Historic Preservation Committee Packet 05-28-2025Page 1
HOW TO PARTICIPATE
The Town of Los Gatos strongly encourages your active participation in the public process. If
you are interested in providing oral comments during the meeting, you must attend in-
person, complete a speaker’s card, and return it to the staff. If you wish to speak to an item
on the agenda, please list the item number on the speaker card. The time allocated to
speakers may change to better facilitate the meeting. If you are unable to attend the meeting
in-person, you are welcome to submit written comments via email to
planning@losgatosca.gov.
Public Comment During the Meeting:
When called to speak, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes, or such other time as
the Chair may decide, consistent with the time limit for speakers at a Town meeting.
Speakers at public meetings may be asked to provide their name and to state whether they
are a resident of the Town of Los Gatos. Providing this information is not required.
Deadlines to Submit Written Comments:
If you are unable to participate in person, you may email planning@losgatosca.gov with the
subject line “Public Comment Item #_” (insert the item number relevant to your comment).
Persons wishing to submit written comments to be included in the materials provided to the
Commission must provide the comments as follows:
For inclusion in the agenda packet: by 11:00 a.m. the Friday before the Committee
meeting.
For inclusion in the agenda packet supplemental materials: by 11:00 a.m. on the day of
the Committee meeting.
For inclusion in a desk item: by 11:00 a.m. the day of the Committee meeting.
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
MAY 28, 2025
110 EAST MAIN STREET
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
4:00 PM
Lee Quintana, Chair
Martha Queiroz, Vice Chair
Susan Burnett, Planning Commissioner
Emily Thomas, Planning Commissioner
Alan Feinberg, Committee Member
Page 1
Page 2
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CONSENT ITEMS (Items appearing on the Consent Items are considered routine Town business
and may be approved by one motion. Any member of the Committee may request to have an
item removed from the Consent Items for comment and action. Members of the public may
provide input on any or multiple Consent Item(s) when the Chair asks for public comments on the
Consent Items. If you wish to comment, please follow the Participation Instructions contained on
Page 1 of this agenda. If an item is removed, the Chair has the sole discretion to determine when
the item will be heard.)
1. Draft Minutes of the March 26, 2025, Historic Preservation Committee Meeting
2. Draft Minutes of the April 23, 2025, Historic Preservation Committee Meeting
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS (Members of the public are welcome to address the Historic
Preservation Committee on any matter that is not listed on the agenda and is within the subject
matter jurisdiction of the Committee. To ensure all agenda items are heard, this portion of the
agenda is limited to 30 minutes. 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. Each speaker is limited to three minutes or such time as authorized
by the Chair.)
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Applicants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of five
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 three minutes maximum for closing statements. Items
requested/recommended for continuance are subject to the Committee’s consent at the meeting.)
3. Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic Resources Inventory
for Property Zoned R-1D. Located at 446 San Benito Avenue. APN 410-16-051. Exempt
Pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). Request for Review PHST-25-005. Property
Owner/Applicant: Devendra Deshwal. Project Planner: Erin Walters.
4. Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic Resources Inventory
for Property Zoned R-1:8. Located at 37 Ellenwood Avenue. APN 510-19-015. Request for
Review PHST-25-008. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b)(3). Property
Owner/Applicant: Arthur Chatoff. Project Planner: Samina Merchant.
5. Consider a Request for Approval to Construct Exterior Alterations to a Non-Contributing
Single-Family Residence in the Almond Grove Historic District on Property Zoned R-
1D:LHP. Located at 109 Tait Avenue. APN 510-18-037. Minor Development in a Historic
District Application HS-25-009. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301:
Existing Facilities. Property Owner: Howard Labe and Jill Nakamura. Applicant: Terry J.
Martin, AIA. Project Planner: Erin Walters.
Page 2
Page 3
6. Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic Resources Inventory
for Property Zoned R-1:8. Located at 16805 Loma Street. APN 532-07-101. Exempt
Pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). Request for Review PHST-25-007. Property Owner:
William Wundram. Applicant: David Britt, Britt-Rowe. Project Planner: Sean Mullin.
7. Consider a Request for Approval to Construct an Addition and Exterior Modifications to an
Existing Pre-1941 Single-Family Residence on Property Zoned R-1:8. Located at 119
Harding Avenue. APN 532-35-022. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301:
Existing Facilities. Request for Review Application PHST-25-010. Property Owner: Brian
Conlisk. Applicant: Jay Plett Architect, LLC. Project Planner: Sean Mullin.
OTHER BUSINESS (Up to three minutes may be allotted to each speaker on any of the following
items.)
8. Consider a Request for Preliminary Review to Construct a New Second-Story Addition and
Exterior Alterations to an Existing Non-Contributing Single-Family Residence Located in
the Almond Grove Historic District on Property Zoned R-1D:LHP. Located at 310 Tait
Avenue. APN 510-14-058. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301: Existing
Facilities. Request for Review Application PHST-24-026. Property Owner: Santiago Allende.
Applicant: Donna Chivers. Project Planner: Erin Walters.
REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE MATTERS
ADJOURNMENT
ADA NOTICE In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance
to participate in this meeting, please contact the Clerk’s Office at (408) 354-6834. Notification at
least two (2) business days prior to the meeting date will enable the Town to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR §35.102-35.104].
NOTE The ADA access ramp to the Town Council Chambers is under construction and will be
inaccessible through June 2025. Persons who require the use of that ramp to attend meetings are
requested to contact the Clerk’s Office at least two (2) business days prior to the meeting date.
Page 3
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 4
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMITTEE REPORT
MEETING DATE: 05/28/2025
ITEM NO: 1
MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING
MARCH 26, 2025
The Historic Preservation Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a regular meeting on
March 26, 2025, at 4:00 p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 4:00 PM
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Lee Quintana, Planning Commissioner Susan Burnett, Planning Commissioner
Emily Thomas, and Committee Member Alan Feinberg.
Absent: Vice Chair Martha Queiroz stuck in traffic.
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CONSENT ITEMS
1. Approval of Minutes – February 26, 2025
MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Burnett to approve the consent calendar.
Seconded by Committee Member Feinberg.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously 3-0-1. Commissioner Thomas abstained and
Vice Chair Queiroz was absent.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. 222 University Avenue
Minor Development in a Historic District Application HS-24-055
Consider a Request for Approval for Construction of an Addition and Exterior
Alterations to an Existing Non-Contributing Single-Family Residence Located in the
University-Edelen Historic District on Property Zoned R-1D:LHP. APN 529-04-004.
Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301: Existing Facilities.
Property Owner/Applicant: Tuyet Pham
Project Planner: Sean Mullin
The project planner presented the staff report.
Opened Public Comment.
Page 5
PAGE 2 OF 9
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2025
The applicant was not present.
Committee members asked questions of Staff.
Sean Mullin, Project Planner
Clear directions were given to the applicant. In response they submitted revised plans.
Advise the Committee to conduct the review without the applicant present and make a
recommendation. The original siding has been enclosed by additions. The current visible siding
was installed post-1941 and is not original.
Closed Public Comment.
Committee members discussed the matter.
The structure was originally described in the Historic Inventory as a barn. The barn siding from
that period was board and batten and not shingles. The proposed project blends in much better
with the district. The changes followed all the Committee’s recommendations. The proposal is a
huge improvement and reads as a single-family residence.
MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Thomas to Forward a Recommendation of
Approval to Construct an Addition and Exterior Alterations to an Existing
Non-Contributing Single-Family Residence Located in the University-
Edelen Historic District on Property Zoned R-1D:LHP. Located at 222
University Avenue. APN 529-04-004. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15301: Existing Facilities. With the Plans and Findings
as Presented. Seconded by Commissioner Burnett.
Committee members provided comments.
Disappointed that the applicant was not present. Board and batten would be a better choice.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously, (4-0). Vice Chair Queiroz was absent.
3. 31 University Avenue
Planned Development Modification PD-25-001, Architecture and Site Application S-25-
004, and Conditional Use Permit U-25-001
Consider a Request for Approval to Modify Planned Development Ordinance 2025 to
Allow Modifications to Building E, an Architecture and Site Application for Exterior
Modifications to an Existing Commercial Building in the University/Edelen Historic
District, and a Conditional Use Permit for Formula Retail over 10,000 square feet and
for a Restaurant with Alcohol Service on a Property Zoned C-2:LHP:PD. Categorically
Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301: Existing Facilities.
Property Owner: SRI Old Town, LLC
Applicant: Rick Nelson, MBH Architects
Page 6
PAGE 3 OF 9
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2025
Project Planner: Erin Walters
The project planner presented the staff report.
Opened Public Comment.
Stuart Waggoner, HR Architects, Applicant
They presented the Committee’s comments to their senior management. They decided
not to make any changes. They looked at Google Earth to see the styles of nearby buildings and
felt it fit in. Symmetry, balance and proportion are important to RH.
The Committee asked questions of the Applicant.
Stuart Waggoner, HR Architects, Applicant
The Committee’s comments were relayed to their CEO, but the CEO has a vision and
decided not to make any changes.
Carol Pluster, Resident
Carol lives in Town and loves Los Gatos. They have seen the renderings and think it will
be a beautiful addition to the Town. The building is in character of the Town. They are in
support of the project.
Chair Lee Quintana
The Committee also received a Desk Item letter from Demetra Jennings who is in
support of the project.
The applicant had nothing to add.
Closed Public Comment.
Committee members discussed the matter.
What are the Commercial Design guidelines regarding corporate architecture? There are two
choices: either send to the Planning Commission with a recommendation for denial or continue
the item with further direction. There are two policies: LU 6.5 and LU 1.4. 3.7.1 Village scale and
character. The proposed design is not consistent with the neighborhood. It should be denied.
There should be an Individual feeling and different from each other. It should reflect the Old
Town across the street. It is a disappointment that the applicant decided not to work with the
Committee. The development mimics the streetscape of a village. The role of the HPC is to
maintain the small-town character. Not in favor of the project. I appreciate some of the
architectural features such as the arched windows and natural lighting. It is pedestrian
oriented. There was no attempt to consider the Committee’s concerns. The proposed design is
a very nice building that would fit on Los Gatos Boulevard, where it would be an individual
building amongst other buildings with a more modern design. It is not read as part of Old Town.
Page 7
PAGE 4 OF 9
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2025
Not in support. The design reads as a large individual building. In the Old Town, the style is
consistent while each store is different. Even if use is all one.
Note: Vice Chair Martha Queiroz has arrived.
Is the issue that the current building doesn’t have a historic look that contributes to the historic
district or that it doesn’t fit the individual style of Old Town? The present building. did a better
job in the rear than at the front of the building. The idea that there are three parts and not just
one building. It should carry out the idea of breaking it up, it will stand out more of it doesn’t fit
with the scale of the district. Since the next step is to go to Planning Commission. Be very
explicit that it is less the style but that it is one giant building. It looks like one continuous
building while the intent was to have it feel like a collection of individual structures. The design
by the Arhous furniture store was approved. Their design kept the asymmetry, but they painted
it all white which is a reasonable compromise. The Town would benefit economically by having
a major tenant like RH to come to Los Gatos. But the Committee’s job is historic preservation.
The building looks good, and the fixes could be simple. They can use different subtle colors,
light sconces, and materials like tiles, to distinguish the facades. They add landscaping like a
fountain on the corner or more trees in front. The building style is between Italian Renaissance
and Spanish revival. Decorative dentil to add along the roof line. It looks like the sleek
Restoration brand. They could paint the roof red to resemble red clay tiles. They could make
small changes that could keep their brand and blend in with the historic neighborhood. The
skylight is still visible. Not bothered by the skylight. I would like to see the skylight tie in with
the other roof tops next door and across the street.
The Committee asked questions of Staff.
Sean Mullin, Project Planner
There was no preliminary review. The applicant worked with staff. They decided to
submit a formal application to start the process. An Architecture and Site (A&S) application was
triggered because it was in a historic district. An A&S application would go before the Planning
Commission. Because it’s a planned development it would then go before the Town Council.
MOTION: Motion by Committee Member Burnett to Forward a Recommendation
to Deny the Request to Modify Planned Development Ordinance 2025 to
Allow Modifications to Building E, an Architecture and Site Application for
Exterior Modifications to an Existing Commercial Building in the
University/Edelen Historic District, and a Conditional Use Permit for
Formula Retail over 10,000 square feet and for a Restaurant with Alcohol
Service on a Property Zoned C-2:LHP:PD. Categorically Exempt Pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301: Existing Facilities. Seconded by Vice
Chair Queiroz.
The Maker of the Motion amended the motion to include redesigning the skylight so that it is
not visible.
Page 8
PAGE 5 OF 9
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2025
The Seconder of the Motion did not accept the amendment to the motion.
The Maker of the Motion amended the motion to include the directions provided at the
March 26, 2025 meeting and as summarized in the action letter. In addition, it includes the
subtle changes outlined by Vice Chair Queiroz regarding paint, lighting, materials, trees,
landscaping, roof painting, etc. to achieve the appearance of a collective of individual
structures.
The Seconder of the Motion accepted the amendment to the motion.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously, 4-1. Commissioner Thomas voting no.
4. 16488 Bonnie Lane
Minor Residential Development Application MR-24-007
Consider a Request for Approval to Construct a Second-Story Addition Exceeding 100
Square Feet and Exterior Alterations to an Existing Pre-1941 Single-Family Residence
on Property Zoned R-1:8. Located at 16488 Bonnie Lane. APN 532-02-014. Minor
Residential Development Application MR-24-007. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15301: Existing
Facilities.
Property Owner: Mai of Tran 2020 Trust
Applicant: Vu-Ngan Tran
Project Planner: Maria Chavarin
The project planner presented the staff report.
Opened Public Comment.
Mai Tran, Owner
The second-story project was approved as of May 2024. They have returned with a small
change. The architect has made the dormer more even. The biggest change is to make the
house more presentable.
The Committee asked questions of the Applicant.
Mai Tran, Owner
The second-bedroom design was changed. Instead of a bump out to make room for the
bathtub there is now a straight wall. The roofline has not changed. They were asked to use
fiberglass clad wood windows. Their architect provided names of manufacturers, but those
vendors only offer full fiberglass windows. They are asking for vendor recommendations. They
are hoping to be approved. The proposed master bedroom was intended to make room for
their in-laws who are in their late 80’s.
Closed Public Comment.
Page 9
PAGE 6 OF 9
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2025
The Committee asked questions of Staff
Maria Chavarin, Project Planner
This is the second-floor proposal that was approved at the last meeting. The applicant
has returned to modify the footprint of the second floor. They added three more windows
because they expanded the footprint of the second floor.
Sean Mullin, Planning Manager
They widened the dormer and separated one window into 3 smaller windows. There is
no change in the roof ridge. Staff can connect the applicant with resources for the windows.
Committee members discussed the matter.
In support of the new proposal. It is a good proposal. The changes are acceptable. Concerned
about the window situation for sources. Concerned about the changes to the front of the house
because: 1) the direct connection to the street is lost. 2) It adds to the bulk of the house. Want
the steps to come off the porch onto the Bonnie Lane, which is the main face of the street.
Familiar with the previous owners. We never entered through the front door, only through the
side door. It is not a corner lot. What is the owner’s reason for changing the entry? Is it because
of landscaping? The side of the house is on Bonnie Lane. It’s a wedge corner lot and faces a
private road. In support of approving the new plans.
MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Thomas to Recommend Approval for
Construction of a Second-Story Addition Exceeding 100 Square Feet and
Exterior Alterations to an Existing Pre-1941 Single-Family Residence on
Property Zoned R-1:8. APN 532-02-014. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section
15301: Existing Facilities. Minor Residential Development Application
MR-24-007. Located at 16448 Bonnie Lane. With the requested changes,
and the new consistency with the Architecture and Site proposed plans
and the recommendation that staff help the applicant find a good source
for appropriate windows to fit the historic nature of the structure.
Seconded by Committee Member Feinberg.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
5. 16401 Englewood Avenue
Architecture and Site Application S-25-004 and Conditional Use Permit U-25-001
Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic Resources
Inventory for Property Zoned R-1:20. APN 532-05-010. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA
Section 15061(b)(3). Request for Review PHST-25-002.
Property Owner/Applicant: Christine Garwood
Project Planner: Ryan Safty
Page 10
PAGE 7 OF 9
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2025
The project planner presented the staff report.
The Committee asked questions of Staff
Opened Public Comment.
Christine Garwood, Owner
They found no historic significance or information from their research at the library. No
historic significance for the property, events or people. Record of a remodel in 1973 remodel.
They did an extensive remodel in 2012. The footprint is the same. But they added a second
story, front porch, and a brick façade. They changed the roof, all the windows, and the siding.
There was no historic review process through the County. In 2019 it was part of a larger
neighborhood annexation.
The Committee asked questions of the Applicant.
Christine Garwood, Owner
They may add an ADU but haven’t decided on what they want to do. Removal from the
Historic Inventory is their first step.
Closed Public Comment.
The Committee asked questions of Staff
Committee members discussed the matter.
Because of the detailed information and recent extensive remodel, we can approve removal.
This remodel was done very well and looks historic. Given the records, it can be removed. It fits
well with the neighborhood. It meets all the criteria to be removed. The existing house has
nothing left of the true historic characteristic.
MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Burnett to Approve the Request to Remove a
Pre-1941 Property from the Historic Resources Inventory for Property
Zoned R-1:20. Located at 16401 Englewood Avenue. APN 532-05-010.
Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). Request for Review PHST-
25-002. With the Required Findings. Seconded by Commissioner
Thomas.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
Page 11
PAGE 8 OF 9
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2025
OTHER BUSINESS
6. 333 Los Gatos Boulevard
Request for Review Application PHST-25-004
Consider a Request for Preliminary Review to Construct an Addition to an Existing
Pre1941 Single-Family Residence on Property Zoned R-1D. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA
Section 15301: Existing Facilities.
Property Owner/Applicant: Nicholas Palmer
Project Planner: Sean Mullin
The project planner presented the staff report.
Opened Public Comment.
Nicholas Palmer, Owner
They moved in February 2021. They would like to add a bathroom. There is only one
shower. They explored master addition in the back, but the cost was too high. They would like
to put in in the front since the master bedroom is already there. It would help lessen the street
noise. The goal is to make the front look the same. They have extra siding in the garage and
found a vendor who can replicate the siding. They would reuse the existing window. They
would reuse the glass but modify the frame. They want to see if their plan is even feasible
before spending money on plans.
Committee members asked questions of the applicant
Nicholas Palmer, Owner
The width of the window would remain but shortened to fit above a vanity. They are
flexible about the footprint of the bathroom footprint. They would like to retain the pillars of
the existing porch instead of it being all one wall. There are two existing windows that would be
removed because of a closet.
Committee members provided comments:
The removal of the two windows makes it look better and less cluttered. This is a good
remodel. See if you can swap the vanity and tub to keep the window size. Okay with shortening
the one window above the vanity. If you cannot reuse the 1912 window, you can save the
windows on the porch as a back-up.
Closed Public Comment.
7. Committee Conduct and Procedures
The Chair would like the meeting to be more systematic and orderly by raising hands
during discussion. Next month, the Chair would like to discuss what are the Residential
Page 12
PAGE 9 OF 9
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2025
Design Guidelines, zoning codes, etc. that deal with historic pre-1941 structures. How
do we consider a structure as a historic landmark?
8. Annual Certified Local Government Report 2023-24
Asking for acceptance of the Report. Accepted by the Committee. The California
Preservation Foundation (CPF) is offering training and a 2025 Conference in
Sacramento.
Committee members discussed the matter.
What is the role of the Committee in recommending program items under Committee matters.
Is there a formal way to update the records or programs? The Town Council needs to give
directions before staff can take on the task. It could be put on the HPC agenda, and one
Committee member could speak at the Town Council during verbal communications. The
Mayor is considering putting pre-1971 structures on the Historic Inventory. Need direction from
the Mayor. Look around Town for properties that should be considered for the inventory. An
individual property owner can apply for historic designation.
REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR
All the Director’s decisions aligned with the recommendations from the HPC.
COMMITTEE MATTERS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned 6:08 p.m.
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true
and correct copy of the minutes of the
March 26, 2025, meeting as approved by the
Historic Preservation Committee.
Prepared by:
________________________________________
Sean Mullin, AICP, Planning Manager
Page 13
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 14
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMITTEE REPORT
MEETING DATE: 05/28/2025
ITEM NO: 2
MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING
APRIL 23, 2025
The Historic Preservation Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a regular meeting on
April 23, 2025, at 4:00 p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 4:00 PM
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Lee Quintana, Vice Chair Martha Queiroz, Planning Commissioner Susan Burnett,
and Committee Member Alan Feinberg.
Absent: Commissioner Emily Thomas.
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CONSENT ITEMS
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 1 Orchard Street
Request for Review PHST-25-006
Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic Resources
Inventory for Property Zoned R-1:10. APN 529-32-041. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15061 (b)(3).
Property Owner/Applicant: Mahsa Nakhjiri
Project Planner: Samina Merchant
The project planner presented the staff report.
Vice Chair Queiroz notes, for the record, that Chair Lee Quintana has arrived.
Opened Public Comment.
Masha Nakhjiri, Owner/Applicant
We purchased this house about 12 years ago and didn’t realize the house was historic
until recently. There are some repairs needed. We are looking to remove this house from the
historic inventory list. None of the houses on their street are considered historic. There is
nothing significant about the house to remain on the list.
Page 15
PAGE 2 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
Committee Members ask the applicant questions.
Masha Nakhjiri, Owner/Applicant
We haven’t drafted plans yet, but we know we need to replace the windows as water
gets into the house. We need to replace the front door as there were shifts of the foundation
and it’s not operational. We want to remove it from the historic list, not only to bypass a review
by the Committee, but if it remains historic, the cost of upkeep will be more expensive. It will
restrict me from much needed renovations. I have talked with some architects but felt that
coming before the Committee was the first step.
Closed Public Comment.
Committee members discussed the matter.
Susan Burnett
I find this house still very architecturally pleasing to our historic inventory. This is a
unique house and exemplifies what our community is about. You can still refurbish or remodel
but still maintain its integrity.
Lee Quintana
Just because changes were made, it doesn’t mean that those changes were not
consistent with the original structure.
MOTION: Motion by Chair Quintana to Continue to a Date Uncertain a Request to
Remove a Pre-1941 on Property Zoned R1:10, Located at 1 Orchard
Street, APN 529-32-041, to Give the Applicant Time to Work with an
Architect and Bring the Item to the Committee When There is More
Information on the Applicant’s Plans with the Property. Seconded by
Commissioner Burnett.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously (4-0).
2. 446 San Benito Avenue
Request for Review PHST-25-005
Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic Resources
Inventory for Property Zoned R-1D. APN 410-16-051. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Section
15061(b)(3).
Page 16
PAGE 3 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
Property Owner/Applicant: Devendra Deshwal
Project Planner: Erin Walters
The project planner presented the staff report.
Opened Public Comment.
Devendra Deshwal, Owner/Applicant
I’m available to answer any questions.
Committee Members ask the applicant questions.
Devendra Deshwal, Owner/Applicant
All houses nearby have been remodeled. I haven’t specifically spoken to the neighbors
about possible changes to be proposed.
Closed Public Comment.
Committee members discussed the matter.
Erin Walters
The Anne Bloomfield rating shows this building is a contributor with some alterations,
but only if it is located in a district. This house is not located in a district.
Lee Quintana
The home is very small, and we don’t know what the plans are for this home yet.
Alan Fienberg
To be consistent, since there are no architectural plans, it is hard to determine the best
recommendation, similarly to the first item on tonight’s agenda.
MOTION: Motion by Committee Member Fienberg to Continue to a Date Uncertain
a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 on Property Zoned R-1D, Located at 446
San Benito Avenue, APN 410-16-051, from the Historic Resources
Inventory to Give the Applicant Time to Work with an Architect and Bring
the Item to the Committee When There is More Information on the
Applicant’s Plans with the Property. Seconded by Vice Chair Queiroz.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously (4-0).
3. 17269 Verdes Robles
Request for Review PHST-25-001
Page 17
PAGE 4 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic Resources
Inventory for Property Zoned R-1:12. APN 424-30-103. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15061 (b)(3).
Property Owner/Applicant: Uma Nikhlesh
Project Planner: Suray Nathan
The project planner presented the staff report.
Opened Public Comment.
Bonnie Montgomery, Historian
The County records show that this house was likely built in 1915, though it is likely a
little older. However, in 1993, the Town gave it a permit to completely alter the facade of the
house, and it now looks more like a 1960s home in the subdivision. With the garage, new porch,
and new front door really change the character of the house. The change that the applicant is
requesting to the siding won’t change the current facade, but it doesn’t fit with the 1910s.
