Loading...
HPB Agenda Packet - 02-27-2019Historic Preservation Board REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, February 27, 2019 | 5:00 PM City Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 N First St., Campbell CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Approval of Minutes of January 23, 2019 Attachment 1 – Meeting Minutes, 1/23/2019 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for individuals wishing to address the Board on matters of community interest that are not listed on the agenda. In the interest of time, the Chair may limit speakers to three minutes. Please be aware that State law prohibits the Board from acting on non-agendized items, however, the Chair may refer matters to staff for follow-up. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.360 E. Campbell Avenue – Site and Architectural Review Permit Modification / Tier 1 Public Hearing to consider the application of Eaton Hall Architects for a Modification (PLN2019-09) to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2016- 76), including a Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Tier 1), to allow a revised window and door design for an ongoing façade restoration and seismic retrofit of a Structure of Merit commonly known as the Second Bank of Campbell Building on property located at 360 E Campbell Avenue. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Attachment 2 – Staff Report NEW BUSINESS 3.Authorization to Procure Former Chair Signatures for Unsigned Adopted Resolutions Request for HPB authorization to have adopted unsigned resolutions signed by former Board Chairs. Attachment 3 – Staff Report 4.Mills Act Program – Proposed Review Plan Review proposed Mills Act Program Review Plan. Attachment 4 – Staff Memorandum Historic Preservation Board Agenda for February 27, 2019 Pg. 2 OLD BUSINESS 5. Kennedy Tract Surveys Discuss ongoing survey collection and process improvements. BOARD/STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS, UPDATES, AND REQUESTS 6. Mandatory Ethics Training City Clerk notice of mandatory ethics training.  Attachment 5 – City Clerk Email, dated February 12, 2019 ADJOURNMENT Adjourn to the next regularly scheduled Historic Preservation Board meeting of March 27, 2019, at 5:00 PM, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, listening assistance devices are available for meetings held in the Council Chambers. If you require accommodation to participate in the meeting, please contact Corinne Shinn at the Community Development Department, at corinnes@cityofcampbell.com or (408) 866-2140. Historic Preservation Board REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, January 23, 2019 City Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 N First St., Campbell CALL TO ORDER The Historic Preservation Board meeting of January 23, 2019, was called to order at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Foulkes, and the following proceedings were had to wit. ROLL CALL HPB Members Present: Michael Foulkes, Chair Yvonne Kendall, Vice Chair Susan Blake Laura Taylor Moore Todd Walter HPB Members Absent: None Staff HPB Members Present: Daniel Fama, Senior Planner Cindy McCormick, Senior Planner Corinne Shinn, Recording Secretary ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (ITEMS NOT AGENDIZED) None Chair Foulkes took a moment to make some introductory remarks as he leads his first HPB meeting: •Thanked the HPB Members of the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) for electing him to serve as Chair for 2019. •Extended his congratulations to the two Board HPB Members, Blake and Moore, who were recently reappointed to serve an additional four years on HPB. •Introduced newly assigned HPB Staff Liaison, Daniel Fama, who will support the HPB. •Reported that he recently met with Daniel Fama to get acquainted and go over the first HPB meeting agenda for 2019. •Pointed out that Cindy McCormick, who served as HPB Staff Liaison for several years, did so well for so long. •Said that HPB has tended to run things loosely. •Added that he’d like to see the HPB move in a direction that is more in keeping with the other Boards and Commissions, which is more formal in nature. •Reminded that there is a difference between the things HPB has to do and those thingsHPB would like to do. It is important that HPB is asking for things in the correct manner. ATTACHMENT 1 Historic Preservation Board Minutes for January 23, 2019 Page 2 of 10 • Stated his goal for HPB is to push to make Campbell’s history more relevant and interesting. • Reminded that currently there are people that don’t want their properties included on the Historic Resource Inventory List. • Said that there are ways to encourage inclusion on HRI as a desirable thing. He wants people to want their historic home to be on HRI. • Added that the Historic Preservation Ordinance could be improved and that might be a project for HPB to undertake. Commissioner Kendall said she approves that angle or approach. She added that it coincides with one of tonight’s agenda items that she had requested Daniel Fama add to this agenda. Chair Foulkes reported that he spoke with the Chief Counsel of the State Office of Historic Preservation and will discuss what he learned with Daniel Fama. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Upon motion of Board HPB Member Kendall, seconded by Board HPB Member Blake, the Historic Preservation Board minutes of the meeting of December 19, 2018, were approved as submitted. (5-0) PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. None NEW BUSINESS 2. Certified Local Government Annual Report: Cindy McCormick, Senior Planner, provided the following update: • Advised that each year the HPB reports to the Office of Historic Preservation for a one- year period between October 1st and September 30th. • Added that the Certified Local Government Annual Report (CLGAR) requires the setting of goals, attendance records of the Board HPB Members, training that has been done as well as obstacles we have come across. Chair Foulkes said he read through the CLGAR and found it to be helpful to outline what HPB has done. HPB Member Blake: • Agreed that the report was very well done. • Added that the CLGAR strengthens the case for what HPB does. • Suggested that if possible this report be shared with the City Council. • Stated that perhaps they have no grasp of the level of accountability we have with the State. Historic Preservation Board Minutes for January 23, 2019 Page 3 of 10 Motion: Upon motion of Board HPB Member Blake, seconded by Board HPB Member Moore, the 2017 Certified Local Government Annual Report was adopted. (5-0) 3. Heritage Tree Designation Planner Daniel Fama: • Advised the Board that he wanted to discuss and better understand the core actions undertaken by the HPB on the issue of Heritage Tree Designation. • Stated that there are trees that have been recognized as “heritage”. The City’s Tree Protection Ordinance outlines the process for heritage designation. • Added that in the future it will be important to develop specific requirements to be used when considering the designation of a new heritage tree. HPB Member Moore asked