That's the way you go.

Should I go?

Yeah.

All right.

Welcome to the historic landmark commission meeting.

Following roll call during summary of hearing procedure and we'll review how the public may provide comment during today's session.

I'm going to start with roll call.

Um, Chair Royer, absent today.

Um, Chair Vice Chair Gondright present.

Uh, Commissioner Arnold.

She's absent today.

Commissioner Bainlaw.

Commissioner Caluso.

Present.

Commissioner Cohen.

Yes, maybe.

Commissioner Kagura.

Present.

Okay.

Uh, the procedures for this hearing are as follows.

After the staff report, applicants and opponents may take may make a five-minute presentation.

Um, if you wish to speak on an item, complete a card and place it in the speaker card box or bring your card to uh historic preservation officer Edwards.

When I receive your speaker call card, I will call you forward.

Each speaker will be given up to two minutes for public testimony, and speakers using a translator will have up to four minutes.

At this discretion of the chair, the time allotted to each speaker may be changed depending on the number of items on the agenda, number of speakers, and other factors.

Speakers using a translator will have double the time allotted.

After the public testimony, the applicant may make closing remarks for up to an additional five minutes.

Of the speakers, response to commissioner questions will not reduce the speakers' time allowance.

The public will then be the public hearing will then be closed and the historic landmarks commission will take action on the item.

The commission may request staff to respond to the public testimony, ask staff questions, and discuss the item.

If a commissioner would like a topic to be addressed under one of the good and welfare items, please contact planning staff in advance of the commission meeting.

So that maybe it's too late.

Um I really need to read the rest of the two paragraphs.

Yeah, right.

So California Public Records Request Act.

Okay.

All public records relating to an open session item on this agenda, which are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act that are distributed to a majority of the legislative body will be available for public by email by emailing planning support staff at San Jose CA.gov at the same time that the public records are distributed or made available to the legislative body.

Before we begin, I want to remind the historic landmarks commission members and members of the public to follow our code of conduct and meetings.

This includes commenting on the specific agenda item only and addressing the full body.

Public speakers will not engage in a conversation with the commissioners or staff.

All members of the historic landmarks commission staff and public are expected to refrain from abuse of language, repeated failure to comply with this code of conduct, which will disturb disrupt or impede the orderly conduct of this meeting, may result in removal from the meeting.

This meeting of the historic landmarks commission will now come to order.

Okay.

All right, the first item is deferrals.

Um there's no items.

The second item is consent calendar.

Once again, no items.

The third item is public hearings.

I understand we're we're gonna be taking it out of order and starting with item B, which is HL26001 application for rescission of city landmark designation for southern Pacific Switching Tower Building and site at 725 Chestnut Street to reflect existing conditions as the structure was destroyed by fire and is no longer extant.

Uh Union Pacific Railroad Company Owner, Council District 6.

So CEQA is exempt pursuant to SQL Guidelines Section 15061 B3.

Common sense send exemption for projects where there is no possibility that the product that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment.

Adopt a resolution rescinding the city landmark designation for 725 Chestnut Street, which no longer contains the Southern Pacific switching power building insight.

Thank you.

Um Vice Chair Golendari.

Uh I'm just gonna hand it directly over to uh Sherry Jackman, uh, who's the representing the applicant union specific.

Um, she has a presentation which would be difficult of mine, so we're just gonna go ahead and let her present.

Thank you, Dana, and thank you, commissioners and staff for all the hard work and preparation going into this.

Um, I'm here to just go over the history of this site and why we believe the decision of the historic designation is appropriate.

Um next slide, please.

So I'll just tell you a little bit about the applicant.

The applicant is uh union Pacific Railroad, the successor to the Southern Pacific Railroad, which started operating rail lines in San Jose in the 1800s.

Quite a history.

Eventually it became sort of obsolete as technologies advanced and switching of this nature was no longer needed or required due to modernization of technology.

Next slide, please.

So just to frame the geographic location of the site, this is at the corner of Chestnut Street and West Taylor.

There's an overpass there.

And the site no longer contains the switch switching tower, so I can't show you exactly where it was, but it was sort of in that corner there.

Exactly.

But it is no longer present.

Oh, did that too?

Is that the next one?

Or did I yes perfect?

I think so.

Yeah.

So historically, the switch house and the site was designated as a historic resource.

Closely after the time it stopped operating in 1993.

This is resolution 64399, which is available in your packets.

Next slide, please.