Uma Nikhlesh, Owner/Applicant
This topic started due to the inability to get home insurance on this property. It has to
do with the redwood shingles on the home. When we tried to submit for a building permit to
replace the damaged area, it was stated that we needed to go before this Committee. We are
requesting to be removed from the inventory list to be able to change the shingles without
issue and at a lower cost than what redwood shingling will cost.
Hector Alverez, Contractor
We checked the house to determine what changes need to be made to protect the
integrity of the home. We provided other options outside of redwood shingles as they are
expensive, and maintenance can be difficult. Also, the insurance piece of it.
Closed Public Comment.
Committee members discussed the matter.
Lee Quintana
I was inclined to approve the removal, but I was not aware of the reason they were
asking to be removed. Using the interpretation that it must be in-kind or be considered a
demolition, which would remove it from the list, has me thinking about denying this request.
Alan Fienberg
The problem I have with this property is that it doesn’t look historic. It looks like the
standard 1970s home that you can see in other jurisdictions in the area.
MOTION: Motion by Chair Quintana to Recommend Approval to Remove a Pre-
1941 Property from the Historic Resources Inventory on Property Zoned
R-1:12 as it Does Not Meet the Criteria of Finding Number Five, the
Page 18
PAGE 5 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
Integrity of the Home. APN 424-30-103. Seconded by Committee
Member Feinberg.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously (4-0).
OTHER BUSINESS
4. 117 Edelen Avenue
Review Application PHST-25-003
Consider a Request for Preliminary Review for Exterior Alterations and Construction of
a Second-Story Addition of 100 Square Feet to an Existing Single-Family Residence on
Property Zoned R-1D:LHP. Located at 117 Edelen Avenue. APN 529-02-020. Request for
Review Application PSHT-25-003. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301:
Existing Facilities.
Property Owner: Jeff and Julie Prince
Applicant: David Kuoppamaki
Project Planner: Maria Chavarin
The project planner presented the staff report.
Opened Public Comment.
David Kuoppamaki, Applicant
The house was built in 2000. We are proposing to remodel the entire house with a focus
on the second floor. The client would like to have ten-foot-tall ceilings. We are proposing a
three and twelve roof with a ten-foot plate height on the second floor. The same siding and
windows as the rest of the home will be used.
Closed Public Comment.
Committee members discussed the matter.
Maria Chavarin
The property is not shown as removed from the inventory list since the house was
approved for demolition in 2012. It still remains in the University-Edelen Historic District.
Joel Paulson
Homes within a historic district typically do not get removed from the historic inventory
because it is located within the District. Ones that are not in a historic district that are pre-1941
are able to request removal from the inventory.
Maria Chavarin
It is premature to install the orange netting or story poles to this property because the
application before you is preliminary.
Page 19
PAGE 6 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
Susan Burnett
The existing structure has a nice little gable roof with a window to the right. With the
new design, it would be nice to have two windows which will help balance it out. There are
issues with the new design feeling too tall. It is interesting that there are no windows on the left
side elevation like there is currently.
Martha Queiroz
The houses in the area are rather Victorian and I think the design being presented is
nice, but it feels like it is forcing the house to fit where it doesn't fit due to the lack of pitched or
gabled roofing.
Lee Quintana
One of the character defining features of this home is the gable roofing which matches
the neighborhood well. The proposed changes are not in line with the architecture of the
neighborhood.
Maria Chavarin
The current proposed height is the maximum height it can be.
Alan Fienberg
What stands out to me is the existing versus proposed elevation. Both the front and the
side are completely different from the current home. It completely changes the character.
No action was needed for this item.
5. Discussion regarding Pre-41 versus Landmark Designation
Committee Members discuss the matter.
Lee Quintana
In the Residential Design Guidelines, specific to historic preservation, there is a
statement that says that extremely significant homes have been designated as landmarks.
There is another statement about contributing structures in a historic district, which are not
landmarks. Our codes are written in a confusing way. We say that pre-1941 are presumptive
historic resources. Our Town has several ways to identify historic resources. One, by landmark
status that meets state or federal criteria. Or if it doesn’t meet the criteria, but because it is in a
historic district, it is considered a contributing structure. What makes a pre-1941 presumptive
historic resource not a historic resource? When looking at the Anne Bloomfield study survey, it
often designates, in a historic district, that it is a contributing structure. The criteria for state
and federal around landmark structures is basically the same five findings that the Town uses
when we need to make findings with the exception that the state and federal have an “or” or
“and” before the last and next to the last finding. The Town has an “or.” The way I read this is
that it doesn’t have to meet all the previous findings, just the last one. It seems that the state
and federal criteria are stricter. I’ve always been told that Los Gatos has a strong historic
Page 20
PAGE 7 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
program, but it isn’t clear in our documents. I was finding myself not sure that I was making
consistent decisions when requests were made to remove homes from the historic inventory.
Do we have a historic inventory, or is it from the Bloomfield survey?
Joel Paulson
Staff are working on review of the historic inventory.
Lee Quintana
When I first joined the Committee, it was confusing and frustrating due to the lack of
clarity with all our documents.
Alan Fienberg
The decision process is more difficult, and arbitrary because of the lack of clarity.
Susan Burnett
When I was on the Historic Preservation Committee, it was much easier when I first
joined many years ago. Now, there are more challenges to be able to save historic homes.
Lee Quintana
When a project comes in with an evaluation, they are using the state and federal criteria
rather than the Town’s criteria. This makes it more challenging to assess a project.
Susan Burnett
How do we fix this?
Lee Quintana
What I can figure out is the criteria. If the structure qualifies as a contributing structure
in a historic district, it would be considered a Los Gatos historic resource.
Alan Fienberg
So, anything less than that is not historic.
Lee Quintana
We need criteria to help establish whether it would be a contributor. Part of the
problem is, after reading many of the historic reports that have been provided, that they all
have different criteria, so it is not consistent. This was an issue in San Jose, so they established
criteria that historic architects had to use to analyze historic buildings to allow for consistency.
We would hire a historic architect to help with consistency.
Alan Fienberg
What can we do? What can we ask staff to do to fix this? I agree with the comments
about being clear and consistent with our discussions and decisions.
Lee Quintana
Page 21
PAGE 8 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
I think it is easier for appeals to be approved because of the lack of consistency. Joel, is
this something that staff can define better, or can we form an ad hoc committee and come up
with some suggestions that can be forwarded to the Council or Policy Committee?
Joel Paulson
If you want to share the ideas and thoughts that you have with staff. We have directives
from the Town Manager and Council, whether it is ad hoc committees, or subcommittees, if it
involves very much time, unless it is directed by Council, we are not going to be participating in
that effort. You are free to do what you want as an ad hoc. I will check to see, since you are a
recommending body, if there are any special rules. There could be trouble with the Brown Act
and bringing people in. There have been issues with other subcommittees in the past. Write
down the ideas you have. We will look into the state and federal criteria that is different from
the Town’s. It is in the Town Code that we have modified over the years.
Lee Quintana
We make findings and we make considerations. I am not sure why one or why the other.
The findings that we make are in the introductions to the zoning code chapter. The
considerations we make are referred to as standards in the zoning code. The historic overlay
refers to standards that are in the historic overlay portion of the code. They refer to the
Residential Design Guidelines standards. We don’t have standards. The last thing is, it is easy to
conclude whether a pre-1941 structure is contributing or not. That doesn’t cover the issues that
Susan brought up that we are losing these smaller, Los Gatos, historic-defining structures
because we don’t have the tools to not.
Joel Paulson
The HPC has roles, duties, and responsibilities, continuing items to see plans that are not
your purview doesn’t make any sense. If you can’t make one of the findings to remove or keep
the structure on the list, just make the recommendation to deny it. You have two instances
tonight, where one, you have a property owner who isn’t doing this all the time and one who
has a historian, which is a leg up. There are times when we have applicants come forward who
think they are requesting something that seems simple, and the amount of research they did
before coming forward, just for the discussion to be continued because you don’t know what
they want to do, you should just deny the request if you can’t make the findings.
Lee Quintana
If we deny them, what happens?
Joel Paulson
They either appeal or they don’t. If they appeal, it will go before the Planning
Commission. Your recommendation comes to me, then I will go with your recommendation
unless there is specific evidence that shows that I should go against the recommendation. From
there, the applicant can decide what they want to do.
Lee Quintana
Page 22
PAGE 9 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
Part of the problem is that I don’t think most homeowners, even doing the research that
they do, really have the skills to assess historic structures. I don’t know how to get around that.
Joel Paulson
It’s a cost, right? Not everyone wants to spend the money to hire a historian.
Susan Burnett
If a house has major work done, but keeps its integrity then they sell it, and the new
owners say it’s been completely remodeled. Now it isn’t historic, but it follows our current
guidelines. You are kind of stuck because it is technically new but still looks historic. What
would we do in this situation?
Joel Paulson
There are so many different iterations of what can happen. Let’s say you have a pre-
1941 home outside of a historic district. They come in and want to do some remodeling. They
are matching in-kind. They are doing an addition that doesn’t need discretionary review. Staff
asks does it meet the criteria for historic resources, yes or no? If it does, it gets a building
permit. In those cases, they are replacing materials in-kind. If they aren’t, then it comes to the
HPC. There are other processes where if they are replacing the siding, do they want a building
permit because they aren’t demolishing because they are not historic, or do they want to pay
$30+ thousand dollars in applications fees and get six to nine months of application processing
and meetings for what should be a simple permit. Another thing is if you touch more than 25%
of the façade facing the street, it is considered a technical demo.
Lee Quintana
Having that at 25% being considered a demo encourages demos. I think that number
would be higher than for a regular house.
Joel Paulson
The point is to try and maintain the integrity of the existing structure and existing
materials. That is why it is lower than a non-historic house. Non-historic homes don’t have a
front façade number at all. It is 50% of the entire perimeter.
Erin Walters
For historic homes, it is the exterior wall covering, and for non-historic homes, it is the
framing.
Joel Paulson
We are running into issues with in-kind materials with homes in the hillside and fire
safety. If the home is pre-1941, they will have to come to HPC for review and request to replace
with the hardie siding. What someone wants to do with their home is irrelevant to the decision-
making of their application. We care about the five findings and whether you can make any of
those findings.
Lee Quintana
Page 23
PAGE 10 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
It makes sense for certain things, but if someone wants to be removed from the list
because they want to demolish it. When you do a demo, you must have a replacement
structure. We’re setting it up so that the replacement structure doesn’t have to be consistent
with the historic anymore because we took it off the list. The demolition ordinance works
against historic homes. It is not very strict in that it says if you can make any of these types of
findings, it can be demolished. In the General Plan language has “prohibit” throughout for the
historic section, but when you get the body of the section, it’s not prohibited at all. There is
inconsistency in our General Plan.
Alan Fienberg
To that point, if we recommend denial of an application, and the applicant takes issue
with the decision and takes it to Planning Commission, our recommendation goes out the
window. Or, if they don’t like the Commission’s decision, they take it to the Town Council, and if
they uphold the request of the applicant, we potentially lose another historic home.
Erin Walters
That is just like every application we have.
Susan Burnett
Are we able to have houses come back to us to review their new design?
Joel Paulson
You would have to change the code to do that.
Susan Burnett
How do we do that?
Joel Paulson
You would have to go to Council with the request as we must be directed by them to
work towards making that change. You can ask Council if you would like.
Alan Fienberg
I had this conversation with Matthew (Hudes), and he said that I would be glad to know
that one of his top priorities for his term as Mayor is Historic Preservation, but that comes
below several other critical issues he has before him. This means there might not be any
movement on this during his term.
Joel Paulson
Previously, there came a time when we worked through our strategic priorities and
listed out ordinances that people asked us to review and update or create and staff share what
staff priorities are. It was done differently this year, and we haven’t met to review these topics
this year.
Page 24
PAGE 11 OF 11
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2025
Lee Quintana
If we can make a suggestion to the Council, how do we provide it to the Council from
the Committee? That will have a lot more weight.
Joel Paulson
I will check with Gabrielle, Town Attorney, to see what her thoughts are on this. The
reality is that it doesn’t matter if it’s one of you or all of you, it is the same issue.
Susan Burnett
We have so many new people moving into Town, and they don’t understand what we
are trying to preserve.
Lee Quintana
We love this Town because of its historic character.
Joel Paulson
The pre-1941 criteria will be tied into the code and/or policy document revisions to
include a criterion to help make the distinction around this. We still need Council to direct staff
to work on this.
REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR
None.
COMMITTEE MATTERS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:53 p.m.
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true
and correct copy of the minutes of the
April 23, 2025, meeting as approved by the
Historic Preservation Committee.
Prepared by:
________________________________________
Sean Mullin, AICP, Planning Manager
Page 25
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 26
PREPARED BY: Erin M. Walters
Senior 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: 05/28/2025
ITEM NO: 3
DATE: May 23, 2025
TO: Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic
Resources Inventory for Property Zoned R-1D. Located at 446 San Benito
Avenue. APN 410-16-051. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3).
Request for Review PHST-25-005. Property Owner/Applicant: Devendra
Deshwal. Project Planner: Erin Walters.
DISCUSSION:
On April 23, 2025, the Historic Preservation Committee considered the request to remove the
subject pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory (Attachment 1). The 1990
Anne Bloomfield survey indicates a construction date of the home in the 1920s with a
preliminary rating of “” or historic and some altered but still contributor to the district if there
is one (Attachment 1, Annexure 4). The property is not located in a historic district. The building
footprint shown on the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps is consistent between 1928 and
1944 (Attachment 1, Annexures 1 and 2).
On April 23, 2025, the Los Gatos Historic Preservation Committee considered the request, and
continued the application to a meeting date uncertain to allow the applicant time to work with
an architect on a design and return to the Committee with information on the applicant’s plans
for the property.
In response to the Committee discussion on April 24, 2025, the applicant submitted a Letter of
Justification providing additional information regarding the history of the property after
meeting with the adjacent property owners and has provided photographic documentation of
the building from the previous property owner (Attachment 2). The applicant describes
evidence of modifications to the residence impacting its integrity. The applicant believes that
the required findings for removal from the Historic Resources Inventory can be made for this
property.
Page 27
PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: 446 San Benito Avenue/PHST-25-005
DATE: May 23, 2025
CONCLUSION:
Should the Committee find that the structure no longer has historic significance or architectural
merit due to the loss of integrity, a recommendation of approval of the request to remove the
property from the Historic Resources Inventory would be forwarded to the Community
Development Director. Once approved by the Director, any proposed alterations 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.
_____ 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. April 23, 2025, Historic Preservation Committee Staff Report
2. Letter of Justification
Page 28
PREPARED BY: Erin M. Walters
Senior 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: 04/23/2025
ITEM NO: 2
DATE: April 18, 2025
TO: Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic
Resources Inventory for Property Zoned R-1D. Located at 446 San Benito
Avenue. APN 410-16-051. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3).
Request for Review PHST-25-005. Property Owner/Applicant: Devendra
Deshwal. Project Planner: Erin Walters.
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider a request to remove a pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory for
property zoned R-1D located at 446 San Benito Avenue.
PROPERTY DETAILS:
1.Date primary structure was built: 1905 per County Assessor
2.Town of Los Gatos Historic Status Code: “” or historic and some altered
3.Does property have an LHP Overlay? No
4.Is structure in a historic district? No
5.If yes, is it a contributor? N/A
6.Findings required? Yes
7.Considerations required? No
DISCUSSION:
The applicant is requesting approval to remove the pre-1941 residence from the Historic
Resources Inventory. The Santa Clara County Assessor’s Database lists a construction date of
1905.
The 1990 Anne Bloomfield survey indicates a construction date of the home in the 1920s with a
preliminary rating of “” or historic and some altered but still contributor to the district if there
is one (Attachment 1, Annexure 4). Note this property is not located in a historic district. The
ATTACHMENT 1Page 29
PAGE 2 OF 3
SUBJECT: 446 San Benito Avenue/PHST-25-005
DATE: April 18, 2025
building footprint shown on the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps is consistent between 1928 and
1944 (Attachment 1, Annexures 1 and 2).
The applicant has provided a letter justifying the requested removal (Attachment 2), and
property research (Attachment 1), which includes but is not limited to the Sanborn Fire
Insurance Maps, the Anne Bloomfield survey, building permit records, existing conditions plans,
and existing site photographs. Based on the research provided, the applicant believes that the
required findings for removal from the Historic Resources Inventory can be made for this
property as the residence is not in its original condition and there is nothing noted about the
property that is significant to the Town’s history.
Town Building Permit records from 2004 and 2010 include an electrical service upgrade, front
porch repair and repair of eave, and repair to roof and eaves including replacement of rafters
(Attachment 1, Annexure 8). The applicant has provided evidence that there have been
unpermitted additions to the original structure (Attachment 1). Building permits show that the
permitted floor area of the house is 684 square feet where the actual existing floor area of the
house is 889 square feet. The applicant provided plans for the existing house (Attachment 1,
Annexure 10), showing the existing floor area of 889 square feet. This evidence suggests that
unpermitted additions were made to the house. The existing ceiling height of the bedroom and
bathroom, located on the right side of the house, ranges from nine feet to six feet, 11 inches
whereas the ceiling height of the main house has a minimum height of eight feet. Further
establishing evidence of an unpermitted addition. The applicant has provided photos of the
existing house (Attachment 1, Annexure 10) and has provided a discussion on concerns that the
house is not structurally sound and has been altered.
CONCLUSION:
Should the Committee find that the structure no longer has historic significance or architectural
merit due to the loss of integrity, a recommendation of approval of the request to remove the
property from the Historic Resources Inventory would be forwarded to the Community
Development Director. Once approved by the Director, any proposed alterations 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.
_____ In evaluating a request for a determination of historic significance or architectural merit,
the Historic Preservation Committee shall consider the following:
Page 30
PAGE 3 OF 3
SUBJECT: 446 San Benito Avenue/PHST-25-005
DATE: April 18, 2025
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.Applicants Research
2.Applicants Request
Page 31
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 32
Page 33
N:\DEV\FORMS\Planning\2022-23 Forms\HPC\HPC - Request for Review.docx 3/25/2022
HOW TO RESEARCH THE HISTORY OF A HOUSE IN LOS GATOS
At the Los Gatos Public Library
100 Villa Avenue, Los Gatos CA 95030
Locked Cases Area
1.The Los Gatos Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps located on the microfilm file cabinet. These maps indicate
the outline of buildings in 1884, 1888, 1891, 1895, 1904, 1928 and 1944 (please note the 1944 maps
have been relabeled and appear out-of-order, before the 1928 maps). These can be used to identify a
construction date range.
Bookcase #11
1.The 1941 Tax Assessment Survey. The listings are alphabetical by street name. An entry will note how
old the owner thought the house was in 1941 (please note that this information is not always accurate).
2.The 1991 Anne Bloomfield Historic Resources Survey. These listings are alphabetical by street name.
3.A list of the Museums of Los Gatos Historic Homes Tours and programs.
4.A list of the 100 Bellringers and information.
5.As it Was by Dora Rankin.
Bookcase #12
1.The 1924-1974 Polk’s Directories (please note that some years are missing), with reverse listings by
address and then resident name.
2.Business and Telephone Directories, as early as 1881-82.
History Room (Docent Hours: 1:00-5:00 Mondays and Thursdays; 10:00-12:00 Wednesdays)
1.History of Los Gatos by George Bruntz and Los Gatos Observed by Alistair Dallas (979.473).
2.Information in the Residences drawers of the Vertical File, filed by street.
3.The Patrons’ Inquiries, binder #3 Residences, listed by street, located on the shelf above the computers.
These may provide information found under previous searches.
General
1.ancestry.com is available free while inside the library.
2.A Field Guide to American Houses by Virginia Savage McAlester (728 M11 in non-fiction)
Page 34
JUSTIFICATION FOR REMOVAL FROM HISTORIC INVENTORY
446 San Benito Avenue Los Gatos, CA, 94032
SUBJECT: Request for removal of a Pre-1941 Property from Historic Resources
Inventory for the Property Zoned R-1D, Located at 446 San Benito Avenue .
APN 410-16-051.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Devendra Deshwal
PROPERTY DETAILS :
1. Date primary structure was built: as per ANNE BLOOMFIELD ARCHITECTURAL
SURVEY- LOS GATOS RESEARCH -Year 1920, As Per Town Record -1905
2. Town of Los Gatos Historic Status Code: N/A
3. Does property have an LHP Overlay? No
4. Is the structure in a historic district? No
5. If yes, is it a contributor? N/A
DETAILED JUSTIFICATION:
A wide-ranging research has been conducted in line with the guidelines of the Historic
Research WorkSheet, Historic Preservation Committee, Town of Los Gatos and the details
of the research are given as below:
1. LOS GATOS PUBLIC LIBRARY :
a. SANBORN MAPS : The Sanborn maps of 1928 & 1944 are attached as
Annexures-1 & 2. These maps show the main house and an accessory
structure in the rear yard. The main house still exists but the accessory
structure is no longer existing as will be seen from the existing site plan sheet
A1 in the plan set of the existing house attached as Annexure 10. .
b. 1941 TAX ASSESSMENT : The 1941 Tax Assessment Survey is attached
as Annexure-3. It does not convey any pointer to the historical character of
this building. (The survey report is for lot 43 (Old No.) as also correlated in the
ANNE BLOOMFIELD SURVEY.
c. 1989 ANNE BLOOMFIELD HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY
FORM :
The Anne Bloomfield Historic Resource Survey Form is attached as
Annexure-4. The survey also mentions its old lot No. as 43 and also provides
its likely year of construction as 1920. The original style is said to be
“Banglow”. It also mentions that some alterations to existing windows and the
Porch were done to the original house. A photo of the house is also given but
the features of the house are not very clear from it. As such, the survey does
not establish it to be a structure of historic importance.
d. POLK’S DIRECTORIES & TELEPHONE DIRECTORY :
Contd P2
ATTACHMENT -1
Page 35
The Polk’s Directories & Telephone directories were researched to know the
details of persons staying or associated with this house. A chronological detail
of the persons stayed is given in Annexure -5 attached including the relevant
pages of the Polk’s Directory.
A search was made on the internet for important persons associated with Los
Gatos and a list of 83 people appeared as per the link below:
https://www.famousfix.com/list/people-from-los-gatos-california
None of these famous people lived in this house..
Thus a perusal of Annexure 5 and the Google search shows that no
significant persons are associated with this house/structure.
e. HISTORIC PROPERTY RESEARCH COLLOECTION :
The Historic Property Research Collection in the Los Gatos Library was
searched and no record pertaining to this structure was found in box no. 9
relevant for the San Benito Ave. A record of only one house i.e. for 441, was
found in the box. This establishes the house at 446 San Benito Ave does not
have any historical importance.
2. SANTA CLARA COUNTY RESOURCES:
A request was made to the planning department of the Santa Clara County to
ascertain if any plans or any other records are available in the county records.
The county replied that no plan or any other records are available for 446 San
Benito Ave & asked to contact the town of Los Gatos for the same. Thus no
historical records are available in the county for this structure. The email
screenshot of the replies from the county are attached as Annexure 6 & 7.
3. TOWN OF LOS GATOS- COMPUTER RECORDS:
A search was made on the computer installed in the lobby to find out the
records of 446 San Benito Ave. The search yielded some of the records
including the permit records for some of the works done in this house. These
records are attached as Annexure 8 (11 pages). A perusal of these records
indicate that some alteration works have been done to the original house as
below:
1. Electrical service upgrade
2. Front porch repair and repair of the eve.
3. Repair of the roof and eave including replacement of the rafters. The
shape of the house given in this permit is rectangular box type.
4. In addition other unpermitted works have also been carried out in the
house as brought out in succeeding paras.
4. ADDITIONAL DETAILS:
(a) In addition, the details of the house were also downloaded from the Town
of Los Gatos city portal and the same are attached as Annexure-9.. A
perusal of these records show that the permitted floor area of this house is
684 Sq Ft only. whereas the existing floor area of the house is 889 sq ft
without the front porch. It speaks of some unpermitted addition made to
the house as discussed in following paras.
-2-
Contd P3Page 36
(b) The plans of the existing house have been prepared and are attached as
Annexure 10 (24 pages). The floor area of the existing house is 889 Sq Ft
as against the permitted floor area of 684 Sq Ft only.
It is also seen that the ceiling height of the bedroom & bathroom on the
right side is only 6’-9” to 6’-11”, as against the main house ceiling height of
8’-0”(+). It is marked with A, B & C on sheet A4, A5 & A6.1.
It establishes that some unpermitted constructions have been made to the
house. The possible unpermitted portion is marked in redlines in sheet A2
(Existing Floor Plan) & A2.1 (Area Calculations).