Daniel Fama to clarify what is allowed under the existing Code. Planner Daniel Fama responded that one thing that is important to take into consideration is that the historic designation of a tree thereafter prevents that tree from being cut down. The heritage tree is so formalized via the placement of a deed restriction on the property title requiring the continued protection and preservation of that heritage tree. HPB Member Kendall pointed out that heritage tree designation is only with the “will and permission” of the property owner. Planner Daniel Fama: • Explained that there are four protected species for single-family residential zoned properties. Those four species are Oak, Redwood, Cedar and Ash. No others are protected. It would require establishing the tools to protect other species of tree not currently protected and to add new trees to the list of potential heritage trees. Reminded that the list HPB has is informal. Staff must concentrate on things that are already codified by the existing Codes. • Asked what the intent is for the list of potential heritage trees. Chair Foulkes said the intent for the list is to serve as a tool to track these potential heritage trees so we don’t forget there are more potential trees out there. HPB Member Kendall: • Added that HPB knows the list and likes those trees that are located on private properties. • Asked if there is any cost to the City to have a tree designated as heritage. • Inquired if there is any problem drafting a letter to the owners of the properties containing their 10 favorite trees contained on the potential heritage tree list. Planner Daniel Fama admitted that he is somewhat hesitant. A property owner’s interest is pursuing heritage tree designation should originate from them. Perhaps an informal conversation with a potential tree owner with one HPB Member of HPB would suffice. Historic Preservation Board Minutes for January 23, 2019 Page 4 of 10 HPB Member Blake: • Responded that there is no fee for processing a heritage tree request. • Informed the HPB Members that HPB has kept this potential heritage tree list for many years now. • Added that most of the trees listed are of the four protected species. • Stated that sometimes owners come to us to request another species of tree for heritage designation. Specifically she recalls one being a Mulberry. • Reported that she continues to do survey walks and then sends out a letter to property owners on which a potential heritage tree is located thanking them for their preservation of such a special tree. • Admitted that she is hesitant to stop doing these lists. • Said that this list of potential heritage trees also helps the planners when considering the processing of trees for removal. • Opined that the current process offers a slight degree of protection and acknowledged that there is a formal process available. • Added that she sometimes casually approaches a property owner to ask them whether they had ever considered making their tree designated as heritage. She then gives them a copy of the Tree Protection Ordinance. Planner Daniel Fama reported that the City will be launching a new website in the next couple of months. Perhaps this process can be added to the website. HPB Member Moore: • Said it is a natural thing for HPB to preserve heritage trees. • Pointed out that these beautiful trees are a benefit to the City. • Concluded that their approach is a non-adversarial one and that it is good to have that collected knowledge. Planner Daniel Fama: • Advised that staff does not share the list with the public. • Said that the new ordinance is a prospective option. • Suggested a placeholder to include a future Heritage Tree Ordinance or to modify the existing Tree Protection Ordinance to cast a wider net. Chair Foulkes: • Stated that the Tree Protection Ordinance itself needs help. • Cautioned that as he reads the Ordinance, he would never designate a tree on his property as historic. • Added that if he’s a homeowner willing to consider designation of a tree he would want to see a benefit come from that designation. Perhaps it could be an arborist report at no cost to them. He supports using a carrot rather than a stick. • Admitted that he finds having a secondary list to be strange. HPB Member Moore asked about the City’s list. Historic Preservation Board Minutes for January 23, 2019 Page 5 of 10 Planner Daniel Fama replied that the City only keeps a list of trees that have been formally designated as heritage trees. HPB Member Kendall asked staff to elaborate on the plans for the website update. Planner Daniel Fama reported that the plan for this website update was actually new “news” to staff from about a week ago. He understands that the primary focus will be to make the home page more modern in function and appearance. He added that an intern will be tasked with updating the website as part of his/her work program. HPB Member Kendall asked how tree removals are handled on a property with a heritage tree or structure on it. Planner Daniel Fama admitted that is the challenging point. The Tree Protection Ordinance is less burdensome for residential property owners. While in the past many removal requests were approved, these days the City tends to favor trees more and frequently denies a removal request if it’s not supportable. HPB Member Kendall recalled from her experience serving on the Planning Commission that they often required the preservation of trees rather than the requested removal. HPB Member Blake: • Reminded that the Tree Protection Ordinance falls under HPB’s purview. • Added that Campbell prides itself on being a Tree City USA. • Said that she doesn’t want to throw the baby out with the bath water. • Stated that in the past, staff has used our list. • Admitted that she is happy to learn about the pending website update. It will provide another way to publicize heritage trees and historic preservation. • Stressed her preference to continue current practices as it pertains to attempting to identify and list potential heritage trees within the City of Campbell. Planner Daniel Fama: • Said he would consult with Director Paul Kermoyan. • Admitted he is not sure about the potential timing for an update to the Tree Protection Ordinance. It would have to become a work plan item and he is not sure how it gets there. • Assured that there are lots of mechanisms available to protect trees. Chair Foulkes: • Agreed that there must be the consideration of timing and priorities. • Suggested brainstorming to consider better ways of doing it. • Reminded that Campbell has a supportive government that is trying not to over- regulate. • Pointed out that while some cities trim their street trees every year or so, there are other cities that place that responsibility for the care of street trees on property owners. Historic Preservation Board Minutes for January 23, 2019 Page 6 of 10 4. Historic Preservation Promotion Planner Daniel Fama said this item provides the HPB an opportunity to discuss promotional activities. HPB Member Blake reported she had recently posted information on NextDoor about the availability of the Historic App and gave information about three tours included on the