Loading...
307 W. Main St - Staff Report & Exhibits 1-9TOWN OF LOS GATOS ITEM NO: 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April27, 2016 PREPARED BY: APPLICATION NO.: LOCATION: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: CONTACT: APPLICATION SUMMARY : Susie Pineda, Contract Associate Planner s pin eda@ lo s gatosca .gov Architecture and Site Application S-16-009 307 W. Main Street (Located on the south side of West Main Street, between Bayview Avenue and Tait Avenue) Jay Plett, Architect Dane and Lori Howard Jay Plett Requesting approval for a second story addition to an existing single- family residence and to exceed the maximum allowable floor area on property zoned R-lD :LHP. APN 510-45-083 DEEMED COMPLETE: March 23,2016 FINAL DATE TO TAKE ACTION: September 23 ,2016 RECOMMENDATION: Approval, subject to conditions. PROJECT DATA : CEQA : General Plan Designation : Medium Density Residential Zoning Designation: R-1D:LHP , Single Family Residential Applicable Plans & Standards: Residential Design Guidelines Parcel Size : 5082.5 sq. ft. Surrounding Area : The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15301 : Existing Facilities. Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 2 307 W. Mai n Street/S-16-009 April27, 2016 FINDINGS: • As required, pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, this project is Categorically Exempt, Section 15301 : Existing Facilities . • As required by Section 29.40.075(c) of the Town Code for granting approval to exceed the maximum allowable floor area. • As required by the Residential Design Guidelines that the project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines. CONSIDERATIONS: • As required by Section 29.20.150 ofthe Town Code for granting Architecture and Site application. • As required by Section 29.80.290 (2) of the Town Code for applications within a Historic District. ACTION: The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed within ten days. EXHIBITS : 1. 2. 3. 4 . 5 . 6. 7. 8. 9 . BACKGROUND: Location map Findings (two pages) Recommended Conditions of Approval (three pages) Project Data sheet (two pages) December 17 , 2015 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes (four pages) February 24, 2016 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes (four pages) Letters from neighbors (five pages) Letter of Justification (two pages) Development Pl ans (six sheets) The subject property is a 5,082-square foot interior lot zoned R-1D:LHP and currently contains a 2,163 sq. ft . single-family residence with a 339 sq. ft. attached garage. The subject site is a non- contributing structure in the Broadway Historic District. The applicant is requesting to add a 295-square foot second story addition (above the existing garage) to an existing two-story residence. The project was reviewed by the HPC on December 17 , 2015 and February 24, 2016 (Exhibits 5 and 6). The Architecture and Site application is being considered by the Planning Commission because the proposal would exceed the maximum allowable floor area. Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 3 307 W. Main Street/S-16-009 April27, 2016 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. Architecture and Site Application The applicant is proposing a 295 square foot second story addition to an existing two-story residence. The addition would be located above the existing garage, with a maximum height of 22 feet , 10 inches. The total proposed house floor area is 2,458 square feet. The material s for the addition would consist of horizontal wood siding, trim and a composition shingle roof to match the existing structure. A letter of justification is attached as Exhibit 8 and the current development plans are attached as Exhibit 9. B. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood The proposed project is located on the south side ofW. Main Street, between Bayview A venue and Tait Avenue. Surrounding properties contain single-family dwellings to the north, south and east and a two-family residence to the west. C. Zoning Compliance A single-family residence is a permitted use in the R 1 D:LHP zo ning di strict. The project complies with setbacks , height, and on-site parking requirements. ANALYSIS: A. Floor Area The application is being considered by the Planning Commission because the proposed square footage would exceed the maximum allowable floor area. With a lot size of 5,082 square feet , current Floor Area Ratio (FAR) requirements limit the hou se size to a maximum of 1, 779 square feet. According to Town and County records , the existing 2, 185-sq uare foot structure was built prior to adoption of the current FAR requirement s and has an FAR of 0.43. The proposed project would further exceed the FAR requirements increasing the FAR to 0.48. At 