The photo survey of the existing house has also been done & the photos
of the house are given in sheet A 6.1 to A6.17 & A7 of the attached plan
set (Annexure -10).
A quick perusal of the photos & plan indicate that the house is not
structurally sound & also some alterations have been made which are not
code compliant as outlined below:
i. The ridge board of the porch is not provided as seen in plan sheet
A6.7. Thus the porch roof is not structurally sound.
ii. The height in the bedroom 2 is less than 7’-6” the minimum admissible
height.
iii. A wall has been constructed between bedroom 1 & closet which is
abutting the middle of the window as seen in Sheet A6.17.
iv. The existing windows of the bedroom are not egress compliant as per
the current code requirement etc.
v. The architectural design of the house is very simple- a rectangular box
with front porch enclosed on all sides and no uniqueness is noticed in
the architectural details/design.
vi. Further due to alteration to window & porch etc, the original design is
no longer existing.
(c) As would be seen from the plan sheet A7, all the houses around this
house have been modified and present a good look and this house in the
existing condition is totally a misfit in the area.
(d) The APN map and the Tract Map of the lot are also attached as Annexure
11 & 12.
CONCLUSION:
In view of the above points, it is clear that the existing house has no architectural
merit for the following reasons:
a. The structure is not associated with events that have made a significant
contribution to the Town;
b. No significant persons are associated with the structure.
c. There are no distinctive characteristics of type, period or method of
construction or representation of work of a master;
d. The structure does not yield information to Town history; and,
-3-
Contd P4Page 37
Page 38
ANNEXURE-1
(1928 SANBORN MAPS)
446 San Benoto Ave
Page 39
ANNEXURE-2
(1944 SANBORN MAPS)
446 San Benito Ave
Page 40
ANNEXURE -3
Page 41
Page 42
ANNEXURE-5
OWNERSHIP HISTORY OF 446 SAN BENITO AVE, LOS GATOS
As per Telephone directories of various years available in the Los gatos Library, the
ownership details are as below:
Period Homeowners
Prior to 1934 No record found
1934 to 1941 Mr Conroy Owen
1941 to 1943 Mr M J Wuseri ( The 1941 Tax assessment indicated his name
(name not legible).
1943 to 1944 Vacant
1945 to 1947 Mrs Kinter Paula
1949 to 2025 Mr Cushman Arth C
2025 onwards Mrs Rajkumari & Devendra Deshwal
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
ANNEXURE -6
Type text hereSanta Clara County Reply -1
Page 53
ANNEXURE-7Santa Clara County Reply -2
Page 54
CITY COMPUTER RECORDS
1. Electrical Service Upgrade (5 pages)
ANNEXURE-8
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
REROOF INCLUDING REPLACEMENT OF ROOF PERMIT -1 Page3.
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
ANNEXURE-12TRACT MAP
Page 92
Dated 04.07.2025
To
Town of Los Gatos
Historic Preservation Committee
SUBJECT: Request for removal of a Pre-1941 Property from Historic Resources Inventory
for the Property Zoned R-1D .
Address: 446 San Benito Ave
APN 410-16-051.
Dear CommitteeMembers,
This is regarding a request for removal of the house at 446 San Benito Ave from the
Historic Resource Inventory. As outlined in the Historic Research Worksheet, the required
research was conducted and the following documents reviewed:
● Sanborn Maps – Attached as Annexure 1 & 2 along with the HRC worksheet.
● 1941 Tax Assessment – Attached as Annexure 3 along with the HRC worksheet.
● 1989 Ann Bloomfield Historic Resource Survey Form – Attached as Annexure 4
along with the HRC worksheet.
● Polk Directories – Attached as Annexure 5 along with the HRC worksheet.
● Historic Property Collection and Tour Books – Nothing could be found in the
Historic property Collection as outlined in the HRC worksheet.
● Telephone Directories – Included with Polk Directories.
In addition following documents were also relied upon:
● Santa Clara County records -No records were available in the county for this
property. The replies from the county are attached as Annexure 6 & 7 with the HRC
Worksheet.
● Permit history of the house from City Computer Records: As per Annexure 8
attached with HRS worksheet.
● Town of los Gatos Parcel Report: As per Annexure -9 attached with HRC
worksheet.
● Home inspection report: attached herewith as Annexure 13.
Our research has determined that the structure has neither any historic significance nor any
architectural merit:
● It is believed that the home may have been built in 1905.
○ The home was not constructed with any defined architectural style and has
been modified from the original design.
■ The house does not have any perimeter foundation. Refer Page 8 of
the Home Inspection report attached herewith as Annexure 13.
■ The front porch has clearly been modified. The ridge board of the
porch is not provided as seen in plan sheet A6.7. Thus the porch roof
is not structurally sound.
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 93
■ Unpermitted additions have been made to the house. The height in
bedroom 2 is less than 7’-0”, the minimum admissible height.
■ A wall has been constructed between bedroom 1 & closet which is
abutting the middle of the window as seen in Sheet A6.17 of the plan
set attached as Annexure 10 along with HRC worksheet.
■ The existing windows of the bedroom are not egress compliant as per
the current code requirement etc.
■ The vinyl windows are not original and of the time of its construction,
and may not be in their original locations.
■ The windows and front door do not reflect the architectural style nor
materials used in that era.
■ The architectural design of the house is very simple- a rectangular box
with front porch enclosed on all sides and no uniqueness is noticed in
the architectural details/design.
■ Further due to alteration to window & porch etc, the original design is
no longer existing.
○ Our research indicates that no person of any significant importance nor
anyone associated with the Town’s founding or history has ever owned or
lived in the property.
○ While the home was built prior to 1941, it is not included in historical records,
is not located within any historic district, and has no redeeming architectural
qualities.
○ In its current condition under modern codes, it may be deemed uninhabitable.
The above details, along with the specifics provided in the HRC worksheet demonstrate
that all five required findings have been proven:
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 the 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.
Based on the evidence provided above, we strongly believe that this structure should be
removed from any historic list.
Encl: 1. HRC Worksheet along with Annexures 1 to 12.
2. Home inspection report as Annexure -13 -Page 8 for foundation condition.
Devendra Deshwal
Homeowner
446 San Benito Ave
out
0410712025
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
ANNEXURE-14Page 106
Page 107
'DWHG
7R
7RZQ RI /RV *DWRV
+LVWRULF 3UHVHUYDWLRQ &RPPLWWHH
68%-(&7 5HTXHVW IRU UHPRYDO RI D 3UH 3URSHUW\ IURP +LVWRULF 5HVRXUFHV ,QYHQWRU\
IRU WKH 3URSHUW\ =RQHG 5'
$GGUHVV 6DQ %HQLWR $YH
$31
'HDU &RPPLWWHH0HPEHUV
7KLV LV UHJDUGLQJ D UHTXHVW IRU UHPRYDO RI WKH KRXVH DW 6DQ %HQLWR $YH IURP WKH
+LVWRULF 5HVRXUFH ,QYHQWRU\$V RXWOLQHG LQ WKH +LVWRULF 5HVHDUFK :RUNVKHHW WKH UHTXLUHG
UHVHDUFK ZDV FRQGXFWHG DQG WKH IROORZLQJ GRFXPHQWV UHYLHZHG
Ɣ 6DQERUQ 0DSV ± $WWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH DORQJ ZLWK WKH +5& ZRUNVKHHW
Ɣ 7D[ $VVHVVPHQW ± $WWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH DORQJ ZLWK WKH +5& ZRUNVKHHW
Ɣ $QQ %ORRPILHOG +LVWRULF 5HVRXUFH 6XUYH\)RUP ±$WWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH
DORQJ ZLWK WKH +5& ZRUNVKHHW
Ɣ 3RON 'LUHFWRULHV ± $WWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH DORQJ ZLWK WKH +5& ZRUNVKHHW
Ɣ +LVWRULF 3URSHUW\&ROOHFWLRQ DQG 7RXU %RRNV ±1RWKLQJ FRXOG EH IRXQG LQ WKH
+LVWRULF SURSHUW\ &ROOHFWLRQ DV RXWOLQHG LQ WKH +5& ZRUNVKHHW
Ɣ 7HOHSKRQH 'LUHFWRULHV ± ,QFOXGHG ZLWK 3RON 'LUHFWRULHV
,Q DGGLWLRQ IROORZLQJ GRFXPHQWV ZHUH DOVR UHOLHG XSRQ
Ɣ 6DQWD &ODUD &RXQW\UHFRUGV 1R UHFRUGV ZHUH DYDLODEOH LQ WKH FRXQW\ IRU WKLV
SURSHUW\7KH UHSOLHV IURP WKH FRXQW\DUH DWWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH ZLWK WKH +5&
:RUNVKHHW
Ɣ 3HUPLW KLVWRU\RI WKH KRXVH IURP &LW\&RPSXWHU 5HFRUGV $V SHU $QQH[XUH
DWWDFKHG ZLWK +56 ZRUNVKHHW
Ɣ 7RZQ RI ORV *DWRV 3DUFHO 5HSRUW $V SHU $QQH[XUH DWWDFKHG ZLWK +5&
ZRUNVKHHW
Ɣ +RPH LQVSHFWLRQ UHSRUW DWWDFKHG KHUHZLWK DV $QQH[XUH
2XU UHVHDUFK KDV GHWHUPLQHG WKDW WKH VWUXFWXUH KDV QHLWKHU DQ\KLVWRULF VLJQLILFDQFH QRU DQ\
DUFKLWHFWXUDO PHULW
Ɣ ,W LV EHOLHYHG WKDW WKH KRPH PD\ KDYH EHHQ EXLOW LQ
ż 7KH KRPH ZDV QRW FRQVWUXFWHG ZLWK DQ\ GHILQHG DUFKLWHFWXUDO VW\OH DQG KDV
EHHQ PRGLILHG IURP WKH RULJLQDO GHVLJQ
Ŷ 7KH KRXVH GRHV QRW KDYH DQ\SHULPHWHU IRXQGDWLRQ5HIHU 3DJH RI
WKH +RPH ,QVSHFWLRQ UHSRUW DWWDFKHG KHUHZLWK DV $QQH[XUH
Ŷ 7KH IURQW SRUFK KDV FOHDUO\EHHQ PRGLILHG7KH ULGJH ERDUG RI WKH
SRUFK LV QRW SURYLGHG DV VHHQ LQ SODQ VKHHW $7KXV WKH SRUFK URRI
LV QRW VWUXFWXUDOO\ VRXQG
ATTACHMENT -1
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
!! %$ $ !# ' (#%% ' $&!! #% & %$ % &$%* %# #"&$% #
# + %#% + % + %# % $ + # % $ % #
!#$& !%' $% # #$ &#- $ ( # $% $ % % $$$% % !! % %# (#%%
' $&!! #% & %$+ % $$$% % $% #
#$#'% %% &#
' &% % #"&$%-
!! %$ $ !# ' (#%% ' $&!! #% & %$ % $% # #%%&#
#%#$%$+ ## %$%#&%&#$ 0 $%#&% %+ %#% %$+ ! % #!
& %% 1 ! ! 0 ( # . # #$ % $1- (#%% ' % % %$
( # $%+ ! $ %% $!#% $%$-
$% #
#$#'% %%#'($%!! % &$ % ( 2$$% #$%#% #
#"&# %$- !$ % # 0$1 # ' % ( - %% %$ % &#%
$* '#* %- $ 64 *$ !# #% % % * 55,44 -
0! $ % ) * & ! % * &# #$#1,
5-
$ % $
&
##* 0$ ( % $# % $% #* &$
$ % $1,
Ƒ # !$
Ƒ 5:85 ) $$$$ %
Ƒ 5:9: $% # $ &# &#'* # $
Ƒ Polk’s Directories
Ƒ ! #% #$
Ƒ %#
6- % # & %* $ &#$ 0$! * !& #properties previously located in the county’s
&#$% 1,
Ƒ % # & %*
!#% % # #$
Ƒ $
&
##* 0 # 1
7- & %* ' ! % !#% % $ &#$,
Ƒ # !$
Ƒ 5:9: $% # $ &# &#'* # $
Ƒ & %* ' ! % !#% % !# !#%* $ 0!# % $% #*1
$# ($ &% 0! $ %# %1, ////////////////////////////////////
#$ & %$ & 0! $ %% !$1, ///////////////////////////////
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
dŚĞ ũƵƐƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĨŽƌ ƚŚĞ ƌĞŵŽǀĂů ŽĨ ϰϰϲ ^ĂŶ ĞŶŝƚŽ ǀĞ ĨƌŽŵ ƚŚĞ ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐ /ŶǀĞŶƚŽƌLJ ŝƐ ĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚ
ĂƐ ƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚͲϭ ĐŽŶƚĂŝŶŝŶŐ Ăůů ƚŚĞƐĞ ĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ ĂƐ ŶŶĞdžƵƌĞƐ ϭ ƚŽ ϭϬ͘
03/21/2025
1. San Born Maps. 2. 1941 Tax Assesment
3. 1989 Anne Bloomfield Historic Survey. 4. Telephone Directories. 5. Computer Records. 6. SCC replies
Page 111
366 6"$$ $ 6A?AA7AB %(#)6 6 7 '+)* %( , -4%.B5AD5A?AA
! ! !
" $
'&& # "% ! *)&(&
%! )) (
@4 %) *%)
"%* %$ * # (% "# " $*4 ) #&) $ *
* %+*" $ % + " $ ) $ @GGC1 @GGG1 @GH@1 @GHD1 @H?C1 @HAG $ @HCC 9&") $%* * @HCC #&)
, $ ("" $ &&( %+*7% 7%((1 %( * @HAG #&):4 ) $ +) *% $* /
%$)*(+* %$ * ($ 4
%%!) <@@
@4 @HC@
! "4 " )* $ ) ( "& * " / )*(* $#4 $ $*(/ - ""$%* %-
%" * %-$( * %+ * * %+) -) $ @HC@ 9&") $%* * * * ) $ %(#* %$ ) $%* "-/) +(*:4
A4 @HH@ "4 ) " )* $ ) ( "& * " / )*(* $#4
B4 " )* % *
$ &(% (#)4
C4 " )* % * @?? $ $ %(#* %$4
D4 ) * ) / %( $! $4
%%!) <@A
@4 @HAC7@HFC Polk’s Directories 9&") $%* * * )%# /() ( # )) $ :1 - * (,() " )* $ ) /
()) $ * $ () $* $#4
A4
1 ) ("/ ) @GG@7GA4
)*%(/ %%# 9%$* %+()3 @3??7D3?? %$/) $ +()/)2 @?3??7@A3?? $)/):
@4 )*%(/ % %) *%) / %( (+$*0 $ %) *%) )(,/ " )* ( "") 9HFH4CFB:4
A4
$ %(#* %$ $ * ) $) (-() % * (* " "1 " / )*(*4
B4 The Patrons’ Inquiries, binder #3 Residences, listed b/ )*(*1 "%* %$ * ) " %, * %#&+*()4
) #/ &(%, $ %(#* %$ %+$ +$( &(, %+) )( )4
$("
@4 $)*(/4%# ) , "" ( - " $) * " ((/4
A4 " + *% #( $ %+)) / ( $ , ")*(9FAG @@ $ $%$7 * %$:
Page 112
Page 113
-867,),&$7,21 )25 5(029$/ )520 +,6725,& ,19(1725<
6DQ %HQLWR $YHQXH /RV *DWRV &$
68%-(&7 5HTXHVW IRU UHPRYDO RI D 3UH 3URSHUW\ IURP +LVWRULF 5HVRXUFHV
,QYHQWRU\ IRU WKH 3URSHUW\ =RQHG 5' /RFDWHG DW 6DQ %HQLWR $YHQXH
$31
3523(57< 2:1(5$33/,&$17 'HYHQGUD 'HVKZDO
3523(57< '(7$,/6
'DWH SULPDU\VWUXFWXUH ZDV EXLOW DV SHU $11(%/220),(/'$5&+,7(&785$/
6859(< /26 *$726 5(6($5&+ <HDU $V 3HU 7RZQ 5HFRUG
7RZQ RI /RV *DWRV +LVWRULF 6WDWXV &RGH 1$
'RHV SURSHUW\ KDYH DQ /+3 2YHUOD\" 1R
,V WKH VWUXFWXUH LQ D KLVWRULF GLVWULFW" 1R
,I \HV LV LW D FRQWULEXWRU" 1$
'(7$,/(' -867,),&$7,21
$ZLGHUDQJLQJ UHVHDUFK KDV EHHQ FRQGXFWHG LQ OLQH ZLWK WKH JXLGHOLQHV RI WKH +LVWRULF
5HVHDUFK :RUN6KHHW +LVWRULF 3UHVHUYDWLRQ &RPPLWWHH7RZQ RI /RV *DWRV DQG WKH GHWDLOV
RI WKH UHVHDUFK DUH JLYHQ DV EHORZ
/26 *$726 38%/,& /,%5$5<
D6$1%251 0$36 7KH 6DQERUQ PDSV RI DUH DWWDFKHG DV
$QQH[XUHV 7KHVH PDSV VKRZ WKH PDLQ KRXVH DQG DQ DFFHVVRU\
VWUXFWXUH LQ WKH UHDU \DUG7KH PDLQ KRXVH VWLOO H[LVWV EXW WKH DFFHVVRU\
VWUXFWXUH LV QR ORQJHU H[LVWLQJ DV ZLOO EH VHHQ IURP WKH H[LVWLQJ VLWH SODQ VKHHW
$ LQ WKH SODQ VHW RI WKH H[LVWLQJ KRXVH DWWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH
E 7$;$66(660(17 7KH 7D[$VVHVVPHQW 6XUYH\LV DWWDFKHG
DV $QQH[XUH ,W GRHV QRW FRQYH\ DQ\ SRLQWHU WR WKH KLVWRULFDO FKDUDFWHU RI
WKLV EXLOGLQJ 7KH VXUYH\ UHSRUW LV IRU ORW 2OG 1R DV DOVR FRUUHODWHG LQ WKH
$11( %/220),(/' 6859(<
F $11(%/220),(/'+,6725,&5(6285&(6859(<
)250
7KH $QQH %ORRPILHOG +LVWRULF 5HVRXUFH 6XUYH\)RUP LV DWWDFKHG DV
$QQH[XUH 7KH VXUYH\DOVR PHQWLRQV LWV ROG ORW 1RDV DQG DOVR SURYLGHV
LWV OLNHO\ \HDU RI FRQVWUXFWLRQ DV 7KH RULJLQDO VW\OH LV VDLG WR EH
³%DQJORZ´ ,W DOVR PHQWLRQV WKDW VRPH DOWHUDWLRQV WR H[LVWLQJ ZLQGRZV DQG WKH
3RUFK ZHUH GRQH WR WKH RULJLQDO KRXVH$SKRWR RI WKH KRXVH LV DOVR JLYHQ EXW
WKH IHDWXUHV RI WKH KRXVH DUH QRW YHU\ FOHDU IURP LW $V VXFK WKH VXUYH\GRHV
QRW HVWDEOLVK LW WR EH D VWUXFWXUH RI KLVWRULF LPSRUWDQFH
G32/.¶6 ',5(&725,(6 7(/(3+21( ',5(&725<
Contd P2
ATTACHMENT -1
Page 114
7KH 3RON¶V 'LUHFWRULHV 7HOHSKRQH GLUHFWRULHV ZHUH UHVHDUFKHG WR NQRZ WKH
GHWDLOV RI SHUVRQV VWD\LQJ RU DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKLV KRXVH$FKURQRORJLFDO GHWDLO
RI WKH SHUVRQV VWD\HG LV JLYHQ LQ $QQH[XUH DWWDFKHG LQFOXGLQJ WKH UHOHYDQW
SDJHV RI WKH 3RON¶V 'LUHFWRU\
$VHDUFK ZDV PDGH RQ WKH LQWHUQHW IRU LPSRUWDQW SHUVRQV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK /RV
*DWRV DQG D OLVW RI SHRSOH DSSHDUHG DV SHU WKH OLQN EHORZ
KWWSV ZZZIDPRXVIL[FRPOLVWSHRSOHIURPORVJDWRVFDOLIRUQLD
1RQH RI WKHVH IDPRXV SHRSOH OLYHG LQ WKLV KRXVH
7KXV D SHUXVDO RI $QQH[XUH DQG WKH *RRJOH VHDUFK VKRZV WKDW QR
VLJQLILFDQW SHUVRQV DUH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKLV KRXVHVWUXFWXUH
H+,6725,& 3523(57< 5(6($5&+ &2//2(&7,21
7KH +LVWRULF 3URSHUW\5HVHDUFK &ROOHFWLRQ LQ WKH /RV *DWRV /LEUDU\ZDV
VHDUFKHG DQG QR UHFRUG SHUWDLQLQJ WR WKLV VWUXFWXUH ZDV IRXQG LQ ER[ QR
UHOHYDQW IRU WKH 6DQ %HQLWR $YH$UHFRUG RI RQO\RQH KRXVH LH IRU ZDV
IRXQG LQ WKH ER[7KLV HVWDEOLVKHV WKH KRXVH DW 6DQ %HQLWR $YH GRHV QRW
KDYH DQ\ KLVWRULFDO LPSRUWDQFH
6$17$ &/$5$ &2817< 5(6285&(6
$UHTXHVW ZDV PDGH WR WKH SODQQLQJ GHSDUWPHQW RI WKH 6DQWD &ODUD &RXQW\ WR
DVFHUWDLQ LI DQ\SODQV RU DQ\ RWKHU UHFRUGV DUH DYDLODEOH LQ WKH FRXQW\UHFRUGV
7KH FRXQW\UHSOLHG WKDW QR SODQ RU DQ\ RWKHU UHFRUGV DUH DYDLODEOH IRU 6DQ
%HQLWR $YH DVNHG WR FRQWDFW WKH WRZQ RI /RV *DWRV IRU WKH VDPH7KXV QR
KLVWRULFDO UHFRUGV DUH DYDLODEOH LQ WKH FRXQW\ IRU WKLV VWUXFWXUH7KH HPDLO
VFUHHQVKRW RI WKH UHSOLHV IURP WKH FRXQW\ DUH DWWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH
72:1 2) /26 *$726 &20387(5 5(&25'6
$VHDUFK ZDV PDGH RQ WKH FRPSXWHU LQVWDOOHG LQ WKH OREE\ WR ILQG RXW WKH
UHFRUGV RI 6DQ %HQLWR $YH7KH VHDUFK \LHOGHG VRPH RI WKH UHFRUGV
LQFOXGLQJ WKH SHUPLW UHFRUGV IRU VRPH RI WKH ZRUNV GRQH LQ WKLV KRXVH7KHVH
UHFRUGV DUH DWWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH SDJHV $ SHUXVDO RI WKHVH UHFRUGV
LQGLFDWH WKDW VRPH DOWHUDWLRQ ZRUNV KDYH EHHQ GRQH WR WKH RULJLQDO KRXVH DV
EHORZ
(OHFWULFDO VHUYLFH XSJUDGH
)URQW SRUFK UHSDLU DQG UHSDLU RI WKH HYH
5HSDLU RI WKH URRI DQG HDYH LQFOXGLQJ UHSODFHPHQW RI WKH UDIWHUV7KH
VKDSH RI WKH KRXVH JLYHQ LQ WKLV SHUPLW LV UHFWDQJXODU ER[ W\SH
,Q DGGLWLRQ RWKHU XQSHUPLWWHG ZRUNV KDYH DOVR EHHQ FDUULHG RXW LQ WKH
KRXVH DV EURXJKW RXW LQ VXFFHHGLQJ SDUDV
$'',7,21$/ '(7$,/6
D ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH GHWDLOV RI WKH KRXVH ZHUH DOVR GRZQORDGHG IURP WKH 7RZQ
RI /RV *DWRV FLW\SRUWDO DQG WKH VDPH DUH DWWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH $
SHUXVDO RI WKHVH UHFRUGV VKRZ WKDW WKH SHUPLWWHG IORRU DUHD RI WKLV KRXVH LV
6T )W RQO\ ZKHUHDV WKH H[LVWLQJ IORRU DUHD RI WKH KRXVH LV VT IW
ZLWKRXW WKH IURQW SRUFK ,W VSHDNV RI VRPH XQSHUPLWWHG DGGLWLRQ PDGH WR
WKH KRXVH DV GLVFXVVHG LQ IROORZLQJ SDUDV
-2-
Contd P3Page 115
E 7KH SODQV RI WKH H[LVWLQJ KRXVH KDYH EHHQ SUHSDUHG DQG DUH DWWDFKHG DV
$QQH[XUH SDJHV 7KH IORRU DUHD RI WKH H[LVWLQJ KRXVH LV 6T )W
DV DJDLQVW WKH SHUPLWWHG IORRU DUHD RI 6T )W RQO\
,W LV DOVR VHHQ WKDW WKH FHLOLQJ KHLJKW RI WKH EHGURRP EDWKURRP RQ WKH
ULJKW VLGH LV RQO\ ¶ ´ WR ¶´DV DJDLQVW WKH PDLQ KRXVH FHLOLQJ KHLJKW RI
¶´ ,W LV PDUNHG ZLWK $ % & RQ VKHHW $ $ $
,W HVWDEOLVKHV WKDW VRPH XQSHUPLWWHG FRQVWUXFWLRQV KDYH EHHQ PDGH WR WKH
KRXVH 7KH SRVVLEOH XQSHUPLWWHG SRUWLRQ LV PDUNHG LQ UHGOLQHV LQ VKHHW $
([LVWLQJ )ORRU 3ODQ $ $UHD &DOFXODWLRQV
7KH SKRWR VXUYH\RI WKH H[LVWLQJ KRXVH KDV DOVR EHHQ GRQH WKH SKRWRV
RI WKH KRXVH DUH JLYHQ LQ VKHHW $ WR $ $RI WKH DWWDFKHG SODQ
VHW $QQH[XUH
$TXLFN SHUXVDO RI WKH SKRWRV SODQ LQGLFDWH WKDW WKH KRXVH LV QRW
VWUXFWXUDOO\VRXQG DOVR VRPH DOWHUDWLRQV KDYH EHHQ PDGH ZKLFK DUH QRW
FRGH FRPSOLDQW DV RXWOLQHG EHORZ
L7KH ULGJH ERDUG RI WKH SRUFK LV QRW SURYLGHG DV VHHQ LQ SODQ VKHHW
$ 7KXV WKH SRUFK URRI LV QRW VWUXFWXUDOO\ VRXQG
LL7KH KHLJKW LQ WKH EHGURRP LV OHVV WKDQ ¶´ WKH PLQLPXP DGPLVVLEOH
KHLJKW
LLL$ZDOO KDV EHHQ FRQVWUXFWHG EHWZHHQ EHGURRP FORVHW ZKLFK LV
DEXWWLQJ WKH PLGGOH RI WKH ZLQGRZ DV VHHQ LQ 6KHHW $
LY7KH H[LVWLQJ ZLQGRZV RI WKH EHGURRP DUH QRW HJUHVV FRPSOLDQW DV SHU
WKH FXUUHQW FRGH UHTXLUHPHQW HWF
Y7KH DUFKLWHFWXUDO GHVLJQ RI WKH KRXVH LV YHU\VLPSOHD UHFWDQJXODU ER[
ZLWK IURQW SRUFK HQFORVHG RQ DOO VLGHV DQG QR XQLTXHQHVV LV QRWLFHG LQ
WKH DUFKLWHFWXUDO GHWDLOVGHVLJQ
YL)XUWKHU GXH WR DOWHUDWLRQ WR ZLQGRZ SRUFK HWF WKH RULJLQDO GHVLJQ LV
QR ORQJHU H[LVWLQJ
F $V ZRXOG EH VHHQ IURP WKH SODQ VKHHW $DOO WKH KRXVHV DURXQG WKLV
KRXVH KDYH EHHQ PRGLILHG DQG SUHVHQW D JRRG ORRN DQG WKLV KRXVH LQ WKH
H[LVWLQJ FRQGLWLRQ LV WRWDOO\ D PLVILW LQ WKH DUHD
G 7KH $31 PDS DQG WKH 7UDFW 0DS RI WKH ORW DUH DOVR DWWDFKHG DV $QQH[XUH
&21&/86,21
,Q YLHZ RI WKH DERYH SRLQWVLW LV FOHDU WKDW WKH H[LVWLQJ KRXVH KDV QR DUFKLWHFWXUDO
PHULW IRU WKH IROORZLQJ UHDVRQV
D7KH VWUXFWXUH LV QRW DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK HYHQWV WKDW KDYH PDGH D VLJQLILFDQW
FRQWULEXWLRQ WR WKH 7RZQ
E1R VLJQLILFDQW SHUVRQV DUH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH VWUXFWXUH
F7KHUH DUH QR GLVWLQFWLYH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI W\SHSHULRG RU PHWKRG RI
FRQVWUXFWLRQ RU UHSUHVHQWDWLRQ RI ZRUN RI D PDVWHU
G7KH VWUXFWXUH GRHV QRW \LHOG LQIRUPDWLRQ WR 7RZQ KLVWRU\ DQG
--
Contd P4Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
ANNEXURE -4
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
CITY COMPUTER RECORDS
1. Electrical Service Upgrade (5 pages)
ANNEXURE-8
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
REROOF INCLUDING REPLACEMENT OF ROOF PERMIT -1 Page3.Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
ANNEXURE-12TRACT MAPPage 171
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 172
PREPARED BY: Samina Merchant
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: 05/28/2025
ITEM NO: 4
DATE: May 23, 2025
TO: Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic
Resources Inventory for Property Zoned R-1:8. Located at 37 Ellenwood
Avenue. APN 510-19-015. Request for Review PHST-25-008. Exempt Pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b)(3). Property Owner/Applicant: Arthur
Chatoff. Project Planner: Samina Merchant.
