Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-14-08 Heritage Preservation Commission Agenda PacketCity of Saratoga HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA Date: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 - 8:30 a.m. Place: Planning Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. Please meet in the parking lot in front of Warner Hutton House at 8:30 a.m. and Staff will provide transportation to the site visits under New Business and return to the Planning Conference Room by approximately 10:20 a.m. Type:. Regular Meeting 1. Routine Organization A. Roll Call B. Approval of minutes from September 9, 2008 meeting C. Posting of Agenda — Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda was posted on October 10, 2008. D. Oral & Written Communication - Any member of the public may address the Commission about any matter not on the agenda for this meeting for up to three minutes. Commissioners may not comment on the matter but may choose to place the topic on a future agenda. E. Oral Communications — Historic Preservation Commission direction to Staff — Instruction to staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. 2. Old Business A. Discuss National Registry & Saratoga Landmark Plaques B. Discuss Heritage Orchard Signage 3. New Business A. 8:30 a.m. Site Visit — Saratoga Village — Review proposed Historical Walking Tour and Brochure for Saratoga Village, B. 9:00 a.m. Site Visit — 13686 Quito Road — Review whether the existing structures on the site have historic significance prior to demolition as part of a proposed four lot subdivision. C. 9:30 a.m. Site Visit —19161 Cox Avenue — Review proposed replacement roofing for a house included on the Historic Resource Inventory D. 9:50 a.m. Site Visit —13514 Hammons Avenue — Review proposed new stucco exterior wall covering and replacement windows for an existing adobe brick home. 4. Pending Items A. Update the Heritage Resources Inventory List B. National Register Applications 5. Adjournment Adjourn to 8:30 a.m. Tuesday, November 11, 2008, Planning Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. Please advise the Chair if you will be absent from the next scheduled meeting In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you are a disabled person and you need a disability - related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (408) 868 — 1269 or ctclerk @saratoga.ca.us. Requests must be made as early as possible and at least one full business day before the start of the meeting. Any recommendation made by the Heritage Preservation Commission may be appealed to the Planning Commission within ten (10) days of the date of the decision. The appeal shall be taken by filing with the Secretary of the Planning Commission a written notice and filing fee within ten (10) days of the date of the decision. In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the Historical Preservation Commission by City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Community Development Department Director at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the office of the Director at the time they are distributed to the Planning Commission. Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Heritage Preservation Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Signed this 10th day of October 2008, at Saratoga, California 0 Christopher Riordan Senior Planner City of Saratoga (408) 868 —1235 City of Saratoga HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES Date: Tuesday, September 9, 2008 - 8:30 a.m. Place: Planning Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Type: Regular Meeting 1. Routine Organization A. Roll Call PRESENT — Commissioners Koepernik, McCarty, Gommersall, Vice Chair Marra, and Chair Kellond ABSENT — Commissioner Tai GUESTS — Ms. Jenny Taylor, Mr. Salim Sagarchi, Mr. Kyung -Mo Shin B. Approval of minutes from August 12, 2008 meeting — Approved 5 -0 C. Posting of Agenda — Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda was posted on September 4, 2008. — Staff announced this item D. Oral & Written Communication - Any member of the public may address the Commission about any matter not on the agenda for this meeting for up to three minutes. Commissioners may not comment on the matter but may choose to place the topic on a future agenda. Mr. Sagarchi said that he has come to the HPC to discuss putting a fence around his property at 13901 Saratoga Lane which is located on a Heritage Lane. Mr. Sagarchi said that he was in the middle of construction of the wall when he got a call that he had to stop construction of the wall and that he was surprised since the planner that approved the project had not mentioned that the property was on a Heritage Lane and needed HPC review. He showed the HPC pictures of the fence that he would like to construct that included a picket wood fence constructed in between the newly constructed concrete columns. He said that he is bothered by the lack of incentives to submit for HPC review. since the application fee is expensive. Commissioner Koepernik stated that the HPC would also be in support of a program that offered historical incentives and requested that Mr. Sagarchi express his concerns in writing and submit them to the HPC. Mr. Sagarchi said that he would consider such a letter since there needs to be motivation for HPC review. Chair Kellond asked Mr. Sagarchi to submit the letter to staff so it could be placed on an HPC agenda for discussion. Ms. Taylor stated that she was questioning the design of the wall for 13901 Saratoga Lane. She said that the real reason she came to today's HPC meeting was to discuss the removal of the Oak from the City's Heritage Orchard and had the understanding that the removal of the tree was already a done deal but admitted that she had not yet reviewed the minutes from the HPC and City Council. Ms. Taylor stated that she was of the belief that West Valley College would not want the removal of the tree to become a public problem and that the removal of the tree would involve the use of large equipment and that this equipment could damage the orchard trees and that it would be reckless to remove the tree. Ms. Taylor stated that West Valley College was surprised that so many Saratoga residents were concerned with the removal of the tree and that she would like the Heritage Orchard to have a historic standing and that it would be an interesting exercise to research the history of the orchard ownership to determine if there was more history to it than just being a orchard. E. Oral Communications — Historic Preservation Commission direction to Staff — Instruction to staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. — The Commission directed staff to schedule the following items for discussion at next month's meeting: plaques, register project, costs of_ updating list. Commissioner Gomersall stated that she would be absent for the October meeting. 2. Old Business A. Discuss National Registry & Saratoga Landmark Plaques B. Discuss Heritage Orchard Signage 3. New Business A. 8:30 a.m. Site Visit— 13514 Hammons Avenue — Review proposed new stucco exterior wall covering for an existing adobe brick home. — Site visit completed. Item discussed. Commissioner Koepernik stated that he could not support the existing structure being altered as proposed since doing so would cause the loss of its most significant historical element. He also stated that he would not support the replacement of the existing wood windows since there is no need to alter the existing windows as they can be repaired. He repeated that he could not support losing the adobe structure. Commissioner McCarty stated that she agreed with the statements made by Commissioner Koepernik in that she would like to maintain the existing adobe exterior wall but would be in support of replacing the windows with new dual pane windows with the same style as the existing windows. Chair Kellond reminded the Commission that the focus of the project discussion should be on the projects historical significance. He stated that the addition to the structure had been done according to the Secretary of the Interior Standards and he believed that the project would meet Criteria "C" in that "It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials" and that he felt it was important to preserve the adobe structure. Chair Kellond stated that it could be difficult to apply stucco over the adobe walls as the methods required to affix mesh lathe to the exterior of the structure may not stay in the adobe and could collapse over time. Mr. Shin said that contractors he had consulted had told him that there was a new kind of adhesive that could be used to attach the lathe to the stucco walls. Chair Kellond said that he would not support adding stucco to the building and the window openings should not be modified; any new windows are to be in character with the existing building, the building should be added to the Heritage Resources Inventory List. Commissioner Koepernik said that there could be damage to the adobe caused by changing out the windows and that the existing windows can be repaired if necessary since he did not believe that windows should be removed because they are old and that other techniques such as shades and drapes can be used to reduce heat loss. Chair Kellond stated that there was no . significant architectural value to the existing windows and that the correct choice of replacement windows could be compatible with the style of the structure and that it is the adobe construction materials that meet the criteria not the windows. Mr. Shin said that he wanted to replace the existing windows because they are noisy since he lives on a corner. Commissioner Koepernik stated that the existing wood windows can be repaired. Chair Kellond stated that due to the age of the structure he' could not make a historical argument to preserve the windows. Vice Chair Marra stated that he too did not want the adobe walls to be covered with stucco and that covering the existing exposed wood beams would make the windows to narrow. Chair Kellond said that he would support a new design for the windows that would not cause a change to the size of the existing window openings and would be in support of new wood windows with a style consistent with the building. Commission McCarty said that the materials submitted by the applicant stated that the window sills would be removed and she would like these sills to remain on the windows. Commissioner Gomersall said that she agreed with Chair Kellond that the present addition is compatible with the Secretary of the Interior Standards but she would prefer if the entire house was adobe. Chair Kellond asked for a motion and that the motion should identify if the structure was historically significant, does it meet the criteria, and discus specific issues. Commissioner Gomersall stated the project would meet Criteria "C; the stucco over the adobe should be denied, and the applicant should come back with an alternative window design. Mr. Shin said that his house is not complete in that there are different exterior styles and that he would like the house to be more consistent by adding new stucco and new windows and that he likes the Mission architectural style. Chair Kellond stated that the house is attractive and has historical significance and it meets at least one of the seven criteria and. that there is a great opportunity for the applicant to make the project new and fresh while maintaining the adobe construction. Commissioner Koepernik agreed that the house has historical significance and that it met criterion "C ". Motion to continue the project by Chair Kellond, seconded by Commissioner Koepernik with the following recommendation: The application is being continued so as to give the applicant additional feedback from the HPC, the project meets Criteria "C" of the seven criteria needed to deem the property historically significant and to direct staff to place the structure on the historical list, the applicant is to return to the HPC with an alternative proposal for the exterior windows and at that time the HPC will make a final determination. Carried on a 5 -0 vote. B. 8:45 a.m. Site Visit —13601 Saratoga Avenue (Heritage Lane) — Review proposed relocation of an existing storage container from Saint Andrew's Episcopal Church /School Parish and School to the playfield. Site visit not completed. Item discussed. Motion to approve the relocation of the trailer by Chair Kellond, seconded by Commissioner Koepernik. Carried on a 5 -0 vote. C. Discuss the September 3, 2008 Joint City Council /Heritage Preservation Commission meeting and action items. Item Discussed. — Vice Chair Marra stated that it was his understanding that the City was going to have a consultant update the list and that the City Council was going to leave the manner of the presentation of the plaques to the HPC. Commissioner McCarty asked if the HPC had indeed lost control of the Orchard. Chair Kellond stated that the City Council has backed off from that proposal at this time. Chair Kellond said that the HPC needs to get the orchard sign approved and that the second issue is the determination of who controls the orchard and that education with respect to the orchard has always been on the HPC's agenda and that the HPC would like to work with Parks and Recreation on events for the orchard and that the HPC got good feedback on the presentation of the plaques. Chair Kellond asked for a volunteer to take photographs of the properties that would be getting a plaque and that these photographs.are to be taken prior to the next HPC meeting. Commissioner Koepernik stated that he nominated Vice Chair Marra to take the photographs. 4. Pending Items A. Update the Heritage Resources Inventory List — Item Discussed. Vice Chair Marra stated that this discussion should be on hold until staff has had the opportunity to get prices from consultants. B. National Register Applications — Item Discussed. The HPC agreed to split up the task of resubmitting the National Register applications for the McWilliams House and the Museum. Commissioners McCarty and Gomersall will work on the McWilliams House and Chair Kellond and Vice Chair Marra will work on the Museum. Vice Chair Marra said that the HPC has paperwork on the orchard and that we need to get approval from the City Council. 5. Adjournment Adjourn to 8:30 a.m. Tuesday, October 14, 2008, Planning Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 14, 2008 TO: Heritage Preservation Commission FROM: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Review Walking Tour and Brochure for Saratoga Village Property Location: Saratoga Village, Saratoga, California Property APN: Varies Project Applicants: Saratoga Village Development Council Project Summary The Saratoga Village Development Council (SVDC) is proposing a Walking Tour and Brochure of the Saratoga Village. Number numbered plaques would be placed in the sidewalk in front of selected Village properties. These numbers would correspond to a map and description of each property that would be listed in a Walking Tour Brochure. A draft copy of the text for the Walking Tour and Brochure are attached. Decision by HPC The SVDC is requesting review of the proposal by the HPC. The City Council will be reviewing the proposed Walking Tour at a later date. Attachments (1) Draft Text of the Saratoga Village — Walking Tour and Brochure Saratoga Village — Walking Tour and Brochure — April Halberstadt The Village of Saratoga, the place we now think of as the original town of Saratoga, was originally three tiny settlements adjacent to each other. The first was a water - powered flour mill, built by William Campbell around 1847. The mill was located near what we now call Long Bridge, across from the intersection of Sanborn Road. The second settlement was McCarthysville, land acquired and subdivided by Martin and Hannah McCarthy in 1852. The McCarthy land covered an area from Saratoga Creek to what we now call Aloha Avenue and from Lomita down to the Los Gatos Road. The McCarthy's subdivided part of their land, selling lots on Big Basin Way and along Oak Street to their neighbors for homes and businesses. The third settlement was known as Bank Mills, and was located between Campbell's and McCarthysville. Bank Mills was established by Charles Maclay around 1860. He acquired a parcel of land and established Maclaytown, with 47 parcels divided into lots. He built a mill, store and tannery on the site, as well as several houses. Maclay convinced the post office to change the name of the area from McCarthysville to Maclaytown. Then, following his political ambitions, Maclay left the area for Southern California in the 1870's. Saratoga Village continued to develop under the guidance and investment of Hannah McCarthy. Widowed in 1864 and left with four young children, she continued to develop her properties. She built houses and commercial buildings and then rented or sold them to new residents. She donated land to the community for the first school, located on Oak Street. She also donated land to the Congregational Church for their needs. Just before her death in 1893, she was planning to subdivide the remainder of her property, her' vineyard near what is now Aloha Avenue. Her son Daniel worked with her in her business. Most of what we now think of as Saratoga Village takes its shape from the subdivision originally surveyed by Jonathan Lewis for Martin and Hannah McCarthy in November of 1852. The original area of what we consider Saratoga Village is a compact area set into the side of a hill with a creek running along one side. There is one commercial street, Big Basin Way; there is one residential street, Oak Street. And the early village included the cemetery and some agricultural property, the vineyard and orchard belonging to Hannah McCarthy. 