Attachment 1 - Letter to the Town Council Regarding Future Historic Preservation Committee Workplan ItemsTo: Mayor Hudes and Members of the Town Council
From: Historic Preservation Committee
Re: Proposed Historic Preservation Committee Work Program
Date: November 13, 2025
The Historic Preservation Committee is pleased to submit the proposed Work Program for your
review and consideration. The attached document outlines the Committee’s overarching goal,
key objectives, and a series of recommended action items designed to support the Town’s
historic preservation priorities.
For clarity and ease of reference, the recommended action items are organized into five
categories. During the Committee’s Special Meeting on October 29, 2025, members
acknowledged areas of overlap among these categories; however, the Committee unanimously
agreed to retain them, as each reflects important intersections and gaps within existing guiding
documents and policies.
While mindful of the Town’s current budget and staffing constraints, the Committee believes this
Work Program is well aligned with the Town’s strategic objectives and will strengthen the
preservation, understanding, and stewardship of Los Gatos’ historic resources. We respectfully
request the Council’s consideration of the proposed action items.
Respectfully submitted,
Lee Quintana, Chair
Martha Queiroz, Vice Chair
Susan Burnett, Committee Member
Alan Feinberg, Committee Member
Emily Thomas, Committee Member
ATTACHMENT 1
Goal of the Work Program
Enhance efficiency, transparency, and understanding of the entire historic resources review and
approval process for the community members, committee members/commissioners, Town
Council members, and staff.
Objectives of the Work Program
●Objective A: Update and clarify the definitions and required findings for determining
historic resource status in Town code
●Objective B: Streamline and clarify the Historic Preservation review and approval
process, including Historic Preservation Committee meetings, to improve efficiency
●Objective C: Improve the consistency and predictability of decisions by clarifying the
criteria and standards used in evaluating historic resources
●Objective D: Improve shared understanding of the purpose and value of historic
resources through clearer documentation, communication, and education
●Objective E: Provide consistency and alignment across Town documents, procedures,
and code sections related to historic preservation and resources
●Objective F: Implement historic preservation policies and procedures that support
Housing Element goals
●Objective G: Evaluate and update existing and potential historic districts, heritage areas,
and special recognition areas, including boundaries, eligibility, and documentation
Suggested Action Items
Area Action Item Justification Objective
Chapter 29
Article I
Division 1. -
Miscellaneous
Sec.
29.10.09030. -
Demolitions
1. Clarify demolition of historic structures (c)Article I Division 1 Sec. 29.10.09030. Demolitions and Article
VIII Division 3 Sec. 29.80.310 are not consistent with each
other or the Residential Design Guidelines.
Sec. 29.10.09030. (c) cites criteria for permit approval for
demolition of a historic structure although the requirements
are not identified as findings. It is not clear how these
requirements differ or relate to findings listed in Sec.
29.10.09030.(e)(2).
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
2 . Clarify definition of "contributor to a
potential historic district"
Sec. 29.10.09030. (c) term “contributor to a potential historic
district” is not defined and only a term used in the Bloomfield
Survey.
3. Clarify the reason for and criteria of the
“report”
In Sec. 29.10.09030.(c) the required “report” is vague and its
intent is not clear; it doesn’t state if/when the report is used to
determine historic resource status or other decision making.
4. Clarify preservation of historically or
architecturally significant buildings or
structures (e)(2)
Sec. 29.10.09030.(e) is not clear with regards to the difference
between findings for historic and non-historic structures and
its relevance to granting architecture and site applications.
Chapter 29
Article VIII
Division 3 -
Historic
Preservation
and LHP
Landmark and
Historic
Preservation
Overlay Zone
5. Add definitions of the Town’s historic
resources
The code does not currently include definitions of historic
resources or findings in Chapter 29 Article VIII Division 3.
The difference between “pre-1941”, “Historic Status Code”,
and “contributor” are not defined but used to make decisions.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
6. Add findings for different types of historic
resources
7. Clarify the differences between the
Federal/State findings and the Town’s findings
for integrity
Findings are only required with regards to status in the historic
inventory. Considerations for all other situations are not clear.