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider a request to remove a pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory for
property zoned R-1:8, located at 37 Ellenwood Avenue.
PROPERTY DETAILS:
1. Date primary structure was built: 1940 per County Assessor; 1950+ per Bloomfield Survey
2. Bloomfield Preliminary Rating: None provided
3. Does property have an LHP Overlay? No
4. Is structure in a historic district? No
5. If yes, is it a contributor? N/A
6. Findings required? Yes
7. Considerations required? No
DISCUSSION:
The applicant is requesting approval to remove the pre-1941 residence from the Historic
Resources Inventory. The Santa Clara County Assessor’s Database lists a construction date of
1940. The property was included in the 1990 Anne Bloomfield Survey; however, a preliminary
rating and estimated age were not provided (Attachment 1). The evaluation notes at the
bottom of the sheet are annotated with a construction date as 1950+. The subject property was
included in the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps through 1956; however, no structures are shown
in the location of the existing residence. The maps show that a residence existed in the present
location of the existing carport.
Page 173
PAGE 2 OF 4
SUBJECT: 37 Ellenwood Avenue/ PHST-25-008
DATE: May 23, 2025
The applicant provided a Letter of Justification for the requested removal (Attachment 2),
property research results (Attachment 3), and photographs of the current residence
(Attachment 4). Based on the submitted research, the applicant believes that the findings
required for removal from the Historic Resources Inventory can be made. Further, the
justification letter states that the residence lacks any architectural features that would indicate
historical significance in terms of design or features, and there is no documentation suggesting
the property holds any significance to the Town’s history.
The Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps from 1928-1956 show an existing dwelling and an accessory
building located in the area now occupied by the existing carport (Attachment 5). Town records
do not provide a date for the demolition of the previous dwelling. The location of the current
residence is shown undeveloped through 1956. The Sanborn Maps support the build date listed
on the Bloomfield Survey, that the existing residence was constructed after 1956 and is
therefore not historic pursuant to the Town Code having been built after 1940.
CONCLUSION:
The evidence in the record indicates that the existing residence at 37 Ellenwood Avenue was
constructed after 1956 and is therefore not historic under the Town Code. Based on this
evidence, staff recommends that the Committee forward a recommendation of approval to
remove the property from the Historic Resources Inventory to the Community Development
Director. Once approved by the Director, the property would no longer be on the Inventory and
any proposed alterations 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.
_____ 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.
Page 174
PAGE 3 OF 4
SUBJECT: 37 Ellenwood Avenue/ PHST-25-008
DATE: May 23, 2025
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 1990 Anne Bloomfield Survey
2. Letter of Justification
3. Applicant’s Research
4. Exterior Photos
5. Sanborn Fire Maps
6. Building Permits
7. Town Records - 2010 Building Permit Plans
Page 175
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 176
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 178
Historic Preservation Committee
May 1, 2025
To Whom It May Concern:
I am the current owner of both 37 Ellenwood Ave and 41 Ellenwood Ave in Los Gatos. I have owned
and resided at 41 Ellenwood Ave for over 30 years. My wife and I purchased 37 Ellenwood Ave from
the previous owners 9 years ago. The previous owners had 4 generations living in the home during
the time we owned 41 Ellenwood Ave. They purchased the home in 1950. One of the living owners
stated the home was built in 1940 from the same builder as the home on Apricot Lane directly behind
37. The records show the first owner as Hodges and second owners as Hetzner. The records found
also state 1940 for the age.
The Anne Bloomfield records updated, June 1991, Historic Resources inventory does not have 37
Ellenwood Ave on the inventory list.
The pictures of the home will show additions around 20 years ago which included T1-11 siding
material as well as various lap siding. The house layout is dysfunctional. There is not any
architectural features that would indicate any historical significance of design or features.
The house is not visible from any street. Our Home at 41 Ellenwood Ave has the only direct view of
37 Ellenwood.
In our research at the Los Gatos Library and Santa Clara County Records, as well as contact from the
previous owners, indicate nothing of historic significance about the home or owners. Therefore, we
request that 37 Ellenwood be removed from the Historic Inventory in Los Gatos.
Respectfully,
Art Chatoff
Owner
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 179
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 180
No mention of 37 Ellenwood Ave ATTACHMENT 3Page 181
Sheppard R C is listed in the directory Page 182
Hodges E B is listed in the directory Page 183
Hetzner Harold is listed in the directory Page 184
Hetzner Harold is listed in the directory Page 185
!" #$%& $
! "#$ % & ' ( )' *
+ , - .' '-- '-' -') '/- / 0 1 .' - '-- ' 2
!"#$%& $
! "#$% & ' ( )' *
Page 186
!" #$%& #%
! "#$ % & ' ( )' *
+ , - .' '-- '-' -') '/- / 0 1 .' - '-- ' 2Page 187
!! "
! " #$" % &
' ( )
* +" *")) ")" )"$ *",) , -. +" ) *")) "
/
Page 188
!" #
! " #
$%# & '
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 194
ATTACHMENT 4
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
-PT(BUPT4BOCPSO.BQ
.BSUP.BZ
dd,D Edϱ
Page 207
-PT(BUPT4BOCPSO.BQ
Page 208
ATTACHMENT 6Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Page 223
Page 224
Page 225
Page 226
Page 227
Page 228
Page 229
Page 230
Page 231
Page 232
Page 233
Page 234
Page 235
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 236
PREPARED BY: Erin M. Walters
Senior 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: 05/23/2024
ITEM NO: 5
DATE: May 28, 2025
TO: Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider a Request for Approval to Construct Exterior Alterations to a Non-
Contributing Single-Family Residence in the Almond Grove Historic District on
Property Zoned R-1D:LHP. Located at 109 Tait Avenue. APN 510-18-037.
Minor Development in a Historic District Application HS-25-009. Exempt
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301: Existing Facilities. Property
Owner: Howard Labe and Jill Nakamura. Applicant: Terry J. Martin, AIA.
Project Planner: Erin Walters.
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider a request for approval to construct exterior alterations to a non-contributing single-
family residence in the Almond Grove Historic District on property zoned R-1D:LHP, located at
109 Tait Avenue.
PROPERTY DETAILS:
1. Date primary structure was built: 1920 per County Assessor; 1940’s per Bloomfield Survey
2. Bloomfield Preliminary Rating: ‘N’ – New, probably built since 1950
3. Does property have an LHP Overlay? Yes
4. Is structure in a historic district? Yes, Almond Grove Historic District
5. If yes, is it a contributor? No
6. Findings required? No
7. Considerations required? Yes
BACKGROUND:
The County Assessor indicates that the residence was constructed in 1920, and the 1990 Anne
Bloomfield Survey indicates a construction date of the 1940’s (Attachment 1). The property is
included in the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps having a consistent footprint between 1928 and
1956 (Attachment 2). Town records provide a permit history including a remodel with rough
Page 237
PAGE 2 OF 3
SUBJECT: 109 Tait Avenue/HS-25-009
DATE: May 23, 2025
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser12\AppData\Local\Temp\tmp92CF.tmp 5/23/2025 5:12 PM
framing, new roof, new siding, new foundation, and electrical completed in 1961 (Attachment
3). Records include plumbing, lighting, and mechanical permits for a kitchen remodel and reroof
completed in 1995. The applicant provided a request letter including photographs of the
property (Attachment 4), a summary of the property research (Attachment 1), and project
plans (Attachment 6)
DISCUSSION:
The subject property at 109 Tait Avenue is located on the northwest side of Tait Avenue,
approximately 70 feet northeast of the intersection with Bean Avenue. The property is
developed with a single-story main residence and a detached garage and accessory dwelling
unit. The applicant is requesting approval to construct a new covered porch and exterior
modifications to the main residence (Attachment 6). The proposed modifications include the
following:
Reconfiguration and simplification of the existing multiple roof pitches at the rear and side
elevations;
Construction of a new 354-squrae foot rounded covered rear porch and deck with wood
posts and guard rails;
The addition of five new low-profile sun tunnels on the reconfigured roof; and
Reconfiguration of door and windows at rear and left side elevations to accommodate the
porch access.
New materials, composition roofing, wood trim, wood windows with painted mullions, vertical
wood siding and all architectural characteristics will match the existing materials and
architectural style. The proposed roof reconfiguration and rear porch addition will be located at
the rear of the residence and will not impact the elevations visible from the street (Attachment
6).
The proposed project appears to fall below the Town’s demolition thresholds for historic
residences. Staff will verify this under review of the Building Permit.
Town’s Residential Design Guidelines
The Committee should consider Section 3.9 of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines, which
provides recommendations for construction of additions to existing residences (Attachment 5).
Including but not limited to the following recommendations:
The existing built forms, components and materials should be reinforced. Heights and
proportions of additions and alterations should be consistent with and continue the original
architectural style and design.
Page 238
PAGE 3 OF 3
SUBJECT: 109 Tait Avenue/HS-25-009
DATE: May 23, 2025
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser12\AppData\Local\Temp\tmp92CF.tmp 5/23/2025 5:12 PM
Additions should be subordinate, and compatible in scale and proportion to the historically
significant portions of the existing structure.
When an addition or remodel requires the use of newly constructed exterior elements, they
should be identical in size, dimension, shape, and location as the original, and should utilize
the same materials as the existing protected exterior elements.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant is requesting approval to construct a new covered rear porch and exterior
modifications to an existing pre-1941 non-contributing single-family residence on property
zoned R-1D:LHP in the Almond Grove Historic District located at 109 Tait Avenue. Should the
Committee find merit in the request, a recommendation of approval would be forwarded to the
Community development Director. Once approved by the director, the project would be
accomplished through a Building Permit and would not return to the Committee.
CONSIDERATIONS:
A. Considerations
Sec. 29.80.290. Standards for review.
In evaluating applications, the deciding body shall consider the architectural style, design,
arrangement, texture, materials and color, and any other pertinent factors. Applications
shall not be granted unless:
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.
B. Residential Design Guidelines
Section 3.9 of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines offers recommendations for
construction of additions to existing residences (Attachment 5).
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Property Research
2. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps
3. Building Permit Records
4. Request Letter and Photos
5. Section 3.9, Residential Design Guideline
6. Project Plans
Page 239
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 240
N:\DEV\FORMS\Planning\2022-23 Forms\HPC\HPC - Minor Development in a Historic District.docx 3/25/2022
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
HISTORIC RESEARCH WORKSHEET
Applicants shall provide written evidence and supporting documents to justify their request for
a remodel, alteration, addition, determination of significance, or demolition of a designated or
presumptive historic resource. This worksheet is intended to assist the applicant in gathering
written evidence and supporting documents, and to assist the Historic Preservation Committee
during evaluation of the request.
Applicants shall provide written evidence and supporting documents of the historical and
architectural characteristics, regarding both structures (construction date, alteration dates,
photographic documentation) and people (owner and/or resident names). If written evidence
cannot fit on this worksheet, please attach separate sheets.
The applicant shall research the following (please check the box once you complete your
research):
1.Los Gatos Public Library (see How to Research the History of a House in Los Gatos):
□Sanborn Maps
□1941 Tax Assessment
1989 Anne Bloomfield Historic Resource Survey forms
□Polk’s Directories
□Telephone Directories
□Other
2.Santa Clara County Resources (especially helpful for properties previously located in the
county’s jurisdiction):
□Santa Clara County Planning Department records
□San Jose Public Library (California Room)
3.Community Development Department Resources:
□Sanborn Maps
□1989 Anne Bloomfield Historic Resource Survey forms
□Community Development Department property files (permit history)
Research was conducted on (please enter date): ____________________________________
Records and Documents found (please attach copies): _______________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT 1
n
n
3/10/2025
Anne Bloomfield Architectural /
Cultural Survey, Los Gatos Museum Association Historic Home Survey
Page 241
Page 242
Page 243
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 244
Sanborn Map 1895
dd,D EdϮ
109 Tait Avenue
Page 245
Sanborn Map 1904
109 Tait Avenue
Page 246
Sanborn Map 1908
109 Tait Avenue
Page 247
Sanborn Map 1928
109 Tait Avenue
Page 248
Sanborn Map 1928 – 1944
109 Tait Avenue
Page 249
Sanborn Map 1928-1956
109 Tait Avenue
Page 250
ATTACHMENT 3
Page 251
Page 252
Page 253
Page 254
Page 255
Page 256
Page 257
Page 258
Page 259
Page 260
Page 261
Page 262
Page 263
Page 264
Labe Residence Minor Historic Development Submittal
Custom Porch Addition Written Project Description
109 Tait Ave
Los Gatos, CA 95030
May 19, 2025 Page 1 of 5
Terry J. Martin Associates, A.I.A.
1615 Westwood Drive, San Jose, California 95125
terry@tma-arch.com (408) 209-5152 | rebecca@tma-arch.com (408) 679-2645
Los Gatos Historic Preservation Committee
110 East Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
RE: Labe Residence
APN: 510-18-037
To Whom It May Concern:
Per the request of the Town of Los Gatos, we offer this written description of our proposed project.
Our area of work is at the rear of the historic residence at 109 Tait Avenue. At no point will we build above the
highest ridge or make any changes visible from the front of the property.
We propose to remove and replace several flat roofs that were piecemeal additions over the years; these roofs are
failing and have significant issues with leaking. In their place, we propose a more simplified roof configuration. Five
new low-profile sun tunnels will be added to bring light into the house.
In addition, we propose to build a new 354 sf covered porch at the rear of the building. Several doors and windows
will be reconfigured for porch access and will all match existing units. New materials, trim, and overall architectural
characteristics will also match the existing house. Current landscaping will remain except as necessary, and any new
plantings or hardscape will match existing.
See attached photo elevations of each side of the residence. Again, no work is proposed to be visible from the front.
We believe that the proposed work will not adversely affect the exterior architectural characteristics or any other
features of the property.
We request your consideration for approval of the proposed project.
Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call or email.
Best Regards,
Terry J. Martin, A.I.A.
ATTACHMENT 4Page 265
Labe Residence Minor Historic Development Submittal
Custom Porch Addition Written Project Description
109 Tait Ave
Los Gatos, CA 95030
May 19, 2025 Page 2 of 5
Terry J. Martin Associates, A.I.A.
1615 Westwood Drive, San Jose, California 95125
terry@tma-arch.com (408) 209-5152 | rebecca@tma-arch.com (408) 679-2645
Existing Front Elevation:
Page 266
Labe Residence Minor Historic Development Submittal
Custom Porch Addition Written Project Description
109 Tait Ave
Los Gatos, CA 95030
May 19, 2025 Page 3 of 5
Terry J. Martin Associates, A.I.A.
1615 Westwood Drive, San Jose, California 95125
terry@tma-arch.com (408) 209-5152 | rebecca@tma-arch.com (408) 679-2645
Existing Left Side Elevation:
Page 267
Labe Residence Minor Historic Development Submittal
Custom Porch Addition Written Project Description
109 Tait Ave
Los Gatos, CA 95030
May 19, 2025 Page 4 of 5
Terry J. Martin Associates, A.I.A.
1615 Westwood Drive, San Jose, California 95125
terry@tma-arch.com (408) 209-5152 | rebecca@tma-arch.com (408) 679-2645
Existing Rear Elevation:
Page 268
Labe Residence Minor Historic Development Submittal
Custom Porch Addition Written Project Description
109 Tait Ave
Los Gatos, CA 95030
May 19, 2025 Page 5 of 5
Terry J. Martin Associates, A.I.A.
1615 Westwood Drive, San Jose, California 95125
terry@tma-arch.com (408) 209-5152 | rebecca@tma-arch.com (408) 679-2645
Existing Right Side Elevation:
Page 269
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 270
Residential Design Guidelines 33
Town of Los Gatos BUILDING DESIGN3
3.8.3 Use traditional detailing
•Treat openings in walls as though they were constructed of
the traditional material for the style. For example, be sure to
provide substantial wall space above arches in stucco and
stone walls. Traditionally, wall space above the arch would
have been necessary to structurally span the opening, and
to make the space too small is inconsistent with the archi-
tectural style.
•Openings in walls faced with stone, real or synthetic, should
have defined lintels above the opening except in Mission or
Spanish Eclectic styles. Lintels may be stone, brick or wood
as suits the style of the house.
•Treat synthetic materials as though they were authentic.
For example, select synthetic stone patterns that place the
individual stones in a horizontal plane as they would have
been in a load bearing masonry wall.
•Select roof materials that are consistent with the traditional
architectural style (e.g., avoid concrete roof tiles on a Crafts-
man Style house.)
3.8.4 Materials changes
•Make materials and color changes at inside corners rather
than outside corners to avoid a pasted on look.
3.9 ADDITIONS/ACCESSORY BUILDINGS/SECONDARY
UNITS
•Site additions in the least conspicuous place. In many cases
this is a rear or side elevation - only rarely is it a rooftop.
•The existing built forms, components and materials should
be reinforced. Heights and proportions of additions and
alterations should be consistent with and continue the
original architectural style and design.
•Additions should be subordinate, and compatible in scale
and proportion to the historically significant portions of
the existing structure.
•When an addition or remodel requires the use of newly
constructed exterior elements, they should be identical in
size, dimension, shape and location as the original, and
Use stone or wood lintels over
openings in stone walls
Additions, accessory buildings and secondary
units should match the form, architectural
style, and details of the original house
ATTACHMENT 5
Page 271
Residential Design Guidelines34
Town of Los Gatos
BUILDING DESIGN3
should utilize the same materials as the existing protected
exterior elements.
•When an addition necessitates the removal of architectural
materials, such as siding, windows, doors, and decorative
elements, they should be carefully removed and reused in
the addition where possible.
•The introduction of window and door openings not char-
acteristic in proportion, scale, or style with the original
architecture is strongly discouraged (e.g., sliding windows or
doors in a structure characterized by double hung windows
and swinging doors).
•The character of any addition or alteration should be in
keeping with and subordinate to the integrity of the original
structure.
•The amount of foundation exposed on the addition should
match that of the original building.
•Do not add roof top additions where the roof is of historic
significance.
•Second floor additions are discouraged in neighborhoods
with largely one story homes. If horizontal expansion of
the house is not possible, consider incorporating a second
floor addition within the roof form as shown in the example
to the left.
•Second floor additions which are not embedded within the
roof form should be located to the rear of the structure.
•The height and proportion of an addition or a second story
should not dominate the original structure.
•Deck additions should be placed to the rear of the struc-
ture only, and should be subordinate in terms of scale and
detailing.
•New outbuildings, such as garages, should be clearly subor-
dinate to the main structure in massing, and should utilize
forms, materials and details which are similar to the main
structure.
•Garages should generally be located to the rear of the lot
behind the rear wall of the residence. One car wide access
driveways should be utilized.
Original structure
Addition incorporated into the roof
successfully adds space while respecting the
integrity of the existing house and the scale of
the neighborhood
Placing a two story addition to the rear can minimize its impact on the historic resource and the scale of the neighborhood
Page 272
Page 273
Page 274
Page 275
Page 276
Page 277
Page 278
Page 279
Page 280
PREPARED BY: Sean Mullin, AICP
Planning Manager
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMITTEE REPORT
MEETING DATE: 05/28/2025
ITEM NO: 6
DATE: May 23, 2025
TO: Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider a Request to Remove a Pre-1941 Property from the Historic
Resources Inventory for Property Zoned R-1:8. Located at 16805 Loma
Street. APN 532-07-101. Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3).
Request for Review PHST-25-007. Property Owner: William Wundram.
Applicant: David Britt, Britt-Rowe. Project Planner: Sean Mullin.
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider a request to remove a pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory for
property zoned R-1:8 located at 16805 Loma Street.