1. Saratoga Museum — Historical Park This Western Falsefront store structure is one of the earliest commercial buildings in Santa Clara County. Typical of buildings of the 1870's, the exact date of construction is unknown. More than a century old, it. was originally located on Lumber Street, now known as Big Basin Way. Over the years this little building has been a hardware store, a pharmacy, a creamery, a dry goods store and a dress shop. It was moved to its present location in 1975 and renovated as a Museum. It was dedicated on July 4, 1976 to celebrate Saratoga's participation in America's Bicentennial Celebration. 2. Jarboe - McWilliams House — Historical Park The little white saltbox style cottage is a very early structure in Santa Clara County, possibly built in 1852. The house was built by Henry Jarboe, the first blacksmith, using single -wall construction — there are no studs. Jarboe sold dlis house to James McWilliams, the second blacksmith, in 1864. The McWilliams family owned the house until 1900. The house was moved to this site and renovated in 1976. It served as the office of the Saratoga Chamber of Commerce until 2005, when it became part of the Museum. 3. The Village Library — Historical Park Saratoga residents value education and established their first public library in 1914. Their library was. housed in several village shops before funds were raised for dlis structure, completed in 1927. Designed by notable architect Eldridge Spencer whose other works include the Dyer House at Sanborn Park, the Ahwanee Lodge at Yosemite and the Stanford campus, the building is faced with cinder blocks. It still serves book lovers and patrons as the Book -Go- Round, operated by the Friends of the Saratoga Library to support library needs. The building has been placed on the National Register of Historic Places. 4. Parsons House and Taber House /Lundblad's Lodge- 14534 Oak Street Designed by the San Jose architectural firm of Wolfe & McKenzie and built in 1905, these two, shingle -style Craftsman cottages were the home for the Parson and Taber families. Mr. Edward Parsons was a widower with two teenaged children. The house next door was built for his socially active mother -in -law, Mrs. Augusta Taber and her activist daughter, Miss Cornelia Taber. These two ladies were founding members of the California Indian Association, a group who lobbied for Native American rights. In 1918 Mr. and Mrs. Ludwig Lundblad purchased the Taber home. It became a very popular guest house and resort, operated in later years by the Lundblad's daughter, Hazel Bargas. Mrs. Bargas' culinary skills earned her a listing in the prestigious Duncan Hines restaurant Guide. 5. Saratoga Grammar School — the Oak Street School A Saratoga grammar school has occupied this site since 1854, making this perhaps the oldest continuously occupied school site in California. Saratoga students first attended class in the Sons of Temperance Hall on this site. A new school structure was built on the site in 1869, and then the building was doubled in size a decade later. The third school on the site was completed in 1898 and this fourth building replaced it in 1923. It is built in the Mission revival style and was expanded in 2000 to serve a new generation of students. The school bell dates from 1898. Academy award winning actresses Olivia De Havilland and Joan Fontaine are sisters who attended the Oak Street School. Olympic gold medal swimming champion Chris Von Salza also went to the Oak Street School. 5. Corner — 4h& Oak Street This was the original site of the Congregational Church, one of the community's most active and influential organizations. 6. Congregational Church Parsonage —14666 Oak Street The Congregational Church was considered to have the first church building in Saratoga Village, although the Methodist- Episcopal congregation began meeting in the area before 1850. The Congregational Church was at the corner of 4th and Oak, and this home was built around 1875 for its first parson, the Reverend William Merritt. The two -story house is of redwood construction in the modest vernacular style typical of pioneer homes of this age. 7. William F. King House - 14672 Oak Street In 1869, three enterprising businessmen opened the Saratoga Paper Mill at 6"' and Lumber Street, manufacturing "butcher's paper" for northern California. One of the partners, William King built this home for his family around 1870. The structure was remodeled several times during the last century. The paper mill burned down in 1883 and was not rebuilt. 8. Missionary Settlement House —14683 Oak Street The Congregational Church actively recruited retired clergymen and ministers to the Saratoga area, one of the reasons that the family of Abolitionist John Brown came to the area. This Victorian cottage was reportedly built around 1897 by Clarence George and church members later acquired it for use by visiting clergy. 9. Victorian House - 14690 Oak Street Early Saratoga had dozens of small Victorian cottages lining Oak Street and Lumber Street. Many were used by summer visitors who came to Saratoga for vacations. Built after Congress Springs became a popular resort, these little redwood cottages began to appear between 1885 and 1900. 10. Madronia Cemetery - 14766 Oak Street Land for a cemetery was donated to the community around 1854 by Jose Ramon Arguello, owner of the Quito Rancho, the Mexican land grant that once included much of Saratoga. The cemetery takes its name from the American mis- pronunciation of the word madrone, a colorful shrub that covered much of the area. The local cemetery association was formed in 1863 to manage the cemetery. Many notable residents are buried here, including 14 members of the family of the famed Abolitionist John Brown. 11. Victorian cottage - 14650 Sixth Street This charming little Victorian cottage was originally located at the corner of Oak Street and Los Gatos Road, the site of the Village Library. Originally the home of an early physician, the house was relocated to this site around 1926 when the library was built. 12. Site of Muwekma Ohlone Village /Site of Sacred Heart Church A sacred site throughout Saratoga's history, this was the original location for Sacred Heart Catholic Church. Services were held on this site from 1895 until 1961 when the congregation moved to their present location on Saratoga Avenue. After the church was demolished, local archeologists discovered the remains of a Muwekma Ohlone village on this site. Registered as site SC 1 -65, artifacts and materials discovered at the site were found to date back 6,400 years. Several Native American burials were found at this location. 13. John Henry House —14630 Big Basin Way The Saratoga Paper Mill, located just around the bend of the road, was one of Saratoga's earliest manufacturing businesses. Operated by steam power, the plant required the expertise of a steam engineer to maintain its boilers. The builder and original owner of dlis house was reportedly John Henry, the engineer at the paper works. This redwood cottage is of single wall construction, and built with square nails in the saltbox style typical of pioneer homes of the late 1860's. 15.Pettis Livery Stable — Mr. W. W. Pettis operated a stage line from this barn, taking passengers from the railroad station in Los Gatos about four miles away. When the Peninsular Interurban trolley line was completed in 1903, his service was discontinued. 16. Erwin T. King House —14605 Big Basin Way A partner in the Saratoga Paper Mill with his brother, Erwin King built a magnificent two -story home in 1875 when the mill was flourishing. He left the area when the mill burned in 1883. The building later became a boarding house and saloon. Originally a redwood structure with an imposing front porch, the building has been substantially remodeled. 17. Grover House —14521 Big Basin Way 18. The Green Store Building /the Kocher Building 14519 Big Basin Way Known locally as the Green Building because for many years it was painted green, this Western Falsefront store looks like many of the buildings that would have lined Lumber Street in the 1870's and 1880's. This is the last remaining early business building associated with the McCarthy family, Saratoga pioneers from 1852. 19. Sam Cloud House —14503 Big Basin Way Although these two buildings appear to be connected, they were built by different owners a decade or more apart. The residential structure was once the home of the Mr. & Mrs. Sam Cloud, owners of the hardware store next door. Mr. Cloud bought the store in 1893 and built this impressive and ornate two -story Victorian home in 1896. 20. Hutchinson Building /Cloud -Smith Store - 14501 Big Basin Way This stone structure and its twin next door are early reminders of Saratoga's first commercial area. The stone structures are very rare and may be the only ones extant in Santa Clara County. They were built around 1884 by John Hutchinson, an early Saratoga postmaster and original owner of the Saratoga limestone quarry. Sam Cloud bought the store building in 1893 and used the second floor for community events and social gatherings. Cloud's only child, Laura, married Tom Smith, and the business was operated as the Cloud -Smith Store after Sam Cloud's accidental death. He was killed in front of his store when a trolley jumped the tracks. 21. Sam Cloud's Barn - 20640 Third Street This structure has a limestone foundation and was probably built by John Hutchison to serve the livery and stage business along "Lumber Street ". The building has served a number of memorable local businesses including the Van Arsdale "Fixit Shop" and "Tollgate Printing ". The building was substantially renovated in 2007. 22. Hutchinson Building - 14495 Big Basin Way One of two early limestone structures, this building was erected by John Hutchinson in the 1880s. The lower part of the building was known as Oldham's Meat Market and the upstairs was known as Hutchinson's Hall, a place for meetings and dances. 23. Site of Saratoga Christian Church between 2nd and 3`d — Big Basin Way. Erected in 1880, this was the second congregation to build a house of worship. Members of this church later helped form the Saratoga Federated Church. 23. Saratoga National Bank — The Bank 14421 Big Basin Way Saratoga first Bank building was designed by the architectural firm of Wolfe & McKenzie around 1913. Dr. Hogg, a local investor was one of the founders, along with Charles Blaney and other community leaders. The bank became the Garden City Bank in 1917 and was later the local branch of the Bank of America. 24. Memorial Arch — Blaney Plaza - The Crossroads of Highway 9 and Saratoga Avenue The Memorial Arch is a Saratoga icon, a structure that characterizes the generous spirit of this community's residents. The land for the Plaza was donated by several local leaders including real estate developer Charles Blaney, one of California's first highway commissioners. The arch commemorates the death of several young men from Saratoga who died in World War I. The arch was designed in 1919 by noted landscape designed and artist Bruce Porter. The names of five young men are commemorated on the arch, which originally featured a goldfish pond at the base. Since it is such an important community symbol, the arch was chosen as the location for the official plaque designating the Saratoga community as State Registered Landmark No. 435. The plaque was installed in 1950 as part of the California Centennial celebration. 25. Saratoga Fire Bell — Front of the Fire House For many years, the Saratoga Fire Department was composed completely of volunteers, local merchants and farmers who would drop everything to immediately help neighbors in distress. This location has been the site of a Saratoga firehouse since 1924. This bell originally hung in a tower near 4`'' and Big Basin and was used to alert the Volunteers. It later hung in front of the Fireman's Hall on Oak Street. The bell was moved to this location in 2005 when the new firehouse was completed. 26. Methodist — Episcopal Church - 20490 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road Although this congregation held meetings in the Saratoga area as early as 1852, they did not build a church structure until 1895. Their belfry was added in 1903. Never a large group, the congregation merged with the Saratoga Federated Church. and sold their little chapel in 1924. The buyer for the church was acclaimed artist Theodore Wores, California's first important native -born artist. Wores studied art in Germany and France and won international acclaim for his impressionistic works. The building was Wores' studio and gallery until shortly before his death in 1939. The building retains decorative details added by Wores during his ownership. In recent years the building has been used as an antiques store, a photography studio and a retail store. 27. Saratoga Federated Church 20390 Park Place Local residents were so pleased with the design of the Foothill Club, just across the street, that they asked the architect, Julia Morgan, to design their Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Califomia 95070 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 14, 2008 TO: Heritage Preservation Commission FROM: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Determination if whether the existing structures on the site are historic Property Location: 13686 Quito Road, Saratoga, California Property APN: 403 -24- 001,008 Project Applicants: Associates One Property Owners: Associates One Project Summary The project site is currently developed with one single - family residence and three accessory structures including two garages, and one abandoned cottage on the eastern side of the site. The attached historical report for the property was originally prepared in October 2004. The project at that time was to demolish the existing structures on the site in association with a General Plan amendment and a rezoning of the 3.066 gross acre site to allow the construction of 22 market -rate condominium units. The application for this project has been withdrawn and is no longer an active project. The current project is also proposing to demolish the existing structures on the site. The lot would then be subdivided into four lots for the purpose of constructing four single - family homes and related site improvements (see attached site plan). Prior to demolition, the staff and the applicant request a determination from the Historical Preservation Commission (HPC) on the historical significance of the existing residence and accessory structures. The determination to allow the demolition would be based on the recommendation from the HPC. Historic Evaluation A Historical and Architectural Evaluation (The Report) was prepared in October 2004 by Archives & Architecture: Heritage Resource Partners (attached). The report states that the property is not currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Places, or in the City's Inventory List of Historic Properties. The report provides the historical background of the property, describes each building on the site, and the evaluation of significance of the buildings. The report concludes HPC October 14, 2008 Meeting Project Address: 13686 Quito Road, Saratoga, California Project Applicant: Associates One that the main house and the accessory buildings including the cottage, barn, and detached garage are not architecturally or historically significant. Decision by HPC The applicant is requesting a determination of the HPC regarding the historical significance of the structure. The following are options available to the Commission in reviewing this proposal: Determine that the structure is not historically significant: If the Commission determines that the structure is not historically significant, the property would not be listed on the Historic Resources Inventory. Proposed demolition and /or future alterations would not be subject to HPC review. 