Planing Commission Staff Report (2019-09-10)Item No. 3
CITY OF CAMPBELL ∙ PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report ∙ September 10, 2019
PLN2019-101 Tsai, L.
Public Hearing to consider the application of Linda Tsai to remove/rescind
(PLN2019-101) a Structure of Merit commonly known as the Smith House
from the City of Campbell Historic Preservation Inventory, on property
located at 74 N Second Street in the R-1 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission take the following action:
1.Adopt a Resolution (reference Attachment 1), recommending that the City Council not
rescind, but retain the historic designation of 74 N Second Street.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that this project is Statutorily Exempt under Section 15270(a) of the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA), pertaining to projects which
a public agency rejects or disapproves.
DISCUSSION
Project Site: The project site is located near the northeast corner of North Second Street and Civic Center Drive, within the R-1-6 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District (reference
Attachment 2 – Location Map). The property is developed with a single-family residence, a
designated Structure of Merit constructed in the 1930's in the Prairie Style commonly known as
the Smith House (reference Attachment 3 – Photographs). According to the City's current
Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) form, the home was the residence of the widow of Campbell High School’s first principal, Fred Smith, the property's namesake (reference
Attachment 4 – DPR Form). A 380 square-foot rear addition and interior remodel, subsidized
with a City rehabilitation loan, was constructed in 1991.
Proposal: As permitted by the Historic Preservation Ordinance (CMC Sec. 21.33.060.D.1), the
property owner has submitted a written request to rescind the historic designation of the property for personal reasons (reference Attachment 5). No other justification was articulated.
Background: At its meeting of February 5, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11510,
adding 14 properties to the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI), including the subject property
(reference Attachment 6). As discussed in the City Council staff report, the Council approved
designation of these properties based in part on the lack of objection by the property owners (reference Attachments 7). It is the Council's practice not to add a property to the HRI without the owner's consent. This practice has now been codified in the new Historic Preservation Ordinance,
which states that an "owner(s) may withdraw his or her acceptance at any time prior to final
approval of the designation of the property." Moreover, it was the Council understanding that the
same process used to add a property to the HRI would be used to remove it should the current or future property owner desire to do so.
Staff Report – Planning Commission Meeting of September 10, 2019 Page 2 of 3
PLN2019-101 ~ 74 N Second Street
HPB Review: The Historic Preservation Board ("Board") considered this matter at its meeting of
August 12, 2019 (reference Attachment 8 – Draft HPB Minutes). The Board questioned the
applicant as to the reasoning for her request. Ms. Tsai stated that she was concerned that the
historic status would lead to more costly maintenance improvements and that it might limit her ability to modify the front porch posts. She also questioned the historic value of the house. The
Board commented that due to the age of the house that maintenance cost would likely be higher
irrespective of historic designation. Specifically, older structures often used non-standard building
materials that may still require some degree of custom work to replace.
The Board did not find that Ms. Tsai's request satisfied the findings for removal from the HRI, as specified, below. Moreover, the Board touched upon the broader goal of maintaining Campbell's
historic heritage; a small community does not possess many historic structures and each one is
important. By a 3-0-2 vote (Board Members Blake and Moore abstaining due to proximity) the
Board recommended that the City Council not remove the subject property from the HRI.
Following the Board's meeting, Ms. Tsai provided follow-up letters further questioning the historic value of her home and the process the City exercised in adding the property to the HRI
(reference Attachment 9).
ANALYSIS
Historic Preservation Ordinance: Rescinding a property's historic designation requires the City
Council, upon independent recommendations of the Board and Planning Commission, to find that "based on substantial evidence and findings of fact in the record that the resource no longer has historic value with respect to the designation criteria." CMC Section 21.33.060.D.2 further states
that "in the case of disagreement as to the significance of a historic resource, a historic evaluation
report and/or structural report shall be required." Since the Board recommended that the property
not be removed from the HRI, should the Planning Commission recommend rescission, an historic resource evaluation report would need to be prepared at the applicant's cost. The conclusions of such a report, however, would not be binding on the City Council. On the other hand, if the
Commission agrees with the Board, no report is required and the Council will retain its authority
to either accept or reject the Commission's recommendation.