App. Chair Foulkes: • Said while it may not be hard to add on to the App it does take a lot of effort to transfer information from other sources onto the App. • Advised that of all of the things HPB has done the Historic App is something many are excited to find available. • Stated that use of the App is a great way to make people aware and excited about our history and draw people to the historic homes within the community. • Suggested perhaps talking to school districts to have them encourage students to use the App along with their families to learn more history about their community. HPB Member Moore reported that the Museum staff does a fantastic job with middle-school students each year. HPB Member Kendall suggested asking the Campbell Reporter to publish quarterly articles provided by HPB about the historic houses located in Campbell. Chair Foulkes said that was a great idea. He added that there is so much great information at the Historic Museum and HPB has never really connected with them. Perhaps we could invite them to a future HPB meeting. HPB Member Walter asked who decides which will be the next grouping for the App. Perhaps add five more each year? HPB Member Blake: • Suggested adding landmarks, which are scattered all around. • Reported that she received a phone call from an Alice Avenue resident to tell her she had a tour group in front of her house. Shortly after she posted about the App on NextDoor. • Advised that she has written historic articles for Campbell Express and is willing to write again. Most often she wrote items for publication during Historic Preservation Month, which is May. • Offered a suggestion to have a real close up picture of an architectural feature from a historic structure located in Campbell with the challenge for readers to find it from that detail clue. Chair Foulkes said that he finds that people are excited about Campbell and it’s Downtown. He added that the App is well designed. HPB Member Blake added that it is easy to use. Historic Preservation Board Minutes for January 23, 2019 Page 7 of 10 HPB Member Kendall: • Reported that the Rotary Club recently established a Chili Cook Off, which they are calling Orchard City Chili Cook Off. • Added that there is a 5K run that occurs the weekend of the DT Oktoberfest that is organized by Recreation. Why not name the run to honor something historic in Campbell. That would tie people back to our City. Planner Daniel Fama said it seems HPB is interested in helping with the branding of the City and cautioned he was not sure how the Board could drive that. HPB Member Moore: • Reminded the Board about the Historic Downtown Campbell signs that are located at both ends of the Downtown. • Admitted that she would like the Downtown to extend that feeling into the surrounding neighborhood. She’d like to see that delineated. HPB Member Kendall pointed out the Annual Holiday Tree Lighting Event. Perhaps DCBA could help drive this effort. HPB Member Walter: • Brought up the social event that HPB used to sponsor each year until it was put on hold. • Suggested that HPB consider resurrecting that event to serve as a method of outreach. It was fun and tours were offered of the event site. • Pointed out that the HPB Board ran that event. HPB Member Blake: • Reported that the last few years they would invite builders and specialized vendors of interest to owners of historic properties to have a booth at the event. Since HPB would invite the same group of people every year at some point coming back for another such event was less interesting to the invitees. After the last one, we felt it was done. HPB Member Walter suggested perhaps having such an event every few years or so rather than annually. HPB Member Kendall: • Reported that the Los Gatos Chamber of Commerce offers carriage rides in Downtown Los Gatos during the holiday season. • Suggested some similar type of self-funding event that would facilitate touring historic locations. Chair Foulkes: • Said that everyone has offered some really good ideas. • Added that he would ask Daniel to see what’s possible with regard to resources and staffing. • Opined that Campbell is better suited to do this than other cities might be. The Campbell Community still has its small town feel. Historic Preservation Board Minutes for January 23, 2019 Page 8 of 10 OLD BUSINESS 5. Kennedy Tract Surveys: Discuss ways the Board may promote historic preservation activities and educational programs aimed at fostering a better understanding of Campbell’s heritage. The assigned streets are Catalpa (Moore); El Caminito Avenue (Kendall); Cherry Lane (Walter); Budd Avenue (Budd Avenue); and California Street (Blake). Planner Daniel Fama reminded that the Board has been conducting windshield surveys but admitted he was not sure what the angle of this task was for. HPB Member Kendall: • Reminded that the Kennedy Tract consists of post-war housing and has some history in the City of Campbell. • Added that this area may merit becoming a Historical District. • Suggested that homes in this area should be identified as worthy of preservation and added to the inventory. HPB Member Blake added that there is still uniformity in this area. If we don’t look at potential of what we have then it goes away. Chair Foulkes said that this windshield survey effort is a low-key way for the HPB to conduct a study of this area. HPB Member Blake: • Said she is looking to go beyond the existing historic guidelines. • Pointed out that now Campbell has a new area, known as Campbell Village. There is potential for more houses to be added to the historic inventory. Perhaps even placing a Historic Overlay if there is interest by the residents there. Planner Daniel Fama said that a formal context statement and action would have to be done to consider such a project. HPB Member Blake said HPB recognizes the need to consider available staffing and money for any new projects. Chair Foulkes said that it could be a great way to retain the historic look and feel of Campbell Village. HPB Member Moore agreed that it is important to look at the character of a neighborhood. There are a lot of bad neighborhoods out there. Planner Daniel Fama: • Reiterated that proposing new projects must be routed in formal policy. • Reminded that work on the General Plan Update will be restarting on January 29th with a Joint Session of Council and the GPAC after a long hiatus. The General Plan update Historic Preservation Board Minutes for January 23, 2019 Page 9 of 10 process might be the time to consider recommendations for the North and South of Downtown Campbell neighborhoods to be considered as a whole. • Cautioned that the GP Update is not staff driven but rather it is community driven. HPB Member Walters reported he had forwarded some photographs from his windshield survey to Cindy McCormick. It was anticipated that there was going to be a PowerPoint presentation put together using these photos in order to allow the HPB to discuss and evaluate the findings from the survey as a group. Planner Daniel Fama said he would get those photographs from Planner Cindy McCormick. HPB Member Walters asked that they be brought forth to the next meeting so we can