2. Determine that the property /structure is historically significant and direct staff to place the structure on the historical list: If the Commission determines that the property /structure is historically significant: ■ At least one (1) of the seven (7) criteria listed in the City code must be selected to reflect the reasons why the structure is significant. ' The HPC would need to determine that the proposed project either meets or does not meet the Secretary of Interior Standards (Standards) for historic properties. Suggestions to ensure compliance with the Standards may be provided. ■ Staff would place the property on the Historic Resources Inventory and proposed future alterations to the structures would require HPC review and would be required to meet Standards for historic properties. The seven Criteria are as follows (City Code §13- 15.010): (a) It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering or architectural history of the City, the County, the State or the nation; or (b) It is identified with persons or events significant in local, county, state or national history; or (c) It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials; or (d) It is representative of the notable design or craft of a builder, designer, or architect; or (e) It embodies or contributes to unique physical characteristics representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or district within the City; or (f) It represents a significant concentration or continuity of site, buildings, structures or objects, unified by past events or aesthetically by plan or physical or natural development; or Memorandum to the Saratoga Historic Preservation Commission Page 2 HPC October 14, 2008 Meeting Project Address: 13686 Quito Road, Saratoga, California Project Applicant: Associates One (g) It embodies or contributes to a unique natural setting or environment constituting a distinct area or district within the City having special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value. Attachments (1) Project Site Plan (2) Historical and Architectural Evaluation Report for 13686 Quito Road prepared by Archives and Architecture, dated October 2004. Memorandum to the Saratoga Historic Preservation Commission Page 3 NOTE: 1 PRIOR TO FOUNDATION INSPECTION BY THE CITY, THE LLS OF RECORD SHALL PROVIDE A / I WRITTEN CERTIFICATION THAT ALL BUILDING SET BACKS ARE PER THE APPROVED PLANS. o IX TO NNV rr v, sevewPEe -„RD IN ''SINGLE L SINGLE FAMILY \ FAMILY ESIDENCF�F RESIDES i \ / 1 LOT 2 f 3 SINGLE 1� LOT 4A SINGLE' c FAMILY nsrGPEE \I \ FAMILY LOT 3 \ RESIDENCE t 2 –o I _ LOTI /EEC I e% P GlE Gc Or, QUITO IL j ,I -- -- -�- -- -- -- - O"G M NT O RAtE MD,IT ,I ]' HIGH — K pNC rna;T a eAS[ueNT mom � NOTE: THIS PLAN IS INTENDED TO SHOW PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINTS, SITE ACCESS AND SETBACK QUITO ROAD INFORMATION. FOR GRADING AND LANDSCAPING, REFER TO GRADING AND LANDSCAPE PLANS RESPECTIVELY 10' 2G' PLANNING SUBMITTAL : APRIL 2008 �I BARRY SWENSON BUILDER 777 North First Street F fth Floor San Jose, Ca 951 2 tat (408) 287-0 246 fax: (408) 99 &1737 c n —e Rexa�onv. CO -)(>T 0 2008 BARRY S SON BUIDM Una O w I G4'a5Y0 R. , cy'te G9 pet c 01 188E S ♦�TF cK cAT�F� Doe. APRL 30. 2006 AP J* R 9107 IL t !lMwt r- 1 `I Z w F- AIOC, HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL EVALUATION of two parcels (APNs 403 -24 -001 and 403 -24 -008) at: 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road Saratoga, California (Santa Clara County) Prepared For: Holman & Associates, Archeological Consultants 3615 Folsom Street San Francisco, CA 94110 Prepared by: Archives & Architecture: Heritage Resource Partners 1901 S. Bascom Avenue, Suite 1530 Campbell, CA 95008 408.369.5683 phone 408.369.5682 fax Bonnie Montgomery, Consulting Historian Charlene Duval, Historian, Partner Leslie A. G. Dill, Architectural Historian, Partner October 11, 2004 i Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 2 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Qualifications of Consultants ........................................................... ..............................3 Methodology.................................................................................... ..............................3 SurveyStatus of Property ................................:............................... ..............................3 LocationMap ................................................................................... ..............................4 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND . General Historical Background ........................................................ ..............................5 Study Area Historical Background .................................................. ..............................7 DOCUMENTATION OF THE PROPERTY Description of the Property, ........................................................................................... 8 MainHouse ...................................................................................... ..............................8 Barn.............. ............................... .................................................. ..............................9 DetachedGarage ............................................................................. .............................10 Cottage.................................................:.::....................:.....:......... .............................10 Setting............................................................................................. .............................10 EVALUATION FOR SIGNIFICANCE National Register of Historic Places ............................................... .............................11 California Register of Historical Resources ................................... .............................11 Evaluation for State and National Significance .............................. .............................12 MainHouse ......................................................................... .............................12 Cottageand Outbuildings ................................................... .............................12 Setting................................................................................. .............................12 City of Saratoga Historic Resources Survey ................................... .............................12 Buildings (Main House, Cottage, Barn, Garage) ................ .............................13 Setting................................................................................. .............................13 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Analysis .............. .............................14 PHOTOGRAPHS............................................................................................. .............................15 LITERATURE CITED AND CONSULTED ................................................... .............................20 'APPENDIX State Recordation Forms (DPR 523) .............................. ............................... (Attached) ''`' Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 3 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 INTRODUCTION Historical and architectural research and evaluation of the Quito Road Condominium Project in Saratoga, CA was conducted in July through October of 2004 by the firm of Archives & Architecture: Heritage Resource Partners (A &A). Miley Holman of Holman & Associates asked the firm of A &A to undertake historic research and documentation. The subject property, located on the east side of Quito Road, southwest of the Southern Pacific Railroad and northwest of Wildcat Creek, is identified as 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road. The Assessor's Parcel Numbers are 40' 3-24-001 and 403 -24 -008. Qualifications of Consultants Leslie A. G. Dill, Architectural Historian and Partner with the firm of A &A, has a Master of _ Architecture with a certificate in Historic Preservation from the University of Virginia. Charlene Duval, Historian and Partner, has a Master of Social Science with emphasis in History, Geography, and Archeology from San Josh State University. Bonnie Montgomery, consulting _ historian, has a Master of Arts degree and is owner of Bay and Valley Publishers, a firm specializing in local history books. Ms. Dill and Ms. Duval meet the Secretary of the Interior's qualifications to perform identification, evaluation, registration, and treatment activities as Architectural Historian and Historian, respectively, in compliance with state and federal environmental laws. They are listed with the Northwest Information Center of the California State Office of Historic Preservation; the Northwest Information Center utilizes the criteria of the National Park Service outlined in 36 CFR Part 61. Methodology _. Leslie A. G. Dill, Charlene Duval, and Bonnie Montgomery conducted a field survey of the subject property in September 2004. The buildings and site were examined. Notes on the architecture, characteristic features of the buildings, and the neighborhood context were made. Photographs were taken of the interior and exterior. Architectural descriptions within this report were written based on these notes and photographs. Research was undertaken that included work in repositories of local historic source material. These repositories included the California Room of the Martin Luther King Jr. Main Library San Jose, the historians' personal archives, the Santa Clara County Clerk- Recorder's Office and Office of the Surveyor, as well as conducting oral interviews with persons knowledgeable of the property's history. This report was prepared utilizing the methodology recommended by the National Park Service, as outlined in Preservation Briefs #17 (Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character), and 435 (Understanding Old Buildings: The Process of Architectural Investigation). Survey Status of Property The site is not currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or in the City's inventory: "Saratoga's Heritage: A Survey of Historic Resources." Historical and Architectural Evaluation 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 LOCATION MAP topozone 1 _ `mot N ar Wr "� � �: � v�r��ri � � Qtt<4 i ej- 9n�,�deyz 2- 3 � _ .�Tr 1G -a�✓�a" . rt sf s�� aw�i. � �.P, '"4 .� i378;"n.�� 1�-i'r a `#'s t --`•r� 1"'� MR 1�T �� � ems• � 3 t }� �� N�y�� .0 •[`' rj lbfarseari ire ' 1 -- pg t �:- i a( left at t p 1,01! 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 ka 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 ai Map center is UTM 10 589260E 4125264N (WG584 /NAD83) SAN JOSE WEST quadrangle M= '_x.962 Projection is UTM Zone 10 NAD83 Datum G =0.61 Page 4 Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 5 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND General Historical Background The study area was originally part of the rangelands of Mission Santa Clara until secularization of the California missions in 1836. In 1841 the area was granted to Josh Zenon Fernandez and his son -in -law Josh Noriega, and became known as Rancho Quito. This 13,310 -acre rancho was originally the mission's dairy ranch and may have been named for Tito, a mission neophyte responsible for the dairy herd. Both Noriega and Fernandez came to California with the Hijar- Padres Colony in 18' )4. Including many well- educated and professional men, this party of 250 settlers was the last major group of immigrants to come to California prior to American take- over. Although the original intent of the colonizing venture failed, members of the party became prominent in local and departmental politics and government throughout California (Hendry & Bowman 1940; Hoover 1966). Fernandez, born in 1799, served as one of San Jose's first professional schoolteachers. Although he taught for only a short period, he held several civic offices in San Jose and Monterey during the late 18' )Os and early 1840s. Settling in San Jose in 1835, Noriega. also became immediately involved in local government and served with John Burton on the ayuntamiento (council) of the pueblo de San Jose (Bancroft 1964). In addition to his share of the Quito Rancho, he was granted ranchos in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Fernandez and Noriega transferred ownership of the rancho to Ignacio Alviso on July 8, 1844. Alviso was also the grantee of Rancho Rincon de los Esteros in the northern part of the county, and was the namesake for the town of Alviso: The adobe house constructed by Alviso on Quito Rancho lands was located north of the study area, near the intersection of Saratoga Avenue and Quito Road. In 1848, Ignacio Alviso died, and the Quito grant was willed to his heir, Manuel Alviso. After years of litigation with other Alviso heirs, Manuel's ownership was confirmed in 1.866 (Hendry and Bowman 1940), but the subject property had already passed out of his hands. In 1858, Jose Ram6n Arguello, his mother, Maria Soledad Ortega de Arguello (the widow of Governor Luis Arguello), and his business partner S. M. Mezes became possessors of a large portion of the Quito Rancho along its original northeast boundary, including the subject property. The property may have been acquired through Jose Ram6n Arguello's marriage to Maria Isabel Alviso in 1851 (Northrop 1986). Maria Isabel Alviso, born in 1832, was the daughter of Anastacio Alviso and granddaughter of Ignacio Alviso. The Arguello family is noted for their pioneering establishment of a commercial olive orchard of 81 acres on the Quito Rancho, north of the subject property. Josh Ram6n Arguello established this orchard around 1865. Over the years, the Arguello family, which retained only a small portion of their original holdings, sold off much of their portion of the Quito Rancho (Foote 1888). On December 30, 1868, Soledad Ortega de Arguello sold 164 acres to Ebenezer Francis Reynolds (Deeds 12:430). Reynolds, who later was the constable of Los Gatos, appeared to have farmed the area until he sold the same 164 acres to William D. Rucker in November 1875 (Deeds 37:607). The boundaries of this transaction are shown on the 1876 Thompson & West map of Santa Clara County. The Reynolds house was identified on the Thompson & West map as lying south of San Tomas Aquinas Creek, outside of the study area. William D. Rucker was the younger brother of prominent realtor Joseph E. Rucker and Mary Rucker Campbell, the wife of the founder of the city of Campbell. He owned the tract for only five months. Historical and Architectural Evaluation 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 Page 6 The property went through a number of other hands and was subdivided further, until Edward and Elizabeth McLeod sold a 14.96 -acre lot to George C. Meeker in October 1881 (Deeds 61:242). This lot, which included the subject property area, was one of three similarly sized ranch lots on the east side of Quito Road. George C. Meeker, an architect, was born in New Jersey in 1850. His younger sister Annie married the artist Raymond Dabb Yelland in 1874. That year, Raymond and Annie (Meeker) Yelland sailed around the Horn to San Francisco so he could take a position as an art instructor at