The criterion for inclusion on the HRI is listed below. For the Commission's reference, the 1977 and 1999 DPR forms are included as Attachments 10 and 11. Additionally, a scoring sheet from 1997 is included as Attachment 12. Unfortunately, these documents do not provide much
background for which to evaluate the applicant's request. Only a formal historic resource
evaluation would provide a definite opinion as to historic integrity. To what extent the subject
property still satisfies the criteria, is a matter for the Commission to discuss and determine.
(a) The resource is associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history or cultural heritage;
(b) The resource is associated with the lives of persons important to our history;
(c) The resource yields, or has the potential to yield, information important to our
prehistory or history;
(d) The resource embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction;
Staff Report – Planning Commission Meeting of September 10, 2019 Page 3 of 3
PLN2019-101 ~ 74 N Second Street
(e) The resource represents the work of a notable architect, designer, engineer, or builder;
or
(f) The resource possesses significant artistic value or materially benefits the historic
character of the neighborhood, community, or city.
General Plan: The General Plan supports the preservation of historic structures in the community,
finding that it "promotes community identity, enhances the quality of life and preserves a quality
small town feeling." The Land Use Element and Conservation and Natural Resources Element
provide the following policies and strategies that may be taken into account by the Planning
Commission.
Strategy LUT-8.1a: 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-8.1i: Altering or Demolishing Historic Resources: Establish procedures, including
identifying alternatives, for proposals that significantly alter or demolish historic resources
Policy CNR-1.1: Historic Resource Preservation: Ensure that the City and its citizens preserve historic
resources as much as possible.
Attachments: 1.Draft Resolution
2. Location Map
3. Site Photographs
4.DPR Form5.Written Request6. City Council Resolution No. 11510
7. City Council Staff Report, dated February 5, 2013
8.Draft HPB Minutes
9. Applicant Follow-Up Letters10. 1977 DPR Form11. 1999 DPR Form
12. 1997 Survey
Prepared by:
Daniel Fama, Senior Planner
Approved by:
Paul Kermoyan, Community Development Director
RESOLUTION NO. 45xx
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CAMPBELL RECOMMENDING THAT CITY
COUNCIL NOT RESCIND THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION OF A
STRUCTURE OF MERIT COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE SMITH HOUSE, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 74 N SECOND STREET IN
THE R-1-6 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.
FILE NO: PLN2019-101
After notification and public hearing, as specified by law and after presentation by the Community Development Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed.
The Planning Commission finds as follows with regards to file number PLN2019-101:
1.The project site is located near the northeast corner of North Second Street and CivicCenter Drive.
2.The project site is zoned R-1-6 (Single-Family Residential) Zoning District on the City
of Campbell Zoning Map.
3.The project site is designated Low Density Residential on the City of CampbellGeneral Plan Land Use diagram.
4.The project site is developed with a single-family residence, a designated Structure of
Merit constructed in the 1930's in the Prairie Style commonly known as the Smith
House.
5.At its meeting of February 5, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11510,adding 14 properties to the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI), including the subject
property.
6.Pursuant to Campbell Municipal Code (CMC) Section 21.33.060.A, designation of
property as an historic resource requires written acceptance by the property owner,
such that the owner may withdraw his or her acceptance at any time prior to finalapproval of the designation of the property.
7.The owner of the subject property has submitted a request to rescind the historic
designation of the property, pursuant to CMC Section 21.33.060.D.1.
8.Pursuant to CMC Section 21.33.060.D, the City Council shall either approve or deny
the rescission, based on substantial evidence and findings of fact in the record thatthe resource no longer has historic value with respect to the designation criteria.
9.The property owner's stated purpose for removing the property from the HRI is the
purported increased cost associated with maintaining the structure. However, ageing
structures must be maintained irrespective of their historical status. Moreover, older
structures often used non-standard building materials that preclude use ofcontemporary standardized materials such that compliance with the applicable
historic design guidelines does not increase the maintenance cost for the home.