PROPERTY DETAILS:
1. Date primary structure was built: 1929 per County Assessor
2. Bloomfield Preliminary Rating: “+” – historic and intact or worthy of special note
3. Does property have an LHP Overlay? No
4. Is structure in a historic district? No
5. If yes, is it a contributor? N/A
6. Findings required? Yes
7. Considerations required? No
DISCUSSION:
The applicant is requesting approval to remove the pre-1941 residence from the Historic
Resources Inventory. The Santa Clara County Assessor’s Database lists a construction date of
1929. The 1990 Anne Bloomfield Survey estimates the construction date as 1920s and provides
a preliminary rating of “historic and intact or worthy of special note” (Attachment 1). The
property is not within the coverage of the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps.
Page 281
PAGE 2 OF 3
SUBJECT: 16805 Loma Street/PHST-25-007
DATE: May 23, 2025
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser12\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpC8BE.tmp
The subject property was annexed into the Town in the late 1990s and a review of Town
records yielded no Town permit history.
The applicant provided an informational packet with their application, which includes a letter
requesting removal of the residence from the inventory, historic research for the property, an
architectural assessment of the residence, and a structural assessment and photos of the
residence (Attachments 1 through 5). The applicant’s letter indicates that, based on their
research and experience, the findings for removal from the Historic Resources Inventory can be
made, noting that the residence is not associated with events important to the Town, not
associated with significant persons, not representative of work of a master, does not yield
information to the town’s history, and its integrity has been compromised (Attachment 1).
In addition to the materials provided relative to the request to remove the residence from the
Historic Resources Inventory, the applicant has also provided preliminary details related to
potential redevelopment of the property, including a Letter of Justification, project data,
evaluation of the surrounding residences, How to Read Your Neighborhood Workbook,
summary of neighborhood outreach efforts, and preliminary plans for a new residence
(Attachments 6 through 11). Staff notes that the request before the Committee is for removal
of the residence from the Historic Resources Inventory. The preliminary details for
redevelopment should not be used as justification with any recommendation on the request
and is not the subject of this review.
CONCLUSION:
Should the Committee find that the findings for removal can be made, a recommendation of
approval of the request to remove the property from the Historic Resources Inventory would be
forwarded to the Community Development Director. Once approved by the Director, any
proposed alterations or redevelopment of the property 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.
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
Page 282
PAGE 3 OF 3
SUBJECT: 16805 Loma Street/PHST-25-007
DATE: May 23, 2025
C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser12\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpC8BE.tmp
5. The integrity has been compromised such that the structure no longer has the
potential to convey significance.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Request Letter
2. Historic Research
3. Architectural Assessment
4. Structural Assessment
5. Structural Photos
6. Preliminary Letter of Justification for Redevelopment
7. Preliminary Project Data for Redevelopment
8. Evaluation of Surrounding Residences
9. How to Read Your Neighborhood Workbook
10. Summary of Neighbor Outreach Efforts for Redevelopment
11. Preliminary Plans for Redevelopment
Page 283
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 284
BRITT/ROWE
108 N. Santa Cruz Ave.
Los Gatos, CA 95030
TO: Town of Los Gatos Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: David Britt; BRITT/ROWE
FOR: Justification of request for REMOVAL of existing structure from the Historic List of a single
family residence in the TOWN OF LOS GATOS.
Dear members of the Los Gatos Historic Preservation Committee Member;
This letter has been prepared by the applicant David Britt, for the request to remove the existing structure located at
16805 Loma Street, Los Gatos. The property is not located within the town’s historic overlay districts. This letter
outlines the justification for removal based on the 5 criterias adopted by the Town of Los Gatos. To make the
findings for removal, the house has been thoroughly reviewed by me based on 40 years of experience working in the
Town of Los Gatos as a residential designer and an educational background of historic Bay Area architecture at both
San Jose State University and University of California, Berkeley.
1.There is no evidence that structure is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to
the Town. The property was annexed to the town in 1999 as part of the Ferris #6 Annexation.
2.There is no evidence significant persons are associated with the site.
3.There are no distinctive characteristics of the type, period or method of construction or representation of
work of a master. To elaborate, the structure can be identified as a”Builder Bungalow” with a simple
dutch-hipped roof in mass and scale, but without any identifiable architectural features to determine a
specific subset of builder bungalows, i.e. Craftsman, Storybook, Chalet, or others.
4.The Structure does not yield any information to the town’s history
5.The integrity has been compromised such that the structure has the potential to convey significance. If there
were any details that could possibly distinguish that structure and to deem it architecturally significant (i.e,
decorative eave brackets, trim moulds, leaded glass, windows with a specific mullion pattern(s), etc., they
have since been removed. There was an addition in 1967 at the rear of the house adding a bedroom and
laundry room that are not original, nor match the architectural style of the original structure. The property
was also split in the early 70’s to create 16801 Lo where the pre-1941 structure at 16801 Loma
Street was removed to build a new structure in 2000.
For supporting reference material and evidence to the historic research, please refer to “Loma
Historic Research v2.” and “Loma Street Structural Photos”.
Sincerely
David Britt, Britt/Rowe
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 285
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 286
Subj: Research the History of a House in Los Gatos
Location: 16805 Loma Street
Date: Between 3/212025 and 3/27/2025
Conducted By: William and Brenna Wundram (property owners)
Table of Contents
Los Gatos Public Library
Sanborn Maps
1941 Tax Assessment Survey
1989 Anne Bloomfield Historic Resource Survey
Polk’s Directories 1924-1974
Museums of Los Gatos Historic Homes Tours
100 Bellringers
As It Was by Dora Rankin
Los Gatos Historic Resources Inventory – Jun 1991
Historic Property Research folders
History of Los Gatos by Bruntz and Los Gatos Observed by Dallas.
Residence drawers of the vertical file
The Patrons’ inquiries (binder #3)
A Field Guide to American Houses
Santa Clara County Planning Office
County Permit History
Santa Clara County Tax Assessors Office
County Property Records
San Jose Public Library
California Room - Aerial Maps
Los Gatos Planning Office
Laserfiche System – property research
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 287
1. Los Gatos Public Library (POC – Shawnte Santos and Jenn Laredo)
a. Sanborn Maps – Reviewed the 1928 and 1944 Sanborn maps (see photos in Exhibit A).
FINDING: The location of 16805 Loma Street is outside of the scope of the two maps.
b. 1941 Tax Assessment Survey – Reviewed the 1941 Tax Assessment Survey
documentation.
FINDING: 16805 Loma Street was not listed in the tax assessment survey.
c. 1989 Anne Bloomfield Historic Resource Survey – The Anne Bloomfield survey for
16805 Loma Street was executed on April 5, 1990 (see Exhibit B in the Appendix) noting
an estimated age of “1920s” and a “bungalow” style. Three other surveys were
completed for properties on the same street at 16760, 16770 and 16791 Loma Street
noting “bungalow” and “generic” style designations with two of those being active
rentals. Ferris Ave doesn’t have Anne Bloomfield surveys for 164XX addresses, only
addresses starting with 166XX. Englewood also does not have corresponding
Bloomfield surveys yet there were a series of pre 1941 houses on the street that have
been demolished over the years.
Most properties on Loma Street didn’t start to get annexed to the city until February 1st,
1999 as part of the Ferris #6 Annexation, (see Exhibit C in the Appendix) (which was over
nine years after the survey was executed) and well into the 2000s. Santa Clara County
permit activity ceases in 2015 for Loma Street and there was a bulk annexation in 2019.
16805 Loma Street was not in the purview of the City of Los Gatos Planning office at the
time of the Bloomfield survey.
FINDING: Bloomfield survey found for 16805 Loma Street.
d. Polk’s Directories 1924-1974.
The first match to an individual with a registered phone number was in 1962 to Hortenia
Moreno for one year. The next registered phone number started in 1968 through 1974 to
Albert Panighetti. The ancestory.com searches didn’t provide any significant results
(Albert Panighetti – born Mar 2nd, 1904 - died Mar 1991 – WW2 veteran).
Per the listing realtor, Kurt E. and Arlyn M. Wilson family owned it for the past forty years
and rented it out for the past twenty-five years.
FINDING: No significant findings of previous residents.
e. A list of the Museums of Los Gatos Historic Homes Tours and programs.
Page 288
FINDING: No houses on Loma Street were on the home tours.
f. A list of the 100 Bellringers and information.
FINDING: No match from the binder or supplemental.
g. Reviewed As It Was by Dora Rankin.
FINDING: No match found.
h. Reviewed the Los Gatos Historic Resources Inventory – Jun 1991.
FINDING: No match found.
i. Reviewed the Historic Property Research folders.
FINDING: No match found.
j. Reviewed History of Los Gatos by George Bruntz and Los Gatos Observed by Alistair
Dallas.
FINDING: No Loma Street houses listed.
k. Reviewed Information in the Residence drawers of the Vertical file.
FINDING: Box 6 Folders 1-8. No Loma Street residences in the vertical files.
l. Reviewed The Patrons’ inquiries, binder #3 residences.
FINDING: No listing for Loma Street houses.
m. Reviewed A Field Guide to American Houses by Virginia Savage McAlester.
FINDING: No match found.
2. Santa Clara County Resources
a. Santa Clara County Planning Office
FINDING: Found three permits. 1. “remodel/addition” permit from 1967 number:
1967-7094-00 (Exhibit D), 2. “repair roof” from 1967 number: 1967-7410-00 and 3.
“re-roof” permit from 1990 number: 1990-840-00 by the owner Albert Panighetti.
See supporting structural pictures (separate document) noting the addition of the
rear bedroom and laundry room.
b. Santa Clara County Tax Assessor (see Exhibit E from 1966)
Page 289
FINDING: One property was found which was listed under 16801, which is currently
the next-door neighbor’s address now. The original property had a garage that could have
been on the current neighbor’s property. The split of 16801 to create 16801 and 16805 was
Nov 12th, 1971, and the old APN was 532-07-008.
c. San Jose Public Library (California Room)
FINDING: Researched aerial photography from the period and added the best photo I
could from 1948 (Exhibit F) noting other structures on Loma Street.
3. Los Gatos Community Development Department Resources
a. Permit and Planning Documents (Laserfiche)
FINDING: No Planning or Building department results found for 16805 Loma Street. I
did find three demolition requests for pre-1941 houses on Loma Street.
1. 16801 Loma Street – Exhibit G – April 1, 1999 (next door)
2. 16761 Loma Street – Exhibit H – Nov 18, 1998 (same side of the street)
3. 16810 Loma Street – Exhibit I – July 7, 2004 (directly across the street)
Page 290
APPENDIX
Exhibit A – Sanborn Maps 1944
Page 291
Exhibit B – 16805 Loma Street – Anne Bloomfield Survey
Page 292
Exhibit C – February, 1999 (Ferris #6), Annexation of 16805 Loma Street to the City of Los Gatos
Page 293
Page 294
Page 295
Page 296
Exhibit D – 1967 Permit for an Addition / Remodel
Page 297
Exhibit E – County Tax Assessor Property Record
Page 298
Page 299
Exhibit F – 1948 Map showing a series of houses on Loma Street
Page 300
Exhibit G – 16801 Pre-1941 Demo Approval – April 1, 1999
Page 301
Page 302
Page 303
Page 304
Exhibit H – 16761 Pre-1941 Demo Approval – Nov 18, 1998
Page 305
Exhibit I – 16810 Pre-1941 Demo Approval – July 7, 2004
Page 306
Page 307
Page 308
Page 309
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 310
!"#$%
&!
’!(!)!*+!!+!,!!-!!$%!
(!!!.!-,%
(-,,/!+!
-0%".!!$%--%-$1-!1!
!!$%!-!%-!,!!.!!$%
-!!+!2!,(2/%%*
!!$%$%!/!.!!$%-(!/!!2!
2!!(%2%!$-!/!2!,$%!/!
1-!!!!%3!%
0%".!!$%,-%-$1+!!,
4%!!$!51!!6!!7-!(
!!!!6//!,%%.!
(!/%!(!!$%!!6.!4%!
2+!(!2/( !2%!6//!,%,!
%,!)!!!+-!!!6%!
!!6/%%!,!!4!!+%!!$%
!!6,!%%!!,!/%.!!!!,+!
/!!!%!-!!,!/%,!!/!
2+!%
00%"6!!--%!!$%--%+!2!
!)!(22!.!!$%-,-!+!,!!
!!2!8!+!!-%,!!-/!,!!!-
9!%!/!,!!!%!!222/!,!!!
%!!/!,!!!!-*
!!!!-,/&!2!!
!-!/!-!+!,!!/!!8!+!!.!
!!-(!/!!2!22!(!8!+!!!!,
/!/!!-
10"!!!$%-,/!+!/!/(
%!!!,!!!+!6%-!--!!!/!-
2!.!!!%-!$!,!!-,!+!(!
’%-ATTACHMENT 4Page 311
!-!!!!!%*!!+!-
!!/+!2//(!!,!!-%
--!!!!!6!-:%!
/!2+!!+!!,!-!!-!2/4!
!-.(!)!!-!--!%
!%!!%:(!2!8!+!!-(/!!
(-!!-/!!/4!*!!(2/!!,
!!2!-(/!!)!!!2/!
+!!!2/!,!!$%!!+!(!+!
,/!!!2!!$%!.!!-!(
!!!!$%!/!!!!2!,!,
!!!!!!/+!:,(!+!,
(!!!!/+!’!!-!!-!!
!-!!!(-!)!
!!(
!
!%!!+#%!!
Verified by pdfFiller
04/03/2025
04/03/2025
Page 312
Subj: Structural and Condition Photos
Location: 16805 Loma Street
Date: 3/25/2025
Conducted By: William and Brenna Wundram (property owners)
16805 Loma Street Structural Photos
Table of Contents.
1.Foundation
a.Exterior/Interior foundation spalling on exterior and interior foundation walls
(painted over recently)
b.Vertical cracks (front right section)
c.No anchor bolts (Note: this signifles a high probably of no rebar in the foundation
walls)
2.Crawlspace Framing
a.Cripple wall framing on the foundation wall
b.Shimmed fioor joists and mudsill
c.Cracked fioor joists some up to 9ft spans for the 2x6 fioor joists
d.Post framing against dirt
e.Subfioor damage
3.Attic Framing
a.1x6 ridge beams
b.No purlins
4.Rear Addition (rear bedroom and laundry room were added).
a.Rear Addition – Attic view from rear bedroom access).
b.Rear Addition – Original exterior foundation wall
5.Main Level Framing and General Topics
a.No shear walls or exterior sheathing
b.No insulation
c.¼ drywall in multiple rooms
d.Termite damage
e.Single pane windows
f.Knob and tube wiring
g.Electrical panel (unknown amps)
h.Gas meter location (under window)
ATTACHMENT 5
Page 313
1.Foundation
1A. Exterior/Interior Foundation Spalling (painted over recently)
Page 314
Page 315
1B. Vertical cracks (front right section)
Page 316
1C. No anchor bolts (Note: this signifles a high probably of no rebar in the foundation walls)
2.Crawlspace Framing
2A. Cripple wall framing on the foundation wall
Page 317
2B. Shimmed fioor joists and mud sill
Page 318
2C. Cracked 2x6 fioor joists. Some spans are up to 9 feet.
Page 319
2D. Post framing against dirt.
Page 320
2E. Subfioor damage
3.Attic Framing
3A. 1x6 ridge beams
Page 321
3B. No purlins (just vertical 1x6s)
4A. Rear Addition – Attic view from rear bedroom access).
Page 322
4B. Rear Addition – Original Exterior Foundation Wall
Page 323
5A-C. No shear walls or exterior plywood sheathing (1X4 siding shown). No insulation and ¼ drywall
installed in multiple rooms.
5D. Termite damage (rear door)
Page 324
5E. Single pane windows (not original)
5F. Knob and tube wiring
Page 325
5G. Electrical Panel (unknown amps) with cloth wrapped wiring
Page 326
5G. Gas meter location under window (Not allowed)
Page 327
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 328
BRITT/ROWE
108 N. Santa Cruz Ave.
Los Gatos, CA 95030
TO: Town of Los Gatos Planning Staff
FROM: David Britt; BRITT/ROWE
FOR: Justification of request to construct a new single family residence in the TOWN OF LOS GATOS.
Dear Town of Los Gatos Planning Staff;
This letter has been prepared by the applicant David Britt, for the request to construct a new two-story single family
residence located at16805 Loma Street, This letter outlines the justification for construction. To make the findings
for DRC application approval, the residence has been designed within criteria set forth by the town for all new
residential construction as outlined in the “Design Review Guidelines” and other mitigating measures with respect to
neighborhood compatibility and preservation.
1.The residence is designed within the allowed development standards of R1-8 residential zone.
2.The house has been designed to be compatible with the neighborhood by in that it is similar to FAR, height,
proposed setbacks, height, and maas scale similar to many in the neighborhood consistent with the town
Design Review Gj\uiview guideline as outlined in section 3.3.2
3.One story mass elements have been included in the sign to mitigate two-story mass consistent in guidelines
as outlined in section 3:10.1
4.Proposed exterior finishes have been specified to be high quality and are consistent with the proposed
architectural style and to compliment the neighborhood guidelines 3.3.1 and 3.3.2.
5.Propose window and door material have been specified to match the surrounding neigborhood per
as outlined in section 3.4.1
In addition to items found in the Design Review Guidelines, other design elements have been
incorporated to mitigate the impact of a new two-story residence:
1.Second floor windows facing side property lines have high sills.
2.Second floor setbacks are significantly increased from minimum allowable.
Thank you planning staff for your assistance with our application.
Sincerely
David Britt, Britt/Rowe
ATTACHMENT 6
Page 329
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 330
Project Information
Scope of Work: Demolition of existing pre-1941 one-story
single-family residence with no garage, and construction of new
two-story single family residence.
Property Owner: William Wundram
18605 Loma Street
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Project location: 18605 Loma Street
Los Gatos,CA95032
APN: 532-07-101
Zoning: R1-8
Lot Area: 7,461
Avg Lot Slope: less than 2% (flat)
FAR Existing Proposed Allowed
Main Dwelling: 861 (.11) 2,454 (.32) 2,462 (.33)
Garage: 0 (.0) 483 (.06) 671 (.09)
Setbacks Existing Proposed Allowed
Front: 17’-5” 25’-0” 25’-0”
Rear: 33’-6” 20’-0” 20’-0”
Sides (left/right) 38’-7”/9’-3” 8’-0”/8’-0” 8’-0”/8’-0”
Lot Coverage: Existing Proposed Allowed
First Floor/Porches/Garage 905 (12%) 2,326 (31%) (40%)
Building Height: Existing Proposed Allowed
Measured from exist. grade) 14’ 27’ 30’
Page 331
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 332
16805 Loma Street and
Surrounding Houses
Los Gatos
ATTACHMENT 8
Page 333
16805 Loma Street
16805 Loma St
862 sqft
7,460 lot
Single story
Year 1929
Page 334
Rear View
16456 Ferris St
2,750 sqft
15,137 lot
Two story
Year 1995
From 16805 Loma Rear YardPage 335
Front View
Front (from Street) – directly across
16800/10 Loma St
4,400 sqft
10,812 lot
Two story
Year 2010
Was a Pre 1941 House
and was approved for
demolition
Page 336
Front Right View
Front (from Street) – directly across
16490 Ferris Ave
2,505 sqft
9,800 lot
Two story
Year 1999
Was a Pre 1941 House and
was approved for major
renovation and second
story
Page 337
Right View
16801 Loma St
2,472 sqft
7,578 lot
Two story
Year 2000
Was a Pre 1941 House
and was approved for
demolition
Front (from Street)
From 16805 Loma YardPage 338
Left View
16460 Ferris St
2,368 sqft
5,880 lot
Two story
Year Unknown
From 16805 Loma Yard
From 16805 Loma Yard
16460 Ferris St Front (from Street)Page 339
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 340
ATTACHMENT 9
Page 341
Page 342
Page 343
Page 344
Page 345
Page 346
Page 347
Page 348
Page 349
Page 350
Page 351
Page 352
Page 353
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 354
Subj: Neighboring property owner notiflcation
Location: 16805 Loma Street
Date: Between 4/13/2025 and 4/22/2025
Conducted By: William and Brenna Wundram (property owners)
Dear Los Gatos Planning Department,
Brenna and I visited each of the following neighbors regarding our interest building the
proposed house designed by David Britt. We provided each family a three-page packet that
is included in our proposal (A0, A1 and A2) noting the placement of the structure on the lot,
fioor plans and elevations.
Address Location Names Date
16801 Loma Street Right of Property Kerry and Joel Lindholm 4/13/25
16460 Ferris Ave Left of Property Catherine and Gary
Pasternak
4/13/25
16456 Ferris Ave Rear of Property Vicky and Bob Francone 4/18/25
16790 Loma Street Across the Street -
Left
Catherine Ambrozewicz
and Stephan Tremblay
4/18/25
16810 Loma Street Across the Street –
Center
Pavni Diwanji 4/13/25
16490 Ferris Ave Across the Street -
Right
Kris and Mark Rapazzini 4/22/25
All neighbors were receptive of our intended plans, thought the design was fltting for the
neighborhood and appreciated our outreach. The Pasternaks (16460 Ferris Ave) were
interested in discussing potential landscape screening options between the two properties
at a later stage.
Please let me know if you have any further questions. I can be reached at (408) 421-5494 or
by email at wundy76@hotmail.com.
Best regards,
William Wundram
ATTACHMENT 10Page 355
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 356
Page 357
Page 358
Page 359
Material Board – 16805 Loma Street – Los Gatos
Roof Shingles – Presidential Shake – Shadow Gray Metal Roof – Dark Bronze
Windows – Windsor – Bronze Siding – Stucco – Dover White
Trim Color – BM Beigewood Garage Door Color
Page 360
Column Design Front Bracket Design
Page 361
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 362
PREPARED BY: Sean Mullin, AICP
Planning Manager
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
REPORT
MEETING DATE: 05/28/2025
ITEM NO: 7
DATE: May 23, 2025
TO: Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider a Request for Approval to Construct an Addition and Exterior
Modifications to an Existing Pre-1941 Single-Family Residence on Property
Zoned R-1:8. Located at 119 Harding Avenue. APN 532-35-022. Exempt
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301: Existing Facilities. Request for
Review Application PHST-25-010. Property Owner: Brian Conlisk. Applicant:
Jay Plett Architect, LLC. Project Planner: Sean Mullin.
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider a request for approval to construct an addition and exterior modifications to an
existing pre-1941 single-family residence on property zoned R-1:8 located at 119 Harding
Avenue.
PROPERTY DETAILS:
1. Date primary structure was built: 1927 per County Assessor’s Database
2. Bloomfield Preliminary Rating: - historic and some altered but still a contributor to district
if there is one.
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? Yes
BACKGROUND:
The Santa Clara County’s Accessors Database lists a construction date of 1927 for the residence.
The property is included in the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps having a consistent footprint
between 1928 and 1956 (Attachment 1). The property is included in the 1991 Anne Bloomfield
Historic Survey (Attachment 2), which indicates that the Mediterranean revival style residence
has an estimated construction date of the 1930s and provides a preliminary rating of “historic
and some altered but still a contributor to district if there is one.”
Page 363
PAGE 2 OF 3
SUBJECT: 119 Harding Avenue/PHST-25-010
DATE: May 23, 2025
Town records only provide a permit history for the permitted ADU behind the main residence.
No permits were found for the main residence. The applicant provided a request letter
(Attachment 3), a summary of the property research (Attachment 2), photographs of the
property (Attachment 4), and project plans (Attachment 6).
DISCUSSION:
The subject property at 119 Harding Avenue is located on the north side of Harding Avenue
east of the intersection with Los Gatos Boulevard. The property is developed with a single-story
main residence and a two-story accessory dwelling unit. The applicant is requesting approval to
construct an addition and exterior modifications to the main residence (Attachment 3). The
proposed single-story addition would be located at the rear of the residence and would not
impact the elevations visible from the street (Attachment 6). The addition would introduce a
gable end to the rear elevation, consistent with the front elevation, and would not increase the
height of the residence. The addition would be finished with exterior materials to match the
existing exterior materials. The applicant also proposes the replacement of the existing non-
original windows with fiberglass- or metal-clad wood windows with a profile appropriate for the
historic architecture and finished with stucco mouldings.
The proposed project appears to fall below the Town’s demolition thresholds for historic
residences. Staff will verify this under review of the Building Permit.
Town’s Residential Design Guidelines
The Committee should consider Section 3.9 of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines, which
provides recommendations for construction of additions to existing residences (Attachment 5).