Mills College in Oakland (Hughes 2004). George Meeker followed his sister to Oakland by 1878, when two of his residential designs built in Berkeley appeared in the American Architect and Building News (10/26/1878, p. 141). In the 1880 census, Meeker was living with his widowed mother in Oakland; he apparently never married. William A. Yelland, the nephew of Raymond Yelland and adopted son of the Yellands, bought the adjacent lot to the north of the Meeker parcel on Quito Road at the same time that Meeker bought the subject property. Through the 1880s, George C. Meeker was sporadically listed in the county directories as a fruit rancher in Los Gatos. Meeker must have set out his orchards and vineyards soon after purchasing the ranch, as in 1885 H. A. Brainard reported that the plantings appeared about four years old: of trees, 350 prune, 350 apricot, 250 peach, 50 nectarine, 50 cherry, 50 apple, and 50 pear; 3000 vines of Muscat, Malaga and other table grapes." Between 1882 and 1889, Meeker traveled back and forth between the Santa Clara Valley and Seattle, where he was the junior partner of architect William E. Boone (1830- 1921), recognized as the most important Seattle architect before the fire of 1889 (Ochsner 1994). George C. Meeker began to be listed in the city directories as a resident in downtown San Jose in 1887. Between 1887 and 1889, Meeker worked as an architect in the office of prominent San Jose designer- builder Jacob Lenzen..Starting around 1891, Meeker became the partner of architect Francis W. Reid. The year 1891 was a busy one for the firm of Reid & Meeker, who designed dozens of residences and public buildings in San Jose, Los Gatos, and the greater Santa Clara Valley. The firm was profiled in the 1892 Commercial History of San Jose: "Their specialty is first -class work, and by good taste, skill in design, and fidelity to clients' interests, they have acquired awell- established business and enjoy an enviable reputation." Francis W. Reid moved to Oakland around 1896, and Meeker continued in a solo practice in San Josh through about 190' :). On January 12, 1900, George C. Meeker sold his Los Gatos ranch to his brother -in -law, Raymond Dabb Yelland (Deeds 225:418). The 1895/1899 United States Geological Survey map shows no residence on the George Meeker ranch. There are, however, two driveways and two houses in close proximity on the adjacent William A. Yelland ranch. When George Meeker and, later, Raymond and Annie Yelland visited their Quito Road property, they could possibly have stayed on the William A. Yelland ranch to the north. Raymond Dabb Yelland directed the San Francisco School of Design and also taught at University of California in Berkeley for many years. His many pupils include Homer Davenport, Alexander Harrison, Maynard Dixon, and other noted artists. At his summer home on the Monterey Peninsula, he painted many coastal landscapes; the marshes near his home in Oakland also provided ample subject matter (Hughes 2004). His 1880 painting "Summer Morning Near __ Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 7 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 Los Gatos" provides some evidence that the Meeker and Yelland families were familiar with this area before they purchased their ranches (Perry 1999). 0 1880. Garzoli Gallery, San Rafael, California. Raymond Yelland died on July 27, 1900, and the property passed on to his widow, Annie (Meeker) Yelland. Mrs. Yelland continued to live in Oakland; and after 1903, her brother George Meeker moved from San Jose to live with her. Meeker continued to practice architecture in Oakland and lived with his sister until his death in 1919. In 1905, the Los Gatos -San Jose Interurban Railroad cut through the property of Annie Yelland. (The Southern Pacific Railroad line continues to operate on those tracks.) The parcel sold by Annie Yelland to the railroad is APN 403 -24 -001, the northernmost triangular- shaped parcel of the study area. This parcel became known as the "railroad parcel' (Deeds 321:453). Sometime between 1905 and 1917, Annie Yelland appears to have constructed the small house and barn that are currently located on the primary study area, APN 403 -24 -008, perhaps with the architectural assistance of the property's former owner, her brother George C. Meeker. Study Area Historical Background On June 12, 1917, Annie Yelland sold 13.585 acres to Charles and Hattie Luce (Deeds 459:444). According to their youngest daughter, Dorothy Luce Schlaegel, soon after the Luces purchased the ranch, Mr. Luce built a two -story farmhouse on the south side of the creek. Mr. and Mrs. Luce and their six children were living on Quito Road at the time of the 1920 census. Mrs. Schlaegel remembered that the subject house and barn were occupied by prune picking families that worked for her father. On May 19, 1927, Charles and Hattie Luce sold APN 403 -24 -008, bounded on the south by the San Tomas Aquinas Creek, to Millie Dean Graves (Official Records 323:175). At about that time, her brother, Clyde K. Graves, began to be listed in the Los Gatos directories as an orchardist on Quito Road. It appears that Millie Graves lived in Los Gatos and her brother and his family lived on the study area property. In the 1930 census, Clyde K. Graves, age 58, was living on the Quito Road ranch with four of his seven sons: Clyde Jr. (age 21), Donald (age 19), Earl (17), and Mayne (age 15). If not already constructed to accommodate Luce's fruit ranch workers (as is likely from the similarity of trim and materials), Graves could have constructed Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 8 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 the one -room cottage located north of the main residence (an old sign indicates that it was known as 14110 Quito Road). The Luces continued to live on their remaining ranch property. After Clyde K. Graves died in August 1934, his son, Clyde Graves Jr., took over the daily operation of the ranch. On December 15, 1936, Millie Graves deeded the ranch to her 23 -year- old nephew Earl Graves (Official Records 801:211). Millie Graves died a few months later, in March 1937. On April 22, 1940, Earl and his wife Esther deeded the property to his younger brother Mayne Knox Graves (Official Records 982:233). Two months later, Mayne and his wife Ruth - transferred the property to his older brother Reginald Graves (Official Records 1010:192, 6/28/1940). Millie Graves is shown as being the owner of the "railroad parcel" (APN 403 -24- 001) on School District Maps of the. period; however,.deeds were not located that showed that transfer of ownership. On March 6, 1942, however, a deed was recorded transferring ownership of the railroad parcel from the Southern Pacific .Company to Reginald Graves (Official Records 1086:304). Reginald Graves, a machinist at FMC, lived in the main house until his death in January 1985. It is likely that it was Reginald Graves who built the two - bedroom, one - bathroom addition to the cottage. His widow Pearl sold both parcels to Carl and Judith Franklin the following year (Official Records J599:171). The Franklins sold the property to Nadar Eghtesad in 1995 (Official Records N797:220), who in turn sold the property to the current owners in 1997 (Doc. No. 13853819, 9/11/1997). DOCUMENTATION OF THE PROPERTY Description of the Property The subject structures and parcels are located on the east side of Quito Road within the city limits of Saratoga. The roughly triangular study site is southwest of the Southern Pacific Railroad right -of -way and northwest of Wildcat Creek. The subject area currently consists of two lots; the shared property line runs east -west just north of the approximate center of the properties. The northern parcel is fully triangular; the southern parcel has a truncated eastern corner, where Wildcat Creek takes a bend. There are two residential structures and two detached outbuildings on the site. Both residential structures are one -story cottages. The main house is currently occupied as a residence. It is roughly centered in the site. The smaller cottage is north of the main house, on the east -west property line; it is currently vacant. One of the outbuildings is a two -story barn with one -story wings; the other is a one -story garage. The houses and other structures occupy a site that remains unique and relatively unaffected by the surrounding residential development. The setting features many mature oak trees and a number of old orchard trees. The site has little paving or other landscaping improvements; however, there is an asphalt driveway that traverses the property south of the house, from Quito Road to the barn. The bank of the creek is stabilized with a continuous stone wall protected by a concrete cap. Main House The main house is a modest vernacular cottage with some unique, but simple, trim detailing. It occupies a footprint roughly in the shape of two offset rectangles. The earlier portion of the '-' Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 9 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 house has a simple, rectangular plan with a side - gabled roof, a small entrance stoop projects from the long south elevation. The porch roof is gabled, and its eaves are lower than the house eaves. The more recent wing of the house, also rectangular in plan, is offset to the west of the main wing, with a west- facing side gable, so the main facade visible from Quito Road features a pair of offset gable ends, one original and one more recent, both roofs have moderate slopes and are similar in size and massing from this viewing angle. The north wing adjoins the center of the main house with a low, north -south gabled roof, so from the east, the main wing is gabled with a cross -gable set back to the north. There is one metal chimney that projects through the roof of the original wing. The house is built of wood frame construction, including full- dimension, rough -sawn rafters at the exposed original eaves. No foundation is visible at the original front wing, but the rear addition is supported on a concrete foundation. The finished floor of the house is at grade. The exterior of the original wing is clad with dual -bevel drop siding. The detailing of the siding at the window trim indicates that this siding could be concealing an earlier wall finish, but this could not be confirmed from visual observation. The north wing is clad in v- groove horizontal siding. Most of the original fenestration includes six - over -six double -hung wood windows with traditional sash proportions and upper sash dog ears, but the original house also includes a sun porch at the east end,, with large, square, 2x2 hoppers on three sides. The fenestration in the new wing consists of visibly more modern wood, one - over -one double -hung windows. The original windows are trimmed with flat -board casings and aprons and topped by a flat -board hood supported on scroll -cut brackets. The windows in the addition have only simple board trim. Composition shingles protect the roof. The interior of the main house has many original features, including knotty -pine wall paneling and original cabinetry. Barn To the east of the main house, separated from the house by a small open patio and unpaved driveway area, is a small barn with a gabled two -story center wing sandwiched between a pair of one -story, shed - roofed, side wings that are clearly later additions. The center wing is clad in exposed horizontal boards over redwood stud framing and softwood floors on redwood joists, the north side addition has vertical plank walls and a tongue - and - groove wood floor; the south side addition has vertical board- and -batten siding, and a concrete and gravel floor that connects to an asphalt driveway. All of the moderately sloped roofs of the barn are covered in corrugated galvanized sheets, and the barn faces west toward Quito Road and the back of the main house. The center wing of the barn has large, one -lite fixed windows that appear, from their proportions and trim, to be replacement sash. Upstairs is a pair of these windows; downstairs a smaller pair of individual windows flanks the diagonal- board - and - batten -clad door. Also upstairs are pairs of hopper or awning side windows, immediately above the side shed roofs. The north side addition has a ribbon of five 2x3 -lite windows, facing north, that appears to have been built up from salvaged sash from an earlier building. The north barn wing is accessible from a wide front opening with a pair of out - swinging one -panel doors. The south side addition has a ribbon of five 1 -lite fixed windows facing south; this wing has a sliding garage door clad in matching vertical siding. Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 10 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 Detached Garage A detached two -car garage is located to the northeast of the house, beyond an unpaved driveway area; the rear of the garage is parallel to, and immediately above, the bank of the creek, and the garage doors face west toward Quito Road. The building has a square plan, and is built of conventional wood framing with horizontal v- groove siding and a front- gabled roof covered with corrugated metal roofmg. The garage doors are vertical board and batten panels, and the fenestration incorporates a variety of window types and patterns, which were clearly salvaged from older buildings. Cottage To the north and slightly to the east of the main cottage (to the northwest of the garage), and almost engulfed by vegetation, is a one -story, one -room cottage with a rectangular plan and a modest pair of additions to the rear (north). The main portion of the cottage has a gabled roof from front to back (south to north) with exposed rafter tails at the shallow eaves.. The east half of the rear is covered up by a small, gabled addition with an additional small shed- roofed. attachment to its rear. The cottage and its additions are clad in horizontal v- groove siding; the structure is wood -frame with the only visible concrete footings at the rear addition. The centered front door faces south; it is sheltered under a full -width recessed porch. Simple 4x4 porch posts support the forward extension of the.roofline; handrails link the posts although the porch floor is at grade. The porch ceiling is sloped at the outer sides, and clad with beaded board paneling. At the wall /porch ceiling is a line of sawtooth trim. To each side of the door is a symmetrically . placed individual window. The windows are trimmed by flat board casings, topped by a flat - board hood supported by a simple pair of triangular board brackets. The west side has a pair of individually placed windows with trim that matches the front fagade. The east side features a siding-clad, cantilevered stovepipe surround and a hopper window over the internal kitchen cabinetry. The rear additions include one window on the west, and a modest doorway to the rear (north). This cottage seems in poor physical condition due to deterioration of the roof (now covered by bare plywood) and apparent vandalism and/or lack of maintenance. Setting The setting of the two parcels includes many mature trees, including massive oaks, orchard trees (some extremely careworn in their old age), sycamores, and others.y Near the property line, the northwest and west bank of Wildcat Creek is supported by an old stonework retaining wall with a concrete cap. This wall is distinctive for its rustic appearance and representation of engineering techniques prior to the more widespread use of concrete to line creek channels. EVALUATION FOR SIGNIFICANCE Buildings and sites associated with the lives of persons that provided value to their community where the remembrances of those personages and their contributions to society, important to local, state or national history are potentially eligible for the National, California and /or local registers. Three sets of criteria are utilized in evaluating the potential historical and architectural significance of strictures and sites within the City of Saratoga. The first set of criteria used is "- Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 11 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 defined by the National Register of Historic Places, which was established by the National Park Service. The California State Historic Resources Commission developed the second set.of criteria used, for the California Register of Historic Resources. Lastly, properties in Saratoga are evaluated according to City's Selection Criteria for structures of potential historical value. National Register of Historic Places To meet the criteria of the National Register of Historic Places, a building, site, or object must have architectural and historical integrity, and satisfy at least one of the following conditions: Criteria A it is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or Criteria B it is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or Criteria C it embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represents the work of a master, or that possesses high artistic values, or that represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or Criteria D it has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. California Register of Historic Resources In order for a resource to be eligible for the California Register of Historic Resources, a building, site or object must meet three standards of review: A property must be significant at the local, state or national level, under one or more of the following criteria: 1. It is associated with events or patterns of events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of the history and cultural heritage of California and the United States. 