"Identify structures or other resources which are now designated as ‘cultural resources’, but which have qualities that may make them eligible for landmark status."

Once designated, Local Landmarks are regulated by the Heritage Preservation Commission which reviews any proposed change to the exterior of a landmark structure through the Landmark Alteration Permit application process. This process involves a fee and an advertised public hearing before the HPC. Appeals of HPC decisions can be made to the City Council.

A Class 31 Categorical Exemption relieves this action to designate Local Landmarks from California Environmental Quality act (CEQA) provisions and City Guidelines. A Class 31 Categorical Exemption includes actions for historic preservation.

After designation Local Landmarks are also addressed by CEQA, which requires the City to make findings for a Negative Declaration or provide a Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to allowing major changes to heritage resources properties. If mitigation is not feasible, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR is required.

Local landmark property owners may be able to benefit from the Mills Act, which under some circumstances may offer significant property tax relief. The City of Sunnyvale currently has agreed to three separate Mills Act contracts.

Dill Design Group are the professional consultants chosen to evaluate the first three properties, using criteria found in the City of Sunnyvale’s Heritage Preservation Ordinance, (Section 19.96.050) which defines local landmarks as follows:

Although the properties are being considered only for local landmark designation, the consultants have used the evaluation forms that the State Office of Historic Preservation uses to review properties being considered for designation as State historic resources (DPR forms A and B). These forms are also used to catalogue and evaluate properties being considered for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The use of these forms allows properties to be listed at the state or national level if such designation is warranted and desired.

The criteria used to identify heritage resources at the local level are found in Municipal Code Section 19.96.50. They were adopted from the criteria used by the National Register of Historic Places and subsequently the California Register of Historic Resources. Therefore the criteria used for the local, state and national registers are compatible.

There are presently seven individual local landmark properties in Sunnyvale and one Local Landmark District. Of the seven individual landmarks, four are residences, two are industrial properties and one is a set of two redwood trees that were planted by a Sunnyvale pioneer (Attachment 3).

Each of the three properties that are being considered as additions to the list of local landmark properties will be discussed individually below.

This property was placed at the top of the list when the City was considering purchase of the property, in order to develop it as a museum for the Sunnyvale Historical Society. It was important to establish whether the property would qualify as a local landmark, which would limit changes that could be made in renovating the building for museum use. However after further investigation it was decided that it would not be financially feasible to convert the building into a museum.

Two residential buildings (161 and 167 N. Sunnyvale Avenue) actually occupy the site at this time. The site was once subdivided to provide for separate ownership and development of 167 N. Sunnyvale. Later the two separate properties came under the same ownership again. Therefore both residential buildings (and their accessory buildings) were evaluated. (See Attachment 4, Primary Record report, Dill Design Group.)

The consultants identified an ownership history that reflected the historical development of the city. The property, which was once part of the large ranch owned by the Martin Murphy family, was first developed as a single family residence by Arthur Bessey, who was superintendent of the Jubilee Incubator Company. Later, after 161 N. Sunnyvale was converted into apartments, a woman named Beatrice M. Ritchie occupied one of the apartments. She established a very successful company devoted to gift packaging dried fruit and nut products from local orchards.

The smaller property addressed as 167 N. Sunnyvale contains a single family home that was build by Henry Wanderer in 1926. This property was reported to be one of the first electrified houses in the city.

However, while 161 N. Sunnyvale has an interesting local history, it cannot be said that it’s occupants have had the historical stature that would give the property landmark status. The home addressed as 167 N. Sunnyvale Avenue also does not have historical associations (e.g. events) that would warrant landmark status.

The consultants then considered the architecture of the two residential buildings. In reviewing 161 N. Sunnyvale they found that the original single story Classical Revival house had been altered over the years in a manner that significantly affected its architectural integrity. In considering 167 N. Sunnyvale Avenue, the consultants found that while the building retained its original character, the building was not an outstanding example of its style or period and would not rate landmark status.

Based on the criteria used for evaluation the consultants concluded that neither residential building (or the accessory buildings) met the standards used for local landmark designation.

The current property owners have indicated that they are not interested in having the property designated as a local landmark.

Staff does not recommend local landmark status for 161-167 N. Sunnyvale Avenue.

The Stowell House is so named because until 1999 when Dolly Stowell died, it had been the family residence of Sunnyvale pioneer Charles Stowell and his descendents. Stowell bought the home from F. C. Fry in 1899, who had built the home circa 1890. Stowell and his brother-in-law Charles Spaulding were prominent businessmen in the community. They built the S & S building on the corner of Murphy Avenue and Washington Avenue. They also were involved in the construction of several other prominent buildings, including the First Baptist Church and the U.S. Post Office. Therefore the Stowell House is associated with a family that has had a significant influence on the development of the city.

The consultants have recommended this property for local landmark status. (See Attachment 5.) They have described the single family building located at this address as "an excellent example of the Queen Anne style as applied to a farm house." They suggest that the property meets criteria three of the California Register of Historical Resources because "it embodies the distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values." In addition, they note that because of "the building’s high degree of integrity" it appears to be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.

After Dolly Stowell died the house and property were purchased by Citation Homes, who developed the surrounding seven acres with homes, but left the Stowell home intact. At this time the home is being used as a rental.

Staff had initially contacted Citation Homes one year ago when the original list of properties to be considered for landmark status was developed. At that time no objections were raised. Staff has sent registered letters to the owners of all three properties to let them know of the upcoming public hearings. Staff has also attempted to reach the owners by telephone.

Staff recommends approval of the Stowell house as a Local Landmark.

This property was "bumped up" on the list because the property owner expressed strong interest in having the property designated as a local landmark.

The home was built in 1939 by the Homer Pfeiffer family and remained in the family until it was sold in the mid-1980’s. It’s current owners, Stanley and Donna Hendryx, purchased the property in the late 1990’s. The home has retained its architectural integrity.

The consultants (see Attachment 6) describe the home as "an excellent example of the Tudor style as applied to the suburban house." They state that the home "appears to meet the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources under criterion 3 because ‘it embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values.’"

They further suggest that, because of the home’s high degree of integrity and because it embodies "distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction – namely Tudor Revival style, the building also appears eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C.

Staff recommends approval of this property as a local landmark.

The property owner attended the heritage preservation commission public hearing on October 2^nd and expressed his approval of the local landmark designation of his property. (See Attachment 7, HPC Minutes, October 2, 2002.)

Funds for the three consultant evaluations were budgeted and provided by the Community Planning Program budget. Each evaluation costs $1,800 - $3,000.