Correspondence 2 — City Council and Authorities Concurrent, February 25, 2025

Leslie Xavier
Planning Manager
Community Development Department
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Re: PLN23-00148, APN 290-27-006
3111 Benton Street,
November 14, 2024
1091 Pomeroy Ave.

Santa Clara, California 95051
408 892-0621
AT&T telecommunication facility, Installation of 60 foot tall monotree.

Planning Commission Hearing; October 23, 2024 (past) & December 4, 2024 (pending) Dear Ms. Leslie Xavier,
Please find and consider our suggestions for alternative sites (map attached) for the installation of the telecommunications monotree facility proposed by AT&T at the 3111 Benton Street site. We believe our suggested locations, rather than the 3111 Benton Avenue site, are more compatible with the neighborhood, particularly neighborhood aesthetics, and will provide the signal coverage desired by AT&T.

Please forward our suggested alternatives to AT&T for their consideration and discussion prior to the next Planning Commission meeting he9ring on this project scheduled for December 4.

We consulted the AT&T coverage maps ("Existing Sites ... Coverage" and "Existing Sites+ ...

Coverage") provided by AT&T that were included in the attachments for Planning Commission meeting held on October 23. We used those maps to find compatible locations for the monotree in the dark purple and yellow colored areas on the "Existing Sites ... " map where indoor coverage is lacking or less reliable in our neighborhood.

The following are our suggested alternatives for the tower in the dark purple areas of the AT&T coverage map (areas of no coverage to date) that should provide equal or better coverage than the 3111 Benton site; these locations are indicated by e dots on the attached map):

1. Earl Carmichael Park, 3445 Benton Street, rear of park

2. Stratford School, 890 Pomeroy Avenue near school or rear parking lot (*Best Location*)

3. Curtis Field, 890 Pomeroy Avenue, field near Stratford School parking lot

4. Homesteaders 4-H Ranch, 3450 Brookdale Drive, parking lat

5. The Church of Jesus of Latter Day Saints, 875 Quince Avenue, rear parking lot

6. Church in Santa Clara, 3550 Benton Street, parking lot or field next door

7. Church of Christ of Santa Clara, 850 Pomeroy Avenue, north of parking lot, in soil area

8. Neighborhood Christian Center, 887 Pomeroy Avenue, parking lot or lawn in front The following alternatives for the tower are located in the yellow colored areas of the AT&T map (areas of less reliable coverage) that should provide enhanced coverage than the 3111 Benton site; these locations are indicated by yellow colored dots on the attached map:

1. Central Park, 909 Kiely Blvd.,especially the area near the baseball field (*Best Location*)

2. Pomeroy Elementary School, 1250 Pomeroy Avenue, north side of site or field in back

3. Kiely Plaza, 1052-1092 Kiely Blvd. southwest corner of intersection with Benton St.

4. Benton Shopping Center, 3565 Benton St., landscaped areas in front of the mall Please consider all the above sites for the installation of the telecommunications facility proposed by AT&T. We highly recommend the parking lot or field behind Stratford School, 890 Pomeroy Avenue, or Santa Clara Central Park, especially near the baseball field.

Thank you for considering our alternatives.

Sincerely, lE /' 11----:;::> ~ ~ LP 8d4--l 1i4-u_ ~ - fl 05 lr{ ~ las & Ritha anales Rossi
att: map of suggested alternative locations

_·L..
..... ~ ...
700 C v e rage
•
C-.2ml
·t·. ., .. r • .:,..,. .., •
., .
l,,qi j:\- •.;i,e,·
J_ ·.-.... ~- ~ .1·;.
'\1.!.T&t" ?~OP~!::TtJ.f.:\' - Ti:is ~nf orm~1t?.c n .:n!".strh.! tC5 cc ~.·kc:-rr:t:" ;.1: t)~~de secr ets ,::nd co:-::rncr-::~~: or fi::: .1::1 c1,:;;l frn·"'••· C-::·:::~r.:.'!~ I ~:1fr•~~;in..Jc Lt:::·:? P~,:,t-:2..::Ucn. p u:p cs\!'-O on~,} - !t ~~; cx·,!nr:t -'."t"':-"I i~dost:"'';' , .. --i ·,:-- t.:-:~? Fff•c,i, ,t- ~,r 1.)r:.,.-,~.,.t, .. ~ ..... -.:ijt- ~<~h:.:;i:,,n- l!i"'' 'i';.rf hi:C -11: . .::.L!,,"h.1~::i,~ · .... ~ .... 3 1c .... 1t.,'\t . .' ! ··:.s.:..v'10·1, . t ,_:..,-. ·dlo :t .... •fti•-.l .;t~'~ fli {..:,• ,.:r: '.Ct:A', ... ~ . :·.! .. '...! ··--;- ,J, .i.:; .. ~.i, .... ~, "'rf·;n . L e:•· --.:- l"'I ;:,:.r, ~- j ~ , 1·• (~.h'!,,,~s: C l u'.. ··.!: ... (" ·' t"" tiwt. ~- ... :.~'i·"'":' ?c::i·:i,•! ~~r r .~.'~'"~ '~a t .... h ~ _;,· .... ::r .~.r..,• ·0!'b .r-11r"!.tlt,t·nJl----1 •it~rr, ... i• ·;:J,•:r •
..._![·. ~VC"ol :f
l •.·
..... :-.. . . ~.. ,.,. .1
:_ l- ., I
•
•
Legend
i;:eR31:le Sr:?r:ice 1r.C!-:i::rs,1 c :.:tCcors
Rcb::i t;; lc Co-..e:~:,ge In Trar.:;:t
!r.C.Oor C~vcr.117,c- le:.;; Rr.llab:c
■ 2~~b!.--:- ceverufe O:.itcoor:.
lndco-:- Cc·: c~Jf,t ~:;:. Rc::Jb:c
e ~ istmg ~1ti:-
• Propo:;,; d ~-tC
Existing Sites L TE 700 Coverage
+

0.1 J!
. ....,., ··' w; ~
1 "'""•h•o,
0,2mi
"AT&T PROPRIETARY ·· This information constitutes confidential trade secrets and commercial or financial infOrJl!:~:11.11..i,,l\tll Critical Infrastructure Protection purposes onl)l. It is exe pt from disclos. r:~•n·t:1e,..tt.-e,.1o,.,.._ and ft, disclosur, is prohibited under l r1 s t ' 8 l
01 focal 1 .. w requiring disclosure of informat1 ~o
or other recording) or distributed to other$ not gre por, y , u , Executive Order 12600."
•
Legend
I Reliable Service Jndocrs/OUtdoors
Reliable eo~·erage In Transit
Indoor Coverage Less Reliable
I ~~ble Coverage Outdoors
Indoor Coverage Less Reliable
• Existing site
e Proposed site
To:

PMM
PC 10123124
RTC 24-987
Item 4
From:

Subject:

Date:

Attachments:

Plannino Public Comment
; Eric Crutchlow; Nancv Biagini; priya Cherukuru; Oian
RE: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed Installation") Monday, October 21, 2024 12:27:00 PM
imaoe001.png
imaoe003.ono
Thank you for your email, it has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.

ELIZABETH ELLIOTT I StaffAide ll
Community Development Department I Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue I Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.61,5.2450 Direct : 408.6t5.247 4
ffi$i'J:Hie*"
I
I
From: Leilani Shields
Sent: Friday, October 1.8,2024 5:l-8 PM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]>; Tiffany Vien <[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Nancy Biagini <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <[email protected]>; Lance Saleme <[email protected]>; Mario Bouza <[email protected]>;YashrajBhatnagar <YBhatnaga r@Sa ntaclaraca.gov>
Subject: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed tnstallation") Some people who received this message don't often get email from important
Learn whv this is
To: Santa Clara Planning Commission Board Members:

Re: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed lnstallation") Dear sir/Madam,
This letter is regarding the installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T on the premises of Santa Clara First Baptist Church at 3111 Benton Street.

Our neighborhood community hereby formally submits our letter with signatures opposing this plan prior to the meeting which is scheduled for Wednesday, October 23, 2024.

We are strongly opposed to the Proposed lnstallation as we believe this plan is not in the best interest of our community. Our response to the Proposed lnstallation is a big NO. l-. The "monotree" is actually a "wireless cell phone tower" or "cell phone base station." Its location is a mere 20-30 feet away from the backyard fence of the neighboring residential houses and is extremely close to the immediately surrounding residential area.

Meanwhile many municipalities, including in California, have strict requirements for erecting celltowers near residential areas. The following municipalities, districts, orzones have a MINIMUM of 500 feet setback requirement to 1,000 feet or more from residential properties andlor property line
Los Altos, CA
Fremont, CA
Pleasanton, CA
Laguna Beach, CA
West Los Angeles, CA
South Los Angeles, CA
Hollywood, CA
San Diego, CA
Beverly Hills, CA
Calabasas, CA
Encinitas, CA
Palm Springs, CA

2. There is already another Verizon "wireless cell phone base station" at the roof of the main church building, which sits just -80 feet away from the new AT&T location and is already of major concern. ,
Therefore, there will be TWO wireless base stations on the same premises on the church property, thereby further increasing the potential health risks to the surrounding residents

3. We, the neighborhood community, have the followings concerns:

A. The negative health effects caused by wireless radiation from the tower. There has NOT been a clear conclusion that cell towers are not harmfulto health.

This is a serious enough issue that the lnternational Association of Fire Fighters has opposed the installation of cell towers at fire stations, where its fire fighters live.

Further reading can be done on their website Cell Tower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
Cell Tower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
The lnternational Association of Fire Fighters'
position on locating cell towers commercial
wireless infrastruct...

B. Risk of fire. There is a risk of fire, potentially from a malfunction in equipment, weather related such as a lightning strike, or arson and will be devastating for the neighboring houses should one occur.

C. Property Values. Someday, if we decide to sell our houses, we will need to disclose to the buyer that our homes are right under two wireless companies' cell phone towers, not to mention that the towers will be extremely conspicuous.

Many real estate professionals agree that potential buyers will not consider purchasing homes in the nearby vicinity of a cell phone tower. As such, the Proposed lnstallation could negatively impact property values in the neighborhood.
lf AT&T really needs to install a new tower in this area, why don't they choose a location that is not so close to someone's backyard?
We respectfully urge you to honor the wishes of this community and reject this plan from AT&T, and let them seek out alternate sites.

Regards,
Leilani
To:

From
Subject:

Date:

Attachmentsi
Plannino Public Comment
f ; PhmnqpublleConment; Tiffanv Vien; Leslev xavier; Eric crutchlow; Nancv Blagini; Priva lhEniklifiiloian Huanq; Lance Saleme; Mario Bouza; Yashrai Bhatnaoar RE: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed Installation") Monday, October 21, 2024 12:27:00 PM
image001.ong
imaoe003.Dno
Thank you for your email, it has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.

ELIZABETH ELLIOTT I Staff Aide tl
Community Development Department I Planning Division
l-500 Warburton Avenue I Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.615.2450 Direct : 4O8.61,5.241 4
ffi$l'J*;:ero"
From: RajSudhani
Sent: Friday, October 18,2024 4:45 PM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]>; Tiffany Vien <[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Nancy Biagini <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <[email protected]>; Lance Saleme <[email protected]>; Mario Bouza <[email protected]>;YashrajBhatnagar <YBhatnaga r@Sa ntaclaraca.gov>
Subject: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed lnstallation") You don't often get email from Learn whv this is imDortant To: Santa Clara Planning Commission Board Members:

Dear sir/Madam,
This letter is regarding the installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T on the premises of Santa CIarc First Baptist Church at3l11 Benton Street.

I hereby formally submit my letter opposing this plan prior to the meeting which is scheduled for Wednesday, October 23,2024.

I am strongly opposed to the Proposed Installation as I believe this plan is not in the best interest of our community. My response to the Proposed Installation is a big NO.

1. The "monotree" is actually a "wireless cell phone tower" or "cell phone base station." Its location is a mere 20-30 feet away from my backyard fence and is extremely close to the immediately surrounding residential area.

Meanwhile many municipalities, including in California, have strict requirements for erecting cell towers near residential areas. The following municipalities, districts, or zones have a MINIMUM of 500 feet setback requirement to 1,000 feet or more from residential properties andlor property line:
. Los Altos, CA
. Fremont, CA
. Pleasanton, CA
. Laguna Beach, CA
. West Los Angeles, CA
. South Los Angeles, CA
. Hollywood, CA
. San Diego, CA
. Beverly Hills, CA
. Calabasas, CA
. Encinitas, CA
. Palm Springs, CA

2. There is already another Verizon oowireless cell phone base stationoo at the roof of the main church building, which sits just -80 feet away from the new AT&T location and is aheady of major concern.

Therefore, there will be TWO wireless base stations on the same premises on the church property, thereby fuither increasing the potential health risks to the surrounding residents.

3. I have the followings concerns:

A. The negative health effects caused hy wireless
radiation from the tower. There has NOT been a clear
conclusion that cell towers are not harmful to health.

This is a serious enough issue that the International
Association of Fire Fighters has opposed the installation of cell towers at fire stationso where its fire fighters live.

Further reading can be done on their website cellrower
CellTower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
The lnternational Association of Fire Fighters' oosition on locating cell towers commercial wireless infrastruct...

Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
B. Risk of fire. There is a risk of fire, potentially from a malfunction in equipment, weather related such as a
lightning strike, or arson and will be devastating for the neighboring houses should one occur.

Cell towers can catch fire due to the electrical
infrastructure required for wireless facilities. Wiring faults can create electrical arcs that reach temperatures up to 35,000 degrees fahrenheit, which is hotter than the surface of the sun, and is often referred to as an I'arc flash." Malfunctions in transmitterso antennaso or wiring can lead to electrical fires. Lightning strikes could also potentially cause a fire. Due to unpredictable weather patterns in
recent years, lightning strikes are also of concern. There have also been reports of fires caused by arson. The
following are examples of cell phone towers fires:
. September 2023: Sacramento: Near Capital City
Freeway. Flames and sparks were seen coming
from the tower.
. 2020 - Virginia: Entire cell tower caught fire
overnight. The cause was believed to be equipment
malfunction related to a transformer.
. 2019 - California: Cell tower in Sonoma County
caught fire, potentially due to an electrical fault.
. 2018 - New Jersey: A fire at a cell tower was
attributed to arson. Local authorities investigated
the incident due to suspicious circumstances.
. 20t7 - Texas: Cell tower fire occurred, likely due
to equipment malfunction, as heavy winds and
storms were present.
. 2016 - Florida: Cell tower caught fire after being
struck by lightning.
. 2015 - illinois: Cell tower fire was reported,
attributed to equipment failure. The fire spread to
nearby vegetation.
. 2014 - North Carolina: A fire was caused by an
electrical issue related to the cell tower's lighting
equipment.
. 2012 - Michigan: Cell tower fire occurred,
believed to be caused by an equipment
malfunction.
. 20ll - Alabama: Cell tower fire occurred due to a
lightning strike, causing significant damage to the
structure.
. 2009 - Georgia: A fire was reported at a cell tower
site, attributed to equipment failure and
overheating.
. 2008 - Colorado: A fire broke out at a cell tower,
suspected to be caused by an electrical short circuit'
. 2006 - Ohio: Cell tower caught fire due to a
malfunction in the power supply system.
. 2005 - New York: A fire was linked to an electrical
issue at a cell tower site.
. 2004 - Louisiana: Cell tower fire was attributed to
a lightning strike.
. 2003 - Maryland: A fire occurred at a cell tower
site due to suspected electrical malfunctions.
. 2002 - Florida: Cell tower fire was reported,
believed to be caused by equipment overheating
during extreme weather conditions.
. 200L - Texas: A fire at a cell tower was linked to
an arson investigation, where the tower was set on
fire deliberately.

C. Property Values. Someday, if I decide to sell my house, I will need to disclose to the buyer that my home is right under two wireless companies' cell phone towerso not to mention that the towers will be extremely conspicuous.

Many real estate professionals agree that potential buyers will not consider purchasing homes in the nearby vicinity of a cell phone tower. As such, the Proposed Installation could negatively impact property values in the neighborhood.

If AT&T really needs to install a new tower in this area why don't they choose a location that is not so close to someone's backyard? I respectfully urge you to honor the wishes of this community and reject this plan from AT&T, and let them seek out alternate sites.

Sincerely
Raj Sudhani
Concerned Resident
IO:

From:

Subject:

Datel
Attachments:

Plannina Public Comment
; Priva Cherukuru; Oian Huano; Lance Saleme; Mario
RE: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed Installation") Monday, October 21, 2024 12126:00 PM
imaoeO01.Dno
imaoe003.pno
Thank you for your email, it has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.

ELIZABETH ELLIOTT I Staff Aide ll
Communrty Development Department I Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue I Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.6t5.2450 Direct : 4O8.6L5.247 4
Citvof
Santa Clara
;
i{
{
d
T
From: Rajasri Banka
Sent: Friday, October 18,202412:39 PM
To: Tiffany Vien <[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Nancy Biagini <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <[email protected]>; Lance Saleme <[email protected]>; Mario Bouza <[email protected]>;Yashraj Bhatnagar <[email protected]>; Planning Public Comment <Pla n [email protected]>
Subject: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed lnstallation") Some people who received this message don't often get email from important
o:Santa Clara Planning Commission Board Members: Re: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed lnstallation") Dear sir/Madam, This letter is regarding the installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T on the premises of Santa Clara First Baptist Church at 31-11 Benton Street. Our neighborhood community hereby formally submits our letter with signatures opposing this plan prior to the meeting which is scheduled for Wednesday, October 23,2024. We are strongly opposed to the Proposed lnstallation as we believe this plan is not in the best interest of our community. Our response to the Proposed lnstallation is a big NO. 1. The "monotree" is actually a "wireless cell phone tower" or "cell phone base station." lts location is a mere 20-30 feet awayfrom the backyard fence of the neighboring residential houses and is extremely close to the immediately surrounding residential area. Meanwhile many municipalities, including in California, have strict requirements for erecting cell towers near residential areas. The following municipalities, districts, or zones have a MINIMUM of 500 feet setback requirement to 1,000 feet or more from residential properties andlor property line: Los Altos, CA Fremont, CA Pleasanton, CA Laguna Beach, CA West Los Angeles, CA South Los Angeles, CA Hollywood, CA San Diego, CA
Beverly Hills, CA Calabasas, CA Encinitas, CA Palm Springs, CA 2. There is already another Verizon L-oarn whv this is
"wireless cell phone base station" at the roof of the main church building, which sits just -80 feet away from the new AT&T location and is already of major concern. Therefore, there will be TWO wireless base stations on the same premises on the church property, thereby further increasing the potential health risks to the surrounding residents. 3. We, the neighborhood community, have the followings concerns: A. The negative health effects caused by wireless radiation from the tower.

There has NOT been a clear conclusion that celltowers are not harmful to health. This is a serious enough issue that the lnternational Association of Fire Fighters has opposed the installation of cell towers at fire stations, where its fire fighters live. Further reading can be done on their website Cell Tower Radiation Health Effects- IAFF
B. Risk of fire. There is a risk of fire, potentially from a malfunction in equipment, weather related such as a lightning strike,
or arson and will be devastating for the nelghboring houses should one occur.

Cell towers can catch fire due to the electrical infrastructure required for wireless facilities. Wiring faults can create electrical arcs that reach temperatures up to 35,000 degrees fahrenheit, which is hotter than the surface of the sun, and is often referred to as an "arc flash." Malfunctions in transmitters, antennas, or wiring can lead to electrical fires. Lightning strikes could also potentiallycause a fire. Due to unpredictable weather patterns in recentyears, lightning strikes are also of concern. There have also been reports of fires caused by arson. The following are examples of cell phone towers fires:
2020 - Virginia: Entire cell tower caught fire overnight. The cause was believed to be equipment malfunction related to a transformer.
2019 - California: Celltower in Sonoma County caught fire, potentially due to an electricalfault. 2018 - New Jersey: A fire at a cell tower was attributed to arson. Local authorities investigated the incident due to suspicious circumstances.
2017 - Texas: Cell tower fire occurred, likely due to equipment malfunction, as heavy winds and storms were present.
201,6 - Florida: Cell tower caught fire after belng struck by lightning. 2015 - lllinois: Cell tower fire was reported, attributed to equipment failure. The fire spread to nearby vegetation.
2014 - North Carolina: A fire was caused by an electrical issue related to the cell tower's lighting equipment.
201,2 - Michigan: Cell tower fire occurred, believed to be caused by an equipment malfunction. 2O1J - Alabama: Cell tower fire occurred due to a lightning strike, causing significant damage to the structu re.
2009 - Georgia:A fire was reported at a celltower site, attributed to equipment failure and overheating.
2008 - Colorado: A fire broke out at a cell tower, suspected to be caused by an electrical short c irc u it.
2006 - Ohio: Cell tower caught fire due to a malfunction in the power supply system. 2005 - New York: A fire was linked to an electrical issue at a cell tower site. 2004 - Louisiana: Cell tower fire was attributed to a lightning strike. 2020 - Virginia: Entire cell tower caught fire overnight. The cause was believed to be equipment malfunction related to a transformer.
2019 - California: Cell tower in Sonoma County caught fire, potentially due to an electrical fault. 2OI8 - New Jersey: A fire at a cell tower was attributed to arson. Local authorities investigated the incident due to suspicious circumstances.
2OI7 - Texas: Cell tower fire occurred, likely due to equipment malfunction, as heavy winds and storms were present.
201,6 - Florida: Cell tower caught fire after being struck by lightning. 2015 - lllinois: Cell tower fire was reported, attributed to equipment failure. The fire spread to nearby vegetation.
201.4 - North Carolina:A fire was caused by an electrical issue related to the celltower's lighting equipment.
201.2 - Michigan: Cell tower fire occurred, believed to be caused by an equipment malfunction. 20t1, - Alabama: Cell tower fire occurred due to a lightning strike, causing significant damage to the structu re.
2OO9 - Georgia: A fire was reported at a cell tower site, attributed to equipment failure and overheating.
2008 - Colorado: A fire broke out at a cell tower, suspected to be caused by an electrical short circuit.
2006 - Ohio: Cell tower caught fire due to a malfunction in the power supply system. 2005 - New York: A fire was linked to an electrical issue at a cell tower site. 2OO4 - Louisiana: Cell tower fire was attributed to a lightning strike.

C. property Values. Someday, if we decide to sell our houses, we will need to disclose to the buyer that our homes are right under two wireless companies' cell phone towers, not to mention that the towers will be extremely conspicuous.

C. Property Values. Someday, if we decide to sell our houses, we will need to disclose to the buyer that our homes are right undertwo wireless companies' cell phone towers, not to mention that the towers will be extremely conspicuous.

Regards: Rajasri Banka
Ravinder Banka
3281 benton st santa clara
To
From:

Subject:

Datel
Attachments:

Plannino Public Comment
!t_*ffi;
Eric Crutchlow; Nancy Biaoini; Priya Cherukuru; oian Huang; RE: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 C'Proposed Installation") Monday, October 21, 2024 12:26:00 PM
imaoe001.ong
imaoe003.ono
Thankyou foryouremail, it has been received in the Planning Division and will be partof the public record on this item.

ELIZABETH ELLIOTT I StaffAide ll
Community Development Department I Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue I Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.61,5.2450 Direct : 4O8.6L5.247 4
Citvof
Safita Glara
From: Suma G
Sent: Friday, October 18,202411:52 AM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]>; Tiffany Vien <[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Nancy Biagini <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <[email protected]>; Lance Saleme <[email protected]>; Mario Bouza <[email protected]>;YashrajBhatnagar <YBhatnagar@Sa ntaclaraca.gov>
Subject: Project File No.: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed tnstallation") t
I
You don't often get email from Learn why this is important To: Santa Clara Planning Commission Board Members:

Re: Project File No.: PLN23-OO148 ("Proposed Installation") Dear sir/Madam,
This letter is regarding the installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T on the premises of Santa Clara First Baptist Church at 3111 Benton Street.