discuss them. Chair Foulkes agreed that could be agendized. HPB Member Kendall said the HPB is seeking to tell the community what it is we do. Where should we go with that? Chair Foulkes reminded that some efforts discussed would be “no-cost” such as preparing historic articles for the local community newspapers. HPB Member Kendall said that people like mystery, blood and gore. There are famous murders from the past here in Campbell. Perhaps some form of event to teach the history of the more infamous past. HPB Member Moore cautioned that such events take the efforts of a lot of people (volunteers) and a lot of time to put together. HPB Member Kendall suggested that Landmark Houses be considered for these events. HPB Member Moore brought up the Second Bank Building and perhaps hosting an event there. Perhaps HPB could host its May event there. Planner Daniel Fama said that he will need to get a better sense of what Director Paul Kermoyan’s priorities are for HPB. It’s not going to be possible to do things requiring lots of staff support. He admitted that he is not much of a party planner. HPB Member Moore clarified that HPB takes care of its own events independently. Chair Foulkes: • Suggested triaging today’s discussion points and come back next meeting to formalize a plan for the year. • Listed issues to be fine-tuned as: o Sequencing of HPB projects o Summer intern to work on the Historic App o Someone from the Historic Museum being invited to an HPB meeting Historic Preservation Board Minutes for January 23, 2019 Page 10 of 10 HPB Member Kendall: • Pointed out that there is an organization, Our City Forest, which does tree plantings. Some of the Downtown street trees came from Our City Forest. • Suggested that they be invited to come to Campbell to plant tree(s) associated with a historic place or event. BOARD/STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS, UPDATES AND REQUESTS 6. City Council Appointment of two HPB Members for terms expiring October 2022. Chair Foulkes reiterated that both HPB Members Blake and Moore were reappointed to the HPB. 7. 360 E Campbell Avenue/Second Bank of Campbell Building. Chair Foulkes: • Advised that the window and door screening put in place at the Second Bank of Campbell Building were not to plan. • Added that the City has allowed the builder to continue working on the interior space but is requiring the submittal of updated plans to formally modify the design. • Asked staff how long that plan review might take. Planner Daniel Fama replied that the revisions would be processed as fast as possible. Commissioner Blake asked if they had finished the ADA ramp. Planner Daniel Fama replied that instead of a ramp there will be a lift. That was the preference of the business owner so as not to lose too much floor space. HPB Member Blake asked if Director Paul Kermoyan is involved with this change to plan. Planner Daniel Fama replied yes. He clarified that the windows are the same but the door is different. ADJOURNMENT The Historic Preservation Board meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. to the next Regular Historic Preservation Board meeting of February 27, 2019. PREPARED BY: ______________________________________ Corinne Shinn, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: ______________________________________ Michael Foulkes, Chair ATTEST: ______________________________________ Daniel Fama, HPB Staff Liaison Item No. 2 CITY OF CAMPBELL ∙ HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Staff Report ∙ FEBRUARY 27, 2019 PLN2019-09 Public Hearing to consider the application of Eaton Hall Architects for a Modification (PLN2019-09) to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2016-76), including a Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Tier 1), to allow a revised window and door design for an ongoing façade restoration and seismic retrofit of a Structure of Merit commonly known as the Second Bank of Campbell Building on property located at 360 E. Campbell Avenue in the C-3 (Central Business District) Zoning District. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the Historic Preservation Board take the following action: 1.Adopt Resolution No. 2019-01 (reference Attachment 1), recommending that the Planning Commission approve a Modification (PLN2019-09) to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2016-76), including a Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Tier 1). ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that this project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15060(c)(2) of the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA), pertaining to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment. DISCUSSION Project Site: The project site is located at the southwest corner of Campbell and Central Avenues within the C-3 (Central Business District) Zoning District. The property is developed with the Second Bank of Campbell Building, a designated Structure of Merit constructed circa 1911 in an Italian Renaissance Revival style (reference Attachment 2 – DPR Form). Background: On July 25, 2017, the Planning Commission, upon recommendation of the Historic Preservation Board, approved a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2016-76) to allow a minor addition, façade restoration, and seismic retrofit of the Second Bank of Campbell Building. As required by the Conditions of Approval, the Board reviewed and approved the building plans submitted for a building permit at its December 20, 2017 meeting. Construction commenced in the middle of last year, beginning with the seismic retrofit work. In early January, staff was called out to conduct a "framing inspection" in order to confirm that exterior work was being performed per the approved plans. Upon conducting the inspection, it was apparent that the door and window design diverged from the approved plans. The architect indicated that the changes were intended to improve the historic accuracy of the building. However, since the Board had signed-off on the building plans, it would not be appropriate for staff to administratively approve the changes, and as such determined that a formal Modification application was required. So as not to delay the project, staff allowed interior work to continue on an "at-risk" basis should the request be denied. ATTACHMENT 2 Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of February 27, 2019 Page 2 of 3 PLN2019-09 ~ 360 E. Campbell Avenue Proposed Modification: The submitted project plans (reference Attachment 3) call-out the following changes, which are also depicted below (proposed changes shown in red). The intent of the changes is to better replicate the original façade design of the building, as also depicted below. • Changing aluminum frame window to wood frames with top plates which match better with original and existing windows on the building side. • Changing door and sidelights from aluminum to wood, and continue sidelight down to the ground. ANALYSIS The newly adopted Historic Preservation Ordinance requires that discretionary development applications affecting an HRI listed property be reviewed in accordance with the standards for a "Tier 1" Historic Resource Alteration Permit. Specifically, a "Tier 1" approval requires the Board and Planning Commission to find that the project complies with the Municipal Code and applicable design guidelines, and would not have a "significant impact" on the historic resource. Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of February 27, 2019 Page 3 of 3 PLN2019-09 ~ 360 E. Campbell Avenue Additionally, the project must comply with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards such that the decision-making body can affirmatively find: (a) The proposed action will preserve and retain the historic character of the historic resource and will be compatible with the existing historic features, size, massing, scale and proportion, and materials. (b) The proposed action will, to the greatest extent possible, avoid removal or significant alteration of distinctive materials, features, finishes, and spatial relationships that characterize the historic resource. (c) Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced to the greatest extent possible. (d) New additions will be differentiated from the historic resource and will be constructed such that the essential form and integrity of the historic resource shall be protected if the addition is removed in the future. As noted, the intent of the changes is to better replicate the original façade design of the building. When reviewed against the Secretary of the Interior's Standards (reference Attachment 4 – Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, excerpt), the proposed changes appear to satisfy the applicable criteria in that the restored storefront would continue to be a faithful representation of the original storefront, without creating a false historical appearance. In addition, the use of wood framed windows rather than the aluminum frame windows will result in a more authentic appearance in keeping with the style of the subject structure. Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 2019-01 2. DPR Form 3. Project Plans 4. Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, excerpt Prepared by: Daniel Fama, Senior Planner RESOLUTION NO. 2019-01 BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL RECOMMENDING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE A MODIFICATION (PLN2019-09) TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMIT (PLN2016-76), INCLUDING A HISTORIC RESOURCE ALTERATION PERMIT (TIER 1), TO ALLOW A REVISED WINDOW AND DOOR DESIGN FOR AN ONGOING FAÇADE RESTORATION AND SEISMIC RETROFIT OF A STRUCTURE OF MERIT COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE SECOND BANK OF CAMPBELL BUILDING ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 360 E. CAMPBELL AVENUE IN THE C-3 (CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT) ZONING DISTRICT. FILE NO: PLN2019-09 After notification and public hearing, as specified by law and after presentation by the Board Secretary, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed. The Historic Preservation Board finds as follows with regards to file number PLN2019-09: 1.The project site is located at the southwest corner of Campbell and Central Avenues in Historic Downtown Campbell. 2.The project site is zoned C-3 (Central Business District) on the City of Campbell Zoning Map. 3.The project site is designated Central Commercial on the City of Campbell GeneralPlan Land Use diagram. 4.The project site is an approximately 1,500 square-foot commercial property developed with the Second Bank of Campbell Building, a designated Structure of Merit constructed circa 1911 in an Italian Renaissance Revival style. 5.On July 25, 2017, the Planning Commission approved a Site and ArchitecturalReview Permit (PLN2016-76) to allow a minor addition, façade restoration and seismic retrofit of the Second Bank of Campbell Building; and a Modification (PLN2016-99) to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit (PLN2007-183) to modify the interior configuration of an existing restaurant with approved general alcohol sales and late-night operational hours. 6.On December 20, 2017, the Historic Preservation Board reviewed and approved construction plans submitted for a building permit pursuant to the Planning Commission's Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2016-76) approval. 7.On April 2, 2018, the Building Division issued Building Permit No. BLD2017-1353 for the approved minor addition, façade restoration and seismic retrofit. 8.On January 4, 2019, the Planning Division conducted a "framing inspection" in order to confirm that exterior work was being performed per the approved plans. Upon conducting the inspection, it was apparent that the door and window design diverged from the construction plans issued under Building Permit No. BLD2017-1353. Historic Preservation Board Resolution No. 2019-01 Page 2 of 4 PLN2019-09 ~ 360 E. Campbell Ave. – Modification 9. The proposed project is an application for a Modification (PLN2019-09) to the previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2016-76) to allow a revised window and door design in order to better replicate the original façade design of the building. 10. Campbell Municipal Code Section 21.33.070.B.2 (Discretionary Permit Applications) requires that discretionary development applications affecting a historic resource be reviewed in accordance with the standards for a "Tier 1" Historic Resource Alteration Permit, provided in Section 21.33.080 (Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Tier 1). 11. When reviewed against the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, the proposed project would satisfy the applicable criteria in that the restored storefront would continue to be a faithful representation of the original storefront, without creating a false historical appearance. 12. The proposed project is consistent with the C-3 (Central Business District) Design Standards with respect to building mass, building form and composition, storefront design, materials, colors, and finishes, and overall building quality. 13. In review of the proposed project, the Historic Preservation Board considered traffic safety, traffic congestion, site circulation, landscaping, structure design, and site layout. 14. The proposed project would be consistent with the following General Plan policies: Policy LUT-8.1: Historic Buildings, Landmarks and Districts and Cultural Resources: Preserve, rehabilitate or restore the City’s historic buildings, landmarks, districts and cultural resources and retain the architectural integrity of established building patterns within historic residential neighborhoods to preserve the cultural heritage of the community. Strategy LUT-8.1c: Adaptive Re-Use: Encourage adaptive reuse of and incorporation of the city’s historic buildings and structures for new development projects, when feasible. Strategy LUT-8.1h: Historic Preservation Incentives: Develop incentives to encourage preservation and restoration including allowing the use of appropriate historic Building and Fire Codes and leniency on certain standard development requirements. Policy CNR-1.1: Historic Resource Preservation: Ensure that the City and its citizens preserve historic resources as much as possible. Policy D-4.1: Historic Preservation and Redevelopment Compatibility: The small town character of Downtown Campbell shall be maintained by encouraging the preservation of important historic resources, promoting the improvement of existing properties and businesses, and encouraging new development compatible in design with existing and newly approved development. 