Attachment 1
Planning Commission Resolution No. 45xx Page 2 of 2 PLN2019-101 ~ 74 N Second Street
10.The Planning Commission has considered all evidence in the record and verbaltestimony.
11.No substantial evidence has been presented which shows that the project, as
currently presented will have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Planning Commission further finds and
concludes that:
Designation Criteria (CMC Sec. 21.33.060.B.1):
1.The resource is associated with the lives of persons important to our history;
2.The resource embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style,
period, or method of construction; and
3.The resource possesses significant artistic value or materially benefits the historiccharacter of the neighborhood, community, or city.
Environmental Findings (CMC Sec. 21.38.050):
4.This action is Statutorily Exempt under Section 15270(a) of the California Environment
Quality Act (CEQA), pertaining to projects which a public agency rejects or
disapproves.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that City
Council not rescind the historic designation of a Structure of Merit commonly known as the
Smith House, on property located at 74 N Second Street.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of September, 2019, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
APPROVED:
Andrew Rivlin, Chair
ATTEST:
Paul Kermoyan, Secretary
188 This map is based on GIS Information and reflects the most current information at the time of this printing. The map is intended for reference purposes only and the City and its staff is not responsible for errors.
Location Map - 74 N 2nd St.
2,257Campbell IT, GIS Services
376
1:WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet
3760
Scale
Attachment 2
Attachment 3
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information
Page 1 of 2 *Resource Name or #:Smith House P1.Other Identifier:
*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 74 N. Second St. 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: 279-41-048
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials,
condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
A Prairie style house, this one story residence has low sweeping lines that are emphasized
by prominent eaves and horizontal beveled lap siding carried beyond the wall surface onto
the front columns and porch. Symmetrical in plan, the entry porch sits in front of the
building envelope as an open terrace, framed by boxed posts and a low wall. The roof is
hipped and is covered with composition shingles; a smaller hip section projects over the
porch. A small cantilevered section of roof extends over the side door on the north
elevation. The eaves are prominent, boxed underneath, and are terminated with large gutters
with angled fronts, not likely original in design. The windows are double hung with six over
six pane sash. The front door is Craftsman in detail, containing six small windows embedded
within the field of the wood door at eye level. A side gable garage hugs the rear at the end
of a concrete drive. This well landscaped lot is framed with an open board fence with dog-
ear pickets. *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) Single Family Residence
*P4. Resources Present:
Building Structure Object
Site District Element of
District Other (Isolates, etc.)
P5b.Description of Photo: (view,date, accession #) Front Façade,07/17/07
*P6. Date Constructed/Age andSource: Historic
Prehistoric
Both
*P7. Owner and Address:
Linda L. Tsai
*P8. Recorded by: (Name,affiliation, and address) Leslie A.G. Dill Architect 110 N Santa Cruz Ave. Los Gatos, CA 95030
*P9. Date Recorded: 4/1999*P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
*P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") Interview with
Mrs. Roberta J. Field (May 24, 1978) by Tom M. King. Initial survey notes compiled by Kathy Lewis (October 29, 1977). 1977-78 Survey.
*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.)
Attachment 4
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information
*NRHP Status CodePage 2 of 2 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder)B1.Historic Name: Smith HouseB2. Common Name: Smith House
B3. Original Use:Single-Family Home B4. Present Use: Same *B5. Architectural Style: Prairie Style*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations)
Estimated to be built, 1930’s.
*B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date:Original Location:*B8. Related Features:
B9a. Architect: unknown b. Builder: unknown
*B10. Significance: Theme Architecture, Exploration/Settlement Area
Period of Significance Property TypeApplicable Criteria
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period,
and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
Mrs. J. Fred Smith lived here after her husband, who was Campbell High School’s first
principal, died in 1912.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes)
*B12. References:
See P11
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.)