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to the nation or California's past. 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. 4. It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the State or the Nation. The resource must retain enough of its historic character or appearance to be recognizable as an historic property, and to convey the reason for its significance; and It is fifty years old or older (except for rare cases of structures of exceptional significance). Resources already listed or determined eligible for the National Register, or California Historic Landmarks 4770 or higher are also, by definition, eligible for the California Register. A property is automatically eligible for the Register if it has been listed under any state, national or local historic resource criteria, unless the preponderance of evidence indicates otherwise. Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 12 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 Evaluation for State and' National Significance The buildings and site were evaluated for historical significance based on age, integrity, historical association, and architectural value. The age of the cottages and outbuildings could not be conclusively determined from available historical resources; however, it is clear that all four buildings were on the site prior to 190; thus, all four buildings meet the 50 -year threshold of both the National and California Registers. Main House The main house is not architecturally significant; it is not a representative example of any particular style of architecture, and its form and detailing, although interesting, do not represent any widespread or local patterns of vernacular constriction or development. Because of its lack of association with a particular style of architecture or vernacular patterns of design, the house does not appears eligible for National Register listing under Criterion C or the California Register according to Criterion 3. The families associated with the Quito Road property were active in the local arts community and associated with orchard development in Saratoga; however, the Quito Road site does not embody the artistic, architectural, or agricultural contributions of these families to their community in a way that would make this property significant based on such historical associations. Because the property does not illustrate the history of significant events or personages, the property would not be considered eligibleTor the National or California . Registers based on its association with personages or events or patterns of development, Criteria A, B and 1, 2, respectively. Cottage and Outbuildings Without traditional stylistic detailing, and without illuminating vernacular design features, the one-room. cottage and two outbuildings are not architecturally significant, nor.do they physically represent events or patterns of history, nor do they illustrate any association with significant personages. The cottage, barn, and detached garage are therefore not eligible for the National or California registers. Setting The two parcels include many mature trees that add to the setting of the parcel; however, they are not associated directly as historically significant landscaping due to any associations with design, personages, events or patterns of development. Additional, the design of the setting does not represent a supporting setting for a significant building design because the architecture itself is not significant. The historic retaining wall along the northwest bank of Wildcat Creek is distinctive for its age and use of stone and concrete, but it is not individually connected, through historical documentation, with local events, personages, or patterns of development that would make it eligible for either the National or California Registers. With additional research, this stonework might be determined part of a wider representation of vernacular stonework and/or early creek engineering; however, this context has not been determined, and was outside the scope of this property study. City of Saratoga Historic Resources Survey Under the City of Saratoga procedures for recording historic properties, structures of potential historical value are evaluated according to the following Selection Criteria: Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 13 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 a. The property exemplifies or reflects special elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering or architectural history of the City, the County, the State or the nation; or b. The property is identified with persons or events significant in local, county, state or national history; or C. The property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship; or d. The property is representative of the notable design or craft of a builder, designer, or architect; or e. The property embodies or contributes to unique physical characteristics representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or district within the City; or f. The property represents a significant concentration or continuity of site, buildings, structures or objects, unified by past events or aesthetically by plan or physical or natural development; or g. The property embodies or contributes to a unique natural setting or environment constituting a distinct area or district within the City having special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value. Buildings (Main House, Cottage, Barn, Detached Garage) Because they are not associated with historical personages or events that exemplify special historical value to the City of Saratoga, the main house, cottage, barn, and garage at 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road do not qualify for the City of Saratoga Historic Resources Survey as per Criteria a or b. The four buildings on this site do not embody distinctive characteristics of an architectural style, type, period or method of construction, nor is the design representative of the work of notable designers or craftsmen. Because the buildings do not represent important standards of design, either through architectural merit or vernacular patterns of design, the buildings do not appear eligible for the Saratoga Heritage Resource Inventory under any of their architectural criteria, but particularly Criteria c and d. The buildings on the parcel do not contribute to a broader district or neighborhood to meet the local survey requirements as required by Criteria e or f, the parcel and its buildings are physically and visually isolated, with little or no continuity between them and surrounding parcels. Setting The setting of the two parcels includes many mature trees that may be determined locally important; however that evaluation is outside the scope of this report. Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 14 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 The stonework along Wildcat Creek does appear to meet.local Criterion a: "The property ...reflects special elements of the ...engineering ...history of the City." California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Analysis Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a "project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment." In this context, a historic resource is one that is listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources. The California Environmental Quality Act identifies demolition of historic structures as a significant impact on the environment, and modification of historic resources as potentially having-significant impacts on the environment. The threshold for significance, for listing on a local register to be eligible for the California Register, must be established through a public process and can be quantitative or qualitative. Because the house and cottage at 13656 and 14110 Quito Road do not appear to qualify for the California Register of Historic Resources, the buildings would not be considered historic resources under CEQA. Demolition or substantial alteration of the structures would, therefore, not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historic resource and would not, in turn, result in a significant effect on the environment. The two outbuildings do not appear to qualify for the California Register of Historic Resources either. Although these buildings are not proposed for demolition, their rehabilitation need not ZD meet the Secretary's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties to avoid an impact under CEQA. The stonework retaining wall along the northwest bank of the creek is a distinctive built feature on the. property. Modernization of the creek bed by replacing the stone retaining walls with concrete could be considered an impact to the feature, but the stone retaining wall does not appear eligible for either the California or National Registers, so modification of the wall would not be considered an impact to an historic resource under CEQA. Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 18 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 Above: Barn from Southwest, L. Dill, 09/08/04 Below: Garage from Southwest, L. Dill, 09/08/04 Historical and Architectural Evaluation 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 LITERATURE CITED AND CONSULTED American Architect and Building News 1886 George C. Meeker Drawings 26 October. [http• / /www lib umassd.edu/ reference /stickarch/Test/AABN.cfml Bancroft, H. H. 1940 California and Pioneer Index. Baltimore: Regional. Publishing Co. Brainard, H. C. 1887 Brainard's Atlas of Santa Clara County. 1886. On file at the California Room, Martin Luther King Jr. Library, San Josh. California Death Index 1905 -1997 [http: / /www.vitalsearch- ca.coml Dallas, A. 1994 Los Gatos Observed. Los Gatos, Infospect Press. Foote, H. S. 193' ) Pen Pictures from the "Garden of the World. " Chicago: Lewis Publishing Company. Hendry, G. W. and J. N. Bowman 1941 The Spanish and Mexican Adobe and Other Buildings in the Nine San Francisco Counties, 1776 to about 1850, Part VII. Unpublished manuscript at the Bancroft Library, Berkeley. Hoover, Rensch, and Rensch 1942 Historic Spots in California. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Hughes, E. M. 2004 Artists in California, 1786 -1940 (3rd. ed., 2 vols.). Sacramento: Crocker Art Museum. Page 20 Northrop, Marie E. 1987 Spanish- lMexican Families of Early California: 1769 -1850. Volume I. - Burbank: Southern California Genealogical Society. Oakland Tribune 1934 Rites Held for Mrs. [Annie] Yelland. September 14. Ochsner, J. K. 1995 William E. Boone, in Shaping Seattle Architecture: A Historical Guide to the Architects (J. K. Ochsner, ed.). Seattle: University of Washington Press. Historical and Architectural Evaluation Page 21 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 Pacific Press 1892 Commercial History of San Jose. Perry, C. 1988 Pacific Arcadia: Images of California,. 1600- 1915. New York: Oxford University Press. San Josd City Directories [and other Santa Clara County towns] 1870 -1979 San Jose Mercury Herald 1935 Saratogan Kills Self with Rifle [Clyde Kalloch Graves]. August 22. 1936 Last Rites Today for Aged Resident [Millie Dean Graves]. March 16. Santa Clara County 1848 -2004 Deeds and Official Records. On file at the Santa Clara County Clerk Recorder's Office. 1866 -1940 Great Register of Voters. On file at the California Room, Martin Luther King Jr. Public Library, San Josh. Santa Clara County School District Maps c1950s On file at the Office of the County Surveyor. Schlaegel, Dorothy (Luce) 2004 Personal communication with B. Montgomery. September 22. [Danville, CA.] Snyder; J. W. 1975 Index of San Francisco Building, 1879 -1900. Masters thesis, University of California, Berkeley. Thompson and West 1876 Historical Atlas of Santa Clara County. San Francisco: Thompson and West, [San Josh: Smith and McKay Printing Co., reprinted 1973]. United States Population Census 1852 -1930 Santa Clara County. United States Geological Survey 1899 San Jose 15 minute Quadrangle. Historical and Architectural Evaluation 13686 (and 14110) Quito Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 .b State Recordation Forms (DPR523) Page 22 r1l Page 1 of 13 *Resource Name or# (Assigned by recorder): SAR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 P1. Other identifier: Quito Road Condominium Project *P2. Location: ❑ Not for Publication ® Unrestricted *a. County Santa Clara County and (P2b and Plc or P2d. Attach a location map as necessary.) 'b.USGS7.6Quad San Jose West Date 1961, Ph Rev 1980 T 8S ; R 1W ; Mount Diablo B.M. c. Address: 13686 and 14110 Quito Road City Saratoga Zip 95070 d. UTM:(give more than one for large and /or linear resources) Zone 10 ; 589260E mE/ 4125264N mN e.Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) E side of Quito Rd between SPRR & Wildcat Creek; APN# 403 -24 -001 & APN# 403 -24 -008 *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements, include design, material, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The subject structures and parcels are located on the east side of Quito Road within the city limits of Saratoga. The roughly triangular study site is southwest of the Southern Pacific Railroad right -of -way and northwest of Wildcat Creek. The subject area currently consists of two lots; the shared property line runs east -west just north of the approximate center of the properties. The northern parcel is fully triangular; the southern parcel has a truncated eastern corner where Wildcat Creek takes a bend. There are two residential structures and two detached outbuildings on the site. Both residential structures are one -story cottages. The main house is currently occupied as a residence. It is roughly centered in the site. The smaller cottage is northeast of the main house, on the east -west property line; it is currently vacant. One of the outbuildings is a two -story barn with one -story wings; the other is a one -story garage. (See page 4, DPR523L, Continuation Sheet) *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP3. Multiple family property *P4. Resources Present ® Building ® Structure O Object O Site ❑ District []Element of District C) Other (Isolates, etc.) Description of Photo: /, date, accession #) *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none ".) Historical and Architectural Evaluation, Arc] *Attachments: ❑ None ® Continuation Sheet ❑ District Record OR Location Map ® Building, Structure, and Object Record O Linear Feature Record O Sketch Map 0 Archaeological Record O Milling Station Record DPR 523A (1/95) i House from SE, 09/08/04 Date Constructed /Age and Source: istoric ❑ Prehistoric ❑ Both 1y 20th century /maps, actories, etc. )wner and Address: )ciates I i E1 Camino Real Unit 209 Altos, CA 94022 recorded By: (Name, Lion, and address) 11, C.Duval, B.Montgomery ives & Architecture S. Bascom Ave., Ste 1530 bell, CA 95008 )ate Recorded: 10/13/04 Survey Type:(Describe) Intensive lives & Architecture, Oct 11, 2UU4 ❑ Rock Art Record ❑ Other (List): ❑ Artifact Record O Photograph Record * Required Information Page 2 of 13 *NRHP /CRHR Status Code 6Z Resource Name (Assigned by recorder) SAR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 B1. Historic Name: B2. Common Name: B3. Original Use: Residential /Agricultural B4. Present Use: Residential *B5. Architectural Style: Vernacular *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) *137. Moved? ® No El Yes ❑ Unknown Date: Original Location: *B8. Related Features: Main House, Cottage, Barn, Garage, Retaining wall at creek B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown *B10. Significance: Theme Architecture and Shelter Area: Saratoga Period of Significance: n/a Property Type: Residential Applicable Criteria: n/a (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) The primary house associated with this property, as well as an ancillary cottage and related outbuildings are not historically or architecturally significant within the context of the development of the city of Saratoga and its environs. The older house and barn.located on the subject property may have been constructed sometime prior to 1917 for Raymond and /or Annie Yelland who resided in Oakland, or their brother -in -law George Meeker (between 1895 and 1900), or by the subsequent owners (Charles and Hattie Luce). The small ancillary one -room cottage was constructed by 1930 for either the ranch workers who lived on the site prior to 1927, or by Clyde Graves who, with his family, was operating the ranch by 1927. The additions to this cottage occurred sometime after 1940 when the property was owned and occupied by Reginald'Graves. The buildings are vernacular and not distinctive examples,.of local rural building types common to the Santa Clara County during the first half of the twentieth.century. The families associated with the properties since' 1900.are not known for specific contributions to the agricultural development of the region, nor for their significant participation in community affairs." Although it is possible the main house was constructed -by architect" .,,George Meeker,'the.extant building does not exhibit characteristics that would associate-it with this earlier period. (Continued 'on page 5; DPR523L „ Continuation Sheet) B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (list attributes and codes) '1312. References: American Architect and Building News 1886 George C. Meeker_ Drawings 26 October. (http: / /'. .lib.umassd.edu /reference /stickarch /Test /AA- BN.Cfmj Bancroft, H. H. 1940 California and Pioneer Index. Baltimore: Regional Publishing Co. Brainard, H. C. 1887 Brainard's Atlas of Santa Clara County,. 1886. On file'at the California Room, Martin Luther King Jr. Library, 'San Jose. California Death Index' ' 1905 -1997 ( http : / /�.vitalseazch- ca:comi (Continued on page 7, DPR523L, Continuation Sheet) B13. Remarks: House and Cottage proposed for demolition *B14. Evaluator: Leslie Dill *Date of Evaluation: October 13,' 2004 (This space reserved for official comments.) DPR 523B (1195) (Sketch Map with north arrow requirea.) See ne::t page. =or lacati�n Map *Required Information F State of California -.The DEPARTMENT OF PARK LOCATION MAF Page 3 of 13 Primary 'Resource Name or# (Assigned by recorder) SAR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 'Map Name: USGS San Jose west Quadrangle "Scale: N. T. S. Date of Map: 1961, Ph Rev 1980 Page 4 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) SAR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 * Recorded By L. Dill, C. Duval, B.Montgomery * Date 10/13/2004 ® Continuation ❑ Update (Description, continued from page 1, DPR523a, P3a) The houses and other structures occupy a site that remains unique and relatively unaffected by the surrounding residential development. The setting features many mature oak trees and a number of old orchard trees. The site has little paving or other landscaping improvements; however, there is an asphalt driveway that traverses the property south of the house, from Quito Road to the barn. The bank of the creek is stabilized with a continuous stone wall protected by a concrete cap. Main House: The main house is a modest vernacular cottage with some unique, but simple, trim detailing. It occupies a footprint roughly in the shape of two offset rectangles. The earlier portion of the house has a simple, rectangular plan with a side- gabled roof; a small entrance stoop projects from the long south elevation. The porch roof is gabled, and its eaves are lower than the house.eaves. The more recent wing of the house, also rectangular in plan, is offset to the west of the main wing, with a west - facing side gable, so the main fagade visible from Quito Road features a pair of offset gable ends, one original and one more recent, both roofs have moderate slopes and are similar in size and massing from this viewing angle. The north wing adjoins the center of the main house with a low, north -south gabled roof, so from the east, the main wing is gabled with a cross -gable set back to the north. There is one metal chimney that projects through the roof of the original wing. The house is built of wood frame construction, including full- dimension, rough -sawn rafters at the exposed original eaves. No foundation.is visible at the original front wing, but the rear addition is supported on a concrete foundation. The finished floor of the house is at grade. The exterior of the original wing is clad with dual -bevel drop siding. The detailing of the siding at the window trim indicates that this siding could be concealing an earlier wall finish, but this could not be confirmed from visual observation.'The north wing is clad in v- groove horizontal siding. Most of the original fenestration includes six - over -six double -hung wood windows with traditional sash proportions and upper sash dog ears, but the original house also includes a sun porch at the east end, with large, square,' 2x2 hoppers on three sides. The fenestration in the new wing consists of visibly more modern wood, one -over -one double -hung windows. The original windows are trimmed with flat -board casings and aprons and topped by a flat -board hood supported on scroll -cut brackets. The windows in the addition have only simple board trim. Composition shingles protect the roof. The interior of the main house has many original features, including knotty -pine wall paneling and original cabinetry. To.the north and slightly to the east of the main cottage (to the northwest of the garage), and almost engulfed by vegetation, is a one - story, one -room cottage with a rectangular plan and a modest pair of additions to the rear (north). The main portion of the cottage has a gabled roof from front to back (south to north) with exposed rafter tails at the shallow eaves. The east half of the rear is covered up by a small, gabled addition with an additional small shed - roofed attachment to its rear. The cottage and its additions are clad in horizontal v- groove siding; the structure is wood -frame with the only visible concrete footings at the rear addition. The centered front door faces south; it is sheltered under a full -width recessed porch. Simple 4x4 porch posts support the forward extension of the roofline; handrails link the posts although the porch floor is at grade. The porch ceiling is sloped at the outer sides, and clad with beaded board paneling. At the wall /porch ceiling is a line of sawtooth trim. To each side of the door is a symmetrically placed individual window. The windows are trimmed by flat board casings, topped by a flat -board hood supported by a simple pair of triangular board brackets The west side has a pair of individually placed windows with trim that matches the front fagade. The east side features a siding -clad, cantilevered stovepipe surround and a hopper window over the internal kitchen cabinetry. The rear additions include one window on the west, and a modest doorway to the rear (north). This cottage seems in poor physical condition due to deterioration of the roof (now covered by bare plywood) and apparent vandalism and /or lack of maintenance. To the east of the main house, separated from the house by a small open patio and unpaved lriveway area, is a small barn with a gabled two -story center wing sandwiched between a pair of (See next page, DPR523L, Continuation Sheet) DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information Page 5 of 13 'Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) SAR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 " Recorded By L. Dill, C. Duval, B.Montgomery ' Date 10/13/2004 ® Continuation ❑ Update (Description, continued from previous page, DPR523L, Pia) one - story, shed - roofed, side wings that are clearly later additions. The center wing is clad in exposed horizontal boards over redwood stud framing and softwood floors on redwood joists; the north side addition has vertical plank walls and a tongue- and - groove wood floor; the south side addition has vertical board - and - batten siding, and a concrete and gravel floor that connects to an asphalt driveway. All of the moderately sloped roofs of the barn are covered in corrugated galvanized sheets, and the barn faces west toward Quito Road and the back of the main house. The center wing of the barn has large, one -lite fixed windows that appear, from their proportions and trim, to be replacement sash. Upstairs is a pair of these windows; downstairs a smaller pair of individual windows flanks the diagonal- board- and - batten -clad door. Also upstairs are pairs of hopper or awning side windows, above the side shed roofs. The north side of the north addition has a ribbon of five 2x3 -lite windows, which appears to have been built from salvaged sash from an earlier building. The north barn wing opens at a wide front door with a pair of out- swinging one -panel doors. The south side addition has a ribbon of five one -lite fixed windows facing south; this wing has a sliding garage door in matching vertical siding. Detached Garage: A detached two -car garage is located to the northeast of the house, beyond an unpaved driveway area; the rear of the garage is parallel to, and immediately above, the bank of the creek, and the garage doors face west toward Quito Road. The building has a square plan, and is built of conventional wood framing with horizontal v- groove siding and a front- gabled roof covered with corrugated metal roofing. The garage doors are vertical board and batten panels, and the fenestration incorporates a variety of window types and patterns, which were clearly salvaged from older buildings. Setting: The setting of the two parcels includes many mature trees, including massive oaks, orchard rees (some extremely careworn in their old age), sycamores, and others. Near the property line, the northwest and west bank of Wildcat Creek is supported by an old tonework retaining wall with a concrete cap. This wall is distinctive for its rustic appearance nd representation of engineering techniques prior to the more widespread use of concrete to line reek channels. (Significance, continued from page 2, DPR523b, B12) HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: The subject property is a.portion of what was once a 14.96 -acre lot that was sold by Edward and Elizabeth McLeod to George C. Meeker in October 1881 (Deeds 61:242). This lot, which included the subject property area, was one of three similarly sized ranch lots on the east side of Quito Road. George C. Meeker, an architect, was born in New Jersey in 1850. His younger sister Annie arried the artist Raymond Dabb Yelland in 1874. That year, Raymond and Annie (Meeker) Yelland sailed around the Horn to San Francisco so he could take a position as an art instructor at Mills College in Oakland (Hughes 2004). George Meeker followed his sister to Oakland by 1878, when two of his residential designs built in Berkeley appeared in the American Architect and Building News (10/26/1878, p. 141). In the 1880 census, Meeker was living with his widowed mother in Oakland; he apparently never married. William A. Yelland, the nephew of Raymond Yelland and adopted son of the ellands, bought the adjacent lot to the north of the Meeker parcel on Quito Road at the same time that Meeker bought the subject property. Through the 1880s, George C. Meeker was sporadically listed in the county directories as a fruit rancher in Los Gatos. Meeker must have set out his orchards and vineyards soon after purchasing the ranch, as in 1885 H. A. Brainard reported that the plantings appeared about four years old: "of trees, 350 prune, 350 apricot, 250 peach, 50 nectarine, 50 cherry, 50 apple, and 50 pear; 3000 vines of Muscat, Malaga and other table grapes." Between 1882 and 1889, Meeker traveled back and forth between the Santa Clara Valley and Seattle, where he was the junior partner of architect William E. Boone (1830- 1921), recognized as the most important Seattle architect before the fire of 1889 (Ochsner 1994). (See next page, DPR523L, Continuation Sheet) DPR 523L (1/95) "Required Information Page 6 of 13 *Resdurce Name or# (Assigned by recorder) - SAR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 " Recorded*By . L. Dill, c. Duval, B.Mointgomery 'Date 10/13/2004, ® Continuation 0 Update (Significance, continued from previous page, DPR523b, B12) George C. Meeker began to be listed in the city directories as a resident in downtown San. Jose Ln 1887. Between 1887 and 1889, Meeker worked as an architect in the office of prominent San Jose 9esigner- builder Jacob Lenzen. Starting around.1891, Meeker became the partner of architect 7rancis W. Reid. The year 1891 was a busy one for the firm of Reid & Meeker, who designed dozens Df residences and public buildings in San Jose, Los Gatos, and the greater Santa Clara Valley. The Eirm was profiled in the 1892 Commercial History of San Jose: "Their specialty is first -class aork, and by good taste, skill in design, and fidelity to clients'. interests, they have acquired a cell- established business and enjoy an enviable reputation." Francis W. Reid moved to Oakland around 1896, and Meeker continued in a solo practice in San Jose through about 1903. On January 12, 1900, George C. Meeker sold his Los Gatos ranch to his brother -in -law, Raymond Dabb Yelland (Deeds 225:418) . The 1895/1899 United States Geological Survey map shows no residence Dn the George Meeker ranch. There are, however, two driveways and two houses in close proximity on :he adjacent William A. Yelland ranch. When George Meeker and, later, Raymond and Annie Yelland visited their Quito Road property, they could possibly have stayed on the William A. Yelland ranch =o the north. Raymond Dabb Yelland directed the San Francisco School of Design and also taught. at University Df California in Berkeley for many years. His many pupils include Homer Davenport, Alexander iarrison, Maynard Dixon, and other noted artists. At his summer home on the Monterey Peninsula, he Dainted many coastal landscapes; the marshes near his home in Oakland also provided ample subject natter (Hughes 2004) . His 1880 painting "Summer Morning Near Los Gatos" provides some evidence :hat the Meeker and Yelland families were familiar with this area before they purchased their ranches (Perry 1999). Raymond Yelland died on July 27, 1900, and the property passed on to his widow, Annie (Meeker) Yelland. Mrs. Yelland continued to live in Oakland; and after 1903, her brother George Meeker noved from San Josh to live with her. Meeker continued to practice architecture in Oakland and Lived with his sister until his death in 1919. In 1905, the Los Gatos -San Jose Interurban Railroad cut through the property of Annie Yelland. (The Southern Pacific Railroad line continues to operate on those tracks.) The parcel sold by knnie Yelland to the railroad is APN 403 -24 -001, the northernmost triangular- shaped parcel of the Study area. This parcel became known as the "railroad parcel" (Deeds 321:453) . Sometime between 1905 and 1917; Annie Yelland appears to have constructed the small house and barn that are :urrently located on the primary study area, APN 403 -24 -008, perhaps with the architectural assistance of the property's former owner, her brother George