Including but not limited to the following recommendations:
The existing built forms, components and materials should be reinforced. Heights and
proportions of additions and alterations should be consistent with and continue the original
architectural style and design.
Additions should be subordinate, and compatible in scale and proportion to the historically
significant portions of the existing structure.
When an addition or remodel requires the use of newly constructed exterior elements, they
should be identical in size, dimension, shape, and location as the original, and should utilize
the same materials as the existing protected exterior elements.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant is requesting approval to construct an addition and exterior modifications to an
existing pre-1941 single-family residence on property zoned R-1:8 located at 119 Harding
Page 364
PAGE 3 OF 3
SUBJECT: 119 Harding Avenue/PHST-25-010
DATE: May 23, 2025
Avenue. If approved, the project would be accomplished through a Building Permit and would
not return to the Committee.
CONSIDERATIONS:
A. Considerations
Sec. 29.80.290. Standards for review.
In evaluating applications, the deciding body shall consider the architectural style, design,
arrangement, texture, materials and color, and any other pertinent factors. Applications
shall not be granted unless:
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.
B. Residential Design Guidelines
Section 3.9 of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines offers recommendations for
construction of additions to existing residences (Attachment 5).
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps
2. Request Letter
3. Property Research
4. Photos
5. Section 3.9, Residential Design Guideline
6. Project Plans
Page 365
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 366
1928
ATTACHMENT 1Page 367
1956
Page 368
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
HISTORIC RESEARCH WORKSHEET
Applicants shall provide written evidence and supporting documents to justify their request for a
remodel, alteration, addition, determination of significance, or demolition of a designated or
presumptive historic resource. This worksheet is intended to assist the applicant in gathering written
evidence and supporting documents, and to assist the Historic Preservation Committee during
evaluation of the request.
Applicants shall provide written evidence and supporting documents of the historical and architectural
characteristics, regarding both structures (construction date, alteration dates, photographic
documentation) and people (owner and/or resident names). If written evidence cannot fit on this
worksheet, please attach separate sheets.
The Historic Preservation Committee reviews the application using the Town's Historic District Ordinance
requirements. Copies of the ordinance(s) are available at Town Hall. The Committee meets the fourth
Wednesday of every month. The filing deadline is 20 days prior to the meeting by 11:00 AM.
The applicant shall research the following (please check the box once you complete your research):
1.Los Gatos Public Library (see How to Research the History of a House in Los Gatos):
□Sanborn Maps
□1941 Tax Assessment
□1989 Anne Bloomfield Historic Resource Survey forms
□Polk’s Directories
□Telephone Directories
□Other
2.Santa Clara County Resources (especially helpful for properties previously located in the county’s
jurisdiction):
□Santa Clara County Planning Department records
□San Jose Public Library (California Room)
3.Community Development Department Resources:
□Sanborn Maps
□1989 Anne Bloomfield Historic Resource Survey forms
□Community Development Department property files (permit history)
Research was conducted on (please enter date): ____________________________________
Records and Documents found (please attach copies): _______________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT 2
n
n
n
May 6, 2025
Sanborn maps, Anne Bloomfield notes
Page 369
cflnne !Bfoom{uld
ARCHITECTURA L/CULTURAL SURVEY
LOS GATOS RESEARCH
File address //1 fk:rp/,7
PARCEL MAP INFORMATION
ARCHITECTURAL H ISTORY
14 15) 922-1063
2229 WEBSTER STREET
SAN FRANCISCO. CA 941 1 5
Parcel # 53 ;2-3 5'"-~z ~ Lot size: . t5""0front ft. x ~~~ ft. deep
Lot shape: Rectangle~~L___ Rectangle with small rear jog___ Other _____________ _
Location: N / S E w side of __,H:........;.._-_________ St Ave ,......... Other _____ _
distance to cross st: JP)~o ft. N_ s_ E / w_ from '-~ s G c:t -.,4..~ ,t3
at NE NW SE sw corner of _____________________ __
HISTORIC INFORMATION ON PARCEL MAP
7 7 -;:::. Old tract or subdivision name. __________________ Old Block #--~---Old lot # ____________ __
FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION (handwritten in red)
Preliminary rating· v' Estimated age/9'30;:. Style /t{eo/, 1 -,t:=;;v # stories__
Alterations vV ,,,.,cJ&t...U«:~ a-Jic ~' ct.. I n/) ne.y c5i(., ,.., ~
Other _____________________________________________ ___
COUNTY ASSESSOR--PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS (paste on c~py) Page 9"711EFFective date 1;-J--'i! 7
1,2
OWNERSHIP SHOWN ON MAPS
Source Source Source Location of property, or Lot Owner
Name Date Page Old ·tract/block/lot Size Name
:1891
I
Blk Book '1908
I
Survey jl941 17 ~r-s old
I
MISCELLANEOUS PHOTOS : Roll/frame #1/3 ,i_:f
National Register listed date. __________________ __
County Inventory 1979 ______________ ~------------
Town of Los Gat os: Designation __ Recognition __
Di strict Name ~-------------------------------
Previous Sur vey
t/tZ'~.:-· .... ~ ~
~VALUATION. ate'-L.J.:.:;:::;:-z-,~~~T Contributor
JA rJ;,."' Allt J ;J!.'Ti f4.Di s tri ct Hon-contri b_ Raised_ Porch$ d~~cl-tf'A-Additi on i ..... &.._
· · m page #
-~ Alterations: Moved_
Earliest known _ v .....,...,_ _ J.i~/ -.)~ Windovav-Condition_ Owner~ Resident/'lo :.JVwlf .T~~ran•~r .. "'\ cJ,..·,w.'ft-' -eone•••<s~: ~~ --ldre r Des~"'1 ~.~,.-dX, G p .Da.•.-..
Page 370
PUBLISH!!> MIMOUNC&M!NTS
clln.ne _r \om{u:.fd
ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY
BUILDING RESEARCH
sourcer __ A&.& __ Bulletin __ CA&BN __ call Chron DPB __ Ed..AB __ EX __ News _PeA Other
ARCHIT 'TURAL HISTORY
C4151 922·1063
222" ..VEBSTER STREET
SAN FRANCCSCO, CA 9411 5
Volunae Date · --Page-=-
Nature of announcement: Contract notice ___ Notice of completion ___ BP issued __ Photo ___ Elev/sketch/rend'g __ Floor plan __ Arch't/cont'r pub __ Real eat.
Copy exactly: --~ Builder/Contractor Architect/Engineer 4ocation Nature of work Coat
BUILDING PERMITS
source, Permit
Reqiater Preas
Address requested~-------------------
• -Application Date Delli., or . . . Number '"""""""' Location £2.!1
OTHER SOURCE (specify thoroughly)
SANBORN MAPS Color:
Vac. yel, pnk,
or orange Patches
Vol/ dif. blu,gry Yea/ No. l)f
Date ~ bldg Address reen ..J!!!._ No stories
f/1/J..g ;;17 /s ,//7 #-v IJ 1
Use/ Owner Builder/ Arch't/
No . of & contr. & engin'r
units address address & address
No. of
Height bay 'PoR e 1+ M ·.s~. ....uw windows
0 0
Description
/Initials Date
of work
Bldg's
width/ I depth
height
~.nitia 18
Exterior
Mater~als
s!•te ---
/Initials Date
Date of Describe or aketcl
constr. plan
0
Page 371
dlnfU !Bfoom{utd
ARCHI'!SC~C..t}L_'l'URAL_ SURVBY
RAM!! RBIBARCH
ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY
141 51 ~22·1 063
2229 WEBSTER STREET
SAN FRANCISCO. CA 941 1 5
•~ (~r•~. b~i~in9, or~aation, atc)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\ddra•••• aaaociated with ~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
aelevant datea r conatr~ction._~~-· birth. ___ • death. ___ • othar_~~~~~~~~~-
I. DIRECTORY S&ARCH (City Directori••· county Db-actorie•, Telephorw Book•, aociaty t!iNctori••· ate.)
Yaa Book N&Me/Claaai.#iad H-di"" Liat:ifta f....,nv •ftt:i..,. .... ,..,~ aa ah,_• u a• * •nP hnl,..a,..\
/~ 'PtJ SJD <-!Ia d~ -vur_ I;., C '-" i-1 n ~-~ ~,_..., "-O~v;;.,J-w I' ~14 ) ~/e.,... 1:,.1' tV~+~~ ,_J!
" + ~#-v, Jf"11 r<S :U.-Pv b"s e-J...
I <in " ·Cv;,nrf ~/.a.-. "D~ j;q tv+ uJ C~'ff.J ~1/e.r ~~ N<V/-/15&~ . .-cJ h /11~rzl,-~ .a.v ,
date
• BIOGRAPHICAL SIARCR, indaae• • other alphabetical li•tinqa.
Mrk 'X' (infct .or 'tJ' (nothin9 found) at each •ource you try. Liat fi.ndtecJa 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, 1B88 (bio index)
Sunshine Fruit & Flowers, 1895 (bio index)
--Guinn, 1904 (bio index) San Jose Historical Museum:
---Sawyer, 1922 (bio index) ___ Great Registers (of voters)
---Bruntz, Hist'y of.LG, 1971 (bio index) ___ Indexes
Cu~xtended index to Bruntz Photo collection
Blo index of Nunroe Frazer, 1681 (Survey box)
Photo collection (2 boxes) Other sources:
Los Gatos Museum (Forbes Mill):
___ Death records by year
___ Funeral records (index cards to big
Photo collection
__ Indexes, California Historical ~uarterly
State Library Information Index (fiche)
--State Library-S.F. Newspaper Ind~-x -:(")
books_) _
III. LIST ALL RU'EUNCES FROM ABOVE. Find them. Copy qoot! -tarial " attach. Or copy below if only
a few words. Or explain why not relevant (as, wronq ~r•on).
L:7 Continued on Reverse
1-
Page 372
File Address /! 1 ./-4:::t '~'/, ,. ._,.
7
d/mu: !J3foor r . .,[J
A H C II I 'I' 1·: C T lll< A l. :-, ll H V E Y
ASSESSMENT HULL RESI~ARCII
True t.l HI ockl Lot -------------------
L.L.i.~ Wt.U:>tt;.tC ::Jitctt.l
SAN H~ANCISI r -... !t41 I::>
Assessments arc filed by last name of property uwuer, hut uot IICiess;H ·ily ill alphabetical order·. Sonrt.• yt><US there is a11
index inside the vol ume or in a separatt.> hook . Tlu .. • goa l of a sear•ll is to find the years wheu the asse•sscd value of
"improvements" (buildings) c hanged from 0 to ovl'r $'>00, en wh1·11 that figut·p rust.' hy $'>00 or mroe. Wri l t~ down every ye<H
and name you tr·y, inc luding the years wht•n you I iud nothiug . l>itto marks are I ine.
--.of I d I'll I i I i cat i ""I Bo 1111 d; 11 i t• s
'l't ill' I I B I c 11 k / Lot I
Date Page Name Acre::; N Bd y E Bd y S Bd y
-g !>.
;?.;;;;.. Cu .-r· .... ) 5c) ' 7·' ·?,~ /_.,.,. 1, T
( I K~=--'--"'-----
-------
----
w Bdy
7 ~
As::;essme111 f (Jt --..
Laud --
$
;;;&0
.
I
II
mprovt•
lt.'lll s
$
Other Info.
/tnttJals it ate
Page 373
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 374
JA/FLEET
CONLISK 4/22/25
119 HARDING AVENUE
LOS GATOS, CA 95030
project description
TO: TOWN OF LOS GATOS hpc
FROM: JAY PLETT ARCHITECT
description
RESTORE, REMODEL and ADD small addition TO A
PRE-1941 HOME LOCATED AT 119 HARDING AVe.
•the home is in general dis-repair
•Per Anne Bloomfield, the windows are not
original and are historically inaccurate.
Windows are failing of rot, bondo-ed to hold
together and fill holes, and are termite
infested (see attached photos and Bloomfield
report).
•the roofing has outlived its life
we propose to replace the failing existing non-
original windows with like sized new wood windows of
fiberglass or aluminum clad with stucco mould
matching a historically correct profile.
the front street view facade massing and roof
profile will remain unchanged - only the windows
and entry door will be replaced.
new roofing will be asphalt comp shingles, matching
the existing roofing.
the addition has been kept to the rear of house, not
visible from street, the plaster will match the
existing.
P R
O P
O S
A L
REST
ORE,
REM
ODE
L
and
ADD
TO A
PRE-
1941
HOM
E
LOC
ATED
AT
119
HAR
DING
AV.
- THE
HOM
E IS
IN
GENE
RAL
DIS-
REP
AIR
- THE
WIND
OWS
ARE
NOT
ORIG
INAL,
ARE
HIST
ORIC
ALLY
IN-
ACC
URAT
E,
ARE
FAILI
NG
OF
ROT
BEIN
G
BON
DO-
ED
TOGE
THER
TO
FILL
THE
HOLE
S.
- THE
ROO
FING
HAS
OUTLI
VED
ITS
LIFE
WE
PRO
POS
E TO
REP
LACE
THE
FAILI
NG
WIND
OWS
WITH
NEW
CLA
D
WOO
D
WIND
OWS
WITH
STUC
CO
MOUL
D
MAT
CHIN
G A
HIST
ORIC
ALLY
COR
RECT
PRO
FILE.
THE
FRO
NT
FAC
ADE
MAS
SING
and
ROO
F
PRO
FILE
WILL
REM
AIN
UNCH
ANG
ED -
ONLY
THE
WIND
OWS
AND
ENTR
Y
DOO
R
WILL
BE
REP
LACE
D.
NEW
ROO
FING
WILL
BE
ASP
HALT
COM
P
SHIN
GLES
,
MAT
CHIN
G
THE
EXIST
ING
ROO
FING.
THE
ADDI
TION
HAS
BEEN
KEP
T TO
THE
REA
R OF
HOUS
E,
NOT
VISIB
LE
FRO
M
STRE
ET,
THE
PLA
STER
WILL
MAT
CH
THE
EXIST
ING.
proposal
ATTACHMENT 3
Page 375
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 376
ATTACHMENT 4
Page 377
Page 378
Page 379
Page 380
Page 381
Page 382
Residential Design Guidelines 33
Town of Los Gatos BUILDING DESIGN3
3.8.3 Use traditional detailing
•Treat openings in walls as though they were constructed of
the traditional material for the style. For example, be sure to
provide substantial wall space above arches in stucco and
stone walls. Traditionally, wall space above the arch would
have been necessary to structurally span the opening, and
to make the space too small is inconsistent with the archi-
tectural style.
•Openings in walls faced with stone, real or synthetic, should
have defined lintels above the opening except in Mission or
Spanish Eclectic styles. Lintels may be stone, brick or wood
as suits the style of the house.
•Treat synthetic materials as though they were authentic.
For example, select synthetic stone patterns that place the
individual stones in a horizontal plane as they would have
been in a load bearing masonry wall.
•Select roof materials that are consistent with the traditional
architectural style (e.g., avoid concrete roof tiles on a Crafts-
man Style house.)
3.8.4 Materials changes
•Make materials and color changes at inside corners rather
than outside corners to avoid a pasted on look.
3.9 ADDITIONS/ACCESSORY BUILDINGS/SECONDARY
UNITS
•Site additions in the least conspicuous place. In many cases
this is a rear or side elevation - only rarely is it a rooftop.
•The existing built forms, components and materials should
be reinforced. Heights and proportions of additions and
alterations should be consistent with and continue the
original architectural style and design.
•Additions should be subordinate, and compatible in scale
and proportion to the historically significant portions of
the existing structure.
•When an addition or remodel requires the use of newly
constructed exterior elements, they should be identical in
size, dimension, shape and location as the original, and
Use stone or wood lintels over
openings in stone walls
Additions, accessory buildings and secondary
units should match the form, architectural
style, and details of the original house
ATTACHMENT 5
Page 383
Residential Design Guidelines34
Town of Los Gatos
BUILDING DESIGN3
should utilize the same materials as the existing protected
exterior elements.
•When an addition necessitates the removal of architectural
materials, such as siding, windows, doors, and decorative
elements, they should be carefully removed and reused in
the addition where possible.
•The introduction of window and door openings not char-
acteristic in proportion, scale, or style with the original
architecture is strongly discouraged (e.g., sliding windows or
doors in a structure characterized by double hung windows
and swinging doors).
•The character of any addition or alteration should be in
keeping with and subordinate to the integrity of the original
structure.
•The amount of foundation exposed on the addition should
match that of the original building.
•Do not add roof top additions where the roof is of historic
significance.
•Second floor additions are discouraged in neighborhoods
with largely one story homes. If horizontal expansion of
the house is not possible, consider incorporating a second
floor addition within the roof form as shown in the example
to the left.
•Second floor additions which are not embedded within the
roof form should be located to the rear of the structure.
•The height and proportion of an addition or a second story
should not dominate the original structure.
•Deck additions should be placed to the rear of the struc-
ture only, and should be subordinate in terms of scale and
detailing.
•New outbuildings, such as garages, should be clearly subor-
dinate to the main structure in massing, and should utilize
forms, materials and details which are similar to the main
structure.
•Garages should generally be located to the rear of the lot
behind the rear wall of the residence. One car wide access
driveways should be utilized.
Original structure
Addition incorporated into the roof
successfully adds space while respecting the
integrity of the existing house and the scale of
the neighborhood
Placing a two story addition to the rear can minimize its impact on the historic resource and the scale of the neighborhood
Page 384
Page 385
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 386
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: 05/28/2025
ITEM NO: 8
DATE: May 23, 2025
TO: Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider a Request for Preliminary Review to Construct a New Second-Story
Addition and Exterior Alterations to an Existing Non-Contributing Single-
Family Residence Located in the Almond Grove Historic District on Property
Zoned R-1D:LHP. Located at 310 Tait Avenue. APN 510-14-058. Exempt
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301: Existing Facilities. Request for
Review Application PHST-24-026. Property Owner: Santiago Allende.
Applicant: Donna Chivers. Project Planner: Erin Walters.
DISCUSSION:
On December 18, 2024, the Committee discussed the proposed second-story addition, provided
the following feedback, and requested that the applicant return to the Committee at a future
date (Attachment 1):
Take into account the roofing materials and low-pitched roof sections;
Consider adding architectural details to the side elevations;
Pay particular attention to the long pitch on the side elevation as it is not harmonious with
the rest of the design;
Study the neighborhood carefully, especially the two-story houses in the immediate
neighborhood, update this design to be more consistent with the neighborhood; and
Move the mass of the second floor to the back.
The applicant submitted revised plans and a letter summarizing their response to the
Committee’s direction (Attachment 2). The revised plans include the following modifications
(Attachment 3):
Redesigned roof is a combination of a 4:12 and 6:12 roof pitch which will accommodate
asphalt composition roofing shingles;
Retained the existing brick fireplace;
Matched new materials to existing materials;
Page 387
PAGE 2 OF 3
SUBJECT: 310 Tait Avenue/PHST-24-026
DATE: May 23, 2025
Added a wood scallop detail at the new gable ends to match the original detailing;
Eliminated the long pitch roof;
Redesigned the second-story addition to be consistent with the building height (23 feet,
three-inches), roof design, and exterior materials of the two-story homes in the immediate
neighborhood and with the architectural style of the existing home;
o The 25-foot-tall residence at 301 Almendra Drive features a gable end roofline with
shingle siding;
o The 30-foot-tall residence at 256 Bachman Avenue features a gable-end roofline and a
combination of shingle and horizontal siding for exterior material; and
Reduced the mass of the second story and increased the second story front setback to 15
feet from the property line.
CONSIDERATIONS:
A. Considerations
Sec. 29.80.290. Standards for review.
In evaluating applications, the deciding body shall consider the architectural style, design,
arrangement, texture, materials and color, and any other pertinent factors. Applications
shall not be granted unless:
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.
B. Residential Design Guidelines
Sections 3.9 of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines offers recommendations for
construction of additions to existing residences (Attachment 7 of Attachment 1, December
18, 2024, Historic Preservation Committee Staff Report).
CONCLUSION:
The applicant is requesting the Committee to provide preliminary feedback on the first- and
second-story additions with exterior modifications (Attachment 3). A new second-story
addition, if not triggering a technical demolition, will be processed as an Architecture and Site
application. This application would return to the Committee for a formal recommendation to
the deciding body.
Page 388
PAGE 3 OF 3
SUBJECT: 310 Tait Avenue/PHST-24-026
DATE: May 23, 2025
ATTACHMENTS:
1. December 18, 2024, Historic Preservation Committee Staff Report
2. Response Letter
3. Revised Development Plans
Page 389
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 390
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
ǣͳʹȀͳͺȀʹͲʹͶ
ǣ
DATE: December 13, 2024
TO: Historic Preservation Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Requesting Preliminary Review for Construction of a New Second-Story
Addition and Exterior Alterations to an Existing Non-Contributing Single-
Family Residence Located in the Almond Grove Historic District on Property
Zoned R-1D:LHP. Located at 310 Tait Avenue. APN 510-14-058. Exempt
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301: Existing Facilities. Request for
Review Application PHST-24-026. Property Owner: Santiago Allende.
Applicant: Donna Chivers. Project Planner: Erin Walters.
RECOMMENDATION:
Requesting preliminary review for construction of a new second-story addition and exterior
alterations to an existing non-contributing single-family residence located in the Almond Grove
Historic District on property zoned R-1D:LHP located at 310 Tait Avenue.
PROPERTY DETAILS:
1.Date primary structure was built: 1918 per County Assessor’s Database
2.Town of Los Gatos Historic Status Code: N/A
3.Does property have an LHP Overlay? Yes
4.Is structure in a historic district? Yes, Almond Grove Historic District
5.If yes, is it a contributor? No
6.Findings required? No
7.Considerations required? Yes
BACKGROUND:
The Santa Clara County’s Accessors Database lists a construction date of 1918 for the residence.
According to the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, the 1908 and 1928 map shows the property
ATTACHMENT 1Page 391
2 Ͷ
ǣ ͵ͳͲȀ ǦʹͶǦͲʹ
ǣ ͳ͵ǡʹͲʹͶ
before it was subdivided and an accessory structure shown approximately in the footprint of
the subject residence. The footprint on the July 1944 and 1956 maps shows the house in its
current configuration located on a larger property, prior a lot split (Attachment 1).
The property is not included 1991 Anne Bloomfield Historic Survey. Town records show a
building permit for replacement of windows to match the existing aesthetics and originality of
the home and a reroof in 2007 (Attachment 2). The applicant provided a summary of the
property research (Attachment 3), as well as photographs of the property (Attachment 4).
DISCUSSION:
The subject property at 310 Tait Avenue is located on the east side of Tait Avenue, between
Bachman Avenue and Almendra Avenue. The applicant is requesting a preliminary review by
the Committee to provide feedback on a proposed first floor addition, and a new second-story
addition to the existing one-story house. The applicant provided a scope of work (Attachment
5).
The project proposes an internal remodel of the house, and a 256-square foot one-story
addition to the front and rear of the house. The project also proposes a new 730-square foot
second-story addition to the residence (Attachment 6).
The existing one-story cottage style house is approximately 12 feet, six inches in height with hip
roof. The existing house has a mix of tongue and groove vertical wood siding and horizontal lap
wood siding. The gable roof ends have wood scalloped vertical siding. The front elevation has
brick wainscoting that matches the brick chimney on the south elevation. The front door is a
wood decorative cottage style door. The existing windows are white vinyl with wood trim and
wood decorative shutters at the front elevation. The existing roof is asphalt composition
shingle.
The proposed residence would be 25 feet, one inches in height and would install exterior siding
to match the existing siding. The new roof would be composition shingle and introduces two
new bay windows at the front elevation. The existing windows would be replaced throughout
the home with a variety of window styles and shapes.
The existing brick chimney is proposed to be removed. The front elevation would retain the
brick wainscoting and introduces a new wood front door with sidelights. The proposed project
includes a proposed rear deck with wood railings.
The proposed project has not been evaluated to determine if it would fall below the Town’s
demolition thresholds for historic residences.
Page 392
3 Ͷ
ǣ ͵ͳͲȀ ǦʹͶǦͲʹ
ǣ ͳ͵ǡʹͲʹͶ
Town’s Residential Design Guidelines
The Committee should consider Section 3.9 of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines, which
provides recommendations for construction of additions to existing residences (Attachment 7).