Attachment 5
Attachment 6
Attachment 7
Historic Preservation Board
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
Monday, August 12, 2019 | 5:00 PM
City Council Chambers, City Hall, 70 N First St., Campbell, California
CALL TO ORDER
The Historic Preservation Board meeting of August 12, 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: HPB Members Absent
Michael Foulkes, Chair None
Yvonne Kendall, Vice Chair
Susan Blake Staff Members Present:
Laura Taylor Moore Daniel Fama, Senior Planner
Todd Walter Corinne Shinn, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.Approval of HPB Minutes of July 24, 2019
Motion: Upon motion of Board Member Moore, seconded by Board Member
Kendall, the Historic Preservation Board minutes of the meeting of
July 24, 2019, were approved as submitted. (4-0-0-1; Chair Foulkes
abstained)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (ITEMS NOT AGENDIZED)
None
BOARD/STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS, UPDATES AND REQUESTS
Planner Daniel Fama:
•Advised the HPB that a training session would occur at the next meeting on
September 25th. There are no hearing items to consider so this offers a good
opportunity for required training.
•Suggested that the HPB members send him any suggestions for topics off line.
•Added that he would also consult with Planner Cindy McCormick for suggestions.
•Concluded that likely the training would involve a webinar that can be viewed
together here at City Hall.
Attachment 8
Historic Preservation Board Minutes for August 12, 2019 Page 2
Board Member Blake said that the California State Preservation Board conducts a
webinar between noon and 1:30 p.m.
Planner Daniel Fama said he would look into that.
Board Member Walter suggested using a previous training event so the entire HPB can
watch together. It is more difficult to schedule an additional specific time occurring
during the work week for all five members.
Board Member Blake announced that another historical profile article has been
published in the Campbell Express about Mayor Watson’s former home on Catalpa.
Board Member Kendall suggested have a sandwich board created to help introduce and
make the public aware of the availability of the HPB’s Walking Tour App. The sandwich
board sign can be displayed at community events including the weekly Farmers Market
in Downtown.
Board Member Moore advised that the City has a standing booth space at each
Farmers Market at Second and E. Campbell Avenue. It offers a space for public
outreach including Fire, Councilmembers, and other issues of interest to the community
coming from the City itself.
Planner Daniel Fama said he would investigate that.
Board Member Kendall suggested having members of HPB staff the booth when its sign
is being displayed there to answer questions.
Board Member Blake said that perhaps one person could even wear the sandwich
board sign.
Board Member Kendall reference the “pink house” that she is sure has a story behind it.
Board Member Blake said she must be referring to the home located at the corner of
Grant and Second.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2.74 N Second Street – HRI Rescission Request (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Public Hearing to consider the application of Linda Tsai to remove/rescind (PLN2019-
101) a Structure of Merit commonly known as the Smith House, on property located at
74 N Second Street, from the City of Campbell Historic Preservation Inventory. Staff is
recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA.
Planner Daniel Fama:
•Said that the property owner of 74 N. Second Street is asking that her home be
removed/rescinded as a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory.
•Added that the request is detailed in the staff report.
Historic Preservation Board Minutes for August 12, 2019 Page 3
•Advised that there are required findings the HPB must make that would be opposite
to those findings that were made with the original action taken in 2013 to add this
home to the HRI.
•Stated that this issue would be forwarded on to the Planning Commission in
September. If the PC reaches a different recommendation than HPB, a history study
will be required. The Council will then consider and take final action.
Board Members Blake and Moore both advised that they would need to recuse
themselves from participating in Item No. 2 due to proximity to their respective homes to
the subject site. The left the dais and chambers.
Ms. Linda Tsai, Property Owner, 74 N. Second Street:
•Stated that she needs to be able to upkeep her home.
•Pointed out that the home was a rental prior to her purchase and was in bad
condition.
•Said that original details are missing and difficult to find replacements.
•Advised that the foundation is settling, which she has been told is normal, but leaves
the house appearing slated in one direction as seen from the frontage.
•Stated that she can do a better job of repairs at a lower cost if this home is not
included on the HRI.
•Added that she feels like her hands are tied with her home being on the HRI and she
is asking to be removed.
•Admitted that she has no specific plans right now.
•Reported that in 1991 and addition was made to the home and new double paned
windows installed throughout.