2,458 square feet, the residence would be the fourth largest based on square footage and have the fourth largest FAR in the immediate area. Based on Town and County records , the residences in the immediate neighborhood range in size from 1,050 square feet to 3,404 square feet. The F ARs in the immediate neighborhood Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 4 307 W. Main Street/S-16-009 April27,2016 range from 0.14 to 0 .77 . The Neighborhood Analysis table below reflects the current conditions in the immediate neighborhood. Neighborhood Analysis Address 11 House SF Garage SF Lot Size SF House FAR Stories 307 W. Main St. (E) 2,185 339 5,082 0.43 2 307 W . Main St. (P) 2,458 339 5,082 0.48 2 305 W . M ain 2,848 480 5 ,287 0.54 3 311 W. Main 2,147 0 7 ,500 0.29 1 312 W. Main 3,404 525 4 ,327 0.77 2 310 W. Main 2,331 851 7,463 0 .31 1 300 W. Main 2,880 252 5,600 0 .51 2 315 W . Main 1,624 0 7,500 0 .22 1 253 W. Main 1,050 0 7,500 0.14 1 A request to exceed the maximum FAR may be granted if the deciding body can make the following findings. Staffs analysis of each is below each finding in italic type. ( 1) The design theme, sense of scale, exterior materials and details of the proposed project are consistent with the provisions of: a. Any applicable landmark and historic preservation overlay zone; and The project site is a non-contributing structure within the Broadway Historic District. This project was brought to the HPC on December 17, 2015 and F ebruary 24, 2016, where it rec eived a unanimous recommendation of approval (Exhibits 5 &6). b. Any applicable specific plan; and Not applicable. Planning Commission Staff Report-Page 5 307 W. Main Street/S-16-009 April 27, 20 16 c. The adopted residential development standards; and Th e proposal is consistent with the residential development standards in that it is similar in mass, bulk, and scale to the immediate neighborhood. Plate h eights have been minimized, th e proposed new roof does not excee d the height oft he existing rooj and the front e levation includes a recessed garage door and a french door on the second s tory which provide depth and articulation to the home. (2) The lot coverage, setbacks, and FAR of the proposed project is compatible with the development on surrounding lots . The proposal is compatible with development on surrounding lots and it conforms to lot coverage and setback requirements. While the proposal does not comply with current FAR requirements, it is compatible with existing development on surrounding lots in t erms of size, scale, and massing. Three lots in the immediate neighborhood have larger F ARs that exceed current FAR requirements and the proposed project would not result in the largest home in the neighborhood or have the largest FAR. B. Historic Preservation Committee The plans were reviewed by the HPC December 17,2015 and February 24, 2016 (Exhibits 5 and 6). The HPC determined that while the property resides within the Broadway Historic District, the residence is a non-contributing structure. At the first meeting, the HPC directed the applicant to make modifications to the design. The applicant made modifications and the project was unanimously recommended for approval by the HPC on February 24,2016. C. General Plan The goals and policies of the 2020 General Plan applicable to this project include, but are not limited to: • Policy LU-6.8-New construction, remodels, and additions shall be compatible and bl end with the existing neighborhood. • Policy CD-1.2-New structures, remodels, landscapes, and hardscapes shall be designed to harmonize and blend with the scale and rhythm of the neighborhood and natu ra l features in the area. Planning Commission Staff Report-Page 6 307 W. Main Street/S-16-009 April27, 2016 D. CEQA Determination The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15301: Existing Facilities. PUBLIC COMMENTS: The applicants have coordinated with neighbors and all have been supportive of the proposed project (Exhibit 7). At the time of this report's preparation, the Town has not received any other public comment. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: A. Summary If approved, the application would allow the applicant to construct a 295-square foot second story addition to an existing two-story home. The proposed project conforms to the Residential Design Guidelines and staff was able to make the findings required to exceed the FAR because the project is similar in mass , bulk, and scale to the immediate neighborhood and would not create the largest home in terms of square footage or FAR. B. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions to approve the Architecture and Site Application: 1. Find that the proposed project is categorically exempt, pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act as adopted by the Town (Exhibit 2); and 2. Make the required findings as required by Section 29.40.075(c) of the Town Code for granting approval of a request to exceed the FAR (Exhibit 2); and 3. Make the finding that the project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines (Exhibit 2); and 4. Make the required considerations as required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for granting approval of an Architecture & Site application (Exhibit 2); and 5. Make the required consideration as required by Section 29.80.290 (2) of the Town Code for applications within a Historic District (Exhibit 2); and 6. Approve Architecture and Site Application S-16-009 with the conditions contained in Exhibit 3 and development plans attached as Exhibit 9. Planning Commi ss ion Staff Report-Page 7 307 W. Main Street/S-16-009 April27, 2016 ALTERNATIVES: Alternatively, the Commission can: 1. Approve the application with additi o nal or modified conditions of approval ; or 2. Deny the application ; or 3. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction. A.~L~ Susie Pineda Joel Paulson, AlCP Contract Associate Planner Community Development Director cc: Jay Plett, 213 Bean Avenue, Los Gatos, CA 95030 Dane and Lori Howard, 307 W. Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95030 N :\DEV\PC REPORTS \2 0 16\W . Main St 307. 4-27-16 .docx This Page Intentionally Left Blank + 307 W. Main Street 0 0.25 ---------================:1 M i les 0.125 This Page Intentionally Left Blank PLANNING COMMISSION -Apri/27, 2016 REQUIRED FINDINGS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR ARCHITECTURE AND SITE: 307 W. Main Street. Architecture and Site Application S-16-009 Requesting approval for a second story addition to an existing single-family residence and to exceed the maximum floor area on property zoned R-1D:LHP. APN 510-45-083. PROPERTY OWNER: Dane & Lori Howard APPLICANT: Jay Plett, Architect FINDINGS Required finding for CEQA: • The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act , Section 15301: Existing Facilities. Required finding for exceeding the maximum Floor Area Ratio: • As required by Section 29.40.075 of the Town Code, the deciding body may allow a FAR in excess of the FAR derived by the formulas in subsections (b)( 1 ), (2), and (3) above if it makes the following findings: (1) The design theme, sense of scale, exterior materials and details of the proposed project are consistent with the provisions of: a. Any applicable landmark and historic preservation overlay zone; and b. Any applicable specific plan; and c. The adopted residential development standards; and (2) The lot coverage, setbacks and FAR of the proposed project is compatible with the development on surrounding lots. Required Compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines: • The project is in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines for single-family homes not in hillside residential areas. CONSIDERATIONS Required considerations in review of Architecture & Site applications: • As required by Section 29 .20.150 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an Architecture and Site application were all made in reviewing this project. EXHIBIT 2 Required consideration for construction in historic districts: • As required by Section 29.80.290 (2) of the Town Code for approval of work within an historic district. 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 an appropriateness, with its surroundings, including neighborhood structures, nor adversely affect the character, or the historical or aesthetic interest or value of the district. The second story addition meets the de sign guidelines of the Broadway Historic Di strict and is compatible with the neighborhood. N :\DEV\FINDINGS\2016\W . Main St 307.docx PLANNING COMMISSION -Apri/27. 2016 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 307 W. Main Street. Architecture and Site Application S-16-009 Requesting approval for a second story addition to an existing single-family residence and to exceed the maximum allowable floor area on property zoned R-1D:LHP. APN 510-45- 083. PROPERTY OWNER: Dane & Lori Howard APPLICANT: Jay Plett, Architect TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Planning Division 1. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approva l listed below and in substantial compliance with the plans approved and noted as received by the Town on March 10, 2016. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans shall be approved by the Community Development Director, the Development Review Committee, the Planning Commission, or Town Council, depending on the scope of the changes. 2. EXPIRATION: The approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to Section 29.20.320 of the Town Code, unless the approval has been vested. 3. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be down directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. No flood li ghts sha ll be used unless it can be demonstrated that they are needed for safety or security. The lighting plan shall be reviewed during building plan check. 4. GENERAL: All existing trees shown on the plan and trees required to remain or to be planted are specifi c subjects of approval of this plan, and must remain on the site. 5. STORY POLES: The story poles on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of approval of the Architecture & Site app li cation. 6. TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires that any appli cant who receives a permit or entitlement from the Town shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Town and its officials in any act ion brought by a third party to overturn, set aside , or void the permit or entitlement. This requirement is a condition of approval of all such permits and entitlements whether or not expressly set forth in the approval, and may be secured to the satisfaction of the Town Attorney. 7. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM: A memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building plans detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed . Building Divis ion 8. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Building Permit is required for the construction of the second story addition and alt erations to the existing single-family residence. 9. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue-lined in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the Building Permit Application detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. 1 r.XHlBIT 3 I 0. SIZE OF PLANS: Four sets of construction plans , size 24" x 36". 11. FIRE ZONE: The project requires a Class A Roof assembly. 12. BLUE PRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara County Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (24x36) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Service Counter for a fee of $2 or at ARC Blue Print for a fee or online at www.lo sgatosca.go v/building. 13. APPROVALS REQUIRED : The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuing a Building Permit: a. Community Development-Planning Division: Susie Pineda (408) 354-6806 b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: Ryan Do (408) 395-5340 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010 · TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS: Engine ering Division 14. GENERAL: All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town Standard Plans, Standard Specifications, and Engineering Design Standards. All work shall conform to the applicable Town ordinances. The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept clear of all job related dirt and debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be washed into storm drainage facilities. The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and /or the street will not be allowed unless an encroachment permit is issued. The Developer's representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to this condition may result in the Town performing the required maintenance at the Developer's expense. 15. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT : All work in the public right-of-way will require a Construction Encroachment Permit. All work over $5 ,000 will require construction security. It is the responsibility of the Applicant/Developer to obtain any necessary encroachment permits from affected agencies and private parties, including but not limited to , Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), AT&T, Comcast, Santa Clara Valle y Water District, California Department of Transportation . Copies of any approvals or permits must be submitted to the Town Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department prior to releasing any permit. 16. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The Developer shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of the Developer's operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to, curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway, and pavement shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Any new concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti , etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor's sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the Engineering Construction Inspector, and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. The Developer shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions . 2 17. STREET/SIDEWALK CLOSURE: Any proposed blockage or partial closure of the street requires an encroachment permit. Special provisions such as limitations on works hours, protective enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe manner may be required. 