C. Meeker. On June 12, 1917, Annie Yelland sold 13.585 acres to Charles and Hattie Luce (Deeds 459:444) lccording to their youngest daughter, Dorothy Luce Schlaegel, 'soon after the Luces purchased the ranch, Mr. Luce built a two -story farmhouse on the south side of the creek. Mr. and Mrs. Luce and -heir-six children were living on Quito Road at the time of the 1920 census. Mrs.. Schlaegel remembered that the subject house and barn were occupied by prune picking families that worked for ier father. On May 19, 1927, Charles and Hattie Luce sold APN 403 -24 -008, bounded on the south by the San Comas Aquinas Creek, to Millie Dean Graves (Official Records 323:175) . At about that time, her Drother,.Clyde K. Graves, began to be listed in the Los Gatos directories as an orchardist on 2uito Road. It appears that Millie Graves lived in Los Gatos and her brother and his family lived Dn the study area property. In the 1930 census, Clyde K. Graves, age 58, was living on the Quito toad ranch with four of his seven sons: Clyde Jr. (age 21), Donald (age 19), Earl (17), and Mayne (age 15) . If not already constructed to accommodate Luce's fruit ranch workers (as is likely from =he similarity of trim and materials), Graves could have constructed the one -room cottage located north of the main .residence (an old sign indicates that it was known as 14110 Quito Road). The Luces continued to live on their remaining ranch property. After Clyde K. Graves died in August 1934, his son, Clyde Graves Jr., took over the daily Doeration of the ranch. On December 15, 1936, Millie Graves deeded the ranch to her 23- year -old iephew Earl Graves (Official Records 801:211) . Millie Graves died a few months later, in March 1937. (See next page, DPR523L, Continuation Sheet) DPR 523L (1/95) 'Required Information i-i * Recorded By. L. Dill, C. Duval, B.Montgomery * Date 10/13/2004 ® Continuation ❑ Update (Significance, continued from previous page, DPR523b, B12) On April 22, 1940, Earl and his wife Esther deeded the property to his younger brother Mayne Knox Graves (Official Records 982:233). Two months later, Mayne and his wife Ruth transferred the ?roperty to his older brother Reginald Graves (Official Records 1010:192, 6/28/1940). Millie raves is shown as being the owner of the "railroad parcel" (APN 403 -24 -001) on School District Maps of the period; however, deeds were not located that showed that transfer of ownership. On arch 6, 1942, however, a deed was recorded transferring ownership of the railroad parcel from the Southern Pacific Company to Reginald Graves (Official Records 1086:304). 2eginald Graves, a machinist at FMC, lived in the main house until his death in January 1985. It Ls likely that it was Reginald Graves who built the two- bedroom, one- bathroom addition to the pottage. His widow Pearl sold both parcels to Carl and Judith Franklin the following year (Official Records J599:171). The Franklins sold the property to Nadar Eghtesad in 1995 (Official records N797:220), who in turn sold the property to the current owners in 1997 (Doc. No. 13853819, )/11/1997). EVALUATION: Main House: The main house is not architecturally significant; it is not a representative example of any particular style of architecture, and its form and detailing, although interesting, do not represent any widespread or local patterns of vernacular construction or development. Because of its lack of association with a particular style of architecture or vernacular patterns of design, the house does not appears eligible for National Register listing under Criterion C or the California Register according to Criterion 3. The families associated with the Quito Road property were active in the local arts community and associated with orchard development in Saratoga; however, the Quito Road site does not embody the artistic, architectural, or agricultural contributions of these families to their community in a way that would make this property significant based on such historical associations. Because the property does not illustrate the history of significant events or personages, the property would not be considered eligible for the National or California Registers based on its association with personages or events or patterns of development, Criteria A, B and 1, 2, respectively. .. Cottage and Outbuildings: Without traditional stylistic detailing, and without illuminating vernacular design :features, the one -room cottage and two outbuildings are not architecturally significant, nor do they physically represent events or patterns of history, nor do they illustrate any association with significant personages. The cottage, barn, and detached garage are therefore not eligible for the National or California registers. Setting: The two parcels include many mature trees that add to the setting of the parcel; however, they are not associated directly as historically significant landscaping due to any associations with design, personages, events or patterns of development. Additional, the design of the setting does not represent a supporting setting for a significant building design because the architecture itself is not significant. The historic retaining wall along the northwest bank of Wildcat Creek is distinctive for its age and use of stone and concrete, but it is not individually connected, through historical documentation, with local events, personages, or patterns of development that would make it eligible for either the National or California Registers. With additional research, this stonework might be determined part of a wider representation of vernacular stonework and /or early creek engineering; however, this context has not been determined, and was outside the scope of this property study. (References, continued from page 2,. DPR523b, B12) Dallas, A. 1994 Los Gatos Observed. Los Gatos, Infospect Press. Foote, H. S. 1933 Pen Pictures from the "Garden of the World." Chicago: Lewis Publishing Company. (See next page, DPR523L, Continuation Sheet) DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information .`w- _ i � Page 8 of 13 'Resource Name or# (Assigned by recorder) SAR Quito Road 13686 and• 14110 Recorded By L. Dill, C. Duval, B. Montgomery *Date 10/13%2004 ® Continuation ❑ Update C (References, continued from previous page, DPR523b, B12) Hendry, G. W. and J.. N. Bowman 1941 The Spanish and Mexican Adobe and Other Buildings in the _Nine San Francisco Counties, 1776 to about 1850, Part VII. Unpublished manuscript at the .Bancroft Library, Berkeley. Hoover, Rensch, and Rensch 1942 Historic Spots in California. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Hughes, E. M. 2004 Artists in California, 1786 -1940 (3rd. ed., 2 vols.). Sacramento: Crocker Art Museum. Northrop, Marie E. 1987 Spanish- Mexican Families of Early California: 1769 -1850. Volume I. Burbank: Southern California Genealogical Society. Oakland Tribune 1934 Rites Held for Mrs. (Annie] Yeliand. September 14. Ochsner, J. K. 1995 William E. Boone, in Shaping Seattle Architecture: A Historical Guide to the Architects (J. K. Ochsner, ad.). Seattle: University of Washington Press. Pacific Press 1892 Commercial History of San Jose. Perry, C. 1988 Pacific Arcadia: Images of California, 1600 -1915. New York: Oxford University Press. San Jose City Directories (and other Santa Clara County towns] 1870 -1979 San Jose Mercury Herald 1935 Saratogan Kills Self with Rifle (Clyde Kalloch Graves]. August 22. 1936 Last Rites Today for Aged Resident [Millie Dean Graves]. March 1.6. Santa Clara County 1848 -2004 Deeds and Official Records. On file at the Santa Clara County Clerk Recorder's Office. Santa Clara County 1866 -1940 Great Register of Voters. On file at the California Room, Martin Luther King Jr. Public Library, San Josh. Santa Clara County School District Maps c1950s On file at the Office of the County Surveyor. Schlaegel, Dorothy (Luce) 2004 Personal communication with B. Montgomery. September 22. (Danville, CA.] Snyder, J. W. 1975 Index of San Francisco Building, 1879 -1900. Masters thesis, University of . California, Berkeley. Thompson and West 1876 Historical Atlas of Santa Clara County. San Francisco: Thompson and West, [San Jose: Smith and McKay Printing Co., reprinted 1973]. United States Population Census 1852 -1930 Santa Clara County. United States Geological Survey 1899 San Jose 15 minute Quadrangle. Photo Key: Photograph page 9: Main House from west, 09/08/04 Photograph page 10: Cottage from south, 09/08/04 Photograph page 11: Garage from southwest, 09/08/04 Photograph page 12: Barn from southwest, 09/08/04 Photograph page 13: Wildcat Creek (including retaining wall) and Garage from north, 09/08/04 DPR 523L (1/95) "Required Information MEGE i Page 9 of 13 "Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) SAR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 Recorded By L. Dill, C.Duval., B.Montgomery "Date 10/13/2004 ® Continuation ❑ Update •b"'r" A x ;s 41;:N :'!+ ` r r .r ��'r �;'s$�°' s �g,{ fe l sb g �. Y 7 Z Y �$+ i K �k ,. ,�'. C g• x �i, 4�T� 1 •.'s*iD art: .s s ff,,, ` j P Ae. e f•• +Z`R, � �S F 9 � � } Y � 7 4 S. Y ,y. .+.'P+s ..+'� .. 1 7FPA ♦ 1—Y- py l Y T4 4V . qN.. F 3<. < ,,.iy- T'F J, r'r .,as l.:te.'. „� '�fiv '• Vt �9 4 �i r • i,. •k i',' �f, aj '� .6 `AS• s v- ? _ a � L yf ro�y� � 16� ♦ '"�sKi'[ ,ydy4�' z � '��ar¢� R- i, '�'^� t t�s s,- s � rs � �W •�`'.- k. y��i• �g3.x �„ � y.. -.'SS 'i�3`..'�s� �34' - %'. `i .1�°�i �° €� -§i.7 � . ; � �� •• ' t ty 44 i Q `"fir, � �`F ` � � �a=.. � ' - t.1�ta�, SL � * �a '� • � � �. '% y. e � -.� y - '�`' t �"' +� r r - it ' z was i a rN DPR 523L (1/95) 1 'Required Information Page 10 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) sAR Quito Road 13686 and 19110 Recorded By L. Dill, C. Duval, B_Montgomery ' Date 10/13/2004 ® Continuation ❑ Update DPR 523E (1195) 'Required Information Page 11 of 13 *Resource Name or# (Assigned by recorder) SAR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 * Recorded By L. Dill, C. Duval, B.Montgomery * Date 10/13/2004 ® Continuation 0 Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information Page 12 of 13 *Resource Name or #. (Assigned by recorder) SPR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 * Recorded By L:. Dill, C. Duval, B.Montgomery * Date 10/13/2004 ® Continuation ❑ Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information Page 13 of 13 'Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) SAR Quito Road 13686 and 14110 Recorded By L.Dill, c.Duval, B.Montgomery ' Date 10/13/2004 ® Continuation ❑ Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 14, 2008 TO: Heritage Preservation Commission FROM: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Review proposed replacement roofing for a house included on the Historic Resource Inventory Property Location: 19161 Cox Avenue, Saratoga, California Property APN: 386 -47 -035 Project Applicants: Pam Parker Property Owners: William Cox Estate Project Summary The subject property located 19161 Cox Avenue, also known as the Joseph Cox House (circa 1915), is a Craftsman style structure listed on the City of Saratoga Historic Resources Inventory. According to the applicant (see attached letter and photographs), the existing roof has numerous leaks with water causing considerable damage to the inside of the house. The applicant's goal is to replace the roof prior to the beginning of the raining season. The roof of the house is currently covered with composite shingles. The applicant does believe that roof of the house was originally covered with wood shake shingles. The applicant would like to replace the' existing composite shingles with new composite shingles. The manufacturer of the shingles would be GAF -Elk and the color would be "Barkwood" or "Weathered Wood" The applicant has submitted samples of the roof materials which will be present at both the site visit and public hearing. Historic Evaluation The home is located on the City of Saratoga Historic Resources Inventory. Attachments (1) Project description letter prepared by the applicant 8 Oct 2008 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is a request for approval of the replacement of the roof on the house located at 19161 Cox Ave which was placed on the Heritage Resource Inventory in 1988. The roof has numerous leaks (including a large hole) that have been causing considerable damage to the inside of the house (the ceilings and walls in the living room and den have extensive water damage as well as the kitchen and porch). With the approach of the rainy season it is of the upmost importance that the roof be replaced as soon as possible to avoid further damage. At the time the house was placed on the Heritage Resource Inventory in 1988 it had the composite shingles that are currently on the roof and we would like to reroof with the same shingles. It is my understanding that the house originally had wood shake shingles but there are a number of reasons to now use composite; they are more fire retardant, better for the environment because we would not be using natural resources for the roof, longer lasting, better maintained and more aesthetic. We will match as closely as possible the current shingles so the appearance of the house will look the same as it does. Sincerely, Pamela Parker Administrator of the William E Cox Estate L-> P t a�, 0 If edl (..) a 0 d I c ,,(,I (OIL oc s 616 ( ) Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 14, 2008 TO: Heritage Preservation Commission FROM: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Determination of whether or not the existing home located at 13514 Hammons Avenue is historically significant. Property Location: 13514 Hammons Avenue, Saratoga, California Property APN: 393 -34 -009 Project Applicants: Cindy Brozicevic — InnerHouse Design Property Owners: Kyung -Mo Shin Project History On September 9, 2008, the HPC reviewed the applicant's proposal to stucco over the existing adobe bricks and to replace the existing windows and relocate some exterior openings of an existing one story single - family home located at 13514 Hammons Avenue. The HPC agreed that the the house is aesthetically attractive and that the existing adobe bricks give the house historical significance. The HPC determined that that the house met Criterion "C" of the seven criteria needed to deem the property historically significant, that there was a great opportunity for the applicant to make the project new and fresh while maintaining its historical significance, and directed staff to place the structure on the historical list. The HPC recommended that the applicant return to the HPC at a later date with an alternative proposal for the exterior windows and at that time the HPC would make a final determination. The applicant has submitted a detail of the exterior elevation and windows. The changes to the structure would include: • Replace existing windows with Low E Wood Clad Windows with true divided lights • Existing masonry window sills would remain with replacement windows installed inset match existing windows. • Smooth stucco would be applied over the existing adobe bricks and existing wood exterior additions so that the whole structure would be covered in stucco. • Bull nose all stucco corners at inset windows and exterior building corners The applicant has also a letter with photographs and minutes from the May 28, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting. At that meeting the Commission recommended that the homeowners of a project at 20220 Thelma Avenue could demolish their existing ranch style home for the construction of a new single - family home. The home on Thelma Avenue also featured adobe brick construction that is similar to the residence at 13514 Hammons Avenue. The applicant is requesting that the HPC reconsider their decision to declare 13514 Hammons Avenue historic given the fact that the Commission recently recommended that a similarly constructed home could be demolished. HPC October 14, 2008 Meeting Project Address: 13514 Hammons Avenue Project Applicant: Cindy Brozicevic — InnerHouse Design Project Summary The subject property is a one story single - family home located at 13514 Hammons Avenue. According to the applicant, the home was constructed in 1951. The residence was originally constructed using adobe bricks. An addition was added in 1977 that used conventional wood framing with a smooth stucco exterior that does not match the exterior of the original adobe home. The applicant does not plan on adding any square footage to the existing residence. Modifications would include updating the existing windows as well as relocating some of the exterior openings. The existing roofline and roof tiles are to remain. The primary exterior change would consist of coating the existing adobe bricks with smooth stucco so that both the original house and the addition would have the same exterior finish. Prior to applying stucco over the existing adobe bricks, the staff and the applicant request a determination from the Historical Preservation Commission (HPC) on the historical significance of the existing residence. The determination to allow the project to continue would be based on the recommendation from the HPC. Historic Evaluation The property is not currently listed on the City's Historic Resources Inventory. Decision by HPC The applicant is requesting a determination of the HPC regarding the historical significance of the structure. The following are options available to the Commission in reviewing this proposal: 1. Determine that the structure is not historically significant: If the Commission determines that the structure is not historically significant, the property would not be listed on the Historic Resources Inventory. Proposed demolition and /or future alterations would not be subject to HPC review. 