Shortly after the historic designation, the railroad decided to donate the College Park Tower to Santa Clara County for exhibition, along with some other unique historic structures, including a really cool old turntable, a herder's shack, and some other equipment, and Santa Clara County accepted the offer.

Just to help staff, you know, understand the history.

We provided the correspondence that we were able to locate on this topic.

And staff has quoted from these documents, and we're just providing excerpts here as well.

Next slide, please.

Unfortunately, although the donation was made and accepted in 94, there were a couple years before, you know, movement could take place.

There were some delays.

And what happened was this site became sort of an attractive nuisance for vandals, and there were multiple documented of um, you know, perhaps unhoused person entering the structure and um vandalizing it in different respects.

So the railroad then wrote to um the county asking for them to expedite preparation of the movement of all these structures to the appropriate location for historic preservation, um saying that there was some danger of vandalism.

Sorry, don't worry.

Um next slide, please.

Actually, one month after that letter, uh, there was a documented incident where perhaps transients or my preferred words unhoused person, set fire to the structure, and it was badly burned.

Next slide, please.

This will show you the very sad demise of the structure.

As you can see, it was completely charred by the fire, the windows were blown out, the roof um was absolutely um kind of with holes in it, and the structure was no longer really safe.

And I don't know if that hold fence there related to the activity, but to you know somebody's uh guess, maybe someone opened up a hole in that fence when they entered the premises to burn that structure, sadly.

Next slide, please.

Um, so Union Pacific, Southern Pacific, same railroad, reaffirmed its commitment to donate the structures.

Uh, however, and actually county said yes, we still want them, but there was an assessment performed by a firm called MBA Architects, which concluded it was not feasible to move the structures, they were too badly charred.

There wasn't really anything that could be done about the you know very badly damaged materials.

And in fact, the structure became a very uh dangerous public safety concern because um it was again frequented by the unhoused and uh interest continued in this very dangerous structure.

So it was actually removed.

Uh the chart remains were removed for public safety after lots of reports of continuing um activity and trespassing.

To make matters even more complicated, the site where the tower was previously located is actually a hazardous waste site.

It's contaminated with chlorinated solvents and other contaminations due to historic operations.

These were not railroad operations, they were tenant operations.

Uh, there's an ongoing kind of cleanup out there.

The railroad has enrolled the site in what's called a voluntary cleanup agreement, which is um a property owner stepping up saying, Hey, we've identified a site, it has termination, even though we didn't cause it, we're committed to investigating and remediating this property.

So, because of that, um, the continued historic designation presents even more challenges.

Um there's regulatory uncertainty, there's practical impediments to cleaning up the site, including site access, excavation, and redevelopment planning.

So the conclusion is that rescission of the historic designation of the site is essential to facilitate the environmental response work that needs to happen out there to protect public health, uh, comply with environmental law and to benefit the surrounding community.

Uh consistent with staff's conclusion, uh, we've identified the criteria in SJMC 1348110H.

And because there's no structure here, it's pretty easy to conclude that there is no uh historical significance because there's nothing left really.

Uh, there was no historic event because it's the history and the designation is due to just to the structure.

Uh there was not, you know, a significant person involved.

It was really just this really cool old structure that was being preserved.

Um, so I won't uh be redundant here, but because the structure no longer exists, none of the criteria can be met.

Um, in conclusion, because the College Park Tower was severely damaged by fire, became a public health and safety hazard, and was removed.

Uh, we think uh rescission of the existing historic designations appropriate.

Um, one helpful fact for those who love old railroad equipment like me, um, is that there's a nearby similar structure that is preserved.

It's called the Santa Clara Tower, and it was preserved in place, and it is very much an embodiment of this structure.

So for folks that you know miss the structure, there's something to go see that's almost identical.

Um, the site was noteworthy, only due to the structure.

Just to be clear, there wasn't something else about the site that was designated.

Environmental remediation is needed.

And so we fully conclude and concur with the commission uh staff recommendation to recent the historic designation.

Um last photo, I believe, is uh again that Santa Clara Tower that is preserved is there on the right.

Um the structure that was demised is on the left.

So um, and this structure is located just south of the Costco near El Camino.

If anyone ever wants to go see it just to, you know, relive the past a little bit.

Fun fact about these structures is the top, there were always two stories.

There weren't that many of them in California, but there were several.

The top was designed to have a 360 degree view so that you could watch the trains and determine when switching was needed, and then the bottom uh story was usually where you know switching equipment and batteries were often stored, cool old buildings and a fun little remnant of the past.

Next slide, please.

And that's just um a snip of the record that I've already um uh reiterated several times.

So that concludes my presentation, and thank you so much for your time.

Happy to take any questions, no one was questions.

No, no, okay.

Well, well, are there anybody?

We've over public comment, right?

That's usually what we guessed.

So is there any member of the public here at Homeland?

Okay.

Now we can open up to commissioner questions.

Um I'm not against this, obviously, but I do have a couple of questions.

Sorry.

Um who originally requested having that, having it landmarked?

Was it union Pacific?

I requested it get landmarked, or was it instigated by the county or the city?

This is a curiosity.

I don't actually know the answer to that, but I could look into it.

There are several historic railroad societies that are often behind those uh projects.

Oh, that may have I'm just curious.

Yeah, I started the process.

Yeah, I could look into that.

It might have been um, you know, I used to work at Santa Clara County and was the historic preservation officer there.

I worked with the parks department on those historical heritage grants that um they issued every year, and Rod Deradon used to come a lot for restoration of locomotives and this project too, I believe.

So it may have been initiated by Rod Dare Don or and or the county, um, and the reason for it being landmarked would be that you can't get grant money unless it's landmarked also.

Because it has to be, you have to be able to regulate it because public money has to be open to the public.

So that may have been part of part of it.

And I have seen that name Ron Dirida Don and the files.

Um, so that sounds consistent with what I know, but I could look for any further documents.

He just passed, unfortunately, he was a huge proponent to transportation, particularly um steam-powered railroad.

He's very passionate, yeah.

Um, so it was donated in 1984 Santa Clara.

Um, it sounds like the county was really negligent as far as taking care of this property and moving it.

So have they been fined?

Should they be fined?

Can they be fined?

Well, it's long gone now.

Right, but I mean the fact that they were negligent.

Is there any repercussions?

I mean the city, I don't think with me taking any, but the material was moved, um, and it was stored for a long time, I believe, at the county.

Then I think the county eventually decided they didn't want to do a railroad museum there.

Um, and I believe that some of the material, at least the roundhouse, uh was donated to Sinnol.

Does this did you hear any of this?

Yes.

Um, and I and implemented, I don't know if it has been implemented there yet.

Yes.

So I know that one of the causes of the delay was environmental review.

That's stated in the documents in your um application.

And I know that just takes forever, and logistically moving a and I'm not excusing anybody, but I'm also trying to understand what was happening in the 90s.

Um, but I know that moving these structures is incredibly difficult.

There's multiple types of consultants involved, and so it seems like oh, you just lift it up, but because they're so old, there's very strict protocol, as you guys probably know better than anybody.

Um, so that may have also been part of the delay, and this site, you know, was it's just in a location where there's just a lot of vandalism over the years as well.

No site is there was a fence around it.

No site is free of that.

We have we've learned that.

Yeah, but it did look like somebody was trying to protect it with a fence, and it just looks like somebody ripped it open and they want to get in there again.

Yeah, I mean, we've we've everybody here sitting at that stable knows that, yeah.

Um, and then my last question is the one that you've already preserved.

Um, are there proper um measures being taken to protect it?

Well, so it's no longer under the railroads kind of control, right?

But I understand it's part of the um South Bay Historical Railroad Museum, and they have multiple kind of exhibits in that space.

So I would hope that they're um taking reasonable steps to preserve it and protect it.

It looks like it's been there since 2000, so 25 years, not bad.

Um hopefully it you know continues to to stand because it's a it's a beautiful structure.

Right, yeah, just you know, yeah, nobody wants to live here about it.

Yeah, so yeah, that's all the quote will I add.

Yeah, great question.

So thanks.

Thanks for your page.

What will the intended use be once it's cleared and does?

Yeah, so that is not known yet.

Um environmental remediation projects take a long time.

And so what we normally do, I'm an environmental lawyer by the way, is we complete the project and understand what you know the levels of cleanup are at the end of the project and what the property can be used for.

It will probably be a restrictive covenant on the property prohibiting sensitive uses like hospitals daycare, things of that nature.

So um, you know, we'll have to determine what uses um can be utilized for a site that has a pretty uh significant environmental past.

But that whole activity is underway.

There's been a ton of investigation work out there, and there are uh remedies being developed to address the contamination, but these remedies often take years to implement.

Yeah, and once you know we get the due designation, I think it will be easier for us to like for example a slurry wall might have to go into the ground to to prevent movement of contaminants and so forth.

Where is this um roundhouse thing you're speaking of?

Is that the one that was on Lenson?

Yes, okay, yes.