18 . CONSTRUCTION STREET PARKING: No vehicle having a manufacture's rated gross vehicle weight exceeding ten thousand (1 0,000) pounds shall be allowed to park on the portion of a street which abuts property in a residential zone without prior to approval from the Town Engineer. 19. SITE DRAINAGE : Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through curb drains will be allowed. Any storm drain inlets (public or private) directly connected to public storm system shall be stenciled/signed with appropriate "NO DUMPING - Flows to Bay" NPDES required language. On-site drainage systems for all projects shall include one of the alternatives included in section C.3 .i of the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit. These include storm water reuse via cisterns or rain barrels, directing runoff from impervious surfaces to vegetated areas and use of permeable surfaces. If dry wells are to be used they shall be placed a minimum of ten (1 0) feet from the adjacent property line and/or right of way. 20 . GOOD HOUSEKEEPING: Good housekeeping practices shall be observed at all times during the course of construction. All construction shall be diligently supervised by a person or persons authorized to do so at all times during working hours. The storing of goods and/or materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed unless an encroachment permit is issued by the Engineering Division. The adjacent public right-of- way shall be kept clear of all job related dirt and debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debri s shall not be washed into storm drainage facilities . The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed unless an encroachment permit is iss ued. The Developer's representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours . Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to this condition may result in the Town performing the required maintenance at the Developer's expense. All trucks transporting materials to an d from the site shall be covered. N:\DEV\C O N DITIONS\201 6\W. Main St 307.docx 3 This Page Intentionally Left Blank 307 W. MAIN STREET -PROJECT DATA EXISTING PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRED/ CONDITIONS PERMITIED Zoning district R-lD:LHP R-1D :LHP - Land use single family Residence single family residence - General Plan Designation Med ium Dens ity Medium Density - Residential Residential Lot size (sq. ft.) 5082.5 5082 .5 8,000 sq . ft . min imum Exterior materials: $ siding horizontal wood siding horizontal wood siding - to match existing $ trim wood trim wood trim to match - existing $ windows wood wood to match existing - $ roofing composition shingle composition shingle to - match exi sting Building floor area: $ first floor 1,188 1 '188 - $ second floor 975 975 + 295=1 ,2 70 - N /A N/A - $ cellar 339 339 - $ garage Setbacks (ft.): $ front 26 feet 26 feet 15 feet minimum $ rear 26 feet 26 feet 20 feet minimum $ side 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet minimum $ side 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet minimum Maximum h eight (ft.} 25 feet 25 feet 30 fee t maximu m EXHIBIT 4 Building coverage(%) 30% 30 % 40 % maximum Floor Area Ratio(%) $ house 2163 sq . ft .= 0.43 2,458 sq. ft. = 0 .48 1,779 sq. ft. maximum $ garage 339 339 400 sq. ft . maximum Parking two spaces two spaces two spaces minimum Tree Removals N/A N/A canopy replacement Sewer or septic sewer sewer - N:IOEV\SUS JEIMAIN W. 307/PROJECf DATA SHEET TOWN OF LOS GATOS 110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95030 (408) 354-6872 SUMMARY MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS FOR DECEMBER 17, 2015, HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 110 E MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS , CALIFORNIA . The meeting was called to order at 4:00 P.M . by Chair Len Pacheco. ATTENDANCE Members Present: Len Pacheco, Bob Cowan, Kathryn Janoff, Michael Kane, Tom O'Donnell Members Absent: None Staff Present: Joel Paulson, Interim Community Development Director Jennifer Savage, Senior Planner Mami Moseley. Associate Planner VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS None. ITEM 1 ITEM2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Bob Cowan requested changes to page 2 ofthe November 19 , 2015 minutes. Micha el Kane moved to approve the minutes of November 19, 2015. The motion was seconded by Tom 0 'Donnell and approved 5-0 with changes. 