Our neighborhood community hereby formally submits our letter with signatures opposing this plan prior to the meeting which is scheduled for Wednesday, October 23,2024.

We are strongly opposed to the Proposed Installation as we believe this plan is not in the best interest of our community. Our response to the Proposed Installation is a big NO.

1. The "monotree" is actually a "wireless cell phone tower" or "cell phone base station." Its location is a mere 2O-3O feet away from the backyard fence of the neighboring residential houses and is extremely close to the immediately surrounding residential area.

Los Altos, CA Fremont, CA Pleasanton, CA Laguna Beach, CA West Los Angeles, CA South Los Angeles, CA Hollywood, CA
San Diego, CA
Beverly Hills, CA Calabasas, CA Encinitas, CA Palm Springs, CA

Therefore, there will be TWO wireless base stations on the same premises on the church property, thereby further increasing the potential health risks to the surrounding residents. 3, We, the neighborhood community, have the followings concerns:

A. The negative health effects caused by wireless radiation from the tower. There has NOT been a clear conclusion that cell towers are not harmful to health.

This is a serious enough issue that the International Association of Fire Fighters has opposed the installation of cell towers at fire stations, where its fire fighters live.

Further reading can be done on their website Cell Tower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
Cell Tower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
The International Association of Fire Fighters'position on locating cell towers commercial wireless i nfrastruct...

B. Risk of fire. There is a risk of fire, potentially from a malfunction in equipment' weather related such as a lightning strike,
or arson and will be devastating for the neighboring houses should one occur.

Celt towers can catch fire due to the electrical infrastructure required for wireless facilities. Wiring faults can create electrical arcs that reach temperatures up to 35,OOO degrees fahrenheit, which is hotter than the sudace of the sun, and is often referred to as an "arc flash."
Malfunctions in transmitters, antennas, or wiring can lead to electrical fires.

Lightning strikes could also potentially cause a fire. Due to unpredictable weather patterns in recent years, lightning strikes are also of concern. There have also been reports of fires caused by arson. The following are examples of cell phone towers fires:

ZO2O - Virginia: Entire cell tower caught fire overnight. The cause was believed to be equipment malfunction related to a transformer.
2OLg - California: Cell tower in Sonoma County caught fire, potentially due to an electrical fa ult.
2018 - New Jersey: A fire at a cell tower was attributed to arson. Local authorities investigated the incident due to suspicious circumstances. 2OL7 'Texas: Cell tower fire occurred, likely due to equipment malfunction, as heavy winds and storms were present.
2OL6 - Florida: Cell tower caught fire after being struck by lightning. 2015 - Illinois: Cell tower fire was reported, attributed to equipment failure. The fire spread to nearby vegetation.2OL4 - North Carolina: A fire was caused by an electrical issue related to the cell tower's lighting equipment.
2oL2'Michigan: cell tower fire occurred, believed to be caused by an equipment malfunction.
2011 - Alabama: Cell tower fire occurred due to a lightning strike, causing significant damage to the structure.
2OO9 - Georgia: A fire was reported at a celltower site, attributed to equipment failure and overheating,
2OO8 - Colorado: A fire broke out at a cell tower, suspected to be caused by an electrical short circuit.
2006 - Ohio: Cell tower caught fire due to a malfunction in the power supply system. 2OO5 - New York: A fire was linked to an electrical issue at a cell tower site. 2OO4 - Louisiana: Cell tower fire was attributed to a lightning strike. 2OO3 - Maryland: A fire occurred at a cell tower site due to suspected electrical malfunctions.
2oo2' Florida: cell towerfire was reported, believed to be caused by equipment overheating during extreme weather conditions.
2OO1 - Texas: A fire at a cell tower was linked to an arson investigation, where the tower was set on fire deliberately.

C. Property Values. Someday, if we decide to sell our houses, we will need to disclose to the buyer that our homes are right under two wireless companies'cell phone towers, not to mention that the towers will be extremely conspicuous.

If AT&T really needs to install a new tower in this area, why don't they choose a location that is not so close to someone's backyard?
We respectfully urge you to honor the wishes of this community and reject this plan from AT&T, and let them seek out alternate sites.

Regards,
Sumangala Moogi
Santa Clara resident
tlCI f I i07'I

REC EIVED

PLANNI NG
October 18,2024
1091 FomeroyAve.

Lestis Xavier
Plannlng Manager
Community Devetopment Departmont
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Senta Clara, CA 95050
Re: PLN23-00148, APN 290-27.006
3111 Benton Street, 3.15 acre lot tocated nonhBast of Benton Street and PomeroyAvenue Appllcant: SteveProo,CompteteWlrstessConsultang
Owner: Santa Ctara Flrst Baptlst Church
SubJectl Condltionat Use Permlt for a new unmanned AT& Ttstecommunlcatlon facitity, lnstallatlon of 6ofoot tatt rnonotree.

Hearlng Date: October 23,2o24, at 6:00 PM, City Hatt Councit Chambers Doar Ms. Lestie Xavler,
Wa horeby obfect to the above named proJect forthe foltowlng rBasons and request the project be continued to another time untll att our concerns betow are addressed:

1. Radiatlon danger
Radiation qnd cancer danger to atl peraone within 500 foot radius of the aforementionod 60 toot tetecommunication towers, and alt reeldents of Pornoroy Green, where we tive, which has of 78 houslng unlts that stand to be impasted by this profect. Thle is very serlous lssue becguse the instattatlon of this towerwllt generete s continuous radlstlon exposure whish wllt lmpact heatth ln a negatlv€ way accordingto many medical eources (name them lf you have timE from the eources I prwlded to you).

These talt telecommunlcatlon towera wltt ba lrradlatlng ue 24 hours a day, 7 daye a woek, AT&T, as watl as ths Bsptlst Church, rnust not tske economic advantaga, for economic purpose, whitE sndangering the heetth and wett bElng of so many resldents.

Durlng nrytn-convercation with the manager of ths adlacent Baptlst Church, hE mentionad that AT&T came to thern offerlng monthly compenaation for atlowlng. AT&T to use the church proparty - The personnetpafronr athAT&T, as wetl as tho most mombsrs of th€ Baptlst Church tlkely do not tlve in thig area and are onty exposed to ths radlation a few houra a week.

It ls very wetl known in the scientiflc literaturg that ttrch radistion ls heatth hazard, that €xposure to RF energy can have harmful effects. (cite medical sourceg I provided to you in my omall to you). We know that we are sublect to some radiation, but this projeot wilt 6xpo8e us to 24 hours a day of powerfut radiation. We don't wantfutur€ clusters of cancer in this neighborhood, especialty since there are other arees in Sante Clara whers this tower can be placed. {provicle suggestions to atternative tocations).

2. Aesthetic concerns that may subject the projectto environmental review The towor proJect wiltcause aesthetic damage to our comptex and neigh neighborhood. The 60 foot structures ar€ much higher than att the houses and most traes in the neighborhood and therefore wltl detract from the overalt aesthetic quatities of tho comptex and neigh nelghborhood.

At Pomeroy Green att our utitities are burred to creata a beautlful environrnent for our residents. lf the tower is cons$ucted it ltt be an eyesore that wltt be vislbte form att tocations within Pomeroy Green. ltwitt aeethetlcatly impact not only Pomeroy Green but atso attthe surrounding homes too, thoss to the north and east of the project.

The Pomeroy Green Cooperative housing comptex is regietered in tha Natlonat Register of Historic Places (the NRHPf and, thorefore, the tower proJect may be roquired to be reviewsd for environmentat impacts, inctuding aesthetic impacts, by tocat and hlgher gov€rnment agencies. The tower project may roquiro a permit from the FCC, maklngtlro projoct sublectto Section 106 of th€ Nationat Historic Preservation Act.

The range of the environrnental impacts may extend to nearby muttifamity comptex, Pomeroy West (potentlatty hlstorlc) and the CiW's Earl Carmichaet Park. Those residents and the City's Parks and Recreation Department ehoutd be provided a notlce of pubtlc hearing end notitled respoctivety $o that those residents and the public can comment on the proiect, We request the city provide those notlces of pubtic hearings and also have the project roviewed under the Gity's Architectura[ Revlew process.

3. Cotlapsing hazard
There is a potentiat hazard to the surrounding housing from the tower cottapslng dqe to naturat disastors. Forifforinstsncer a powerfutearthqusksorstorm coutd causethe60footstructurssto fatt on one or more of the residences ln the area.

4. Proper pubtlc notice not provided
The City Ptsnnlng Commisslon's "Notice of Pubtic Hearlng" was not malled to att of th6 townhouse unlts in Pomeroy Green nor w6s the Pomeroy Oreen Bosrd of Dlrectors nor Property Manager notifled olthe propos€d tower proioct.

Pomeroy Green Cooparative hss a parcet map fited wlth ths County Assessors Office (Book 290, page 69h therefore, the CiO should have mailed the notice to atl.the townhouses in the complex, not lust those within 500' of the project. The people in this area have not been glven notice to for the public to consider the ramificatlons of such a serioug proJect. &, Flolgc( est*H'F"c lo€so$qttolufi$r* th tbo w
TheprutsireaddtodtytEBtraadtrrencttterloettionlntfia&thattlfi0sdtveififo*tdtltiptdhtnm 'ae1retdbrigrteffiidahgtlc.tntrttlgnestghtmaQtsf luehss$innstarstillltlf*tfu$iwhlehtrsr' *rp16ryI&momgtr*aace bota{cnhoiass-a6dth&totffPr'.rorhs,rastdcnblffth&elocBtfonp ailg Bcr hnFssat{ $ ndffioa narttrithrlirct 0t fth$ffiort n*tgr*l dl6{lttilb. fld*tm#;f fl,ru,G",ffisr- ' Nloholri-&REhe€anatslf,sfi.| ccl 8erfra. Gl$t FF$ grItult ehurah, ATScf
Pomeroy G reen Residents
Non-lonizing radiation exposu re
Questions that need answers
from
City of Santa Clara
Cell Tower Emitted Power lnformation needed:
. What is the total RF power emitted on a daily basis by the 5G towers installed on the Church property?
Although the FCC permits an effective radiated power (ERP) of up to 500 watts per channel (depending on the tower height), the majority of cellular sites in urban and suburban areas operate at an ERP of 100 watts per channel or less. . How often is the emitted radiation measured at this site to ensure it conforms to the permitted limit?
FCC Guideline:

The FCC limits public exposure from cell towers to a maximum of 580 microwatts per square centimeter.
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/gu ides/h u ma n-exposure-rad io-freque ncy-fields-guid elines-cellu la r-and-pcs-sites Calculations corresponding to a "worst-case" situation (all transmitters operating simultaneously and continuously at the maximum licensed power) show that, in order to be exposed to RF levels near the FCC's guidelines, an individualwould essentially have to remain In the main transmitting beam and within a few feet of the antenna for several minutes or longer,
Consideration points:
. T-Mobile 5G tower on the roof of the Church.
. Proposed AT&T tower in the Church parking area.
' Upstairs bedroom windows of PG homes are directly in line-of-sight of the towers. For homes closest to towers, the downstair patio doors face the towers and are in line-of-sight.
' People spend most of the day and night (L6-2O hours/day) in these bedrooms due to working from home including retirees.
' People spend time (at least 2 hours/day) in their backyard or swimming pool during the day.

What is the combined TOTAL exposure to residents nearest to the 5G cell towers (both T-Mobile and AT&T tower)
what is the combined TOTAL exposure to residents in the swimming pool area spending a minimum of 2 hours during the day.

What is the com bined TOTAL exposu re to residents fu rthermost to the 5G cell towers (both T-Mobile and AT&T tower)
Whqt obout 5G networks?
Fifth generation (5G) celtular networks are now being rolled out in many parts ofthe United States and in olher countries. 5G networks are capable of t.ansmitting much larger amounts of data over shofter periods of time than previous generations (4G, 3G, etcl.

Earlier generation networks have used RF wavelengths below 6 gigahert? (GHz). 5G netlvorks will use some wavelengths in this range, but witl also use some higher frequency wavelengths, at the lower end of the mlllimeter wave spectrum (which ranges from 30 GHz to 300 GHz). While these RF waves are higher frequency {higher energy) than those used by older generatlons, they are still forms of non.ionirlng radiation, so they stilt lack the ability to directly damage DNA, The higher frequency waves used by 5G travel shorter distances and don't go through objects (such as buildings, or ev€n tree leaves) as well as lower frequency waves. Because of this,5G networks require many more, smallerversions of base stations (often referred to as small cells) in some places, especially in densely
could result in the antennas being closer to people, smallcells The addltion of the higher wavelengthsfrom 5G networks could also expose people to more RF lvaves overall.

At the same time, these higher frequency RF waves are less able to penetrate the body than lower frequency waves, so in theory they might be less likely to have any potential health effects. But so far this issue has not been well studied.

At this time, there has been very little research showing that the RF waves us€d in 5G networks are any more (or less) ofa concern than the other RF wavelengths used in cellular communication.

Wrltten by Addltional resources Resources
Will there be more towers
located in the neighborhood ?
How many more towers lvill
be permitted?
oth€r
lnmrrtsr
{rCcmcr f Sod.ry
TheAmenffi aa@r Striew m€dr@l and edibr€l 6denttem
O!rleam i5 made up of docloE and sncolog! rerlified nil6e9with deep hrowledge ofcanaet care as wall as edlto6and translato.s withextensrve experi€naein nredical wdting.

From: Nicholas H Rossi
Sent: Tuesday, October 22,2024 3:40 PM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Subject: Telecommunications tower proposed for 311-L Benton Stree|, PLN 23-00148;APN: 290-27- 006
You don't often get email from Learn why this is important Please find the letter to Leslie Xavier, Planning Manager, Community Development Department, City of Santa Clara (attached). Please bring this to the attention of the Planning Commission at their meeting scheduled for Wednesday, October 23,2024 This letter supercedes our earlier letter on this subject dated October 16,2024 regarding the telecommunications tower proposed for 3111 Benton Street; PLN 23- 001 48; APN: 290-27 -006.

Thank you,
Nick Rossi
october 22,2024
1091 PomeroyAve.

Santa Ctara Catifornia 95051
Lestie Xavier
Ptanning Manager
Community Devetopment Department
City of Santa Ctara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Ctara, CA 95050
Re: PLN23-00148,
APN 290-27-006
31 1 1 Benton Street, 3.1S-acre tot tocated northeast of Benton street and Pomeroy Avenue Appticant: Steve Proo, Comptete Wiretess Consutting
Owner: Santa Ctara First Baptist Church
Subject: Conditionat Use Permit for a new unmanned AT& T tetecommunication facitity, lnstattation of 60-foot tat[ monotree.
ptanning Commission Hearing Date: October 23,2024, at 6:00 PM, City Hatt Councit Chambers Dear Ms. Lestie Xavier,
We hereby object to the above-named project for the fottowing reasons and request the project be continued to anothertime untit at[ our concerns betow are addressed:

1. Radiation danger
Radiation and cancer danger to att persons within 500-foot radius of the aforementioned 60 foot tetecommunication towers, and att residents of Pomeroy Green, where we [ive, which has 78 housing units that stand to be impacted by this project. This is a very serious issue because the instatl,ation of this tower witt generate continuous radiation exposure which witt impact heatth in a negative way accordingto many medicat sources conducted by government agencies, such as Environmentat Protection Agency (EPA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) & Wortd Heatth Organization (WHO), and others.

These tatt tetecommunication towers wil,t be irradiating us 24 hours a day,7 days a week. AT&l as wett as the Baptist church, must not take economic advantage, for economic purpose, white endangering the heatth and wett-being of so many residents.

During my conversation with the manager of the adjacent Baptist Church, he mentioned that AT&T came to them offering monthty compensation for attowing this project. AT&Twants to use the church property; the personnet at AT&l as wett as the most members of the Baptist Church, tikety do not tive in this area and are onty exposed to the radiation a few hours a week.

It is very wet[ known in scientific literature by institutions such as National Cancer lnstitute (NCl), lnternationat Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) & Federat Drug Administration (FDA)that radiation is a heatth hazard, that exposure to RF energy can have harmful effects. We know that we are subject to some radiation, but this project witl expose us to 24 hours a day of powerfut radiation. We don't want future ctusters of cancer in this neighborhood, especiatty since there are other areas in Santa Ctara where this tower can be ptaced. For instance, Santa Ctara Centrat Park & open areas not near to residentiat areas where this project woutd be such a threat to harm peopte

2. Aesthetic concerns that may subject the project to environmental review The tower project witt cause aesthetic damage to our comptex and neighborhood. The 60-foot structures are much higher than att the houses and most trees in the neighborhood and therefore witt detract from the overa[[ aesthetic quatities of the comptex and neighborhood.

At Pomeroy Green atl our utitities are ptaced underground to create a beautifut environment for our residents. lf the tower is constructed it witt be an eyesore that witt be visibte from att tocations within Pomeroy Green. lt witt aestheticatty impact not onty Pomeroy Green but atso att the surrounding homes too, those to the north and east of the project.

The Pomeroy Green Cooperative housing comptex is registered in the National Register of Historic Ptaces (the NRHP) and, therefore, the tower project may be required to be reviewed for environmentaI impacts, inctuding aesthetic impacts, by tocat and higher government agencies. The tower project may require a permit from the FCC, making the project subject to Section 106 of the Nationat Historic Preservation Act.

The range of environmentaI impacts may extend to another nearby muttifamity comptex, Pomeroy West (potentiatty historic) and the City's Ear[ Carmichaet Park. Those residents and the City's Parks and Recreation Department shoutd be provided with the notice of pubtic hearing so that those residents and the pubtic can comment on the project.

We request the city provide those notices of pubtic hearings and atso have the project reviewed under the City's ArchitecturaI Review process.

3. Cottapsinghazard
There is a potentiat hazard to the surrounding housing from the tower cottapsing due to naturat disasters. For instance, a powerful earthquake or storm coutd cause the 60 foot structure to fatl. on one or more of the residences in the area.

4. Proper pubtic notice not provided
The City Ptanning Commission's "Notice of Pubtic Hearing" was not maited to att of the townhouse units in Pomeroy Green nor was the Pomeroy Green Board of Directors nor Property Manager notified of the proposed tower project.

Pomeroy Green Cooperative has a parcel map fited with the County Assessor's Office (Book 290, page 69); therefore, the City shoutd have maited the notice to att the townhouses in the comptex as wett as the Pomeroy Green Cooperative Corporation, not just those residents within 500' of the project. The peopte in this area shoutd have been provided with proper notice in order to consider the ramifications of such a serious project.

5. Attractive nuisance
The proposed tower witt create an attractive nuisance. Young peopte inctuding preteens from our neighborhood and schoots nearby (Santa Ctara High Schoot. Pomeroy Etementary Strafford schoots) mayfind the tower a chattenge to ctimb. Pomeroy Green has probtems with young peopte and chitdren crossing our property and entering our pool area that is surrounded by a 6'high cyctone fence.

6. Project coutd be tocated etsewhere in the city
The project coutd easity be ptaced in another location in the city that witt solve most of the probtems we have enumerated above. We suggest atternatives such as Santa Ctara Central Park, which has room to provide more distance between homes and the tower so that residents in those tocations are not impacted by radiation, aesthetic effect or danger from natural disasters.

Sincerety,
Nichotas & Ritha Canates Rossi
cc: Santa Ctara First Baptist Church, AT&T
From: Planning Public Comment
Sent: Wednesday, October 23,2024 9:39 AM
To: Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>
Cc: Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Lance Saleme <[email protected]>; Mario Bouza <[email protected]>; Nancy Biagini <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <[email protected]>; Yashraj Bhatnaga r <YBhatnaga r@Santacla raca.gov>
Subject: FW:Telecommunication tower proposed for 311-1 Benton Street;, PLN 23-00148;APN: 290- 2l-006; Ken Kratz's public comments
Good Morning Ken,
Your email and attached documents have been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.

Thank you,
Elizabeth Elliott
Planning Division
From: Ken Kratz
Sent: Wednesday, October 23,2024 2:17 AM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Subject: Telecommunication tower proposed for 3111 Benton Street;, PtN 23-00148; APN: 290-27- 006; Ken Kratz's public comments
You don't often get email from Learn whv this is rmoortant Hello Community Development Department,
Please find my attached letter, "AT&T telecommunications tower, 3111 Benton St., K. Kratz Itr. to City.doc", addressed to Leslie Xavier, Planning Manager, Community Development Department, City of SantaClara with attachments regarding the AT&T telecommunications project proposed for 3 1 I 1 Benton Street.

Please bring my letter with attachments to the attention of the Planning Commission for their public hearing on this project scheduled for Wednesday, October 23,2024; the letter with the attachments is my public comment in regard to this project.

Thank you,
Ken Kratz
Pomeroy Green Cooperative shareholder
3283 Benton Street
Ca.95051
October 22,2024
3283 Benton Street
Santa Ctara, Catifornia 95051
Lesl.ie Xavier
Ptanning Manager
Community Devetopment Department
City of Santa Ctara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Ctara, CA 95050
Pta nni ngPu bticComment@Sa ntaCta raCA.gov
Re: 31 1 1 Benton Street
PLN23-00148,
APN 290-27-006
Conditionat Use Permit for a new unmanned AT&T tetecommunication facitity Ptanning Commission Hearing Date: October 23,2O24,6:00 pM Dear Ms. Lestie Xavier:

I object to the above-named project for the fottowing reasons and request the project be continued to another time untit my concerns betow are addressed:

1. Proper pubtic notice not provided.

P/ease providepropernoticeof thepublichearingtoallresldenfs of PomeroyGreen,thePomeroy Green Board of Directors and the Pomeroy Green Property Manager and provide anyfurther notification required by the National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 that may include a wider notification area due to the height of the tower accordingto the Acit Please providefurthernotification pertheActthatmayincludethe resrdents of PomeroyWest condominiums, a multi-family complex of 738 unlts located west of Pomeroy Green across Pomeroy Avenue. Pomeroy West rs in the process of submittrn g an application to National Reglster of Historic Places (NRHP) for their comptex and has been in contact with the State of Cal ifornia Office of Historic Preseruation concerning registration of PomeroyWest in the NRHP. PomeroyWest was designed by the same architect who designed Pomeroy Green and has fhe same distinctive architecture as Pomeroy Green and, therefore is potentially historic. 1 project. The HLC routinely evaluates and advises the City Council on impacts to proposed proiects on historic resources on adiacent properties.

The tower witt be seen from many points within Pomeroy Green and witt therefore cause aesthetic damage to Pomeroy Green and the surrounding neighborhood-the tower wit[ be an eyesore. The 6o-foot tower structure wil.t be much higher than att the townhouses in Pomeroy Green (20' tatt) and the singte-famity detached homes to the north of the tower. The tower is atso tatter than most of the trees in Pomeroy Green and the neighborhood at targe and therefore the tower witt detract from the overatt aesthetic quatities of the comptex and neighborhood.

Atso the utiLities at Pomeroy Green are instatted underground in order to create a beautifut environment for our residents; unfortunatety an existing City overhead utitity [ine runs atong the property tine shared with the church. The tower witt be add another ugty etement atong the property tine with the church where that existing overhead utitity tine now runs . Again, if the tower is constructed it witt be an eyesore that witt be visibte f rom many tocations within Pomeroy Green.