15. No substantial evidence has been presented which shows that the project, as currently presented and subject to the required Conditions of Approval, will have a significant adverse impact on the environment. Historic Preservation Board Resolution No. 2019-01 Page 3 of 4 PLN2019-09 ~ 360 E. Campbell Ave. – Modification Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Historic Preservation Board further finds and concludes that: Site and Architectural Review Permit Findings (CMC Sec. 21.42.060.B): 1. The project will be consistent with the General Plan; 2. The project will aid in the harmonious development of the immediate area; 3. The project is consistent with applicable adopted design guidelines, development agreement, overlay district, area plan, neighborhood plan, and specific plan(s); Historic Resource Alteration Permit – Tier 1 Findings (CMC Sec. 21.33.080): 4. The proposed action is consistent with the purposes of this chapter and the applicable requirements of the Municipal Code; 5. The proposed action is consistent with the applicable design guidelines, including, but not limited to, the Historic Design Guidelines for Residential Buildings; 6. The proposed action will not have a significant impact on the aesthetic, architectural, cultural, or engineering interest or historical value of the historic resource or district; 7. The proposed action is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, as follows: a. The proposed action will preserve and retain the historic character of the historic resource and will be compatible with the existing historic features, size, massing, scale and proportion, and materials. b. The proposed action will, to the greatest extent possible, avoid removal or significant alteration of distinctive materials, features, finishes, and spatial relationships that characterize the historic resource. c. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced to the greatest extent possible. d. New additions will be differentiated from the historic resource and will be constructed such that the essential form and integrity of the historic resource shall be protected if the addition is removed in the future. Environmental Findings (CMC Sec. 21.38.050): 8. The project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15301 Class 1 of the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA), pertaining to minor alterations to an existing private structure, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination. Historic Preservation Board Resolution No. 2019-01 Page 4 of 4 PLN2019-09 ~ 360 E. Campbell Ave. – Modification THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Historic Preservation Board recommends that the Planning Commission approve a Modification (PLN2019-09) to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2016-76), including a Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Tier 1), to allow a revised window and door design for an ongoing façade restoration and seismic retrofit of a Structure of Merit commonly known as the Second Bank of Campbell Building on property located at 360 E. Campbell Avenue, subject to the attached Recommended Conditions of Approval (attached Exhibit “A”). PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of February, 2019, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Board Members: NOES: Board Members: ABSENT: Board Members: ABSTAIN: Board Members: APPROVED: Michael Foulkes, Chair ATTEST: Daniel Fama, Secretary EXHIBIT A RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Site and Architectural Review Permit Modification Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Tier 1) 360 E. Campbell Avenue Where approval by the Director of Community Development, City Engineer, Public Works Director, City Attorney or Fire Department is required, that review shall be for compliance with all applicable conditions of approval, adopted policies and guidelines, ordinances, laws and regulations and accepted engineering practices for the item under review. Additionally, the applicant is hereby notified that he/she is required to comply with all applicable Codes or Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California that pertain to this development and are not herein specified. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1. Approved Project: Approval is granted for a Modification (PLN2019-09) to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2016-76), including a Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Tier 1), to allow a revised window and door design for an ongoing façade restoration and seismic retrofit of a Structure of Merit commonly known as the Second Bank of Campbell Building on property located at 360 E. Campbell Avenue. The revised project shall substantially conform to the Project Plans stamped as received by the Planning Division on January 14, 2019. 2. Permit Expiration: This Approval shall be valid for one (1) year from the effective date of Planning Commission action. Within this one-year period, revised construction plans for Building Permit No. BLD2017-01353 must be submitted. Failure to meet this deadline or expiration of an issued building permit will result in the Approval being rendered void. 3. Previous Conditions: Except as modified by this Approval, the Conditions of Approval provided in Planning Commission Resolution No. 4394 shall remain in effect. 4. Additional Alterations: Additional alterations to the subject structure, including, but not limited to the installation of awnings or wall-mounted heaters or a change in building colors, may be approved administratively by the Community Development Director only if such changes would not alter the character-defining features of the structure pursuant to CMC Sec. 21.33.070.B.1.a.(1). All other changes shall require a Modification to this Approval with issuance of a Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Tier 1). DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information Page 1 of 2 *Resource Name or #: Second Bank of Campbell Building P1. Other Identifier: Campbell Historic Resource *P2. Location:  Not for Publication  Unrestricted *a. County Santa Clara and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad Date T; R ; ¼ of ¼ of Sec ; B.M. c. Address 360 E. Campbell Ave.City Campbell Zip 95008 d.UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone ,mE/ mN e.Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., asappropriate) APN: 412-07-030 *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials,condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The Italian Renaissance Revival style Second Bank of Campbell building has a parapet roof with a wide, overhanging cornice supported by pairs of decorative brackets. The building is clad with white glazed brick that form a simple decorative frieze and frames the large arched windows with pilasters. The sills tri-part windows form a projected terra cotta belt course. The front entrance and windows have been remodeled. The building is in good condition and retains a high degree of historical integrity. *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) 06- Commercial building*P4. Resources Present:  Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b.Description of Photo: (view, date, accession #) Front Façade,07/12/07 *P6. Date Constructed/Age andSource:  Historic  Prehistoric  Both 1911 *P7. Owner and Address:Salvatore & Karen Blancato, trustee1 301 Eureka Canyon Rd. Corralitos, CA 95076 *P8. Recorded by: (Name,affiliation, and address) G. Laffey, Archives & Architecture 353 Surber DR. San Jose, CA 95123 *P9. Date Recorded: 9/1998 *P10. Survey Type: (Describe) Inventory Update *P11. Report Citation: (Citesurvey report and other sources, or enter "none.") 1977-78 Historic Resources Inventory, Jack Burns, Historical Advisor *Attachments: NONE Location Map Continuation Sheet  Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record  Other (List): State of California — The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date P5a.Photograph or Drawing (Photograph required for buildings, structures, and objects.) DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information *NRHP Status Code Page 2 of 2 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) B1. Historic Name: Mrs. Putnam’s Dry Good Store B2. Common Name: Mrs. Putnam’s Dry Good Store B3. Original Use: Clothing Store B4. Present Use: Commercial *B5. Architectural Style: Commercial Brick Building 1911 *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Built, 1911. First story front façade has been remodeled. *B7. Moved?  No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location: *B8. Related Features: Building at 354 E. Campbell was part of original construction. B9a. Architect: unknown b. Builder: unknown *B10. Significance: Theme Architecture, Economic/Industrial Area Period of Significance Property Type Applicable Criteria (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) The second Bank of Campbell was built in 1911 and located on the southwest corner of E. Campbell Avenue and Central Avenue. While here the bank was merged with the Garden City Bank of San Jose and later merged with the American Trust Company. Since it ceased being a bank, there have been many tenant, including the Ford Motor Company which used it as a showroom; the Campbell Water Company offices; Jeffer’s Clothing Store; an acrobatic shop; and finally in 1978 the Western Lifetime Cookware. A store front was added (date unknown) however, the interior has retained the original woodwork, plaster and bank vault. With little restoration work required this architectural structure of merit is important in maintaining the visual character of the commercial row of Downtown Campbell. B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References: Dennis L. Wardell (March 2, 1982) Campbell Museum 75 N. Central B13. Remarks: *B14. Evaluator: See P8 *Date of Evaluation: See P9 State of California — The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD (This space reserved for official comments.) A354 - 360 E CAMPBELL AVE.CAMPBELL, CA 95008DOWNTOWN CAMPBELLSEISMIC RETROFITDateRev. No. DescriptionProject Number:Date: © 2014 Eaton Hall Architecture, Inc.EATON HALL ARCHITECTUREA CALIFORNIA CORPORATIONSheet Title:Client:SALVATORE F. & KAREN E. BLANCATO TRUST12/08/20173.621Drawn by: PM1501 The Alameda, Suite 105San Jose, CA 95126TEL 408.265.5255FAX 408.265.6155ISSUED FOR PLAN CHECK 12/08/17SCHEDULES,EXISTING/PROPOSEDELEV'S/ SECTIONA3.1KEY NOTES3PROPOSED TRANSVERSE SECTION1/4" = 1'-0"PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION (E CAMPBELL AVE.)1/4" = 1'-0"1EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION (E CAMPBELL AVE.)1/4" = 1'-0"2DOOR SCHEDULEDOOR NOTESDOOR ELEVATIONWINDOW SCHEDULE1/4" = 1'-0"7HARDWARE GROUPSWINDOW ELEVATIONS1/4" = 1'-0"6DOOR HEAD DETAIL AT STOREFRONT3" = 1'-0"5THRESHOLD DETAIL AT STOREFRONT3" = 1'-0"4match new frame window with existingwood.continue sidewindows to groundmatch with original.change door frame towood 354 - 360 E CAMPBELL AVE.CAMPBELL, CA 95008DOWNTOWN CAMPBELLSEISMIC RETROFITDateRev. No. DescriptionProject Number:Date: © 2014 Eaton Hall Architecture, Inc.EATON HALL ARCHITECTUREA CALIFORNIA CORPORATIONSheet Title:Client:SALVATORE F. & KAREN E. BLANCATO TRUST12/08/20173.621Drawn by: PM1501 The Alameda, Suite 105San Jose, CA 95126TEL 408.265.5255FAX 408.265.6155ISSUED FOR PLAN CHECK 12/08/17A8.2PILASTER DETAILSPHOTOS1564PHOTOSPHOTOSPHOTOSKEY NOTESMAIN SECTION - BRICK LAYOUT23" = 1'-0"EXISTING ELEVATION PILASTER71" = 1'-0"EXISTING ELEVATION - SIDE PILASTER31" = 1'-0"match new window withexisting wood frame continue sidewindows to ground,and made 24" codeclearance .change door frame towoodmatch new frame window with existingwood.24" match new entry tooriginal, with sidewindows to groundmatch windowswith original woodframe windows Storefronts ....Replace recommended..... Replacing in kind an entire storefront that is too deteriorated to repair--if the overall form and detailing are still evident--using the physical evidence as a model. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. not recommended..... Removing a storefront that is unrepairable and not replacing it; or replacing it with a new storefront that does not convey the same visual appearance. Incompatible replacement storefront and inappropriate window alteration. Design for Missing Historic Features The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed. recommended Designing and constructing a new storefront when the historic storefront is completely missing. It may be an accurate restoration using historical, pictorial, and physical documentation; or be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building. Compatible, contemporary storefront design replaced a later, non-significant storefront. not recommended..... Creating a false historical appearance because the replaced storefront is based on insufficient historical, pictorial, and physical documentation. Introducing a new design that is incompatible in size, scale, material, and color. Using inappropriately scaled signs and logos or other types of signs that obscure, damage, or destroy remaining character-defining features of the historic building. Item No. 3 CITY OF CAMPBELL ∙ HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Staff Report ∙ FEBRUARY 27, 2019 Staff Request Staff request for Historic Preservation Board authorization to procure former Chair signatures for unsigned resolutions adopted from 2009 to 2018. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the Historic Preservation Board take the following action: 1.Make a Motion, authorizing the staff liaison to procure signatures from former Chairs of the Historic Preservation Board for unsigned resolutions adopted from 2009 to 2018. DISCUSSION With the transition to a new liaison to the Historic Preservation Board staff has begun to conduct a review of the Historic Preservation Program's files and records. As part of the review, staff cataloged all resolutions adopted by the Board over the last decade. Of the 34 resolutions adopted during this time period, only four were signed and scanned into the City's digital repository. The table, below, lists all resolutions adopted during this time period. The four signed resolutions are identified in red; all other resolutions were either lost and/or never signed by the Chair (the City did, however, retain Microsoft Word "soft" copies of the documents). To resolve this matter, staff is requesting that the Board make a motion authorizing staff to procure signatures from three former Chairs for the unsigned resolutions. Two of the former Chairs are current Board Members—Blake and Walters—and one is currently seated as a Planning Commissioner (Hernandez). This action does not affect the validity of the Board's actions over this time period; however, it will ensure that the City's permanent records reflect the Board's actions. Staff has also cross-referenced the roll-call vote for each resolution with the adopted meeting minutes to ensure the resolutions correctly reflect the approved action and vote count. Reso # Date Address Action File No. Chair 2009-01 5/27/2019 1 W Campbell Reso of Appreciation N/A Hernandez 2009-02 5/27/2009 1 W Campbell Heritage Tree PLN2009-68 Hernandez 2009-03 5/27/2009 1395 Munro Rd. Heritage Tree PLN2009-70 Hernandez 2009-04 5/27/2009 1888 White Oaks Heritage Tree PLN2009-71 Hernandez 2010-01 5/26/2010 540 W. Rincon Ave. Heritage Tree PLN2010-112 Blake 2010-02 5/26/2010 170 El Caminito Heritage Tree PLN2010-69 Blake 2011-01 5/25/2011 1 W Campbell Heritage Tree PLN2011-133 Hernandez 2011-02 7/27/2011 415 E. Campbell CUP PLN2011-137 Hernandez 2011-03 12/21/2011 140 S. Peter CUP PLN2011-11 Hernandez 2012-01 3/28/2012 Multiple HRI Update PLN2012-63 Blake 2012-02 4/25/2012 894 Robin Ln. Heritage Tree PLN2012-66 Blake 2012-03 11/28/2012 Multiple HRI Update PLN2012-63 Blake ATTACHMENT 3 Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of February 27, 2019 Page 2 of 3 Historic Preservation Board Authorization to Procure Former Chair Signatures Reso # Date Address Action File No. Chair 2012-04 12/18/2012 63 N 2nd St Landmark Designation PLN2011-228 Walter 2013-01 8/28/2013 431 Esther Heritage Tree PLN2013-227 Hernandez 2013-02 9/25/2013 99 Alice Ave. CUP PLN2013-203 Walter 2014-01 4/16/2014 Multiple HRI Update PLN2014-93 Hernandez 2015-01 1/28/2015 Multiple HRI Update PLN2015-23 Walter 2015-02 3/5/2015 99 Alice Ave. CUP PLN2015-30 Walter 2015-03 4/22/2015 155 Alice Landmark Designation PLN2015-89 Walter 2015-04 6/24/2015 119 S. 2nd St. HRI Rescission PLN2015-04 Walter 2015-05 8/19/2015 400 E. Campbell Ave. CUP PLN2015-202 Walter 2015-06 8/19/2015 400 E. Campbell Ave. CUP PLN2015-203 Walter 2016-01 5/25/2016 307 Orchard City Dr. PD Permit Mod. PLN2016-73 Hernandez 2016-02 5/25/2016 96 E. Rincon Ave. Historic Determination N/A Walter 2016-03 9/28/2016 235 Sharp Ave. Heritage Tree PLN2016-193 Blake 2016-04 10/26/2016 235 S 1st CUP PLN2016-258 Blake 2017-01 5/24/2017 360 E. Campbell Ave. S/A Review Permit PLN2016-76 Blake 2017-02 6/17/2017 N/A Meeting time change N/A Blake 2017-03 10/25/2017 20 Alice Ave. CUP PLN2017-164 Blake 2017-04 10/25/2017 N/A HP ZTA PLN2017-319 Blake 2017-05 11/15/2017 N/A Accept OHP Comments N/A Blake 2018-01 10/24/2018 110 s 2ND Mills Act PLN2018-302 Walter 2018-02 10/24/2018 68 S 2nd St. P-D Permit PLN2018-276 Walter Prepared by: Daniel Fama, Senior Planner To: Chair Foulkes and Board Members Date: February 27, 2019 From: Daniel Fama, Senior Planner Subject: Mills Act Program – Review Plan Background: At its meeting of December 4, 2018, the City Council provided direction to staff regarding review and expansion of the Mills Act Program, specifically: •Conduct a comprehensive review of the Mills Act Program ("program"), includingthe following elements: o Selection criteria o Qualifying improvements o Application form requirement o Reporting program (e.g., annual checklist receipts, etc.) •Investigate ways to market/promote the program •Upon completion of the review, schedule a Council hearing to consider expansion of the program (i.e., number of approved Mills Act contracts) Discussion: Based on the Council's direction, staff has prepared the following review plan to guide the evaluation of the Mills Act Program. As outlined below, this effort will entail at least two additional HPB meetings. However, the dates for the upcoming meetings are unknown at this time given staff time limitations and other departmental priorities. •HPB Meeting (2/27/19) o Discuss general issues/concerns with the program o Discuss how the program may be improved o Discuss ideas for developing a marketing/promotion plan •Obtain and review all Mills Act Annual Survey Reports from the County Assessor o Due to the County on March 15th •Conduct inspections of the 2013 contract properties (61 Catalpa Ln., 140 S. Peter Dr., and 75 N 2nd St.) •HPB Meeting (TBD) o Provide summary of program review o Discuss program elements in need of refinement (based on the results of the program review) •Prepare (draft) revised program materials and marketing/promotion plan City of Campbell MEMORANDUM Planning Division ATTACHMENT 4 Mills Act Program – Review Plan •HPB Meeting (TBD) o Review revised program materials and marketing/promotion plan o Make recommendation to the Council for program expansion •City Council (TBD) o Consider approval of program expansion o Consider revised program materials and marketing/promotion plan 1 Daniel Fama From:Andrea Sanders Sent:Tuesday, February 12, 2019 9:53 AM Cc:Daniel Fama; Wendy Wood Subject:Mandated Ethics Training Good morning, AB 1234 became effective January 1, 2006 and mandated that all local agency officials shall receive a minimum of 2 hours of ethics training by January 1, 2007, and every two years thereafter, if a local agency provides any type of compensation, salary, or stipend to a member of a legislative body, or provides reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses incurred by a member of a legislative body in the performance of official duties. The term “legislative body” includes not only the governing body of a local agency, but also a commission, committee, board, or other body of a local agency, whether permanent or temporary, decision-making or advisory. Therefore, all members of Campbell’s advisory commissions, boards and committees are required to receive two hours of ethics training. According to the City Clerk’s records, you are due, or soon to be due to complete the required training. There is an on-line training available that allows local officials to satisfy the two-hour training requirement of AB1234 and can be accessed at the following link: www.fppc.ca.gov Once you have completed the on-line training, please provide the City Clerk’s office with a signed copy of the certificate of completion. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 1-408-866-2117. cc: Daniel Fama, Senior Planner Thank you, Andrea Sanders Deputy City Clerk City of Campbell | City Clerk’s Office 70 N. First Street | Campbell, CA 95008 www.cityofcampbell.com | 408.866.2117 ATTACHMENT 5