Including but not limited to the following recommendations:
x The existing built forms, components and materials should be reinforced. Heights and
proportions of additions and alterations should be consistent with and continue the original
architectural style and design.
x Additions should be subordinate, and compatible in scale and proportion to the historically
significant portions of the existing structure.
x When an addition or remodel requires the use of newly constructed exterior elements, they
should be identical in size, dimension, shape, and location as the original, and should utilize
the same materials as the existing protected exterior elements.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant is requesting preliminary review for construction of a new second-story addition
and exterior alterations an existing non-contributing single-family residence located at 310 Tait
Avenue. A new second-story addition, if not triggering a technical demolition, is processed
under a Minor Residential Development application. This application would return to the
Committee for a recommendation to be forwarded to the Community Development Director
and the application would continue through the Minor Residential Development process.
CONSIDERATIONS:
A. Considerations
Sec. 29.80.290. Standards for review.
In evaluating applications, the deciding body shall consider the architectural style, design,
arrangement, texture, materials and color, and any other pertinent factors. Applications
shall not be granted unless:
In historic districts, the proposed work will neither adversely affect the exterior
architectural characteristics or other features of the property which is the subject of
the application, nor adversely affect its relationship, in terms of harmony and
appropriateness, with its surroundings, including neighboring structures, nor adversely
affect the character, or the historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value of the
district.
B. Residential Design Guidelines
Section 3.9 of the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines offers recommendations for
Page 393
4 Ͷ
ǣ ͵ͳͲȀ ǦʹͶǦͲʹ
ǣ ͳ͵ǡʹͲʹͶ
construction of additions to existing residences (Attachment 5).
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps
2. Permit Records
3. Property Research
4. Photographs
5. Request Letter from Applicant
6. Project Plans
7. Section 3.9, Residential Design Guidelines
Page 394
Sanborn Map
1908
Location of subject property
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 395
Sanborn Map
1928
Location of subject property
Page 396
Sanborn Map
March 1928- July 1944
Location of subject residence
Page 397
Sanborn Map
1956
Location of subject residence
Page 398
Page 399
Page 400
Page 401
Page 402
pp18Fdp"j> p
,Wbp(8dWbp%"p p
".- p
p
&>8\p)GbdW]F<8Op.]>b>\j8cJWUp0W<G>dmp
/>b>8\<Dpk8bp<WU=f<d>=pAX^pp28Gdp"j> pfbFUCpdD>p\>bWg^<>bpGU=G<8d>=pHUpdD>p
8YZOG<8dGWU p #>PWkp8\>pdD>p@GU=GUCb!p
.8c\WUbp+U[fF]F>bp9FV=>\pGU=G<8d>=pcD8dpdD>pO8bdp\>[f>bdp@W\pGUBX]T8eHWUpWUp
18Fdp"j>pk8nbp<WTZO>d>=pGUp
-WpZDWdWbpW@pDWfb>p@WgU=pFUp />bG=>U<>bp=\8k>\bpWApdD>p7>`G<8Op'GP>
3E>pDWgb>pIbpUWdpWUpcD>p$>OO\FUC>\bpQGbd
1D>pDWfb>pGbpUWdpOJbd>=pGUpdD>p*KbdW^J<p*WT>bp1Wf]b
4D>p p18lp"bb>bbT>Udp0f^j>mpbhCC>bdbpdD8dpdD>pDWfb>pT8mpD8j>p:>>Up9iGOc
JUp
1D>p08U9W\UpT8ZbpbDWkpLU<WUbJbd>Ucpbi;=GjGbGWUbpbc^g<df]>bp8U=pQW<8dGWUpWA
bd_f<df\>bpWj>]pdD>pm>8\b
5D>p.WRMbp&G\><dW\G>bp=J=pUWdp\>j>8Rp8UmpUWd8:O>pHU=GjF=g8ObpkDWpOGj>=p8dp
68Kdp"j>
.O>8b>pO>dpT>pNUWkpF@pmWgpU>>=p8Ump @faD>\pJU@X\T8dGWUp
/>C8\=b p
op
08UdJ8CWp"PS?U=>p
dd,D Edϯ
Page 403
Page 404
ATTACHMENT 4
Page 405
7KLV3DJH
,QWHQWLRQDOO\
/HIW%ODQN
Page 406
1
Donna Chivers
4716 Bryce Cir.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
510-714-8309
donnachivers@gmail.com
December 13, 2024
Community Development Department
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos CA 95030
Re: Scope of Work for the Proposed Addition and Remodel at 310 Tait Ave.
Dear Town of Los Gatos,
We are proposing to expand the existing footprint by 256 s.f. and build a new 730 s.f. upper level
addition. The entire interior will be remodeled and the existing roof will be removed and replaced to
build the upper level. Additional scope of work includes:
Install new and replacement windows
Install new flooring throughout
Install cabinets, counters, plumbing fixtures and appliances
Paint interior
Install exterior siding to match existing siding
Install elextrical fixtures, outlets and switches
Insulate per Title 24 requiremens
Install new HVAC and Water Heater per Title 24 requirements
Please feel free to contact me at any time with questions.
Regards,
Donna Chivers
g,
dd,D EdϱPage 407
7KLV3DJH
,QWHQWLRQDOO\
/HIW%ODQN
Page 408
6&$/('$7('5$:1%<REVISIONSBY7$,7$9(/26*$726&$ $31 SHEET'211$&+,9(56''(6,*16//&%5<&(&,5&$5/6%$'&$ GRQQDFKLYHUV#JPDLOFRPZZZGGHVLJQFRP'(6,*1&2168/7$17&/,(1710/28/20243:40:26 PM$Author&29(56+((77$,7$9(/26*$726$//3(50,76(;&((',1*,19$/8$7,216+$//5(48,5(,167$//$7,212)$33529('602.($1'&$5%210212;,'('(7(&7256:,7+,17+(':(//,1*$//3(50,76(;&((',1*,19$/8$7,216+$//5(48,5(7+(,167$//$7,212)$1$33529('$8720$7,&*$66+872))'(9,&(217+(&86720(52:1('3,3,1*$77+(87,/,7<0(7(5%8,/',1*$''5(66180%(560867%($0,1,0802),1&+(6,1+(,*+725,1&+(6,1+(,*+7$1'6(/),//80,1$7('3(57+(*5((1%8,/',1*67$1'$5'6&2'(7+(&216758&7,21$1''(02/,7,2125',1$1&( & ' $33/,(675866&$/&8/$7,21672%($'()(55('68%0,77$/*$6/,1(',$*5$072%($'()(55('68%0,77$/2:1(5(1*,1((5,1'(;2)'5$:,1*6$&29(56+((7$6,7(3/$1$(;,67,1*)/2253/$1$1''(023/$1$(;,67,1*522)3/$1$1(:)/2253/$1$1'6&+('8/(6$1(:(/(9$7,216$522)3/$1$6(&7,216$*(1(5$/127(6*&$5(6,'(17,$/*5((1%8,/',1*&2'(6+((7*&$5(6,'(17,$/*5((1%8,/',1*&2'(6+((777,7/($'877,7/($'870$1'$725<0($685(6$'877,7/($'877,7/($'870$1'$725<0($685(6$'8((/(&75,&$/3/$1((/(&75,&$/127(6&2175$&725,65(63216,%/()259(5,)<,1*$//6,7($1'),(/'&21',7,21635,2572$1''85,1*&216758&7,21:,1'2:'225$1'&$%,1(7',0(16,2160867%(9,)%<&2175$&725,167$//(525)$%5,&$72535,257225'(5,1*$1<',6&5(3$1&<)281'%(7:((13/$16$1'$&78$/),(/'&21',7,210867%(%528*+7727+($77(17,212)''(6,*16$1'7+(6758&785$/(1*,1((5,192/9(',17+(352-(&7)$,/85(72'26292,'6''(6,*16$1'7+((1*,1((52)5(63216,%,/,7<72:25.3(5)250('%<&2175$&725''(6,*16,61275(63216,%/()25216,7(,163(&7,2172$6685(&203/,$1&(:,7+0$7(5,$/625:25.0$16+,363(&,),('+(5(,181/(66%<6(&21'$5<$*5((0(17'(6,*1(57,7/('211$&+,9(56%5<&(&,5&$5/6%$'&$ GRQQDFKLYHUV#JPDLOFRP7,7/(6800$5<6(()8//7,7/(5(3257)25$//5(48,5(0(176'$9,'+(16(/3(32%R[6$10$5&26&$ 6&23(2):25.3529,'(3523(5/<3/$&('%/2&.,1*$1'%$&.,1*,1$//%$7+52206$1'&/26(76)257+(3523(5,167$//$7,212)72:(/%$5672,/(73$3(5+2/'(566+(/9,1*$1'$1<:$//02817('),;785(25/,*+7%8,/'6)/2:(5/(9(/$'',7,213(53/$1%8,/'1(:6)833(5/(9(/$'',7,213(53/$1,167$//:,1'2:6$1''22563(53/$1,167$//)/225,1*3(5+20(2:1(5,167$//&$%,1(76&2817(563/80%,1*),;785(6$1'$33/,$1&(6,167$//7,/(,167$//*/$666+2:(5(1&/2685(7$3(7(;785($1'3$,17,17(5,25&2/257%'%<+20(2:1(5,167$//(;7(5,256,',1*&2/257%'%<+20(2:1(5,167$//(/(&75,&$/),;785(6287/(76$1'6:,7&+(63(5(/(&75,&$/3/$1,168/$7(3(57,7/(5(48,5(0(176,167$//+9$&$1':$7(5+($7(53(57,7/(5(48,5(0(1761.CONTRACTOR SHALL, AS PART OF THIS CONTRACT, FURNISH ALL INSURANCE REQUIRED BY THEOWNER AND FURNISH ALL MATERIAL, LABOR TRANSPORTATION AND EQUIPMENT AND PROPERLYINSTALL ALL WORK SPECIFIED HEREIN, SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS, OR REASONABLY IMPLIED TOCOMPLETE THE CONSTRUCTION. INCLUDED AS PART OF THE WORK OF THESE SECTIONS, NOTNECESSARILY LIMITED BY THEM, ARE THE FOLLOWING: ALL MATERIALS, LABOR, TOOLS ANDEQUIPMENT REQUIRED TO PROPERLY EXECUTE AND COMPLETE HIS WORK ACCORDING TO THEPLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINISHING OF HIS WORK IN THE MANNER ANDFORM PRESCRIBED BY THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. REPORT DISCREPANCIES OR ERRORSAND OMISSIONS IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE WORK PRIOR TO SUBMITTING BID.3.CONTRACTORS ARE TO PROTECT ALL PROPERTY AND THE WORK OF ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL,STATE AND NATIONAL CODES WHICH GOVERN THIS AREA.4.ALL CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION SHALL COMPLY ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE ANDNATIONAL CODES WHICH GOVERN THIS AREA.5.CONTRACTORS SHALL INDIVIDUALLY WARRENT FOR ONE YEAR ALL MATERIALS ANDWORKMANSHIP EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE AGREES. IN CASE OF CONCONFLICT, NOTES AND SPECIFICDETAILS ON DRAWINGS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THESE "GENERAL NOTES ANDSPECIFICATIONS" AND OVER TYPICAL DETAILS.6.WHERE NO CONSTRUCTION DETAILS ARE SHOWN OR NOTED FOR ANY PART OF THE WORK,DETAILS SHALL BE THE SAME AS FOR OTHER SIMILAR WORK.7.ITEMS SPECIFIED ON PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REPRESENT THE TYPE AND QUALITY REQUIRED.SUBCONTRACTORS MAY SUBSTITUTE "EQUAL" ITEMS IN THEIR BID WHEN APPROVED BY THEOWNER AND ARCHITECT.8.CONTRACTORS SHALL, UPON COMPLETION OF THIS WORK, CLEAN AND CLEAR THE AREA OF ALLDEBRIS OR ANY OTHER MATTER CAUSED BY HIS OPERATION.9.THE ARCHITECT WILL IN NO WAY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WAY IN WHICH FIELD WORK ISPERFORMED, SAFETY IN, ON OR AROUND THE JOBSITE, METHODS OF PERFORMANCE ORTIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK.10.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CAREFULLY STUDY AND COMPARE THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ANDSHALL AT ONCE REPORT TO THE ARCHITECT ANY DISCREPANCY OR OMISSION HE MAY DISCOVER.11.FENCES AND FREE STANDING MASONRY WALLS UP TO 36" IN HEIGHT DO NOT REQUIRE A BUILDINGPERMIT. ALL THOSE OVER 36" IN HEIGHT REQUIRED A SEPARATE BUILDING PERMIT.12.SIGNS REQUIRE A SEPARATE PERMIT.13.WHERE CONTINUOUS OR SPECIAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED BY THESE PLANS, A REGISTEREDDEPUTY INSPECTOR APPROVED BY AND RESPONSABLE TO THE ARCHITECT AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT SHALL BE EMPLOYED BY THE OWNER.14.SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS FOR DEFERRED SUBMITTAL ITEMS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THEREGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE, WHO SHALL REVIEW THEM ANDFORWARD THEM TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WITH A NOTATION INDICATINGTHAT THE DEFERREDSUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND THAT THEY HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE INGENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING. THE DEFERRED SUBMITTAL ITEMSSHALL NOT BE INSTALLED UNTIL THEIR DESIGN AND SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS HAVE BEENAPPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.15."PENETRATIONS OF FIRE-RESISTIVE WALLS, FLOOR-CEILINGS AND ROOF-CEILINGS SHALL BEPROTECTED AS REQUIRED IN CRC SECTION R302.4.16.THESE DRAWINGS SHOW ONLY REPRESENTATIVE ABD TYPICAL DETAILS TO ASSIST THECONTRACTOR. THE DRAWINGS DO NOT ILLUSTRATE EVERY CONDITION. ALL ATTACHMENTS,CONNECTIONS, FASTENINGS, ETC. SHALL BE PROPERLY SECURED IN CONFORMANCE WITH BESTPRACTICE, AND CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND INSTALLING THESAME. ALL SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS INCLUDED ON THESE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED TOINDICATE A PARTICULAR LEVEL OF QUALITY FOR THE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR AND ALLSUBCONTRACTORS SHALL INSTALL ALL MATERIALS AND SYSTEMS IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITHEACH SPECIFIC MANUFACTURERS INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS. ALL MANUFACTURERSRECOMMENDATIONS FOR MATERIAL INSTALLATION SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER ANY METHODIMPLIED IN THESE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.17.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TOCOMMENCING WORK AND NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF AN DISCREPANCIES.18.ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALE SHOWN ON DRAWINGS. DO NOT SCALEANY DRAWINGS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.19.THE BUILDING INSPECTOR WILL RECHECK FOR EXPANSIVE SOILS AND/OR GRADINGREQUIREMENTS AT THE FIRST INSPECTION20.THE CONTROL VALVES IN SHOWERS, TUB/SHOWERS, BATHTUBS, AND BIDETSMUST BE PRESSUREBALANCED OR THERMOSTATIC MIXING VALVES. CPC SECTIONS 408, 409, 410.1.COMPLIANCE WITH THE DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS OF THE 2022 ENERGYEFFICIENCY STANDARDS IS NECESSARY FOR THIS PROJECT. REGISTERED,SIGNED, AND DATED COPIES OF THE APPROPIATE CF1R, CF2R, AND CF3R FORMSSHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT NECESSARY INTERVALS FOR BUILDINGINSPECTOR REVIEW. FINAL COMPLETED FORMS WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR THEBUILDING OWNER.2.ALL PROPOSED BUILDING, STRUCTURES, ADDITIONS, MODIFICATIONS TOBUILDINGS/STRUCTURES MUST COMPLY WITH THE APPROVED LOCATION, ASSHOWN ON THE COUNTY APPROVED PLOT PLAN. AT THE DISCRETION OF THECOUNTY, THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PROOF OFCURRENT PLACEMENT OF EACH ON THE PARCEL. THIS WAY INCLUDE A STAMPEDAND SIGNED SETBACK CERITIFATE PREPARED BY A CALIFORNIA LICENSEDSURVEYOR OR CIVIL ENGENNER. (COUNTY BUILDING CODE 91.1.107.2).COMPLIANCE NOTESGENERAL NOTESALL WORK SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FOLLOWING AND ANY OTHER STATE AND LOCAL CODES HAVING JURISDICTION:ALL 2022 CALIFORNIA CODES2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE 2022 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARD CODE2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDSGOVERNING CODEPROJECT ADDRESS:310 TAIT AVE., LOS GATOS, CA 95030LOT SIZE: 2649 S.F.APN:510-14-058ZONING DESIGNATION:OVERLAY DESIGNATIONS:BASE FAR:OCCUPANCY GROUP:EXISTING USE:PROPOSED USE:SETBACKS:FRONT YARD SETBACK:INT.SIDE YARD SETBACK:EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK: REAR YARD SETBACK: MAX. ALLOWABLE HEIGHT:R1-D:LHPNONER-3/URESIDENTIALRESIDENTIALTBDTBDTBDTBD30'CONSTRUCTION TYPE:YEAR BUILT:EXISTING # OF STORIES:PROPOSED # OF STORIES:PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT:FIRE SPRINKLERS:FIRE ALARM:V-B19181225' -1"NONOSITE DATAZONING DATABUILDING DATAAREA CALCULATION VICINITY MAP7$,7$9(/26*$726&$ $31 (N) BUILDING AREA(E) LOWER LEVEL731 S.F.(N) LOWER LEVEL ADDTION256 S.F.(N) UPPER LEVEL ADDITION730 S.F.TOTAL BUILDING AREA1747 S.F.dd,D EdϲPage 409
Page 410
OHOHSD397.83TFS396.86FS397.85FNC/GATE399.53TBC399.03FC/DW399.04TBC398.60FC/DW390.46399.36BRK39916-TE399.15BRK399.26TFS398.54WALK399.24WLK/PVRS399.2321-TREE398.5824-TREE398.44TBC398.63TBC/BRK398.72WLK398.78TBC/BRICK398.82TBC/BRICK398.99WLK398.96WLK399.44CONCWALK397.86DI397.92DI399.31BW399.30BW399.39BW399.19BW399.28FW COR398.93BRK398.65COL COR398.48WLK398.54WLK398.59BW398.57WLK399.11SSCO399.20FNCEND399.08WLK398.73PVRS397.27FW COR399.33BW399.30BW396.93FW396.26CNC/DECK396.31CONCCOR396.38CONCCOR396.835-LEMON396.67RCKWALLG397.22G397.32FNC398.01FNCEND398.00SHEDCOR396.66RCKWALL396.26G396.12SHED396.12CONC/WDDECK398.74TW392.71G398.68TW397.51TW389.53G397.47TW392.47FW394.75TFW389.75G3913923973
9
7398 399399399390S 53°28'37" E 53.09' (B) (SE'LY 53.0')(C)N 53°28'37" W 53.09'(NW'LY 53.0' & PARALLEL)(C)S 36°28'16" W (B) 48.50' (SW'LY48.5')(C)N 36°28'16" E48.50'N 36°28'16" E 101.52'(NORTHEASTERLY 101.50')(C)WALKGRAVELWALLTURFBRICKPROCKWALLFENCE ON WALLWMCOLUMNFENCESTORM DRAINCHANNEL10"TREE0812164GRAPHIC SCALE 1 (/(9$7(''(&. ( 6+('72%(5(029('$1'5(%8,/7:,7+,13523(57</,1(6N727$/6,7($5($ 6) ( %8,/',1*$5($5(6,'(1&(6) 1 %8,/',1*$5($ ( /2:(5/(9(/6) 1 /2:(5/(9(/$''7,216) 1 833(5/(9(/$'',7,21 6)727$/%8,/',1*$5($6)
$5($2)833(5/(9(/$'',7,21$5($2)/2:(5/(9(/$'',7,21 ( 6+('72%(5(029('3523(57</,1('$6+('/,1(,1',&$7(1(:6+('/2&$7,2172)52173/
726,'(3/
72 1 6+('
',67)5201(:6+('723/
72'(&.
