Skip to main content
City of Santa Clara logo

Legislative Public Meetings

File #: 18-474    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Public Hearing/General Business Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 4/12/2018 In control: Council and Authorities Concurrent Meeting
On agenda: 5/29/2018 Final action:
Title: Determination of Eligibility for Historical or Architectural Listing for the properties located at 1411 Lewis & 1444 Madison Street
Indexes: CC
Attachments: 1. Excerpt of Historical and Landmarks Commission Meeting Minutes of April 5, 2018, 2. Historical and Landmarks Commission Staff Report of April 5, 2018, 3. Applicant's Justification Packet for Demolition, 4. Public Comments, 5. Conceptual Development Plan, 6. POST MEETING MATERIAL

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT

Title

Determination of Eligibility for Historical or Architectural Listing for the properties located at 1411 Lewis & 1444 Madison Street

 

Report

BACKGROUND

The applicant filed a preliminary application on January 18, 2018 to consider the proposal to demolish the structures at 1411 Lewis Street and 1444 Madison Street, and subdivide the single parcel into three parcels to construct three new single-family dwellings. Planning Staff recommended that the applicant host a community outreach meeting and apply for an early consideration of eligibility before the Historical Landmarks Commission for the existing buildings at 1411 Lewis Street (project site) for listing on the City of Santa Clara Historical Resource Inventory (HRI).

 

The project site is currently developed with two primary structures, a two-story single family house with a detached garage (1411 Lewis Street), and a duplex (1444 Madison Street). The single-family house was constructed circa 1880 in a functional (vernacular) style of that period. The single-story duplex was constructed in 1948, in the post-war minimal traditional style. A number of smaller sheds are also situated on the property.

 

At the noticed public hearing on April 5, 2018, the Historical and Landmarks Commission reviewed the request. Seven community members addressed the Commission, expressing support and/or concerns related to the proposed request. While five community members opposed the requested demolition due to the age of the house, two neighbors supported the project as a way to remove blight. Following the public testimony, the Commission made the following four recommendations:

1.                     That the Council not add the duplex residence at 1444 Madison Street to the HRI as it is not a contributing historical or architectural resource;

2.                     That the Council finds that the building of vernacular style at 1411 Lewis Street is eligible for listing on the HRI based on City’s Criteria for Architectural Significance, the age of the building and time period of construction;

3.                     That the Council not allow demolition of existing structures until such time as a development plan is approved; and

4.                     That the Council finds preservation and rehabilitation of the original portion of the single-family residence at 1411 Lewis Street would help to maintain the integrity of the Old Quad.

 

An excerpt of the Historical and Landmarks Commission meeting minutes and the staff report with prior attachments are attached to this report.

 

DISCUSSION

The applicant’s request is an early consideration of the eligibility for a development of three new single-family residences that would be consistent with the character of the existing block and the larger Old Quad neighborhood in that the project would conform with the General Plan designation for the area and result in the development of structures of like use and massing. Although the project design remains conceptual at this point, the determination of eligibility for listing of the existing buildings on the HRI is an important step to determine the future process for any proposed redevelopment of the site.  Should a structure on the site be designated as historic, an applicant could still request to demolish the structure, but the proposed demolition would require preparation of an Environmental Impact Report as demolition of a designated structure is deemed to be a significant impact under the California Environmental Quality Act.  Given the size and location of the single-family residence in question, it would likely be difficult for the applicant to develop three single-family residences on the site without its demolition.

 

The existing structures on the site are in a deteriorated condition and the extensive cost of preservation could make repair and relocation infeasible and unpractical.  The applicant has provided a justification packet to validate the infeasibility for repair and relocation of the single-family residence at 1411 Lewis Street. An evaluation prepared by Robert Cartier of Archaeological Resource Management determined that both the duplex residence and the two-story single-family residence lack the architectural integrity and significant historical association that give them value as a historical resource.

 

While the Archaeological evaluation prepared for the project concluded that the existing structure did not have identifiable architectural elements or an association with a specific historic event that would warrant designation of the property as a historic resource, the Historical Landmarks Commission recommended to the City Council that the single-family residence be designated as a historical resource.  This recommendation was made in consideration of public input and the age of the structure.

 

Should the Council determine that the project site is not eligible for listing on the HRI, the applicant will be able to proceed with their current proposal to demolish the existing buildings and redevelop the project site subject to granting of subsequent land use entitlements. Should the City Council consider the residence at 1411 Lewis Street as eligible, any future development including demolition of the single-family residence would require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report.

 

The primary issue for Council consideration is whether the age of the residence provides adequate justification to require its preservation even when the structure does not meet the normal criteria for determination of a historical resource.  Because the project does not meet these criteria (e.g., identifiable architectural style associated with an historical period and/or association with a specific historical event), staff recommends that the structure not be designated as historic.  (Refer to Attachment #3, pages 5-52 for more detail.)  Designation of the project as historic could delay or prevent future redevelopment of the property for uses consistent with the City’s General Plan.

 

FISCAL IMPACT

There is no impact to the City for processing the requested application other than  administrative staff time and expense typically covered by processing fees paid by the applicant.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

As requested, the consideration of eligibility is exempt from the CEQA environmental review requirements per CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). The activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. Currently, no project is proposed. Early consideration of the eligibility for listing is being considered by the City Council.

 

COORDINATION

This report has been coordinated with the Finance Department and City Attorney’s Office.

 

PUBLIC CONTACT

The applicant sent notice letters to property owners within 500 feet of the project site for a community meeting at the Senior Center on Fremont Street on March 15, 2018. Four community members were present, including three neighbors who live in the immediate block. All four were in support of the proposed demolition to improve the property.

 

On May 11, 2018, the notice of public meeting for this item was posted at three conspicuous locations within 500 feet of the project site and was mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the project site. No public comments have been received at the time of preparation of this report.

 

Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email clerk@santaclaraca.gov or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

 

ALTERNATIVES

1. Find that the duplex residence at 1444 Madison Street and the single-family residence at 1411 Lewis Street are not eligible for listing on the Historical Resource Inventory as they are not contributing historical or architectural resources;

2. Find that the building of vernacular style at 1411 Lewis Street is eligible for listing on the HRI based on City’s Criteria for Architectural Significance, the age of the building and time period of construction;

3. Not allow demolition of existing structures until such time as a development plan is approved; and

4. Find preservation and rehabilitation of the original portion of the single-family residence at 1411 Lewis Street would help to maintain the integrity of the Old Quad.

 

RECOMMENDATION

Recommendation

1. Find that the duplex residence at 1444 Madison Street and the single-family residence at 1411 Lewis Street are not eligible for listing on the Historical Resource Inventory as they are not contributing historical or architectural resources.

 

Staff

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director of Community Development

Approved by: Deanna J. Santana, City Manager

 

ATTACHMENTS    

1. Excerpt of Historical and Landmarks Commission Meeting Minutes of April 5, 2018

2. Historical and Landmarks Commission Staff Report of April 5, 2018

3. Applicant’s Justification Packet for Demolition

4. Public Comments

5. Conceptual Development Plan