Furthermore, the Pomeroy Green Cooperative housing comptex is tisted in the Nationat Register of Historic Places (the NRHP tisting: hltps/wwv(.xps.go-v1s-ublectslnatio,nalrcglsteiAvc€J<ly:llst 202'l03.z€-h!m and the Catifornia Register tisting: https:1lohp-parl<s.ea.gqvl?page*id=30205); therefore, the tower project may be required to be reviewed for environmental impacts, inctuding aesthetic impacts, by Locat and higher tevet government agencies. The tower project requires a permit f rom the FCC, making the project subject to Section 106 of the Nationat Historic Preservation Act:

The Nationat Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 is imptemented through the FCC's environmentat rutes. Section 106 of the NHPA requires federat agencies to consider the effects of federat undertakings on historic properties. The FCC treats the construction of communications towers and the cottocation of communications equipment using FCCticensed spectrum as federat undertakings subject to Section 106 review. White Antenna Structure Registration (ASR) is required for some communications towers, Section 106 review may be required even if ASR Registration is not required. (from elivtsr-o n /t o we,-r- a n d - a n t e n n a - s ttng#Scc 1 0 6- a c c e s s e d 1 O -22-2024]r I do not think the tower project is "...categoricatty exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)..." as the Community Devetopment Department asserts in the Report to the Ptanning Commission asserts. According to the California Office of Historic Preservation:

Listing in the Nationat Register may resutt in design or environmentaI review administered tocatty pursuant to the Catifornia Environmentat Quatity Act (CEQA) or through [ocaI zoning and tand use ptanning regutations. (from htlgsjlolr&parks.ea.gov/?page-id=21231 accessed 10-22-2024)
The range of environmentat impacts may extend to another nearby muttifamity comptex, Pomeroy West (potentiatty historic) and the City's Eart Carmichaet Park. Those residents and the City's Parks 3 Please notify the City's Parks and Recreation Department about the tower project so that environmental impacts to the City's Earl Carmichael Park, Iocated to the west of Pomeroy West on Benton Street, are considered.

The Ptanning Commission's "Notice of Pubtic Hearing" was not maited to att of the townhouse units in Pomeroy Green (Pomeroy Green is the mutti-famity townhouse comptex tocated to the west of the church property and the proposed tower), nor were the Pomeroy Green Board of Directors and Pomeroy Green Property Manager notified of the pubtic hearing to consider the proposed tower project.

Many of the common areas in Pomeroy Green complex are contiguous with the church property where the tetecommunication project is proposed. See attached copy of the Parcel Map, Book 290, page 69.

Atso, the Pomeroy Green Cooperative Corporation shoutd have been notified of the hearing for the tower project by the City's Community Devetopment Department because the comptex is identified in many City f ites. The comptex's name (Pomeroy Green Corporation) and address is identified on the utitity bitts that Pomeroy Green receives from the City (attached water/sewer/sotar system bitts), The same address is used on the gas bitts from PG&E.

Furthermore, a property Devetopment Agreement, though I have onty an unsigned copy, was evidentty fited between the City and Pomeroy Green (attached).

Therefore the City's Community Devetopment Department shoutd have been aware of the Pomeroy Green comptex and shoutd have maited the hearing notice to att the townhouses in the comptex as we[[ as the Pomeroy Green Cooperative Corporation and its manager, Property Pro, rather than the timiting the distribution to residents within 500' of the project.

With proper notice, atl Pomeroy Green sharehotders, the Pomeroy Green Board of Directors and the Pomeroy Green Property Manager witt be abte to consider the ramifications of such a serious project to Pomeroy Green

2. Aesthetic concerns may subject the project to environmentaI review Please request AT&T contactthe California Office of Historic Preseruation (COHP) to inquire about the government review process required to determine the environmental impacts, inclusive of aesfhetlc impacts, if any, to Pomeroy Green, the historic resource.

AT&T should also mention to the COHP that Pomeroy West condominiums, a potentially historic resource located nearby, should be included in an environmental impact review.

A/sq please have the tower project reviewed bythe City's Historical and Landmarks Commlssion (HLC) tor impacts to Pomeroy Green prior to the public hearingto consider the approval of the tower 2 and Recreation Department shoutd be provided with the notice of pubtic hearing so that those residents and the pubtic can comment on the project.
/ suggest the City's Historical and Landmarks Commission review the tower project's impact on Pomeroy Green and any other historic or potentialty historic property located nearby as required by government regulations. That City commission regularly reviews impacts of proiects adiacentto historic properties.

3. Attractive nuisance
Please relocate the proposed tower out of the neighborhood, away from youths gathering places (schools, there are three in the neighborhood and the high school is located directly across the streetform the proposed lower location) because itwill create an attractive nuisance.

Young peopte from our neighborhood and the nearby schoots (e.g., Santa Ctara High Schoot. pomeroy Etementary, and the Stratford Schoot), may be interested in attempting to ctimb the tower and its targe foundation. We atready have enough probtems in the neighborhood without the addition of this tower project that witt prove to be an attractive nuisance; there is ongoing vandatism occurring in the neighborhood.

For exampte of this ongoing probtem in this neighborhood, though intermittent, youth who do not live at Pomeroy Green occasionatty enter the property enter the private property and we are seeing some random acts of vandatism by the pubtic. For instance, Pomeroy Green has probtems with young peopte entering the property and, on one occasion, entering the fenced poot area (l witnessed that personatty). I think the fence for the proposed tower wit[ not be adequate.

Atso, the poot at Pomeroy Green was vandatized; paint was poured into the poo[ the perpetrator was not identified. Atthough the poot area is surrounded by a 6'high cyctone fence and tocked doors and gates, peopte and youths were abte to gain access to the poot area; the 6' high fence to be constructed around the proposed tower witt not deter unauthorized access by youths and the generaI pubtic.

The pubtic sidewatks on Benton Street that f ront Pomeroy Green have been graffiti-tagged by vandats indicating further probtems in our neighborhood. I expect the targe concrete foundation required for the tower (15' in diameter) witt attract more graffiti to the neighborhood.

The targe foundation for the tower witt atso provide a hiding ptace for vandats and criminats form passing potice department surveittance from the pubtic street.

4. Cottapsinghazad
Please relocate the tower to another location to reduce the danger to resldents in Pomeroy Green and the resldenfs of the nearby single-famity detached homes due to the tower collapsing in and earthquake, sforrn or other other natural disaster'
4 There is a potentiaI hazard to the surrounding housing from the tower cottapsing due to naturaI disasters. For instance, a powerf u[ earthquake or storm coutd cause the 60 foot tatt structure to fatt on one or more of the residences in the area. The Pomeroy Green property tine it shares with the church is approximatety 50'from the tower location and, if the the tower fatts, it coutd reach the backyards of those Pomeroy Green units and injure those residents.

4. Radiation danger
P/ease relocate the tower to another location to reduce the exposure of radiation to the n e i gh bo r h o od resldents.

There is a chance of cancer devetoping in persons exposed to exposure to RF radiation from the proposed tower, particutarty the two Pomeroy Green townhouse buitdings located at the northeast corner of the Pomeroy Green property and the singte-famity detached homes to the north of the proposed tower. According to the radiation study inctuded in the agenda report, those two Pomeroy Green buitdings witt need a sign posted in the vicinity to warn peopte about the radiation hazard.

The AT&T personnel who witt be maintaining the tower as wetl as the most members of the Baptist Church who tikety do not tive in this area witl onty be exposed to the radiation a few hours a week at the most. On the other hand, the neighborhood residents, the Pomeroy Green residents and those residents of the homes to the north of the project site, wit[ be exposed to the radiation 24 hours a day,Tdaysaweek.

According to many scientific and medicat sources, government agencies, and professionat organizations such as Environmentat Protection Agency (EPA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Wortd Heatth Organization (WHO), Nationat Cancer lnstitute (NCl), lnternationat Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) the Federat Drug Administration (FDA) and the lnternationat Association of Fire Fighters, ctaim exposure to RF energy may have harmful effects on humans.

Al.though the effects of this [eve[ of radiation are inconctusive, I don't want to take chance on future ctusters of cancer in the neighborhood; I remember the tong time it took for air-borne asbestos to be dectared a heatth probtem by the government.

There are other areas in Santa Ctara where the tower can be ptaced to reduce exposure to radiation. For instance, Santa Ctara Centrat Park and other more open areas in the neighborhood (e.9., parking tots and the tops of commerciat properties nearby)that are farther from residences and are visited infrequentty where this tower project woutd not be a heatth threat to residents.

We request the city provide those notices of pubtic hearings and atso have the project reviewed under the City's ArchitecturaI Review process.

6. Project coutd be located etsewhere nearby in the city 5 Please consider retocating the tower to another, nearby location.

The project coutd easity be ptaced in another nearby tocation that witt sotve most of the probtems I have enumerated above white stitt providing the cett phone coverage desired by AT&T. I suggest atternatives such as Santa Ctara Centrat Park, which has room to provide more distance between homes and the tower so that residents in those locations are not impacted by radiation, aesthetic effect or danger f rom natural disasters.

Thank you for considering my concerns tisted above and ptease continue/postpone the project's pubtic hearing to a later date to atl,ow the community Devetopment Department to provide proper notice of the pubtic hearing to neighborhood residents and to attow ampte time for the Department and AT&T to investigate and respond to my concerns. Ptease consider tocating the tower to a more compatibte tocation nearby..

Sincerety,
Ken Kratz
Pomeroy Green Cooperative sharehotder
att:

Parcel map of Pomeroy Green
Bil.ts to Pomeroy Green for water/sewer/sotar panel use f rom city of santa ctara Bitt to Pomeroy Green for gas service form PG&E
property Devetopment Agreement between City of Santa Ctara and Pomeroy Green 6 lo.3 k
PB0PSB!! pEr$oltli8ut AoRFEilENT
lsEgqNI FqE ryq$-o_{s gl_grlcrRrc ArrD !FAr8R DrsTRrturroil 9lsTq{s r0 sumrrtsroxg, $rpnovgrgNi ij{ siiiisdsJ - fr Siii*rrolr ot sBltERs, sronx onrrrs' ilD ocffiuu,ic-i6fo-i'fr6iiiiilEs.

Thts dgreenant aadc Btd Entcrtd toto ?hl.s . day of
19-r by rbd bctr*u tba cl.tr of $rnte clara, a uunlolpal conporatiou, ltmeln crllad ths n0ltfn and a real Fropefty
omarr devrloper or nrbdlridtr, hcreln ca11ad the rDcvalop€rr. lflTt{8998?tlr
?lHBnBlS, e f1na1 nap of, subdtytston, rccord of aurvey or butldtrg per"olb {Slte Gbarasoe} appllcatlon baE pgw baen mbnl.ired, io bhe OLty for approval ard ecccptatca, corcflsg e*ta1n rcrf, ostabe rnoun as lnd ca],led Erc!rl* Hcosr Porclrlr Ftin
aadl
K}IEREAS, tbe nDaveloprrr rcgulrea scrtaln uttllttes and prbl.lc wprka faeLlttiec ln order iq gerrrlet the proparty undcr rhc ntnlcrur statrdards establ-fubed by rbe Clty and, 'rlHl8glsr tbe 0tay, by and rtrrougb lre Etiy connclt, bss eaacted carceln Ordlnences srd icsolutlonr and qerteln Rules and,ftegulrt'ions have bees, pronulgated coaoeralns fhe cubJcsc 6&ttar of thts agrue$rn? and, Sn8nEfflr tlrc 0tty has cortaLn rerponslblil.tlec for oalateuance a:rd oPeret'1on fsr the estlnated uccl\il 1lfe of 0ha requlred utlltlteE and publtc aarvlce faclllttcs and f,or prod,ating the nacessrr:/ co!:rEcr,&g syatsn,, geaerll 91ant aad apputtcnancts, and thc gtty la agreel,ng to dlschargc iboae respoEst bllltles, fl0ti THEREF0RET 1rr coneld?r.?ioa of the preudrec, and ln ordgr to crrrT out thc lstari rnd" prrposc of a*id 0rdipaaces, Roeoluttrons and Beggtettons, lt Lr agraGd by aad bc0wsen th6 pErgicg ar folLore:

S!0TIOS lr
?hat all 0rdlnences, Reeolulions, Ruler rnd &cgulatlons and ertabItshai pqll"ciea of thr City rnd tbc leltt of ?hc Statc of CelLfornla conccrolng the sulJect nat'?6r of, tbls *gfocqrni are heraby raferrad to 'aad lncorporetcd lprcl:r to the cafia effrct ar if thry rrarc cat out at bng?h hAreln. Sald Ordlnansea and Rcgul*lonr lnclude, bnt ar. not ltalted to, tba fo11ordn6:

G1t't Ord1n$ca !lo. 6lt es asnded by Ordlnrace [o!. ?05, ?1S, ?5t and 6]8 t$uUdltlstoa Fap Aco, Subdlnlsloa Procadurir et6.l; Ordlaaace tlo' ?75 ac dDeDded by ordinance Nos. 76?1 789,8J0, s3g, gtr5, t[6, d50 end $72 (?ontre Ordlnenca); Ordtnance No. dja as anended (1958 Untforu fuitding Codel;Ordinance No. 859 (fnprovelnent Code); BesolutLon No. 6Jj (subdlnie{on or Developsent of, &eal Praperiy); Rules and RegulatLons. Iacluded tu the above are all of, thE above referred !o regulatiops and substlLuilous tberefor, as a.ureaded to the tlue qf exeeution of tbia agreenent.

SEOTION 2:

Tbe 0evelopsr agrs6s!
a. To perforn each ard every provielon required by tbe Cir,y ta be perforoed by tbe Developer in eaeb aad every one of saLil 0r&Laaneeg ard other reguletLons,
b, Ts graut to ihe 0igy witltout charge, fres and Clsar of encuebrances, anf and all stlpulated eassnaate and rtghts of way in and to his seid real property nec€.sss.ry for the Clty in order tbai its water, electrleity and/or sewor 1in6s ln or to Bald real property nay be extendqd,
c, To ladennify and hold the cily harnLess aud free frou aLL dapage and lnjury done to any uttllcy, publlc f,actlity or otber roaterlaL or lagtallatlon of the Clty on said, rEal estatg wblqh tbe Developer or any contracbor or subeontrac* 'tor of the Developer, or any eoployee thereofr shall do in grading cr working upon sald real €Eta?€.
d. To construct and lnprove a1I publlc works facillttes and otlrer inproveoents as set- out, herein, accordiag to the staadard,s here- toiore establlghed, and according to the gradee, plans arrd speciflcattons thereof, all as approved by the Cit'y &gineerl andt as security for sild lnprovlfoente and facllttles, to firrnlsp and poet a gqoit eufftclent corporate sureby cotrPally boud nrnalng ln iavor of tbe Clty ln ths faee arnount of no lesc thsD
Lt-ooo ' DoIIara, ail as prsvided for uy pi6ffi-rffi fustueia and Pror-essloas Code of the sEate of Caltfornlar'the ordlnanceE of the Cliyr and tble agreenent' e. That upon approvaL of the flnal nap of tbe subdid-elon' tbe record of survey or the bulldlng pernl't covcrl'Eg the reaJ. estate to be inpnoved, and before eny wofk ls done theretnt the Developer shall piy to Ehe Clty all ourosr excePt costs to be borui ty tbe Git'y, shown in Seetlon;f bereof, to bE due under the terEs and provieions of thla agreeo8at.
sEctroil 3:
fhat al} sarqg Ebowl herels to be payable by tha Devaloper to tbe City are due and p.ayable !o the Ctt'y upon bbe Brecutlon of thla agtreeneat; provl"ded bowever, thai at Developerts optlon, the davelsPmaat costs for electd.c e.nd water utitl,ty isprovetreatc (ar sborrE ln $cc.jBubsecilons l End J hcrei]l) oay be pald to the Clty 1o two lnstallmenis as follows:
a, At lsagt one-bal.f tbereof upon exequglon of thl"s agrecBeni; b, Rerainlng balauce upon cooplEtl'on of thE proJect.

Eacb inetaLlailon to be accoep).lsbEd by tbe Ctty sball constltute a seParets pnoJect for thts purposer
-2-
88CTIOil L:
. Th&? ell of tbe-provtslsnc of, thls egreanca? aad all rork to bc done plrtlu,Ei go tbe terls of tble rgr*coent trr to b* pngre.lcd rltbtn oaa ye€ur froa end after the datc sfld yeer ftrst sbove r,,rrittsr, sBStrsl 5:

That ths epeclel provlolona concctolng tba garttcular rEal. 6!to,te rgferred tc abovr, belng attac.had hereto, are hereby lDcorporatcd herotu ead aErcealy rnade a per* of this .grc*oent.

SBCIION 6:

The faltbfirl and Frsspt Ferfotnanaa by thc Developer of each and evrrT teru ud eondttlos coatslned !*rr1a Xe aada .e! eJ(paess condl.tlon precede4t to ths duty of thc 0ity io perfbm Enf acr tn oonneqtlon wlth tbis trrnsactJ.on, and, tbe f,allure, aegl.act or.rcfilael of, tb€ 0eveloprr to so p.rfoni, otr Eo pay any tror8yt due harcunder rhcn due ctrall reLcaaa tha Clty fron any eod ell ebtlsatloas berEutder anil the Cl.tyr at 1ts clacti.oa, Eey enforce ths pcrforuancc of any pnovtsl,on hereln, or any rlght.accnrlag to tbe Clty 9r Eay pursuc eny ranedy nhatsoever lt Day have rmdEr ths lawe of tho Stats qf Calljornla or tbc Ordinenca or. Rasolutlons of the Clty, lu tbe €Teat of any guch defaulc Uy Developer. sEstlo$ ?:

Tbai tha lollowtng are thg estluatad a.dounig of, corur to !e bome by thr rrspGctivc paratea hereto, end lt lc furCbar,usdcrstood ad agread that sald a,sounts ars €stloaicr only end arg mbJgct to ttral dfterolBetlon upon" cornplatlon of tbe worb: : .

P{fitITr DBsErnlpq$T cosls qlltrs cosrs
e. Easencuts & Blghts-o!-mY
'rOn rltcni sso Rcc. 6J5r
Sec. 6, 9: Tablc II
Scc Etlnrlalrc,o No' i
c. Strect Fa
cec Ord. Trlle II,
Yl-!B & Inrprovcocatc;
5J1, Scc. 55; Baa.635t lhc. llrl3rltll5
S 100I hy rtareloPcr t{uc
b. Eaae$ents & Rlghts-ol-way
rgc Rsa, 635.

Tebilc fI ilOff gi.

Sec, 9
ten;
& 10:
-F
f-9r93L,.
rrcl+rqr
d, Street Curblng, Bnttcrrng rnd foproveq€Etsi see 0rd,63l $;. t5;il;;.Ei l, iiuii-ri; $;:fl pEvm4FF$osts jggtllg-ggs,g.
*
I brv dtrveloDor
'*
lloal
$trctuCea ia nlt
Sce Speclal Elcctrdcrl Agreonrnt
t B.'rlq.I? I fOO( Iebol
-
-b
Sse SllluLtim So. 2
e. .Sideralk Inprovaats: s€e
drril.63lrSec.55; Rer. 635,
Teble If, Sec. 1I
Sea $ttsqlatlou l{o. 2
f. Street [ame ghne: aee -: nie.6ii"riuiiii, Fac.u Sjg3:g:lgg- *---{gs" -.- g. Street free Plantt[g & ParkuaaY Imwovcneqtg: see 0rd. 63i; sio. 31 & 55; Bes.635' table II, Sec. 11
b. StreEt Ligbtbg; See 0rd.63lr
Ses.55; Ris. 635, 9sc' 5;
?able II, Sco. LLi Elcctclc
Dcparioaat, Eogulatlme
Electr{c Utiuty luprovamcatr;
Rgs. 635,8ee.5i lebls fI'.Stc'
18; Etrct.Dcpt. 8cgc. 2-18
t
-{. grt6r uttlltv Inproveoentei
ase 8cg.635'i!ec.-516 & l8t
Tsbls I.I
t
{lcludas rteDe t
.k. Santtarr Srrnr Inprovcuratg
non altlr: scr ffi. 63I.8rC. 5r;;li;cil,5ic.i,ig-il6ii-ir l-gfl:oo - lJg4!ei- ': r.i.f' '
"ti. ...
--?,i!i',.:
'.:,\r"', -.

FACITIIT
Or $ecrea0ion charge; see Ord.
6J1, Sec. 56 as arcsded by 0rd: ?05
p. Ctty hgt4oering & Inapaction;
cee Ree. 635, SEc. &
?sf.- ?16( of Bonil doturled. cha.rtsg
DEySrOEMEfr C03T8 CTTYTS COST$
IGone t
$_&g,gg.__ t__$e.oo__
$-;g'ggg $gjl"t"dl-l{qo:99-- I ilour
$ 1942.00 $--pas--
$ r0,' ?t.1?
-
t t&,854.25
* -(aorrz?ioe)
62?.0o
58 $ _
e18.34

1. Sanl.tarlr Sewer Inproycmgnts roff siter; See Res.635.

Table II; Sec. 19
n. Stora Draluage Iqproyeucnte non slt,e'': aee Ord.53I.8cc" Jji'na8.615, Sec.5: Tible If Sec. 19
n_. Stor[ Draltrage loprov@ents toff slten. aes Ord.63l.8cc.

58.1i ord.75E; Res.635.- Tabti II, Sec. 1g
Sac St{urlatloa !Io. 3
Developer dcgr eleco to pay only I of eald utlllty -Tdoeslffirt costs llpon execu?tror sf thlg agrse&snt as aforesaLd.

I$ l{gfNBSS l{$tAEOF, sal"d peritca have cauesd tbase pfesants to bs cxacuted the date and year flrst, above rrrl-ttonr
TO?AL DETSTOPDIEUI COSI|T.AS $HOUIN AEOYE:
rottl, 6xrr'5 s0ET As sH0llil l80YE;
DTIE FROIi{ DS[E[.OPBR:

DEFEAruD CBEDIISI see epeclal" condtttons attacbed.

DEFEnRfiII CEARGFST see epeclel qqndtl,ong attachud
A{OUAt FAYAH.ET
-5-
cAlourrTloN sr@t
glclll#n Eu..Es lOr.EnDr offiEil ,' : I
$rnlterv Smrrl
Fccrr 5.212 te. O S?|O/I. -
Csnstnctlon Crraditr;
l2n ttP 8a5 L.F. a $r.?t
4' vEP 506.tF 3 S1,75 Lll Ir C faSO qscl
Clern Otrt
Storo Drelnr
Feccr 6.11? Ac, e $750/Lc t
Gonrlnrctlon C rcdit e l
UP ncP 6A L.F. . S3.50 -
un ncP ?95 L.r, c $?.oo
C.8. A.'aa $UO oech
Poaer.oy Awnuc -
Ssmvo .4ct. pa?ln€,
L5,&& $q, rt. s so.os
f Sasc Eock n'7n $q. Ft. o $O'13 I
3tt E{6 11,?31 $o-.rtt $0rI1 -
lrfrrrr{-CsdSai
Prvtrg. Foamy lvauo
lcnorw Stora Srrcr
lcfcnrcd Cherroat
I rrrcr
brgr. & InrPoctlon
s3,093.?5
8{15.50
rrobo.oo
6r.m
15r}t4lt,25
Gliyr u 0os!
rJno.00
s?,183.0o
$4,6i9.00
$4r659.0o
-38r,25
-$4, i:f*.OO
tz,l98.oo
5'565'Co
lao.0O IE 4O$25ocach
Ci3,r Pertnr Csgla:

Ccntedlnc Fvlng - Dsrton - 9500 5q. Ft. Ottdlttg 0,05 8oc& 0.U J" Pl,llt
Sc,9t+5.00
cityrs Cost
-grlt $0.3r
$qfogz.og.
fitroa?.oo
$1rt53.oO
$2,304.00
3t.<2t.oo
$8"of,l.oo
18a6glr-0q
$26r62?,oO
$ ,.105?.58

1.q,2.dO I ,,J?r.55
STIH'IATIOI{ SHEE|!
EICHIAR $0iAS FolmOI 0f,EBf
Stlruhtlon llo. 1:

Thc dqvelopcr rhall dedtcate "4!roorR/}{ tor Bentorr Strsct, and BO foat R/tf lor Poucrtry lvdrut tacludlq thal porllon frontin5 thc axeludcd pr*el.

Etl'u.rlatlon l{o. 2:
the dcvelopor 5hrl1 canstruoi th6 p.vlrlg, eurb erid Euitaf,, Ind stdrm.lk in Ecnton $treet rnd ln Pod€rcy Avenuc, 'the Lnpmverlen?s ln Ssaton st,roet 9hat1 ert.nd to thg ceni€r ltrrt of ths tlrgot. lhe daveloper shs1I, bq rsl$bursed for the oost of the ioproveqlento of,the southcrtyr l2 foot, dcla otrtp ol Ecnt,on Street, Esttsated aas! -
$ZrgL5.oO, [o Ut
ralnbursrd nLthln tr€ yrar!.
lhc clcvclapcr gh.ll comtrnrct 3t foot of paulng rlrd ihe eurb, Xuiter and slds\telk tn Fooaroy, tdj.c6nt to lhte dcveloprcnt lncludlng the fmnlrge of ihc fcalducl Farcel. fha developar ghrll algo cotratruct JO fcct of pcrmenant lrupmvmnts for a dittrncs of rppeitatahr fZ? .fcot nor{,her\r fion i.hlE dcveLopront: Tho laproveeqrtc ln Foterol Ayafiu? shrJ,l incltrds the raplaceucnt of the odsiln3 5 foolv rralh-rdy adJaccni to thc rert.r\r edgo of the pavi.n6l, ylth on€ of slullar constnrctlon, lhc developer shal! s.Iso lrovlds e $nooth tranaltion, at ihe touL|erly end gf the {er aolrstnrctlan to Joln vlth the Fdstlng pevtng.

The Ctty ghrll rcLnburso the dcveloper ulthln tuo years for tha cost of lnpmvlng thc westarly 11 foet,1 thc norther\r 12? feot extensionr. a# tte cooL of pdvoocnt, the plact:rg of 9{ of brac rcck tn the southorlt lrrnrltlon gectlon. The cstluatsd cost of the Cliy portion la $5r082.0o.

Stirnrletlon fo. 1r
lhq Eor! of tho olfaltc ttorrr draln l.n Poneroy Avenue sha].1 bd p41d to liro dcvrloper ln the fort of progrera ptrlnnents as follot{ol
40F rtrga Irrt ot the uork LE sotsFlet., SoF uhen 601 coaplata, and tho flnal 206 upon accrytauce of the rork Ey thc Cityr
thr dovcloyer rhr$ no! strr.t work on th.r Ponercy Avgruc ator:n draln ll.na untLl the 61ty Engtnear hag revteucd and.ccrpf,ed t,he utlJ.t prlces subdllied by t'ho developc.-ra eoBlractor.

Stlnubtler llo. L:

All Cllf cost8 .r' es?lrstcd only and ehaU !e lecalculeted uFort bccaptancs ol the nork bt thc 8riy.

Arl
I
I
o F(i?y E OF COUNIY ASSESSOR
-
sANlA
''--{,5tl-LkllLrFLl-rl l2ol2tl22l23la,l25l
| 'iiel'n-r l'izg | ,ii' l,'-r l,u-r I
Etiiltan I $l e2l
tFtr-J
'tEii--'l
a 0!l Mlst? I
trfiI-] lsl
b2631!2al1!26t lUa9l1267l!255132131325r I
I 0e I 6J I il I e I e I s! | & I A9 I
Lrl-rrlrl-ut-rfuJ-fu
CLARA COUNTY cAtlFolNlA
BOOX
290
PACE
69 1" - 75'
@
@ r-ti-T
144 tlaa I
I 52r!l
I 342!t
14! -
t47 I
I nnl

POM E ROY AREEN

COOPERATIVE
n.o.5. 125/29

5.54 AC.

I
o
tts
LJ
E
o
o.
l-Lkt-L_Ln I 4Al 491 501 5t I
lrilrl..i lr-*l..lo I
I
otrArL t" ?o'
lr
L
---- -_
J
E
FLI-r-t-LLrl l52lAls4l5nl
lfirlszls lii, hiirl
l:lUE lin-67Ei6tEtr3l
I ztl Ela la I
Ln-r-F-l_Ll
151
9e\l1o$ @
P o MeR.oY 6RtEu't
ATN
-1 r6aul h ' Qc"A+
-a zqo'61-o'- L'x- 2oo1
I
70 a
NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1o24-oo18
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registralion Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions.

1. Name of Property
Historic name: Pomeroy Green
Other names/site number:

Name of related multiple property listing : N/A
(Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing 2, Location
Street & number: 1087-1151 Pomeroy Avenue and320l-3289 Benton Street City or town: State County: Santa Clara
Not For Publication: Vicinity

3. State/FederalAgency Certification
As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certiff that this X nomination _
request for determination of eligibility meets
the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.

In my opinion, the property X_ meets _ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of signifi cance:
_national _statewide _flocal
Applicable National Register Criteria:
aA _B XC _D
il State Historic Preservation Officer February 17,2021 Signature of certiffing official/Title: Date
Celifornia Sfafe of Historic Preservation
State or Federal aqency/bureau or Tribal Government
In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria.

Signature of commenting official: Date
Title: State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Santa Clara, California
County and State

4. National Park Service Certification
I hereby certit/ that this property is:
_entered in the National Register
-determined eligible for the National Register
-determined not eligible for the National Register
_removed from the National Register
_other (explain:)
Signature of the Keeper Date of Action

5. Classification
Ownership of Property
(Check
Private:
as many boxes as
Public - Local
Public - State
Public - Federal
Category of Property
(Check only one box.)
Building(s)
District
Site
Structure
Object
X
Sections l-6page2
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Number of Resources within Property
(Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing
t7
t9 0
Santa Clara, California
County and State
buildings
sites
structures
objects
Total
Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register

6. Function or Use
Historic Functions
(Enter categories from instructions.)
DOMESTIC/multiple dwell in g
SOClAl/clubhouse _
LANDSCAPE/park
Current Functions
(Enter categories from instructions.)
DOMESTIC/multiple dwel lin g
SOClAl/clubhouse
LANDSCAPEipaTk
Sections l-6 page 3
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 Ol\ilB No. 102+0018
Green
Name Property
Santa Clara, California
County and State

7. Description
Architectu ral Classifi cation
(Enter categories from instructions.)

MODERN MOVEMENT
Materials: (enter categories from instructions.)
Principal exterior materials of the property: Plvwood. Concrete. Stucco. Glass Narrative Description
(Describe the historic and current physical appearance and condition of the property. Describe contributing and noncontributing resources if applicable. Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property, such as its location, type, style, method of construction, setting, size, and significant features. Indicate whether the property has historic integrity.)
Summary Paragraph
Pomeroy Green is an Eichler Homes, Mid-century Modern multi-family housing complex located on the northeast cofner of Pomeroy Avenue and Benton Street, near the western limits of the city of Santa Clara. The complex is in a primarily residential zoned part of the city consisting of tract homes and schools, and a church. The district includes sixteen multifamily buildings of varied configurations ranging from two to eight two-story townhouses per building and a clubhouse and swimming pool set in extensively landscaped grounds. Buildings are oriented on a north-south or east-west axis, and arranged in a manner to enclose motor courts, parking lots, or .
social spaces. Buildings are constructed of concrete masonry unit walls and post and beam construction, allowing the fronts and backs of each townhouse to feature large expanses of glass windows and sliding glass doors. Wood siding and panels of stucco are also used on the exterior walls. Townhouses are all the same size, and each successive townhouse in a building is a mirror image of its adjacent neighbor. Only small changes have been made to its design and materials, including replacement of some doors and windows, and addition of some fireplaces and additional parking. The district is in good condition and retains historic integrity.

Section 7 page 4
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Histodc Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Santa Clara California
County and State
Narrative Description
Location and Setting
Pomeroy Green has been an owner-occupied multi-family housing cooperative since inception.

Owners are shareholders in the cooperative and have the exclusive use of their townhouse unit.

Shareholders manage the complex through an elected Board of Directors-five shareholders who meet monthly to determine maintenance and occupancy policies. Day-to-day management of the complex is performed by a professional property manager overseen by the Board. The original construction was inspected by the Federal Housing Administration as well as city building inspectors. The success of Pomeroy Green helped secure the subsequent development of Pomeroy West, another Eichler Homes project in the Mid-century Modern style located across the street to the west. The two complexes share most of the same architectural features.

Pomeroy Green is surrounded by housing from the same period, the 1960s. Tract homes are to the south across Benton Street, and to the north. A church is to the east. The city expanded westward from its origin, called the Old Quad, near the Santa Clara Mission and the railroad on the east side of the city. In contrast to the surrounding tract homes, Pomeroy Green is an oasis of trees, green lawns, and open space (Photo 7). In the summer, Pomeroy Green is noticeably cooler due to the trees and ground cover.

The city's housing expansion replaced the fruit orchards that were once the predominant feature of the Santa Clara Valley. The valley is bordered by the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west and south and the Diablo Mountain range to the east. The Santa Cruz Mountains buffer the Pacific Ocean-based winter storms and contribute to the mild Mediterranean climate in the valley. The mild climate allows a wide variety of exotic plants to thrive and numerous architectural styles to succeed, including the modern architecture of Pomeroy Green.

Pomeroy Green was once part of a much larger property, a vanished fruit orchard owned by the Pomeroy family. Benton Street was realigned farther to the south, in a reverse curve design, to accommodate construction. A ranch style single-family house at 1075 Pomeroy Avenue, outside the district boundary is surrounded on three sides by Pomeroy Green Buildings 6, 14, and 16.

Further research is needed to confirm if the ranch house is the last home of the Pomeroys.

The surrounding neighborhood is suburban in character, mostly single-story residential buildings, and includes two elementary schools and a high school within walking distance. The historic El Camino Real highway is a half-mile to the north and features commercial businesses and connections to public transportation.

Landscape One Contributing Site
Open space prevails between buildings. The site is relatively flat, and landscape and building architecture provide visual interest. Alternating areas of open and closed spaces are interconnected (Figure 3). The frontage along Benton Street and Pomeroy Avenue is composed of varying amounts of open space. Some areas are relatively shallow and front buildings, while Section 7 page 5
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registralion Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green Santa California
Name of Property County and State
others feature deep open spaces that provide glimpses into the interior of the complex (Photo 12). This irregularity creates visual interest in contrast to the regimented pattern of landscaping and pavements in front of the single-family ffact homes nearby, a result of the repeated front and side setbacks and other requirements of the zoning ordinances.

The buildings enclose a central common area with clubhouse and pool. Social and recreational spaces also include a playground and basketball court. A small park (Photo 18) and herb garden enhance the consistent architectural character of the complex and provide a space for community activity. Those spaces feature trees, benches, and pavements as found elsewhere in the complex and thus help unify the complex. The park includes a circular planting bed with flowering plants surrounded by a circular exposed aggregate walkway with benches. The herb garden features the same concentric circle design and benches.

Spaces are interconnected by pathways between buildings (Photo 19). Rectangular shaped exposed aggregate pads placed in lawn areas echo the rectangular shape of the buildings and reinforce the look of the complex. Outdoor lighting and benches are provided along the pathways. The exterior lighting fixtures are globes on steel poles and provide low-level lighting throughout the complex. The globe fixtures continue on the front fences of the townhouse units.

They light the parking areas and the trees in front of each unit, illuminating the tree branches and canopy to provide a dramatic visual effect from both the interior and exterior of the units.

The common grounds are extensively landscaped. Approximately three hundred trees are arranged to enclose the driveways, parking lots, and social spaces, as well as to help define pathways. The trees shade the asphalt parking lots and motor courts, as well as the units, and keep the housing complex cooler in summer. Sod and ivy ground cover also contribute to the cooling effect. This shading is particularly welcome because the townhouses do not include air conditioning.

Many original landscape features are extant. The small, landscaped park along the backside of Buildings 6 and 14 features sod ground cover, three large elm trees, and numerous benches. The park is separated from the city street by a six-foot high board-and-batten fence.

Evergreen pear trees (Pyrus kawakami) line the long driveways along Buildings 1,2 and 3 from Pomeroy Avenue and Buildings 7, 8, 9 and I I from Benton Street, referred to by residents as the long Pomeroy and Benton courts. Further research is necessary to determine if those trees are original. The trees specified on the plans are privet trees (Ligustrum japonicum) and Victorian box (Pittosperum undulatum), though they would be about the same height as the pear trees, matching the original design intent.

These trees transform the driveway areas into outdoor spaces with well-defined edges. Since a single species of tree is planted on both sides of the driveways at regular intervals, a clean, straight line is created. The crowns reach across the width of the driveway, almost touching, thereby enclosing and defining space. The trees define the space and are also efficient in shading pedestrians and driveways from the intense California sun' Section 7 page6
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registralion Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara California
Name of Property County and State
Several other spaces at Pomeroy Green are defined by the tree selections. Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) are an efficient, functionalsolution to landscaping a parking lot.

Providing shade, they are low maintenance, requiring infrequent and little pruning and leaf litter removal. The trees are of a uniform height with the trees in front of the buildings, thereby extending the tree canopy across the entire lot, helping to define and enclose the space while shading the lot in summer and diverting wind up and over the complex in winter.

The long walkway that runs east-west through the complex, starting at Building 6 and ending at Building I l, is defined by elm trees (Ulmus parvifolia) that line the walk on one side. The regular spacing of those trees helps define the edge of the walkway space, enhancing the clean lines of the space. Those elms, along with the pepper trees (Schinus terebinthifolius), birch trees (Bettula alba), and Chinese pistache trees (Pistacia chinensis), on the south, west, north, and east sides respectively, surround the clubhouse and pool area. Those trees help to define the space, provide shade over the walkways in summer and help direct the winter winds up and over the complex.

The use of sod for ground cover along the frontage, in the small park, along walkways between buildings, and around the small basketball court, is a practical solution for plantings that must tolerate moderate pedestrian traffic and recreational activity. The Santa Clara Valley Water District, the government agency that delivers water to customers in the valley, has encouraged homeowners to replace sod with drought tolerant plants. Alternatives to sod have been explored by Pomeroy Green residents. The balance of the ground cover is primarily ivy (Hedra canariensis), used in locations where little foot traffic is expected, such as borders along walkways and in the medians of the parking courts.

Buildings Seventeen Contributing Buildings
General Attributes
Exteriors
Buildings are oriented on an east-west or north-south axis to take advantage of sunlight. The orientation of many of the buildings at ninety degrees to one another and the generous building separations provide privacy as well as allowing unobstructed views in most cases. Each building group is aranged around a driveway or parking lot to facilitate access to automobiles. Grouping the buildings around parking lots and driveways blocks vehicular noise from the townhouse back yards. Each townhouse also has an integral carport for one passenger vehicle. The entry door for the townhouse is inside the carport, providing shelter. Superior to the secondary entry door found in the garage of a typical single-family detached home, the carport entry door is illuminated by daylight and there is not the added expense ofa secondary entrance door.

The Mid-century Modern architectural style features repeated building elements, modular design and construction, and rectangular shapes. The townhouse units are allthe same size and design.

Mirrored floor plans contribute to the modular look of the architecture. Townhouses are assembled into rectangular buildings of two, three, four, five, six, and eight townhouses. The architect refers to these buildings as blocks.

Section 7 pageT
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Other modular and rectangular elements in the design and construction include flat roofs that further enhance the rectangular look. Entry doors are flush and painted in bright colors to provide a rectangular focal point that emphasizes the modular design. Door height has been standardized at seven feet, matching the height of the underside of the carport roof, so that it visually enhances the sense of the carport space. The carport roofs extend into and away from the townhouse, further emphasizing the carport space. The roof underside features a flat, white-colored surface lit at night. This surface creates a visually distinctive rectangular horizontal plane that directs the eye towards the front door. This planar surface extends beyond the fagade of the building intermittently, for every fwo units, and provides relief to the otherwise long, rectangular building.

The townhouse roofs cantilever four feet beyond the rear wall of the building, forming an overhang that protects the sliding glass windows and doors. They also provide a decorative element since the boards are chamfered along their length, creating a shadow that directs the eye out, from the rooms through the windows, towards the sky. The townhouses and the clubhouse include rectangular walls constructed of concrete masonry units (CMU) laid in a stack bond that echoes the rectangular wall, contributing to the modular design. The CMU walls and wood posts support structural beams that allow the buildings to feature large expanses of glass windows and sliding glass doors.

Windowless walls, made of CMU, on the ends of the buildings provide visual and acoustic privacy between buildings (Photo 24) and provide a backdrop for shadows cast by the trees (Photo 25). To further enhance privacy, the concrete block walls that separate one townhouse from another extend past the front and rear walls of the homes, obstructing views into neighbors' yards. Light is reflected from those block walls into the interiors of the units (Photo 26).

While the rear walls of the townhouses extend from the ground to the roof, creating an imposing impression, the front fagade is irregular. In the front of each townhouse, the second floor extends over the front patio, slightly creating a soffit finished in textured stucco. The second floor spans and partially covers the carport, creating a recessed volumetric space in the building's fagade (Photo 27).The flat carport ceiling, when lit at night, creates a dramatic effect enhanced by the shadow pattern of the two-by-four wood framing near the entry.

Large, fixed pane windows and sliding glass doors on the first floor, front and rear faqades, visually connect the indoors with the outdoors, and allow a lot of natural light into the buildings.

To further maximize sunlight, buildings are oriented on either a north-south or east-west axis, ignoring the alignment with the surrounding city streets. Flat roofs also allow more sunlight on the landscape and adjacent buildings because flat roofs block less sunlight than sloped roofs.

On the second floor of each townhouse, the front fagade features four identical namow doublehung windows that extend from the floor to the beam near the ceiling. The windows are divided into three parts: a double-hung top and middle over a lower fixed portion. The repeated windows and the block walls emphasize the modular look of the architecture.

Section 7 pageS
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form '10-900 OMB No- 1O2+OO18
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Front windows are located on each side of the front bedrooms, next to the interior concrete block walls. This window placement helps to brighten the adjacent interior walls and floors and leaves the center of the wall free for furniture. The symmetrical location of the windows on each unit gives a rhythm to the fagade of the entire building and helps to differentiate each unit. Narrow windowsills make the second-floor rooms appear bigger because there is no shadow cast by the sill onto the interior wall.

The second-floor bedrooms at the back of the townhouse are each lit by a sliding glass window, as well as a fixed pane window next to the cement block wall. The fixed pane location allows daylight to fall on the wall surface, improving the overall lighting in the room. Five skylights further illuminate the second-floor rooms. Skylights are above the two full bathrooms, master bedroom, laundry area, and stairwell and second floor hallway.

Interiors
The ground floor features an open-floor plan. The half bathroom in the center effectively separates the various living spaces. Upon entering the unit from the carport, a short hallway leads directly to the stairwell, the living room, and the half bathroom. Opposite the half bathroom is a multipurpose area and kitchen accessed from the hallway or the dining space. The living room and dining area overlook the back yard, and the multipurpose room overlooks the front yard.

A staircase to the second-floor lands at a short hallway that provides access to four bedrooms and two bathrooms. Two bedrooms are located at the front, and two at the back. The master bedroom includes a bathroom and small walk-in closet. All bedrooms include built-in closet space. The second floor also features a laundry area near the bedrooms. A boiler room, including a gas-fired water heater, pumping equipment for the radiant floor heating system, and a potable hot water heater, is also on the second floor. These centralized utilities are an improvement over their garage location as is normally found in other types of housing from the period.

Interior walls and doors are finished with mahogany plywood, stained to darken the color, or gypsum board. The gypsum board is used in areas of high fire risk, such as the boiler room, bedrooms, and in the stairwell. Other finishes include kitchen cabinets with sliding Masonite panels for doors, and cabinet drawers comprised of wood faces affixed to plastic trays that have rounded corners for ease of cleaning. Unusual installations include a stovetop cabinet height lower than industry standards (32 inches versus 36 inches) to allow greater observation and ease of cooking, stovetop controls located toward the front of the appliance for ease of access, a cabinet-mounted wall oven installed at waist height for ease of use, and laundry facilities convenient to bedrooms.

Yards
Each townhouse features two fenced yards, a small front yard and a larger back yard (Photo 28).

The yards are accessed through floor to ceiling sliding glass doors that, along with adjacent floor to ceiling fixed-pane glass windows, allow a visual connection befween the indoors and outdoors (Photo 29). This indoor-outdoor connection visually expands the interior space and is a signature feature of Eichler's Mid-century Modern architecture.

Section 7 page9
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Residents have planted extensively in their front and back yards. Many residents have planted fruit trees; citrus trees in particular thrive here. Flowering plants are found frequently in the front yards. Bougainvillea is a favorite plant in those locations as well as other climbing vines that cover some of the fencing and soften the rectangular architecture' The front and back yards feature six-foot high fences that separate neighboring townhouses and adjacent properties. Fencing provides privacy for the yards and prevents views into ground floor interiors. The front yard fence includes tongue-and-groove boards placed vertically, facing the public side of the fence. These boards provide a more'finished appearance than the board-andbatten fence used in the back yard and help to define and accentuate the rectangular space.

Front yards may include a decorative feature on the inside face of the fence and gate in a section of fence that separates the yard from the carport. This feature consists of vertical wood strips, ll2" thickby l-l12'wide, and spaced 314" apart, applied to the fence framing as well as the swinging door that provides access to the carport. This decorative fence treatment disguises the swinging door and makes it look like part of the fence, thereby giving the whole door and fence assembly a planar look emphasizing the space rather than the fence.

C onstruction Materials
Portland cement concrete floor slabs and block walls, wood framing, plywood, and stucco are used in a manner that expresses their decorative, protective, and structural properties. Aluminum frames of the windows and sliding glass doors have a brushed finish to provide a non-glare surface.

Construction consists of a slab on grade with a steelreinforced spread footing in the concrete block walls. The block walls funher serye to separate one unit from another, provide a fire and acoustic barrier between units, and support structural beams that provide support for each townhouse second floor and the clubhouse roof. Exterior wood-framed walls and some interior walls are inserted into the wall/beam structural system and are non-load bearing.

The underside of the carports features a textured gypsum to create the flat, homogeneous surface characteristic of modern architecture. The roof over the townhouse consists of a waterproof membrane supported by 2" by S" tongue and groove boards that allow for expansion and contraction. The boards are exposed inside the unit, and the joints between the boards creates an interesting pattern.

The exterior walls, both front and back, feature vertically grooved plywood that contrasts with the long horizontal profile of the buildings. Two stucco panels on the rear wall extend from the head of the glass doors and windows on the first floor to the sill of the sliding glass and fixed pane windows on the second floor. These panels'rectangular shape complements the rectangular windows.

Section 7 page 10
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara California
Name of Property County and State
The clubhouse features the same type of modern construction and sfyle as the townhouses. Floor to ceiling fixed windows and sliding glass doors are inserted into the post and beam construction along one side of the room, overlooking the pool and deck. The beams and roof extend past the glass wall toward the pool and deck, protecting the interior from the summer sun as well as visually directing attention toward the outdoors. The windows blur the distinction between the interior and exterior spaces, visually extending the sense of space.