•Stated that this home is not really that historic at this point.
•Opined that since Mrs. Smith was widowed when she lived in this home as a renter
that doesn’t significantly connect this home to the Smiths.
•Concluded that she is doing what she can with her limited resources to improve her
home.
Board Member Kendall asked Ms. Tsai if she has brought forth any potential upgrade
plans to the City for review.
Ms. Linda Tsai replied no. She said she would have to hire a designer or architect and
it is possible that she would not be able to go forward with those added costs.
Board Member Kendall asked how long Ms. Tsai has owned this home.
Ms. Linda Tsai said she bought it on April 25, 1987.
Board Member Kendall said that means she hadn’t done the addition.
Ms. Linda Tsai replied no. She added that in 1991 she worked with Sharon Teeter at
the City to secure a City loan to rehab the home. This loan was a joint program
between Campbell and the County. She had double-paned windows installed with other
improvements.
Historic Preservation Board Minutes for August 12, 2019 Page 4
Board Member Walter pointed out that it was not done in an historic manner.
Planner Daniel Fama reminded that this home was not yet included on the HRI at that
time.
Ms. Linda Tsai added that all windows were replaced. The door was not solid enough
for current standards and was also replaced. A 300 square-foot addition was added on
to the original 900 square-foot home.
Board Member Walter asked if the addition was placed at the rear of the home.
Ms. Linda Tsai replied yes.
Board Member Walter advised that the HPB mainly focuses on the front elevation of
historic structures. He asked if the photos in the report were current.
Planner Daniel Fama replied yes.
Board Member Walter asked Ms. Tsai if the main reason she fears staying on the HRI is
that it would be too expensive to maintain a designated historic house.
Ms. Linda Tsai said that is one reason. She added that the stated historic significance
of this home is not that compelling in tying the home to the Smiths. She added that
there are no additional historic files remaining at the County Offices due to a fire.
Board Member Walter clarified that Ms. Tsai has owned this property since 1987 and it
was added to the HRI in 2013. He asked why Ms. Tsai had not asked at that time not to
be considered.
Ms. Linda Tsai:
•Stated that she works in high tech, in a demanding job.
•Admitted that she didn’t have the time at that point to investigate it.
•Added that she noticed the address was wrong in one reference and that made her
think it wasn’t her home under consideration.
•Assured if she had known how to do so, she would have asked to be removed or not
included.
•Stated that she regrets that she didn’t ask how to not be included in 2013.
•Pointed out that no environmental was done.
Board Member Walter:
•Explained to Ms. Tsai that the HPB is trying to preserve homes in the area.
•Cautioned that without preservation we are losing our history and charm.
•Pointed out that Campbell doesn’t have a lot of historic structures and HPB
encourages those there are listed to keep the HRI designation.
•Stated that Ms. Tsai has a very charming house and he would hate to see it go
away.
•Reported that there are incentives available that include Mills Act Contracts whereby
a property owner of a historic home receives tax rebates to defray the costs of
maintaining a historic structure.
Historic Preservation Board Minutes for August 12, 2019 Page 5
•Asked Ms. Tsai if she had ever investigated a Mills Act Contract.
Ms. Linda Tsai:
•Replied no.
•Added that she had never heard about it before.
•Pointed out that her home is not a beautiful example of a Craftsman or such.
•Reminded that her house is sinking downward.
•Admitted that she is not sure what to do to make it look better.
Board Member Walter asked Ms. Tsai if she is currently living in this home.
Ms. Linda Tsai:
•Replied yes.
•Added that she has lived in the home since its purchase in 1987.
•Displayed a photograph of a home that demonstrates post pillars at the front that
she would like to see on her home. She said it is a common style.
•Stated that adding such post pillars at the front of her home would update it. She
can see these on her home.
Board Member Kendall:
•Stated that it makes sense the Ms. Tsai wants to update her home.
•Added that the HPB wants to maintain historic homes and/or to return them to an
original state or condition.
•Said that Ms. Tsai’s home represents a significant architectural look in Campbell as
well as having some historic significance due to the connection to a member of the
Smith family.