8. Clarify the difference between findings and
considerations and when they are applied
9. Change title of Sec. 29.80.290 Standards for
Review from “Standards” to “Considerations”
10. Move Sec. 29.80.290 Standards for Review
to follow definitions
Considerations are currently described in the code as
standards.
Sec. 29.80.290 outlines the review process but is currently
“hidden” after less used code.
1991 Historical
Resources
Survey Project
(Bloomfield
Survey and
Historic
Inventory)
11. Update, conduct a new survey, or use the
current survey for reference only
The Bloomfield Survey was a “windshield” survey conducted
30 years ago, therefore, not all pre-1941 structures in Town
were evaluated and some structures included in the survey do
not meet criteria for a historic resource.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
12. Add a description of the Bloomfield Survey
including its purpose, study area, methodology,
and final recommendations to the Residential
Design Guidelines
The Bloomfield Survey is central to the review, analysis, and
decision making process and its intended use is currently
absent from the Residential Design Guidelines. A description
of the survey will increase the understanding of the Town’s
historic preservation review process.
13. Consider revising the 1941 construction
date for historic resources
This date was chosen because it was the first year the County
has comprehensive tax records for the Town. The Bloomfield
Survey recommended changing the 1941 date.
14. Protect historic resources not currently
covered under the LHP Overlay by:
a. Designating additional historic districts
as recommended by the Bloomfield
Survey, starting with Glenridge
b. Establishing a Heritage Area based on
the Bloomfield Survey area
c. Establishing special recognition areas
or sites to acknowledge architectural,
There are districts in Town with a high concentration of
pre-1941 structures that have been identified in the Bloomfield
Survey as “potential contributors to historic districts”. The
Survey suggested the addition of Historic Districts, specifically
Glenridge.
A Heritage Area could protect structures identified as
“potential contributors to a historic district” by the Bloomfield
Survey.
There are areas of Town outside of current Historic Districts
that have architectural, cultural, and aesthetic significance that
do not qualify as a historic resource under the current 1941
standard. For example, the mosaics depicting early California
cultural, or aesthetic resources that are
newer than 1941
life at Riviera Drive.
15. Separate the Town’s Inventory of Historic
Resources from the Bloomfield Survey and
publish the Inventory
Not all pre-1941 structures listed in the Survey meet the
criteria for a Los Gatos Historic Resource. Publishing the
Historic Inventory and list of the Survey addresses would
allow better public access and transparency.
Residential
Design
Guidelines
Chapter 4
Historic
Resources
16. Revise and update acceptable substitute
materials including window replacements and
siding materials
There are many new materials available that are of high
quality, integrity, and indistinguishable from traditional
materials. In addition, these materials may be required by fire
code and/or insurance companies for fire safety. A
B
C
D
E
F
G
17. Add specific guidelines for additions and
accessory structures for historic resources
and historic districts
The Guidelines currently focus on the immediate
neighborhood for compatibility, which is appropriate for new
construction, but not for additions or accessory structures for
historic resources or districts. Specific guidance for additions
and accessory structures for historic resources and districts
with consideration of the architecture and character defining
features of the existing structure rather than immediate
neighborhood would be more appropriate.
18. Clarify Section 4.5 Demolitions and the
definitions in sidebar on page 42 and cite
findings required to demolish a historic
resource
The process is unclear and does not align with Sec.
29.10.09030 Demolition Code.
Other
19. Add a Flow Chart or Table of the various
types referrals to the HPC
It is not clear how projects move through historic review in
Town. Adding a flow chart, a table, and/or graphics would
demystify the process for the various types of applications
and projects that are referred to the HPC.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
20. Sec. 29.40.075. - Floor area ratio
Only exclude up to 400 square feet from FAR
calculations for historic properties and historic
districts zoned R-1D and R-D
Historic properties and lots in historic districts typically have
smaller detached garages located at the rear of the property.
Garages that are detached from historic structures minimizes
the mass of additions to existing structures.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank