Agenda — Campbell City Council, September 17, 2024 (part 2 of 3)

Attached data also includes a description of changes to the Contract Documents that the proposed substitution will require for its proper installation.

The undersigned certifies that the following paragraphs are correct: (CIRCLE either yes or no; if no, submit separate letter stating in detail deviations from the following paragraphs.

1. Yes No The proposed substitution do es not affect dimensions shown on Drawings.

2. Yes No The undersigned will pay for changes to the building design, including engineering design, detailing, and construction costs caused by the requested substitution.

3. Yes No The proposed substitution will have no adverse affect on other portions of the Work, the construction schedule or specified warranty requirements.

The undersigned further states that the function, appearance, and quality of the proposed substitution are equivalent or superior to the specified item.

Submitted by General Contractor

Signature ____________________________ For use by the Architect/Engineer Firm ____________________________ [ ] Approved [ ] Approved as noted Address ____________________________ [ ] Not
Approved
[ ] Received too late
____________________________ By _______________________________ Date ____________________________ Date _______________________________ Telephone ____________________________ Charges for Review & Evaluation: ________

5.b
Packet Pg. 143
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

Project # ____________
SUBSTITUTION REQUEST – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Page 3 ends

Please include the following information attached to the request for substitution.

1. An explanation of the advantages to the City for accepting the substitution.

2. A comparison of significant qualities of the proposed substitution with those specified.

3. A list of changes or modifications needed to other parts of the work and to construction performed by the City and separate Contractors that will be necessary to accommodate the proposed substitution.

4. A statement indicating the substitution’s effect on the Construction Schedule compared to the Construction Schedule without acceptance of the substitution. Indicate the effect of the proposed substitution on overall contract time.

5. Cost information, including a proposal of the net change, if any, in the Contract Sum.

6. Certification that the substitution is equal to or better in every respect to that required by Contract Documents, and that it will perform adequately in application indicated. Include Contractor’s waiver of rights to additional payment or time extensions that may be necessary because of the substitution’s failure to perform adequately.

5.b
Packet Pg. 144
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

Appendix B:

Construction Workday Calendar

5.b
Packet Pg. 145
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

CONSTRUCTION WORKDAY CALENDAR
2024 - 5 Day

JANUARY JULY

SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT 683 684 685 686 807 808 809 810
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
687 688 689 690 691 811 812 813 814 815
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
692 693 694 695 816 817 818 819 820
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
696 697 698 699 700 821 822 823 824 825
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
701 702 703 826 827 828
28 29 30 31 28 29 30 31

FEBRUARY AUGUST
704 705 829 830
1 2 3 1 2 3
706 707 708 709 710 831 832 833 834 835
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
711 712 713 714 836 837 838 839 840
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
715 716 717 718 841 842 843 844 845
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
719 720 721 722 846 847 848 849 850
25 26 27 28 29 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

MARCH SEPTEMBER
723 851 852 853 854
1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
724 725 726 727 728 855 856 857 858 859
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
729 730 731 732 733 860 861 862 863 864
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
734 735 736 737 738 865 866 867 868 869
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
739 740 741 742 743 870
24 25 26 27 28 29 30 29 30
31 APRIL OCTOBER
744 745 746 747 871 872 873 874
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5
748 749 750 751 752 875 876 877 878 879
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
753 754 755 756 757 880 881 882 883
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
758 759 760 761 762 884 885 886 887 888
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
763 764 889 890 891 892
28 29 30 27 28 29 30 31

MAY NOVEMBER
765 766 767 893
1 2 3 4 1 2
768 769 770 771 772 894 895 896 897 898
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
773 774 775 776 777 899 900 901 902
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
778 779 780 781 782 903 904 905 906 907
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
783 784 785 786 908 909 910
26 27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

JUNE DECEMBER
911 912 913 914 915
1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
787 788 789 790 791 916 917 918 919 920
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
792 793 794 795 796 921 922 923 924 925
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
797 798 799 800 801 926 927 928 929
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
802 803 804 805 806 930 931
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 29 30 31
30 249 Working Days Prepared 10-17

5.b
Packet Pg. 146
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

Appendix C:

Best Management Practices for the Construction Industry

5.b
Packet Pg. 147
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

5.b
Packet Pg. 148
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-

5.b
Packet Pg. 149
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-

Appendix D:

City’s Storm Water Pollution Control Requirements

5.b
Packet Pg. 150
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities Chapter 14.02 - STORMWATER POLLUTION CONTROL
Sections:

14.02.010 - Purpose.
(a) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified urban stormwater runoff as the leading cause of water pollution in the United States. Furthermore, both federal and state agencies have identified stormwater runoff from the city as a major source of pollution adversely impacting the beneficial uses of the South San Francisco Bay. As a result, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Regio n, has issued a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit requiring the city to establish legal authorities sufficient to protect its municipal storm drain system from certain prohibited discharges. The city is also required to implement a stormwater management program to assure that stormwater runoff from the city does not cause or contribute to a violation of the water quality standards of South San Francisco Bay. (b) The purpose of this chapter is therefore to provide minimum requirements designed to control the discharge of pollutants into the city municipal storm drain system and to assure that discharges from the city municipal storm drain system comply with applicable provisions of the Federal Clean Water Act and the current N ational Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit No. CA0029718 including amendments and California Regional Water Quality Control Board approvals. Enactment of this chapter falls within the scope of the city police power to protect the health, safety and welfare of its residents. Nothing in this chapter is intended to preclude more stringent federal or state regulation or any activity covered by this chapter.
(Ord. 2046 § 1(part), 2004; Ord. 1869 § 1(Exh. A)(part), 1993).

14.02.020 - Definitions.

The following words and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall be as defined in this section.

Words and phrases used in this chapter and not otherwise defined shall be as defined in the regulations promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to implement the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act, or as defined by the State Water Resources Control Board to implement the California Water Code:
"Applicable materials" mean all materials used in industrial or commercial establishments that ar e stored outdoors, that may be exposed to stormwater, and that have the reasonable potential to degrade the quality of runoff from the site. These include, but are not limited to, all materials containing cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver and zinc, which are pollutants that have specifically been identified as known to contribute to impairment of applicable water quality standards. "Deemed complete" means that a project applicant has submitted a development application package for discretionary approval that is determined to be a complete and acceptable application by the community development director. Public projects are deemed complete if funding has been approved by the city council and construction has been scheduled.
"Discharge" means the discharge, addition, placement, deposit, release or dumping of any pollutant or combination of pollutants to surface waters from any point source. This definition includes, but is not limited to, additions of pollutants into waters, from: surface runoff and discharges through pipes, sewers, channels or other conveyances owned by a state, municipality or other person which do not lead to a treatment works. "Discharge," within the meaning of this chapter, shall also mean any discharge on public or private property which results or will reasonably result in a discharge into any and all watercourses.

Such discharges represent a process whereby pollutants, debris and chemicals are placed or otherwise deposited on streets, construction sites, parking lots and other exposed surfaces and are subsequently washed off and carried away by stormwater runoff into watercourses.

5.b
Packet Pg. 151
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities "Grease" means and includes fats, oils, waxes or other related constituents. Grease may be of mineral origin, including kerosene, lubricating oil and road oil. Grease may also be of vegetable or animal origin, including butter, lard, margarine, vegetable fats and oils, fats in meats, cereals, seeds, nuts and certain fruits. Grease is generally present as, but need not be, a floatable solid, a liquid, a colloid, an emulsion, or in a solution.
"Grease generating activity" means any commercial or industrial activity that uses or produces grease on an ongoing basis.
"Grease removal device" means an interceptor or other mechanical device designed, constructed and intended to remove, hold or otherwise prevent the passage of grease to the (sanitary sewer or) municipal storm drain system.
"Impervious surface" means a constructed or modified surface that does not allow rainfall to percolate through to the subsoil and thus creates stormwater runoff. Impervious surface includes, but is not limited to, building rooftops, pavement, sidewalks, patios, driveways or other hardscape where such surfaces are not constructed with pervious materials and/or are not designed so as to have zero stormwater discharge.
"Interceptor" means a receptacle or trap designed and constructed to intercept, separate and prevent the passage of prohibited substances into the (sanitary sewer or) municipal storm drain system. "Major development or redevelopment project" means a project that creates, adds, or replaces an amount of impervious surface as defined in the current NPDES permit. "Municipal storm drain system" means and includes, but shall not be limited to, t hose facilities within the municipality by which stormwater may be conveyed to waters of the United States, including any roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, manmade channels or storm drains, which are not part of a publicly owned treatment works (POTW). "NPDES permit" means a valid National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, in accordance with regulations promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to implement the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act.
"Pollutants" mean and include all sewage, sewage sludge, garbage, biological materials, radioactive materials, and chemical, industrial and agricultural waste discharge into water. "Project with significant pollution potential" means any project determined by the city to be likely to have sources of pollutants on- site and/or to contribute pollutants to stormwater after project completion, based on a review of the proposed uses of or activities planned for the site. "Stormwater" means all rainfall runoff, surface runoff and drainage. "Watercourses" mean and include all natural waterways and definite channels and depressions in the earth that carry water, even though such waterways may only carry water during rains and storms and may not carry stormwater at and during all times and seasons. Watercourses include facilities owned and operated by the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
(Ord. 2046 § 1(part), 2004; Ord. 1916 § 1, 1995; Ord. 1869 § 1(Exh. A)(part), 1993).

14.02.030 - Requirements.
(a) Non-stormwater Discharges.
(1) Discharge Prohibition. No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged into the municipal storm drain system or watercourses any materials other than stormwater. In addition, no person shall discharge or cause to be discharged into the municipal storm drain system or watercourses, any pollutants or waters containing any pollutants that cause or threaten to contribute to a violation of applicable water quality standards. It is also unlawful to discharge, or cause to be discharged into any storm drain or natural outlet or channel, any sewage, industrial

5.b
Packet Pg. 152
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities waste or other polluted waters or materials without a valid NPDES permit or written authority from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or its designated enforcement agent. (2) Exceptions to Discharge Prohibition. The preceding discharge prohibition in subsection (a)(1) of this section shall not apply to any discharge that is specifically authorized by an NPDES permit to flow to a storm drain or natural outlet or channel. In addition, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, has determined that the discharge prohibition shall not apply to the following "permissible" activities: water line flushing, landscape irrigation/lawn watering, uncontaminated foundation drains, uncontaminated nonindustrial roof drains, irrigation water, uncontaminated groundwater infiltration, residential car washings, flows from firefighting, flows from potable water sources, and dechlorinated swimming pool waters. (3) Protection Against Accident Discharge. The owner or operator of a commercial or industrial establishment shall provide reasonable protection from accidental discharge of prohibited materials or other wastes into the municipal storm drain system or watercourses. Facilities to prevent accidental discharge of prohibited materials or other wastes shall be provided and maintained at the owner or operator's expense.
(4) Report of Accidental Discharges. Where an accidental discharge of prohibited materials or other wastes has entered the municipal storm drain system or a watercourse, such incident shall be reported to city or designated agent as soon as possible, but in no event later than twenty-four hours after such a discharge. If the accidental discharge or prohibited materials or other wastes emanates from a commercial or industrial establishment, the owner or operator of such establishment shall also retain an on- site written record of the discharge and the actions taken to prevent its recurrence. Such records shall be retained for at least three years. A notice shall be permanently posted in a conspicuous place on the premises of each commercial or industrial establishment advising employees of the department or agency to call in case of such an accidental discharge.
(5) Abatement of Prohibited Discharge by Responsible Party. The prohibited discharges are declared to constitute a public nuisance. Remediation and abatement of prohibited disc harges shall be the responsibility of persons causing such discharge. The city shall be advised of the abatement and shall inspect the discharge site to insure that the nuisance has in fact been abated.
(b) Watercourse Protection.
(1) Watercourse Protection Requirements. Every person owning property through which a watercourse passes, or such person's lessee, shall keep and maintain that part of the watercourse within the property reasonably free of trash, debris, excessive vegetation, and other obstacles that would pollute, contaminate or significantly retard the flow of water through the watercourse. In addition, the owner or lessee shall maintain existing privately owned structures within or adjacent to a watercourse, so that such structures will not become a hazard to the use, function or physical integrity of the watercourse. The owner or lessee shall not remove healthy bank vegetation beyond that actually necessary for maintenance, nor remove the vegetation in such a manner as to increase the vulnerability of the watercourse to erosion. (2) Acts Requiring Permit. No person shall commit or cause to be committed any of the following acts, unless a written permit has first been obtained from the city or designated agent:
(A) Discharge into or connect any pipe or channel to a watercourse; (B) Modify the natural flow of water in a watercourse; (C) Carry out development within a setback designed in whole or in part to protect a watercourse;
(D) D eposit in, plant in, or remove any material from a watercourse, including its banks, except as required for necessary maintenance;
(E) Construct, alter, enlarge, connect to, change or remove any structure in a watercourse; or

5.b
Packet Pg. 153
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities (F) Place any loose or unconsolidated material along the side of or within a watercourse or so close to a side as to cause a diversion of the flow, or to cause a probability of such material being carried away by stormwater passing through such watercourse. (c) Outdoor Storage of Materials.
(1) Proper Outdoor Storage of Materials Required. All applicable materials stored outdoors at a commercial or industrial establishment shall be managed in a manner that minimizes the discharge of pollutants to stormwater and as is required to meet water quality standards.

Establishments covered by the general NPDES permit for stormwater discharges associated with industrial activities that has been promulgated for Santa Clara County by the California Regional Water Qualit y Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, shall address this requirement in applicable provisions of their stormwater pollution prevention plan. (2) Protection Against Accidental Discharge. The owner or operator of a commercial or industrial establishment shall provide reasonable protection from accidental discharge of applicable materials to the municipal storm drain system or watercourses. Specifically, secondary containment systems or equivalent measures approved by the fire department shall be provided for all applicable materials that are liquids. All facilities to prevent the accidental discharge of applicable materials to the municipal storm drain system and watercourses shall be provided and maintained at the owner or operator's expense.
(3) Report of Accidental Disc harge to the Storm Drain. Where applicable materials have entered the municipal storm drain system or a watercourse due to an accidental discharge at a commercial or industrial establishment, the owner or operator of such establishment shall report such incident to public works department as soon as possible, but in no event later than twenty - four hours after such a discharge. The owner or operator of such establishment shall also retain an on- site written record of all accidental discharges of applicable materials (whether or not such discharge actually entered the municipal storm drain system or a watercourse) and the actions taken to prevent their recurrence. Such records shall be retained for at least five years.

A notice shall be permanently posted in a conspicuous place on the premises of each commercial or industrial establishment advising employees of the department or agency to call in case of such an accidental discharge.
(d) Grease Disposal and Control.
(1) Grease Disposal Prohibited. No person shall dispose of any grease, or cause any grease to be disposed, by discharge into any drainage piping, (any public or private sanitary sewer), any part of the municipal storm drain system, or any land, street, public way, river, stream or other watercourse.
(2) Grease Removal Device Required. The owner or operator of every newly constructed, remodeled or converted commercial or industrial establishment with one or more grease generating activities shall install or cause to be installed for each grease generating activity, a grease removal device (of an approved design) for preventing the passage of grease to the municipal storm drain system and watercourses.
(3) Maintenance of Grease Removal Devices Required. The contents of all grease removal devices shall be removed periodically as necessary to prevent a violation of this chapter. At a minimum, the contents shall be removed every ninety days. All grease removal devices shall be kept in good repair, and shall be maintained in continuous operation at the owner or operator's expense.
(e) New Development/Redevelopment.
(1) Stormwater Management Required for Major Projects. Every applicant for a building permit and/or grading permit for a major development or redevelopment project shall identify the potential for stormwater to be discharged from the project site following completion of construction activity and shall demonstrate that the plans, drawings or specifications for such project include the installation of management techniques, practices, and control measures designed to mitigate the potential adverse impacts of stormwater that may be discharged from

5.b
Packet Pg. 154
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities the project site on an ongoing basis including stormwater treatment measures. In addition, applicants for building and/or grading permits for projects with significant pollution potential may be required to demonstrate that sources of pollutants will be controlled on- site with appropriate measures. The stormwater management techniques, practices, and control measures shall be selected, designed, and maintained in accordance with the city's current NPDES permit requirements and the city's Stormwater Management Manual. (2) Issuance Permits. The city shall not issue a building permit and/or grading permit for a major development or redevelopment project or a project with significant pollution potential until it has reviewed the mitigation measures proposed by the applicant pursuant to subsection (e)(1) of this section, where appropriate, and determined that they are sufficient to address the potential adverse impacts of stormwater that may be discharged from the project site on an ongoing basis.
(3) Occupancy. The building official shall not issue a certificate of occupancy or other equivalent permit for a major development or redevelopment project or a project with significant pollution potential until it has determined that the mitigation measures identified in the building permit and/or grading permit issued for such project have been adequately implemented and that appropriate arrangements have been made to ensure that these management techniques, practices and control measures will be maintained on an ongoing basis in accordance with the city's current NPDES permit requirements and the city's Stormwater Management Manual. (Ord. 2046 § 1(part), 2004; Ord. 1869 § 1(Exh. A)(part), 1993).

14.02.040 - Enforcement—Violation—Penalties.
(a) Criminal Penalties. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by imprison ment for a term not to exceed six months or by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars or by both. Each and every violation of this chapter shall constitute a separate offense. Every day each such violation continues shall be an additional offense.
(b) Civil Penalties. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter shall be civilly liable to the city in a sum not to exceed one thousand dollars per day for each day in which the violation occurs. Each and every violation of this chapter shall const itute a separate offense. Every day each such violation continues shall be an additional offense.
(c) Civil Liability. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter shall be civilly liable to the city for all costs, including attorney's fees, ass ociated with the investigation and remediation of environmental conditions caused by the discharge of pollutants into the municipal storm drain system or watercourse in violation of this chapter.
(d) Remedies Cumulative. The remedies provided for in this chapter are cumulative and not exclusive and shall be in addition to any and all other remedies available to the city under state and federal law.
(e) Public Nuisance. The discharge of pollutants and related applicable materials into any municipal storm drain system or other watercourses, in violation of any provision of this chapter, is declared to be a public nuisance and shall be subject to any and all remedies available, pursuant to city, state and federal law, including but not limited to injunctive relief. The director of public works may record with the county recorder's office a declaration of nuisance for the particular parcel so noticed. (Ord. 1930 § 3, 1995; Ord. 1916 § 2, 1995; Ord. 1869 § 1(Exh. A)(part), 1993).

14.02.050 - Inspection.

5.b
Packet Pg. 155
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities (a) During Regular Business Hours. Every business establishment that is open to the public shall permit agents of the city to inspect their premises for compliance with this chapter at any time the business is open to the public.
(b) Other Times. Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, agents of the city may inspect any property for compliance with this chapter upon providing the owner and occupants of the property at least twenty-four hours' advance notice of the inspection in the following manner:
(1) A notice shall be conspicuously posted on the property to be inspected, specifying the date, time and reason for the proposed inspection and setting forth a telephone number with directions for the residents or property owners to call for further information; and (2) If the identity and address of the owner is known, such owner shall be notified of the proposed inspection by first class mail, setting forth the same information required by subsection (b)(1) of this section.
(c) Provisions Supplemental. The inspection provisions set forth in this section are intended to supplement, and not supersede, any existing authority for inspection by city officials. In the event that any provision of this section is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be void or unenforceable, the remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect. (Ord. 1947, 1997).

5.b
Packet Pg. 156
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

Appendix E:

South Bay Water Recycling Program

5.b
Packet Pg. 157
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities South Bay Water
Recycling Program
700 Los Esteros Road, San José, CA 95134
Recycled water is used in water features and the irrigatation system of the Evergreen Community College campus in south San José.

Environmental Services Delivering world class
utility services and programs to improve our
health, environment, and economy
www.sjenvironment.org Main: 408-535-8550
Media Contact
Jennie Loft, Public Information Manager
[email protected]
408-535-8554
I
n the South Bay, recycled water is a locally sustainable and established component of the non-potable water supply. With pipeline in the cities of San José, Santa Clara, and Milpitas, South Bay Water Recycling (SBWR) is the largest of four recycled water systems in Santa Clara County. The other systems
are associated with the wastewater treatment facilities in Sunnyvale, Gilroy/Morgan Hill, and Palo Alto/Mountain View.

CUSTOMERS, RETAILERS & SERVICE AREA
� Number of customers: ~ 750
Includes Levi’s Stadium, Great America, McCarthy Ranch
Shopping Center, Evergreen College, Guadalupe Gardens,
Intel, and San José City Hall
�
SBWR is a reycled water wholesaler to San Jose Water
Company, San José Municipal Water, City of Santa Clara, and City of Milpitas; customers buy recycled water from the water retailer for their location
SYSTEM
SBWR comprises a north-south artery across San José and an east-west artery from mid-Milpitas down through the
eastern side of Santa Clara. These main arteries feed extension pipelines to reach various customers. The system includes:
�
140 miles of pipeline and growing
� 5 pump stations
� 3 above-ground storage reservoirs that together have a storage capacity of 9.5 million gallons

PRIMARY USES OF SBWR RECYCLED WATER
� Irrigation at public parks, theme parks, golf courses, street medians, business landscaping, and college campuses
� Industrial cooling towers and 4 power plants
� Toilet/urinal flushing in dual-plumbed commercial and municipal buildings

RECYCLED WATER SOURCE
� SBWR main pump station is adjacent to the San José-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility (RWF), which manages the SBWR program
�
RWF produces an average 110 mgd of high quality, tertiary- treated water; roughly 13% flows to SBWR, remainder
discharges into the Bay
�
As of March 2014, SBWR blends RWF tertiary water with
water from Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification
Center, operated by the Santa Clara Valley Water District mgd = million gallons per day
over

5.b
Packet Pg. 158
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities M:\MEDIA FACT SHEETS\SBWR MediaFactSheet
04-25-16 jh
recycled water signage
SBWR main pump station
Great America irrigates with
recycled water

INVESTMENT & RATE SETTING
� SBWR reflects a ~$250 million investment to date; US
Bureau of Reclamation is reimbursing SBWR for 25% of this investment
�
Santa Clara Valley Water District has contributed several million dollars to SBWR
�
San Jose Water Company is constructing new extensions
to the system at their own cost, and paying a $2 million capacity fee to ensure system reliability
�
SBWR sets the wholesale recycled water rate to water
retailers, who in turn set rates for their respective customers

CONTACTS
SBWR
City of San José Environmental Services Dept.

Media contact: Jennie Loft (408) 535-8554

RECYCLED WATER RETAILERS
City of Milpitas Water & Sewer
Public Works Department
1265 North Milpitas Boulevard, Milpitas, CA 95035
Phone: (408) 586-2600 www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov

City of Santa Clara Water & Sewer Utility
1500 Warbutron Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050
Phone: (408) 615-2000 www.santaclaraca.gov

San Jose Municipal Water System - Recycled Water
Engineering & Operations
3035 Tuers Rd., San José, CA 95121
Phone: (408) 535-3500 www.sanjoseca.gov

San Jose Water Company
110 W. Taylor St., San José, CA 95110
Phone: (408) 279-7900 www.sjwater.com

DELIVERY VOLUME & GREEN VISION
SBWR deliveries have grown:
�
2012: SBWR delivered an average 10.3 mgd to ~690 customers � 2014: SBWR delivers average 14 mgd to ~750 customers
With an average home of 4 people using 400 gallons per day, the rate of 14 mgd offsets enough drinking water to supply ~ 35,000 homes daily
�
Production since inception in 1998: 43.9 billion gallons Equivalent to the water use of ~ 217,000 homes in one year � San José’s Green Vision, a plan for a sustainable San José, includes a goal to recycle or beneficially use 100% of our wastewater and targets 40 mgd of recycled water use by 2022

REGULATIONS & WATER QUALITY MONITORING
� Regional Water Quality Control Board regulates and
monitors the safe use of recycled water under Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations; the Board also reviews building plans to ensure that reycled water and drinking water pipes and systems do not mix
�
Title 22 outlines bacteriological water quality standards for the expected degree of public contact with recycled water; if public contact is anticipated, disinfected tertiary treatment is required, such as provided by SBWR
�
RWF laboratory, a state-of-the-art water quality lab, tests SBWR recycled water regularly to ensure its safety; SBWR frequently surpasses requirements for recycled water
quality

ROLE OF SILICON VALLEY ADVANCED WATER

PURIFICATION CENTER (SVAWPC)
� Santa Clara Valley Water District opened SVAWPC in March 2014 as a demonstration project to advance recycled water as a drought-proof component of our water supply
�
8 mgd capacity
� Receives secondary-treated wastewater from RWF and uses microfiltration, reverse osmosis, and ultra-violet disinfection to fully purify the water
�
At SBWR main pump station, SVAWPC purified water blends with RWF tertiary water, thus reducing its salt content �
SBWR provides water that ranks among the highest quality recycled water in California
For more information, visit www.sjenvironment/sbwr

5.b
Packet Pg. 159
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities Revision 0223015
South Bay Water Recycling
Recycled Water Access Point Program
Fact Sheet

Expanding Recycled Water Use with Recycled Water Access Points (RWAP) To conserve our valuable drinking (potable) water supplies, South Bay Water Recycling (SBWR) has made recycled water available for commercial non-potable uses at several truck fill locations in San José and Milpitas. State Approved uses include construction activities such as grading, compaction, concrete wetting, and dust control as well as landscape irrigation, pressure washing, and sewer flushing.

Recycled Water Quality
Recycled water is highly treated to meet rigorous and protective standards set by the State Water Resources Control Board – Division of Drinking Water, and SBWR currently supplies clean and safe tertiary-treated recycled water to over 750 customers in San Jose, Milpitas and Santa Clara.

Participation Requirements
Users must complete a short Training and sign a User Agreement to confirm the correct use of the fill stations and the proper handling of recycled water. In addition, trucks must be inspected and labeled to certify that they are correctly equipped to transfer recycled water.

After truck and driver certification, users will be issued a portable recycled water meter, with a unique nozzle that can only fit the RWAP hydrants. This minimizes the possibility of cross- connections between the potable and recycled water distribution systems.

Construction exemptions for required use of recycled water may be granted on a case by case basis
, depending on the availability of recycled water near the project site. Please contact the City Planning Department for more information on the required use of recycled water for proposed projects.

Getting Started
In order to complete the certification process, and receive meters, site keys, and the most updated site maps, please contact the recycled water retail agencies listed below:

Milpitas – call (408) 586-2600
San Jose –call (408) 277-3671

RWAP Supervisor Trainings are scheduled every Wednesday morning from 9am-11am at the San Jose/Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility (700 Los Esteros Road in San José) or by appointment. Contact the City of Milpitas for trainings and inspections in their area.

5.b
Packet Pg. 160
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities South Bay Water Recycling
Recycled Water Access Point
FAQs

1. What is a Recycled Water Access Point?
A Recycled Water Access Point (or RWAP) is a stand-pipe that allows a certified RWAP Supervisor access to recycled water to fill their tanker truck.

2. How can I get locations and information about using recycled water from an RWAP? Please contact your local water retailer or South Bay Water Recycling for availability in your area.

City of Milpitas – (408) 586-2600
City of San José – South Bay Water Recycling (408) 277-3671

3. What are the uses for recycled water?
Recycled water is approved for nonpotable (non drinking) uses such as irrigation, dust control, and street sweeping

4. Can I use recycled water to irrigate my landscape at home? No. Recycled Water is approved only for commercial (non-residential) uses.

5. Can I drink recycled water?
No. At this time, recycled water is not approved for drinking.

6. Do I have to use recycled water?
The use of recycled water is required by many city ordinances if recycled water is available. Visit your local city’s planning department for availability in your area.

7. Where does recycled water come from?
Recycled water is produced from treated wastewater from the San Jose/Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility.

8. Why is recycled water regulated more than potable (drinking) water? Recycled water is safe to use by trained personnel to assure it is used appropriately and that the public drinking water supply is separated and protected from contamination.

9. Are there any rules I need to follow when using recycled water? Recycled water has not been treated and disinfected for drinking. The use of recycled water is therefore regulated by the State of California Division of Drinking Water, State Water Resources Control Board to ensure that the public health and potable water supply are separated and protected from contamination. To assure that the use is appropriate, the State has required that users be trained, vehicles and sites are inspected and certified, and appropriate safeguards are in place to protect public health.

10. Do I have to use a special container?
All containers must be properly labeled, per the SBWR RWAP User Agreement. Recycled water is only distributed to certified RWAP Supervisors with registered trucks that have been inspected.

11. Can I store recycled water at my site or commercial business? Yes. Recycled water can be stored on site, with appropriate signage and use management per the User Agreement.

12. Do I have to get certified in multiple cities or will one certification work at all SBWR locations? Recycled Water Access Point Supervisors can be trained and registered at any qualified SBWR water agency.

13. Can I take the recycled water I picked up in one city and take it to another city? Yes. Recycled water purchased from one city may be used in a different city.

14. Can I use a potable meter to access recycled water or do I have to get a special meter? The RWAP meter is different from a potable water meter, so you must use a recycled water RWAP meter when accessing recycled water.

15. Do I need to clean my tank or container before filling it with potable water? Recycled water trucks must be certified and registered to carry water for nonpotable uses only.

16. What if I have multiple tanker trucks?
All trucks must be inspected and registered with SBWR.

17. How much does recycled water cost?
Please contact your water retailer for prices and availability.

18. How do I report my recycled water usage and pay?
It will vary depending on recycled water retailer. Please see your local recycled water retailer for specifics.

5.b
Packet Pg. 161
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities Piercy Rd
Yerba Buena Rd at Mongomery Hilll Park
Corie Court
Spring Street and McKendrie
Los Esteros Rd
Hellyer Ave
Spring Street Guadalupe Gardens
Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, USGS, Intermap, iPC, NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand)

SAN JOSE RECYCLED WATER

TRUCK FILL LOCATIONS
Legend

RW TRUCK FILL ACCESS LOCATIONS

WATER RETAILER

SAN JOSE MUNICIPAL WATER

SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY
0 1 2 3 40.5
Miles
Los Esteros Rd Zanker Rd
Grand Bl
Disk Dr
Nortech Py
Baytech Dr
Oakland Rd
Schallenberger Rd
Pear Orchard Dr
880
Spring St
Ruff Dr
McKendrie St
Yerba Buena Rd
Verona Rd
Falls Creek Dr
Tuscany ClRural Access
Placido Ct
NB 101 ToCoyote Rp
Silver
Creek
Valley Rd
Fontanoso
Wy
Piercy Rd
For additional information call
South Bay Water Recycling (408) 277-3671
San Jose Municipal Water (408) 535-3500
San Jose Water Company (408) 279-7900
Corie Ct
Located 1,100 Feet South of Verona Rd
Los Esteros Station
Gates Open Monday Thru Friday
8:00 AM to 6:00 PM
Located 350 Feet South of Silver Creek Valley Rd
Taylor StEmory StAsbury St
Walnut St
Hedding St
University Av
Spring St
Emory St
Hellyer Av
Eden Park Pl
Piercy Rd
Jenny Ct
Hellyer Av
Silicon Valley
Blvd
Located 1,800 Feet West of Silicon Valley Blvd

5.b
Packet Pg. 162
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Office Hrs:
8:00 am - 12:00 Noon
1:00 pm - 5:00 pm
(Noon - 1:00 pm, Ofc Closed for
SJMWS Staff Lunch Hour)

CITY OF SAN JOSE

MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM
3025 TUERS ROAD
SAN JOSE, CA 95121
(408) 277-3671
(408) 277- 4218

CITY OF SAN JOSE

LOS LAGOS

PUBLIC GOLF COURSE

LION FOODCTR

RITE AID

FOR TEMPORARY METERS - CALL & SCHEDULE A PICK-UP TIME

WITH AN ENGINEERING STAFF MEMBER BEFORE COMING TO PICK
UP A METER.

DEPOSIT OF $800 (CHECK OR CREDIT CARD) PER METER.
(3",Green)

5.b
Packet Pg. 163
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities 87 Guadalupe Fwy
W Taylor St
Spring St
W Hedding St
Coleman Ave
880 Nimitz Fwy
McKendrie St
Ruff Dr
Spring St
North Fill Location
Spring St
South Fill Location
Curie Ct
E Gish Rd
E Brokaw Rd
Oakland Rd
880 Nimitz Fwy
Old Bayshore Hwy
Curie Ct
Fill Location
San Jose Water Company
Recycled Water Fill Locations
Requirements for filling at any of the 3 locations
x San Jose Water Co. issued portable non-potable water meter. Deposit required upon receipt of meter. Call 408-279-7835 for more information. x Key to unlock cap.
x Certified non-potable water vehicle. Must be certified and permitted through South Bay Water Recycling.
x Non-potable hoses with 3" camlock fittings and a wrench to actuate valve. Must be supplied by consumer.

Recycled Water Meter Information:

San Jose Water Company
1251 S. Bascom Ave San Jose, CA
M - F 7:30 - 3:00
(Blue area, 4" & $1600 deposit)

5.b
Packet Pg. 164
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-

5.b
Packet Pg. 165
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Revised 7/21/20 Page 1 of 2

RECYCLED WATER ACCESS POINT

PROGRAM USER AGREEMENT
PRODUCER: San Jose/Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility - 700 Los Esteros Road, San Jose CA 95134 REGULATORY AGENCY: South Bay Water Recycling - 3025 Tuers Road San Jose, CA 95121 - 408.277.3671 EFFECTIVE DATES OF PERMIT: ________________________________ THROUGH DECEMBER 31ST 2022 License #: SJ-________

USER INFO
TRAINEE NAME: ___________________________________ CSLB CONTRACTOR LICENSE #: __________________________ COMPANY NAME: ___________________________________ TRUCK/TRAILER LICENSE #: ____________________________ COMPANY ADDRESS: ___________________________________ ATTACH YOUR ACORD INSURANCE FORM TO THIS AGREEMENT COMPANY PHONE #: ___________________________________ PLEASE GIVE THIS AGREEMENT TO YOUR OFFICE MANAGER

A USER AGREEMENT MUST BE COMPLETED FOR EACH VEHICLE OPERATOR AND MUST BE RETAINED DURING ACQUISITION AND APPLICATION OF RECYCLED WATER.

USERS AND USERS’ COMPANIES SHALL ADHERE TO THE ATTACHED SBWR TERMS OF USE. USER AGREEMENT IS SUBJECT TO RWQCB ORDER 95-117.

RECYCLED WATER USE INFORMATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
METHOD OF WATER DISTRIBUTION: [ ] RECYCLED WATER ACCESS POINT [ ] TEMPORARY SITE METER OTHER: _________________________ APPLICATION METHOD: [ ] TANKER TRUCK SPRAY [ ] HOSE O THER: ____________________________________________ USE OF RECYCLED WATER*: [ ] CONSTRUCTION (COMPACTION/DUST CONTROL) [ ] STREET SWEEPING [ ] S EWER CLEAN OUT OTHER*: ______________________________
* REFER TO THE FULL TEXT OF THE LATEST VERSION OF TITLE-22: CALIFORNIA WATER RECYCLING CRITERIA, ARTICLE 3. USES OF RECYCLED WATER, JUNE 18, 2014.

SIGNS REQUIRED: [ ] TANKER TRUCK [ ] CONTAINER [ ] OVERHEAD TANK [ ] PROJECT SITE OTHER: __________________ LOCATION WHERE RECYCLED WATER WILL BE APPLIED:

ADDRESS: ________________________________________ SITE SUPERINTENDENT: ___________________________________________

CERTIFICATION

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS APPLICATION AND ALL ATTACHMENTS ARE TRUE, ACCURATE, AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I ALSO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE SBWR TERMS OF USE AND ALL APPLICABLE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE RWQCB ORDER NO. 95-117 AND HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED INSPECTION BY THE LOCAL RETAILER. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

TRUCK CONTRACTOR/DRIVER/EMPLOYEE SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME TITLE DATE _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ** SUPERINTENDENT OR FOREMAN SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME TITLE DATE

LYLE FROHMAN
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SBWR SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME DATE

5.b
Packet Pg. 166
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities Revised 7/21/20 Page 2 of 2

RECYCLED WATER ACCESS POINT PROGRAM

PLEASE WASH YOUR HANDS AFTER USING RECYCLED WATER

CHECK THIS
USER AGREEMENT LIMITS THE USE OF RECYCLED WATER TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:


1. RECYCLED WATER IS FOR NONPOTABLE
USES ONLY - NO DRINKING! Recycled water may not be exposed to food, used within designated eating areas or used within 50 feet of any domestic well, drinking fountain or potable water supply.


2. There shall be no cross-connection between recycled water and any potable water supply. Recycled water may no
t be plumbed into potable irrigation or onsite plumbing systems. Recycled water meters are prohibited from con
necting to potable hydrants. Match purple to purple only 

3. Recycled water may not be discharged into storm drains or outside the designated use area that was approved by the water retailer and/or SBWR. Overspray, pooling and runoff of recycled water is not permitted. Cover this in yo
ur Safety meetings.


4. Tan
ker trucks must maintain an air gap of at least twice the diameter of the fill pipe (i.e. water overflows the tank before r
eaching the fill pipe). Tanker trucks must have water-tight connections, piping and hoses to ensure no
leakage will occur during fill-up or use. They must be fully drained before transport and prior to every connection.
 5.

Recycled water tanker trucks may not transport potable water for potable uses.  6.

All tanker trucks accessing and hauling recycled water must satisfy local and state safety requirements. Active auto/truck/trailer and general liability insurance (i.e. an ACORD form) is required. 

7. Recycled water meters may be inspected by the retailer for appropriate use at any time. The volume of recycled water used must be reported as specified by the recycled water retailer.

SPECIAL

APPROVAL, TRAINING AND SITE INSPECTION REQUIRED
 8.

If recycled water is transferred to other storage containers/reservoirs, they must be labeled with signage equivalent to tanker truck signage and must follow the safety guidelines in this User Agreement.  9.

Recycled water may be used for pressure washing and washing equipment and vehicles if the recycled water is not heated and where the general public is excluded from the washing process.  10.

Recycled Water may not be used for directional drilling without prior approval from SBWR.

ADV

ISORY SIGNS

Tan
ker Truck Sign: Tanker trucks hauling recycled water must have an SBWR approved adhesive sign issued by retailer at l
east six inches by twelve inches on the tank, in a location clearly visible to users and workers, with the following wording in one inch, or larger, letters on a purple background. 
Tan
ker Truck Inspection Decal: Tanker trucks hauling recycled water must have an SBWR approved adhesive decal is
sued by retailer at least three inches by six inches signifying that the tanker truck has passed inspection and met all SBWR requirements.

App
urtenance Sign: Appurtenances serving recycled water must have an SBWR approved adhesive or bolted sign is
sued by the retailer at least six inches by eight inches, in a location clearly visible to users and workers, with the following wording in one inch, or larger, letters on a purple background.

5.b
Packet Pg. 167
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

Appendix F:

California Prevailing Wage Rates

5.b
Packet Pg. 168
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

GENERAL PREVAILING WAGE DETERMINATION MADE BY THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE PART 7, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE 2, SECTIONS 1770, 1773 AND 1773.1

FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDING, HIGHWAY, HEAVY CONSTRUCTION AND DREDGING PROJECTS Craft: Carpenter#
Determination:

NC-23-31-1-2020-1
Issue Date:

August 22, 2020
Expiration date of determination:

June 30, 2021** The rate to be paid for work performed after this date has been determined. If work will extend past this date, the new rate must be paid and should be incorporated in contracts entered into now. Contact the Office of the Director - Research Unit for specific rates at (415) 703-4774.

Localities:

Area 1: All localities within Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties.

Area 2: All localities within Monterey, San Benito, and Santa Cruz Counties.

Area 3: All localities within El Doradoa, Placera, Sacramento, San Joaquin and Yolo Counties.

Area 4: All localities within Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Del Norte, El Doradoa, Fresno, Glenn, Humboldt, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Mendocino, Merced, Modoc, Nevada, Placera, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Tulare, Tuolumne, and Yuba Counties.

Wages and Employer Payments:

5.b
Packet Pg. 169
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 2 of 11 ends

Classification
(Journeyperson)
Basic
Hourly
Rate
Health
and
Welfare
Pension Vacation
and
Holiday
b
Training Other
c
Hours Total
Hourly
Rate
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d e
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d f g
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2X)
d f
Sunday/
Holiday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d h
Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring
Erector (Area
1)
$52.80 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 8.0 $83.91 $110.31 $136.71 $110.31 $136.71 $136.71 Carpenter
(Area 2) $46.77 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 8.0 $77.88 $101.265 $124.65 $101.265 $124.65 $124.65 Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring
Erector (Area
2)
$46.92 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 8.0 $78.03 $101.49 $124.95 $101.49 $124.95 $124.95 Carpenter
(Area 3) $46.77 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 8.0 $77.88 $101.265 $124.65 $101.265 $124.65 $124.65

5.b
Packet Pg. 170
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 3 of 11 ends

Classification
(Journeyperson)
Basic
Hourly
Rate
Health
and
Welfare
Pension Vacation
and
Holiday
b
Training Other
c
Hours Total
Hourly
Rate
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d e
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d f g
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2X)
d f
Sunday/
Holiday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d h
Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring
Erector (Area
3)
$46.92 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 8.0 $78.03 $101.49 $124.95 $101.49 $124.95 $124.95 Carpenter
(Area 4) $45.42 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 8.0 $76.53 $99.24 $121.95 $99.24 $121.95 $121.95 Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring
Erector (Area
4)
$45.57 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 8.0 $76.68 $99.465 $122.25 $99.465 $122.25 $122.25

5.b
Packet Pg. 171
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 4 of 11 ends

Wages and Employer Payments (2nd Shifti):

Classification
(Journeyperson)
(2nd Shift)
Basic
Hourly
Rate
Health
and
Welfare
Pension Vacation
and
Holiday
b
Training Other
c
Hours
j
Total
Hourly
Rate
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d k
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d f g
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2X)
d f
Sunday/
Holiday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d h
Carpenter (Area
1) $56.16 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.5 $87.27 $110.09 $136.41 $110.09 $136.41 $136.41 Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring Erector
(Area 1)
$56.32 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.5 $87.43 $110.31 $136.71 $110.31 $136.71 $136.71 Carpenter (Area
2) $49.89 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.5 $81.00 $101.27 $124.65 $101.27 $124.65 $124.65 Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring Erector
(Area 2)
$50.05 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.5 $81.16 $101.49 $124.95 $101.49 $124.95 $124.95 Carpenter (Area
3) $49.89 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.5 $81.00 $101.27 $124.65 $101.27 $124.65 $124.65

5.b
Packet Pg. 172
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 5 of 11 ends

Classification
(Journeyperson)
(2nd Shift)
Basic
Hourly
Rate
Health
and
Welfare
Pension Vacation
and
Holiday
b
Training Other
c
Hours
j
Total
Hourly
Rate
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d k
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d f g
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2X)
d f
Sunday/
Holiday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d h
Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring Erector
(Area 3)
$50.05 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.5 $81.16 $101.49 $124.95 $101.49 $124.95 $124.95 Carpenter (Area
4) $48.45 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.5 $79.56 $99.24 $121.95 $99.24 $121.95 $121.95 Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring Erector
(Area 4)
$48.61 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.5 $79.72 $99.47 $122.25 $99.47 $122.25 $122.25 Wages and Employer Payments (3rd Shifti):

5.b
Packet Pg. 173
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 6 of 11 ends

Classification
(Journeyperson)
(3rd Shift)
Basic
Hourly
Rate
Health
and
Welfare
Pension Vacation
and
Holiday
b
Training Other
c
Hours
j
Total
Hourly
Rate
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d k
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d f g
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2X)
d f
Sunday/
Holiday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d h
Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring Erector
(Area 1)
$60.34 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.0 $91.45 $110.31 $136.71 $110.31 $136.71 $136.71 Carpenter (Area
2) $53.45 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.0 $84.56 $101.27 $124.65 $101.27 $124.65 $124.65 Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring Erector
(Area 2)
$53.62 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.0 $84.73 $101.49 $124.95 $101.49 $124.95 $124.95 Carpenter (Area
3) $53.45 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.0 $84.56 $101.27 $124.65 $101.27 $124.65 $124.65 Hardwood
Floorlayer,
Power Saw
Operator, Saw
Filer, Shingler,
Steel Scaffold
And Steel
Shoring Erector
(Area 3)
$53.62 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.0 $84.73 $101.49 $124.95 $101.49 $124.95 $124.95

5.b
Packet Pg. 174
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 7 of 11 ends

NC-23-31-1-2020-1A
Issue Date:

August 22, 2020
Expiration date of determination:

Localities:

All Localities within Alameda, Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Contra Costa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Humboldt, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Marin, Mariposa, Mendocino, Merced, Modoc, Monterey, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Benito, San Francisco, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yolo, and Yuba Counties.

5.b
Packet Pg. 175
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 8 of 11 ends

Wages and Employer Payments:

Classification
(Journeyperson)
Basic
Hourly
Rate
Health
and
Welfare
Pension Vacation
and
Holiday
b
Training Other
c
Hours. Total
Hourly
Rate
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d e
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d f g
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2X)
d f
Sunday /
Holiday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d h
Bridge Builder/
Highway
Carpenter
$52.65 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 8.0 $83.76 $110.085 $136.41 $110.085 $136.41 $136.41 Bridge Builder/
Highway
Carpenter
(Special Single
Shift)
$59.23 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 8.0 $90.34 $119.955 $149.57 $119.955 $149.57 $149.57 Wages and Employer Payments (2nd Shifti):

5.b
Packet Pg. 176
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 9 of 11 ends

Bridge
Builder/Highway
Carpenter
$60.17 $11.70 $10.65 $5.09 $1.03 $2.64 7.0 $91.28 $110.09 $136.41 $110.09 $136.41 $136.41 Determination:

NC-23-31-1-2020-1B
Issue Date:

August 22, 2020
Expiration date of determination:

Localities:

Area 1: All localities within Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties.

Area 2: All localities within Monterey, San Benito, and Santa Cruz Counties.

Area 3: All localities within El Doradoa, Placera, Sacramento, San Joaquin and Yolo Counties.

Wages and Employer Payments:

Classification
(Journeyperson)
Basic
Hourly
Rate
Health
and
Welfare
Pension Vacation
and
Holiday
b
Training Other
l
Hours Total
Hourly
Rate
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d e
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d f g
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2X)
d f
Sunday /
Holiday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d h
Millwright
(Area 1) $52.75 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 8.0 $85.46 $111.835 $138.21 $111.835 $138.21 $138.21 Millwright
(Area 2) $49.27 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 8.0 $81.98 $106.615 $131.25 $106.615 $131.25 $131.25 Millwright
(Area 3) $49.27 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 8.0 $81.98 $106.615 $131.25 $106.615 $131.25 $131.25 Millwright
(Area 4) $47.92 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 8.0 $80.63 $104.59 $128.55 $104.59 $128.55 $128.55

5.b
Packet Pg. 177
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 10 of 11 ends

Wages and Employer Payments (2nd Shifti):

Classification
(Journeyperson)
(2nd Shift)
Basic
Hourly
Rate
Health
and
Welfare
Pension Vacation
and
Holiday
b
Training Other
l
Hours
j
Total
Hourly
Rate
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d k
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d f g
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2X)
d f
Sunday/
Holiday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d h
Millwright
(Area 1) $56.27 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 7.5 $88.98 $111.84 $138.21 $111.84 $138.21 $138.21 Millwright
(Area 2) $52.55 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 7.5 $85.26 $106.62 $131.25 $106.62 $131.25 $131.25 Millwright
(Area 3) $52.55 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 7.5 $85.26 $106.62 $131.25 $106.62 $131.25 $131.25 Millwright
(Area 4) $51.11 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 7.5 $83.82 $104.59 $128.55 $104.59 $128.55 $128.55 Wages and Employer Payments (3rd Shifti):

Classification
(Journeyperson)
(3rd Shift)
Basic
Hourly
Rate
Health
and
Welfare
Pension Vacation
and
Holiday
b
Training Other
l
Hours
j

Total
Hourly
Rate
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d k
Daily
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(1 ½ X)
d f g
Saturday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2X)
d f
Sunday/
Holiday
Overtime
Hourly
Rate
(2 X)
d h
Millwright
(Area 1) $60.29 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 7.0 $93.00 $111.84 $138.21 $111.84 $138.21 $138.21 Millwright
(Area 2) $56.31 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 7.0 $89.02 $106.62 $131.25 $106.62 $131.25 $131.25 Millwright
(Area 3) $56.31 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 7.0 $89.02 $106.62 $131.25 $106.62 $131.25 $131.25 Millwright
(Area 4) $54.77 $11.70 $10.65 $5.18 $1.03 $4.15 7.0 $87.48 $104.59 $128.55 $104.59 $128.55 $128.55 Recognized holidays:

Holidays upon which the general prevailing hourly wage rate for Holiday work shall be paid, shall be all holidays in the collective bargaining agreement, applicable to the particular craft, classification, or type of worker employed on the project, which is on file with the Director of Industrial Relations. If the prevailing rate is not based on a collectively bargained rate, the holidays upon which the prevailing rate shall be paid shall be as provided in Section 6700 of the Government Code. You may obtain the holiday provisions for the current determinations on the

5.b
Packet Pg. 178
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24- Determination: NC-023-31-1-2020-1

Page 11 of 11 ends

Director's General Prevailing Wage Determinations Website (http://www.dir.ca.gov/OPRL/DPreWageDetermination.htm). Holiday provisions for current or superseded determinations may be obtained by contacting the Office of the Director – Research Unit at (415) 703-4774.

Travel and/or subsistence payment:

In accordance with Labor Code Sections 1773.1 and 1773.9, contractors shall make travel and/or subsistence payments to each worker to execute the work. You may obtain the travel and/or subsistence provisions for the current determinations on the Director's General Prevailing Wage Determinations Website (http://www.dir.ca.gov/OPRL/DPreWageDetermination.htm). Travel and/or subsistence requirements for current or superseded determinations may be obtained by contacting the Office of the Director – Research Unit at (415) 703-4774. # Indicates an apprenticeable craft. The current apprentice wage rates are available on the Prevailing Wage Apprentice Determinations Website (http://www.dir.ca.gov/OPRL/PWAppWage/PWAppWageStart.asp). a Area 3 includes the portion of Placer County west of and including Highway 49 and the portion of El Dorado County west of and including Highway 49 and the territory inside the city limits of Placerville. Area 4 includes the portions of Placer and El Dorado Counties not covered in Area 3.
b Includes an amount per hour worked for Work Fees. The Vacation amount is $2.95 per hour worked for Carpenter; $2.85 per hour worked for Millwright.
c Includes Annuity Trust Fund, Industry Promotion, Carpenters International Training Fund, Work Preservation, Carpenter Employers Contract Administration, and Vacation/Holiday/Sick Leave Admin.
d The overtime rates for shift work are based on the non-shift overtime rates. e For building construction, rate applies to the first 4 hours daily overtime. For all heavy, highway and engineering construction overtime worked, Monday through Friday, rate applies to the first 4 hours daily overtime. f In the event that work cannot be performed Monday through Friday because of inclement weather or major mechanical breakdown, employees may voluntarily make up such day on Saturday and shall be paid at the applicable straight time rates. g Rate applies to the first 8 hours for building construction and for the first 10 hours worked on heavy, highway and engineering construction. h Time and one-half shall be paid for the first eight (8) hours worked on the four (4) days of each year selected by the Union as designated off/holidays listed in the Holiday Provision.
i Does not apply to tenant improvement or renovation projects in occupied buildings with a total contract value of $5 million or less. j Daily overtime applies after 7 ½ hours worked at the straight-time rate for second shift and after 7 hours worked at the straight-time rate for third shift.
k For building construction, rate applies to the first 2 hours prior to the start of the regular or approved day, or the first 4 hours after the end of the approved or regular work day, not to exceed a total of 4 hours in any 1 work day. For heavy, highway and engineering construction rate applies to the first 4 hours prior to the start of the regular or approved day, or the first 4 hours after the end of the approved or regular work day, not to exceed a total of 4 hours in any 1 work day l Millwright Annuity Trust Fund, Industry Promotion, Carpenters International Training Fund, Work Preservation, and Vacation/Holiday/Sick Leave Admin.

5.b
Packet Pg. 179
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-

Appendix G:

California Public Contract Code Section 9204

5.b
Packet Pg. 180
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

5.b
Packet Pg. 181
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

5.b
Packet Pg. 182
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

5.b
Packet Pg. 183
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

5.b
Packet Pg. 184
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities

Appendix H:

Site Map

5.b
Packet Pg. 185
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) – CCC Buildings D & H (Facilities Athletic
Field 2
A
D
B
M-48M-49
32 31
33 34 35
Orchard
City
Banquet
Hall
Handball
Courts
FE
D
J
K
L
N P
B
H
C
A
RQ
i
i
i Rec
Office
Adult
Center
Auxiliary
Gym
Main
Gym
Heritage
Theatre
Roosevelt
Redwood Rm
Mary
Campbell
Rm
84 80
53 - 58
59-65
66-72
74 Board
Rm.

Activity
Rm.
36-41
20-301-19

WINCHESTER PARKING LOT

LATIMER PARKING LOT

CAMPBELL PARKING LOT
Skatepark
Football Stadium
& Track
Athletic
Field 1
Tennis Courts
76 Fitness Center/
Spinning Room
Pool
Weight
Room
LATIMER AVE.

WINCHESTER BLVD.

CAMPBELL AVE.

HEDEGARD AVE.

E
iRestrooms Building ID
Letters
Pay Phones Site Directory

MAP KEY
The
Campbell
Community
Center
Office:
1 W. Campbell Ave., #C-31
Campbell, CA 95008
(408) 866-2105
(408) 866-2138
www.cityofcampbell.com
Athletic
Field 3
Athletic
Field 4
C
Practice
Wall
1 2
M-52
M-47
Parent Lounge
Multi-Purpose Room
M-50 M
42-46

5.b
Packet Pg. 186
Attachment: Construction Specs & Bid Solicitation for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-

CONTRACT

BETWEEN CITY OF CAMPBELL
AND
______________ TBD____________________

FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
CITY FACILITIES ROOF REPLACEMENT, PROJECT 24-TT (FY 2025) – CAMPBELL

COMMUNITY CENTER BUILDINGS D AND H

THIS AGREEMENT, made and concluded in duplicate, this __ TBD___, day of ______________________, ____ 2024______ by and
between______TBD____________________ hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR", and the City of Campbell, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY":

ARTICLE I. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinafter mentioned, to be made and performed by CITY, and under the conditions expressed in the two (2) bonds, bearing event date with these presents, and hereunto annexed, the CONTRACTOR agrees with the CITY, at his own proper cost and expense, to do all the work and furnish all plant, labor, services, tools, equipment, supplies, transportation, utilities, and materials, except such as are mentioned in the Specificatio ns to be furnished by the CITY, necessary to construct and complete to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, in accordance with this Contract, the Notice Inviting Bids, the accepted Bid Proposal, the Plans, the Special Provisions, the City of Campbell Standard Specifications and Details for Public Works Construction (CCSS) dated July 1994, the General Provisions Sections 1 – 9 dated March 2022 (General Provisions), the City of San Jose Standard Specifications (SJSS) and Standard Details (SJSD) dated July 1992, the State of California, Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications (SS) and Standard Plans (SSP) dated May 2006 and 2018, the Labor Surcharge and Equipment Rental Rates of the California Department of Transportation, and the General Prevailing Wage Rates, each of which documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk and all of which are hereby specifically referred to and by such reference made a part hereof.

The work to be done is shown upon the project plans and specifications entitled, CITY FACILITIES ROOF REPLACEMENT, PROJECT 24-TT (FY 2025) – CAMPBELL COMMUNITY CENTER BUILDINGS D AND H, which said project plans, specifications, and referenced specifications are hereby made a part of this Contract.

ARTICLE II. The CITY hereby promises and agrees with the CONTRACTOR to employ, and does hereby employ, the CONTRACTOR to provide the materials and to do the work according to the terms and conditions herein contained and referred to, for the price aforesaid, and hereby contracts to pay the same at the time, and in the manner and upon the conditions herein set forth; and the CITY and the CONTRACTOR, for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, do hereby agree to the full p erformance of the covenants herein contained.

ARTICLE III. The CONTRACTOR agrees to receive and accept the prices indicated in the Contractor's signed proposal as full compensation for furnishing all materials and for doing all the work contemplated and embraced in this Contract; also for all loss or damage, arisi ng out of the nature of the work aforesaid, or from the action of the elements, or from any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in the prosecution of the work until its acceptance by the CITY, and for all risks connected with the work; also for all expenses incurred by or in consequence of the suspension or discontinuance of work and for well and faithfully

5.c
Packet Pg. 187
Attachment: Contract Services Agreement for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) (Sample) (Facilities Roof Replacement

completing the work, and the whole thereof, in the manner and according to the Plans and Specifications, and the requirements of the Engineer, and also for furnishing the required bonds and insurance, and for doing all other things mentioned, contemplated or embraced in this agreement, and the contract documents.

ARTICLE IV . In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code, the Contractor will be required to secure the payment of worker's compensation to his employees.

ARTICLE V. By my signature hereunder, as CONTRACTOR, I certify that I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self -insurance in accordance wit h the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract.

ARTICLE VI . The improvement contemplated in the performance of this Contract is an improvement over which the CITY shall exercise general supervision. The CITY shall have the right to assume full and direct control over this Contract whenever the CITY, at its sole discretion, shall determine that its responsibility to the United States or the State of California so requires.

ARTICLE VII. The general prevailing wage rates as heretofore specified, and any minimum wage rates indicated in the Special Provisions are hereby specifically referred to and by this reference are made a part of this Contract. It is further expressly agreed by and bet ween the parties hereto that should there be any conflict between the terms of this instrument and the Bid or Proposal of CONTRACTOR, then this instrument shall control and nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance of said terms of said Proposal conflicting herewith.

ARTICLE VIII. Contractor shall be responsible for complying with the provisions of California Labor Code Section 1771.1(a) which states: A contractor or subcontractor shall not be qualified to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, subject to the requirements of Section 4 104 of the Public Contract Code, or engage in the performance of any contract for public work, as defined in this chapter, unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5. It is not a violation of this section for an unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and Professions Code or by Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the contractor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract is awarded.

ARTICLE IX . Contractor and any subcontractors under the Constructor shall comply with Section 1775 of the California Labor Code regarding prevailing wages.

ARTICLE X. Contractor shall be responsible for complying with the provisions of Section 1776 of the California Labor Code concerning payroll records, as more specifically described in Section 7-1.01A(4) ”Payroll Records” of the General Provisions.

ARTICLE XI. Contractor shall be responsible for complying with the provisions of California Labor Code Sections 1777.5 through 1777.7, inclusive, concerning apprentices, as more specifically described in Section 7-1.01A(8) “Apprentices” of the General Provisions.

ARTICLE XII. Contractor shall be responsible for complying with the provisions of California Labor Code Sections 1810 through 1815, inclusive, concerning working hours, as more specifically described in Section 7-1.01A(2) “Working Hours” of the General Provisions.

5.c
Packet Pg. 188
Attachment: Contract Services Agreement for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) (Sample) (Facilities Roof Replacement

ARTICLE XIII. Contractor's attention is directed to Section 7 -1.01D “Trench Safety” of the General Provisions, regarding trench excavation.

ARTICLE XIV . In accordance with Section 8 -1.07 “Liquidated Damages” of the General Provisions, the sum of Two Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($2,100.00) will be assessed as liquidated damages for each and every calendar day's delay in finishing the work in excess of the number of working days prescribed. Liquidated damages for non -compliance with the requirements in Section 8 “Prosecution & Progress”, “Hours of Work" , and under Section 12 “Temporary Traffic Control and Public Safety”.

The City further agrees that the Contractor shall not be assessed liquidated damages for delay in completion of the project, when such delay was caused by the failure of the City or the owner of the utility to move or relocate such utility facilities as se t forth in California Government Code Section 4215.

ARTICLE XV. Contractor shall be responsible for complying with the provisions of California Public Contracts Code Section 7104 regarding trenching and excavations that extend deeper than four (4) feet below the surface. No change order issued pursuant to California P ublic Contracts Code Section 7104 shall provide for any increase in compensation that would exceed the recovery allowed pursuant to Section 7 “Legal Relations and Responsibility” of the Special Provisions.

ARTICLE XVI. The City of Campbell shall notify Contractor of the receipt of any third -party claim relating to this contract within 30 days of receipt. The City of Campbell may recover its reasonable costs incurred in providing such notification, pursuant to subdivision (c) of Public Contract Code Section 9201. Notwithstanding this notification provision, the City of Campbell reserves its full authority to compromise or otherwise settle any claim relating to this contr act at any time.

5.c
Packet Pg. 189
Attachment: Contract Services Agreement for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) (Sample) (Facilities Roof Replacement

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties of these present have hereunto set their hands the year and date first above written and having fully read and understood the terms and conditions of this contract, acknowledge their agreement to be bound thereby.

CONTRACTOR

By: ____________________________

Title: ____________________________

(Attach Contractor's Notary Acknowledgment)

CITY OF CAMPBELL

By: _____________________________________

Title: _________________________________________

ATTEST:

____________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk

5.c
Packet Pg. 190
Attachment: Contract Services Agreement for City Facilities Roof Replacement Project FY25 (24-TT) (Sample) (Facilities Roof Replacement

City
Council
Report

TITLE: Commending John Burchfiel for More Than Seven Years of Service with the City of Campbell Upon His Retirement (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)

RECOMMENDED ACTION

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution commending John Burchfiel for more than seven years of outstanding service to the City of Campbell.

DISCUSSION

John Burchfiel began his career with the City of Campbell as Senior Public Works Inspector in the Public Works Department in January 2017. In this position, John has been responsible for performing complex inspections of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects, private land development, and utility construction within the public right - of-way.

For a career spanning over 45 years, John has worked in both the private sector for 16 years and in local government public service for 29 years including the past seven years in the City of Campbell. John’s first exposure to materials and soils testing began early in his career and has served as the foundation for him to develop his extensive knowledge of pavement treatments. He continued to expand his experience as he worked on an array of large pavement projects prior to joining the City of Campbell Public Works Department. As he became part of the Campbell team, he brought with him valuable experience and best practices to apply to all Public Works projects.

During his time in Public Works, he became a mentor and valuable support to his team members, whether in the office or in the field. John was instrumental in defining the role of inspection by contributing to the standards of operation procedures for projects in the construction phase. He assured work in the public right -of-way was constructed safely and to City standards. As the Senior Public Works Inspector, John would be stern but fair to contractors, calm when issues arose, empathetic when connecting with people and always place importance on building good relationships.

John has demonstrated a high regard for the service and commitment to improve the streets of Campbell and has been a valued and contributing member of the Department.

His efforts have served to improve the overall quality of life for Campbell residents and have left the organization in position to better address future challenges.

Item: 6
Category: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: September 17, 2024
6 Packet Pg. 191
Commending John Burchfiel Page 2 of 2

Among his higher profile projects were the pavement resurfacing projects o n Winchester Boulevard and Camden Avenue and the construction of the John D. Morgan Park All-Inclusive Playground.

John Burchfiel retired from the City of Campbell effective September 13, 2024. It is now appropriate for the City to recognize John for his seven years of dedicated, professional, and valuable service to the Campbell community and for the City Council to adopt a resolution commending John for his service to the City.

Prepared by:

Amy Olay, City Engineer

Reviewed by:

Todd Capurso, Director of Public Works

Approved by:

Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment:
a. Resolution
6 Packet Pg. 192
RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL

COMMENDING JOHN BURCHFIEL FOR MORE THAN SEVEN YEARS OF

DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE CITY OF CAMPBELL UPON HIS RETIREMENT

WHEREAS, John Burchfiel began his career with the City of Campbell in January 2017 as Senior Public Works Inspector in the Public Works Department; and

WHEREAS, for a career spanning over 45 years, John has worked in both the private sector for 16 years and in local government public service for 29 years including the past seven years in the City of Campbell; and

WHEREAS, as John joined the City of Campbell, he brought along his extensive knowledge of pavement treatment and best practices to apply to all Public Works projects; and

WHEREAS, during his time in Public Works, John became a mentor and valuable support to his team members, whether in the office or in the field; and

WHEREAS, John was instrumental in defining the role of inspection by contributing to the standards of operation procedures for projects in the construction phase; and

WHEREAS, among his higher profile projects were the pavement resurfacing projects on Winchester Boulevard and Camden Avenue and the construction of the John D.

Morgan Park All-Inclusive Playground; and

WHEREAS, John assured work in the public right -of-way was constructed safely and to City standards; and

WHEREAS, as the Senior Public Works Inspector, John would be stern but fair to contractors, calm when issues arose, empathetic when connecting with peopl e, and always place importance on building good relationships; and

WHEREAS, John has demonstrated a high regard for the service and commitment to improve the streets of Campbell and has been a valued and contributing member of the Department.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Campbell does hereby express its appreciation to John Burchfiel for more than seven years of dedicated, professional, and valuable service to the Campbell community and best wishes for a fulfilling retirement.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____day of ____________2024, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

6.a
Packet Pg. 193
Attachment: Resolution (Commending John Burchfiel)
NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

APPROVED:

________________________
ATTEST: Susan M. Landry, Mayor

__________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk

6.a
Packet Pg. 194
Attachment: Resolution (Commending John Burchfiel)

City
Council
Report

TITLE: Public Hearing to Consider the Request of Glenn Kinsey for a Historic Rescission to Remove a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) Commonly Known as the Emile and May Fritz House, on Property Located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue. Staff is Recommending that This Project be Deemed Categorically Exempt Under CEQA. File Number PLN-2023-170. (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Adopt a Resolution approving the request of Glenn Kinsey to remove a structure of merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) commonly known as the Emile and May Fritz house, on property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue and finding the project categorically exempt under Section 15061(B)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act. File No.: PLN-2023-170.

BACKGROUND
Project Site : The 8,400 square -foot project site is located along Sunnyside Avene, between Winchester Boulevard and South First Street, as shown on the aerial map, below. There is an existing public alleyway that provides access between Winchester Boulevard and S. First Street. The property is generally surrounded by low -medium density residential uses to the south, east, and west, with single -family residential uses to the north, as seen in the aerial map below.

Item: 7
Category: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND

INTRODUCTION OF

ORDINANCES
Meeting Date: September 17, 2024
7 Packet Pg. 195
Historic Rescission Page 2 of 13

1 Aerial Map
Proposal: This application requests the removal of the property from its current designation on the City’s Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) as a structure of merit. As detailed in the attached Written Request (reference Attachment 2 – Written Request), the applicant seeks a review of the property’s classification as a historic resource and raises concerns about the property being listed without the owner's prior consent.

2 Subject property. Front elevation, two angles
Project Background: The applicant submitted a request to remove the subject building from the City’s Historic Resource Inventory accompanied by an Historic Resource Evaluation (reference Attachment 3 – Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. Historic Resource Evaluation), prepared by Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. on October 4, 2023.

The Garavaglia evaluation assessed the property's eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources, but it did not evaluate the City's local criteria for rescinding a Structure of Merit as detailed in CMC Section 21.33.060.B.1. Subsequently staff procured the services of the historic consultant, Mark Sandoval, to perform an independent peer review and analysis of the property (reference Attachment 4 – M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Histori c Resource 7 Packet Pg. 196
Historic Rescission Page 3 of 13
Evaluation) that included an evaluation of the City’s local criteria for rescinding a Structure of Merit. This staff report will reference both evaluations.

Designation: Between 1977 and 1978, the City of Campbell conducted a citywide historical resource survey to determine the number of potentially historic resources within the jurisdiction. The City was surveyed using the recently adopted State Guidelines issued by the Office of Historic Preservation in response to the passing of Section 65303 of Government Code which enabled local governments to integrate historic preservation into their general plans. The City Council at that time created an ad-hoc subcommittee comprised of a panel of architectural and historic advisors to review the 467 properties flagged for historic importance from the survey. 67 Sunnyside Avenue was flagged during that survey as identified on the attached survey sheet from 1977 (reference Attachment 5 – 1977 Historic Resource Inventory Survey).

3 Photo from the 1979 Survey
As researched in the Sandoval evaluation, this property's historical roots trace back to its original land grant awarded to Benjamin Casey in 1870, marking it a significant area of development of the Santa Clara Valley, especially in shaping the early development patterns of Campbell. Acquired by the Kennedy family in 1881, who relocated here with their children to establish a farm, the property became pivotal for the community. The current property was later created through a subdivision of this farm symbolizing the transformation of the area as large farms began to be subdivided, fostering population growth, as described in the Historical Overview and Context Statements (1996.

7 Packet Pg. 197
Historic Rescission Page 4 of 13
In 1979, following the survey, the City adopted its first Historic Preservation Ordinance, establishing criteria and procedures for designating a historic resource. In 1984, based on recommendations from the Historic Preservation Board, the City Council adopted by Resolution No. 6793 a master list of historic properties known as the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI), totaling 127 properties, within the City. 67 Sunnyside Avenue was included in the HRI at this time, acknowledging its role in the area's historical and cultural fabric. This property was subsequently recorded on the Parks and Recreation Form in 1986 ( reference Attachment 6 – 1986 DPR Form ) as an "historic inventory property," where the property has remained without change. Specifically, as noted on the DPR Form and the 1977 Survey Sheet, the property was included on the HRI for its architectural style, which was noted as Queen Anne Cottage, and the historic significance of the builder’s relationship with the Kennedy family.

The City’s criteria for historic designation remained largely unchanged until it was revised in a 2018 update. The revised and current designation criteria emphasizes the overall historical and cultural contributions of resources, their potential to offer insights into history or prehistory, and their artistic and architectural uniqueness.

During the 1984 creation of the HRI, the City notified the owners of the 127 properties eligible for the HRI. The original mailing list, which demonstrates that the property owners of 67 Sunnyside were included in this noticing effort is attached along with the draft notice letter as an excerpt from Resolution No. 6793 ( reference Attachment 7 – Excerpt from City Council Resolution No. 6793).1

DISCUSSION
Alterations: As detailed in both historic evaluations, the house has experienced significant modifications since it was originally built. Notably, the front porch was altered during the 1920s, as evidenced by the Sanborn maps of 1920 and 1928. These maps show that the porch was moved from the side to the center of the front facade.

1 At the time, the Historic Preservation Ordinance did not require explicit property owner authorization to include a property to the HRI; under State law, the City may designate a property has historic exercising its "police powers," as with any other zoning restriction. However, with the 2018 update, the City Council determined that it was more appropriate to require a property owner to agree in writing to add their property to the HRI on a going -forward basis.

The updated Historic Preservation Ordinance, however, does not require retroactive authorization for properties currently listed on the HRI.
7 Packet Pg. 198
Historic Rescission Page 5 of 13

4 Sandborn Maps
The evaluations consider the renovated front porch as an addition as it displays significant differences in style from the original house, including a steeper front facing gable in contrast with the existing building’s simplified pyramid roof and decorative elements like boxed cornices, the ornate archway, and louvre that are not carried over onto the rest of the house.

5 Non-original front porch
The property, designated in 1984, has since undergone extensive modifications. The front porch was remodeled to include vinyl casement windows with small, fixed, triangular transom windows next to the replacement door, which together fill the space below the archway —previously a screened corridor to the front entrance, as noted in the 1979 survey. This alteration resulted in a shallower porch, now clad in vinyl siding, as seen in the photo below.

7 Packet Pg. 199
Historic Rescission Page 6 of 13

6 Screened porch filled in and enclosed with vinyl siding and vinyl windows While the house was originally fitted with wooden windows, these were replaced with vinyl retrofit windows altering the visual character of the house. Additionally, a large rear deck was added. Significant interior changes further obscure the intrinsic form of the house.

Historic Significance : The house was constructed during a period when the city was experiencing rapid expansion, which prompted a preference for quicker, simpler architectural designs, often vernacular in character. As outlined in the City’s Statement, the era was marked by the emergence of "simplified versions" of popular architectural styles. This particular house was designed in the Folk Victorian style, a more rudimentary offshoot of the Queen Anne Cottage style. The Queen Anne Cottage style holds significance in Campbell, as outlined in the City’s Historic Design Guidelines for Residential Buildings.

The property, as described in the evaluation prepared by M. Sandoval Architects, exhibits typical features of the Folk Victorian style such as simple wood siding, a low - pitched pyramid roof, and plain window treatments, all of which underscore the architectural theme of "Architecture and Shelter" highlighted in the Statement.

Due to its age and location, the house garnered attention in the 1979 survey and was subsequently added to the Historical Register. The significance is not only architectural but also cultural, capturing a snapshot of a city transitioning from an orchard -based economy to a more diversified urban area. The Sandoval evaluation detailed the property’s evolution over the years, noting that many original architectural features have been altered or removed, as catalogued in the table below. 7 Packet Pg. 200
Historic Rescission Page 7 of 13

Feature Specific to 67 Sunnyside Original
Character Defining Features (Universal)
Windows Cutaway bay window with original wood
trim
No
Doors Ornately detailed door No
Porches Dominant front single-story entry porch No
Ornamentation Louvered vent with original wood trim No Other features seen by the public Original wood trim archway No Features Specific to the Queen Anne Cottage Style
Multi-gable roof with
predominant front gable
Prominent front gable; No
Spindle-work and frieze
decorative turnings
Spindle Railings No
Double-hung wood sash
windows in narrow openings
Original double-hung sash windows with
narrow openings;
No
Corner brackets and other jigsaw
ornamentation
Front porch decorative brackets No
Irregular, asymmetrical massing - -
Shingles used as decoration - -
Shallow rectangular windows
over main window or larger
panes of glass bounded by
smaller panes

Small, triangular transom windows
adjacent to the new door
No

ANALYSIS
Administrative Procedure: Pursuant to CMC Sec. 21.33.060.D, the decision to rescind the listing of a designated historic resource shall require approval by the City Council upon independent recommendations of the Historic Preservation Board and the Planning Commission at noticed public hearings. Further, as specified by CMC Section

21.33.060.D, rescission of a structure of merit shall be by resolution of the City Council, based upon substantial evidence and findings of fact in the record that the resource no longer has historic value with respect to the designation criteria identified in the Historic Preservation Ordinance.

Effect of Rescission : Rescission of the historic designation of a structure from the Historic Resource Inventory relieves the subject property from the provisions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.33), including removing eligibility for a future Mills Act contract. However, the property would still be subject to all other applicable regulations, including but not limited to the Campbell Municipal Code and the California Building Code.

Findings for Decision : As specified by CMC Sec. 21.33.060.D, rescinding a property's historic designation requires the City Council, upon independent recommendations of 7 Packet Pg. 201
Historic Rescission Page 8 of 13
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." The historic designation criteria are as follows:
a. The proposed resource is associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history or cultural heritage;

No. This property has not been the site of any significant historical events.

However, when considered within the broader context of Sunnyside Avenue as a district, the house exemplifies the early residential life in what is now Campbell, supporting the 'Architecture and Shelter' theme. This assertion is grounded in the Statement and Sandoval evaluation which highlight the property’s embodiment of typical early 20th -century residential designs in the region. Furthermore, the property’s architectural style, particularly its representation of the Queen Anne Cottage style, aligns with the architectural transformations noted during Campbell’s horticultural boom, as detailed in the historical records and Sandborn maps provided in the Sandoval evaluation. Such architectural and community development patterns are indicative of the broader architectural evolution of the area, corroborated by findings from Garavaglia evaluation.

While the house reflects the early residential patterns near present -day Downtown Campbell, it does not meet the criteria for historical designation based on specific events. Historical significance is often tied to locations associated with pivotal events, significant societal changes, or notable individuals. Absent such connections, the property does not qualify as a historical landmark, despite its representation of the architectural and historical context of its time.

b. The proposed resource is associated with the lives of persons important to our history;

No. As detailed in the Sandoval evaluation, the Kennedy family played a notable role in the Campbell community from 1890 until 1935. Their contributions to the area’s development are well documented as researched by Sandoval. This property is linked to Robert Kennedy’s sister -in-law, May Giles Fritz, who resided here for fifteen years. Despite her long -term residence, archival searches and local historical accounts researched and described in the Garavaglia evaluation do not highlight any significant contributions by Mrs. Fritz to Campbell's social, cultural, or political history.

While the property's association with R. W. Kennedy was deemed significant in 1984, further research from the Sandoval evaluation reveals that Emile and May Giles Fritz were “only related through marriage” and were “not significant” in Campbell's history. In contrast, other properties in the Campbell Historic Resources Inventory have closer and more meaningful connections to the Kennedy family, further undermining the historical importance of this property.

Similarly, her husband, Emile Fritz, is not noted in significant historical accounts, indicating his minimal impact on the community’s historical narrative. For these 7 Packet Pg. 202
Historic Rescission Page 9 of 13
reasons, none of the subsequent owners or tenants have been significant figures in the Campbell community either.

c. The proposed resource yields, or has the potential to yield, information important to our prehistory or history;

No. Although the Sunnyside Avenue district reflects a typical Folk Victorian architectural style and fits into the historic context of its era, this particular house lacks unique attributes or significant associations that would distinguish it as a critical resource for understanding broader historical themes or developments.

The lack of distinguishing historical features or connections suggests that the property does not meet the criteria for a historical significance designation under current evaluation standards.

d. The proposed resource embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction;

No. The property at 67 Sunnyside Avenue was originally a prime example of the Folk Victorian style, reflecting the architectural preferences of its era in a way that contributed to its historical significance and integrity. However extensive modifications and alterations have been documented, indicating a significant loss of original architectural elements and materials. According to the Sandoval evaluation, these changes have compromised the property's ability to convey its historical and architectural value since its designation in 1984.

Further compounding this assessment, as outlined in the National Park Service’s Preservation Brief 16: The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors, the extent of replacements —whether with original or substitute materials— have severely compromised the building's historic integrity. This property has undergone numerous replacements as described above, which dilute its original architectural expression and historical context.

Moreover, the Garavaglia evaluation supports the conclusion that the property no longer retains the necessary attributes that would classify it as a representative of its original architectural style or construction period. These alterations and the resulting lack of historical fabric prevent the property from being a true representative of its stated architectural style and construction period.

e. The proposed resource represents the work of a notable architect, designer, engineer, or builder; or

No. Historical evaluations and architectural assessments provide no evidence that Emile Fritz, the owner and builder, qualifies as a key historical figure within Campbell's heritage. Despite his activity during a significant period in Campbell's history, Fritz's contributions lack the substantial impact necessary to classify him 7 Packet Pg. 203
Historic Rescission Page 10 of 13
among the notable architects, designers, engineers, or builders pivotal to Campbell’s development.

The Sandoval evaluation researched local historical records and confirmed that Fritz’s architectural and cultural contributions do not meet the threshold of lasting legacy. Significant architectural influence requires innovations or stylistic advancements that shape urban development, criteria Fritz’s work does not satisfy.

Further, the architectural assessment conducted by the Garavaglia evaluation supports this conclusion, indicating that the property at 67 Sunnyside Avenue, while reflective of its era’s architectural styles, does not possess unique characteristics or exhibit distinctive craftsmanship that are indicative of landmark status. This assessment aligns with the criteria outlined in the City’s designation criteria which stipulate that properties eligible for historic designation must demonstrate exceptional architectural features or historical significance, neither of which applies to the Fritz House.

f. The proposed resource possesses significant artistic value or materially benefits the historic character of the neighborhood, community, or city.

No. The property at 67 Sunnyside Avenue does not meet the criteria for maintaining its historic structure of merit status due to significant alterations that have compromised its architectural integrity, lack of association with significant historical events or notable individuals, and absence of unique historical information or representation of notable architectural work as further described in this report. Consequently, its historical and architectural value has been significantly diminished.

Historic Preservation Board Meeting : The Historic Preservation Board initially considered this application at its May 22, 2024, meeting (reference Attachment 8 and 9 – Staff Report and Meeting Minutes). Following its deliberation, the Board voted to continue the meeting in order to obtain additional information from the Historic Consultant.

At its June 26, 2024, hearing, after thorough discussion, and hearing testimony from the Historic Consultant, the Board voted to deny the request to remove 67 Sunnyside from the City’s Historic Resource Inventory, emphasizing its role in protecting and preserving the historical and architectural integrity of Campbell. The Board expressed a belief that preserving this property aligns with the City’s preservation responsibilities and goals. As a result, the Historic Preservation Board by a 2 -1 vote continued consideration of the item, and directed staff to prepare an alternative resolution that supported a denial recommendation (reference Attachment 10 and 11 – Staff Report and Meeting Minutes).

7 Packet Pg. 204
Historic Rescission Page 11 of 13
Subsequently, a special meeting was held on August 5, 2024, where the board voted 3 - 0 to adopt a resolution to recommend that the City Council deny the request (reference Attachment 12 – HPB Resolution No. 2024 -04). The resolution for a denial recommendation acknowledges that although the property is not of the highest architectural tier, it reflects Campbell's working -class heritage and contributes to the community's diverse historical narratives. The resolution also recognizes that the property meets the criteria for a Historic Structure of Merit due to its architectural integrity, historical associations, and distinctive style. The property's alterations over the years, including a 1920s porch alteration, have not detracted from its historical value but instead serve to support the historic narrative of the building according to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.

Moreover, the HPB's resolution notes that key character -defining features, such as the building shape and roof form, remain intact, preserving its historical integrity. The property exemplifies a simplified architectural trend from a period of rapid city expansion, aligning with the City's Historical Overview and Context Statements (1996.

The Folk Victorian style of the house, a simpler derivative of the Queen Anne Cottage style, is significant in Campbell’s architectural history, supported by the City’s Historic Design Guidelines for Residential Buildings and General Plan policies.

Planning Commission Board Meeting : The Planning Commission convened on August 27, 2024, to review the proposal regarding 67 Sunnyside Avenue. Commission discussion focused on several key aspects, including the historical modifications to the structure, compliance with applicable codes, the information provided to the property owner at the time of purchase regarding the historic status, and the applicant’s future intentions for the property.

Staff clarified that both the current and previous owners have made changes to the property over time. Due to the property’s long history and multiple ownerships, pinpointing the exact timeline of all modifications is challenging. The current owner, who acquired the property in 1995, has acknowledged making several changes, including the replacement of railings and windows and the addition of a rear extension. At the time of these alterations, the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance did not offer clear guidelines, making it difficult to determine if any violations occurred. The applicant expressed his intention to continue residing on the property, affirming that the request for removal from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) is not motivated by redevelopment plans.

The Commission subsequently voted unanimously to approve a Resoltion ( reference Attachment 13 – PC Resolution No. 4721) recommending that the City Council remove 67 Sunnyside Avenue from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI).

PUBLIC COMMENT
No written public comments were submitted regarding this application. However, two individuals provided verbal comments in support of the rescission during the Historic Preservation Board meetings on June 26 and August 5, 2024. Notably, Council Member 7 Packet Pg. 205
Historic Rescission Page 12 of 13
Dan Furtado, speaking as a private citizen and not in his official capacity as a City Council member, expressed his support for the rescission at the August 5, 2024, meeting.

FISCAL IMPACTS
There are no fiscal impacts associated with this project.

ALTERNATIVES

The City Council may consider the following alternatives:

1. Do Not Rescind the Historic Designation : If the City Council determines that is cannot make the findings for rescission , it may deny the request to remove the subject property from the HRI. This action would require continuance of the public hearing so that a denial resolution may be drafted for the Council's consideration.

Prepared by:

Larissa Lomen, Assistant Planner

Reviewed by:

Rob Eastwood, Community
Development Director

Approved by:

Angelique Gaeta, Assistant City
Manager

Attachment:
a. Draft Resolution
7 Packet Pg. 206
Historic Rescission Page 13 of 13
b. Written Request
c. Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation d. M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation e. 1977 Historic Resource Inventory Survey
f. 1986 DPR Form
g. Excerpt from City Council Resolution No. 6793
h. Staff Report HPB 05-22-24
i. HPB Minutes 05-22-24
j. Staff Report HPB 06-24-24
k. HPB Minutes 06-26-24
l. HPB Resolution No. 2024-04
m. PC Resolution No. 4721
7 Packet Pg. 207
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX

BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

CAMPBELL APPROVING THE REQUEST OF GLENN KINSEY TO

REMOVE A STRUCTURE OF MERIT FROM THE HISTORIC

RESOURCE INVENTORY (HRI) COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE
EMILE AND MAY FRITZ HOUSE, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 67

SUNNYSIDE AVENUE AND FINDING THE PROJECT
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. FILE NO.: PLN-
2023-170.

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 City Council finds as follows with regard to the recommended approval to rescind a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (PLN-2023-170):

1. The project site is an 8,400 square- foot project site is located along Sunnyside Avene, between South Winchester Boulevard and South First Street

2. The Project Site is zoned P -D (Planned Development ) as shown on the Campbell Zoning Map.

3. The Project Site is designated Low-Medium Density Residential (8-16 units/gr. Acre) as shown on the City of Campbell General Plan Land Use diagram.

4. The Subject Property is currently developed with a single -family residence in a Folk Victorian style constructed around 1900, commonly known as the Emile and May Fritz House. The building is one and a half stories tall, with the main floor situated above a raised crawlspace. This crawlspace had been converted into two separate basement apartments (69 and 71 Sunnyside Avenue), but the current homeowner has since combined them to create a home office space. A detached garage was constructed in 1995 via Building Permit BLD 95-309.

5. The property at 67 Sunnyside Avenue was flagged in a 1977 citywide historical resource survey and subsequently included in the City's Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) in 1984, following the City Council's approval of Resolution No. 6793, which established a master list of 127 historic properties.

6. As detailed in the DPR Form and the 1977 Survey, the property was listed on the HRI for its Queen Anne Cottage architectural style and the historical significance of the builder's connection to the Kennedy family.

7.a
Packet Pg. 208
Attachment: Draft Resolution (Historic Rescission)
City Council No. xx Page 2 of 4
PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission
assessed the property's eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources, it did not address the City’s local criteria for rescinding a Structure of Merit as specified in CMC Section

21.33.060.B.1. To address this gap, staff enlisted the historic consultant Mark Sandoval to conduct an independent peer review and analysis, which included evaluating the City’s local criteria for rescinding a Structure of Merit.

8. The Sandoval evaluation identifies the property as featuring some of the typical elements of the Folk Victorian style, a simpler derivative of the Queen Anne Cottage style. These elements include simple wood siding, a low -pitched pyramid roof, and plain window treatments. The Queen Anne Cottage style is particularly significant in Campbell, as highlighted in the City’s Historic Design Guidelines for Residential Buildings.

9. Both historic evaluations detail the property’s evolution over the years, noting that many original architectural features have been altered or removed since the 1984 historic designation. These changes include removal of original doors and windows, walling off the original screened front porch, addition of non- historic ornamental details, such as a louvre and spindles.

10. As detailed in both evaluations, the Kennedy family significantly contributed to the Campbell community from 1890 to 1935. This property, linked to Robert Kennedy's sister-in-law May Giles Fritz, lacks documented contributions to Campbell's history, as researched in the Garavaglia evaluation. Further research in the Sandoval evaluation indicates that Emile and May Giles Fritz, only related to the Kennedys by marriage, were not significant figures in Campbell's history. In contrast, other properties in the Campbell Historic Resources Inventory have stronger connections to the Kennedy family, further diminishing this property's historical importance.

Subsequent owners and tenants also lack notable contributions to the community.

11. Pursuant to CMC Section 21.33.060.D.1 (Initiation), rescinding of the property's historic designation requires the City Council, upon independent recommendations of the Historic Preservation 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.

12. The rescission of a structure's historic designation from the Historic Resource Inventory exempts the property from the provisions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.33), including removing its eligibility for a future Mills Act contract.

13. Maintaining a property that has lost its historical integrity on the Historic Resource Inventory undermines the purpose of the list and dilutes the import of other listed properties. proposed by the property owner.

7.a
Packet Pg. 209
Attachment: Draft Resolution (Historic Rescission)
City Council No. xx Page 3 of 4
PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission
absence of unique historical information or representation of notable architectural work. Consequently, its historical and architectural value has been significantly diminished.

15. Removing the Subject Property from the Historic Resource Inventory is justified due to significant alterations that have compromised its architectural integrity and its lack of association with significant historical events or notable individuals. This is consistent General Plan Goal COS -5, and its supporting policy and strategies and with the intent and purpose of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, as specified in CMC Section 21.33.010.B (Purpose of Chapter), by hindering the City's ability preserve culturally and historically significant resources and fulfilling its responsibility, as a certified local government, to enforce state and local legislation for the designation and protection of historic resources.

16. 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.

Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the City Council further finds and concludes that:

Historic Resource Recission Findings (CMC Sec. 21.33.060.D):

1. The proposed resource is not associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history or cultural heritage;

2. The proposed resource is not associated with the lives of persons important to our history;

3. The proposed resource does yield, nor has the potential to yield, information important to our prehistory or history;

4. The proposed resource does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction;

5. The proposed resource does not represents the work of a notable architect, designer, engineer, or builder; and
Environmental Findings (CMC Sec. 21.38.050):

6. This project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility for the action to have a significant effect on the environment, because the structure does not constitute an "historic resource" under CEQA.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the C ity Council approves the request to rescind the historic designation of a Structure of Merit
from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI)
commonly known as the Emile and M ay Fritz house, on property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue.

7.a
Packet Pg. 210
Attachment: Draft Resolution (Historic Rescission)
City Council No. xx Page 4 of 4
PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilm embers:

APPR
OVED:

Susan M. Landry, Mayor
A
TTEST:

Andrea Sanders, City Clerk

7.a
Packet Pg. 211
Attachment: Draft Resolution (Historic Rescission)

7.b
Packet Pg. 212
Attachment: Written Request (Historic Rescission)

7.b
Packet Pg. 213
Attachment: Written Request (Historic Rescission)

Innovating Tradition

67 Sunnyside Ave
Historic Resource Evaluation – FINAL

Prepared for
Glenn R. Kinsey

Prepared by
Garavaglia Architecture, Inc.

October 4, 2023

7.c
Packet Pg. 214
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 1 Project Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 2 Methodology ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 3 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 5 Site ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 5 Building ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 6 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND / CONTEXT ................................ ................................ .................... 16 Context #1- City of Campbell ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 16 Context #2- Emile Fritz, Campbell Fruit Growers’ Union, and beyond ................................ ....... 19 SITE EVOLUTION AND C ONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY ................................ .................... 21 Site Development ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 21 Construction Chronology ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 25 Ownership/Occupant History ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 25 EVALUATION FRAMEWORK ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 26 The National Register Criteria for Evaluation ................................ ................................ .................. 26 The California Register Criteria for Evaluation ................................ ................................ ................ 27 City or Locality Histo ric Criteria ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 27 Historic Integrity ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 28 EVALUATION FINDINGS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 28 National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) / California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 28 Historic Integrity ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 33 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 34 REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 35 APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRA PHS ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... A APPENDIX B: SANBORN MAPS ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... B APPENDIX C: LEGA L DOCUMENTATION ................................ ................................ ..................... C

INTRODUCTION

7.c
Packet Pg. 215
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. was contracted by Glenn R. Kinsey in July of 2023 to prepare a Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE ) for the property at 67 Sunnyside in Cambpell (Figures 1 and 2 include the parcel map and the Google Map view ). This report has be en requested in connection with the city of Campbell for a Historic Resource Evaluation . The building has been previously evaluated for historical significance and is not part of an existing or identified potential historic district .

Figure 1. Aerial view of subject property outlined in white with building highlighted in yellow (Google Maps, amended by author )

7.c
Packet Pg. 216
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

3 Figure 2. Parcel map with subject property outlined in red , Santa Clara County Assessor

The building is listed in the City of Campbell’s Historic Resource Inventory. It was evaluated for the inventory in 1984 via an Inventory form, as opposed to a historic district, or a landmark.

The 1984 form provides some background before concluding that the house was historic due to its age and it being a “typical example of a Queen Anne Cottage”. 1 This HRE will address the subject property’s eligibility for listing as a historic resource on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), as well as the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). It will also re- evaluate the property’s eligibility for the City of Campbell’s Historic Resource Inventory using the updated Historic Preservation O rdinance.

METHODOLOGY
Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. staff conducted a site visit and survey of the property’s interior and exterior on September 7
th, 2023. During this visit , staff documented the building’s configuration and architectural elements with pho tographs and field notes. The Client provided resources on Campbell’s history and some important oral history for the house.

Garavaglia Architecture Inc. also conducted additional archival research on the subject property and surrounding area. The following repositories/collections were consulted to complete the research process (see References section for complete list of resources) .

1 Peggy Coats, State of California - Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record, 1984, 2.

7.c
Packet Pg. 217
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

4 • Sanborn Maps
• City directories
• Newspapers.com
• Ancestry.com
• City archives
• Resources from the Campbell History Museum
• History San Jose
• University of California Santa Barabara Historic Aerials Collections

7.c
Packet Pg. 218
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

5 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION

SITE
The building sits in the middle of the street surrounded on all sides by similar residential homes. Sunnyside Avenue sits one street south f rom the Alice Avenue Campbell Historic District, so its company among the city builtscape i s similar. It sits on the north side of the street, which runs east-west. Its APN is 41204045. It is zoned as residential, and is not in any special district.

The building sits on a standard lot facing south. It is located in the center of its lot with space in both the front and the back. To its sides lie the neighboring houses on the adjacent lots, and the houses behind it lie in the Alice Avenue historic district. There is a garage off to its east, which sits on the adjacent lot, that provides parking for the residents of 67 -69 Sunnyside Avenue. A large tree sits just on the south side of the lot.

Figure 4. 67 Sunnyside from across the street

Figure 3. South facade, facing north

7.c
Packet Pg. 219
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

6 BUILDING
The building itself is two stories tall, with a basement and a ma in floor. It is residential. Its shiplap siding is made out of white and grey painted wood, with a composite shingle roof and a hipped pyramidal roof. It has a wood dormer on its front facade.

Exterior

South/Front Facade
The front or south facade has a porch and stairway that project outward onto a concrete pathway. This is the main feature of the f acade, and directs visitors to an arched entryway with a wood door surrou nded by two 2x6 casement windows. The porch itself has a railing with ornate spindles, which connects to two posts that support the porch roof. To the east and west of the porch are two double-hung windows. Above the porch and entry lies the dormer, which has a metal grate that lets air and light enter the attic. Below the eastern portion of its facade is a door that allows people to enter the basement. Aside from that are the two doors that let people renting or staying 69 and 71 Sunnyside to enter the res idence through the basement level. This front facade was heavily modified in numerous different eras. The current entryway noticeably has part of the dormer and porch covering up a part of the arched entrance (top of figure 3).

This is because that entranc e itself used to be a porch, and the original entryway sat beyond the foyer of the interior of the house.

Figure 5. Close-up of South Facade, facing north

7.c
Packet Pg. 220
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

7 West/Side Facade

Figure 6. West Facade, facing northeast
The west facade consists of wood siding and four double -hung windows, arranged symmetrically as one, then a pair, then one again leading to the back porch. The trim on the windows is all original wood, but the windows themselves are vinyl. The window on the wall leading out to the back porch is a picture window.

7.c
Packet Pg. 221
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

8 North/Rear Facade

Figure 7. North facade, view southwest
The north facade is unadorned. It primarily currently serves as the exit to the uncovered deck. It showcases the rear roof, which is a hip that connects it to the main hipped pyramid. There is a double-hung window just above the door exiting from the basement . Adjacent to the basement door is the main exit from the primary floor of the house. This exit leads to the deck, which is a wood structure that provides guests with a view of the backyard. The structure is formed by triangle braces and a triple guardrail on its east side and on its west by a wood lattice fence. The simple gable roof of th is structure is composed of composite shingles, the same as the main house. This rear structure, and the rear portion of the house with the added hip roof, has been heavily modified from the original construction of the house.

7.c
Packet Pg. 222
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

9 Figure 8. Rear covered deck, view west

East/Side Facade

Figure 9. East facade, view northwest

7.c
Packet Pg. 223
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

10 The east facade is the most complex of the f acades. It is from this f acade the roof structure can be most clearly seen, despite the vege tation. Unlike the other f acades, the east facade has a bay window which means the window patterning is similar on the east and west f acades. Behind the bay window is a small double -hung window that provides a small look into the bathroom.

There is a small screen double-hung window on the south side of the east f acade that provides the office in the basement with some light and air.

Interior
The main thing the interior displays is the amount of structural changes the house has been through over the years. The interior has different siding in different places, along with crevices and remnants of doors in walls. The layout that makes it clear this house has been significantly modified.

In general, the house has a white finish on its interior walls. Sometimes the finish is white paint, sometimes it is plaster. The wood trim on most doorframes has been added recently. Most of the doorframes are original, particularly in the basement.

Figure 10. Foyer leading to bedroom and family ro om
Pictured above is the interior foyer. The entrance to one bedroom can be seen on the left. The walls here are wood siding where the rest of the house has a plaster finish, a clue that this is a recent addition to the house due to a lack of continuity an d unconventional layout.

7.c
Packet Pg. 224
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

11 Figure 11. Family room
The family room shows a couple important details, including the corner block rosettes on the door frames seen in the top- right of the screen here. Most of the framing on the inter iors, windows included, is new.

7.c
Packet Pg. 225
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

12 Figure 12. Bathroom tile Figure 13. Kitchen
The bathroom interior has an outline of where a door was previously located. The door connected the kitchen, where the bath room is today, into the family room. The kitchen has now been moved a bit further back within the house to accommodate this bathroom (figure 13).

7.c
Packet Pg. 226
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

13 Figure 14. Interior hallway
This interior hallway is emblematic of the rest of the house. This window is actually one -third of the bay window, the northernmost portion. It was previously one open space , yet has been divided into a hallway and a bedroom, leaving the window to point at an angle towards the wall.

7.c
Packet Pg. 227
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

14 Figure 15. Underneath the porch
Underneath the porch lies a lot of the original framing. Wire nails show this is likely some of the few original details the house may have left. The attic also has similar cross -bracing and framing, indicating these two s paces are the two original spaces of the house.

Garage
The garage is on the same lot as the house, but was built much later than the house. Aerials show that the garage was built sometime after 1965, and the property owners indicate they built it in the nineties when they bought the property. The garage itself features wood siding and composite shingles much like the rest of the house . It has a gable roof with a large metal door offset slightly from the center.

7.c
Packet Pg. 228
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

15 Figure 16. Garage

7.c
Packet Pg. 229
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

16 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND / CONTEXT
CONTEXT #1- CITY OF CAMPBELL

CAMPBELL DEVELOPMENT
Historian Glory Anne Laffey developed a document entitled Historical Overview and Context Statements for the City of Campbell in October 1996.2 It provides a good basis fo r understanding Campbell’s history and development and provides a contextual framework for the evaluation of potential historic resources in the area. A portion of this document is quoted below to provide overall historical background for the purposes of t his review. Please see the original document for the full text.

Summary of Geographical Development

This section will review the geographical development within Campbell's downtown core and original city limits, the surrounding agricultural districts, an d later suburban development outside the original city limits.

Geographer Jan Broek (1932) identified three agricultural phases through which the Santa Clara Valley passed after 1850. The first phase from 1850 to 1865 was characterized by cattle ranging, extensive wheat cultivation, and all around experimenting with crops.

During the second phase, beginning in 1865, wheat farming dominated cattle raising and the foundations were laid for specialization in horticulture. From 1875 through the 1930s, horticulture superseded the declining wheat culture, and many other forms of intensive land utilization were developed under the increasing use of irrigation. The size of the ranches in the valley were closely correlated with these changing land uses. The Mexican ranchos consisted of several thousands of unfenced acres over which cattle ranged. Early American ranchers followed the Mexican practice of free ranging their cattle for some years; however, the spread of farm enclosures and environmental factors caused the large stock ranches to give way to more intensive land use in the form of a smaller stock breeding farms or dairy farms confined to several hundred acres. Wheat farms during this period also ranged from 100 to 500 acres in size, averaging 213 acres in 1880. With the increasing crop value per land unit, the large farm became unnecessary.

The correlated increase in land prices, cultivation costs, and growing population led to the all around subdivision of farm lands into highly specialized ‘fruit ranches’ from 3 to 50 acres in size. By the 1890s, the valley ranked as one of the foremost fruit producing districts on the Pacific Coast.

Until American settlement, the Santa Clara Valley outside the settlements at the mission and the pueblo was largely undeveloped and utilized primarily for the grazing of livestock. In the late 1820s and 1830s, large tracts of land were granted by the Mexican government to California citizens. As each of these ranchos was occupied, the landowners constructed residences, laborers' housing, corrals, grist mills, tanneries, etc., in order to provide the basic needs of the rancho community. Three Mexican settlements are known to have been located within Campbell's city limits.

2 Glory Anne Laffey, Historical Overview and Context St atements for the City of Campbell , submitted to the Department of Community Development, Planning Division, City of Campbell, 1996, 3.

7.c
Packet Pg. 230
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

17 Farms in the Campbell area developed according to the land use patterns identified by Broek. Early wheat farms consisted of parcels of several hundred acres. With the arrival of the railroad in 1877 and the success of early experiments in fruit packing and canning, the owners of the large wheat farms around Cam pbell began subdividing their properties and planting orchards by the early 1880s. Earlier farms were more widespread, and the basic farm complex consisted of a farmhouse, barn, well, windmill and water tower. As the parcel sizes decreased during the horti cultural period, fruit processing buildings such as cutting sheds and sulfuring tunnels were added to the farm units.

In November 1882, Benjamin Campbell had surveyor Charles Herrmann survey his property for the Town of Campbell. By 1887, the town had a railroad depot, a post office and a town hall. The first residential lot was sold in 1888; and by 1895, Campbell was a thriving village. The commercial center developed at the intersection of Campbell and Central avenues. The town's first industrial activit ies centered around the fruit industry.

Drying yards, packing houses and canneries developed in close proximity to the railroad depot. Fruit growing and fruit processing industries were the primary economic forces in the Campbell area until the early 1950s .

As drying yards and canneries closed down and their facilities were abandoned, the property was often subdivided for residential or commercial development. Likewise, orchard properties would be also be subdivided. During the first couple of decades, residential development was confined to the original survey and in adjacent areas subdivided on the edge of the village. During the 1890s, residential neighborhoods were centered on S. Second, N. Third, N. Central, N. Harrison, E. Everett, Railway, and Gilman. The first decade of the century saw residential development spread to First and N. Second streets, and Sunnyside and Rincon avenues. Also there was some early residential development on Sunnyoaks and Parr avenues during this decade. After 1910 the village residential areas expanded to include south Third and Fourth streets, and Alice and Kennedy avenues. Outlying residential areas included Smith Avenue in the San Tomas area east of Campbell, Redding Road in the Union district, and Union Avenue between Campbell Avenue and Dry Creek Road. The 1920s saw development move west along W. Campbell and Latimer avenues, north on Esther Avenue. Also in the late 1920s, there was residential construction on White Oaks Avenue in the Union district. In the 1930s, new sub divisions included Shelley Avenue in the Union district and Rancho Del Patio on the northeast edge of Campbell. Between 1938 and 1942, there were at least fourteen subdivision maps filed in what is now the City of Campbell.

Adjacent to Campbell's core were development north along Harrison Avenue, Rosemary Lane, the Hedegard, Bland, and Rees subdivisions east of town, and Shadyvale Court east of Bascom. Five subdivisions were located in the southwest portion of the City in the San Tomas district, i.e., Harri et Avenue, the Munro Tract, Hazelwood, the Riconada Gardens on Hacienda, and the San Tomas Acres and Parrview Tracts near the Hacienda and Winchester intersection. Following the war in the late 1940s, there were over thirty subdivisions filed. These develo pments were primarily located east of Winchester, as well as several near the intersection of Campbell and Bascom avenues.

By this time, the post -World War II population boom was underway and rural communities were in danger of being swallowed by the aggr essive annexation activities of San Jose and other larger cities in the county. Campbell and many of the other smaller communities across the valley incorporated. Since incorporation Campbell has annexed

7.c
Packet Pg. 231
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

18 numerous parcels as the residential development took over the surrounding orchards at a steady pace.3

Architecture and Shelter

Architecture/Shelter as a theme includes buildings representing various architectural periods and styles, structures designed by outstanding architects, and those resources that relate to residential living arrangements and landscaping.

Potential resources associated with this theme could date from the earliest settlement of the area by Sebastian Peralta, Jose Fernandez and Juan Galindo in the 1840s. American farmers began settlin g in the area as early as 1848, squatting on rancho lands or pre - empting homesteads. Early farm complexes consisted of simple gabled or wing -and- gable farm houses. As farmers became more prosperous in the later decades of the century, some farmhouses began to reflect currently popular architectural styles: Gothic Revival, Italianate, and Queen Anne. These styles featured the use of elaborate wood decorations (shingles, spool work, brackets, and moldings), bay windows, and wrap - around porches.

After 1888 when the first lots were sold in the village of Campbell, the earliest residential neighborhoods developed on the old Benjamin Campbell Ranch along Campbell Avenue. Relatively modest in form, these homes also reflected the currently popular "Victorian" archi tectural styles of the late 19th century.

Around the turn -of-the century, architectural tastes were changing due to the influence of the Arts and Crafts Movement. As this was also a time of rapid growth in the town of Campbell, these early twentieth century styles are particularly characteristic of the downtown neighborhoods. Although the simple gabled structures continued in popularity, home styles began to reflect the horizontal lines of the Craftsman and Prairie styles. Simplified versions of these styl es are commonly called bungalows. Interest in California’s Spanish roots was also reflected in architectural styles. Spanish Colonial and Mission Revival styles became popular in Campbell after 1915 and through the 1930s.

Other revival styles also gained p opularity during the 1920s and 1930s, especially Colonial and English Revival.

During the 19th century, some of the more prosperous farmers had homes designed by architects who had offices in San Jose; i.e . Levi Goodrich, Theodore or Jacob Lenzen, Francis Reid, or 1. O. McKee. More commonly, however, houses were designed and built by their owners with the help of a local carpenter. Some carpenters became building contractors using published house plans. Several of these carpenter/ contractors lived and wo rked in Campbell. George Whitney, known as the "Builder of Campbell," worked in Campbell from 1888 through the 1930s. Other builders were WalkerVaugh and Anthony Bargas.

Also an important representation of this theme are the small cottages J. C. Ainsley constructed for his employees east of his cannery. There were also labor camps for the large force of seasonal workers that came to Campbell during the height of the fruit processing season. During the 1930s, migrant field workers built semi- permanent

3 Ibid., 9-14.

7.c
Packet Pg. 232
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

19 housing. Usually of flimsy construction, dwellings were constructed of whatever materials could be gathered, such as recycled fruit boxes, tar paper or newspapers.

Multi-tenant housing was not prevalent in Campbell until the modern period. As early as 1896, however, there were several hotels that catered to travelers and visitors. Some of the larger homes in town were converted to rooming houses that provided housing for seasonal workers at the canneries and packing houses.

Following World War II, large housi ng developments replaced the orchards that surrounded Campbell. Farmhouses were moved to more convenient locations or were incorporated into the development to stand beside its more modern neighbors. As the commercial and industrial land uses have expanded , older houses have been relocated out of the path of new development. 4
CONTEXT #2- EMILE FRITZ AND CAMPBELL FRUIT GROWERS’ UNION According to the DPR Form, the Department of Parks and Recreation, the house was constructed by Emil and May Giles Fritz. It notes that Emil Fritz had relations to the Kennedy family and held shares in Campbell Fruit Growers’ Union.

Emile Fritz was born in 1860, in Tipton California. Tipton is in Tulare , in the central valley south of Fresno. Emile bounced around with his family and then as a farmer and then gold miner for a bit. He went through one marriage, with multiple kids, one dying young. After mining he moved up to Oregon and listed himself as a contract builder, before moving back to the San Francisco Bay Area and settli ng in around Campbell between 1917 and 1920. 5 Having contract building experience gave him the perfect experience to build a home in the growing area. Combined with his farming exper ience, this may have given him the experience and impetus to invest in th e Campbell Fruit Growers’ Union. At the time, this may have been the largest fruit drying plant in the world .6 The plant specialized specifically in dried prunes . In 1901, they dried and graded 140 ,621 pounds of prunes, with 638 being “second quality” .7 With a large volume of prunes, investors stood to gain quite a bit of money as alluded to in the first context.

4 Ibid., 15-16.
5 “1870 United States Census”, Ancestry.com, 6B, (https://www.ancestry.com/search/collecti ons/6224/ : accessed August 22, 2023); “US City Directory: Oakland, California”, Residence date: 1917 Residence place: Oakland; Alameda; Berkeley, California, USA, Ancestry.com, 521; “1920 United States Census”, Ancestry.com, 6A, (https://www.ancestry.com /search/collections/6224/ : accessed August 22, 2023). 6 “A Great Business”, The Peninsula Times Tribune, July 31, 1903, 3. 7 “Fresh and Newsy News”, Los Gatos Mail, October 10, 1901, 5.

7.c
Packet Pg. 233
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

20 Figure 17. Prune drying yard of the Campbell Fruit Growers' Union , 18958 Much of Campbell’s legacy came from prunes. It appears that by 1930, Emile had retired with his second wife and moved to Santa Clara, where the couple would live in retirement off of the funds from the variety of adventures Emile took on until Emile’s death in 1936.9

Aside from his Ancestry.com re cords, very little is written about Emile’s time in Campbell.

Even the newspaper records do not have any mention of his time in Campbell. Other counties do- a relative visiting alongside the death of their child was all over the Shasta County newspapers.
10 Oakland and San Francisco newspapers talk of his divorce to his first wife, Eliza Avery.11 No papers or other sources reviewed mention his time in Campbell, however.

Normally men of a proposed stature are very well represented in newspapers, but Fritz is no t, possibly in part due to a lack of historical record on Fritz or perhaps because Fritz did not stand out among the more prominent early Campbell citizens . Either way, most of Fritz’s impact is absent from the historical record.

After the Fritz’s, the next notable tenants were the McCaugheys, of which Mrs. Lucretia McCaughey passed away in 1928, leaving the house to her daughter, T.A. Robinson. She had moved to the area from Ohio and had lived in Campbell for 37 years. 12

The house changed hands over a nu mber of years as it bounced around according to the title report, before landing in the hands of the Humphreys. The Humphreys had the longest stay of anyone in the house, totaling just over 44 years if you count Etta Humphreys time as well. Soon after the Kinsey family, the current owner, bought the home.

8 A.P. Hill, “Prune drying yard of the Campbell Fruit Growers’ Union, 1895”, photograph, History San Jose, 1895, accessed September 18, 2023.
9 "1930 United States Census," Ancestry.com, 13B, (https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/6224/ : accessed April 22, 2023); “California Death Index”, Ancestry.com, 2326, (https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/6224/ : accessed August 22, 2023). 10 “Only son drowned in mill stream waters”, Record Searchlight , September 14, 1905, 1. 11 “Sets Aside Decree Granted the Averys: Judge Hall Takes Ground that Litigants Should Fully Pres ent their Cases”, San Francisco Call and Post , September 1, 1901, 11. 12 “Mrs. Lucretia McCaughey”, Los Gatos Star, April 19, 1928, 1.

7.c
Packet Pg. 234
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

21 SITE EVOLUTION AND CONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY

SITE DEVELOPMENT

Figure 18. 1899 Sanborn Map of the city; San Jose City Library

7.c
Packet Pg. 235
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

22 Figure 19. 1920 Sanborn Map; San Jose City Public Library

7.c
Packet Pg. 236
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

23 Figure 20. 1920 Sanborn Map, 67 Sunnyside close -up; San Jose City Public Library

Figure 21. 1928-1935 Sanborn Map, 67 Sunnyside close- up; San Jose City Public Library

7.c
Packet Pg. 237
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

24 Figure 22. 1965 Aerial close-up, Univeristy of California Santa Barbara Historic Aerials

7.c
Packet Pg. 238
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

25 CONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY

Construction Chronology
Date Owner Alteration
Late 1910’s Emile Fritz House constructed
1948-1949 Billups Family Porch extended, major facade changes, building raised
1970’s Etta Humphreys Replaced screen front door
1990’s Kinsey family Garage built, balustrades replaced, rear deck added, modified interior rooms to current
configuration

The Department of Parks and Recreation form for the property, done in 1986, mentions the front door is “screened on either side”. While no old pictures of the home exist, this is the first clue that shows the home seen today is not the same home that Emile Fritz built in the late 1910’s.

The segmented archway is slightly covered by the porch overhang, showing that the front facade is heavily modified. In the DPR form, it mentions the home is a “Queen Anne Cottage” style home. The replaced railings, the new garage, the removal of the screens, the removal of the covered porch, all indicate this f acade is not the facade the house used to have. Through a variety of short -term and long-term owners, the house has grown in a number of ways that mean the Queen Anne Cottage that used to exist has evolved into a much more minimal traditional style house with a simple entrance shielded by a wood canopy.

The original house clearly had 1 -story according to the Sanborn maps. It now is almost two and a half stories, as it was raised sometime in the late 40’s or early fifties to accommodate basement units. It also has a sizeable rear addition that expands the house to a much larger size than it used to be. Lastly, between 1935, when the last Sanborn Map was done for Campbell and now, the front porch was extended and the house’s shape completely changed. The difference between the 1935 Sanborn and the 1965 aerial is stark. The home is considerably different.

Of note the current photo in the DPR form is from 2007. 13 OWNERSHIP/OCCUPANT HISTORY
Date Range Owner Occupant Notes
1905-1920 Emile Fritz NA Emile Fritz buys land , home
built mid-late 1910’s
1920-1947 H.L and Ada
Barnes
H.L. and Ada Barnes Buy land from Fritz
1947-1948 T.A. and Elena
Robinson
Robinson family

13 Peggy Coats, “California Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record: Emil and May Giles Fritz House”, State of California, 1986, 1.

7.c
Packet Pg. 239
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

26 Date Range Owner Occupant Notes
1948-1949 B.W. and Mary
Pounds
Pounds family
1949-1951 Maurice and
Billye Ann
Billups
Billups family
1951-1976 Samuel J and
Etta Humphreys
Humphreys family ,
Skaggs family, Bright
family
Samuel Joseph passes, house
goes to Etta. Skaggs and
Bright family rented
1976-1992 Etta Humphrey s Etta Humphreys Sister also lived at the house 1992-1995 Humphreys
family trust
NA
1995-present Glenn R. and
ZoAnn C.

Kinsey
Kinsey family

EVALUATION FRAMEWORK

THE NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION
The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the nation’s master inventory of known historic resources. It is administered by the National Parks Service (NPS) in conjunction with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The National Register includes listings of buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts possessing historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local levels. The National Register criteria and associated definitions are outlined in the National Register Bulletin Number 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. The following is quoted from National Register Bulletin 15:

Criteria
Generally, resources (structures, sites, buildings, districts, and objects) over 50 years of age can be listed in the National Register provided that they meet the evaluative criteria described below. Resources can be listed individually in the National Register or as contributors to an historic district. The National Register criteria are as follows:

A. Resources that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history;

B. Resources that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;

C. Resources that embody the distinctive characteristics of a t ype, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant or distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or

D. Resources that have yielde d or may likely yield information important in prehistory or history.

7.c
Packet Pg. 240
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

27 THE CALIFORNIA REGISTER CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION
The California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) is the official list of properties, structures, districts, and objects significant at the local, state, or national level . California Register properties must have significance under one of the four following criteria and must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and convey the reasons for their significance (i.e. retain integrity). The California Register utilizes the same seven aspects of integrity as the National Register. Properties that are eligible for the National Register are automatically eligible for the California Re gister. Properties that do not meet the threshold for the National Register may meet the California Register criteria.

1. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to broad patterns of local or regional history, or cultural heritage o f California or the United States;

2. Associated with the lives of persons important to the local, California or national history

3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a design -type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic value; or

4. Yields important information about prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation.

CRHR criteria are similar to National Register of Historic Places criteria, and are tied to CEQA, so any resource that meets the above criteria, and retains a sufficient level of historic integrity, is considered an historical resource under CEQA.

CITY OR LOCALITY HISTORIC CRITERIA
The City of Campbell does have local historic criteria used to designate properties as historic, used to designate something as a landmark or, as in this case, register it in the historic resource inventory. The criteria are as follows:

a. Historical and cultural significance
i. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city’s aesthetic, architectural, cultural, economic, engineering, political or social history; ii. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or federal history; iii. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a method, per iod, style, or type of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship; or
iv. It is representative of the notable work of an architect, builder, or designer b. Architectural, engineering, and historical signifi cance. i. The construction materials or engineering methods used in the proposed historic resource inventory property or landmark are unusual or significant or uniquely effective; or
ii. The overall effect of the design of the proposed historic resource inventory property or landmark is unique or its details and materials are unique, or unusual c. Neighborhood and geographic setting
i. It materially benefits the historic character of the neighborhood ii. Its location represents an established and fami liar visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or city

7.c
Packet Pg. 241
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

28 HISTORIC INTEGRITY
When evaluating a resource for the NHRP or CRHR , one must evaluate and clearly state the significance of that resource to American history, architecture, archaeology, engineerin g, or culture. A resource may be considered individually eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR if it meets one or more of the above listed crit eria for significance and it pos sesses historic integrity. Historic properties must retain sufficient historic integrity to convey their significance.

The following seven aspects define historic integrity:

• Location. The place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred.

• Design. The combination of elements that creat e the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property.

• Setting. The physical environment of a historic property.

• Materials. The physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or conf iguration to form a historic property.

• Workmanship. The physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.

• Feeling. A property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particula r period of time.

• Association. The direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property.

To retain historic integrity, a resource should possess several of the above -mentioned aspects.

The retention of specific aspects of int egrity is essential for a resource to convey its significance.

Comparisons with similar properties should also be considered when evaluating integrity as it may be important in deciding what physical features are essential to reflect the significance of a historic context. If a property is determined to not be eligible or individual listing on the NRHP or CRHR, then it will not be evaluated for historic integrity.

EVALUATION FINDINGS

NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES (NRHP) / CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF

HISTORICAL RESOURCES (CRHR)
This section uses the historic information discussed above to evaluate the property at 67 Sunnyside in Campbell for historic significance. The CRHR uses generally the same guidelines as the NRHP (developed by the National Park Serv ice); as such, selected language from those guidelines will be quoted below to help clarify the evaluation discussion.

To be potentially eligible for individual listing on the NRHP/CRHR, a structure must usually be more than 50 years old, must have histo ric significance, and must retain its physical integrity.

The subject building at 67 Sunnyside was constructed in the late 1910’s and therefore meets the

7.c
Packet Pg. 242
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

29 age requirement. In terms of historic significance, the NRHP/CRHR evaluates a resource based on the following four criteria:

Criterion A/1: Event
As stated by the National Park Service (NPS), this criterion “recognizes properties associated with single events, such as the founding of a town, or with a pattern of events, repeated activities, or historic tr ends, such as the gradual rise of a port city's prominence in trade and commerce.”14 When considering a property for significance under this criterion, the associated event or trends “must clearly be important within the associated context: settlement, in t he case of the town, or development of a maritime economy, in the case of the port city…Moreover, the property must have an important association with the event or historic trends” 15

The house was built in the late 1910’s as it first appears on the Sanborn Map in 1920 and the family first moved to the area sometime between 1917 and 1920. However, the title record shows the couple moved out of the house by 1921. Emile himself was a carpenter, gold miner, farmer and investor, but did so over his entire life s pan at many different locations in California , and even Oregon. The house eventually changes hands numerous times, but in each case information on respective owners remains fairly limited aside from knowing that they lived at the house and their birth/deat h dates. The house itself goes through numerous changes, but other than that is a fairly standard residential building for the area and time.

The property is ineligible for listing under Criterion A/1. Without a concrete event or pattern of history to embed in the historical record , it is not eligible for listing under Criterion A/1.

Criterion B/2: Individuals
This criterion applies to properties associated with individuals whose specific contributions to history can be identified and documented. The NPS defines significant persons as “individuals whose activities are demonstrably important within a local, state, or national historic context.

The criterion is generally restricted to those properties that illustrate (rather than commemorate) a person's impo rtant achievements. The persons associated with the property must be individually significant within a historic context.” The NPS also specifies that these properties “are usually those associated with a person's productive life, reflecting the time period when he or she achieved significance.”
16 The main individual by which the Department of Parks and Recreation form states the property is listed in the Historic Resource Inventory is associated with is Emile Fritz, particularly for being investors in the early Campbell Fruit Growers’ Union. While this may have meant Fritz became particularly wealthy, being an investor is not a noteworthy, special, or defining feature of an individual’s life. This means that the best connection Fritz has with the home is as the builder of the home. Examination into other peoples that have lived here have shown that there is either not enough information to say they are historic or that they are not historic.

Therefore, the property is not eligible for listing under Criterion B/2.

Criterion C/3: Design and Construction

14 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resources staff, “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation,” National Register Bulletin, no. 15 (1990: revised for internet 1995).
15 Cultural Resource s staff “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” 16 Cultural Resources staff “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.”

7.c
Packet Pg. 243
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

30 Under this criterion, properties may be eligible if they “embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, …represent the work of a master, …possess high artistic values, or… represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction .”17
According to the NPS, “ ‘Type, period, or method of construction’ refers to the way certain properties are related to one another by cultural tradition or function, by dates of construction or style, or by choice or availability of materials and technology. A structure is eligible as a specimen of its type or period of construction if it is an important example (within its context) of building practices o f a particular time in history.”
18 The building does not have any significant character defining features. It is a fairly st andard minimal traditional home.

Therefore the property is not eligible for listing under criterion C/3.

Criterion D/4: Information Potential
Archival research and physical investigation of the site focused on the above ground resource only. Therefore, no informed determination could be made regarding the property’s eligibility for the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion D/4.

CITY OF CAMPBELL HISTORIC LANDMARK/RESOURCE INVENTORY CRITERIA A property is eligible for listing if in as a Local Landmark or eligible for listing in the City of Campbell’s historic resource inventory if it meets any of the following three criteria.

67 Sunnyside does not have any historical or cultural significance. It is not a good representative of the city’s aesthetic, architectural, cultural, engineering, political, or social history. The house itself is not associated with an y broader historical or cultural patterns. It is not emblematic of a particular style or period, as it more accurately represents many styles and periods. It is not the notable work of an architect, builder, or designer.

b. Architectural, engineering, an d historical significance. i. The construction materials or engineering methods used in the proposed historic resource inventory property or landmark are unusual or significant or uniquely effective; or
ii. The overall effect of the design of the propos ed historic resource inventory property or landmark is unique or its details and materials are unique, or unusual

17 Cultural Resources staff “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” 18 Cultural Resources staff “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.”

7.c
Packet Pg. 244
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

31 67 Sunnyside is not constructed using unusual or significant techniques or materials, nor is it unique in overall details. The property is no t eligible for listing as a structure of merit or historic resource under these criteria.

c. Neighborhood and geographic setting
i. It materially benefits the historic character of the neighborhood ii. Its location represents an established and familia r visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or city

The building does not greatly enhance the character of its neighborhood. Its neighborhood mostly consists of similar homes, a motley crew of different buildings with vastly different time periods of construction. It consists of new and old craftsman buildings, a few bungalows, a foursquare, a minimal traditional, and a couple of ranch buildings. Among this landscape, 67 Sunnyside does not benefit the historic character of the neighborhood, in part be cause there is no historic character of the neighborhood, and it does not represent and established and familiar visual feature. Rather, it blends in.

7.c
Packet Pg. 245
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

32 Figure 23. 131 Sunnyside, courtesy of Google Maps

CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES
Normally, character -defining features are only done if the site or building is found potentially significant. However, because the building is listed as a structure of merit in the City of Campbell’s Historic Resource Inventory, it will also be evaluated here.

As such, individual features of the building have been identified that define the historic character of the building. Assessment of various features is done according to a prioritized evaluation system. Once the character -defining features have been identified, each is assigned a priority rating to create a sense of the relative historical importance of these spaces and features.

7.c
Packet Pg. 246
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

33 A rating scale of “Premier -Important-Contributing-Non-Contributing” is used. In general, this system allows for the analysis of the structure as a whole to guide what types of work should be done, and where such work could be completed with the least damage to the historic integrity of the resource.

The character-defining features of the residence and property at 67 Sunnyside, include:

Primary
- Dormer on south f acade
- The hipped roof

Important
- None

Contributing
-
The double-hung windows

Non-Contributing
- The front facade and arched entry
- The basement, which indicates the building was raised - The porch railings
- The casement windows on the south f acade
- The doors on the south f acade indicating the house was subdivided - The staircase leading up to the front of the house
- The porch and spindles that covers up part of the entryway arch - The rear extension
- The rear deck
- The garage

HISTORIC INTEGRITY

The subject building and property at 67 Sunnyside, while not been found to have been potentially significant by this report, will still have its historic integrity evaluated

Location: The building maintains integrity of location, havin g never been moved.

Design: The building does not maintain integrity of design. Too much has changed to intuit or discern the original design from its current look.

Setting: The building does maintain integrity of setting; its surroundings are similar in character to its first incarnation.

Materials: The building does maintain integrity of materials. While the house is still made of wood, the siding was replaced, the entire building was raised a floor, the windows are not original material, and the remov al of the old porch and extension of the new porch caused new materials to be brought in for the house. The house no longer maintains integrity of its materials.

7.c
Packet Pg. 247
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

34 Workmanship: The house does not maintain integrity of workmanship . Too many alterations have been made to the house for it to maintain the integrity of workmanship ; too much has changed for that to be discernable.

Feeling: The house does not maintain integrity of feeling. The house no longer feels like a 1 - story cottage, mostly because it is not a 1-story cottage. It is now a more contemporary two- story house.

Association: The building has no particular historical association to maintain, therefore it has no integrity of association. The features of the property are not sufficient enough to convey a historic significance.

Historic Integrity Summary
The subject property and building at 67 Sunnyside retains 2 aspects of integrity — Location, and Setting— and lacks integrity of Design, Materials, Workmanship, Feeling, and Association .

Therefore, the site lacks historic integrity.

CONCLUSION
In summary, the subject property at 67 Sunnyside does not display a level of historical significance or integrity that would qualify it for listing as a historic resource on the National Register of Historic Places , on the California Register of Historical Places, or as a structure of merit on the City of Campbell’s Historic Resource Inventory . The site did not meet any of the criteria outlined at the National or California registers, as it is not associated with a ny important or historic events or people, and its architecture is not historic or notable. Regarding the City of Campbell’s Historic Resource Inventory, it is not a good example of a historic resource within the City of Campbell. It is not a historic or c ulturally relevant resource on any local metric, is not notable for its architecture, and is not important to the neighborhood’s character. While it is listed as a structure of merit in the City of Campbell’s Historic Resource Inventory, the property has gone through a number of changes both before then and since then that means the site no longer displays appropriate integrity to qualify it for listing in the Inventory. In conclusion, the building at 67 Sunnyside, the Emile and May Giles Fritz house, is no t a historic resource.

7.c
Packet Pg. 248
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

35 REFERENCES
Coats, Peggy. State of California - Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record . 1984, 2.

Laffey, Glory Anne. Historical Overview and Context Statements for the City of Campbell , submitted to the Department of C ommunity Development, Planning Division, City of Campbell, 1996,

3. "1870 United States Census." Ancestry.com. 6B. Accessed August 22, 2023. https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/6224/.
"US City Directory: Oakland, California." Residence date: 1917. Residence place: Oakland; Alameda; Berkeley, California, USA. Ancestry.com. 521.
"1920 United States Census." Ancestry.com. 6A. Accessed August 22, 2023. https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/6224/.
"A Great Business." The Peninsula Times Tribune , July 31, 1903, 3. "Fresh and Newsy News." Los Gatos Mail, October 10, 1901, 5.

Hill, A.P. "Prune drying yard of the Campbell Fruit Growers’ Union, 1895." Photograph. History San Jose, 1895. Accessed September 18, 2023.
“1930 United States Census." Ancestry.c om. 13B. Accessed April 22, 2023. https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/6224/.
"California Death Index." Ancestry.com. 2326. Accessed August 22, 2023. https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/6224/.
"Only son drowned in mill stream waters." Record Searchlight, September 14, 1905, 1. "Sets Aside Decree Granted the Averys: Judge Hall Takes Ground that Litigants Should Fully Present their Cases." San Francisco Call and Post , September 1, 1901, 11. "Mrs. Lucretia McCaughey." Los Gatos Star, April 19, 1928, 1.

Coats, Peggy. "California Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record: Emil and May Giles Fritz House." State of California, 1986, 1.

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resources staff. “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Register Bulletin, no. 15 (1990:
revised for internet 1995).

7.c
Packet Pg. 249
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHS

(Figure 17) Fruit drying yard of the Campbell’s Fruit Growers Union, 1895

(Figure 22) 1965 Aerial close up

7.c
Packet Pg. 250
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

APPENDIX B: SANBORN MAPS

(Figure 24) 1899 Sanborn Map of the city; San Jose City Library

7.c
Packet Pg. 251
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

(Figure 25) 1920 Sanborn Map; San Jose City Public Library

7.c
Packet Pg. 252
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

(Figure 26) 1920 Sanborn Map, 67 S unnyside close-up; San Jose City Public Library

(Figure 27) 1928-1935 Sanborn Map, 67 Sunnyside close- up; San Jose City Public Librar

7.c
Packet Pg. 253
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

APPENDIX C: LEGAL DOCUMENTATION

Figure 28. Chain of Title 1

7.c
Packet Pg. 254
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

Figure 29. Chain of Title 2

7.c
Packet Pg. 255
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) 67 SUNNYSIDE, CAMPBELL
Historic Resource Evaluation - Final October 4, 2023

Figure 30. Chain of Title 3

7.c
Packet Pg. 256
Attachment: Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) M. SANDOVAL ARCHITECTS, INC.

Page: 1

145 Corte Madera Town Center #404

Corte Madera, California 94925

Peninsula and South Bay Region

Phone: 650.941.8048

San Francisco, Marin and

North Bay Region

Phone: 415.924.7059

Napa and Sonoma

Phone: 707.637.4363

[email protected]

www.msandovalarchitects.com
Architecture - Historic Pr eservation - Design

April 15, 2024

Larissa Lomen, Assistant Planner
City of Campbell | Community Development Department
70 N. First St.

Campbell, CA 95008

RE: 67 Sunnyside Avenue Primary Record (DPR 523 A & B) along with the Continuation Sheets (DPR 523L)

Dear Larissa,

Attached you will find the updated Primary Record (DPR 523 A & B) along with the Continuation Sheets (DPR 523L) for the property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue.

Included as part of these documents, is our archival research of the property’s history, ownership and construction chronology, in addition to our conclusions.

Please note that the methodology we used in this evaluation of this property started with our initial visit to the property on the morning of March 14, 2024, where we documented both the existing building’s exterior and interior architectural features (through photographs and field notes), and also had the opportunity to discussed the home and the past construction improvements made by Glenn and ZoAnn Kensey, the current property owners. Upon the completion of our reconnaissance of the property, a thorough archival research of the property, past occupants, and an analysis of the building’s historical integrity was performed. Please refer to BIBLIOGRAPHY section for the complete listing of these references. After a careful review of these findings was made, it is our opinion the property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue, does not retain the level of historical significance and integrity required to be listed on the City of Campbell’s Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) as a Structure of Merit.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any question regarding this attached material. Thank you.

Warm regards,

Mark Sandoval, AIA

Mark Sandoval, AIA
President
M. SANDOVAL ARCHITECTS, Inc.

Attachment:

7.d
Packet Pg. 257
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission)

Page 1 of 23 ends

P1. Other Identifier: ____

DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
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
*P2. Location: Not for Publication x Unrestricted *a. County Santa Clara and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Jose West Date 2021 T 7S ; R 1W ; E ½ of SW ¼ of Sec 35 ; M.D. B.M. c. Address 67 Sunnyside Av City Campbell Zip 95008 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 10S, 597916 mE/ 4126608 mN e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, decimal degrees, etc., as appropriate) APN 412-04-045; north side Sunnyside Avenue, approximately 400 feet east of Winchester Boulevard *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The subject property is located on the north side of Sunnyside Avenue that runs between South First Street to the east and Winchester Boulevard to the west and is one street south of the City of Campbell’s Alice Avenue Campbell Historic District.

Zoned P-D Plan Development, of the forty-three properties found along Sunnyside Avenue, this neighborhood consists of one church and two multi-family properties, with the rest of the properties occupied by single-family homes. Of these residential properties, six are listed on the city’s Historic Resource Inventory (HRI), with same number built in the 1920s or earlier but not listed, while the rest of the homes on the street were constructed around 1989 or later. (Continued on page 3, DPR523L)

*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP2. Single family property *P4. Resources Present: x Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (view,
date, accession #) Front elevation,
3/14/2024, no accession #
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: x Historic Prehistoric
Both
1906 / 108 years ( Campbell Press,
4/27/1906)

*P7. Owner and Address:

Kinsey Family Trust
67 Sunnyside Ave
Campbell CA 95008
*P8. Recorded by:
(Name, affiliation, and address)
Bonnie Montgomery, 421 N 5th St, San Jose,
CA 95112
*P9. Date Recorded: 4/10/2024

*P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
intensive
*P11. Report Citation : (Cite survey
report and other sources, or enter "none.")
Garavaglia Architecture. 67 Sunnyside Ave
Historic Resource Evaluation— Final,
October 23, 2023.

*Attachments: NONE Location Map x Continuation Sheet x Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List):

P5a. Photograph or Drawing (Photograph required for buildings, structures, and objects.)

7.d
Packet Pg. 258
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) Emil e and May Giles Fritz House *NRHP Status Code 6Z

Page 2 of 23 ends

DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(T his space reserved for official comments.)
(S ketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: Emile and May Giles Fritz House
B2. Common Name: Emil and May Giles Fritz House (as entered on Campbell HRI) B3. Original Use: single-family residence B4. Present Use: multi-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: Queen Anne Cottage
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Likely constructed early 1906; porch modified in 1920s; converted to triplex around 1949 *B7. Moved? x No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

Ga rage built 1995 ( Permit No. 9500000309); rear deck constructed c. 1995.

B9a. Architect: unknown or none b. Builder: Emile Fritz *B10. Significance: Theme Architecture and Shelter Area City of Campbell Pe riod of Significance 1878–1918 (Horticultural Period) Property Type residential Applicable Criteria n/a (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The Ohlone people have lived on the land now known as the Santa Clara Valley for thousands of years. The Spanish colonization of Alta California began in 1769 with the Portolá expedition of 1769. In January 1777, the Franciscan order founded Mission Santa Clara to gather the Ohlone people into the Mission to Christianize them. In November 1777, members of the De Anza colonizing expedition of 1775–1776 founded the pueblo of San José de Guadalupe. Mexico gained its independence from Spain in 1821. During the 1820s through early 1840s, large tracts of land were granted by the Mexican government to local residents. The subject property is approximately one-half mile from the northeast boundary of Rancho Rinconada de los Gatos. Mexico ceded California to the United States with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo on February 2, 1848. The United States Surveyor General in 1851 began surveying all land not otherwise claimed by Mexican citizens. The subject property is in the E ½ of the SW ¼ of Section 35 of Township 7 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian. The Surveyor General approved the first map of this Township on September 16, 1866.
(Continued on page 7)
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) none *B12. References:
(S
ee page 13, DPR523L)
B13. Remarks: historic evaluation for requested removal of property from Campbell Historic Resources Inventory *B14. Evaluator: Bonnie Montgomery and Mark Sandoval, AIA *Date of Evaluation: April 10, 2024

7.d
Packet Pg. 259
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __3___ of _23__

(Continued from page 1, DPR523a, P3a)
The home is positioned asymmetrically on the rectangular-shaped lot, just a few feet from the west property line.

The lot is flat, with one mature tree set in the front yard between the paved walk and the concrete driveway and several large trees occupying the rear yard. An alleyway runs along the rear property line to the north. To the east, a detached two-car garage sits with a wide concrete driveway that extends in front of the garage and to the right side of the garage beyond a gated fence enclosure and terminates just short of the east property line.

The home can be characterized as constructed in the Queen Anne Cottage Style and was built probably around 1906.

It is a one and a half stories in height, with the primary floor level constructed over a raised crawlspace that has been repurposed into two separate basement apartments (69 and 71 Sunnyside Avenue), but which have since been combined by the present homeowner for use as their home office space.

From the street, a concrete walkway leads the visitor from the public sidewalk that runs in front of the home to a set of wooden stairs that leads to an elevated porch that is topped with a shallow sloped hip roof (Figure 11). Supported by wood posts at the front two corners and a wall on the front façade of the building, this feature extends outward toward the street, providing weather protection for the main entrance to the home. Non-historic ornamental wood spindled guard railings fill the open space between the wood newel posts at the top of the stairs and the corner posts that support the roof and each side of the porch that attaches to the wall. A hinged outswing door clad with vertical painted boards has been inserted within the porch base wall to the right of the stairs, allowing access to the crawl space beneath the porch (Figure 12). The porch handrails at either side of the stairs are constructed with 2 x 4 painted boards and appear to be fastened to about every third stair nosing and tread.

To the left and right of the front walk and placed directly in front of the porch stairs that lead to the primary floor level are two narrow concrete walkways with access to the two basement apartments that have been constructed in the excavated crawl space below the home. Short concrete retaining walls (Figures 17 and 18) have been used at each walk and landing to support the existing grade elevation of the front yard.

Above each apartment screened entry door landing is a crudely fashioned rectangular flat sheet metal awning. In the upper wall above and positioned above each apartment entrance are individual double-hung windows that serve the front two rooms of the home.

The porch ceiling above is constructed of wood bead board running north to south. It is set at an awkward height of just a few inches below the top of the arch trim board above the doorway. The floor is constructed of wood and is topped with a decking water-proofing paint surface. The support walls are clad in painted horizontal wood shiplap board siding that appears to be the same as that used to clad the cripple wall beneath the primary floor level.

From the porch, the entry to the home is through a modern-day rectangular four-panel door with an upper half- circle top lite that has been placed in the center of a flat wood trimmed segmented archway (Figure 6). Vinyl casement windows with small fixed triangular-shaped transom windows are positioned at each side of the door and fill the little remaining wall space below this archway feature. This archway feature had once served as a screened vestibule, allowing the occupants of the front two rooms of the home to come and go as they wished without disturbing the rest of the members of the household. However, for reasons of uninvited guests showing up at all hours unannounced, the front door of the home was eventually relocated to its present location.

Centered above the entry porch and the hip roof of the home is a dominant front-facing gable dormer (Figure 1).

Stretching across the base of its triangular shape is a flat horizontal trim board that attaches to the frieze boards that make up the box eave cornices found below the edge of the hip roof at either side. In the middle of this board, the shallow sloped hip roof of the porch below connects to the wall. Placed above it is a projecting molding, and above this feature is a wood semi-elliptical arched louvered attic vent that is set in the lower wall of the gable. (Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 260
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __4___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)
Like the rest of the home, the south façade of the home is clad with painted wood shiplap horizontal board siding and is capped with a steeply pitched composition asphalt shingle roof. The roof eave is constructed as a simple enclosed box cornice, to which an ogee profile metal gutter and tubular down spouts are attached.

The original rectangular-shaped double-hung wood sash windows that once occupied the current window openings have all been removed in recent years and replaced with modern-day vinyl retrofit windows. Each window serving the primary floor level is trimmed with wood exterior casing attached to the sides with projecting sills and aprons at the bottom and slanted wood drip caps placed on the top head trim.

Vertical trim boards are placed on the front corners of this façade and extend upward, connecting with the horizontal frieze board of the cornice above. This corner trim condition is found only on the front of the building and may suggest it was added to conceal alterations to the front of the home that necessitated the removal and replacement of the original horizontal shiplap board siding.

Looking from the neighboring driveway in a northeast direction, the west façade (Figure 2) consists of the same painted wood shiplap wood board siding used on the front of the home. The window openings found on this side of the building are arranged symmetrically, with a pair of double-hung windows placed in the middle of the wall and one single double-hung window at an equal distance from the center windows to the corners of the building within the wall. Each is trimmed with a wood exterior casing attached to the sides, with projecting sills and aprons at the bottom. But unlike the windows found on the front and back of the building, the drip cap is a molding and suggests that this window trim is original to the home.

From this vantage point, the hip roof of the original rear porch and the gabled roof deck addition are also visible.

Because of the existing redwood fence that runs along the entire length of the property, the lower part of this façade is blocked from view.

Looking in a southwestern direction at the north façade (Figure 4), the steeply pitched hip roof that caps the home, as well as the masonry chimney that is positioned just below the roof’s pyramid ridge line, is clearly visible. Within the wall to the left is a single double-hung window opening that has been altered to squeeze in a small horizontal fixed pane of glass beneath the projecting sill. This was probably done to allow the current owners a better and more complete view of the backyard from the kitchen. Directly below, vertical trim boards are extended upward from the projecting drip cap that runs across the head trim that has been placed above the only rear entrance to the basement apartments. Because of the limited interior ceiling headroom height found in the basement apartments (below 7’0” in height), the door entering the space needed to be place at the ceiling height, and as a consequence, the head and upper jamb trim interrupts the exterior wood horizontal water table molding that runs horizontally at the top of the original supportive cripple wall that encloses the apartments beneath the primary floor and the building’s foundation.

At the right in the wall above this entrance and near the corner of the building is the shallow sloped hipped covered porch, which is the only door leading to the backyard of the home. Connected to the wooden porch landing, this feature has been modified to accommodate two sets of stairs, one open riser wood constructed staircase that accesses an open redwood deck that steps down to the lawn area and a second that leads to the elevated rear covered exterior deck addition.

The elevated deck addition (Figure 5) appears to have been added by the current owner and contains an outdoor kitchen area for entertaining guests. The low sloped gable roof that caps this structure is composed of the same composition shingle roof material used on the main house. It is constructed from plywood panels attached to rafters with collar ties fastened to horizontal framing members that are supported by six vertical posts with diagonal bracing attached.
(Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 261
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __5___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)
The entire roof under structure, in addition to both gabled ends, is exposed to view. Below and between the two posts nearest the rear porch landing, a vertical wall clad in wood horizontal siding has been added to provide concealment of both the electrical and plumbing serving the outdoor kitchen area. Placed within this wall above the sink cabinet is an aluminum fixed window allowing the afternoon light into this kitchen area. Redwood lattice has been attached to the interior side to the right of this wall for privacy. Painted triple wood board open guardrails extend around the south and east elevations of the structure, and placed in the middle of the last two posts that form the east side of this structure is a set of redwood wood stairs with open 2 x 4 handrails on each side that leads to the open deck below.

Looking at the building’s east façade (Figure 4) from a southeastern direction, the original cantilevered bay can be observed. Capped with a similar steeply sloped hid roof as the rest of the home, the bay is positioned within the center of the wall, with double-hung window openings placed at an equal distance to the left and right of this projecting feature. Arranged much like the windows on the opposite side of the building, the bay is composed of two rectangular double-hung windows, with similarly sized companion windows placed slightly offset within these angled walls with their jamb trim boards set closer to the bay’s intersection with the wall. The soffit of the boxed eave cornice above is cantilevered over these angled window openings, allowing for the use of the more simplified roof form above (Figure 3).

To the right of the bay is a shiplap-clad gabled end outdoor utility closet that has been constructed in the narrow planting area along the house below. Positioned below the bay and to the left and right of it within the cripple wall is a collection of rectangular modern-day vinyl windows of various sizes set in wood trimmed frames that serve to bring natural light into the basement apartment located on this side of the building.

If the footprint of the original home diagramed in the July 1920 Sanborn map (Figure 25) was accurate and was not just a drafting error corrected in the June 1928 version, it is plausible that both the appearance of the exterior street façade and the actual internal front room partition layout could have been much different from what we observe today. It is theorized that perhaps if the front porch was originally placed off center of the central axis of the home, then this would suggest the original floor plan may have been laid out in a more conventional manner. If this were the case, instead of stepping into a vestibule with angled wall partitions at the right of a narrow central hallway passage, one may have entered from the street under the protection of a covered porch, through the main entry door (located in the same or similar location), and into a hallway with the parlor to the left. The bedroom chamber would have been placed much like it is today, but without the angled wall. If this were true, then it may suggest the street façade of the original home may not had the front-facing gable roof, which seems to be in stark contrast with the other hip roof forms deliberately used on the building, and perhaps this feature may have been added at the time when the porch was repositioned in the center of the front façade and the arched interior vestibule constructed.

There is plenty of evidence in the field to support the notion that substantial construction alterations were made to both the original home’s street façade and its interior over the years by the past occupants, but unfortunately, no other archival records are available to confirm this was the case, other than this earlier Sanborn map.

The two-car garage (Figure 19) that occupies the same lot was built much later (Permit No. 9500000309) in 1997.

The garage is clad in a similar-looking horizontal wood siding as the main house and has a gable roof at each end.

The street façade has a large standard-size roll-up aluminum garage door that is positioned slightly offset from the center. Below the gable ends in both the front and back are rectangular-shaped attic vents. Vinyl sliding windows have been placed on the two sides and the back of the garage for natural light. At the rear of the structure (Figure 20), a six-panel colonial-style manufactured door has been placed toward the right west corner of the garage wall.

The roof above has been extended to create a covered patio area for storage. It is supported by the wall of the garage on one end and by three wood vertical posts on the other end. The roof framing is all exposed to view. (Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 262
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __6___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)

INTERIOR FEATURES
67 Sunnyside Avenue
Once through the front door, the visitor steps into the vestibule of the home. The angled walls of the bedroom chamber appear to the right, and to the left is a living room space that had served as another bedroom. In front is the main entrance hallway that leads to the family room (Figure 7), and from it to the dining room beyond and then the kitchen to the right.

To the right of the family room, a short hallway leads to the doorway of a small bathroom at the end and to the front bedroom on the other side. This hallway also serves as the laundry area. At the end of this passageway, the wall of the front bedroom veers to the left at an angle to connect with the wall space that separates the cantilevered bay’s two double-hung center windows from its northern angled companion double-hung window (Figure 8). The only interior features that might be traced back to the original interior appear to be the wood diagonal wainscot lower wall detail that appears in the family room and entrance hallway in addition to the more decorative milled interior casing that is found around some of the doors and windows in the same areas the diagonal wainscot is used. There may also be the painted wood closet cabinets in the front bedroom and the two cabinets attached to a decorative archway (Figure 9) located between the opening of the kitchen and the dining room. Although there exists other flat interior trim wood casing in addition to both vertical and horizontal interior trim found within the interior of the home, they are difficult to determine if they are original, without a more complete and thorough examination. The current owner has added many decorative features to the home, such as wallpaper and the Rossette wood corner blocks that appear on the upper flat door casing in some of the rooms, but not much is left to convey the home’s original interior features. The original plaster finish walls have been covered with drywall in most rooms, including above the walls where the diagonal wainscot is found. As a general observation, the interior of the home has gone through many structural alterations and if there had been any decorative ceiling features (i.e., a wood crown, coved plaster ceilings, etc.), evidence of any has long been removed by the various occupants of the home over the years. 69 and 71 Sunnyside Avenue
As mentioned above, the raised crawlspace beneath the home was repurposed into two separate basement apartments (69 and 71 Sunnyside Avenue). They has since been combined by the present homeowner for use as home office space (Figure 13). Since the wall between each of the apartments supports the house above, there are only a few openings in this wall to allow passage. The ceiling height is unusually low to be considered habitable by today’s building code standards, and because of this, all doors and openings have been specially sized to fit within the limited height between the ceiling and the floor (Figure 14).

This space was constructed with a concrete slab floor that appears to slightly slope from the front to the back of each apartment. At the slab floor’s connection to the perimeter exterior walls, the top of the original concrete foundation of the home is exposed to view. This condition is most noticeable at each of the exterior door entrances to the space, where the threshold of the door has been cut through the top of the foundation (Figure 16).

Most of the walls are covered with wallboard, with some that have been covered with a thin vertical veneer paneling.

Not original to the home or having any historic value, the two apartments have been converted and repurposed for use as a home office by the current owner. The interior room layout consists of two rooms (Figures 13 and 14) that have access to the street in front, with one side containing a small kitchen (Figure 15) area and the other side functioning as the office, with a work room and a small bathroom placed near the rear entrance leading to the backyard of the home.
(End of DPR523b, P3a)

7.d
Packet Pg. 263
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __7___ of _23__

(Continued from page 2, DPR523b, B12)
Benjamin Casey received a patent on 80 acres in the E ½ of the SW ¼ of Section 35 on May 2, 1870. He arrived in the Santa Clara Valley in the 1850s, joining his younger brother, Lewis C. Casey, who had settled here in 1853. The 1876 Thompson & West map (Figure 21) shows that William H. Cole owned the 52 acres of Casey’s original 80 acres, all the land between Winchester Boulevard and the Los Gatos Creek. The boundary between Benjamin Campbell’s 160 acres and Cole’s 52 acres is the current alignment of the alley behind Sunnyside Avenue.

On May 19, 1881, William H. Cole sold his 51.95-acre ranch to Missouri Ann Kennedy (SCC Deeds Book 59, Page 610). Figure 22 shows the Kennedy ranch on the 1889 Official Map of Santa Clara County. Missouri Ann Potter and Benoni Alexander Kennedy were married in Missouri in 1854. Their first child, Robert Wilson Kennedy, was born the following year. In 1863 when Robert was eight, the Kennedy family, which then included his younger brother William, crossed the plains and settled in Artois in present-day Glenn County. In 1879, Benoni Kennedy died, leaving a family of eight children. In 1880, Robert Wilson Kennedy married Ella Giles. The following year, his mother purchased W. H. Cole’s ranch and moved with his other siblings to Campbell. In 1890 Robert, Ella, and their five children moved from Artois to Campbell. R. W. Kennedy purchased a tract of land on the west side of Winchester Boulevard near his mother’s ranch. The R. W. Kennedys added four more children to their family, for a total of nine. The family lived in a ranch house at the corner of Budd Avenue and Winchester Boulevard, now the site of a strip shopping center. His son Erle Russell Kennedy built a Spanish Revival residence in 1930 at 61 Catalpa Lane, which the City of Campbell designated an Historic Landmark in 1984.

On February 4, 1899, shortly before her death on March 28, 1899, Mrs. M. A. Kennedy granted the ranch to three of her surviving children, William A. Kennedy, James E. Kennedy, and Mary F. Duncan. The Kennedy siblings recorded the deed on April 22, 1899 (SCC Deeds Book 218, Page 384). They subdivided the property into six lots and recorded the map on June 3, 1899 (SCC Recorded Maps Book I, Page 117). Figure 23 shows the family home (H) and barn (B) within dotted rectangles in Lot 1. (This was the approximate site of the Cole homestead shown in Figure

21.) The siblings divided the lots between themselves: Lot 1 went to James E. Kennedy; Lots 2, 5, and 6 went to William A. Kennedy, and Lots 3 and 4 went to Mary J. Duncan (SCC Deeds Book 221, Pages 418 and 420; Book 223,

Page 304 ends

James granted Lot 1 to his brother Robert W. Kennedy (SCC Deeds Book 223, Page 310).

On January 10, 1900, Leslie J. Stratton purchased Lot 1 from Robert W. and Ella G. Kennedy (SCC Deeds Book 227,

Page 98 ends

Together the two lots were 14.85 acres. An article in the December 1, 1904, Campbell Press reported, “L. J. Stratton last week decided to place on the market his fifteen-acre orchard ranch which adjoins Campbell on the south.” H. C.

Tillman surveyed the land on November 26, 1904, and Stratton recorded the map of the Sunnyside Tract on December 15, 1904 (SCC Recorded Maps, Book K, Page 27). According to the Press account, workmen were already digging out orchard trees to put through streets, laying cement sidewalks and piping water to each lot. Thirty lots had already been sold in the first week. On June 1, 1905, May Giles Fritz and Emile Fritz purchased Lot 7 in Block 3 in the Sunnyside Tract (SCC Deeds Book 295, Page 449). Six months later, on December 1, 1905, they purchased the adjoining Lot 6 (Deeds Book 293, Page 379).

May Giles Fritz was the older sister of Ella Giles Kennedy. She married building contractor Emile Fritz on February 18, 1903, in Sacramento. Their son, Emile Giles Fritz, was born the following year. May’s parents lived at Balls Ferry in Shasta County. Her father died there in February 1905. During a visit to May’s widowed mother in September 1905, according to an account in the Redding Record Searchlight, Emile Giles Fritz, age 18 months, drowned in a stream on the family’s ranch. While May and Emile might have purchased the property in Campbell to raise their son near her family, the move to be near her sister in Campbell might have become a consolation in grief. (Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 264
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __8___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)
Emile Fritz likely built the house between December 1905 and April 1906. The center of the house sits directly on the line between Lots 6 and 7, so it could not have been constructed before Fritz purchased both lots. The first mention of “Mrs. E. Fritz” in the Campbell Press is April 6, 1906, when she and her sister Ella were called back to Balls Ferry due to “the serious illness of their mother,” Rosena E. Giles, who died two days later. Mrs. Giles was eulogized in the April 27, 1906, issue of the Campbell Press. Her survivors included “Mrs. Ella Kennedy and Mrs. May Fritz of Campbell.” The first definitive mention of the Fritz home on Sunnyside Avenue appears in the Campbell Press of February 1, 1907: “Miss Ida Fritz, who has been attending school in San Francisco is now at home with her father, E.

Fritz, on Sunnyside avenue.” (Ida was one of Emile Fritz’s daughters from his first marriage.) May, Emile, and Ida received occasional mentions in the Campbell Press during their tenure on Sunnyside Avenue between 1906 and 1920. May Fritz spent the 1907–1908 school year teaching in Balls Ferry. While Emile Fritz would leave Campbell occasionally to erect buildings in other towns, he became best known in Campbell for digging wells. On September 13, 1912, the Press reported Fritz had a contract to dig a well for E. E. Phelps. The following winter, Fritz and his crew dug a well for the Water Company. On May 23, 1913, the Press reported, “a 7 h.p. engine which E. Fritz has purchased for his pumping plant. Mr. Fritz has built a cement reservoir for storing water for irrigating.” The 1977 and 1986 DPRs both report, “The property originally had a well in the yard through which water was piped to adjoining neighbors.”
The subject property first appears on the July 1920 Sanborn map. This was also the month that May Giles Fritz and Emile Fritz sold the property to H. L. and Ada B Barnes (SCC Deeds Book 520, Page 119). Figure 24 shows Sunnyside Avenue on that Sanborn map. The subject property is highlighted in red. In the backyard is a “gasol. eng.” and 20-foot-tall water tank. This corresponds to the “pumping plant” described in the May 23, 1913, Press article.

The property to the east, highlighted in green, was Mrs. M. A. Kennedy’s ranch house and outbuildings. (The site was cleared prior to 1947 to make way for the Campbell Baptist Church, now the Campbell Bible Church).

Harry L. Barnes was a house painter living in downtown San Jose, according to the 1920 census. He and his wife Ada owned the subject property for a little over a year before selling it to William McCaughey on November 1, 1921 (SCC Deeds Book 539, Page 446). In 1891, William C. McCaughey and his wife Lucretia brought their family to the Santa Clara Valley from Ohio. He had an orchard in the Union School District until his retirement. Their daughter Elena married Arthur Robinson in 1907 and set up housekeeping in “Herbert Sault’s pretty new cottage on Sunnyside Avenue.” After a few years living in Merced County, the McCaugheys and Robinsons returned to Campbell. They were living in Campbell on South Second Street in the 1920 census. On the occasion of their fifty- fifth wedding anniversary in October 1926, Mr. and Mrs. McCaughey granted the subject property to their son Ben L. McCaughey and their daughter Elena Robinson (SCC Official Records [hereafter OR] Book 271, Page 348). The couple continued to live in this house until their deaths, Mr. McCaughey at age 88 in October 1927, and Mrs.

McCaughey at age 84 in April 1928.

Ben L. McCaughey likely lived at the subject property until his death “at his Sunnyside Ave. home” on February 6, 1947. Neither he nor this house could be found in the 1930 census. During the 1930s, Ben, like many of Campbell’s residents, received mail at the Campbell Post Office. Neither city directories nor voting registration rolls are helpful in placing Campbell residents at certain addresses. The house’s address in the early 1940s was 29 Sunnyside Avenue.

In the 1940 census, Ben McCaughey was lodging with his tenants: Joseph Subdon, his wife Nola, and their son Richard. All occupants lived in the same house in 1935. The 1942 draft registration cards for both Joe Subdon and Ben Lewis McCaughey report their addresses as 29 Sunnyside Avenue, although Ben’s mailing address was a Campbell post office box.
(Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 265
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __9___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)
Two Sanborn maps are available from Ben L. McCaughey’s time living on Sunnyside Avenue. Figure 25 shows all three available views of the subject property. The June 1928 Sanborn was not an update of the July 1920 Sanborn: the map was completely redrawn. All houses in Campbell on the 1928 Sanborn look slightly different from how an earlier draftsman rendered them in 1920. The front porch of the subject property is drawn off center of the house’s central axis on the 1920 Sanborn. In 1928, the porch is centered over the front door as it exists today. The architectural description in P3a addresses the question of whether the 1920 Sanborn was a drafting error that the 1928 draftsman corrected, or whether the front porch was reconstructed between those two years. The 1928 map shows that Emile Fritz’s “pumping plant” had been removed from the backyard. An accessory building was built along the north and west corners of the property line. By December 1935, the accessory building in the west side yard had been demolished.

On March 20, 1947, Elena Robinson terminated the joint tenancy of her brother Ben by establishing the fact of his death (SCC OR Book 1439, Page 91). On March 31, 1947, Elena and her husband sold the subject property to Buel W. and Mary E. Pounds (SCC OR Book 1436, Page 327). By the 1950 census, the house had been converted to three units. Upstairs lived Buel’s father, Howard A. Pounds, a building contractor, Buel’s mother, Gertrude, and his tw o
you
nger brothers, Loye and Marvin. Buel and his wife Mary lived in one downstairs unit, renters Ernest and Mabel Ka
iley in another unit. Howard A. Pounds was born near Dallas, Texas, in 1896. The 1920, 1930, and 1940 censuses find him and his wife moving their family further west through Texas, with Howard working as a trucker According to
son Loye’s 2009 obituary in the San Jose Mercury News, the family arrived in Campbell in 1941, where he graduated from Campbell High School in 1944.

While the Pounds family lived in the house in 1950, they did not own it. On March 25, 1948, Buel and Mary Pounds sold the property to Earl and Lora Billups (SCC OR Book 1620, Page 535). On October 19, 1949, Earl and Lora Billups sold the westerly 45 feet of Lot 6 to their son and daughter-in-law Maurice W. and Billye Ann Billups (SCC OR Book 1865, Page 103). By this time, the Billups family had built the house next door at 55 Sunnyside Avenue. In the 1949–1950 Santa Clara County directory, Earl Billups is listed as a carpenter and Maurice is listed as a painter living at what was then 57 Sunnyside Avenue. The Billups family is also listed at this address in the 1950 census. The Billups family was from Duncan, Oklahoma, where Earl and Maurice ran a grocery and service station. On April 11, 1948, three weeks after Earl and Lora purchased property in Campbell, the Duncan Eagle reported a farewell party for Mrs. Billups, who was “leaving with her husband to establish a home in San Jose, Calif.” Since Howard A. Pounds and Earl Billups both claimed to be carpenters or building contractors in the 1949 county directory and in the 1950 census, it is very likely that either or both of them excavated the basement of the subject property and converted it to two apartments. Neither man were professional carpenters, which might explain the low ceilings in the basement. The Billups’ sojourn in Campbell was brief. On July 9, 1951, they sold the house to Samuel J. and Etta A. Humphreys (SCC OR Book 2245, Page 465). The following month the Duncan Banner reported that Earl and Lora were guests at a picnic supper at Duncan Lake. Soon afterwards, Earl’s service station was advertising in the Duncan newspapers.

Samuel J. Humphreys and Etta A. (Weston) Humphreys were from Garland County, Arkansas, where they married on March 11, 1930. Samuel’s sister Ruth married James Washington Kinsey on June 25, 1925. Another sister, Mary Catherine, married George Washington Kinsey on September 19, 1931. All three couples were found in Garland County in the 1940 census. On March 20, 1948, James W. Kinsey died in Garland County, leaving his widow Ruth and two sons, Glenn, age 11, and John Max, age 9. Ruth’s brother Samuel and sister Mary had relocated to the Santa Clara Valley during or soon after World War II. Ruth and the boys joined them in California. In the 1950 census, Ruth, Glenn, and John Max were living with George and Mary Kinsey on White Road near San Jose. (Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 266
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __10___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)
When Samuel and Etta purchased the subject property in 1951, Ruth, Glenn, and John Max moved in with them.

According to an interview with Glenn Kinsey, they moved so that he could attend Campbell High School.

Ruth Kinsey “had been in poor health for several years,” according to her obituary published in the May 12, 1954, San Jose Mercury. Glenn and John Max moved away after their mother’s death.

Samuel J. Humphreys died on April 6, 1974, and on February 25, 1976, Etta transferred the property into her name (SCC OR Book B885, Page 385). On October 8, 1977, a member of the City of Campbell Historic Survey team interviewed Mrs. Humphreys. Architectural advisors to the survey gave the house a C rating as a typical example of a Queen Anne cottage; historic advisors gave it a B rating, based on its association with Emile and May Fritz. The house was added to the Campbell Historic Resources Inventory in 1984 as a Structure of Merit.

On June 8, 1992, Mrs. Humphreys transferred the property into a family trust (SCC OR Book M2128, Page 1904). In June 1994, she applied for a permit to upgrade the house’s electrical service to 100 amps (Permit No. 9400000423).

On March 8, 1995, Etta A. Humphreys sold the property to her nephew, Glenn R. Kinsey, and his wife, ZoAnn C.

Kinsey (SCC OR Book M782, Page 152). Mrs. Humphreys died on April 10, 1997, at the age of 94. The following month, the Kinseys applied for a permit to build the garage (Permit No. 9500000309). The Kinseys have made other changes. They built a covered deck adjacent to the back porch. Vinyl windows have replaced the wooden originals. A screen door and screen windows at the front entry have been replaced with a solid entry door flanked by new vinyl windows.

In the three decades that Glenn R. Kinsey and ZoAnn Kinsey have lived in this house, the character of Sunnyside Avenue has changed. Each house lot in the Sunnyside tract as originally surveyed in 1904 was almost a quarter of an acre. Some houses, like the subject property, were built on double lots. As the population of Campbell grew after World War II, the pressure to subdivide these Sunnyside lots increased. The first such instance occurred in 1949, when the Billups subdivided this double lot, built another house at 55 Sunnyside Avenue, and turned the subject property into a triplex. Table 1 chronicles the changes in Sunnyside Avenue’s housing inventory since 1945 with the current APN map provided for context (Figure 26). Demolishing original single-family residences (SFRs), splitting the lots, and building new SFRs is a trend that has accelerated over the last 25 years. Reporting in the San Jose Mercury-News on January 17, 2008, Cathy Weselby noted the transformation, as “mostly Craftsman-style houses were being razed and the properties are being divided to make way for multiple single-family homes.” The subject property and seven other houses on Sunnyside Avenue were designated as Structures of Merit and added to Campbell’s Historic Resources Inventory in 1984. Table 2 lists these eight properties and their present status. On February 20, 2018, the Campbell City Council repealed and replaced its Historic Preservation Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2230, Municipal Code Chapter 21.33). The subject property, along with the remaining Structures of Merit on Sunnyside Avenue, have not been re-evaluated according to the current criteria for designation as a Structure of Merit.

SIGNIFICANCE
To evaluate the property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue for its historic significance and eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, the CRHR uses generally the same guidelines as the National Register of Historic Places (developed by the National Park Service); as such, selected language from those guidelines will be quoted below to help clarify the evaluation discussion. To be potentially eligible for individual listing on the CRHR, a structure must usually be more than 50 years old, must have historic significance, and must also retain its physical integrity. Built in 1905, the subject property meets the age criteria. (Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 267
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __11___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)
In addition, the report uses the Historical Overview and Context Statements for the City of Campbell (Archives & Architecture, 1996) as a standard for evaluating this property. According to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standard for the Treatment of Historic Properties, development of historic contexts is the foundation for decisions about identification, evaluation, registration, and treatment of historic properties. Based on the context statement’, this house will be evaluated under the Architecture and Shelter theme as a residential property type. The house was constructed during the Horticultural Period of Campbell’s history (1878–1918).

Criterion A/1: Properties can be eligible for the National Register (Criterion A) or California Register (Criterion 1) if they are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of national or state history. No individual events of national or state historic significance occurred at this site. Its contribution to the broad pattern of town development in Campbell is not significant on the national or state level. It does not appear individually eligible for the National Register or California Register under Criterion A/1.

Criterion B/2: Properties may be eligible for the National Register (Criterion B) or the California Register (Criterion 2) if they are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past. This property was first considered locally historically significant based on its association with Emile and May Giles Fritz, who do not rise to the level of state or national significance. No subsequent owners or tenants were found to be significant to national or state history. The property does not appear to be eligible for the National Register or California Register under Criterion B/2.

Criterion C/3: Properties may be eligible for the National Register (Criterion C) or the California Register (Criterion 3) if they embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent th e
wo
rk of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The house appears to have been built by Emile Fritz for himself, not the work of a master. The house has character-defining features of the Queen Anne style, but those features are not distinctive. The property would therefore not appear to qualify for the National Register or California Register under Criterion C/3.

Criterion D/4: Properties may be eligible for the National Register (Criterion D) or the California Register (Criterion 4) if they have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. All research and physical investigation of the project’s site has focused only on the ground above the structure. Nothing about the buildings, structures, or objects on the site contain information important in prehistory or history. The property would therefore not appear to qualify for National Register or California Register under Criterion D/4.

Criteria for Local Significance. Section 21.33.060 of the City of Campbell Historic Preservation Ordinance sets out the following criteria for local historic significance. An evaluation for each criteria appears below in italics:

1. Designation Criteria for a Structure of Merit. The application to designate an eligible resource as a structure of merit shall be reviewed for conformance with the following criteria:
a. The proposed resource is associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history or cultural heritage; No significant events occurred on this property. Sunnyside Avenue has lost its pre-1920 architectural character of which this house was once a contributor. b. The proposed resource is associated with the lives of persons important to our history; Robert Wilson Kennedy was a significant member of the Campbell community between 1890 and his death in 1935. This property is associated with his sister-in-law, May Giles Fritz. Mrs. Fritz herself was not a significant figure in Campbell’s history during the fifteen years she lived here. Her husband Emile Fritz did not make a significant contribution to Campbell’s history. No subsequent owners or tenants were significant members of the Campbell community.
(Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 268
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __12___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)
c. The proposed resource yields, or has the potential to yield, information important to our prehistory or history; Nothing about the buildings, structures or objects on this property has the potential to yield information important to our prehistory or history.
d. The proposed resource embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction; The house displays characteristics of the Queen Anne style, but nothing about its design or method of construction is distinctive.
e. The proposed resource represents the work of a notable architect, designer, engineer, or builder; or f. The proposed resource possesses significant artistic value or materially benefits the historic character of the neighborhood, community, or city. This house appears to be Emile Fritz’s only surviving contribution to Campbell’s built environment. The house itself does not possess significant artistic value. Its age alone does not materially benefit the historic character of the neighborhood, community, or city.

The Emile and May Giles Fritz Residence does not qualify as a Structure of Merit according to the current City of Campbell Historic Preservation Ordinance. It likewise does not qualify under the more stringent criteria listed below for a City Landmark:

2. Designation Criteria for a Landmark. The application to designate an eligible resource as a landmark shall be
re
viewed for conformance with the following criteria:
a. The proposed resource represents a unique, rare, or extraordinary example of an architectural design, detail or historical type; Nothing about the architecture of this house is unique, rare, or extraordinary. b. The proposed resource identifies with a person or persons who significantly contributed to the history, culture, or development of the city, the state or the nation; Robert Wilson Kennedy was a significant member of the Campbell community between 1890 and his death in 1935. This property is associated with his sister-in-law, May Giles Fritz. Mrs. Fritz herself was not a significant figure in Campbell’s history during the fifteen years she lived here. Her husband Emile Fritz did not make a significant contribution to Campbell’s history. No subsequent owners or tenants were significant members of the Campbell community. or c. The proposed resource represents the site of a significant historic event. No significant events occurred on this property.

INTEGRITY
Integrity refers to a property’s ability to convey its significance. Significance is conveyed by the retention of a resource’s visual and physical characteristics and its surroundings. The National Register criteria recognize seven aspects to integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. To retain historic integrity, a property will always possess several, and usually most, of these aspects.

The modern test of integrity according to the California Office of Historic Preservation is to stand on the sidewalk and ask yourself the following question: “Does the resource display enough of what made it significant for its historical period that it can be easily grasped by the average passerby?” Properties must have sufficient integrity in addition to meeting the criterion for significance to be considered a qualified historic resource.

The subject property does not retain sufficient aspects of integrity to qualify as an historic resource. The property is still in its original location, the only aspect of integrity it retains. When the property was added to the Campbell Historic Resources Inventory in 1984, Sunnyside Avenue was still a largely a neighborhood of Queen Anne and Craftsman single-family residences on quarter-acre lots. Over the past forty years, many of those original houses have been demolished and replaced with new single-family residences on split lots. Integrity of setting, feeling, and association of the original neighborhood has been lost. Although the house is not currently used as a triplex, its two basement entrances still convey to the passerby its conversion from a single-family residence. Integrity has been compromised in design, materials, and workmanship, particularly through replacement windows, and added front gable, and alterations to the front porch and entry. (Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 269
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __13___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The subject property does not qualify as individually eligible for the National Register or California Register. When evaluated under the current City of Campbell Historic Preservation Ordinance criteria for local historic significance, it does not qualify as a Structure of Merit or a City Historic Landmark and can be removed from the City of Campbell Historic Resources Inventory.

The criteria upon which the subject property was judged and placed on the inventory in 1984 were less well defined.

The subject property, then and now, meets the criteria for age, but that is not sufficient. The association with R. W.

Kennedy was deemed significant in 1984, but further research for this report finds that Emile and May Giles Fritz were related only through marriage and that they themselves were not significant in the history of Campbell. Other properties on the Campbell Historic Resources Inventory are more closely associated with the R. W. Kennedy family (especially the Landmark E. R. Kennedy House at 61 Catalpa Lane). The architectural significance of the house itself was not considered of primary importance when the house was listed in 1984. This report finds also that the architecture is not distinctive. The house itself has lost integrity through the loss of historic materials since 1984, and the neighborhood has lost its historic character over the past forty years through demolition of pre-1920 houses and construction of new dwellings.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ancestry.com. Various online databases. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2011.

Archives & Architecture. Historical Overview and Context Statements for the City of Campbell. San Jose, 1996.

Campbell Press.
“Lots Selling Fast,” December 1, 1904.

April 6, 1906.
“Obituary,” April 27, 1906.
“Press Notes,” February 1, 1907.
“Wedding Anniversary,” October 15, 1926.
“W. C. McCaughey,” May 6, 1927.
“Lucretia McCaughey Laid to Rest,” April 13, 1928.
“Looking Forward, 55th Anniversary,” April 3, 1935.
“R. W. Kennedy, Aged Pioneer, Called by Death,” September 12, 1935. “Final Rites for B. L. McCaughey,” February 13, 1947.

Guinn, J. M. “Lewis C. Casey,” in History of the State of California and Biographical Record of Coast Counties, California. Chicago: Lewis Publishing Co, 1904, pages 1380–1381.

Herrmann Brothers. Official map of the County of Santa Clara, California: compiled from U.S. surveys, county records, and private surveys and the tax-list of 1889, by order of the Hon. Board of Supervisors. San Jose:

Herrmann Brothers, 1890. [available online at https://www.loc.gov/item/2012592102/] National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Technical Bulletin No. 15. 1997.

Record Spotlight (Redding, CA)
“J. K. Giles Dies at Ball Ferry,” February 14, 1905.
“Baby Boy Toddles from Home and Is Drowned in Millrace,” September 15, 1905. “Mae F. G. Fritz, Ex-Teacher Dies,” February 17, 1954.

San Jose Mercury Herald.
“Campbell Couple to Celebrate 55th Anniversary,” April 7, 1935.

San Jose Mercury.
“Ruth Kinsey Succumbs,” May 12, 1954.
(Continued on next page)

7.d
Packet Pg. 270
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __Emile and May Giles Fritz House____________________________________________________________________ Page __14___ of _23__

(Continued from previous page)
San Jose Mercury-News.

Weselby, Cathy, “Changes on Campbell Street Have Planners… ” (Web Edition), January 17, 2008.

Weselby, Cathy, “Older Sunnyside home can be demolished … ” (Web Edition), March 21, 2008.

Santa Clara County Deeds, Miscellaneous Records, and Official Records. On file at the Clerk-Recorder’s Office.

Santa Clara County Recorded Maps. On file at the Clerk-Recorder’s Office.

Thompson & West. Historical Atlas of Santa Clara County. San Francisco: Thompson & West, 1876.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. General Land Office Records. Accession No.

CA0040_.050, May 2, 1870.

U.S. Federal Census, 1860–1950.

Watson, Jeanette. Campbell: The Orchard City. Campbell: Campbell Historical Museum Association, 1989.

7.d
Packet Pg. 271
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __ Emile and May Giles Fritz House ______________________________________________________________________ Page __15___ of _23_

SITE VISIT PHOTOGRAPHS
MARCH 14, 2024
Figure 1. View of the front south façade of the home from Sunnyside Avenue.

Figure 2. View from sidewalk of the front and west facades of the home.

Figure 3. View looking in a westerly direction from the paved driveway of the detached garage at the east façade.

Figure 4. View from the southwest looking at the north façade.

Figure 4. Close-up view of the north covered deck extension. Figure 6. View of the primary street entrance from the interior central entry hallway.

7.d
Packet Pg. 272
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __ Emile and May Giles Fritz House ______________________________________________________________________ Page __16___ of _23_

SITE VISIT PHOTOGRAPHS
MARCH 14, 2024
Figure 7. View looking towards the central entry hallway from the family room.

Figure 8. Interior view looking east at the front bedroom’s wall attachment to the original bay window.

Figure 9. Interior view of what appears to be the original archway feature separating the kitchen from the family room.

Figure 10. Interior view of the front bedroom’s closet and entrance door that led to the original front screened porch.

7.d
Packet Pg. 273
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __ Emile and May Giles Fritz House ______________________________________________________________________ Page __17___ of _23_

SITE VISIT PHOTOGRAPHS
MARCH 14, 2024
Figure 11. Close-up view of front porch entrance. Figure 12. View of the original cripple wall of the basement beneath the front porch.

Figure 13. View of 71 Sunnyside Avenue’s basement interior looking in a northerly direction.

Figure 14. Interior view of 69 Sunnyside Avenue’s basement interior looking south.

7.d
Packet Pg. 274
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __ Emile and May Giles Fritz House ______________________________________________________________________ Page _18____ of _23_

SITE VISIT PHOTOGRAPHS
MARCH 14, 2024
Figure 15. Interior view of 69 Sunnyside Avenue’s kitchen space. Figure 16. Interior close-up view of 71 Sunnyside Avenue’s street entrance threshold.

Figure 17. View of the 69 Sunnyside Avenue’s street entrance from the main paved walkway.

Figure 18. Close-up view of the 71 Sunnyside Avenue’s front concrete retaining wall.

7.d
Packet Pg. 275
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __ Emile and May Giles Fritz House ______________________________________________________________________ Page _19____ of _23_

SITE VISIT PHOTOGRAPHS
MARCH 14, 2024
Figure 19. View of the detached garage looking towards the southwest.

Figure 20. View from the rear yard looking south at the detached garage.

7.d
Packet Pg. 276
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __ Emile and May Giles Fritz House ______________________________________________________________________ Page __20___ of _23_

HISTORICAL MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
Figure 21. 1876 Thompson & West Atlas of Santa Clara County. Figure 22. 1889 Official Map of Santa Clara County.

Figure 23. A portion of Santa Clara County Recorded Map (Book K, Page 27), June 3, 1899, “Map of Subdivision of Lands formerly owned by Mrs. M. A. Kennedy, by her conveyed to her children W. A. Kennedy, J. E. Kennedy, and Mary F. Duncan.”

7.d
Packet Pg. 277
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __ Emile and May Giles Fritz House ______________________________________________________________________ Page __21___ of _23_

HISTORICAL MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
Figure 24. Sunnyside Avenue, as shown on portion of Page 6, Campbell Sanborn map, July 1920. Subject property highlighted in red; M. A.

Kennedy house and outbuildings highlighted in green (present site of Campbell Bible Church; Structure of Merit properties highlighted in blue. Highlighted in yellow are houses built before 1920, retaining historic integrity to their build date, and not on Campbell’s Historic Resources Inventory.

Figure 25. 67 Sunnyside Avenue on the three available Sanborn maps for the City of Campbell.

7.d
Packet Pg. 278
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __ Emile and May Giles Fritz House ______________________________________________________________________ Page __22___ of _23_

SUNNYSIDE AVENUE MAPS AND TABLES
Figure 26. Sunnyside Avenue on current Assessors’ Parcel Map Book 412, Page 4.

Table 1. Sunnyside Avenue Post–World War II Building Chronology Date Sunnyside Tract Street Address(es) SCC Recorded Maps Notes Block Lots Book Page
1949 3 6 and 7 55 and 67–71 None None Build new SFR on westerly 45 feet Lot 6; convert SFR to
triplex
1969 3 8 93 None None Demo SFR, build duplex
1977 2 17 and
18 208 and 214 404 43 Split double lot, demo SFR,
build two four-plexes
1986 2 11 146 and 148 508 41 Split lot, demo SFR, build two townhouses
1996 3 3 and 4 33, 35, 37, 39 672 16 Split double lot, demo SFR, build four SFRs
1999 2 16 202 and 206 699 19 Split lot, demo SFR, build two SFRs
2000 3 9 105 and 107 711 51 Split lot, demo SFR, build
two SFRs
2003 2 12 154 and 158 753 7 Split lot, build new SFR
behind Structure of Merit
2004 2 10 128 and 132 753 30 Split lot, build new SFR
behind Structure of Merit

7.d
Packet Pg. 279
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission) DPR 523L (9/2013)
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Tr inomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: __ Emile and May Giles Fritz House ______________________________________________________________________ Page __23___ of _23_

Date Sunnyside Tract Street Address(es) SCC Recorded Maps Notes Block Lots Book Page
2006 1 15 and
16 68, 72, 76, 80 798 21 Split double lot, demo
Structure of Merit, build four
SFRs
2007 3 10 115 and 117 834 28 Split lot, demo SFR in 2007, build two SFRs in 2008 and
2014
2014 2 18 226 None None Demo SFR, build new SFR
2015 2 15 190 and 196 845 35 Split lot, build new SFR
behind remodeled 1942 SFR
2021 3 16 189 None None Demo SFR, build new SFR
2023
(proposed)
1 13 and
14 44 and 56 Proposed Proposed Split double lot, demo two SFRs, build six SFRs
Ta
ble 2. Properties on Sunnyside Avenue Designated as Structures of Merit in 1984 Sunnyside Avenue Address Name Status
67 Emil and May Giles Fritz House Still on HRI
68 ?? Demolished in 2005; removed from
HRI in 2018
120 None Still on HRI
131 Barbano/Matt & Gose Tusup House Still on HRI
132 Tony Bargis House? Still on HRI; lot split in 2004, new SFR built in rear lot
154 None Still on HRI; lot split in 2003, new
SFR built in rear lot
188 ?? Too greatly remodeled between
1992 and 2008 to retain its historic
integrity; removed from HRI in
2018
211 None Still on HRI

7.d
Packet Pg. 280
Attachment: M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation (Historic Rescission)

7.e
Packet Pg. 281
Attachment: 1977 Historic Resource Inventory Survey (Historic Rescission)

7.e
Packet Pg. 282
Attachment: 1977 Historic Resource Inventory Survey (Historic Rescission)

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information

Page 1 of 2 ends

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 67-71 Sunnyside 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., as appropriate) APN: 412-04-045

*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)

One and a half story wood frame construction house, with shiplap wood exterior siding. Main body of house is elevated via a raised open porch, supported by two wood spindle supports. A ground level apartment is underneath. Hipped roof is composition shingle, with front dormer containing a louvered center-pointed vent. Eaves are plain boxed cornice, with rafter ends enclosed. Windows are flat rectangular double -hung sash, with semi-molded trim and continuous lugsills. Front entry door is segmental in shape, with plain arched trim, screened on either side.

*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, 07/25/07

*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source:  Historic
 Prehistoric
 Both
Estimated,_1900

*P7. Owner and Address:

*P8. Recorded by: (Name,
affiliation, and address)
Peggy Coats
Campbell Museum
51 N. Central

*P9. Date Recorded: 5/1986

*P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
Inventory Update

*P11. Report Citation: (Cite
survey report and other
sources, or enter "none.")
Survey 1977-78

*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.)

7.f
Packet Pg. 283
Attachment: 1986 DPR Form (Historic Rescission)

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information

*NRHP Status Code

Page 2 of 2 ends

B1. Historic Name:

B2. Common Name:

B3. Original Use: Residence B4. Present Use: Residence *B5. Architectural Style: Queen Anne Cottage
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations)

Estimated to be built, 1900. Converted into three living areas.

*B7. Moved?  No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown
*B10. Significance: Theme Architecture 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.)

This typical example of a Queen Anne Cottage was constructed circa 1900, and owned by Emil and May Giles Fritz. Emil Fritz was related to the Kennedy family, significant shareholders in the Campbell Fruit Growers Union. The property originally had a well in the yard through which water was piped to adjoining neighbors.

B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes)

*B12. References:

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.)

7.f
Packet Pg. 284
Attachment: 1986 DPR Form (Historic Rescission)

7.g
Packet Pg. 285
Attachment: Excerpt from City Council Resolution No. 6793 (Historic Rescission)

7.g
Packet Pg. 286
Attachment: Excerpt from City Council Resolution No. 6793 (Historic Rescission) Item No. 2

CITY OF CAMPBELL ∙ HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD
Staff Report ∙ May 22, 2024
PLN-2023-170
Glenn Kinsey
Public Hearing to consider the request of Glenn Kinsey to remove a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) commonly known as the Emile and May Fritz House, on property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue. The application under consideration includes a Historic Recission. File No.: PLN - 2023-170

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Historic Preservation Board take the following action:

1. Adopt a Resolution (reference Attachment 1), recommending that the City Council remove 67 Sunnyside Avenue from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI).

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
As discussed, below, if the Historic Preservation Board accepts the conclusions of the City's historic consultant, the action to remove the subject property from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) may be deemed Exempt under Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines in that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility for the action to have a significant effect on the environment, because the structure does not constitute an "historic resource" under CEQA.

BACKGROUND
Project Site: The 8,400 square-foot project site is located along Sunnyside Avene, between South Winchester Boulevard and South First Street, as shown on the aerial map, below. There is an existing public alleyway that provides access between South Winchester Boulevard and South First Street. The property is generally surrounded by low-medium density residential uses to the south, east, and west, with single-family residential uses to the north, as seen in the aerial map below.

7.h
Packet Pg. 287
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of May 22, 2024 Page 2 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue

1 Aerial Map

Proposal: This application requests the removal of the property from its current designation on the City’s Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) as a structure of merit. As detailed in the attached Written Request (reference Attachment 2 – Written Request), the applicant seeks a review of the property’s classification as a historic resource and raises concerns about the property being listed without the owner's prior consent.

2 Subject property. Front elevation, two angles

Project Background: The applicant submitted a request to remove the subject building from the City’s Historic Resource Inventory accompanied by an Historic Resource Evaluation (reference Attachment 3 – Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. Historic Resource Evaluation), prepared by Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. on October 4, 2023.

Subsequently staff procured the services of the historic consultant, Mark Sandoval, to perform an independent peer review and analysis of the property (reference Attachment 4 – M. Sandoval

7.h
Packet Pg. 288
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of May 22, 2024 Page 3 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation) that included an evaluation of the City’s local criteria for rescinding a Structure of Merit. This staff report will reference both evaluations.

Designation: Between 1977 and 1978, the City of Campbell conducted a citywide historical resource survey to determine the number of potentially historic resources within the jurisdiction.

The City was surveyed using the recently adopted State Guidelines issued by the Office of Historic Preservation in response to the passing of Section 65303 of Government Code which enabled local governments to integrate historic preservation into their general plans. The City Council at that time created an ad-hoc subcommittee comprised of a panel of architectural and historic advisors to review the 467 properties flagged for historic importance from the survey. 67 Sunnyside Avenue was flagged during that survey as identified on the attached survey sheet from 1977 (reference Attachment 5 – 1977 Historic Resource Inventory Survey).

3 Photo from the 1979 Survey
As researched in the Sandoval evaluation, this property's historical roots trace back to its original land grant awarded to Benjamin Casey in 1870, marking it a significant area of development of the Santa Clara Valley, especially in shaping the early development patterns of Campbell. Acquired by the Kennedy family in 1881, who relocated here with their children to establish a farm, the property became pivotal for the community. The subject property was later created through a subdivision of this farm symbolizing the transformation of the area as large farms began to be subdivided, fostering population growth, as described in the Historical Overview and Context Statements (1996), which
underscore the transformation due to subdivision of large properties like this.

In 1979, following the survey, the City adopted its first Historic Preservation Ordinance, establishing criteria and procedures for designating a historic resource. In 1984, based on recommendations from the Historic Preservation Board, the City Council adopted by Resolution No. 6793 a master list of historic properties known as the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI), totaling 127 properties, within

7.h
Packet Pg. 289
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of May 22, 2024 Page 4 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
the City. 67 Sunnyside Avenue was included in the HRI at this time, acknowledging its role in the area's historical and cultural fabric. This property was subsequently recorded on the Parks and Recreation Form in 1986 (reference Attachment 6 – 1986 DPR Form) as an "historic inventory property," where the property has remained without change. Specifically, as noted on the DPR Form and the 1977 Survey Sheet, the property was included on the HRI for its architectural style, which was noted as Queen Anne Cottage, and the historic significance of the builder’s relationship with the Kennedy family.

The criteria for designation remained largely unchanged until it was revised in the 2018 update. This new approach emphasizes the overall historical and cultural contributions of resources, their potential to offer insights into history or prehistory, and their artistic and architectural uniqueness.

Prior to the 1984 creation of the HRI, the City Council directed staff to notify the owners of the 127 properties eligible for the HRI. The original mailing list, which demonstrates that the property owners of 67 Sunnyside were included in this noticing effort is attached along with the draft notice letter as an excerpt from Resolution No. 6793 (
reference Attachment 7 – Excerpt from City
Council Resolution No. 6793).1

The updated Historic Preservation Ordinance, however, does not require retroactive authorization for properties currently listed on the HRI.

7.h
Packet Pg. 290
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of May 22, 2024 Page 5 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue

5 Non-original front porch

The property, designated in 1984, has since undergone extensive modifications. The front porch was remodeled to include vinyl casement windows with small, fixed, triangular transom windows next to the replacement door, which together fill the space below the archway— previously a screened corridor to the front entrance, as noted in the 1979 survey. This alteration resulted in a shallower porch, now clad in vinyl siding, as seen in the photo below.

Significant interior changes further obscure the intrinsic form of the house.

7.h
Packet Pg. 291
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of May 22, 2024 Page 6 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
Historic Significance: The house was constructed during a period when the city was experiencing rapid expansion, which prompted a preference for quicker, simpler architectural designs, often vernacular in character. As outlined in the City’s Statement, the era was marked by the emergence of "simplified versions" of popular architectural styles. This particular house was designed in the Folk Victorian style, a more rudimentary offshoot of the Queen Anne Cottage style . The Queen Anne Cottage style holds significance in Campbell, as outlined in the City’s Historic Design Guidelines for Residential Buildings.

The property, as described in the evaluation prepared by M. Sandoval Architects, exhibits typical features of the Folk Victorian style such as simple wood siding, a low -pitched pyramid roof, and plain window treatments, all of which underscore the architectural theme of "Architecture and Shelter" highlighted in the Statement.

Due to its age and location, the house garnered attention in the 1979 survey and was subsequently added to the Historical Register. The significance is not only architectural but also cultural, capturing a snapshot of a city transitioning from an orchard-based economy to a more diversified urban area. The Sandoval evaluation detailed the property’s evolution over the years, noting that many original architectural features have been altered or removed, as catalogued in the table below.

Small, triangular transom windows
adjacent to the new door
No

7.h
Packet Pg. 292
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of May 22, 2024 Page 7 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
public hearings. Further, as specified by CMC Section 21.33.060.D, rescission of a structure of merit shall be by resolution of the City Council, based upon substantial evidence and findings of fact in the record that the resource no longer has historic value with respect to the designation criteria identified in the Historic Preservation Ordinance.

However, the property would still be subject to all other applicable regulations, including but not limited to the Campbell Municipal Code and the California Building Code.

Findings for Decision: A
s specified by CMC Sec. 21.33.060.D, 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." The historic designation criteria are as follows:
a. The proposed resource is associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history or cultural heritage;

No. This property has not been the site of any significant historical events. However, when considered within the broader context of Sunnyside Avenue as a district, the house exemplifies the early residential life in what is now Campbell, supporting the 'Architecture and Shelter' theme. This assertion is grounded in the Statement and Sandoval evaluation which highlight the property’s embodiment of typical early 20th- century residential designs in the region. Furthermore, the property’s architectural style, particularly its representation of the Queen Anne Cottage style, aligns with the architectural transformations noted during Campbell’s horticultural boom, as detailed in the historical records and Sandborn maps provided in the Sandoval evaluation. Such architectural and community development patterns are indicative of the broader architectural evolution of the area, corroborated by findings from Garavaglia evaluation.

While the house reflects the early residential patterns near present-day Downtown Campbell, it does not meet the criteria for historical designation based on specific events.

Historical significance is often tied to locations associated with pivotal events, significant societal changes, or notable individuals. Absent such connections, the property does not qualify as a historical landmark, despite its representation of the architectural and historical context of its time.

b. The proposed resource is associated with the lives of persons important to our history;

Despite her long-term residence, archival searches and local historical accounts researched and described in the Garavaglia evaluation do not highlight any significant contributions by Mrs. Fritz to Campbell's social, cultural, or political history.

While the property's association with R. W. Kennedy was deemed significant in 1984,

7.h
Packet Pg. 293
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of May 22, 2024 Page 8 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
further research from the Sandoval evaluation reveals that Emile and May Giles Fritz were “only related through marriage” and were “not significant” in Campbell's history. In contrast, other properties in the Campbell Historic Resources Inventory have closer and more meaningful connections to the Kennedy family, further undermining the historical importance of this property. Similarly, her husband, Emile Fritz, is not noted in significant historical accounts, indicating his minimal impact on the community’s historical narrative. For these reasons, none of the subsequent owners or tenants have been significant figures in the Campbell community either.

c. The proposed resource yields, or has the potential to yield, information important to our prehistory or history;

No. Although the Sunnyside Avenue district reflects a typical Folk Victorian architectural style and the fits into the historic context of its era, this particular house lacks unique attributes or significant associations that would distinguish it as a critical resource for understanding broader historical themes or developments. The lack of distinguishing historical features or connections suggests that the property does not meet the criteria for a historical significance designation under current evaluation standards.

d. The proposed resource embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction;

Further compounding this assessment, as outlined in the National Park Service’s Preservation Brief 16: The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors ,
the extent of replacements—whether with original or substitute materials— have severely compromised the building's historic integrity. This property has undergone numerous replacements as described above, which dilute its original architectural expression and historical context.

7.h
Packet Pg. 294
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of May 22, 2024 Page 9 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
e. The proposed resource represents the work of a notable architect, designer, engineer, or builder; or

No. Historical evaluations and architectural assessments provide no evidence that Emile Fritz, the owner and builder, qualifies as a key historical figure within Campbell's heritage. Despite his activity during a significant period in Campbell's history, Fritz's contributions lack the substantial impact necessary to classify him among the notable architects, designers, engineers, or builders pivotal to Campbell’s development.

The Sandoval evaluation researched local historical records and confirmed that Fritz’s architectural and cultural contributions do not meet the threshold of lasting legacy.

Significant architectural influence requires innovations or stylistic advancements that shape urban development, criteria Fritz’s work does not satisfy.

f. The proposed resource possesses significant artistic value or materially benefits the historic character of the neighborhood, community, or city.

Public Comment: No public comment has been received on this application.

Attachments:

1. Draft Resolution

2. Written Request

3. Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation

4. M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation

5. 1977 Historic Resource Inventory Survey

6. 1986 DPR Form

7. Excerpt from City Council Resolution No. 6793

7.h
Packet Pg. 295
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of May 22, 2024 Page 10 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue

Prepared by:

Larissa Lomen, Assistant Planner

Reviewed by:

Daniel Fama, Senior Planner

Approved by:

Rob Eastwood, Community Development Director

7.h
Packet Pg. 296
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission)

HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, May 22, 2024, 2024 I 5:00pm
Doetsch Room, City Hall

CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Historic Preservation Board meeting of May 22, 2024 was called to order at 5:0 0 pm by Chair Walter, and the following proceedings were had to wit.

ROLL CALL

Staff Members Present:

Daniel Fama, Senior Planner
Larissa Lomen Assistant Planner
Ken Ramirez, Administrative Analyst

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. Approval of Minutes of April 22, 2024 (Roll Call Vote) Meeting Minutes, 4/22/2024 (Regular Meeting)

Board Member Walter, Blake, and Foulkes approved. Board member Moore and Zhang abstained

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for individuals wishing to address the Board on matters of community concern 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.

HPB Members Present:

Todd Walter, Chair
Susan Blake, Vice Chair
Michael Foulkes, Board Member
Bill Zhang, Board Member
Laura Moore, Board Member

HPB Members Absent:

7.i
Packet Pg. 297
Attachment: HPB Minutes 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Campbell Historic Preservation Board Meeting Minutes – May 22, 2024 Page 2

BOARD/STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
Board Members and/or staff may make announcements on matters related to historic preservation and promotion.

Environmental Program Specialist will be inviting a representative from Historic Preservation Board to participate on an Advisory Committee.

PUBLIC HEARING

2. PLN-2023-2 - 126 N. Second Street - Administrative Planned Development Permit & Tier 1 Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Resolution/Roll Call Vote) Public Hearing to consider the request of Hammerschmidt Construction on behalf of Brian Brennan to allow construction of an approximately 886 square-foot addition to the rear of an existing single -family residence listed as a Structure of Merit on the Historic Resource Inventory, commonly known as the Nona and Dan Clark House, on property located at 126 N. Second Street. The applications under consideration include an Administrative Planned Development Permit and a Tier 1 Historic Resource Alteration Permit . File No.: PLN-2023-

2. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA.

Project Planner: Larissa Lomen, Assistant Planner
Recommended Action: That the Historic Preservation Board continue the public hearing to a date certain of May 22, 2024.

➢ Staff Report

Board Member Blake motioned, seconded by Board Member Moore, to continue I tem 2 to the Historic Preservation Board meeting of June 24, 2024.

3. PLN-2023-67 – 67 Sunnyside Avenue – Historic Recission (Resolution/Roll Call Vote) Public Hearing to consider the request of Glenn Kinsey to remove a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) commonly known as the Emile and May Fritz House, on property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue. The application under consideration includes a Historic Recission . File No.: PLN -2023-170. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Project Planner: Larissa Lomen, Assistant Planner
Recommended Action : That the Historic Preservation Board adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve a Historic Recission.

Assistant Planner Larissa Lomen presented staff report Hearing to consider the request of Glenn Kinsey to remove a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) commonly known as the Emile and May Fritz House, on property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue.

7.i
Packet Pg. 298
Attachment: HPB Minutes 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Campbell Historic Preservation Board Meeting Minutes – May 22, 2024 Page 3

Board members asked if the applicant would consider entering into a Mills Act Contract as an alternative to this recission request.

Board Members were informed that the applicant received information about the Mills Act program. Although many changes have been made over time to the property, the city does not have any records of building permit applications.

Chair Walter opened public hearing.

Owner spoke and stated that he was surprised that the property was listed on the Historic Resource Inventory given the condition of the home. Plans to continue living on the property, and is not seeking the recission as an opportunity to redevelop the site

Board Members asked what changes had been done to the property since the applicant’s ownership period (1995 to date).

Owner informed the Board Members that he added screen doors to the front of the home during his ownership of the home and made additional minor changes that constitute regular upkeep and maintenance such as replacing spindles, doors, and updating window treatments.

Board Members stated that they believe that the historic integrity of the home is not altered simply by the change or addition of the home. Would like to know more about how the architect consultant reached the findings presented in the report. Specifically, Board member Moore asked about the alterations to the home conducted outside the period of significance.

Assistant Planner Lomen stated that the period of significance was from 1885 – 1910, and provided that the addition/alteration of the front porch, which was considered a major change, dated back to the 1920s, outside this period.

Board Member Foulkes motioned, seconded by Board Member Moore, to continue the public hearing to the Historic Preservation Board meeting of June 24, 2024. Board Member Blake was opposed to continuing the item. Board Members would like to receive more information from the architect consultant that conducted the Historic evaluation of the property.

STUDY SESSION

4. PLN-2023-2 - 126 N. Second Street – Study Session
Study Session to consider three development options for a proposed rear addition to a Structure of Merit on the Historic Resource Inventory, commonly known as the Nona and Dan Clark House, on property located at 126 N. Second Street. File No.: PLN-2023-2.

Project Planner: Larissa Lomen, Assistant Planner

7.i
Packet Pg. 299
Attachment: HPB Minutes 05-22-24 (Historic Rescission) Item No. 2

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Historic Preservation Board take the following action:

1. Adopt a Resolution (reference Attachment 1), recommending that the City Council remove 67 Sunnyside Avenue from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI).

7.j
Packet Pg. 300
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 2 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue

1 Aerial Map

2 Subject property. Front elevation, two angles

Subsequently staff procured the services of the historic consultant, Mark Sandoval, to perform an independent peer review and analysis of the property (reference Attachment 4 – M. Sandoval

7.j
Packet Pg. 301
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 3 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation) that included an evaluation of the City’s local criteria for rescinding a Structure of Merit. This staff report will reference both evaluations.

Designation: Between 1977 and 1978, the City of Campbell conducted a citywide historical resource survey to determine the number of potentially historic resources within the jurisdiction.

3 Photo from the 1979 Survey
As researched in the Sandoval evaluation, this property's historical roots trace back to its original land grant awarded to Benjamin Casey in 1870, marking it a significant area of development of the Santa Clara Valley, especially in shaping the early development patterns of Campbell. Acquired by the Kennedy family in 1881, who relocated here with their children to establish a farm, the property became pivotal for the community. The subject property was later created through a subdivision of this farm symbolizing the transformation of the area as large farms began to be subdivided, fostering population growth, as described in the Historical Overview and Context Statements (1996), which
underscore the transformation due to subdivision of large properties like this.

7.j
Packet Pg. 302
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 4 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
the City. 67 Sunnyside Avenue was included in the HRI at this time, acknowledging its role in the area's historical and cultural fabric. This property was subsequently recorded on the Parks and Recreation Form in 1986 (reference Attachment 6 – 1986 DPR Form) as an "historic inventory property," where the property has remained without change. Specifically, as noted on the DPR Form and the 1977 Survey Sheet, the property was included on the HRI for its architectural style, which was noted as Queen Anne Cottage, and the historic significance of the builder’s relationship with the Kennedy family.

The updated Historic Preservation Ordinance, however, does not require retroactive authorization for properties currently listed on the HRI.

7.j
Packet Pg. 303
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 5 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue

5 Non-original front porch

Significant interior changes further obscure the intrinsic form of the house.

7.j
Packet Pg. 304
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 6 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
Historic Significance: The house was constructed during a period when the city was experiencing rapid expansion, which prompted a preference for quicker, simpler architectural designs, often vernacular in character. As outlined in the City’s Statement, the era was marked by the emergence of "simplified versions" of popular architectural styles. This particular house was designed in the Folk Victorian style, a more rudimentary offshoot of the Queen Anne Cottage style . The Queen Anne Cottage style holds significance in Campbell, as outlined in the City’s Historic Design Guidelines for Residential Buildings.

The property, as described in the evaluation prepared by M. Sandoval Architects, exhibits typical features of the Folk Victorian style such as simple wood siding, a low -pitched pyramid roof, and plain window treatments, all of which underscore the architectural theme of "Architecture and Shelter" highlighted in the Statement.

Due to its age and location, the house garnered attention in the 1979 survey and was subsequently added to the Historical Register. The significance is not only architectural but also cultural, capturing a snapshot of a city transitioning from an orchard-based economy to a more diversified urban area. The Sandoval evaluation detailed the property’s evolution over the years, noting that many original architectural features have been altered or removed, as catalogued in the table below.

Small, triangular transom windows
adjacent to the new door
No

7.j
Packet Pg. 305
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 7 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
public hearings. Further, as specified by CMC Section 21.33.060.D, rescission of a structure of merit shall be by resolution of the City Council, based upon substantial evidence and findings of fact in the record that the resource no longer has historic value with respect to the designation criteria identified in the Historic Preservation Ordinance.

However, the property would still be subject to all other applicable regulations, including but not limited to the Campbell Municipal Code and the California Building Code.

While the house reflects the early residential patterns near present-day Downtown Campbell, it does not meet the criteria for historical designation based on specific events.

b. The proposed resource is associated with the lives of persons important to our history;

While the property's association with R. W. Kennedy was deemed significant in 1984,

7.j
Packet Pg. 306
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 8 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
further research from the Sandoval evaluation reveals that Emile and May Giles Fritz were “only related through marriage” and were “not significant” in Campbell's history. In contrast, other properties in the Campbell Historic Resources Inventory have closer and more meaningful connections to the Kennedy family, further undermining the historical importance of this property. Similarly, her husband, Emile Fritz, is not noted in significant historical accounts, indicating his minimal impact on the community’s historical narrative. For these reasons, none of the subsequent owners or tenants have been significant figures in the Campbell community either.

c. The proposed resource yields, or has the potential to yield, information important to our prehistory or history;

d. The proposed resource embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction;

Further compounding this assessment, as outlined in the National Park Service’s Preservation Brief 16: The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors ,
the extent of replacements—whether with original or substitute materials— have severely compromised the building's historic integrity. This property has undergone numerous replacements as described above, which dilute its original architectural expression and historical context.

7.j
Packet Pg. 307
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 9 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
e. The proposed resource represents the work of a notable architect, designer, engineer, or builder; or

No. Historical evaluations and architectural assessments provide no evidence that Emile Fritz, the owner and builder, qualifies as a key historical figure within Campbell's heritage. Despite his activity during a significant period in Campbell's history, Fritz's contributions lack the substantial impact necessary to classify him among the notable architects, designers, engineers, or builders pivotal to Campbell’s development.

The Sandoval evaluation researched local historical records and confirmed that Fritz’s architectural and cultural contributions do not meet the threshold of lasting legacy.

Significant architectural influence requires innovations or stylistic advancements that shape urban development, criteria Fritz’s work does not satisfy.

f. The proposed resource possesses significant artistic value or materially benefits the historic character of the neighborhood, community, or city.

Historic Preservation Board Continuance : This item was continued from the May 22, 2024, Historic Preservation Board Meeting as members of the Board had additional inquiries for the consultant. The Consultant provided responses to the Board’s inquires below:

Historical Integrity and Photographic Evidence Pre-1995 Board members inquired about the historical integrity of the property, particularly through analysis of photographs taken before 1995. They raised concerns about visible changes over the years and questioned the property's continued inclusion on the list. The historian acknowledged the limitations in the quality of early photographs but noted that the primary street -facing facade has remained largely unchanged. Despite this, the property does not satisfy key criteria under Section

21.33.060 of the Municipal Code for designation as a Structure of Merit, such as association with significant historical events, persons, or architectural styles, nor does it contribute notably to the community's historical character. The historian speculated that the property's original inclusion in 1984 might have been due to a different evaluation methodology and limited historical research at the time.

7.j
Packet Pg. 308
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 10 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue
Neighborhood Cohesion and Architectural Distinctiveness Further inquiries by the B oard addressed whether the property distinctly contributes to its neighborhood's design aesthetic, and if this perception would have been the same in 1984. The historian illustrated that significant changes in the neighborhood over the past four decades — including the replacement of original homes and reduction of lot sizes —have eroded the area's historical cohesion. These developments make it difficult to argue that the property enhances the neighborhood's aesthetic. The historian pointed out that previous alte rations had already compromised the historical integrity of the building's primary facade, diminishing its connection to the neighborhood's original architectural and historical context.

Alterations in the Last 30 Years
The Board expressed concerns about major alterations made to the property in the past thirty years.

Contrary to the owner’s claim that only the front door was changed, the historian's assessment revealed several modifications, including the replacement of all original wood sash windows with aluminum ones, changes to porch guard railings, the addition of a rear deck, and the construction of a two -car garage. Interior renovations and repositioned windows also contributed to the property's transformation. The historian clarified that these significant alterations, mostly made by previous owners, have primarily diminished the property’s historical value.

Public Comment: No public comment has been received on this application.

Attachments:

1. Draft Resolution

2. Written Request

3. Garavaglia Architecture, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation

4. M. Sandoval Architects, Inc, Historic Resource Evaluation

5. 1977 Historic Resource Inventory Survey

6. 1986 DPR Form

7. Excerpt from City Council Resolution No. 6793

Prepared by:

Larissa Lomen, Assistant Planner

Reviewed by:

Daniel Fama, Senior Planner

7.j
Packet Pg. 309
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission) Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of June 26, 2024 Page 11 of 10 PLN-2023-170~ 67 Sunnyside Avenue

Approved by:

Rob Eastwood, Community Development Director

7.j
Packet Pg. 310
Attachment: Staff Report HPB 06-24-24 (Historic Rescission)

HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, June 26, 2024, 2024 I 5:00pm
Doetsch Room, City Hall

CALL TO ORDER
The Regular Historic Preservation Board meeting of June 26, 2024 was called to order at 5:0 0 pm by Acting Chair Blake, and the following proceedings were had to wit.

ROLL CALL
Staff Members Present:

Daniel Fama, Senior Planner
Larissa Lomen Assistant Planner
Ken Ramirez, Administrative Analyst

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. Approval of Minutes of May 22, 2024 (Roll Call Vote) Meeting Minutes, 5/22/2024 (Regular Meeting)
Board member , Blake, and Foulkes approved. Board member Moore and Zhang abstained. Board member Walter was absent.

Correction of meeting minutes to note continuation of item to June 26, 2024

HPB Members Present:

Susan Blake, Acting Chair
Michael Foulkes, Board Member
Laura Moore, Board Member
HPB Members Absent:

Todd Walter, Chair
Bill Zhang, Board Member

7.k
Packet Pg. 311
Attachment: HPB Minutes 06-26-24 (Historic Rescission) Campbell Historic Preservation Board Meeting Minutes – June 26, 2024 Page 2

BOARD/STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
Senior Planner Fama informed the Historic Preservation Board that the City’s Environmental Program Specialist will be circulating a survey for input and feedback.

Applicant for Item 3 asked that the item be discussed first before Item 2

PUBLIC HEARING

3. PLN-2023-67 – 67 Sunnyside Avenue – Historic Recission (Resolution/Roll Call Vote) Continued Public Hearing to consider the request of Glenn Kinsey to remove a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) commonly known as the Emile and May Fritz House, on property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue . The application under consideration includes a Historic Recission. File No.: PLN-2023-170. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Project Planner: Larissa Lomen, Assistant Planner
Recommended Action : That the Historic Preservation Board adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve a Historic Recission.

Historic Consultant Responded with the following:

7.k
Packet Pg. 312
Attachment: HPB Minutes 06-26-24 (Historic Rescission) Campbell Historic Preservation Board Meeting Minutes – June 26, 2024 Page 3

Assistant Planner Lomen presented the findings from both reports , summary presented stated that u pon first glance home met criteria but after further review many changes which happened gradually, further diminished the historic value.

Historic Consultant Mark Sandoval stated that the issue at hand is in regards to the significant modifications done to the front of the house in the 1920s and 1940s.

Modifications done to the crawlspace below intensified the changes. Report shows that front door was previously an enclosed screen door that was modified to accommodate doors on the side. There is a door added to the parlor. In between there was a door that led to the main house. Modifications done to that area occurred prior to the 1940’s. Then modifications to the lower level where they excavated the crawl space where they created two apartments, added additional clutter and changes to the building. It is anticipated that all the changes that have been completed in the 1940s have totally erased the original architecture style and is now a collection of different alterations, imposed on a building.

Historic Consultant Mark Sandoval stated that the actual criteria at the time when the city conducted the review is not the same as today’s criteria.

Historic Consultant Mark Sandoval stated that while the changes were done at a certain period of time and they do tell a story , they do not have merit or did the changes bring more history. Looking for something that gives a connection to a person, place, and time that has historic value to the community. That is the problem that we are faced with.

Because the alterations were random and not done by a notable architect or they were just done for purely function of the family at the time, it doesn’t necessarily meet the criteria that the city has set or the municipal or of merit for the California registry. Just because changes were done that were old doesn’t make it necessarily historic

Board member Foulkes expressed that there is a concern to set a precedent, believes that it is important to be objective and fair. Attempting to differentiate this house from other homes in the registry that may attempt to make the same argument in the future. Wants to be fair to everyone on the registry. Important to preserve homes of different economic groups.

Historic Consultant Mark Sandoval stated that it is important to look at criteria that is necessary to have a building eligible for the municipal codes definition , as it follows the similar criteria that the national and California registry uses. The integrity of the structure is important . Without the integrity of the structure it is difficult to tell the story of the significance of the structure. The history of hodgepodge repairs diminishes the original style of the home because it is not cohesive with the style of the time.

Assistant Planner Lomen expressed that between changes and extenuating circumstances compounded with additional changes over time, report has come together to show that the house does not meet criteria to find the house as a structure of merit.

7.k
Packet Pg. 313
Attachment: HPB Minutes 06-26-24 (Historic Rescission) Campbell Historic Preservation Board Meeting Minutes – June 26, 2024 Page 4

Kurt Anderson, Anderson Architect, asked Historic Consultant how often the criteria changes. The Historic Consultant stated that changes occur seldomly as they are controlled by the National Park Service.

Historic Consultant Mark Sandoval found that criteria currently used by the City is not the same as the criteria that was used in the windshield survey. If the criteria that was used would’ve been the same as the national and state level, the property would not have been listed.

Motion: Upon motion by Board Member Moore, seconded by Board Member Foulkes , the Historic Preservation Board moved to come back to the Historic Preservation Board with a resolution to deny the applicant’s Historic rescission request. by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Foulkes, Moore
NOES: Blake
ABSENT: Walter, Zhang
ABSTAIN: None

2. PLN-2023-2 - 126 N. Second Street - Administrative Planned Development Permit & Tier 1 Historic Resource Alteration Permit (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)

Continued Public Hearing to consider the request of Hammerschmidt Construction on behalf of Brian Brennan to allow construction of an approximately 886 square-foot addition to the rear of an existing single-family residence listed as a Structure of Merit on the Historic Resource Inventory, commonly known as the Nona and Dan Clark House, on property located at 126 N. Second Street. The applications under consideration include an Administrative Planned Development Permit and a Tier 1 Historic Resource Alterat ion Permit. File No.: PLN -2023-2. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Project Planner: Larissa Lomen, Assistant Planner

Recommended Action : That the Historic Preservation Board adopt a resolution recommending that the Community Development Director approve an Administrative Planned Development Permit & Tier 1 Historic Resource Alteration Permit

Invoking the "rule of necessity" pursuant to FPPC regulation 18750, Acting Chair Blake and Board Member Moore stated on record their conflict of interest regarding the application, but that lacking a quorum otherwise, their participation was necessary for timely action to be taken.

Assistant Planner Lomen presented staff report to consider three development options for a proposed rear addition to a Structure of Merit on the Historic Resource Inventory,

7.k
Packet Pg. 314
Attachment: HPB Minutes 06-26-24 (Historic Rescission) RESOLUTION NO. 2024-04

BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION

BOARD OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL RECOMMENDING THAT THE

CITY COUNCIL DENY THE REQUEST OF GLENN KINSEY TO

REMOVE A STRUCTURE OF MERIT FROM THE HISTORIC

RESOURCE INVENTORY (HRI) COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE
EMILE AND MAY FRITZ HOUSE, ON PROPERTY LOCATED A T 67
SUNNYSIDE AVENUE. FILE NO.: PLN-2023-170
A
fter notification and public hearing, as specified by law and after presentation by the Community Development Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed.

T
he Historic Preservation Board finds as follows with regard to the recommended denial to rescind a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (PLN-2023-170):

1. T
he project site is an 8 ,400 square- foot project site is located along Sunnyside Avene, between South Winchester Boulevard and South First Street

2. T
he Project Site is zoned P-D ( Planned Development) as shown on the Campbell Zoning Map.

3. T
he Project Site is designated Low-Medium Density Residential (8-16 units/gr. Acre) as shown on the City of Campbell General Plan Land Use diagram.

4. T
he Subject Property is currently developed with a single -family residence in a Folk Victorian style constructed around 1900, commonly known as the Emile and May Fritz House. The building is one and a half stories tall, with the main floor situated above an excavated crawlspace. This crawlspace had been converted into two separate basement apartments (69 and 71 Sunnyside Avenue), but the current homeowner has since combined them to create a home office space. A detached garage was constructed in 1995 via Building Permit BLD 95-309.

5. T
he property at 67 Sunnyside Avenue was identified in a 1977 citywide historical resource survey and subsequently included in the City's Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) in 1984, following the City Council's approval of Resolution No. 6793, which established a master list of 127 historic properties.

6. A
s detailed in the DPR Form and the 1977 Survey, the property was listed on the HRI for its Queen Anne Cottage architectural style and the historical significance of the builder's connection to the Kennedy family.

7. T
he applicant submitted a request to remove the subject building from the City’s Historic Resource Inventory, supported by a Historic Resource Evaluation prepared by Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. on October 4, 2023. While the Garavaglia evaluation assessed the property's eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources, it did not address the City’s local criteria for rescinding a Structure of Merit as specified in CMC Section

7.l
Packet Pg. 315
Attachment: HPB Resolution No. 2024-04 (Historic Rescission) Historic Preservation Board Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 2 of 4 PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission

21.33.060.B.1. To address this oversight, the City enlisted its historic consultant Mark Sandoval to conduct an independent peer review and analysis, which included evaluating the City’s local criteria for rescinding a Structure of Merit.

8. The Sandoval evaluation identifies the property as featuring some of the typical elements of the Folk Victorian style, a simpler derivative of the Queen Anne Cottage style. These elements include simple wood siding, a low -pitched pyramid roof, and plain window treatments. The Queen Anne Cottage style is particularly significant in Campbell, as highlighted in the City’s
Historic Design Guidelines for Residential
Buildings.

9. Both historic evaluations detail the property’s evolution over the years, noting that many original architectural features have been altered or removed since the original construction and the 1984 historic designation. These changes include removal of original doors and windows, alterations to the original front porch and the addition of non-historic ornamental details, such as a louvre and spindles.

10. Although the house has experienced modifications since it was originally built, such as the alteration of the front porch during the 1920s, this change and others contribute to the building’s overall historical narrative. According to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, changes to a property can also acquire historic significance in their own right and should be retained and preserved. This principle underscores the importance of preserving the full historical narrative of a building, not just its original state.

4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.

11. The property at 67 Sunnyside Avenue retains many of its character -defining features that align with the Queen Anne Cottage style, as outlined in the City's Historic Design Guidelines. Despite some alterations, the primary aspects of the property remain intact such as the building shape, residential setting, roof shape, window openings, and overall massing, thus preserving its historical integrity in line with U.S.

Department of the Interior National Park Service Cultural Resources Preservation Brief 17 an d the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards , which states that the overall visual character of a historic building can be gleaned by looking at its distinguishing physical aspects without focusing on its details.

12. The house was constructed during a period when the city was experiencing rapid expansion, which prompted a preference for quicker, simpler architectural designs, often vernacular in character. As outlined in the City’s Historical Overview and
Context Statements ( 1996), the era was marked by the emergence of "simplified versions" of popular architectural styles. This particular house was designed in the Folk Victorian style, a more rudimentary derivative of the Queen Anne Cottage style.

The Queen Anne Cottage style holds significance in Campbell, as outlined in the City’s Historic Design Guidelines for Residential Buildings consistent with General Plan policies:

7.l
Packet Pg. 316
Attachment: HPB Resolution No. 2024-04 (Historic Rescission) Historic Preservation Board Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 3 of 4 PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission
Policy CD-1.1 Recognize that the city is composed of residential, industrial and commercial neighborhoods, each with its own individual character; and allow change consistent with reinforcing positive neighborhood values, while protecting the integrity of the city’s neighborhoods.

Policy COS-5.1 Protect significant historic resources and use these resources to promote a sense of place and history in Campbell through implementation of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, Historic Design Guidelines for Residential Buildings, the conservation and preservation of the city’s historical collection at the Campbell Museum, and other applicable codes, regulations, and area plans.

13. The property, as described in the evaluation prepared by M. Sandoval Architects, exhibits typical features of the Folk Victorian style such as simple wood siding, a low - pitched pyramid roof, and plain window treatments, all of which underscore the architectural theme of "Architecture and Shelter" highlighted in the Statement.

14. The City's "1987 From Homestead to Heritage – A Guide to Historic Preservation and Heritage Resources in Campbell" also highlights the role of the "scaled- down" version" of the Queen Anne Cottage in Campbell's history:

There was no set "plan' for the structure or it's exterior styling: often it simply developed according to the taste and space of it's owner. Not everyone could afford such an ostentatious display of wealth and whimsy, however, so a scaled- down version, the cottage, came into being for the benefit of the working man. Like its larger counterpart, the cottage is delightful in it's shape, surface detailing (often several different types of shingling were used, from fish- scale to chevrons) and individual expressions of creative flair. This style was very popular in Campbell, and throughout the valley, at the turn of the century.

15. As detailed in both evaluations, the Kennedy family played a notable role in the Campbell community from 1890 to 1935. This property is linked to Robert Kennedy’s sister-in-law, May Giles Fritz, who resided here for fifteen years. The property's association with the Kennedy family was deemed significant in 1984, as noted on the 1977 Survey and remains an important aspect of its historical value. And further supports the historic significance of the property consistent with Preservation Brief 17 which states that there are many other facets of an historic building besides its materials or construction or style that contribute to its historic qualities or significance.

Some of these qualities are feelings conveyed by the sense of time and place or in buildings associated with events or people.

16. The property continues to meet the criteria for maintaining its historic Structure of Merit status due to its architectural integrity, association with significant historical events, and its embodiment of a distinctive architectural style. The alterations made to the property do not significantly detract from its overall historical and architectural value, and retaining the property on the HRI further supports the following General Plan policies and actions:

Policy CD-1.6 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.

7.l
Packet Pg. 317
Attachment: HPB Resolution No. 2024-04 (Historic Rescission) Historic Preservation Board Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 4 of 4 PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission
Policy CD-1.7 Encourage adaptive reuse of and incorporation of the city’s historic buildings and structures for new development projects, when feasible.

Policy CD-2.1 Recognize, enhance, and preserve, where possible, natural features and ecosystems, and protect cultural and historic resources.

Policy COS-5.2 Evaluate the condition of historical buildings, the costs of rehabilitation, and the feasibility of preservation or conservation alternatives when considering the demolition or movement of historic structures; when possible, encourage the adaptive re-use of the historic structure.

17. Maintaining the property on the HRI is consistent with General Plan Goal COS -5, and its supporting polic ies and strategies, and with the intent and purpose of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, as specified in CMC Section 21.33.010.B (Purpose of Chapter).

Goal COS-5 Protect and enhance historic resources —including places, buildings, or landmarks with historic, architectural, cultural, and/or aesthetic significance— in order to preserve the city’s heritage for future generations.

18. While the building does not represent a high tier of architecture, it does honor and reflect the working class heritage of the City of Campbell, and ensures the preservation of diverse narratives that reflect the city’s economic and social growth, from the early days of wheat farming to the establishment of significant transportation routes like the South Pacific Coast Railroad, which facilitated agricultural commerce.

19. The property’s inclusion on the Historic Resource Inventory ensures the protection of its historical and architectural integrity, fulfilling the City's responsibility to preserve culturally and historically significant resources.

20. Pursuant to CMC Section 21.33.060.D.1 (Initiation), rescinding of the property's historic designation requires the City Council, upon independent recommendations of the Historic Preservation 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.

21. The rescission of a structure's historic designation from the Historic Resource Inventory exempts the property from the provisions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.33), including removing its eligibility for a future Mills Act contract.

Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Historic Preservation Board further finds and concludes that:

Historic Resource Recission Findings (CMC Sec. 21.33.060.D):

1. The proposed resource is associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history or cultural heritage;

2. The proposed resource is associated with the lives of persons important to our history;

7.l
Packet Pg. 318
Attachment: HPB Resolution No. 2024-04 (Historic Rescission) Historic Preservation Board Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 5 of 4 PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission

3. The proposed resource does yield, nor has the potential to yield, information important to our prehistory or history;

4. The proposed resource does embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction; Environmental Findings (CMC Sec. 21.38.050):

5. The action to deny the rescission request is Statutorily Exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 21080(b)(5).

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Historic Preservation Board recommends that the City Council deny the request to rescind the historic designation of a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) commonly known as the Emile and May Fritz house, on property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5
th day of August, 2024, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Members:

NOES: Members:

ABSENT: Members:

ABSTAIN: Members:

APPROVED:

Susan Blake, Acting Chair

ATTEST:

Daniel Fama, Secretary

7.l
Packet Pg. 319
Attachment: HPB Resolution No. 2024-04 (Historic Rescission) RESOLUTION NO. 4721

BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE

CITY OF CAMPBELL RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL

APPROVE THE REQUEST OF GLENN KINSEY TO REMOVE A

STRUCTURE OF MERIT FROM THE HISTORIC RESOURCE

INVENTORY (HRI) COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE EMILE AND MAY
FRITZ HOUSE, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 67 SUNNYSIDE
AVENUE. FILE NO.: PLN-2023-170

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 regard to the recommended approval to rescind a Structure of Merit from the Historic Resource Inventory (PLN-2023-170):

1. The project site is an 8,400 square- foot project site is located along Sunnyside Avene, between South Winchester Boulevard and South First Street

2. The Project Site is zoned P -D (Planned Development) as shown on the Campbell Zoning Map.

3. The Project Site is designated Low-Medium Density Residential (8-16 units/gr. Acre) as shown on the City of Campbell General Plan Land Use diagram.

7. The applicant submitted a request to remove the subject building from the City’s Historic Resource Inventory, supported by a Historic Resource Evaluation prepared by Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. on October 4, 2023. While the Garavaglia evaluation assessed the property's eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources, it did not address the City’s local criteria for rescinding a Structure of Merit as specified in CMC Section

7.m
Packet Pg. 320
Attachment: PC Resolution No. 4721 (Historic Rescission) Planning Commission No. 4721 Page 2 of 4
PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission

Subsequent owners and tenants also lack notable contributions to the community.

14. The property does not meet the criteria for maintaining its historic S tructure of Merit status due to significant alterations that have compromised its architectural integrity, lack of association with significant historical events or notable individuals, and absence of unique historical information or representation of notable architectural work. Consequently, its historical and architectural value has been significantly diminished.

7.m
Packet Pg. 321
Attachment: PC Resolution No. 4721 (Historic Rescission) Planning Commission No. 4721 Page 3 of 4
PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission

Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Planning Commission further finds and concludes that:

Historic Resource Recission Findings (CMC Sec. 21.33.060.D):

1. The proposed resource is not associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history or cultural heritage;

2. The proposed resource is not associated with the lives of persons important to our history;

3. The proposed resource does yield, nor has the potential to yield, information important to our prehistory or history;

4. The proposed resource does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction;

5. The proposed resource does not represents the work of a notable architect, designer, engineer, or builder; and
Environmental Findings (CMC Sec. 21.38.050):

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the request to rescind the historic designation of a Structure of Merit
from the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) commonly known as the Emile and May Fritz house, on property located at 67 Sunnyside Avenue.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27
th day of August 2024, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Members: Zisser, Kamkar, Buchbinder, Krey

7.m
Packet Pg. 322
Attachment: PC Resolution No. 4721 (Historic Rescission) Planning Commission No. 4721 Page 4 of 4
PLN-2023-170 – 67 Sunnyside Ave. ~ Historic Recission
NOES: Members:

ABSENT: Members: Ostrowski
ABSTAIN: Members: Majewski

APPROVED:

Alan Zisser, Chair

ATTEST:

Rob Eastwood, Secretary

7.m
Packet Pg. 323
Attachment: PC Resolution No. 4721 (Historic Rescission)

City
Council
Report

TITLE: Approval of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 City of Campbell Investment Policy Update (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the annual update to the City’s Investment Policy for FY 2024-25.

BACKGROUND

The Investment Policy establishes procedures and guidelines by which the City’s surplus funds can be managed in a prudent and fiscally sound manner. The policy encompasses those funds over which the City exercises fiscal control and prioritizes the objectives of public funds management as safety, liquidity and return, in that order and consistent with guidance provided by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). It also stipulates allowable and unallowable investment alternatives as well as establishes parameters for selecting broker/dealers and institutions with which the City may do business.

California Government Code Section 53646 (a) (2) recommends that on an annual basis, the City Investment Policy be submitted to its legislative body and any oversight committee for consideration at a public meeting. The Finance Sub -Committee is the oversight committee responsible for review of the Investment Policy.

DISCUSSION

The City’s Finance Sub -Committee met on September 9, 2024, to discuss and review the recommended Investment Policy for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 -25. The Investment Policy is updated annually to conform to California Government Code (CGC) Section 53600 et. seq. Any statutory revisions made during the previous calendar year that impact the City policy are incorporated as necessary and shown in the Redline (Attachment B ) and Clean ( Attachment C ) versions of the policy. In addition to statutory revisions, staff and the City’s new investment advisors (Chandler) are recommending several revisions below . All page numbers reference the Redline version:
• Header – Modified to September 17, 2024 throughout to reflect tentative Council review and approval date.

Item: 8
Category: NEW BUSINESS
Meeting Date: September 17, 2024
8 Packet Pg. 324
Annual Investment Policy Update FY 2024-25 Page 2 of 4

• Page 5 – Per best practices, added language regarding compliance with Political Reform Act, Fair Political Practices Commissions Regulations, and the City’s Conflict of Interest Policy.

• Page 6 – Updated the risk management language for Federal Agency Bonds; adding issuer limitations as well as callable limits.

• Page 6 – Per best practice and CGC, clarified that no more than 30% of the total portfolio may be invested in any single Agency/Government Sponsored Enterprise (GSE) issuer. And no more than 20% of the total portfolio may be invested in callable agency securities.

• Page 7 – Per best practice and CGC, added maximum maturity language of no more than 180 days for Eligible Bankers Acceptances.

• Page 7 – Per best practice and to reduce risk, lowered maximum percentage of total portfolio from 25% to 20% for Non-negotiable Time Certificates of Deposit.

• Page 7 – Per best practice and CGC, clarified that the maximum maturity on Certificates of Deposit may not exceed 5 years.

• Page 7 – To enhance investment flexibility and in compliance with CGC, added Negotiable Certificates of Deposit (NCDs) to allowable investments list.

• Page 8 – Per best practice and to reduce risk, lowered maximum percentage of total portfolio from 15% to 10% for Mutual Funds.

• Page 8 – Per best practice and to enhance investment flexibility, increased maximum percentage of total portfolio from 15% to 20% for Money Market Mutual Funds. It is not anticipated that this change will significantly increase risk in the City’s overall portfolio.

• Page 8 – Per best practice and to enhance investment flexibility, increased maximum percentage of total portfolio from 10% to 30% for Municipal and State Obligations. It is not anticipated that this change will significantly increase risk in the City’s overall portfolio.

• Page 8 – So as to be in alignment with Senate Bill (SB) 882, added clarifying language regarding Asset -Backed, Mortgage -Backed, Mortgage Pass -Through Securities, and Collateralized Mortgage Obligations.

• Page 9 – Removed note regarding maximum portfolio percentage for Money Market and Mutual Funds and moved detail those sections of the Investment on

Page 8 ends

Campbell City CouncilSeptember 17, 2024

Campbell City Council
September 17, 2024