I ndiv idual Buil d ing D es crip t ions
Unless otherwise noted, windows and doors are original. An intensive survey of condition and alterations was conducted in December 2018 and updated in early 2021. Overall condition is good. Minor alterations to exterior doors and windows do not compromise integrity. Many residents have remodeled their kitchens to include new cabinets (replacing the sliding Masonite doors with swing type doors), appliances, and fixtures, and most residents have painted the wood paneling a lighter color. Known changes are noted in the individual unit descriptions. Kitchen improvements and window replacements are in the same locations as original features and are reversible, with minimal impact on integrity.

Building I I I l3-l123 Pomeroy Avenue six townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors of lll7, I I 19, and I 123 Pomeroy front and rear fagades, have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents. The interior of I123 Pomeroy is original (only first floor viewed).

Building 2 ll37-l l5l Pomeroy Avenue eight townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors of I 139 and 1l4l Pomeroy, front and rear fagade, have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents. At the rear of the second story of unit I139, the sliding window and fixed pane windows have been replaced with a window with a fixed pane in the middle and two sliders on each side of the fixed pane; the original wood divider that separated the original sliding glass window and the fixed pane has been removed to accommodate the new window Unit I149 front and back, first and second stories, the original windows and sliding glass doors been replaced with windows and sliding glass doors that have slightly wider aluminum frames. Townhouse at I l5l Pomeroy has vinyl framed windows on the second floor and original windows and sliding glass doors on the ground floor. Entry doors on I 139 and I l5 I Pomeroy have applied decoration. The interior of I l5 I Pomeroy is original (only first floor viewed).

Building 3 1125-1135 Pomeroy Avenue six townhouses
All the windows on 1125, 1129, I l3 l, and I 133 Pomeroy, except possibly rear fagade bottom windows that cannot be seen, have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents. Entry door on ll27 has applied decoration and I 133 has a raised panel door. The first floor of the interior of I125 Pomeroy is original; the wall between the two front bedrooms of the second floor in this unit has been removed. The interior of I 131 Pomeroy is original (first and second floors viewed).

Buildine4 ll05-llll PomeroyAvenue
Entry doors to I105 and I107 Pomeroy have raised panels.

Section 7 page ll
four townhouses
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 1o-9oo OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Santa Clara, California
County and State
Building 5 1097-1103 PomeroyAvenue fourtownhouses
Townhouse at 1097 Pomeroy has security bars over the second-floor windows at front of unit.

Building 6 1087-1095 Pomeroy Avenue five townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors at 1093 Pomeroy have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents. Townhouses at 1091, 1093, and 1095 Pomeroy have raised panelentry doors and the doors of 1093 and 1095 Pomeroy include fanlights while l09l has an oval light. The interior of 1095 Pomeroy is original (only first floor viewed).

Buildine 7 3209-3215 Benton Street four townhouses
Second floor windows at the front and back of 3209 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents; the ground floor windows and sliding glass doors are original. Almost all of the windows at32ll Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents; only the original fixed pane windows next to the rear sliding glass doors are original. The windows and sliding glass doors on the rear of 3215 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents.

Townhouse at 3209 Benton has a raised panel door that features a fan light. The interior of 3215 Pomeroy is original (only first floor viewed).

Building 8 3201-3207 Benton Street four townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors at 3207 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents; the second-floor fixed pane windows have been replaced with single-hung vinyl framed windows. Townhouse at3203 Benton has originalwindows on the second floor of the front fagade and the rest of the windows and sliding glass doors have vinyl framed equivalents.

Townhouse s at 3203 and 3207 Benton have raised panel doors; 3203 has a fan light and 3207 has a craftsman style light. The first-floor interior of 3223 Benton is original' Buildine 9 3217-3219 Benton Street fwo townhouses
The windows on the second floor of 3217 Benton, front and rear, have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents; ground floor windows and sliding glass doors are original. All windows and sliding glass doors at 3219 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents.

Townhouse at3219 Benton has a raised panelentry door.

Buildins 10 3221-3227 Benton Street four townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors at 3223 Benton and3227 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents. Entries at322l,3223, and3225 Benton have raised panel doors;3223 has a rectangular light and the others have fan lights. The flush door of 3227 Benton has a small amount of applied ornament. The interior of 3223 Benton is original (only first floor viewed).

Buildine 1l 3229-3235 Benton Street four townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors at 3229 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents; the second-floor fixed pane windows have been replaced with single-hung vinyl framed windows. Entries at 3229 and 3233 Benton have raised panel doors and fanlights. The interior of 3229 Benton is original (only first floor viewed).

Section 7 page 12
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+OO18
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Buildine 12 3245-3249 Benton Street three townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors on the front and rear fagade of 3245 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents. The windows and sliding glass doors at the front and rear of 3247 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents;the head areas of the sliding glass doors have been infilled with framing and stucco to accommodate a shorter replacement sliding glass door. The second story windows and sliding glass doors at3249 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents except for the ground floor front and rear fagade where original windows and sliding glass doors are extant. Entry to 3245 has a replacement door with horizontal lights. Entry to 3247 has a raised panel door with rectangular craftsman lights. 3249 Benton has a raised panel door with a fan light.

Buildins l3 325 l-3265 Benton Street eight townhouses
Townhouse at325l has vinyl framed equivalent windows on the second-floor rear of the unit that features windows with a large fixed pane in the middle with two single hung windows on each side of the fixed pane;the original wood divider, the divider between the original fixed pane and slider, and the fixed pane window have been removed in order to install the new window.

Townhouse at3257 Benton has aluminum framed windows that appear similar to original windows;the finish reflects more light due to minimal brushing of the surface by the manufacturer. The windows and sliding glass doors at325l and3259 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents;the windows and sliding glass doors at 3251have divided panes.

Entry doors at 3251,3259, and 3265 Benton have raised panels; 3259 has a fan light and 3265 has an oval light. The door at 3263 is varnished rather than painted and 3257 has applied decoration. The door at 3259 Benton includes a vinyl frame around the door. The interior of 3257 Benton is original (only first floor viewed).

Buildine l4 3267 -3281 Benton Street eight townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors at3267 Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents; the head of the sliding glass doors at the rear have been infilled with framing and stucco to accommodate a shorter sliding glass door. Windows and doors at3271,3273,3279 and 328 I Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents; 327 l, 3273, and 328 I have single-hung windows in the location of the original fixed windows on the second floor of the rear fagade. Only the rear windows and sliding glass doors have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents at 3277 Benton. On the second-floor rear fagad e of 327 5 Benton, black anodized window frames have been installed. On the ground floor rear fagade of that unit, a greenhouse has been installed over one of the sliding glass door openings and adjacent fixed pane window; the greenhouse window extends four feet into the yard. Townhouses at3267,3273,3277,3279, and 3281 Benton have raised panel doors;3267 includes a fan light. The interior of 3271Benton is original (only first floor viewed).

Building 15 3237-3243 Benton Street four townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors at 3237,3239, and 3241Benton have been replaced with vinyl framed equivalents. At 3237 both sliding glass windows and the adjacent fixed pane windows on the second-floor rear fagade have been replaced by a window with a fixed pane in Section 7 page 13
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+oo18
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
the middle and two sliders on each side of the fixed pane; this window required the removal of the original wood post separating the original fixed pane and sliding glass window. The front and rear of 3243 Benton has wood infill between the 6'-8" high vinyl framed front sliding glass door and the original 7'-0" rough opening provided for the original sliding glass door. The rear windows and sliding glass doors of 3243 Benton are vinyl framed equivalents except one original second floor sliding window and both original fixed panes. The ground floor windows and sliding glass doors on the rear fagade of324l Benton cannot be seen. Entry door at3243 Benton has raised panels and a fanlight;3237 Benton has a clear coat finish; 3239 Benton has applied decoration.

Buildine 16 3283-3289 Benton Street four townhouses
The windows and sliding glass doors of 3287 and 3289 Benton have been rep laced with vinyl framed equivalents. The interiors of 3283 and 3285 Benton are original. The interior of 3289 Benton is mostly original; kitchen cabinets and appliances have been replaced (only first floor viewed).

Clubhouse
The clubhouse features alarge gathering place, and restrooms next to the clubhouse, separated by a short corridor. Block walls support exposed beams that extend past the glass wall on the south side of the building. The beams and the cantilevered roof they support attract attention and direct it towards the floor to ceiling glass wall and view outside. The original glass wall is made up of three sliding glass doors and fixed pane windows that overlook and provide access to the deck and swimming pool.

Swimming Pool One Contributing Structure
The original elliptical shaped pool, surrounded by exposed aggregate concrete paving and a bench, G located beyond the clubhouse and deck. The tall trees surrounding the pool area and the pool's shape contrast with the rectangular shape of the surrounding buildings. The pool and its surroundings form a unified design that satisfies aesthetic and social needs. Primary design elements include the pool, the concrete paving surrounding the pool, the wood deck located befween the concrete surround and the clubhouse, and the perimeter chain link fence with climbing vine that defines the limit of the space. Secondary design elements include the perimeter wood bench, pole lighting, and the entry to the pool areathat provides a transition from the public space outside the pool area to the more private area of the pool area reserved for residents.

The pool is 3l'-7" by 56'-3," measured coping to coping, a thirty-five degree ellipse with the long axis oriented in the east-west direction. The short axis is centered on the deck. The projecting roof of the clubhouse, a continuous element that spans the clubhouse and the pussag"way, shares the same centerline as the pool, uniffing these elements and providing symmetry to the composition. The pool and surrounding area-in fair to good condition-are largely original and in their original locations; the few changes are reversible, with minimal impact on integrity.

Section 7 page 14
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Alterations and Integrity
Pomeroy Green has the same location since construction was completed in 1963; no buildings have been added, removed, or moved. The setting of the surrounding neighborhood is still residential in character. Pomeroy Green retains allof its original design elements of site planning, landscape architecture, and building architecture. Most common areas and circulation networks are maintained as intended by the original design. Minor changes in the outdoor recreation areas include the conversion of two sand boxes to planters and a third to a small basketball court. Some of the exposed aggregate concrete pathways have been replaced with brick in the same footprint as the walkways they replaced (Photo 30). Some of the globe lighting fixtures have been replaced with globes approximately the same size as the original. A few additional fixtures of a different style have been installed, which could be replaced with globe fixtures to match the original design. Additional lighting along the pool area pathway is compatible.

Additional landscaping is compatible with the overall design and not noticeable as an addition.

Though some plantings have changed from varieties originally specified by the landscape architects, the complex is still lushly landscaped as intended. Evergreen pear trees (Pyrus kawakamii) have replaced some mock orange trees (Pittosporum undulaturz). Maidenhair trees (Ginkgo biloba) have replaced some Japanese privet (Ligustrum japonicum). Some shrubs have been allowed to grow into smalltrees.

The townhouses and clubhouse, with few exceptions, retain their original architectural design and building elements. Exceptions are reversible. Fireplaces have been installed at the rear of some of the units, seruing the living room and bedrooms above. They are sheathed in the same exterior plywood as the rest of the adjacent wall in order to encase the flue (Photo 31). Further research is needed to determine if fireplace installations were part of the original plans since the chases are standardized throughout the complex and integral to the architecture.

Most replacement windows were installed in the original openings. The vinyl replacements are usually white in color, creating a focal point that optically advances in space. This is especially true of the frames that are much wider than the original brushed aluminum frames ( 32). The original doors and windows visually blend into the fagade, occupying the same plane as the surrounding walls. Narrow-framed vinyl windows can be painted to match the aluminum color of the originalwindows and the wider framed windows can be replaced with new windows to match the original windows more closely. Smaller window and door replacements that required stucco or vinyl infill can be replaced in the future with taller windows and doors more sympathetic to the original design; the original structure around the windows and doors has not been disturbed.

The operation of some of the new windows is different from the original. Some residents have replaced the rear second floor sliding glass windows with double-hung windows, in some instances to install exterior mounted air conditioning units. Other residents have installed continuous windows that required the removal of the wood post that functions in the original Section 7 page 15
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPs Form 10-9oo OMB No. 1024'00'18
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Santa Clara, California
County and State
design as a divider between the sliding glass doors and windows and the adjacent fixed pane windows. Some vinyl framed windows and sliding glass doors have tinted glass rather than clear.

Many of the original front entry flush type doors have been replaced by doors with decorative features and incompatible materials. Shorter, paneled, vinyl, and ornamented doors with fanlights are installations that reflect a desire on the part of some residents to display some traditional ornamentation, a characteristic not normally found in modern architecture. Some door replacements have included adjacent side light/window replacement (Photo 33). Originally made of frosted glass, some windows have been changed to hammered glass or safety glass.

Minor changes to exterior lighting fixtures include similar looking globes with LED technology on front fences. Fixtures in back yards and carports are more likely to appear visually different.

The finish on the plywood siding on the buildings has been changed from a dark brown stain to light gray paint. The color is similar to colors found in other Eichler projects. There has been an effortto reintroduce the limited palette of colors Eichler chose to paint entry doors; those colors are brighter than colors used on the building ehvelope and help to accent and emphasize the location of the entry door, similar to entry doors in other Eichler projects.

The principal building materials have not changed. The townhouse units are separated from one another by original concrete block walls. Wood beams span befween the concrete block walls creating a framework infilled with wood framed walls. The wood framed exterior walls at the front and back of the units feature vertical grooved plywood siding. Original plywood siding has been replaced with T:111 plywood siding that has fewer grooves per foot.

The wood bench around the pool has been replaced. The corners of the replacement bench were constructed with a miter; the original bench had rounded corners, giving the bench a curvilinear appearance. The decking around the pool has been changed from the original redwood boards to composite material, constructed in the same footprint. Several utility enclosures have been replaced with taller enclosures sheathed in a different material than the originals.

Most of the electrical and gas meter enclosures, made to the same height as the front and rear fences, are made of the same materials and design as the adjoining fences, contributing to the rectangular design of the building (Photo 34).

One of the few opportunities to display worhnanshlp in this type of concrete block and beam construction is the front elevation, especially the entryway in the carport. The storage doors and the door to the front patio in the carport are finished with the original Eichler siding and the original tongue-and-groove fencing, respectively, in order that these doors match the appearance of the surrounding walls and fence. This detail required careful planning of the construction in order to match the grooved pattern of the adjacent surfaces.

The architecture of Pomeroy Green conveys thefeeling of the early 1960s, a time when people were exuberant about all things modern, including electronics, television, outer space, Section 7 page 16
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara California
Name of Property County and State
automobile culture, and leisure and recreational activities. The modern design of the complex, with buildings featuring crisp rectangular shaped forms that contrast with the organic shapes of the trees, is visually striking. The complex stillexudes a sense of modernism due to its regularity of repeated forms and repeated building components, its lack of architectural ornamentation, and the straightforward use of materials.

Pomeroy Green retains its association with the Eichler name, modern architecture, and cluster housing development. The complex was featured,in CA Modern, the Eichler Network magazine on mid-century modern architecture distributed to California Eichler owners. Many Pomeroy Green shareholders were interviewed for the article.l
I David Weinstein, "Pioneering 'Easy Living' at the Pomeroys, Eichler's Pomeroy West and Green Developments," Eichler Networt, Spring 2005, 1,6-8.

Section 7 page 17
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 1o-9oo OMB No.'102+0018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Santa Clara, California
County and State

8. Statement of Significance
Applicable National Register Criteria
(Mark "x" in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the property for National Register listing.)
X
X
A. Property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

B. Property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

C. Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction.

D. Property has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Criteria Considerations
(Mark "x" in all the boxes that apply.)
A. Owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes B. Removed from its original location
C. A birthplace or grave
D. A cemetery
E. A reconstructed building, object, or structure
F. A commemorative property
G. Less than 50 years old or achieving significance within the past 50 years Section 8 page 18
United States Departmilnt of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Areas of Significance
(Enter categories from instructions.)

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

ARCHITECTURE

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
Period of Significance
r963
Significant Dates
N/A
Significant Person
(Complete only if Criterion B is marked above.)
N/A
Cultural Affiliation
N/A
Architect/Builder
Eichler. J Leopold
Oakland. Claude
Sasaki. Walker &- Ailiiates
Santa Clara, California
County and State
Section 8 page 19
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No 102+oo18
Pom Green Santa Clara, California
of Property County and State
statement of significance summary Paragraph (Provide a summary paragraph that includes level of significance, applicable criteria, justification for the period of significance, and any applicable criteria considerations.)
pomeroy Green is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places at the local level of signiiicance under-Criterion A in the area of Community Planning and Development for its pionEering use of cluster development. The district is also eligible for listing at the local level of significan*ce under Criterion C in the areas of Architecture and Landscape Architecture. Pomeroy Gieen embodies the distinctive characteristics of Modern building design, materials, and methods, and is an exceptional residential example by regionally prominent post World War II merchant-builder Joseph Eichler, architect Claude Oakland, and landscape architects Sasaki, Walker andAssociat"r. th" period of significance is 1963, the year construction was completed.

Narrative Statement of Significance (Provide at least one paragraph for each area of significance.)
Criterion A: Community Planning and Development
pomeroy Green is significant in Community Planning and Development as an early example of cluster development, a type of suburban housing land use and site planning begun in the 1960s.

Cluster development chailenged the prevailing pattern of single-family tract homes on individual lots that dominated the United States middle-class suburban housing market. Cluster development features common grounds, landscaping, and cooperative management by the residents. The goal is to provide housing while meeting the growing concern in the U.S. to conserve open space and farmland. Cluster housing was influenced by the Regional Planning Association ofAmerica (RPAA) design principles of the American Garden City Movement and, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) design guidelines'2 According to Matthew Gordon Lasner in his book High Life Condo Living in the Suburban Century, i-he Santa Clara County Planning Commission published a briefing directed towards developers encouraging them to cluster homes around common open space' The briefing includid pomeroy Ct""n as an example.3 Pomeroy Green is also featured in Cluster Development by journalist William Wythe.a Published in 1964, the book examines completed cluster developments across the country. The July 14, 1964 issue of Zoo k magazine, a popular photo journal distributed nationwide, featured o'solution for Suburbia" about Pomeroy Green with pioto captions citing the advantages of cluster housing (Figure 7)s. 2 From the turn of the twentieth century, the movement proposed self-contained cities surrounded by greenbelts, in an attempt to balance residential, inaustiiat, and agricultural land use. See Ebenezer Howard's Garden Cities of Tomorrow (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1965).
3 Matthew Gordon Lasner, High Life Co,ndo Living in the Suburban Century [New Haven and London, UK: Yale University Press, 2012), 201.
aWilliam'Why te', Clusier Development (New York: American Conservation Association, 1964),57,88' 100' 101' 5 John Peter and Fred Lyon, "soiution for Suburbia," Look28,no.l4 (July 14, 1964).

Section 8 page 20
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Green Santa California
ame Property County and State
David Gebhard, architectural historian and author of The Guide to Architecture in Son Francisco and Northern Califurnia, stated..

These two tracts [Pomeroy West and Pomeroy Green] were among the pioneering townhouse developments that triggered the'.wave" of planned unit, high density, attached housing that had by the 1970s all but capfured the mass housing markei in California.

Starting in the 1950s, architects advocated such solutions in place of the sprawlof single family detached housing.6
Those housing and land conservation concerns are echoed and form the basis for the RPAA design principles and land-use guidelines, as wellas the design and neighborhood planning goals of the FHA s approved garden apartment communities. At the local level, Pomeroy Green reflected those nationaltrends in suburban development.

Suburban development in the Santa Clara Valley is easily traced. From the 1800s to the 1940s, the Santa Clara Valley was primarily agricultural, from wheat fields to fruit orchards. Beginning in the late 1940s, rapid suburban development began to surround the downtowns of the small cites that dotted the valley, encroaching into the orchards.

Suburban development in the City of SantaClan, originating on the outskirts of the original downtown located on the eastern border with San Jose, made its way westward on former farmland towards the city limits with the Cify of Sunnyvale. As Santa Clara developed, the housing tracts became larger, housing lots in those tracts became larger, homes on those lots became largeE and city streets in those tracts became wider. The houiing developments hastened the demise of the orchards.

In response to concerns over disappearing farmland in Santa Clara Counfy, cluster housing development was proposed by county officials as an alternative to conventional subdivisions of single-family tract homes on individual lots. The county published a brochure describing the advantages of cluster subdivision development compared to conventional subdivision development. The pamphlet was distributed nationwide and used by planners and builders across the country as well as in the Santa Clara Valley.T
Eichler, recognizing those concerns, decided a change was needed from his normal practice of constructing tracts of single-family homes.s Eichler needed flat land to build his single-family homes that he had been most successful in building for homebuyers elsewhere in California. The San Francisco Bay Area is ringed by mountain ranges, and the little flat land available for development was becoming scarce by the 1960s. In reference to the increasing price of his 6 David Gebhard, Eric Sanweiss, and Robert Winter, Architecture in San Francisco and Northern California (Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith Books,2nd ed., 1985), 186.

7.Whyte, Cluster Development, 16-17. Whyte mentions The Common Green brochure was ',fomented" by the county planners in 1961 and credits the brochure's creation to Karl Belser and his associates on the Santa Clara County Planning Commission.
8 Lasner, 201-202.

Section 8 page 2l
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-oo1a
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
single-family detached homes, Eichler remarked, "The sifuation obviously calls for a more intensive use of land, and we are more and more turning our attention in that direction."e One solution to the scarcity of land was the Pomeroy Green project. Pomeroy Green is a higher density development located in a less dense ring of single-family tract homes. Measured by gross density,l0 twelve townhouse units per acre at Pomeroy Green compare to six or fewer singlefamily detached homes per acre usually found in City of Santa Clara typical housing tracts. The preponderance of multi-family housing projects, built after Pomeroy Green as the City expanded westward towards Sunnyvale, confirms that builders in the area were indeed having to adjust to the scarcity of flat land and to rising land prices.

Pomeroy Green met FHA requirements for neighborhood amenities and building design as well as governance. The complex is in a neighborhood that includes two elementary schools, a high school, a city park, two churches, and another Eichler multi-family complex. Pomeroy Green realizedmany of the recommended FHA design guidelines, such as the inclusion of a private entrance for each unit, recreation areas for socializing, and common grounds. The social spaces at Pomeroy Green include a clubhouse, swimming pool, and benches around the complex for informal gatherings of residents. Pomeroy Green shareholders are provided a Sales Binder that includes organization and policy documents to help them manage the complex. Such attributes contribute to neighborhood stability and minimize the risk of investing by lenders, all goals of the FHA.

The integration of the buildings and the landscape result from Pomeroy Green being treated as a single parcel following RPAA and FHA design guidelines. Building architecture and landscape architecture are integrated in order to create a coherent spatial organization that provides community, privacy, fresh air circulation, and control and use of daylight. Hundreds of trees were planted in strategic locations to make the best use of their shade. The protection is particularly welcome because the townhouses were designed without mechanical air-conditioning. During the winter months, when the deciduous trees have lost most of their leaves, the bare trees in combination with a low roof height and flat roofs allows more daylight.rr Criterion C: Architecture
Pomeroy Green embodies the distinctive characteristics of Modern building design, materials, and methods. The district retains its massing, spatial relationships, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation of the type associated with Modern architecture. e Dave Weinstein, "Joe Reveals 'The Eichler Success Formula,"'htttrs://www.eichlernetwork.com/blog/daveweinstein/joe-reveals-o%E27o807o98-eichler-success-fornrula%oE2%o80%o99, accessed December I l, 2018. l0 Gross density is number ofhousing units per acre ofland; land acreage includes transport infrastructure such as private driveways and public streets as well as private or public parking spaces. i' Wult". Gropius, The New Architecture and the Bauharzs (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1965), 104-105. Includes a detailed explanation and diagrams illustrating the relationship between building separation and the number of building floors in regard to sunlight peneffation into the buildings and site.

Section 8page22
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara California
Name of Property County and State
The district reflects the history of Modern architecture in California and the tenets of design established by one of the notable pioneers of modern architecture in California, Rudolph Schindler. Most of the features Schindler prescribed for modern architecture are found in his reply to the 1952 request made by the director of the Department ofArchitecture and Design at the New York Museum of Modern Art to include Schindler's work in an exhibit at the museum:

In my own house (1921) I introduced features which seemed to be necessary for life in California: an open plan, flat on the ground; living patios; glass walls; translucent walls; wide sliding doors; clerestory windows; shed roofs with wide shading overhangs. These features have now been accepted generally and form the basis ofthe contemporary California house.l2
Most of those characteristics appear in the design by Eichler's chief architect Claude Oakland for Pomeroy Green and Schindler's design for El Pueblo Ribera Court (1923), a complex of twelve duplexes in La Jolla, California similar to Pomeroy Green. Both complexes feature units with open floor plans, floor slabs on grade, and expanses of windows (glass walls) that look onto private patios. Both feature translucent windows/walls and wide shading overhangs. Both complexes also feature windowless walls that provide privacy between units and form a backdrop for the landscaping. The careful placement of the windowless walls and the large windows at both complexes provide an indoor-outdoor connection while maintaining privacy befween the units.l3
Pomeroy Green's architectural design can also be considered an offshoot of the International Style, defined by architectural historian Henry-Russell Hitchcock and architect Philip Johnson.

In the preface to The International Style, Alfred Barr, Jr. summarizes the three characteristics elaborated in the book:

The distinguishing aesthetic principles of the International Style as laid down by the authors are three: emphasis on volume-space enclosed by thin planes or surfaces as opposed to the suggestion of mass or solidity; regularity as opposed to symmetry or other obvious balance; and, lastly, dependence upon the intrinsic elegance of materials, technical perfection and fine proportions, as opposed to applied ornament.r4 These aesthetic characteristics are found in the design of Pomeroy Green. Volume is emphasized by the thin planes of the concrete block party walls infilled with plywood-sheathed wall.

Regularity is established by the spacing of the windows and by the projecting roofs of the carports providing rhythm rather than symmetry along the fagade. Elegance, without applied ornamentation, is found in the fine detailing of the exterior surfaces, such as the fine grooves in 12 Susan Morgan, 'Not Another International Style Ballyhoo, A Short History of the Schindler House," http ://schindlellab.otg/history/#_edn2, accessed December I 1, 20 I 8. 13 The Architecture Week, Great Buildings Collection, "El Pueblo Ribera Court," http://www.greatbuildines.com/buildings/El-Pueblo_Ribera_Ct.htnrl, accessed December, 31, 2018. ra Henry-Russell Hitchcock and Philip Johnson, The International Style (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1932),29.

Section 8 page 23
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 1O-9OO OMB No. 102+oo18
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
the exterior plywood, the fine framed windows of brushed aluminum, and the fine textured stucco panels.

Ornament is treated differently in modern architecture. J. M. Richards provides an explanation in An Introduction to Modern Architecture:

The Modern equivalent of applied ornament, however, largely lies in the natural qualities of materials themselves; in the grain and surface of beautifulwoods, in the sheen of new metal alloys, and in the contrasting texture of fabrics; all used with the exactness of finish that machines have introduced into architecture.l5
Materials used in the construction of Pomeroy Green are indeed ornamented in that fashion. The fine grooving of the exterior plywood, the fine brushed aluminum windows, and the mahogany plywood that graces the interior contribute to the sense of ornamentation, without resorting to applied ornamentation.

The post and beam construction found in Pomeroy Green is a common method of framing for a modern house. The post and beam construction allows the use of large expanses of glass since the walls are not load bearing, only functioning as isolating walls. This construction allows the carport roof to project past the building's fagade; that roof introduces a planar element to the overall design and is strikingly modern in appearance.

The bearing walls that form the end walls and the party walls, the walls that separate each unit and support the beams, are made of concrete blocks and contribute more than fire resistance and acoustic separation. Blocks are laid in a stack bond in a straightforward manner, in one continuous wall, without any applied finish, creating a grid pattern across the surface of the wall both in and outside the unit. This pattern emphasizes the rectilinear wall plane as well as the overall rectangular shape of the building. Those concrete masonry block walls extend beyond the building envelope towards the back yard. This extension both enhances back yard privacy and visually divides the long buildings into repeated modular units.

The modularity is emphasized in the repeated use of block walls, and in the variety of materials employed. The buildings are visually interesting since the arrangement of different parts occur periodically along the walls of the building. The plank-type built-up roof, stucco panels with a medium float finish, grooved plywood siding, windows, and sliding glass doors are arranged in a harmonious assembly and are repeated throughout the complex for every unit.

The placement of the sliding glass doors and windows periodically along the fagade and rear wall of each building and exposed portion of the block wall define the limits of each unit and create a visual rhythm across the length of the building. Windows and sliding glass door placement, along with the open floor plan, enhances natural cross ventilation. Fixed pane windows, adjacent to the sliders, increase daylight inside the townhouses. Repetition allows the 15 J. M. Richards, An Introduction to Modern Architecture (1940; reprint with revisions, London: Penguin Books, 1970),42.

Section 8 page 24
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1O2+OO18
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
viewer to extend attention to the landscaping, allowing the architecture to serve as a background for the landscaping.

The building components and materials contribute to the overall geometrical design of the buildings. The design is very similar to the row houses designed by Le Corbusier, Citd Frugds (1924-1926) in Pessac, France. Though many of the buildings were modified, eflorts are underway to restore the original architecture.l6
The modern rectangular look of Pomeroy Green is further emphasized by the materials used to enclose the front yards. The tongue and groove fencing used around the front yard and patio provide a more finished surface than the typical board fencing used for suburban tract homes; that smoothness helps to emphasize the rectangular shape of the front yard, and complements the rectangular facade of the building. Boards are oriented vertically and provide a welcome contrast to the overall horizontal look of the front fagade. The front yard, extending from the building face and under the second floor, interrupts the horizontal boxy look of the building and creating an interesting mix of positive and negative volumes extending from and into the fagade.

The tongue-and-groove fencing enclosing the front yard also runs along one sid.e of the carport providing a smooth transition to the more refined vertically grooved siding near the entrance to the unit. The siding in this location and at the back of the carport is finely grooved in keeping with the small scale of the space and helps define the rectangular volume and rectangular surfaces. The front yard fencing also extends to cover the utility cabinet on the building ends.

This helps to incorporate the cabinets visually into the rectangular architectural design. Rather than distracting the viewer from the overall form of the building, the cabinets add another rectangular element.

The flat roof also contributes to the rectangular architecture of the buildings. The roof cantilever harmonizes with the vertically grooved siding and the exposed portion of the concrete block party walls. All three elements have rectilinear properties: the vertical grooving in the siding, the grid pattern of the block wall, and the exposed horizontal boards that make up the roof. The cantilevered roofprojects horizontally from the rear ofthe building farther than the concrete block walls and runs the length of the building. The cantilever further accents the rectangular shape of the building.

The tongue and groove boards that make up the roof are exposed inside the unit and visible outside where the roof cantilevers horizontally over the back wall. The four-foot cantilever visually extends the room toward the outdoors, which makes the room appear larger. At night, that cantilever produces a dramatic effect. It reflects light from the interior and, along with the joints in the tongue and groove boards, directs the eye towards the outdoors. From the vantage point of the ground outside the unit, the observer's eye is drawn up to the lighted underside of the cantilevered roof and to the source of the light, the interior lighting of the unit. '6 Philip Boudon, Lived in Architecture, Le Corbusier's Pessac Revisited (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1972); Helena Ariza,"La Cit6' Frugds: A Modern Neighborhood for the Working Class," hffp://architecturalvisits.conr/en/20 I 5/0 I /27lcite-fruges-le-corbusier-pessaci, accessed December I 1, 20 I 8.

Section 8 page 25
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-9Oo OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Of particular importance to the Regional Planning Association of America is the privacy afforded by the design of a complex. In Pomeroy Green, the front and rear yard fences, as well as the windowless end walls of the buildings, provide privacy. Privacy is further enhanced by the placement of the living room at the back of the unit overlooking the back yard and away from the carport and parking lots. The building blocks noise from entering the back yards.

Building orientation also helps to protect privacy. Some buildings are oriented ninety degrees to one another and overlap. In this orientation, the buildings are separated a minimum of thirty-six feet; the average separation is forty feet. Buildings facing other buildings along the motor courts are separated by approximately forfy-four feet to provide privacy.

Criterion C : Landscape Architecture
Pomeroy Green's landscape is the work of Hideo Sasaki and Peter Walker of Sasaki, Walker and Associates, landscape architects and site planning consultants. The contribution of Sasaki and Walker to the profession of landscape architecture is acknowledged by Diana Vogelsong in the introduction to her book Landscape Architecture Sourcebook, A Guide to Resources and Practice of Landscape Architecture in the United States:

A new effort to define landscape in the mid-twentieth century was represented by the work of three prominent pioneers: Garrett Eckbo, Dan Urban Kiley, and James Rose. lnventive landscape architects such as Peter Walker, M. Paul Friedenberg, Hideo Sasaki, Martha Schwartz, and others expanded upon those traditions in subsequent decades.lT Pomeroy Green's landscape is an excellent example of mid-century modern landscape design. In "The Rise of Modernism" section on modern landscape architecture in Landscape at Berkeley, the First 100 Years, Randy Hester, Jr. describes the origins and characteristics of modern landscape architecture:

When the international, or modern, sfyle was introduced into the United States in 1932, landscape architecture was being practiced under strict and formal classical rules.

According to landscape mythology, the modern style was born in in the 1940s, when a student at Harvard refused to solve a site-planning problem with classical symmetry. The rebellion gave rise to modernism, which has now dominated the form of landscape architecture for over forty years. The work of nearly all the best known professionals today-Hideo Sasaki, John Simonds, William Johnson, Garrett Eckbo, Lawrence Halprin, [and others]-fits into this category.

Their work is characterized by simple, highly functional, and fficient form; well-defined edges; clearly articulated spaces; clean lines lemphasis added]. Their modernism 17 Diana Vogelsong, Landscape Architecture Sourcebook, A Guide to Resources of the History and Practice of Landscape Architecture in the tJnited States, Design Reference Series, vol. 1 (Detroit, MI: Omnigraphics, Inc., t997), ll-12.

Section 8page26
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1o24-oo'la
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
expressed the nation's need for functional and efficient growth, with modern landscape design giving clear form to those national purposes through design of corporate estates, suburb expansion, and urban renewal projects. l8
These characteristics are found in the design for Pomeroy Green. The landscape design is simple, having few species of plants; is efficient, having low-maintenance plants; and defines space, repeating avariety of plants along and around pathways, buildings, and other architectural features. The buildings themselves echo this space defining characteristic of the landscape design by forming a variety of well-defined spaces that are further enhanced by the plantings, such as the long driveways, courts, and green open spaces.le
The selection of magnolia trees (Magnolia grandiJlora) along Pomeroy Avenue and Benton Street provides a simple and efficient form in addition to being highly functional. The magnolia trees provide dense shade along the city sidewalk and are low maintenance. The five-foot setback of the trees behind the back of the city sidewalk creates a clean line that follows the street; in the case of Benton Street, the trees follow the slight curvature of the street. The choice of one species along the frontage, planted on thirty-foot centers so that the crowns overlap, is a simple, straightforward solution to the problems of providing shade, defining the perimeter of the complex, and enclosing the space between the city street and the Pomeroy Green buildings.

While landscape architecture as an area of significance is typically associated with Criterion C, at Pomeroy Green the landscape architecture also exemplifies the community planning and development addressed under Criterion A: a residential development of low to moderate-cost housing, located on previously undeveloped land, designed by collaborating professionalsplanners, architects, and landscape architects-to provide comprehensive amenities with the goal of fostering community among its residents.20 This collaboration results in residential development that includes positive outdoor space, undivided by property lines, easily accessible by residents.2l
Pomeroy Green shares this comprehensive design objective with many earlier historic housing projects.22 Pomeroy Green is related to the Garden City movement founded in Great Britain in the 1800s and the subsequent community planning efforts in the United States based on that movement. Particularly noteworthy in the United States are the developments in multi-family rB Randy Hester, Jr., Professor Emeritus and Department Chair, Landscape Architecture 1987-lgg2, College of Environmental Design, University of California, Berkeley, "Process Can be Style, Participation and Conservation in Landscape Architecture," in Landscape at Berkeley, The First 100 Years, ed. Waverly B. Lowell, Carrie L. McDade and Elizabeth D. Byme (Berkeley: The Regents of the University of Califomia,2013),49. re For a discussion on the need for space defining elements in the landscape, see Norman T. Newton, Design on the Land, the Developntent of Landscape Architecture (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971). 20 Norman T. Newton, Design on the Land, the Development of Landscape Architecture, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, l97l), 424-425.
21 Ibid., 643.
22Peter Walker, interviewed by the author, July 21,2019, telephone conversation.

Section 8 page 27
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara California
Name of Property County and State
housing projects of the early twentieth century by architect and planner Clarence Stein, in cottaUoiation with planner i{.nry Wright and landscape architect Madorie Sewell Cautley.23 The designs of those housing developments by Stein and his collaborators did not include all the features of a Garden City as proposed by Ebenezer Howard, author and originator of the Garden City movem ent.2a Stein's and Wright's planned communities were large, moderate-cost, housing projects rather than complete cities, with industry and green belts, which Howard had envisioned for his Garden City. Howard's Garden City would have been difficult to rcalize in the U.S. atthat time due to the limited means of corporations to finance and acquire land in the amount and quality needed for such alarge development as well as the short business cycle of the national economy.25
Instead, Stein and his design collaborators focused on the housing needs of a society increasingly reliant on automobile transportation, the same problem faced by the designers of Pomeroy Green twenfy to forty years later. Pomeroy Green shares many features of those earlier projects of Stein and his collaborators, projects listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Projects include Sunnyside Gardens in New York(1924-1928, listed 1983), Radburn in New Jersey (1929-1933, listed 1975), and Baldwin Hills in Los Angeles (l94l,later renamed Village Green, listed 1993), designed by architect Reginald Johnson, associate architects Wilson, Merill and Alexander, and landicape architect Fred Barlow, Jr in consultation with Mr' Stein' 26 Although smaller in scope than those earlier projects by Stein, Pomeroy Green exhibits many of the same design principles. Foremost among those is planned development, an approach to design that includes comprehensive site planning which takes into account the interaction of all the elements of the built environment. These attributes are summarizedby Stein in the conclusion to his book Tbward New Towns for America:

The Unit of Design in New Towns is no longer each separate lot, street or building, it is a whole community; a co-ordinated [slc] entity. This means that the framework of the community and every detail down to the last house and the view from the windows must be conceived, planned and built as a related part of a great setting for convenient, wholesome, and beautiful contemporary living and working. In this way every house gains from its relation to the buildings around it. Beauty as well as convenience is produced by the rational relationship of the individual parts.

The planning of every house and every room in that house is part of the process which gives the superblock its ultimate shape and character. Thus, the size and specific 23 Clarence Stein, Toward Nau Towns for America (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1966),22. 24 The difference in these projects is the size and scope, Howard's being larger and regional in scope and inclusive of industry while Stein's were largely confined to large housing complexes on super-blocks with cul-de-sacs for vehicular access.
25 stein, l8-19.
26 Newton, Design on the Land, 643.

Section 8 page 28
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1O2+00'tB
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
requirements of inner green and private yard, of cul-de-sac or auto court, help mold the superblock in relation to good living in home, community and town.

As he designs, the New Town planner envisages the future home life of the individual and the family, and their life as part of the community. He sees it not only in terms of house and garden but in the grouping of houses in relation to each other so as to take the utmost advantage of sun and wind for every residence, and to open up pleasant, spacious and varied views from every house and, as far as possible, in every direction. He will in part be guided by the form and the nature of the land, and how its trees and streams and rocks can best be used or preserved for the common use and enjoyment of the people who are going to form the community, and whole life, from birth to old age, will be molded by the place.27
Pomeroy Green exhibits community characteristics found in Stein's developments. At Pomeroy Green, the buildings and the landscape were planned together and sited on vacant land held in common. To take advantage of the sun, the buildings are oriented in north-south or east-west.

The buildings are spaced generously to allow air and pedestrian circulation as well as various outdoor activities to take place.

Pomeroy Green further emulates Stein's site planning by locating buildings around green spaces situated towards the interior of the development; spaces are reserved for recreation, pedestrian circulation and the enjoyment of the residents.2s These park like amenities are possible due to the savings in construction costs. Vehicular parking is grouped, and driveways and utilities are shared at Pomeroy Green. A typical subdivision of single-family detached homes provides these amenities on a separate, more expensive basis. The savings were so great that at Pomeroy Green the power lines and telephone lines are all buried underground whereas overhead lines are unsightly in the back yards of the tract homes in the adjacent neighborhood, across Benton Street to the south.

The closest historical precedent to Pomeroy Green among the community planning works of Stein is Village Green, alarge housing complex located in Los Angeles. Both Pomeroy Green and Village Green consist of two-story multi-family homes, built from standardized plans of similar architectural design and organized into blocks of different lengths, which are placed to enclose space and provide vistas into and out of the complex.

Both developments include living rooms located on the backside of the housing unit that look onto green spaces rather than automobile circulation and parking areas. At Pomeroy Green this is accomplished in most instances by looking towards green space in the center of the complex, as was done at Village Green, or by providing large, landscaped setbacks from the surrounding city streets, or by facing the back yards ofadjoining housing projects that include generous setbacks. 27 Stein, 225-226.
28 Elizabeth Barlow Rogers, Landscape Design, A Cultural and Architectural History (New York: Harry N. Abrams, lnc.,200l),421.

Section 8 page 29
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+OO18
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara California
Name of Property County and State
Pomeroy Green and Village Green have the same overall design objective in regard to taming the automobile: to provide living spaces that are protected from motor vehicles and the noise they generate. Of particular concern is separating child's play from motor vehicles. To facilitate this separation, driveways and parking areas are located on the service side of the buildings, away from living rooms and back yards. At Village Green garage courts are provided and at Pomeroy Green parking courts and carports are provided.

The service rooms, kitchens in the case of Village Green and multipurpose rooms and kitchens in the case of Pomeroy Green, face the service side of the building, close to vehicular storage, for convenience and to block vehicular noise from entering living rooms and back yards.

This feature affects the arrangement of the buildings in the overall site planning such that the living rooms and back yards of adjacent buildings mostly face each other across a car-free commons. This car-free and landscaped area with plantings is where the residents can relax or recreate. At Pomeroy Green, several residents enjoy walking on the sidewalk around the perimeter of the central commons, near and around the pool area, cat free and lushly landscaped with trees, shrubs, and groundcover; others enjoy sitting at the numerous benches in these areas.

Other features in common include the selection of trees to form a background to the buildings, such as the trees located at the front and sides ofthe buildings to soften the hard edges ofthe architecture. Trees are also located to define three-dimensional space, such as the camphor trees in the parking lots and the trees around the clubhouse/pool area and the magnolia trees that form a perimeter around the complex.

The idea for enlarging the private yards that face the common green space located in the interior of these developments, a feature found at Pomeroy Green and not in the earlier developments by Stein, was anticipated by Mr. Stein in his post-occupancy evaluation of the Baldwin Hills project.2e Though the common green space has been reduced considerably at Pomeroy Green due to the increase in the size of the private yards, it is still possible for most residents to walk throughout the complex without crossing the car storage areas, by following the circulation paths that lead from their individual yards into the interior of the complex. A pedestrian circulation system is a defining feature of community planning.

The ultimate goals of the two projects are the same. The success of both projects goes far beyond the selection and siting of plant materials to provide complete environments for their residents based on sound community planning. As Stein mentions:

From the days of Sunnyside to those of Baldwin Hills Village we have been in search of new or revised solution of the seffing for communities as well as for family and individual living. We have sought ways of bringing peaceful life in spacious green surroundings to ordinary people in this mechanical age. We have tried to simpliff the 2e stein, 198.

Section 8 page 30
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara California
Name of Property County and State
complexity of needs and desire as contrasted with means, and thus to make changes, from obsolete methods of the dead past, economically feasible.30 Eichler Homes, in their sales brochure for Pomeroy Green, echoes many of the same themes:

These two story townhouses are skillfully arranged at relatively high land-use density.

Each unit has its own carport and two fenced patios. Good site planning, well designed auxiliary open areas, and effective planting provide a high degree of livability and visual appeal.3l
Peter Walker's practice changed during his career, and Pomeroy Green represents a distinct past phase in Walker's approach to design. Up until the early 1970s, his work was focused on two objectives: to provide a setting for the building, and to connect that setting with the existing landscape.32 His work gradually changed after that period, and by the late 1970s, focused on the integration of minimalism (art and theory), classicism, historic garden designs, and landscape architecture. Twenty years later, Walker described this period in his career:

My work for the last twenty years [since 1977lhas been an attempt to weave together the strands of classicism and European and Asian garden formalism and those of modernism, including the late modernists and midcentury minimalists, as I understand them. The result is what I consider minimalism in the landscape.33 Eichler Homes went out of business in 1967 due to the company's work on larger projects that overextended the company.3a Joseph Eichler continued building homes until his death in 1974.

Claude Oakland died in 1989 and Hideo Sasaki in 2000 after long practices in their respective professions.
30Ibid.,226.
3r Pomeroy Green Corporation, Pomeroy Green sales brochure, circa 1963. 12 Petgr Walkqr, "Classicism, Modernism, and Minimalism in the Landscape" in Peter Walker, Minimalist Gardens Leah Levy, ed. (Washington DC: Spacemaker Press, 1997), 18. 13 Ibid., 19.
ra Lvnn O'Dell. "Eichler
to Euild His Oivn and Never Quit,"
Influenced
August 7 I 993- I 0-23-hm-48758-story.html. accessed ,2020 Section8page3l
by Eichler Set Out
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Santa Clara, California
County and State

9. Major Bibliographical References
Bibliography (Cite the books, articles, and other sources used in preparing this form.) Benevolo, Leonard. History of Modern Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989 Boudon, Philip. Lived in Architecture, Le Corbusier's Pessac Revisited. Cambridge, MA MIT Press, 1972.

Damann, Raymond F. The Destruction of Califurnia. London: Collier Books, 1970.

Ditto, Jerry and Lanning Stern. Designfor Living, Eichler Homes. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 1995.

Editors of Fortune. The Exploding Metropolrs. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1958.

Eichler Homes, Inc. ooAnnual Report 1961." Oakland and Imada 2002-3 Collection, box2, folder III 6, Joseph Eichler, 1960-1974, Environmental Design Archives, University of California, Berkeley.
"El Pueblo Ribera Court." Architecture Week, Great Buildings Collection. hffn'//rrnrnrr crp ,:t,{i-^. ^^-/k,,i ldi--"/El Drrahl Accessed December 31, 2018
Firm of Claude Oakland. Project report 1964. Oakland and Imada 2002-3 Collection, box I, folder I3, Claude Oakland personalcorrespondence 1959-1964, EnvironmentalDesign Archives, University of California, B erke ley.

Gebhard, David, Eric Sanweiss, and Robert Winter. Architecture in San Francisco and Northern California.2nded. Salt Lake Cify: Peregrine Smith Books, 1985.

Gropius, Walter. The New Architecture and the Bauhaus. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press,1965.