•Admitted that she’d like to see if there are ways to have this home remain historic
although she is not sure if its best achieved with a new elevation versus replacing
like with like.
Ms. Linda Tsai:
•Reported that there are layers upon layers of paint on the frontage in many different
colors.
•Advised that she hired someone to grind down the layers of paint, which is an
impossible task.
•Added that they can’t fix just some of existing boards and have them line up and
match.
Board Member Kendall asked Ms. Tsai if her foundation is uneven.
Ms. Linda Tsai replied yes. One side is coming down and she wants to make it look
better.
Board Member Walter advised Ms. Tsai that it would cost the same to fix up her house
whether it remains on the HRI or not.
Board Member Kendall suggested to Ms. Tsai that a Mills Act Contract would assist her
with the costs of repairing the foundation and making the house right.
Historic Preservation Board Minutes for August 12, 2019 Page 6
Ms. Linda Tsai said she understands that she really doesn’t have to fix the foundation
itself, but she simply wants the house to look better as seen from the street frontage.
Board Member Walter:
•Advised Ms. Tsai that there is a way to fix it, so it looks both straight and uniform.
•Said that inclusion of simple post columns the existing could be replaced and
painted.
•Assured that the HPB is not crazy and looking for perfection. HPB works with
people to keep their home.
•Suggested that Ms. Tsai not ask to be removed from HRI today but rather that she
goes back and think about what she wants to do with her home. Then come back to
talk with us.
•Stated that the cost difference could be very small.
•Reminded that there is potential for tax credit through a Mills Act Contract, which is
possible if her home is registered on the HRI.
•Said that HPB would be willing to discuss her plans with her and help her plan her
project.
Ms. Linda Tsai:
•Said that she has found people to help her.
•Reported that there is a hold in the existing siding.
•Reiterated her belief that costs would be less if her home is not historic.
Board Member Walter cautioned that trim would likely have to be custom cut. Common
available trims would not work.
Ms. Linda Tsai asked how HPB considers historic information for a property.
Planner Daniel Fama said that is getting off topic at this point.
Chair Foulkes clarified with Ms. Tsai that she has lived in this home since 1987 and
received a City loan in 1991 for improvements to the home including a small addition.
Ms. Linda Tsai replied yes.
Chair Foulkes asked Ms. Tsai if she did any other repairs to the home between 1987
and 1991.
Ms. Linda Tsai:
•Said that there was no real kitchen when she purchased the home so that was the
first thing she did right away. There was no prep counter and the seller replaced the
existing old stove with a new one before sale.
•Added that the house had one bathroom and two bedrooms. The sink in the
bathroom was tiny. The home improvement loan she secured through the City’s
program was either a 10 or 15-year loan.
Chair Foulkes:
Historic Preservation Board Minutes for August 12, 2019 Page 7
•Reiterated that Ms. Tsai had updated the house by fixing the kitchen upon purchase.
•Asked whether there have been any additional “major” repairs to the home between
1991 and now.
Ms. Linda Tsai:
•Explained that the bath was redone with the 1991 loan funds. It originally had to
doors leading into the bathroom and one was closed off to allow for a larger sink.
•Added that the kitchen linoleum was changed twice in the years’ that she has owned
the home.
•Said that there is dry root in the porch.
Chair Foulkes asked if there was anything else done.
Ms. Linda Tsai said a new roof and added solar.
Chair Foulkes stated that he understands that regardless of what happens with the HRI
status for this property, Ms. Tsai will live with the foundation as it is.
Ms. Linda Tsai replied yes. She said she was told that it represents normal settling per
the home inspection. When you look at the home you notice it looks like it’s sinking.
Chair Foulkes restated that Ms. Tsai was previously unaware of the Mills Act Contracts
that provide tax rebates to property owners to allow them to recoup costs for
maintenance of old homes.
Board Member Kendall:
•Admitted that she is disinclined to approve this request to remove this property from
the HRI given there are so few qualifying houses in the City.
•Added that it doesn’t appear to her that this home is in tear down condition at this
time.