6&$/('$7('5$:1%<REVISIONSBY7$,7$9(/26*$726&$ $31 SHEET'211$&+,9(56''(6,*16//&%5<&(&,5&$5/6%$'&$ GRQQDFKLYHUV#JPDLOFRPZZZGGHVLJQFRP'(6,*1&2168/7$17&/,(1710/28/20243:41:21 PM1/4" = 1'-0"$Author6,7(3/$17$,7$9(/26*$7261/4" = 1'-0"1SITE PLANPage 411
0812164GRAPHIC SCALEN 5 ,1',&$7(6'2256:,1'2:672%(5(029(',1',&$7(6:$//672%(5(029(''(02127(6 5(029('2256$1':,1'2:6$6,1',&$7('5(029(:$//6$6,1',&$7('5(029(522)5(029(&$%,1(76&2817(563/80%,1*),;785(6$1'$33/,$1&(67+528*+2875(029(),5(3/$&($1'&+,01(<5(029($//+9$&$1':+81,765(029(%5,&.67$,56,1%$&.5(029((;7(5,250$7(5,$/67+528*+287 5(029(),5(3/$&($1'&+,01(<727$/6,7($5($ 6) ( %8,/',1*)22735,175(6,'(1&(6)/,9,1*522023(1%($09$8/7('&/*%('522023(1&/*%$7+',1,1*5220.,7&+(1/$81'5<:+
6+6+&/26(7CLOSET
6+6+6+
6+6+
)5,'*(SLOPE6+:5BENCH6+6+6+ 6+#
+'5:'SLOPE'1 6+#
+'5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6&$/('$7('5$:1%<REVISIONSBY7$,7$9(/26*$726&$ $31 SHEET'211$&+,9(56''(6,*16//&%5<&(&,5&$5/6%$'&$ GRQQDFKLYHUV#JPDLOFRPZZZGGHVLJQFRP'(6,*1&2168/7$17&/,(178/28/20246:25:59 AM1/4" = 1'-0"$Author(;,67,1*)/2253/$1$1''(023/$17$,7$9(/26*$726&$ 1/4" = 1'-0"1MAIN FLOORPage 412
Page 413
Page 414
Page 415
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 416
5HVLGHQWLDO'HVLJQ*XLGHOLQHV
7RZQRI/RV*DWRV %8,/',1*'(6,*1
8VHWUDGLWLRQDOGHWDLOLQJ
7UHDWRSHQLQJVLQZDOOVDVWKRXJKWKH\ZHUHFRQVWUXFWHGRI
WKHWUDGLWLRQDOPDWHULDOIRUWKHVW\OH)RUH[DPSOHEHVXUHWR
SURYLGHVXEVWDQWLDOZDOOVSDFHDERYHDUFKHVLQVWXFFRDQG
VWRQHZDOOV7UDGLWLRQDOO\ZDOOVSDFHDERYHWKHDUFKZRXOG
KDYHEHHQQHFHVVDU\WRVWUXFWXUDOO\VSDQWKHRSHQLQJDQG
WRPDNHWKHVSDFHWRRVPDOOLVLQFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKHDUFKL
WHFWXUDOVW\OH
2SHQLQJVLQZDOOVIDFHGZLWKVWRQHUHDORUV\QWKHWLFVKRXOG
KDYHGHÀQHGOLQWHOVDERYHWKHRSHQLQJH[FHSWLQ0LVVLRQRU
6SDQLVK(FOHFWLFVW\OHV/LQWHOVPD\EHVWRQHEULFNRUZRRG
DVVXLWVWKHVW\OHRIWKHKRXVH
7UHDWV\QWKHWLFPDWHULDOVDVWKRXJKWKH\ZHUHDXWKHQWLF
)RUH[DPSOHVHOHFWV\QWKHWLFVWRQHSDWWHUQVWKDWSODFHWKH
LQGLYLGXDOVWRQHVLQDKRUL]RQWDOSODQHDVWKH\ZRXOGKDYH
EHHQLQDORDGEHDULQJPDVRQU\ZDOO
6HOHFWURRIPDWHULDOVWKDWDUHFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKHWUDGLWLRQDO
DUFKLWHFWXUDOVW\OH HJDYRLGFRQFUHWHURRIWLOHVRQD&UDIWV
PDQ6W\OHKRXVH
0DWHULDOVFKDQJHV
0DNHPDWHULDOVDQGFRORUFKDQJHVDWLQVLGHFRUQHUVUDWKHU
WKDQRXWVLGHFRUQHUVWRDYRLGDSDVWHGRQORRN
$'',7,216$&&(6625<%8,/',1*66(&21'$5<
81,76
6LWHDGGLWLRQVLQWKHOHDVWFRQVSLFXRXVSODFH,QPDQ\FDVHV
WKLVLVDUHDURUVLGHHOHYDWLRQRQO\UDUHO\LVLWDURRIWRS
7KHH[LVWLQJEXLOWIRUPVFRPSRQHQWVDQGPDWHULDOVVKRXOG
EHUHLQIRUFHG+HLJKWVDQGSURSRUWLRQVRIDGGLWLRQVDQG
DOWHUDWLRQVVKRXOGEHFRQVLVWHQWZLWKDQGFRQWLQXHWKH
RULJLQDODUFKLWHFWXUDOVW\OHDQGGHVLJQ
$GGLWLRQVVKRXOGEHVXERUGLQDWHDQGFRPSDWLEOHLQVFDOH
DQGSURSRUWLRQWRWKHKLVWRULFDOO\VLJQLÀFDQWSRUWLRQVRI
WKHH[LVWLQJVWUXFWXUH
:KHQDQDGGLWLRQRUUHPRGHOUHTXLUHVWKHXVHRIQHZO\
FRQVWUXFWHGH[WHULRUHOHPHQWVWKH\VKRXOGEHLGHQWLFDOLQ
VL]HGLPHQVLRQVKDSHDQGORFDWLRQDVWKHRULJLQDODQG
8VHVWRQHRUZRRGOLQWHOVRYHU
RSHQLQJVLQVWRQHZDOOV
$GGLWLRQVDFFHVVRU\EXLOGLQJVDQGVHFRQGDU\
XQLWVVKRXOGPDWFKWKHIRUPDUFKLWHFWXUDO
VW\OHDQGGHWDLOVRIWKHRULJLQDOKRXVH
dd,D Edϳ
Page 417
5HVLGHQWLDO'HVLJQ*XLGHOLQHV
7RZQRI/RV*DWRV
%8,/',1*'(6,*1
VKRXOGXWLOL]HWKHVDPHPDWHULDOVDVWKHH[LVWLQJSURWHFWHG
H[WHULRUHOHPHQWV
:KHQDQDGGLWLRQQHFHVVLWDWHVWKHUHPRYDORIDUFKLWHFWXUDO
PDWHULDOVVXFKDVVLGLQJZLQGRZVGRRUVDQGGHFRUDWLYH
HOHPHQWVWKH\VKRXOGEHFDUHIXOO\UHPRYHGDQGUHXVHGLQ
WKHDGGLWLRQZKHUHSRVVLEOH
7KHLQWURGXFWLRQRIZLQGRZDQGGRRURSHQLQJVQRWFKDU
DFWHULVWLFLQSURSRUWLRQVFDOHRUVW\OHZLWKWKHRULJLQDO
DUFKLWHFWXUHLVVWURQJO\GLVFRXUDJHG HJVOLGLQJZLQGRZVRU
GRRUVLQDVWUXFWXUHFKDUDFWHUL]HGE\GRXEOHKXQJZLQGRZV
DQGVZLQJLQJGRRUV
7KHFKDUDFWHURIDQ\DGGLWLRQRUDOWHUDWLRQVKRXOGEHLQ
NHHSLQJZLWKDQGVXERUGLQDWHWRWKHLQWHJULW\RIWKHRULJLQDO
VWUXFWXUH
7KHDPRXQWRIIRXQGDWLRQH[SRVHGRQWKHDGGLWLRQVKRXOG
PDWFKWKDWRIWKHRULJLQDOEXLOGLQJ
'RQRWDGGURRIWRSDGGLWLRQVZKHUHWKHURRILVRIKLVWRULF
VLJQLÀFDQFH
6HFRQGÁRRUDGGLWLRQVDUHGLVFRXUDJHGLQQHLJKERUKRRGV
ZLWKODUJHO\RQHVWRU\KRPHV,IKRUL]RQWDOH[SDQVLRQRI
WKHKRXVHLVQRWSRVVLEOHFRQVLGHULQFRUSRUDWLQJDVHFRQG
ÁRRUDGGLWLRQZLWKLQWKHURRIIRUPDVVKRZQLQWKHH[DPSOH
WRWKHOHIW
6HFRQGÁRRUDGGLWLRQVZKLFKDUHQRWHPEHGGHGZLWKLQWKH
URRIIRUPVKRXOGEHORFDWHGWRWKHUHDURIWKHVWUXFWXUH
7KHKHLJKWDQGSURSRUWLRQRIDQDGGLWLRQRUDVHFRQGVWRU\
VKRXOGQRWGRPLQDWHWKHRULJLQDOVWUXFWXUH
'HFNDGGLWLRQVVKRXOGEHSODFHGWRWKHUHDURIWKHVWUXF
WXUHRQO\DQGVKRXOGEHVXERUGLQDWHLQWHUPVRIVFDOHDQG
GHWDLOLQJ
1HZRXWEXLOGLQJVVXFKDVJDUDJHVVKRXOGEHFOHDUO\VXERU
GLQDWHWRWKHPDLQVWUXFWXUHLQPDVVLQJDQGVKRXOGXWLOL]H
IRUPVPDWHULDOVDQGGHWDLOVZKLFKDUHVLPLODUWRWKHPDLQ
VWUXFWXUH
*DUDJHVVKRXOGJHQHUDOO\EHORFDWHGWRWKHUHDURIWKHORW
EHKLQGWKHUHDUZDOORIWKHUHVLGHQFH2QHFDUZLGHDFFHVV
GULYHZD\VVKRXOGEHXWLOL]HG
2ULJLQDOVWUXFWXUH
$GGLWLRQLQFRUSRUDWHGLQWRWKHURRI
VXFFHVVIXOO\DGGVVSDFHZKLOHUHVSHFWLQJWKH
LQWHJULW\RIWKHH[LVWLQJKRXVHDQGWKHVFDOHRI
WKHQHLJKERUKRRG
3ODFLQJDWZRVWRU\DGGLWLRQWRWKHUHDUFDQPLQLPL]HLWVLPSDFWRQWKHKLVWRULFUHVRXUFHDQGWKHVFDOHRIWKHQHLJKERUKRRG
Page 418
1
Donna Chivers 4716 Bryce Cir. Carlsbad, CA 92008 510-714-8309donnachivers@gmail.com
May 2, 2025
Town of Los Gatos Community Planning Department 110 E. Main St.
Los Gatos, Ca 95030
Re: Response to HPC Comments dated 12-19-2024
Dear Los Gatos Historic Preservation Committee,
Per your comments, the addition and remodel at 310 Tait Ave. has been thoughtfully redesigned to maintain the look and feel of the original home and minimize the massing of the new upper level. Please see below for details addressing comments:
1.The redesigned roof is a combination of a 4:12 and 6:12 roof pitch which will accommodate asphaltcomp. roofing shingles.2.The existing exterior materials will remain intact (including the brick fireplace) and the new materialswill match in size and type. A wood scallop detail has also been added in the gable ends to carry the
original design into the new areas.
3. The long pitch roof has been eliminated4.The proposed building height of 24’ 3”, roof design, and exterior materials is consistent with the 2-storyhouses in the immediate neighborhood and with the original design of the existing home:a.The home at 301 Almendra Dr. features a gable end roofline with shingle siding and sits roughly
25’ in total height above street level
b. The home at 256 Bachman Ave. features a gable end roofline and a combination of shingle andhorizontal siding for exterior materials. The building sits roughly 30’ in total height above streetlevel.5. The mass of the second story has been reduced and moved back such that the front wall of the upper
level is 15’ from the front property line.
Please feel free to contact me at any time with questions.
Regards,
Donna Chivers
510-714-8309
ATTACHMENT 2Page 419
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 420
SCALEDATEDRAWN BYREVISIONSBY310 TAIT AVE.LOS GATOS, CA 95030APN: 510-14-058SHEETDONNA CHIVERSD3 DESIGNS, LLC4716 BRYCE CIR.CARLSBAD, CA 92008510-714-8309donnachivers@gmail.comwww.d-3-design.comDESIGN CONSULTANTCLIENT3/5/20255:58:04 PMA0.0AuthorCOVER SHEET310 TAIT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA95030ALL PERMITS EXCEEDING $1,000 IN VALUATION SHALL REQUIRE INSTALLATION OF APPROVED SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTORS WITHIN THE DWELLING.ALL PERMITS EXCEEDING $10,000 IN VALUATION SHALL REQUIRE THE INSTALLATION OF AN APPROVED AUTOMATIC GAS SHUT-OFF DEVICE ON THE CUSTOMER OWNED PIPING AT THE UTILITY METER.BUILDING ADDRESS NUMBERS MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 4 INCHES IN HEIGHT OR 3 INCHES IN HEIGHT AND SELF-ILLUMINATED.PER THE GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, THE CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION ORDINANCE (C & D) APPLIESTRUSS CALCULATIONS TO BE A DEFERRED SUBMITTALGAS LINE DIAGRAM TO BE A DEFERRED SUBMITTALOWNERENGINEERINDEX OF DRAWINGSA0.0COVER SHEETA1.0SITE PLANA1.1DEMO CALCULATIONSA2.0EXISTING FLOOR PLAN AND DEMO PLANA2.1EXISTING ROOF PLANA3.0NEW FLOOR PLAN AND SCHEDULESA3.1NEW ELEVATIONSA3.2ROOF PLANA3.3SECTIONSA3.4GENERAL NOTESG1CA RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING CODE SHEET 1G2CA RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING CODE SHEET 2T24-1TITLE 24 -ADU1T24-2TITLE 24 -ADU 1T24-3MANDATORY MEASURES -ADU 1T24-4TITLE 24 -ADU 2T24-5TITLE 24 -ADU 2T24-6MANDATORY MEASURES -ADU 2E1.0ELECTRICAL PLANE1.1ELECTRICAL NOTESCONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING ALL SITE AND FIELD CONDITIONS PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION. WINDOW, DOOR AND CABINET DIMENSIONS MUST BE VIF BY CONTRACTOR, INSTALLER OR FABRICATOR PRIOR TO ORDERING. ANY DISCREPANCY FOUND BETWEEN PLANS AND ACTUAL FIELD CONDITION MUST BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF D3 DESIGNS AND THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT. FAILURE TO DO SO VOIDS D3 DESIGNS AND THE ENGINEER OF RESPONSIBILITY TO WORK PERFORMED BY CONTRACTOR. D3 DESIGNS IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ON SITE INSPECTION TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH MATERIALS OR WORKMANSHIP SPECIFIED HEREIN, UNLESS BY SECONDARY AGREEMENT.DESIGNERTITLE 24DONNA CHIVERS4716 BRYCE CIR.CARLSBAD, CA 92008510-714-8309donnachivers@gmail.comTITLE 24 SUMMARYSEE FULL TITLE 24 REPORT FOR ALL REQUIREMENTSDAVID HENSEL, PEP.O. Box 1442SAN MARCOS, CA 92079(619) 665-3259SCOPE OF WORKPROVIDE PROPERLY PLACED BLOCKING AND BACKING IN ALL BATHROOMS AND CLOSETS FOR THE PROPER INSTALLATION OF TOWEL BARS, TOILET PAPER HOLDERS, SHELVING AND ANY WALL MOUNTED FIXTURE OR LIGHT.BUILD 301 S.F. LOWER LEVEL ADDITION PER PLANBUILD NEW 415 S.F. UPPER LEVEL ADDITION PER PLANINSTALL WINDOWS, DOORS AND SKYLIGHTS PER PLANINSTALL FLOORING PER HOMEOWNERINSTALL CABINETS, COUNTERS, PLUMBING FIXTURES AND APPLIANCESINSTALL TILEINSTALL GLASS SHOWER ENCLOSURETAPE, TEXTURE AND PAINT INTERIOR. COLOR TBD BY HOMEOWNERINSTALL EXTERIOR SIDING. COLOR TBD BY HOMEOWNERINSTALL ELECTRICAL FIXTURES, OUTLETS AND SWITCHES PER ELECTRICAL PLANINSULATE PER TITLE 24 REQUIREMENTSINSTALL HVAC AND WATER HEATER PER TITLE 24 REQUIREMENTS1.CONTRACTOR SHALL, AS PART OF THIS CONTRACT, FURNISH ALL INSURANCE REQUIRED BY THEOWNER AND FURNISH ALL MATERIAL, LABOR TRANSPORTATION AND EQUIPMENT AND PROPERLYINSTALL ALL WORK SPECIFIED HEREIN, SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS, OR REASONABLY IMPLIED TOCOMPLETE THE CONSTRUCTION. INCLUDED AS PART OF THE WORK OF THESE SECTIONS, NOTNECESSARILY LIMITED BY THEM, ARE THE FOLLOWING: ALL MATERIALS, LABOR, TOOLS ANDEQUIPMENT REQUIRED TO PROPERLY EXECUTE AND COMPLETE HIS WORK ACCORDING TO THEPLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINISHING OF HIS WORK IN THE MANNER ANDFORM PRESCRIBED BY THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. REPORT DISCREPANCIES OR ERRORSAND OMISSIONS IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE WORK PRIOR TO SUBMITTING BID.3.CONTRACTORS ARE TO PROTECT ALL PROPERTY AND THE WORK OF ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL,STATE AND NATIONAL CODES WHICH GOVERN THIS AREA.4.ALL CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION SHALL COMPLY ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE ANDNATIONAL CODES WHICH GOVERN THIS AREA.5.CONTRACTORS SHALL INDIVIDUALLY WARRENT FOR ONE YEAR ALL MATERIALS ANDWORKMANSHIP EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE AGREES. IN CASE OF CONCONFLICT, NOTES AND SPECIFICDETAILS ON DRAWINGS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THESE "GENERAL NOTES ANDSPECIFICATIONS" AND OVER TYPICAL DETAILS.6.WHERE NO CONSTRUCTION DETAILS ARE SHOWN OR NOTED FOR ANY PART OF THE WORK,DETAILS SHALL BE THE SAME AS FOR OTHER SIMILAR WORK.7.ITEMS SPECIFIED ON PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REPRESENT THE TYPE AND QUALITY REQUIRED.SUBCONTRACTORS MAY SUBSTITUTE "EQUAL" ITEMS IN THEIR BID WHEN APPROVED BY THEOWNER AND ARCHITECT.8.CONTRACTORS SHALL, UPON COMPLETION OF THIS WORK, CLEAN AND CLEAR THE AREA OF ALLDEBRIS OR ANY OTHER MATTER CAUSED BY HIS OPERATION.9.THE ARCHITECT WILL IN NO WAY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WAY IN WHICH FIELD WORK ISPERFORMED, SAFETY IN, ON OR AROUND THE JOBSITE, METHODS OF PERFORMANCE ORTIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK.10.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CAREFULLY STUDY AND COMPARE THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ANDSHALL AT ONCE REPORT TO THE ARCHITECT ANY DISCREPANCY OR OMISSION HE MAY DISCOVER.11.FENCES AND FREE STANDING MASONRY WALLS UP TO 36" IN HEIGHT DO NOT REQUIRE A BUILDINGPERMIT. ALL THOSE OVER 36" IN HEIGHT REQUIRED A SEPARATE BUILDING PERMIT.12.SIGNS REQUIRE A SEPARATE PERMIT.13.WHERE CONTINUOUS OR SPECIAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED BY THESE PLANS, A REGISTEREDDEPUTY INSPECTOR APPROVED BY AND RESPONSABLE TO THE ARCHITECT AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT SHALL BE EMPLOYED BY THE OWNER.14.SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS FOR DEFERRED SUBMITTAL ITEMS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THEREGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE, WHO SHALL REVIEW THEM ANDFORWARD THEM TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WITH A NOTATION INDICATINGTHAT THE DEFERREDSUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND THAT THEY HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE INGENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING. THE DEFERRED SUBMITTAL ITEMSSHALL NOT BE INSTALLED UNTIL THEIR DESIGN AND SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS HAVE BEENAPPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.15."PENETRATIONS OF FIRE-RESISTIVE WALLS, FLOOR-CEILINGS AND ROOF-CEILINGS SHALL BE PROTECTED AS REQUIRED IN CRC SECTION R302.4.16.THESE DRAWINGS SHOW ONLY REPRESENTATIVE ABD TYPICAL DETAILS TO ASSIST THECONTRACTOR. THE DRAWINGS DO NOT ILLUSTRATE EVERY CONDITION. ALL ATTACHMENTS,CONNECTIONS, FASTENINGS, ETC. SHALL BE PROPERLY SECURED IN CONFORMANCE WITH BESTPRACTICE, AND CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND INSTALLING THESAME. ALL SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS INCLUDED ON THESE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED TOINDICATE A PARTICULAR LEVEL OF QUALITY FOR THE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR AND ALLSUBCONTRACTORS SHALL INSTALL ALL MATERIALS AND SYSTEMS IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITHEACH SPECIFIC MANUFACTURERS INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS. ALL MANUFACTURERSRECOMMENDATIONS FOR MATERIAL INSTALLATION SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER ANY METHODIMPLIED IN THESE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.17.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TOCOMMENCING WORK AND NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF AN DISCREPANCIES.18.ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALE SHOWN ON DRAWINGS. DO NOT SCALEANY DRAWINGS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.19.THE BUILDING INSPECTOR WILL RECHECK FOR EXPANSIVE SOILS AND/OR GRADINGREQUIREMENTS AT THE FIRST INSPECTION20.THE CONTROL VALVES IN SHOWERS, TUB/SHOWERS, BATHTUBS, AND BIDETSMUST BE PRESSUREBALANCED OR THERMOSTATIC MIXING VALVES. CPC SECTIONS 408, 409, 410.1.COMPLIANCE WITH THE DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS OF THE 2022 ENERGYEFFICIENCY STANDARDS IS NECESSARY FOR THIS PROJECT. REGISTERED,SIGNED, AND DATED COPIES OF THE APPROPIATE CF1R, CF2R, AND CF3R FORMSSHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT NECESSARY INTERVALS FOR BUILDINGINSPECTOR REVIEW. FINAL COMPLETED FORMS WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR THEBUILDING OWNER.2.ALL PROPOSED BUILDING, STRUCTURES, ADDITIONS, MODIFICATIONS TOBUILDINGS/STRUCTURES MUST COMPLY WITH THE APPROVED LOCATION, ASSHOWN ON THE COUNTY APPROVED PLOT PLAN. AT THE DISCRETION OF THECOUNTY, THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PROOF OFCURRENT PLACEMENT OF EACH ON THE PARCEL. THIS WAY INCLUDE A STAMPEDAND SIGNED SETBACK CERITIFATE PREPARED BY A CALIFORNIA LICENSEDSURVEYOR OR CIVIL ENGENNER. (COUNTY BUILDING CODE 91.1.107.2).COMPLIANCE NOTESGENERAL NOTESALL WORK SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FOLLOWING AND ANY OTHER STATE AND LOCAL CODES HAVING JURISDICTION:ALL 2022 CALIFORNIA CODES2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE 2022 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARD CODE2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDSGOVERNING CODEPROJECT ADDRESS:310 TAIT AVE., LOS GATOS, CA 95030LOT SIZE: 2649 S.F.APN:510-14-058ZONING DESIGNATION:OVERLAY DESIGNATIONS:BASE FAR:OCCUPANCY GROUP:EXISTING USE:PROPOSED USE:SETBACKS:FRONT YARD SETBACK:SIDE YARD SETBACK: REAR YARD SETBACK: MAX. ALLOWABLE HEIGHT:R1-D:LHPNONER-3/URESIDENTIALRESIDENTIAL15'5'20'30'CONSTRUCTION TYPE:YEAR BUILT:EXISTING # OF STORIES:PROPOSED # OF STORIES:PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT:FIRE SPRINKLERS:FIRE ALARM:V-B19181224' -3"NONOSITE DATAZONING DATABUILDING DATAAREA CALCULATION VICINITY MAP310 TAIT AVE.LOS GATOS, CA 95030APN: 510-14-058(N) BUILDING AREA(N) LOWER LEVEL 662 S.F.(N) UPPER LEVEL 415 S.F.(N) ADU 370 S.F.TOTAL1447 S.F.ATTACHMENT 3Page 421
OHOHOHOHSD399.53TBC399.03FC/DW399.04TBC398.60FC/DW390.46INV400.06CL399.10CL399.39CL399.36BRK399.4116-TREE399.15BRK399.26TFS398.54WALK399.24WLK/PVRS399.2321-TREE398.5824-TREE398.44TBC398.63TBC/BRK398.72WLK398.78TBC/BRICK398.82TBC/BRICK398.99WLK398.96WLK399.44CONC WALK397.86DI397.92DI399.31BW399.30BW399.39BW399.19BW399.28FW COR398.93BRK398.65COL COR398.48WLK398.54WLK398.59BW39857WLK399.11SSCO399.20FNC END399.08WLK398.73PVRS399.56BW399.41BW399.33BW399.30BW396.45BW396.26CNC/DECK396.31CONC COR396.38CONC COR396.48G398.85TFS396.48FS397.22G397.32398.01FNC END398.00SHED COR396.66RCK WALL396.26CNC/DECK396.26G396.12SHED396.12CONC/WD DECK398.74TW392.71G398.68TW397.51TW389.53G397.47TW39247FW394.75TFW389.75G391392398399399399399390S 53°28'37" E 53.09' (B) (SE'LY 53.0')(C)N 53°28'37" W 53.09'(NW'LY 53.0' & PARALLEL)(C)S 36°28'16" W (B) 48.50' (SW'LY48.5')(C)N 36°28'16" E48.50'N 36°28'16" E 101.52'(NORTHEASTERLY 101.50')(C)N 36°28'16" E 360.67'WALKPGRAVELCONCWALLPTURFBRICKPROCKWALLFENCE OWVWMCOLUMNPORTION OFLOT 9 G-M-35FENCESTORM DRAINCHANNEL10"TREEDN(N) ADU(N) DECK(E) SINGLE STORY HOUSE(N) UPPER LEVELADDITION(E) SHEDTO BE REMOVED(E) SHED TOBE REMOVEDTAIT AVE. 65'TO PL15' - 0"TO PL5' - 0"TO PL20' - 0"BRICK STEPSTO BE REMOVED(E) CHIMNEY0812164GRAPHIC SCALENTOTAL SITE AREA2649/2575S.F.(E) BUILDING AREARESIDENCE 731 S.F.(N) BUILDING AREA(N) LOWER LEVEL 662 S.F.(N) UPPER LEVEL 415 S.F.(N) ADU 370 S.F.TOTAL1447 S.F.SCALEDATEDRAWN BYREVISIONSBY310 TAIT AVE.LOS GATOS, CA 95030APN: 510-14-058SHEETDONNA CHIVERSD3 DESIGNS, LLC4716 BRYCE CIR.CARLSBAD, CA 92008510-714-8309donnachivers@gmail.comwww.d-3-design.comDESIGN CONSULTANTCLIENT3/5/20255:59:57 PM1/4" = 1'-0"A1.0AuthorSITE PLAN310 TAIT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA950301/4" = 1'-0"1SITE PLANPage 422
Page 423
0812164GRAPHIC SCALEN(R)INDICATES DOORS/WINDOWS TO BE REMOVEDINDICATES WALLS TO BE REMOVEDDEMO NOTES:1. REMOVE DOORS AND WINDOWS AS INDICATED2. REMOVE WALLS AS INDICATED3. REMOVE ROOF 4. REMOVE CABINETS, COUNTERS, PLUMBING FIXTURES AND APPLIANCESTHROUGHOUT5. REMOVE FIREPLACE AND CHIMNEY6. REMOVE ALL HVAC AND WH UNITS7. REMOVE BRICK STAIRS IN BACK8. REMOVE EXTERIOR MATERIALS THROUGHOUT9. REMOVE FIREPLACE AND CHIMNEYTOTAL SITE AREA2649/2575S.F.(E) BUILDING FOOTPRINTRESIDENCE 731S.F.LIVING ROOMOPEN BEAMVAULTED CLGBEDROOM 1OPEN CLGBATHDININGROOMKITCHENLAUNDRYW/H10' - 4"7' - 11"21' - 2"12' - 7"13' - 8"5' - 4"8' - 0"12' - 3"2640 SH2640 SHCLOSETCLOSET3' - 1"2640 SH2640 SH2640 SH12' - 7"4' - 6"2040 SH2040 SH5' - 7"FRIDGESLOPESHWRBENCH2640 SH2640 SH2640 SH(3) 2428 SH @ 6' HDRWDSLOPE7" DN(2) 2428 SH @ 6' HDR29' - 4"29' - 2"(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)(R)3068(R)(R)(R)(R)SCALEDATEDRAWN BYREVISIONSBY310 TAIT AVE.LOS GATOS, CA 95030APN: 510-14-058SHEETDONNA CHIVERSD3 DESIGNS, LLC4716 BRYCE CIR.CARLSBAD, CA 92008510-714-8309donnachivers@gmail.comwww.d-3-design.comDESIGN CONSULTANTCLIENT3/5/202512:10:51 PM1/4" = 1'-0"A2.0AuthorEXISTING FLOORPLAN AND DEMOPLAN310 TAIT AVE. LOS GATOS, CA950301/4" = 1'-0"1MAIN FLOORPage 424
Page 425
Page 426
Page 427
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Page 428