2. Determine that the property /structure is historically significant and direct staff to place the structure on the historical list: If the Commission determines that the property /structure is historically significant: • At least one (1) of the seven (7) criteria listed in the City code must be selected to reflect the reasons why the structure is significant. • The HPC would need to determine that the proposed project either meets or does not meet the Secretary of Interior Standards (Standards) for historic properties. Suggestions to ensure compliance with the Standards may be provided. • Staff would place the property on the Historic Resources Inventory and proposed future alterations to the structures would require HPC review and would be required to meet Standards for historic properties. Memorandum to the Saratoga Historic Preservation Commission Page 2 HPC October 14, 2008 Meeting Project Address: 13514 Hammons Avenue Project Applicant: Cindy Brozicevic — InnerHouse Design The seven Criteria are as follows (City Code §13- 15.010): (a) It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering or architectural history of the City, the County, the State or the nation; or (b) It is identified with persons or events significant in local, county, state or national history; or (c) It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials; or (d) It is representative of the notable design or craft of a builder, designer, or architect; or (e) It embodies or contributes to unique physical characteristics representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or district within the City; or (f) It represents a significant concentration or continuity of site, buildings; structures or objects, unified by past events or aesthetically by plan or physical or natural development; or (g) It embodies or contributes to a unique natural setting or environment constituting a distinct area or district within the City having special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value. Attachments (1) Letter from the project architect (2) Detail of the exterior elevation /windows (3) Photograph of the structures' exterior wall and windows (4) Floor plan of existing structure Memorandum to the Saratoga Historic Preservation Commission Page 3 TIN ATTACHMENT � 1 RESIDENTIAL October 9, 2008 Historic Preservation Committee City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Project Location: 13514 Hammons Avenue It has come to our attention that a home nearby of similar age and adobe construction was approved for demolition without going through the HPC process. The information below will illustrate the similarities. Comparison Project Location: 20220 Thelma Avenue 9 t 11 _� ; , 7 1 _ 1 �� i Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of May 28, 2008: As evidenced in the Minus below, The Planning Commission did not discuss the age of the existing structure. There was also no discussion of the nature of the adobe construction of the existing home. PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 5 APPLICATION #PDR08 -0003 (393 -39 -015) HO/LE, 20220 Thelma Avenue: The applicant requests Design Review approval to construct a new single - family residence. The proposed structure will be approximately 4,203 square feet and approximately 23 -feet tall. The gross lot size is 16,353 square feet and the site is zoned R -1- 10,000. Exterior colors and materials consist of valley white base stucco, stone accents, tile roof material, wood stain garage doors and a decorative iron rod accessory. Design Review is required pursuant to City Code Section 15- 45.060(a)(3). (Michael Fossati) Mr. Michael Fossati, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: Made minor corrections to the draft resolution. Said that the applicant is seeking approval to demolish an existing ranch -style home and construct a new Mediterranean -style residence consisting of 4,200 square feet and a maximum height of 23 feet. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of May 28, 2008 Page 24 • Described the zoning as R -1- 10,000 and the subject lot as consisting of 16,300 square feet. • Said that the project can be considered Categorically Exempt under CEQA and advised that geotechnical clearance is not required for this site. • Explained that one Ordinance - protected tree must be removed. There are currently four on the property and there is tree overcrowding. A condition to protect the remaining three of four trees is incorporated into the conditions of approval. • Said that the Public Works Department has reviewed this application and has imposed a condition requiring the replacement of broken sections of curb and gutter. • Reported that high - quality materials are proposed including limestone veneer and quality doors. • Distributed a materials board. • Said that the walls are stucco and a decorative wrought iron feature is included. The colors are browns, beiges and tans on a Valley White base. • Advised that no negative comments have been received and the required 500 -foot noticing was done. • Recommended approval. Commissioner Zhao had questions about the front elevation where a porch area appears to be a deep indentation. She asked how far that porch comes out into the front. Planner Michael Fossati said that the porch has a 25 -foot depth. He added that porches are typical to Mediterranean -style homes. Commissioner Nagpal said that this porch feature appears to go inward. Planner Michael Fossati agreed that it goes inward from the front towards the back of the ho use. Commissioner Zhao asked if this feature is intended to serve as a porch or a carport. Commissioner Nagpal pointed. out that it is open on the right side. Could it be used as a carport? Planner Michael Fossati said no, it is intended to serve as a front patio but he would defer to the architect to substantiate the reason this porch has been incorporated into the design. Commissioner Rodgers asked why the area inside this feature is not double counted. Is it because of the lattice versus solid roof area? She explained that normally three walls and a roof requires said space to be double counted against lot coverage. Director John Livingstone said that a structure area with a roof and three or more walls with a solid material roof covering over 75 percent of the area would be counted. Commissioner Nagpal asked if this is 75 percent covered. Commissioner Rodgers asked if the lattice breaks the solid coverage. Saratoga Planning Commission M.inutes of May 28, 2008 Page 25 Planner Michael Fossati said that as the roof is less than 75 percent, it is not counted as floor area. Director John Livingstone said he has seen this done before to allow natural light. Commissioner Nagpal questioned if this would be used as a carport or simply as a gathering area. Chair Cappello said it would be best to ask the applicant that question. Commissioner Hlava pointed out that there is no door leading directly out to this area and that omission seems a little strange. Commissioner Rodgers said that the area is at grade level with pavers leading to it. Commissioner Kumar said that it appears to be a play area for kids. Chair Cappello opened the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 5. Mr. Frank Ho, Project Architect: Explained that his client likes a nice quality house. She has kids and grandkids and will put a lot of money into this new house. • Stated that it would utilize a nice wood garage door and nice building materials including windows and doors. • Added that the home is also energy efficient. He said that the covered patio would help reduce the need for air conditioning. The break in the roof allows for natural light into the nook and kitchen. Advised that his client has a large family within the Bay Area that gathers often. The porch in the front will serve as a kid's play area. Chair Cappello asked if the possibility exists that this area would be used as a carport. Mr. Ho said that it might be possible to install a curb or half wall railing to prevent that use. Commissioner Nagpal asked how the area would be accessed. Mr. Ho said that the family would come out the front door to access this porch area. Commissioner Nagpal questioned why there is no direct access from the living or family room onto this porch area. Mr. Ho said he could add a door but the owner wanted to use the front door for access. She wants to control security by not having a second door leading outside from the front of the house. He reiterated that he could incorporate some means of closing off the porch so cars could not get through. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of May 28, 2008 Page 26 Commissioner Kundtz asked Mr. Ho if there are any chimneys on the plan. Are there any fireplaces in the house? Mr. Ho said that the fireplaces are all gas.. One is in the living room and another in the master bedroom /bathroom at the hot tub. Commissioner Zhao stressed her concern at the practicality of the front porch area. Mr. Ho said that usually there would be some sort of French door leading out to a porch area such as this but his owner is concerned about security and does not want too many doors at the front. Commissioner Rodgers assured Mr. Ho that Saratoga is a very safe community. Mr. Ho said his client is afraid that the kids could get out without supervision. Commissioner Rodgers said that she thought the intention of the area was to serve as a play area. Mr. Ho said that it is when the children are supervised. Commissioner Rodgers said that the rooms seem tall. Are there any green features? Mr. Ho said that there is radiant floor heating that keeps heat down low rather than at the ceiling. He added that in the summertall ceilings help keep a home cool. He stated that there is a skylight to vent air going up. Commissioner Rodgers asked if there is a way to close off formal areas of the house. Mr. Ho said that there is zoning furnace and air conditioning. Two machines serve activity areas versus bedrooms. Commissioner Zhao reiterated again that she is having a hard time with the porch design. Mr. Ho said that it helps balance the house, as on the other side there is a three -car garage. At the center there is the front entry. This porch is at the right hand side. Commissioner Zhao said that it seems imbalanced. Commissioner Hlava said that with nice patio furniture, large potted plants and perhaps a wall fountain, this area could be gorgeous. Chair Cappello said that the porch along the front almost wraps around the house. Mr. Ho said right. 5 Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of May 28, 2008 Page 27 Chair Cappello reminded Commissioner Zhao that a two- dimensional drawing does not always show depth well. Chair Cappello closed the public hearing forAgenda Item No. 5. Commissioner Nagpal said that she does not like the railing idea, which could look like a jail. Commissioner Hlava said that Mr. Ho's client wants this feature. She agreed that it helps balance the house and appears it is a feature that will work for this homeowner. She said that this house is pretty and sits well on its lot and is in balance with other homes in the area. Commissioner Kundtz said he can make the findings as well. It looks unusual but not bad or wrong. Director John Livingstone said that a permanent condition could be recorded that the patio area is not to be used as a carport. It would become part of the deed. Commissioner Rodgers asked if a carport is allowed. Director John Livingstone replied yes: Chair Cappello said that he prefers that there not be carports in Saratoga and supported making it a permanent condition that the front patio area not be used as a carport. Director John Livingstone clarified that the Planning Commission allows carports under discretionary review. Commissioner Nagpal said that the applicant says this is not a carport. She asked if neighbors could complain in the event that it is used as a carport in the future. Commissioner Rodgers reminded that there is nothing prohibiting carports. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Kundtz, the Planning Commission granted Design Review Approval to construct a new single - family residence on property located at 20220 Thelma Avenue, as modified and with the Public Works added requirement for curb and gutter repairs, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cappello, Hlava, Kumar, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers and Zhao NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO. 6 Comparison Project Photos: 20220 Thelma Avenue As shown in the photos below, this home is strikingly similar to the Hammons Avenue residence. Ll 8 Conclusion: Please consider the precedent this project sets in determining allowable scope of work for the proposed Hammons Avenue project. Given that these houses are around the corner from each other, it seems reasonable to decide that the Hammons Avenue project is not considered Historically significant. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have. Sincerely, aflolk��� Cynthia Brozicevic Designer BAY AREA OFFICE: 12229 Goleta Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 Tel /Fax: 408.868.9475 SIERRA OFFICE: 15101 Georgia Way Grass Valley, CA 95949 Tel /Fax: 530.271.5787 Email: cindy @innerhousedesign.com 11 !�• i RESIDENTIAL PROJECT: SHIN RESIDENCE 13514 HAMMONS AVENUE SARATOGA, CA CORNERES AT INSET WINDOWS AND EXTERIOR BUILDING CORNERS 1 0/9/08 1OOF, IN =MAIN EPLACE EXISTING WINDOWS /ITH HIGH QUALITY LOW -E /OOD CLAD WINDOWS. TRUE IVIDED LIGHTS KISTING MASONRY WINDOW LL TO REMAIN, REPLACEMENT /INDOWS INSTALLED INSET TO ATCH EXISTING (NOT FLISH /ITH EXTERIOR SURFACE) I VLV V � � O TO BE APPLIED OVER ADOBE BRICKS. THE STUCCO SURFACE WILL MATCH ON ALL WALLS OF THE HOUSE, SO THE WOOD ADDITIONS MATCH THE NEW STUCCO FINISH. ELEVATION /WINDOW DETAIL SCALE: 1/4"=V-0" BAY AREA OFFICE: 12229 Goleta Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Tel /fax: 408.868.9475 SIERRA OFFICE: 15101 GEORGIA WAY GRADD VALLEY, CA 95949 Tel /fax: 530.271.5787 ermail: cindy�c�innenccusedesign.com ATTACHMERT J I ­q 11 L4 q ric R Aft ES I DE N Addition #I: The adobe brick exterior does not match along the south side of the building. It is evident that there has been an addition to this building. The window style is also inconsistent. The remodel would include new windows that would match around the entire building. BAY AREA OFFICE: 12229 Goleta Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 Tel/Fax: 408.868.9475 SIERRA OFFICE: 15101 Georgia Way Grass Valley, CA 95949 Tel/Fax: 530.271.5787 Email: Cindy @innerhousedesign.com P ,�N f,40 FES ADVTT1DIQ 2 • ILT IN Iq-TI io I�1ST1�,uG'T i CA =>< o - - Wain FrMG cD _ - 57'u� �1t�1�(� �XT��zlo►� ., �_... STtZuGTUt�� STS- C1ST1Gs SHDWtJ IN or T4E 4q4 W N F-T of RYT J ® Wes, ON UY 44.9b % At4 L1 ,1 0 - NoW PART or L VING1Z IN w-4 tm 5 CI C) s LL N� FLOOR 11 OFUGI����pp 1'''� - UH GA1C a tiNCLOC W M4 AmmoNl