Hester, Jr., Randy. "Process Can be Style, Participation and Conservation in Landscape Architecture." In Landscape of Berkeley: The First 100 Years, edited by Waverly B Lowell, Carrie L. McDade and Elizabeth D. Byrne. Berkeley: The Regents of the University of Californi a, 2013.

Hitchcock, Henry-Russell and Philip Johnson. The International.Sryle. New York: W. W Norton & Company,1932.

Howard, Ebenezer. Garden Cities of Tomorrow. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1965.

D:L^-^ Ct lf^
Sections 9-end page 32
United States Department of the lnterior
Nalional Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. '1124-oo1a
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Lasner, Matthew Gordon. High Life Condo Living in the Suburban Century. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2012.

Levy, Leah, ed. Peter Walker: Minimalist Gardens. Washington DC: Spacemaker Press, 1997.

Morgan, Susan. "Not Another International Style Ballyhoo, A Short History of the Schindler House." https://schindlerlab.org/histor:y/# edn2. Accessed December I l, 2018.

Mumford, Lewis. Roots of Contemporary Architecture. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1972.

Newton, Norman T. Design on the Land: the Development of Landscape Architecture.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.

O'Dell, Lynn. "Eichler Influenced by Wright: After Living in a House Designed by the Architect, Eichler Set Out to Build His Own and Never Quit." Los Angeles Times, (October 23, 1993). https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm- 1993- l0-23-hm-48758- story.html. Accessed August 7, 2020,
Peter, John, and Fred Lyon. "Solution for Suburbia." Look28,no.l4 (July 14, 1964).

Pomeroy Green Corporation. Pomeroy Green Sales Brochure. Circa 1963.

Richards, J.M. An Introduction to Modern Architecture.lg40. Reprint with revisions, London: Penguin Books, 1970.

Rogers, Elizabeth Barlow. Landscape Design: A Cultural and Architectural History. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 2001.

Stein, Clarence. Toward New Towns for America. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1966.

U.S. Department of Commerce. National Bureau of Standards. Fundamentals of Building Heat Transfer. July 5,1977,Institute for Applied Technology, Volume 82, No. 2, by Tamami Kusuda. Washington, D.C.: September-October 1977. https://nvlpubs.nist.eov/nistpubs/jres/82ljresv82n2p97_a I b.pdf. Accessed June 5, 2019 U.S. Department of Energy. "Landscape Windbreaks and Efficiency." https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/design/landscaping-enerqy-efficienthomes/landscape-windbreaks-and-effi ciency. Accessed June 6, 20 I 9.

U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. Historic Residential Suburbs:

Guidelinesfor Evaluation and Documentationfor the National Register of Historic Sections 9-end page 33
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+00'18
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Places, by David L. Ames and Linda Flint. 2002.
https://www.nps.eov/nr/publications/bulletins/suburbs/index.htm. Accessed December I 1,2018.

U.S. Department of the Interior. Natibnal Park Service. Interagency Resources Division.

National Register Bulletin 18, How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes, by J.Timothy Keller, ASLA, and Genevieve P. Keller Land and Community Associates, Charlottesville, Virginia.
https://www.nps.gov/subiects/nationalregister/uploadA'.lRB I 8-Complete.pdf. Accessed August 13,2019.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Using Trees and Vegetation to Reduce Heat Islands." https://r,vww.epa.gov/heat-islands/using-trees-and-vegetation-reduce-heatislands. Accessed June 6, 2019.

Vogelsong, Diana, Landscape Architecture Sourcebook: A Guide to Resources of the History and Practice of Landscape Architecture in the United Stales. Design Reference Series, Vol. l. Detroit: Omnigraphics,Inc., 1997.

Walker, Peter. Peter Walker and Partners: Defining the Craft. San Rafael, CA: ORO Editions,2005.
. Telephone interview by author. July 21,2019.

W'alker, Peter and Leah Levy, ed. Peter Walkef Minimalist Gardens. Washington DC Spacemaker Press, 1997.

Weinstein, David. "Joe Reveals 'The Eichler Success Formula."' Eichler Network, CA Modern,2p1B. https://www.eichlernetwork.com/blog/dave-weinstein/joe-reveals-'- eichler-success-formula'. Accessed December I l, 201 8. "Pioneering 'Easy Living' at the Pomeroys, Eichler's Pomeroy West and Green Developments." Eichler Network, Spring 2005, l, 6-8.

Whyte, William. Cluster DevelopmereL New York: American Conservation Association, 1964.

The Last Landscape. Garden City, New York: Anchor Book, Doubleday & Company, 1968.

Windfinder for San Jose Airport, California,
https://www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/san-iose airport california. Accessed June 6, 2019.

Sections 9-end page 34
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+OO1g
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Santa Clara, California
County and State
Previous documentation on file $[PS):
-
preliminary determination of individual listing (36 CFR 67) has been requested _ previously listed in the National Register
_previously determined eligible by the National Register _designated a National Historic Landmark
_
recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey #
_recorded by Historic American Engineering Record #
_
recorded by Historic American Landscape Survey #
Primary location of additional data:
_ State Historic Preservation Office
_ Other State agency
_ Federal agency
_ Local government
X University
_ Other
Name of repository: Environmental Design Archives. College of Environmental Design.

T Tnirrercitrr nf Cq lifornia Berkelev
Historic Resources Survey Number (if assigned):

10. Geographical Data
Acreage of Property 6.5
Latitudell,ongitude Coordinates
Datum if other than WGS84:
(enter coordinates to 6 decimal places)
l. Latitude: 37.346325 Longitude: -121. 985919
Verbal Boundary Description (Describe the boundaries of the property.) Trapezoid enclosed by Benton Street to the south, Pomeroy Avenue to the west, tract homes to the north, and a church to the east, with a cutout at 1075 Pomeroy Avenue. See Sketch Map/Photo Key, Base Map (Figure 1), and Building Designation Map (Figure 2).

Boundary Justification (Explain why the boundaries were selected.) Boundaries follow the property lines historically associated with Pomeroy Green. The house at 1075 Pomeroy Avenue has always been outside of the Pomeroy Green development.

Sections 9-end page 35
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Santa Cl California
County and State

11. Form Prepared By
name/title Kenneth Kratz
organization:
street & number: 3283 Benton
city or town: Santa C state Cal ztp code: 95051
telephone
date 18 Fe
a
a
a
Additional Documentation
Submit the following items with the completed form:

Maps: A USGS map or equivalent (7.5 or l5 minute series) indicating the property's location.

Sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources. Key all photographs to this map.

Additional items: (Check with the SHPO, TPO, or FPO for any additional items.) Photographs
Submit clear and descriptive photographs. The size of each image must be 1600x1200 pixels (minimum), 3000x2000 preferred, at 300 ppi (pixels per inch) or larger. Key all photographs to the sketch map. Each photogfaph must be numbered and that number must comespond to the photograph number on the photo log. For simplicity, the name of the photographer, photo date, etc. may be listed once on the photograph log and doesn't need to be labeled on every photograph.

Photo Log
Name of Properfy:

City or Vicinity:

County:

State:

Photographer:

Date Photographed:

Pomeroy Green
Santa Clara
Santa Clara
California
Kenneth Kratz
March 4 through IN{'ay 2,2018
Description of Photograph(s) and number, include description of view indicating direction of camera:

Building I south fagade (left foreground), Building 2 south fagade (left background), Building 3 north fagade (right), Building 7 north elevation (far background), camera facing east
I of34
Sections 9-end page 36
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
2 of 34 Building 4 south faqade (left), Building 5 west fagade (right background), camera facing northeast
3 of34
4 of34
5 of34
6 of34
7 of34
8 of34
9 of34
l0 of34
I I of34
12 of 34
13 of34
14 of34
l5 of34
16 of 34
Building 6 west elevation (right), Building 4 south fagade (left), mature landscape, camera facing northeast
Playground between Buildings 7 and 8, camera facing east Building l0 north (left) and west (right) e levations with typical fireplace chimney, camera facing southeast
Walkway between Buildings l0 and 13, Building l0 west and south elevations (left), Building l l west elevation with replacement utility box (middle), Building l3 north elevation (right), camera facing east
Building l2 east elevation, camera facing west
Building 14 east fagade, camera facing northwest
Building l5 north fagade, camera facing south
Building l6 south elevation, camera facing northeast
Clubhouse (right), Building 5 east elevation (left), camera facing northwest Path from public sidewalk, Building l5 east elevation (left), Building l4 east fagade (middle), Building l2 south elevation (right), camera facing northwest Building 6 north fagade, mature landscaping, camera facing southwest Building 4 south fagade, camera facing nofthwest
Building 16 south fagade, camera facing north
Clubhouse interior with view of pool, Building l0 west elevation (left background), Building l3 north elevation (right background), camera facing southeast
17 of 34 Basketball court, Building 3 west elevation (left), Building 5 south elevation (middle), Building 4 east elevation (right), camera facing south Sections 9-end,page37
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
I 8 of34
Santa Clara, California
2l of 34 Walkway between pool and Building 13, Building 1l west elevation (far background), camera facing east
22 of 34 Building l5 north fagade (left), Building 14 west fagade (right, obscured by trees), mature landscaping, camera facing southwest
19 of34
20 of34
23 of 34
24 of24
25 of34
26 of 34
County and State
Park, surrounded by Building 6 south elevation (left), Building l3 west elevation (middle far background), Building l4 west elevation (right), camera facing east INOTE: 1075 Pomeroy Ave further right, outside frame]
Building 10 west elevation (right) with walkway between Building l0 and pool, Building 3 south elevation (background), camera facing northeast Walkway with benches between Buildings 6 and 13, Building l3 north and east elevations (left), Building 15 north fagade (middle far background), Building l4 north elevation (right), camera facing southeast
Building l4 east fagade (left), Building l5 south elevation (right), mature landscape, camera facing west
Building l0 west (left) and south (right) elevations, camera facing northeast Building l6 south fagade (left) and east elevation (right), camera facing northwest Representative townhouse living room, camera facing southeast 27 of 34 Building 13 south fagade with vinyl-framed sliding-glass door and windows, camera facing north
28 of 34 Representative townhouse back yard, Building 5 in background, camera facing southwest
29 of 34 Representative townhouse living room and back yard, camera facing south 30 of 34 Building 5 north elevation (left), Building 4 east elevation with replacement utility box (right), camera facing west
3l of 34 Building l4 west elevation with original aluminum framed windows (left) and replacement vinyl framed (right) windows, camera facing northeast 32 of 34 Building 14 east fagade with original aluminum framed windows (left) and replacement vinyl framed windows (right), camera facing west Sections 9-end page 38
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Santa Clara California
County and State
33 of34 Building l3 south fagade with replacement raised panel front door with fanlight, vinyl framed side light and sliding glass door, camera facing north 34 of 34 Building l6 east elevation with original gas meter box, camera facing southwest Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: This information is being collected for applications to the National Register of Historic Places to nominate properties for listing or determine eligibility for listing, to list properties, and to amend existing listings.

Response to this request is required to obtain a benefit in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.460 et seq.).

Estimated Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 100 hours per response including time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and completing and reviewing the form. Direct comments regarding this burden estimate or any aspect of this form to the Office of Planning and Performance Management. U.S. Dept. of the lnterior, 1849 C. Street, NW, Washington, DC.

Sections 9-end page 39
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Location Map
Latitude: 37.346325 Longitude: -121.985919
Santa Clara, California
County and State
Pdroroy Oen - Efuhhr TmtttSen{s Clara. CA 95051
37 3,i632t. 121-985919 o
Sections 9-end page 40
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1O2+O018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Sketch Map/Photo Key
€-.# TRAST HOMES
-.+
t?
0 l-)
2-IHURLP.J
Santa Clara California
County and State
+
i
)-
4a
E
{
r4
;Jt
I
c
'
I
trl eto
cwlt{ovlE
l
t
rq
otor,o
!gg$l
6 eut,-o,ua xo'
l*+ PHoTO No, 4
DIR€CTION
OF CA}4CRA l8+
*
(-
\
f
R
32 rcr
|\
I
rOUlEqY 6REEN
Pnoro Ke---
Drawing adapted from the Santa Clara County Assessor's Office parcel map, book 290, page 69 fooL
R PHOfos:
t6 - CLU6H005e
a6- FTRST FLooF,
fowNlr0USE
A6- OACKYARD
2q. SACKYARD
Sections 9-end page 4 I
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 Oi/B No. 102+oo18
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Figure 1 Base Map
Santa California
County and State
HISTOR,Ic orgrRlcT gAsg r,up
taaslirl
o L
L
L
'ATF o L
L
:tLerEb{]D:

L LAND.9CA?IN&
Y. .gatcr(YAB0-
srl.i;SlpewALK
PARKINaI.df
IsLANO
fHl,fi AODRESS
5/,r,
Illu^
trmJ
rRAcT HOMES #>
-- CHURCH
^l:'
aro€waLx
5to€wALg
tt
|
-
o So too
I
o
..td 9'
i
I
o
E
.5frows .st6[&rlcANr rMPRqV!ME$ri
mqP^I3^tger"1i8,$s MA? bY Kr(Brdz
Drawing adapted from the Santa Clara County Assessor's Office parcel map, book 290, page 69 Sections 9-end page 42
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Figure 2 Building Designation Map
<--TRACf HOMeS
rcI-I
ET ,,-CuueCA/
tffidEl
E
Santa Clara California
County and State
ittlo|..
rer
rcI
E
rcI !Egs!{!l
SUILDIN. NO. ret
r''tltoi
Po|'rEAoY 6REEll
-
ffiATroN
MAP
Drawing adapted from the Santa Clara County Assessor's Office parcel map, book 290, page 69 gtrrtatl
Ot{g SrDCy l{ou3g
Sections 9-end page 43
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0015
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
tr'igure 3 Eichler Homes Map,1962-1963
F- ?RACT tlot fS .*t
Santa Clara, California
County and State
cHutcrl
PROPEA"Y
!
t
I
#ffi,Ies -/\
[FTGF S*'Fru
X('IL:

SrrRf,ouxlNa PROttFl{
.FiEfARIR D€i(AI9T]ON3 AFDTD IY
g PoflERoY GREEI{ bY ErcflLER tl0lrlE$ qj*m u&E ffi
Source: Oakland and Imada Collection, 2002-3, box 14, folder M04, Pomeroy Green & Pomeroy West 1962-1963, Environmental Design Archives, University of California, Berkeley Sections 9-endpage 44
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Figure 4 Page from "Planned Unit Development with a Homes [sic] Association" ..", +r:rl- --, .

I-1 i-{'",..r":. -. i;ji€:,.:i.:'-',r.". .
-
Source: Oakland and Imada Collection, 2002-3, box box 4, folder III67, Pomeroy Green and Pomeroy West 1963-1964, Environmental Design Archives, University of California, Berkeley Sections 9-end page 45
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 1&900 OMB No. '102+0018
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Figure 5 Pole type exterior lighting
Santa California
County and State
i;
7 iLet$r t\ ITTIEF ICTSE '-UNl i;1 ' :IJNE
zLl'st t: c p1;,g
f 2 ?A "o ri
q{}
t
tri r'A -t
aS40rA o&AL r
l:lr,L. * l. b. q,
lFt{tfl:sx
*ff!traul
t
rrrOtil* .'','
s sdatr";:r;
Source: Oakland and Imada Collection, 2002-3, box l l, folder V 81, Pomeroy Green 1960-1962, Environmental Design Archives, University of California, Berkeley Sections 9-end page 46
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registralion Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Figure 6 Fence and wall mounted exterior lighting
Santa Clara, California
County and State
Source: Oakland and Imada Collection, 2002-3, box I l, folder V 81, Pomeroy Green 1960-1962 Environmental Design Archives, University of California, Berkeley Sections 9-end page 47
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 'lo-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Figure 7 John Peter and Fred Lyon, "solution for Suburbia" Look, 28, no.l4 (July 14, 1964) gr88n8rI
LUTI
F

SUBURBIA
ON
Txs cLUsTDaIxc Californif tcwn hougee
of Pomerov Green rcfieqt the singile moot
significant trend in the way we live. Designed by architect Clsude Oelcland, built by Eichler Homes, Inc., they EsG our incroaaingly extr)enriv-e and fart-disappearing suburban land senribly and imaginatively. Homos shere saeingt of cotnmon wclls, yet provide aounlrydub pleaeuieg.
con.tlnucd
I
I
Sections 9-end page 48
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Ki.tch.ens are carelu,l.ly planned in. relntiott
to lront patio ancl chiklren's bacle playyard.

Santa Clara California
County and State
Sections 9-end page 49
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 1o-9oo oMB No. 1o2+0o18
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
8{l8Ui8ll s*
Closa-quarler ltilng
ls sgaclous
ail lunrlo$ in
Calllornio's Pomeq Srucn
Santa Clara California
County and State
Caption: Each 4-bedroom, 2 lz-bathroom home has a light-filled living room (above), with sliding glass doors that open onto a private patio. Mrs. Frank La Horgue enjoys hers (right) for quiet hours or (left) for neighborly barbecues. With all maintenance-lawn mowing to appliance repair-included in the $20-25,000 [sic] purchase price (under a $200-per-month FHA mortgage), residents are free to enjoy leisure-time community activities or outside diversions, such as weekend cruises on a motorboat (below). This new concept of development living is such a success that a Pomeroy West has been built, and suburban townhouses are going up across the country.

Sections 9-end page 50
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-OO.t8
Pomeroy Green
Name of Properg
Santa Clara, California
County and State
Caption: This drawing shows the community's 78 two-story private homes. Grouped around2 Yz acres of landscaped lawns and shared facilities, they are in Santa Clara County, southeast of San Francisco. Wide walkways (above), protected from traffic, insure safe passage, with frequent play platforms (above, right) for children on the way to the community center and pool.

Sections 9-end page 5 I
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024'00'18
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara California
Name of Property County and State
Photo I Building I south fagade (left foreground), Building 2 south fagade (left background), Building 3 north fagade (right), Building 7 north elevation (far background), camera facing east
Photo 2 Building 4 south fagade (left), Building 5 west fagade (right background), camera facing northeast
Sections 9-endpage52
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Photo 3
Santa Clara California
County and State
Building 6 west elevation (right), Building 4 south fagade (left), mature landscape, camera facing northeast
Photo 4 Playground between Buildings 7 and8, camera facing east Sections 9-end page 53
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Regishation Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Photo 5 Building l0 north (left) and west (right) elevations with typical fireplace chimney, camera facing southeast
Photo 6 Walkway between Buildings 10 and 13, Building 10 west and south elevations (left), Building 11 west elevation with replacement utility box (middle), Building 13 north elevation (right), camera facing east
Sections 9-end page 54
United States Department of the lnterior
Nalional Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green
Name of Property
Photo 7 Building 12 east elevation, camera facing west
Photo 8 Building 14 east fagade, camera facing northwest Santa Clara California
County and State
Sections 9-end page 55
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 1o-9oo olilB No. 1o2+0o18
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Photo 9 Building l5 north fagade, camera facing south
Photo 10
Santa Clara, California
County and State
Building l6 south elevation, camera facing northeast
Sections 9-end page 56
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 112+0o1s
PqCIetoy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Photo 11 Clubhouse (right), Building Five east elevation (left), camera facing northwest Photo 12 Path from public sidewalk, Building 15 east elevation (left), Building l4 east fagade (middle), Building l2 south elevation (right), camera facing northwest t
{
:

Sections 9-end page 57
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OIVB No. 1021Fo018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, Californiq
Name County and State of Property
Photo 13 Building 6 north fagade, mature landscaping, camera facing southwest Photo 14 Building 4 south fagade, camera facing northwest Sections 9-end page 58
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1O2+OO18
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Photo 15 Building l6 south fagade, camera facing north
Santa Clara, California
County and State
Photo 16 Clubhouse interior with view of pool, Building l0 west elevation (left background), Building 13 north elevation (right background), camera facing southeast Sections 9-end page 59
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 1o-9oo OMB No' 102+0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Photo 17 Basketball court, Building 3 west elevation (left), Building 5 south elevation (middle), Building 4 east elevation (right), camera facing south ,fl
Photo L8 Park, surrounded by Building 6 south elevation (left), Building l3 west elevation (middle far background), Building l4 west elevation (right), camera facing east |NOTE: 1075 Pomeroy Ave further right, outside framel
Sections 9-end page 60
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1O2+0O18
Pomeroy Green
Name of Property
Santa Clara, California
County and State
Photo 19 Building l0 west elevation (right) with walkway between Building l0 and pool, Building 3 south elevation (background), camera facing northeast Photo 20 Walkway with benches between Buildings 6 and 13, Building l3 north and east elevations (left), Building l5 north fagade (middle far background), Building 14 north elevation (right), camera facing southeast
Sections 9-end page 6 I
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 1o-9OO OMB No. 102+0018
Pomeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Photo 21 Walkway befween pool and Building 13, Building I I west elevation (far background), camera facing east
Photo 22 Building l5 north fagade (left), Building 14 west fagade (right, obscured by trees), mature landscaping r cameta facing southwest
Sections 9-end page 62
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 102+0019
Pomeroy Green Santa California
Name of Prope(y County and State
Photo 23 Building 14 east fagade (left), Building 15 south elevation (right), mature landscape, camefa facing west
Photo24 Building l0 west (left) and south (right) elevations, camera facing northeast Sections 9-end page 63
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Histodc Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara California
Name of Property County and State
Photo 25 Building l6 south fagade (left) and east elevation (right), camera facing northwest Photo 26 Representative townhouse living room, camera facing southeast I
I
\
I
I
,'
I r',
iF
t
I
I
I
.L
#
?
I crrlr
iii
ir
l
4 I
.:+i+-..\
.r
---t ..-r'*)
,.i:H*i
j.t
i;r
rll
IF
lF -'i
Sections 9-endpage 64
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form '10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Photo 27 Building l3 south fagade with vinyl-framed sliding-glass door and windows, camera facing north
Photo 28 Representative townhouse back yard, Building 5 in background, camera facing southwest
Sections 9-end page 65
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form '10-900 OMB No. 102+0018
Pomerov Green Santa California
Name of Property County and State
Photo 29 Representative townhouse living room and back yard, camera facing south Photo 30 Building 5 north elevation (left), Building 4 east elevation with replacement utility box (right), camera facing west
Sections 9-end page 66
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registralion Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1O2+OO18
Pgmeroy Green Santa Clara, California
Name of Property County and State
Photo 31 Building l4 west elevation with original aluminum framed windows (left) and replacement vinyl framed (right) windows, camera facing northeast Photo 32 Building l4 east fagade with original aluminum framed windows (left) and replacement vinyl framed windows (righQ, camera facing west Sections 9-end page 67
United States Department of the lnterior
National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. '102+oo18
Green Santa Clara California
Name Property County and State
Photo 33 Building l3 south fagade with replacement raised panel front door with fanlight, vinyl framed side light and sliding glass door, camera facing north Photo 34 Building l6 east elevation with original gas meter box, camera facing southwest '\t i
I"tlr
Sections 9-end page 68
City of Santa Clara Municipal Utilitiee
REGULAR BILL ffi
S'
Account Number:

Account Namer
Servlce Address:

Watsr/Sewer/Solar
Water
Sewer
$49.31 X 6 Units = $246.55
I

POMEROY GREEN CORP
3291 BENTON ST HM 3
Bill Dater
iAmount Due:

Customer Servlce
08t23t2024
$1,385.75
(408) 615-2300
Pg2of5
$1,152.00
-$1,152.00
$1,385.75
,385.
$1,385.75
-
$1,385,75 THIS BILL IS DUE UPON RECEIPT $1,139.20
$246.55 To avoid late charges and additional fees,
pay 1,385.75 lN FULL before 09113/2024.

