replaced with steel and other contemporary, structurally rigid materials and using construction methods needed to meet today’s stringent building codes, the original workmanship is lost. The setting has changed from a once open setting to both Walnut and Wissahickon, to a setting of multiple buildings in close proximity where the once-cottage mountain views now look out onto a two-story second building that sits ten feet higher on the lot due in part to topology. The feeling of a small cottage has changed to one of a large massed, two-story house with altered front façade, albeit seismically sound. Findings: The property does not meet the criteria for significance or integrity, is not a significant historical resource, and is not eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. Town of Los Gatos: The following Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan goals and policies relating to archaeological and historical resources are applicable to consider. Goal OSP-9 To protect Los Gatos’s archaeological and cultural resources to maintain and enhance a unique sense of place. Policy OSP-9.1 Evaluate archaeological and/or cultural resources early in the development review process through consultation with interested parties and the use of contemporary professional techniques in archaeology, ethnography, and architectural history. The property was researched and then evaluated for cultural and architectural importance. Nothing of substance was discovered. Goal CD-12 To preserve significant historic and architectural features within the Town. The research and evaluation show that the buildings on the property are not significant features in Los Gatos. In the immediate area, several of the earlier houses have been reconstructed to larger buildings in different architectural styles. These include homes on upper Pennsylvania Avenue, on Walnut Avenue, on Wissahickon, and on Ellenwood. The property location is not within a historic district. Division 3. Historic Preservation and LHP or Landmark and Historic Preservation Overlay Zone Sec. 29.80.215. Purposes. It is hereby found that structures, sites, and areas of special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value have been and continue to be unnecessarily destroyed or impaired, despite the feasibility of preserving them. It is further found that the public health, safety, and welfare require prevention of needless destruction and impairment, and promotion of the economic utilization and discouragement of the decay and desuetude of such structures, sites and areas. The purpose of historic preservation is to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the public through: (1) The protection, enhancement, perpetuation, and use of structures, sites, and areas that are reminders of past eras, events, and persons important in local, State, or National history, or which provide significant examples of architectural styles of the past or are landmarks in the history of architecture, or which are unique and irreplaceable assets to the Town and its neighborhoods, or which provide for this and future generations examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. (2) The development and maintenance of appropriate settings and environment for such structures. (3) The enhancement of property values, the stabilization of neighborhood and areas of the Town, the increase of economic and financial benefits to the Town and its inhabitants, and the promotion of tourist trade and interest. (4) The enrichment of human life in its educational and cultural dimensions by serving aesthetic as well as material needs and fostering knowledge of the living heritage of the past. The Town recognizes a historical resource as follows: any structure/site that is located within a historic district, any structure/site that is historically designated, or any primary structure constructed prior to 1941 unless the Town has determined that the structure has no historic significance or architectural merit. Finding: The Town has designated the historic districts of Almond Grove, Broadway, Los Gatos Commercial, Fairview Plaza and University/Edelen. All the historic districts are located in the historic core area of Los Gatos. The subject property is not in a designated historic district. The main house has been extensively altered and enlarged, and does not exhibit special character; or special historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest; or value to the built environment of Los Gatos. The Carriage House building, landscaping, and second story expansion has been constructed since 2006 and are not contributing to nor preserving any historic value. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) In the historical resource section of CEQA, the concern is directed toward any project that may create an adverse change to any historical resource. CEQA Guidelines Appendix G indicates that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it would: 1. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in section 15064.5; 2. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5; 3. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature; 4. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries; or 5. Conflict with a plan or policy adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. A “substantial adverse change” to a historical resource is defined in Guidelines Section 15064.5(b) as “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired.” The significance of a historical resource is materially impaired when a project “demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources;” or “demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources...” or “demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA.” CEQA (Guidelines Section 15064.5), define the term “historical resources” to include the following: 1. A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register (Public Resources Code §5024.1, Title 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 4850 et seq.). 2. A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant. 3. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California, may be considered to be a historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing in the California Register (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, Title14 California Code of Regulations, Section 4852) CEQA Finding: The research and evaluation of the primary residence and Carriage House at 33 Walnut Avenue conclude that the property and buildings do not meet the criteria of the California Register of Historical Resources or the criteria of the Town of Los Gatos for designating a historical resource. For purposes of CEQA, the subject property is not a “Historical Resource” under the CEQA Guidelines. Reference Materials: 1. Drawings: The following drawings shows precisely where the 1891-built cottage footprint was, based on the original roof-frame artifact that remains beneath the actual functioning rooftop. It clearly shows that the original footprint of the house was 889 sf of living space before the Peed and Montgomery families made their alterations which included removing the fireplace and building an additional room (behind the kitchen) onto the rear of the house. That added room extended the rear of the house back about fourteen feet before being further extended in 2007 by Oveyssi. 2. This photo shows the roof frame artifact remaining in the attic indicating precisely where the rear of the original house ended. This is hard evidence of the original structure not otherwise found in town records. The following photos show some of the exterior changes that have been made over the course of several decades. Earlier changes such as the addition of a glassed-in rear porch and first version of the second story addition are not shown, but are available to see in older photos provided by town staff. 3. View of newly constructed front porch from Walnut Avenue: While true to the Queen Anne style front porch architecture, the improvements in depth, height, and shape, together with the yet to be built new railing leaves no trace of the historic materials or construction methods.. 4. View from Walnut Avenue of Carriage House: This photo shows both the 2007 built exterior staircase and the newly built carriage house structures, both visible from Walnut Avenue. 5. East-facing View of 2021/22-built Carriage House from Rear of Main Residence: No longer is there any view looking out onto Wissahickon from the original house. 6. Northwest view of gabled 2nd-story of 33 Walnut plus 2021/22-built Carriage House: Visibility from Wissahickon the Walnut facing house clearly reveals an entirely different residence than the single-story house originally built with a wide-open view lot. 7. Northern Elevation View of 2007 massively altered second-story of 33 Walnut: Clearly no longer a small 889 sf cottage. 8. Southwestern Elevation (from Wissahickon) view of three-gabled second-story addition: 9. Southern View of the First/Second-story 2007 Additions with High Extended Roofline: The second-story roofline dominates the view from the neighboring lot on the southern elevation. This Page Intentionally Left Blank