94 HERNANDEZ AVENUE Jaime P . Arafiles (applicant), Helen Cadiente (property owner), and Willie Cadiente (property owner) were present and requested approval to remove the structure from the Historic Resources Inventory on property zoned R-1 :8. Jennifer Savage noted that there was no official record that the building was built pre-1941. Kath1yn J anoff stated the applicant would need to provide certain evidence to make the required findings to remove the property from the list. Tom 0 'Donnell indicated more research would need to done to find the findings that would take the property off the list. Bob Cowen recommended the applicant m eet with staff to get a better understanding of the Town's guid elines. EXHIBIT 5 Historic Preservation Committee December 1 7, 2015 Page 2of4 ITEM3 ITEM4 ITEMS Bob Cowen moved to continue the item to a date uncertain. The motion was seconded by Kathryn Janoff and approved 4-0-1 with Len Pacheco recused. 360 BELLA VISTA A VENUE Michael Black (applicant) was present and discussed the request to demolish an existing single-family residence and second unit, subdivide one lot into two lots, and construct two new single-family residences on two properties zoned R-1 :8 . Kathryn Janoff stated the applicant would need to provide certain evidence to make the required findings to demolish the property. Len Pacheco moved to continue to a date uncertain. The motion was seconded by Tom 0 'Donnell and approved 5-0. 213 T AIT A VENUE Bess Wi ersema (architect) was present and discussed the requested approval for an addition greater than 1 00 square feet to an existing second story of a contributing single-family residence in the Almond Grove Historic District on property zoned R-1D:LHP . Len Pacheco stated since the property was over the square footage requirement, the committee can only make a recommendation. Kathryn Janoff expressed concerns that the design would lose the original structure of the property and could not support it. She suggested the design be more consistent with the HPC guidelines. Bess Wi erse ma presented an alternative plan that would be more consistent with the original house structure. Len Pacheco moved to continue to a date uncertain. The motion was seconded by Kathryn Janoff and approved 4-0-1 with Bob Cowan recused. OTHER BUSI NESS a. 307 West Main Street Jay Flett (applicant) and Dane Howard (owner) were present and requested feedback for the approval for a modifications to a single-family residence on property zoned R-ID:LHP. It was noted that the roof plan that was presented was not correct. Historic Preservation Committee December 17 , 2015 Page 3 of4 L en Pacheco asked if the plans included replacing the windows. Jay Flett said that they would match the existing windows. Michael Kane commented that the design fits with what is being done to the neighborhood. Katluyn Janoff said that architecturally the design was okay but suggested to work on the design . The item would have to come back to HPC . b . Policy Recommendations The committee is interested in adding more restrictions for demolition and replacement structures. Kathryn Janoff commented that one of the goals of HPC is to preserve the image of the property. Tom 0 'Donnell questioned if it was the right of the committee to judge the designs presented. Kathryn Janoff was interested in seeing the post design for replacement structures. Micha el Kane encouraged more restoration for some of the historic properties. Jay Plett asked if requirements would be different for contributing properties. Kathryn Jan£?{{ responded that it would be all pre-1941 houses not just historic districts. c . Section 4, Historic Resources, Residential Design Guidelines Kathryn Janoff presented a letter (Exhibit A) with a concept for the committee's discussion. The committee discussed the concept including: • Cost and monetary impacts • Preserving the original structure e Agenda items for new HPC members to review guidelines d. Election of Chair and Vice Chair Len Pacheco moved to elect Bob Cowen as Chair and Kathryn Janoff as Vice Chair. The motion was seconded by Tom 0 'Donnell and approved 5-0. Historic Preservation Committee December 17 , 2015 Page 4 o.f4 ITEM 6 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6 :11p.m . The next meeting is scheduled for January 27, 2016 at 4 :00p.m . ~5 ;;s~I ,Adminis~:;;~~@ /r~oJ 6 et S. Paulson, AICP Len Pacheco nterim Community Development Chair Directo r N:\DEV\H ISTO RI C PRESERVA TION\HPC minut es\20 I 5\H PCm inut cs 12·17 ·15 .docx TOWN OF LOS GATOS 110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95030 (408) 354-6874 SUMMARY MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS FOR FEBRUARY 24, 2016 HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, II 0 E MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA. The meeting was called to order at 4:01 P.M. by C h air Bob Cowan. ATTENDANCE Members Present: Len Pacheco, Bob Cowan, Kathryn Janoff, Michael Kane, Tom O 'Donnell Members Absent: None Staff Present: Marni Moseley, Associate Planner Jennifer Armer, Associate Planner Sylvie Roussel, Administrative Assistant VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS-NONE ITEM 1 Approval of Minutes • January 27, 2016 • February 11, 2016 Len Pacheco stated there was a spelling error on page 4 of the January 2 7, 2016 minutes. Bob Cowan requested a change t o page 2 of the February 11, 20 16 minutes. MOTION: Tom 0 'Donnell moved to approve the January 27, 20 16 with the spelling error fixed . The motion was seconded by Michael Kane and approved 5-0. ITEM 2 Michael Kane moved to approve the February 11 , 2016 minutes wi th the amendment. The motion was seconded by Tom 0 'Donnell and approved 5-0 . 