•Stated that repair costs could be comparable whether the home remains on the HRI
or is removed.
•Opined that Ms. Tsai’s desire to change the “look” of a home isn’t a compelling
reason.
•Reiterated previous comments made that these HRI homes help us all to see where
our roots came from.
•Concluded that as we are a small town every little house is important.
Board Member Walter:
•Admitted that he is in a quandary as well.
•Said it doesn’t appear that anything significant has changed since the HPB approved
this property for the HRI.
•Added that it doesn’t feel like this request is an automatic approval to rescind or
remove this home from the HRI.
•Concluded that he wouldn’t support the request for removal.
•Stated that he is hoping Ms. Tsai would remove her request temporarily and
participate in more discussion to see if there are other ways for HPB to help her
save her home. Be it a Mills Act Contract or some other means.
Historic Preservation Board Minutes for August 12, 2019 Page 8
Chair Foulkes:
•Stated his agreement with the comments of his HPB colleagues.
•Said he appreciates the time and effort to request removal.
•Added that he doesn’t think that we have changed circumstances from when this
home was added to the HRI.
•Explained that he is serving on the HPB to help make it easier for homeowners in
Campbell to retain/maintain their historic homes.
•Pointed out that the appearance of an historic home is concentrate on the front and
both front-side elevations along the first ten feet or so.
Motion: Upon motion of Board Walter, seconded by Board Member Kendall,
the Historic Preservation Board adopted Resolution No. 2019-04
recommending that the home located at 74 N. Second Street be
retained on the City’s Historic Resource Inventory as Structure of
Merit and not rescinded from inclusion, by the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Foulkes, Kendall and Walter
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Blake and Moore
Board Members Blake and Moore returned to the chambers and dais upon completion
of Item No. 2.
Board Member Kendall said she must recuse from the next two items as she lives within
noticing proximity of the two Alice Avenue locations.
3. 146 Alice Avenue – Tier 1 Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Resolution/Roll
Call Vote)
Public Hearing to consider the application of Monica and Ron Grandia for a Tier 1
Historic Resource Alteration Permit (PLN2019-129) to allow installation of new window
openings on the east and west walls of an Alice Avenue Historic District property
commonly known as the Anthony Bargas Sr. House, located at 146 Alice Avenue. Staff
is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA.
Planner Daniel Fama:
•Reported that the property owners of 146 Alice Avenue are seeking a Tier 1 Historic
Resource Alteration permit to allow new window openings to the left and right-side
elevations of their house at 146 Alice Avenue.
•Advised that such a permit requires HPB approval.
Board Member Walter asked if he understands correctly that these new windows would
be custom crafted on site.
Ron Grandia, Applicant and Property Owner, 146 Alice Avenue, replied yes.
Board Member Blake asked if he is using Jim Sheets.
Attachment 9
Summary of Rescinding Appeal for 74 N 2nd Street, Campbell (The complete write-up is attached for full
explanation on these summary)
1.Historical Board members only considered the number of historical homes on the Inventory list
and the cost of repair an historical home getting more expensive custom made material. They
didn’t consider anything else. City of Saratoga historical Resource listed 98 homes/structures
for population of 30,905 (2017). City of Campbell listed 147 structures for population of 41,544
(2017). The number of historical inventory is consistent to the size of the two cities. San Jose as
a bigger city has a lot more.
2.Guideline for placing property on this Inventory list? What significant characteristics qualified it?
My home was named “Smith House” NOT as a Fred Smith’s family home but only due to his
widow lived there for an unspecified time not as an owner but a renter. How significant is this
piece of infor. Comparing with a family home? The home is only a bungalow and not a
craftsman styled home.
3.Two different standards used to place property on this list initiated by the City in 2013 vs
request to remove a property from the list by the homeowners. The request is for the same
treatment to remove it from the Inventory list.
Suggested resolution is to place a plaque with picture of original home by the
Front or Side of the home. Then allow homeowner to modify the front
entrance for better curb appeal. This way, anyone can see what it looked like
originally and what it looked like now.
Attachment 10
Attachment 11
Attachment 12