ROLL CALL

Members Present: Vice Chair Dawn Hopkins; Chair Rose Kausek; Comm. Neil Love; Comm. Amrit Verma;

Staff:  Royston, Hanamoto, Alley, & Abby Consultants; Steve Lynch, Associate Planner; Joey Mariano; Staff Office Assistant

Members of the public: Interested person for item 2005-0319 further noted as “Member of the public”

CONSENT CALENDAR

A.     Approval of the July 6, 2005 Draft Minutes

Chair Kausek requested two modifications to the draft minutes.

SCHEDULED PRESENTATION

PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS		(Speakers are limited to 3 minutes for announcements of related Board/Commission events, programs, resignations, recognitions, acknowledgments)
CITIZENS TO BE HEARD	This category is limited to 15 minutes, with a maximum of 3 minutes per speaker.

PUBLIC HEARINGS/GENERAL BUSINESS

A.     2005-0319 -   Wendell Whitfield [Applicant/Owner]: An application for a Resource Alteration Permit to consider potential demolition of heritage resource structures at 461 and 471 South Murphy Avenue (near Olive Ave.)  The property is located in a DSP-11 (Downtown Specific Plan/Block 11) Zoning District. (APN: 209-26-006, 007)

Chair Kausek asked staff about the potential impacts of their decision.

Chair Kausek then asked the Commission if they were ready to make a decision since the structural report was delivered yesterday and not on the usual Friday. Commission responded that they were ready to hear the item.

Mr. Lynch explained to the Commission that additional information could not be re-introduced to Council if it has not been brought up in this hearing. 

Comm. Love asked staff if the Commission has review authority over the proposed design of the site. Mr. Lynch explained that this hearing is only to determine if the homes have local heritage significance.

Chair Kausek opened the public hearing.

Mr. Whitfield, explained that this application was already approved in 2001 and it is back for a hearing since his permit expired. He also noted that the proposed architectural style is a Craftsman type of architecture which is one of the City’s approved design for new development in this district. He noted that when he bought the property 33 years ago, he was one of only three people who were interested in buying the property and that he asked the past owner if the home had any historical significance and was told no. He asked the Commission why the property may have historical significance now. He noted his understanding of the possibility that the homes may have historical significance if they were occupied by Ida Trubschenck (as stated in the conclusion of the report), but he explained that the home was not occupied by Ida Trubschenck during her formative years, and that the family owned the home as investment properties only. The primary Trubschenck family home was not at this site and has already been demolished.   

He stated some publications by the City that notes historical homes in Sunnvyale, and not one of the two books mention 461 or 471 S. Murphy Avenue

Chair Kausek noted that according to the Sunnyvale Historical society, the homes were indeed resided in by Ida Trubschenck and her sister who lived in 471 S Murphy Avenue, but they were not the primary family homes. The homes were only uses by the Trubschenck’s near the ends of their lives. Mr. Whitfield responded that if anyone wants the home, they are welcome to have it. 

A member of the public asked the Commission if Mr. Whitfield owned the homes for 33 years and why he did not maintain the homes and let the homes deteriorate during these years. He stated that nothing has changed since the last meeting except for more deterioration. 

Mr. Whitfield stated that a termite report was completed. He noted that the home was bought in the first place to be demolished. The only changes he made were minimal, which was to change the rooms and facade. 

A member of the public asked Chair Kausek to ask the applicant why the property is worth so much if they are not historically significant.

Chair Kausek closed the public hearing

Mr. Lynch noted that Mr. Whitfield did apply for this same proposal in 2002 and was approved to demolish the homes and to develop five townhomes.

Comm. Love noted that his research leads him to agree with Chair Kausek regarding the homes being occupied by Ida Trubschenck. He noted that he would like to see the façade of the home located on 461 South Murphy Avenue saved to keep the historic streetscape of Murphy Avenue.

Comm. Verma noted that she understands the applicant’s point, but also replied that the City is only 100 years old and a 90-year-old home should be considered to be historically significant. She further noted that something should be done to archive the 90-year-old home if it is going to be demolished.

Comm. Hopkins noted that she wanted to re-iterate Comm. Verma’s statements. She also wanted to share concern with the applicant’s point of view as well. She also agreed with Comm. Love’s point and understood his desire to save the facade.

Comm. Love referred back to page 7 of the staff report which states that the site does have historic significance locally and asked staff to elaborate.

Mr. Lynch replied that according to City record, Ida Trubschenck did live in the home and stated its potential significance results from that fact. He explained that the report from the consultant does not mean that the homes have local significance, but it did lead staff to make that determination. He further mentioned that the report is the same as the last report in July 2005, except for the structural report.

Comm. Hopkins asked staff for clarification to what tonight’s decision affects. Staff explained that it affects the Heritage Resource listing of the home and subsequently the proposed townhome project at this site.

Comm. Love commented that this situation comes down to a yes or no decision.  He noted that if the façade would be saved, he noted that some form of preservation would be saved.  He contrasted that if the site was demolished entirely, and if the proposed development becomes extremely out of sync of the street, then South Murphy Avenue  would not look and feel as historic. 

Mr. Whitfield noted that the new development design is a Craftsman style, which is approved by the City. Comm. Hopkins noted that if the façade was demolished, then the character would not match. 

Mr. Lynch explained that tonight’s decision is only to determine the historic significance.

B.      2005-0552 – Application for a Mills Act Contract for a City of Sunnyvale Local Landmark property (Collins-Scott Winery) on a 9,460 square foot site. The property is located at 775 Cascade Drive in an R-1 (Low-Density Residential) Zoning District. (APN: 323-05-002) SL

Mr. Lynch noted that this item would be continued to the next meeting in September 7.

C.     2005-0023 – City of Sunnyvale - Visual Streetscape Standards for Murphy Avenue Study Issue

Aditya Advani, RHAA Consultants, explained his background and history of his firm and the downtown Sunnyvale area. He noted that their company shared in the development of the current Murphy Avenue Design Guidelines for the City. He presented the plans for the new streetscape on South Murphy Avenue to the Commission.

Comm. Love stated that “Historic South Murphy Avenue” should be stated on the gateway element to South Murphy Avenue.

Comm. Hopkins would like to see a statue, perhaps of Martin Murphy Jr., on the corner of South Murphy Avenue to symbolize the streets historic landmark.

Nathan Lozier, RHAA Consultants, noted the commission’s ideas and formal requests.

The Commissioners thanked Mr. Advani and Mr. Lozier of RHAA Consultants.

NON-AGENDA ITEMS AND COMMENTS

A.  Staff Follow-Up:  None

B.     Tentative HPC Meeting Dates:

1.      September 7, 2005 meeting

2.      October 5, 2005 meeting

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 8:50 PM