213 Tait Avenue (continued from December 17, 2015) Minor Resi dential Development Permit MR-15-020 Historic Architecture and Site Application HS -i 5-078 Requesting approval for an addition greater than 100 square feet to an existing second story of a contributing single-family residence in the Almond Grove Historic District on property zoned R-1 D : LHP . APN 510-17-007 . PROPERTY OWNER: Joey McCarthy APPLICANT: Bess Wiersema/Studio Three Design PROJECT PLANNER: Jennifer Armer EXHIBIT 6 Historic Preservation Committee February 24, 2016 Page2of4 Len Pacheco expressed concern that the proposed doors look too modem. He suggested a more narrow french door to balance the look. The little touches of modem design are not consistent with the Victorian architecture and he does not support the proposed door design. Kathryn Jano.ffwants to retain the original character of the house and the proposed application does not do that. Michael Kane considered the impact to the contributing structure for the Almond Grove Historic District. MOTION: Tom 0 'Donnell moved to deny the application. The motion was seconded by Kathryn Janoff and approved 3-1-1, Len Pacheco-nay and Bob Cowan recused. ITEM 4 136 Tait A venue (Heard out of Order) Historic Architecture and Site Application S-15-043 Requesting approval to modify a previous approval for an addition to a contributing single-family residence in the Almond Grove Historic District on property zoned R-ID:LHP. APN 510-18-023. PROPERTY OWNER: John and Valerie Hopkins APPLICANT: Steve Sweeters MOTION: Tom 0 'Donnell moved to approve the proposed changes with the exception of the proposed picture window; the windows shall remain dual double hung to match the other bay windows. The motion was seconded by Michael Kane and approved 4-0-l, with Bob Cowan recused. ITEM 3 529 Monterey Avenue (Continued from 1 111912015) Requesting approval to remove a pre-1941 property from the Historic Resources Inventory for property zoned R -1 D. APN 410-15-04 7. PROPERTY OWNER: Edwin Manuele Mingoia APPLICANT: Bess Wiersema PROJECT PLANNER: Mami Moseley Len Pacheco would like to know what will be built after the demolition ofthe property. He would like the new structure to keep the historic feel of the neighborhood. MOTION: Michael Kan e moved to approve the removal from the Historic Resources Historic Preservation Committee February 24, 2016 Page 3 of4 ITEM 5 Inventory. The motion was seconded by Tom 0 'Donnell and approved 4-1 , Kathryn Janoff -nay. 307 W. Main Street Architecture and Site Application S-16-009 Requesting approval for a second story addition to an existing single-family residence and to exceed the maximum Floor Area Ratio on property zoned R-ID. APN 51 0-45-083. PROPERTY OWNER: Dane & Lori Howard APPLICANT: Jay Plett, Architect PROJECT PLANNER: Susie Pineda MOTION: Katluyn Janoff moved to approve the application as proposed . The motion was seconded by Len Pacheco and approved 5-0. ITEM 6 50 University Avenue Minor Architecture and Site application S-16-0 17 Requesting approval for exterior modifications to a historic commercial building (former California Cafe space) on property zoned C-2:LHP :PD . APN 529-02- 044. PROPERTY OWNER: Sri Old Town LLC APPLICANT : Tecta Associates PROJECT PLANNER: Erin Walters MOTION: Tom 0 'Donnell moved to approve the proposed application with the following directions: the relocation of the front door as proposed is appropriate; the proposed metal canopy for the new signage is not appropriate and should be removed; the applicant shall retain the two awnings to the far right and replace the far left awning with the smaller awning to match those on the right and the awnings shall retain the maroon color consistent with those throughout Old Town; additionally any proposed signage shall be consistent with the Old Town sign program and shall complement the historic Old Town character. The motion was seconded by Michael Kane and approved S-0. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6 :03 p .m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for March 23, 2016 at 4 :00p.m. Historic Preservation Committe e February 24,2016 Page 4 of4 Prepared by: Sylvie Roussel, Administrative Assistant Appro ved by: Bob Cowan Chair N:\DEV \HISTORI C PRES ERVA TION\HPCminutL'SI10 16\HPCminutes 2-24 -16.doc x ,... ( i (· ( (' (, I i' f i1 ' ! l j i i I j I l I 1 I ll ' J This Page Intentionally Left Blank Marc h 4t h , 2016 Dane & Lori Howard 307 W. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 RE: Proposed Room Addition. Dear Los Gatos Planning Committee , We have lived at 307 W . Main street s ince 2008. We are a family of 4 and I work in Si licon Valley. We love Los Gatos and enjoy participating i n the town activities, parades and are active members of the town and community. As an artist , entrepeneur, and Silicon Valley Executive, I find that I have the need to work increasingly from our home. We have a modest 3 bedroom that does not accommodate an office or ability to have family guests. We have long wanted to have an additional bedroom & studio. I want to thank you for the opportunity & consideration to review our proposed addition and plans to our house at 307 W . Main Street. I'm sure you'll see that our choice of architect and expertise has given us close alignment and compliance with several of the Los Gatos Residential guidelines, as well as a strong heritage of experience, maturity and sensitivity to this project. The proposed scale and character of the project are inline with immediate neighborhood , aligning with architectural integrity and craftsmanship (ref 1.4). Although our property at 307 W . Main street is not historic, we have received a unanimous approval from the Historic committee. They agree there is no issue with the proposed addition. Furthermore , our surrounding Neighbors are all supportive of the proposed plans and no one has issues with the proposed plans. (Signed form letters contained in separate cover) It is important to address the FAR issue-(Floor to Area Ratio)-A preliminary request asked for ratios of surrounding homes. For this neighborhood , three surrounding homes have exceeding FAR ratios and larger floor areas. 311 , next door, has a larger floor area . Please refer to Sheet A-1 .1 for depiction of the existing neighborhood condition .. The proposed project for our 307 W. Main Street is still below the FAR for the neighboring homes and is one of the smallest houses on the block. Thus, compared to our neighbors, even after the pro posed plan is finished , our FAR numbers will be far below our neighbors. Let's address neighborhood consistency. It is important to note that the Neighborhood patterns EXIDBIT 8 in this neighborhood are inconsistent across this block with several variations and styles. Our non-historic house has a proposed addition that is inline with the immediate neighborhood, and is proposed to align with the existing structure architectural integrity and styling. Many neighbors have commented and praised the proposed plans as actually improving the neighborhood consistency. I'd like to mention that the Street Presence of the proposed is minimal (ref 2.2). The proposed addition is well within existing set back and will not exceed the existing line. The House is behind a wall , and the proposed roofline will not exceed the height of the existing roofline. Minimal impact to street presence has been considered in these plans. It is important to mention that the form and mass of the project (ref 2.3) will have minimal affect on the neighborhood . The house is an *existing* 2 story. There are several two story houses surrounding in the neighborhood. The proposed form and mass does not exceed the existing set back and will not exceed the height of the existing roofline . The aesthetic of the proposed addition is of superior quality and consideration (ref 2.4.2). The existing structure has a prominent Garage Door. The Proposed is to soften the garage door and keep an aesthetic that brings less prominence to the door, while adding an elegant visual relief. The addition, while minimizing 2nd story height, accomplishes an elegant visual relief for the 2nd story by complying with several of the recommended techniques in the residential guidelines, including a recommended Juliet Balcony (ref 3 .3.3) among other seasoned architectural techniques. Our neighborhood has received many recent and approved projects. 309 W. Main Street just recently completed a Major remodel. We feel we have created a humble and modest project that honors the Los Gatos Residential guidelines and will improve our residential quality of life for us. Thank you for your representation and leadership to keep our town in strong accountability for such projects and a disciplined approach in this regard. Thank you for your time and commitment to excellence and for your service to our town. Sincerely , Dane & Lori Howard