Current Charges Total $1,385.75
For more information, see back of bill.

Previous Balance
Payments (Ogl14l2024) - Thank You
0urrent Charges
Amount Due
Plaaso ntum thb portton wtth Voui piymirit rn erivctopc pieiiued. Maka'iilo*-piteb6tt6le$,'.6i S;nter'eiai, AccountNo: I RouteNo.338 AmountDue:
0w
3100
?800
2400
2000
1600
'1200
800
400
0 6ro Eto
l[goa :fL
*g38
Jun Aug Oct Doc Feb Apr Jun Aug 2? 24
BillDater A412312024
Past Due Date: 09/13/2024
SCI,OB 2 6A
200aoQa3a1 27 /2
Amount Encloeed: DIRECT PAYMENT
Direct Payment lnquiries: 408-615-2300

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

POMEROY GREEN CORP

C/O PROPERTY PRO LTD
14127 CAPR| DR # I
LOS GATOS CA 95032-1 534
Currcnt Charges Billirrg Cornmcnts
Billing lnfornration
Read Dates Moter Readlngs Service
Type Prlor Current
Days Currant Prlor
Mult Usago Meter
Number Rat6
This Month
Thls Yoar
(Dally Avs.l
Thls Month
Last Year
{Dally Avg.)
W 07t19 08/20 32 5549 5421 1 128 HCF s331 889 w15 2,992 Gal 2,338 Gal Usage Table and History Graphs
Have you fallen behind on your bill? Don't wait! Call us so we can help you with payment arrangements and payment assistance programs q0 000 q &e
'{
b00[ 10080],395?5?
City of Santa Glara Municipal Utilltiee
REGULAR BILL ?.ffi
Account Number:

Account Name:

Eervice Addrege:
-

POMEROY GREEN CORP
329{ BENTON 8T HM 6
Bill Date:

Amount Due:

Customer Service
To avoid late charges and additional fees,
pay 1,842.53 lN FULL before 09/1312024'
For more information, see back of bill.
08t23t2024
${,842.53
(408) 615'2300
Pg4of5
$2,6'18.37
-$2,618,37
$1,842.53
St Water/SewerlSolar
Waler
Sewer
$4S.31 X 13 Units = $641.03
$t ,842,53 THIS BILL IS DUE UPON RECEIPT
$1,20
$64
50 03
I
Current Charges Total
AccountNo: I
BillDate: AU23|2A24
Part Due Date: 09113/2024
scL08 2 6A
200000ffia9 21 / 4
$1,842.53
Previous Balance
Payments (0811412024) - Thank You
Cunent Charges
Amount Due
Fl€dse dtum,thls portlon wlth youipayment,ln snvdlops prorildcd. Makd check paybbh tbf*i'oi€anta Clara.

Amount Due
6000
6000
4000
3000
t000
1000
0 SAaig tlt 0) 3Ah8
r! 11
'E
$1,842.53
$1,842.53
Amount Enclosed: DIRECT PAYMENT
Direc{ Payment lnquiries: 408-61 5-2300

CITY OF SANTA CLARA
Jun Aug Oct Doc Fsb APr Jun Aug
23 24
Route No.338

POMEROY GREEN CORP
CiO PROPERTY PRO tTD
14127 CAPRI DR # I
tos GATos cA 95032-1534
Current Charges Billing Comrrtents
Billing lnfortnation
Road Drt€s Metor R€adlngs Thls Month
Last Year
(Dallv I'vE,l
Rate
Thls Month
Thls Year
(Dally Avs.l
Mult Usage lll€tor
Number Prlor Current
Days Current Prior
Service
Typ6
H018223 t l02 3,156 Gal 2,782Gat W o7n9 08/20 32 2069 1934 1 135 HCF Usage Talrle ancl History GraPlts
t
I I
Have you fallen behind on your bill? Don'twaitt Call us so we can help you with payment arrangements and payment assigtance programs l{0 u00 q ae q41100In0001,8 t{e530
Current Charges
City of Santa Clara Municipal Utilities
REGULAR BILL q"ffi.,H
Sr
Account Number:

Account Name:

Service Address:

Water/Sewer/Solar
Water
Sewer
$49.31 X 8 Units = $394.48
-

POMEROY GREEN CORP
3291 BENTON ST HM4
BillDate:

Amount Due:

Custorner Service
0812312024
$1,026.38
(408) 615-2300
s1,026.38 THIS BILL IS DUE UPON RECEIPT
Pg 3 of5
$912.05
-$9'12.05
$1,026.38
$631.90
$394.48
E
To avoid late charges and additional fees,
pay 1,026.38 lN FULL betore A911312024,
For more information, see back of bill,
Previous Balance
Payments (0811412024),- Thank You
Current Charges
Current Gharges Total $1,026,38
OGtr|A (igoo :f oL0') glE
Rtlj
=8
2000
1600
1200
800
400
0 Amount Due
I t I
I lr
T
$1,026.38
$1,026.38
Jun Aug Oct Doc Fob Apr JuF Aug 21 24
Please letum this portion with your paymoni ioenvelope provided. Make check peyable to Cig of Santa Clara.

AccountNo: I RouteNo.338 AmountDue: BillDate: 0812312024 Past Due Date: 0911312024
Direct Payment fles: 15-2300
scl,o826A
2000004308 27 /3 GITY OF SANTA CLARA

POMEROY GREEN CORP

C/O PROPERTY PRO LTD
14127 CAPRI DR # I
LOS GATOS CA 9s032.1534
Billing Comments
Billing lnformation
Read Dates Meter Readings Serylce
Type Days
Prior Current Current Prior
Mult Usage fl/letor
Number Rate
This Month
This Year
{Daily Avs.)
This Month
Last Year
(Daily Avs.)
W 07119 08t20 32 99S6 9925 1 71 HCF H0281 ss t /02 1,660 Gal 1,904 Gal Usage Table and History Graphs
Have you fallen behind on your bill? Donl wait! Call us so we can help you with payment arrangements and payment assistance programs Amount Enclosed: DIRECT PAYMENT
t{0 E BB qAe r{ 7 U U Dl,oU BDl,Deb3B 3
City of Santa Clara Municipal Utilities
REGULAR BILL rffi
Account Number:

Account Name:

Service Addrese:
-

POMEROY GREEN CORP
3291 BENTON ST }iM 1
BillDate:

Amount Due:

Cuetomer Servico
To avoid late charges and additional fees,
pay 1,713.84 lN FULL before 09/13/2024.

For more information, see back of bill"
08t23t2024
$1,713.84
(408) 615-2300
Pg 1 ofS
$2,343.00
-$2,343.00
$1,713.84
Sr Water/Sewer/Solar
Water
Sewer
$49.31 X 14 Units = $690.34
$1,713.84 THIS BILL IS DUE UPON RECEIPT
$1,023.50
$690.34
I
-
-
Current Charges Total
AccountNo:
-
BillDate: 0812312024
Past Due Date: 09/13/2024
scr,0 g 2 6A
21BAOOO3O€' 27/r
$1,713,84
Previous Balance
Payments (O$l14l2024j - Thank You
Current Charges
Amount Due
ptsasb retum this portlon'wnh your payncnt.ln envilopc provlded. Mak€ ctrect< psy-aOtd to Ctty of sania dtan. $1,7,l3.84
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0 gA
aEg oa2&L6
SE
=8 Jun Aug Oct Doc Fob Apr Jun Aug 2t u.

Route No.338 Amount Due:

Payment lnquiries: 408-61 5-2300

CITY OF SANTA CLARA
$1,713.84

POMEROY GREEN CORP

C/O PROPERTY PRO LTO
14127 CAFRI DR # I
LOS GATOS CA 95032-1534
Crlrrent Charges Billing Conrnrents
Billing lnfonnation
Read Dates Mstor Readlngs Thls Month
Last Y€ar
{Dallv Avs.}
Meter
Number Rate
Thls Month
Thls Year
(Daily Avg.)
Days Currsnt Prlor
SeMce Mult Usage Type Frlor Current
2,688 Gal 3,060 Gal W 07t19 a8t2a 32 3231 3116 1 115 HCF Y517279 w02 Usage Table ancl History Graphs
Have you fallen behind on your bill? Don't waitl Call us so we can help you with payment arrangements and payment assistance programs Amount Enclosed; DIRECT PAYMENT
ffi qB 090 '{
ge q 58n0180081,713& q t{
City of Santa Glara Municipal Utilities
REGULAR BILL e$fii,ri
Account Number:

Account Name:

Service Address:
-

POMEROY GREEN CORP
3291 BENTON ST HII,I7
Bill Date:

Amount Due:

Customer Service
08123t2024
$s71.04
(408) 615-2300
Pg5of5
$566.62
-$566.62
s571.04
.Ir Water/Sewer/Solar
Water
Sewer
$49.3'l X 4 Units = $197.24
$s71.04 THIS BILL IS DUE UPON RECEIPT $373.80
$197.24 To avoid late charges and additional fees,
pay 571.04|N FULL belore 0911312024,
Current Charges Total $57r.04
For more information, see back of bill,
Previous Balance
Payments (0811412024) - Thank You
Current Charges
Amount Due
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0 Please retum this portion with your paymcint in envelope provided. Make check payaUte to Cig ol Santa Clan. -
$s71.04
$571.04
t'8lUs (,'(l)
=o- L!D
*E3E
Jun Aug Oct Deo Feb Apr Jun Aug 23 24
AccountNo:
-
Bill Date: 0812312024
Past Due Date: 09113flA24
scl,o82 6A
2000000310 2?/5
Route No. 338 Amount Due:

Direct lnquiries: 408.61 5-2300

GITY OF SANTA CLARA

POMEROY GREEN CORP

C/O PROPFRTY PRO LTD
,14127 CAPRT DR# I
LOS GATOS CA 95032-1534
Gurrent Charges Billing Comments
Billing lnformation
Read Dates Meter Readings Service
Type Prior Current
Days
Current Prlor
Mult Usage Meter
Number Rate
This Month
This Year
(Daily Avs.)
Thls Month
Last Year
(Dailv Avq.)
W 07t19 08/20 32 1318 1276 1 42 HCF GM8768 w15 982 Gal 1,029 Gal Usage Table and History Graphs
I rll T
tlrrl TI
Have you fallen behind on your bill? Dont waitl Call us so we can help you with payment anangements and payment assistance programs Amount Enclosed: DIRECT PAYMENT
q0 00 D q8Etr900D:,DDDD05?l,n q 7
Service For:

POMEROY GREEN CO
3291 BENTON ST
SANTA CLARA, CA 95051
Business Specialist available
Mon-Fri: 7am to 6pm
1-800-468-4743
www,pge.com/MYEnergY
www. pge.com/waystoPaY
Your Account $ummary :

Amount Due on.Previous islatement
Payment(s) Received Sinoe Last $tatement
Previous Unpaid Balance
Current Gas Charges
Automatic Payment Service (APS)
to be applied agn112024
$1 80
$1 20
$80
$40
$0
2023
yr$tf www.pge.comrMyEnargy for € detallecl bill crmpafl$on $7.84
-7.84
1 Yosr
Ago
$o.oo
$8.65
$a.es
Curront
P6riod
N/A. xl!_,_!l!_
Gas Therms / Day
1 11qnlAg??51ll?e1EEUEE0nSL50UnEB0U00n
2024
PG&E
BOX 997300
SACRAMENTO, CA 95899-7300

Page 1 of 3 ends

Prinled wlth Water Bd6€d inks on SFI corlified oarcr
No payment ls due. Please relaln for your records' Thank you. o
!4.{
o
o
N
o
o
o
d
e
o
co
o
-t
q
tt'
794410082563 1 AV A.545417 8610 I n
rgllllgl,rlllrlgh,ll,lg'111,'rll,lllllll1',gl',glgl',"11111'lgl

POMEROY GREEN CO
14127 CA?RI DR STE 8
LOS GATOS CA 95032-1534
Due Date:
0911612024
APS Amount
$8.65
APS to be applied:
09111t2024
ffi
From: Planning Public Comment
Sent: Wednesday, October 23,2024l-2:06 PM
To: Gina Muelleman Planning Public Comment
<[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]> Cc: Alexander Abbe <[email protected]>; Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Lance Saleme <[email protected]; Mario Bouza <[email protected]>; Nancy Biagini <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <[email protected]>; Yashraj Bhatnagar <[email protected]> Subject: FW: 3111 Benton St - ATT Monotree Project - Community Development Planning Division - October 23,2024
Hello,
Your email has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.

Thank you,
ELIZABETH ELLIOTT I StaffAide ll
Community Development Department I Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue I Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.615.2450 Direct : 408.61,5.247 4
From: Gina Muelleman
Sent: Wednesday, October 23,202411:59 AM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Cc: Gina Muelleman
Subject: 31l-1 Benton St - ATT Monotree Project - Community Development Planning Division - October 23,2024
I t", don't often get email from Learn whv this is imoortant Hello, please add the attached file as my comment for this meeting Thanks & Regards,
Gina Muelleman,
3235 Benton St
Here are my thoughts on the 3I I I Benton St Monotree project As we run out of lower frequencies, we will need to add more and more of these faux trees because the higher frequencies don't propagate that well. And will 5G+ eventually go up to 300 GHz? lnstallation
And then why hasn't Verizon, T-Mobile, and Dish also asked to place a large antenna in this spot? Or have they asked - and AT&T was the highest bidder so they were chosen? lf one monotree was OK, then are we going to allow all three companies to add 3 antennae in the same place or even nearby? Home Values
Right now, to tell a prospective buyer that your house's neighborhood has the 5G or 5G+ capability would increase value, but if studies ever came out that the higher frequencies affect the brain's performance or worse, cause cancer, we will not be able to sell our houses until a lot of the cell towers are taken down. That would cause the wireless carriers a lot of expense.

Health effects
One article from the lnternationol Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health in September 20L9, reviewed 94 medical studies to see if the higher frequencies (6-100 GHz, millimeter waves, MMW) can have a health impact. They revealed that most studies covered the midrange (30.1to 55 GHz), and they said that a lot more medicalstudies are needed to see what happens at the lower and higher frequencies (ranges up to 30 GHz and over 90 GHz).

They also mentioned: at the RF level, the lnternational Agency for Research on Cancer classified electromagnetic fields as "possibly carcinogenic to humans." cl PMC676590 h
Signal Behavior - Not Constant
The labels for tower and rooftop imply that the RF fields could spike higher than the FCC occupational exposure limits. Does that mean if we are on or near the roofs, we could be exposed to RF radiation (when tower dips into lower frequencies)?
I I
ACAUTl0ltl
CAUTION 2
*tr&T opelatfi Jntennll al lhlt llte.

Eeyoad Iftfi Polnl trou tre rnttdng nn area
where radio frequtnry {nf} frelfi nE u*ed the
F(( 0ccupational Expolure lirniu.

Fdlsw iifsty guidtlinu forwotking in rn RF
€nvironmtnt.
(cntact AI&I il 800-638-t8l?, optian g and l,
rnd fdlow theh inttru(liom priu to prfuming
mrinlefinnce 0t tepiilt beyond tltis poinl.
,, I *art*r.t ltc cltrtl rii t
I
a o
ACAUTIO[I
0n this tower:
f;adio htquenq [ftfl fteldl neer 30rne antennaE
mf,y rr(rcd tfr* t(t 0ecugalional Erporun Linitl"
(tnlact AT&T rt 800-6]8-18lI, optlon 9 and J, and
follow tfteir inllructionl pior to prrforming
mrintrnance or lepair hyond thll pnlnt"
PerEonnel clirnblng thls tower lhould be tralned
for warklng ln Rf envlmnmentl end ure a pe*onal
RF rnanltor lf wsrklng near artlve antennal.
.

I *-rtrl{rlr tkBfflrtilr I
CAUTION 28
A lot to think about.

From: Planning Public Comment <PlanningPublicCom [email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 23,202411:58 AM
To: Ken Kratz Planning Public Comment
<[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]> Cc: Alexander Abbe <[email protected]>; Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Lance Saleme <[email protected]>; Mario Bouza <[email protected]>; Nancy Biagini <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <[email protected]>; Yashraj Bhatnagar <YBhatnagar@Santaclaraca,gov> Subject: RE: Telecommunication tower proposed for 3111- Benton Street;, PLN 23-00148; APN: 290- 27-006; Ken Kratz's public comments (2)
Thank you, Ken
Your email has been received and will be part of the public record on this item Rega rds,
Elizabeth Elliott
Planning Division
From: Ken Kratz
Sent: Wednesday, October 23,202411:56 AM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Subject: Telecommunication tower proposed for 3111 Benton Street;, PLN 23-00148;APN: 290-27- 006; Ken Kratz's public comments (2)
1 I Vou don't often get email from ,'
I earn whv this rs imoortant
Hello Community Development Department,
I have two additional comments and concerns to add to my letter objecting to the project and my request for a continuance/postponement of the hearing until my concems are addressed that I sent earlier in regard to the AT&T telecommunications tower proposed for 311 I Benton Street (projects PLN 23-00148; APN: 290-27-006).

Please bring the following to the attention of Planning Commission for their public hearing on this project scheduled for today, Wednesday, October 23,2024:

1. Noise issue concerns
I read the noise report included in the agenda packet and I think the authors ofthe report need to look at the cumulative effects of the noise, the adding the current background noise to the noise from the proposed tower installation, on the surrounding residents. According to what I have read on-line, noise is cumulative; the authors of the noise report in the packet need to consider the cumulative effects.

This is important because most residents of Pomeroy Green do not have air conditioning and therefore leave their widow and doors open for ventilation when it's hot outside. This situation will be particularly bad at night when everyone is trying to get some sleep.

Could the noise be abated by moving the tower installation somewhere more compatible with these concerns or a sound barrier be provided in the proposed location. The report mentions a partial concrete block wall surrounding the area of the proposed tower electrical gear installation; could that wall be completed/extended and a roof be provided to prevent unwanted noise form entering the yards and homes surrounding the project?

2. Pomeroy Green identification and histroci status
Pomeroy Green can also be identified form a casual walk through the complex to find the historic plaque that is mounted on the side of the Pomeroy Green Clubhouse (see attached photo; that's a picture of me in front of the plaque). There is also a list of contact numbers for our Board Members and our Property Manager on the bulletin board behind me.

Thank you,
Ken Kratz
Pomeroy Green Cooperative shareholder
3283 Benton Street
Santa Clara, Ca. 95051 I
IO:

From:

Cc:

Subject:

Date:

Attachments:

Plannino Public Comment
; Eric Crutchlow; Priva Cherukuru; Oian Huano; Lance
Alexander Abbe
RE: Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church Wednesday, October 23, 2024 4:0I:16 PM
imaoe001.ono
imaoe003.ono
Hello,
Your email has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.

Thank you,
ELIZABETH ELLIOTT I Staff Aide ll
Community Development Department I Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue I Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.615.2450 Direct :408.615.2474
ffi$fiHsr,o
From: Jenny Wen
Sent: Wednesday, October 23,2024 2:55 PM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]>; Tiffany Vien <[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <QH ua ng@Sa ntacla raca.gov>; Lance Saleme <LSa leme @Sa ntaClaraCA.gov>; Ma rio Bouza <[email protected]>; Yashraj Bhatnagar <[email protected]> Subject: Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 6O-foot-monotree by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church
Some people who received this message don't often get email from why this is important
Learn
Dear sir/Madam,
This leffer is regarding the installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T on the premises of Santa CIara First Baptist Church at3I11 Benton Street.

Our neighborhood community hereby formally submits our letter with signatures opposing this plan prior to the meeting which is scheduled for Wednesday, October 23, 2024.

We are strongly opposed to the Proposed Installation as we believe this plan is not in the best interest of our community. Our response to the Proposed Installation is I big NO.

1. The "monotree" is actually a "wireless cell phone tower" or "cell phone base station." Its location is a mere 20-30 feet away from the backyard fence of the neighboring residential houses and is extremely close to the immediately surrounding residential area.

Meanwhile many municipalities, including in California, have strict requirements for erecting cell towers near residential areas. The following municipalities, districts, or zones have a MINIMUM of 500 feet setback requirement to 1,000 feet or more from residential properties andlor property line:
. Los Altos, CA
. Fremont, CA
. Pleasanton, CA
. Laguna Beach, CA
. West Los Angeles, CA
. South Los Angeles, CA
. Hollywood, CA
. San Diego, CA
. Beverly Hills, CA
. Calabasas, CA
. Encinitas, CA
. Palm Springs, CA

2. There is already another Verizon 'owireless cell phone base station" at the roof of the main church building, which sits just -80 feet away from the new AT&T location and is already of major concern.

Therefore, there will be TWO wireless base stations on the same premises on the church property, thereby further increasing the potential health risks to the surrounding residents.

3. We, the neighborhood community, have the followings concerns:

A. The negative health effects caused hy wireless
radiation from the tower.There has NOT been a clear
conclusion that cell towers are not harmful to health.

This is a serious enough issue that the International
Association of Fire Fighters has opposed the installation of cell towers at fire stations, where its fire fighters live.

Further reading can be done on their website Cell Tower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
Cell Tower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
B. Risk of fire. There is a risk of fire, potentially from a malfunction in equipment, weather related such as a
lightning strike, or arson and will be devastating for the neighboring houses should one occur.

The cause was believed to be equipment malfunction
related to a transformer.
• 2019 - California: Cell tower in Sonoma County caught fire, potentially due to an electrical fault.
• 2018 - New Jersey: A fire at a cell tower was attributed to arson. Local authorities investigated the incident due to suspicious circumstances.
• 2017 - Texas: Cell tower fire occurred, likely due to equipment malfunction, as heavy winds and storms were
present.
• 2016 - Florida: Cell tower caught fire after being struck by lightning.
• 2015 - Illinois: Cell tower fire was reported, attributed to equipment failure. The fire spread to nearby vegetation. • 2014 - North Carolina: A fire was caused by an
electrical issue related to the cell tower's lighting
equipment.
• 2012 - Michigan: Cell tower fire occurred, believed to be caused by an equipment malfunction.
• 2011 - Alabama: Cell tower fire occurred due to a
lightning strike, causing significant damage to the
structure.
• 2009 - Georgia: A fire was reported at a cell tower site, attributed to equipment failure and overheating.
• 2008 - Colorado: A fire broke out at a cell tower,
suspected to be caused by an electrical short circuit.
• 2006 - Ohio: Cell tower caught fire due to a malfunction in the power supply system.
• 2005 - New York: A fire was linked to an electrical issue at a cell tower site.
• 2004 - Louisiana: Cell tower fire was attributed to a lightning strike.
• 2003 - Maryland: A fire occurred at a cell tower site due to suspected electrical malfunctions.
• 2002 - Florida: Cell tower fire was reported, believed to be caused by equipment overheating during extreme
weather conditions.
• 2001 - Texas: A fire at a cell tower was linked to an arson investigation, where the tower was set on fire
deliberately.

C. Property Values.Someday, if we decide to sell our
houses, we will need to disclose to the buyer that our homes are right under two wireless companies' cell phone towers, not to mention that the towers will be extremely
conspicuous.

If AT&T really needs to install a new tower in this area, why don't they choose a location that is not so close to someone's backyard? We respectfully urge you to honor the wishes of this community and reject this plan from AT&T, and let them seek out alternate sites.

Sincerely,
Jenny Wen
1 ~ S&o~ 0(7posd , .....
~ -(e/2,/,) /14('_, I S Q.,, l,;;J ;Jo ;
~- ~/8
91- ,.//u-u cA(J ¼ 11U., ~~e ['f,y; ;Julf,i,._L)
PMM
PC Meelin_g 10/23/24
RTC 24-987

City Council and Authorities ConcurrentFebruary 25, 2025

City Council and Authorities Concurrent
February 25, 2025