So there was uh rail yard to the east of this site, which was the lens in yard.

Um also college parkyard was in that that space, and the roundhouse was the last point at that line where the rail the trains would actually turn around physically and then um go back.

Really really cool photos.

If you ever see them, you know, it is wonderful.

Where is that stored?

So I understand, and I know Dana was kind of trying to go through that history as well that initially it was supposed to go to the county fairgrounds, but I believe it's at History Park now.

Um, but I'm not sure, and I have not visited um that park, but that was where the documents appear to say it went.

Um we could look into that further as well.

But there were several.

There was a verter shack, there was a water tower.

There was there were several things that were that were successfully moved.

This one did not survive.

Thank you.

Okay, and sir, last question will there any uh um marking or anything in that area, plaque or something.

Say that it was there.

There is not presently um presently the site is sort of being drilled with lots of you know but afterwards.

Um not to my knowledge this actually was probably the the less exciting of the structures the the turntable was very you know big and prominent this was just sort of a little building um the site is raw land there's nothing on it there's not nowhere to put a plaque or anything like that.

Okay.

So there is no plan to do that currently I can add that when we don't when things are um undesignated or whatever we don't remove them from the inventory it we uh decouple the regulations um that it triggers but uh there's a symbol on there which I think is a red circle that just indicates it's demolished so that we're not losing track of kind of you know where things were we ready to make motion any other questions I just wanted to know do you have any pictures of it before it was burned down yes actually if we can go back to I believe slide 13 uh the structure is on the left okay cool so that's the historic uh former college prep tower and to the right is the existing restored Santa Clara tower.

These are inner interlocking towers um that's why they're so similar in nature they were both built in about 1926 and as I said that the like reason the windows were all the way around was to create visibility for the the switch workers in the buildings.

Thank you.

Yep.

It's interesting that they seem to be oriented differently I think they're the same shape like rectangular has the narrow part in the front yeah but you can see the similarity in the black that's displayed um on the sides of the building that's the one I was able to find on the website for um the South Bay Historical Railroad Museum on the right.

And actually staff's report may have additional um photos of the I think there might have been one more yeah there's a few of them and there's actually for random enthusiasts there's a lot of people who used to photograph these and there's blogs out there and they're fun to read you can see photos of the inside all the switches so there's um a couple of those out there as well okay I don't have any questions ever all right so I think motion to close public comment we have to make a motion for that or can I do close um yeah you can just close the public okay I closed I think I closed that fourth yeah I think yeah so I think I need to make a motion to adopt a resolution rescinding the city landmark designation for 725 chestnut street which no longer contains the Southern Pacific switching tower building and site can you make a motion are you asking for motion no I'm making the motion okay I'll second it all right so we'll take a vote on yes yes yes yes okay yes so much for your time I really appreciate everyone's involvement sadly it is a little sad um but we're going you know we're gonna make that property clean and safe and so that it's happy in in that we can now successfully remediate a contaminated site that's been vacant for many decades.

So that's the good news about this even though um always hard to lose a bit of it.

Right.

It wasn't highly visible though because of that overpass there and then the railroad on that side.

Yeah.

It is tucked away a little bit.

Yeah.

So it's not like you really would have been able to see it too much.

There's a big fence around it if you ever drive in that space.

It's to protect the public from obviously the contamination at this time, but hopefully once we get it like that, that's down and it'll become usable again.

So I really do appreciate um the time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll be ready for A.

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Moving on to item three A, HL25001 and MA2501, applications for city landmark designation and historical property, no back contract between the City of San Jose and the property owner for 647 South 6th Street, William Wayne owner, Campbell District 3 CEQA, exam question of the SQL Guidelines Section 1531.

For historical resources and rehabilitation.

Staff recommends that the historic landmarks commission recommend the city council all of the following actions.

The subject 0.14 Grossacre property is located at 647 South 6th Street and is situated on the west side of South 6th Street, approximately 280 feet south of East Reed Street in this Reed City Landmark District.

Properties surrounded by single family residences to the north and west, single-family and two-family residences to the south, and an elementary school to the east across South 6th Street.

The subject property and the house, which was um there formerly, uh is a two and a half story um structure.

It was built in 1897 in the neoclassical revival architectural style, and it was designed by the regionally prominent architectural firm Wolf and Mackenzie, with detailing suggesting the prominent role of Charles McKenzie.

Let's see if I have um as you can see on the screen, the house maintains the character defining features, and I'll just read a few rectangular massing, recessed curved porch, projecting front gable, a plaster, uh cast decorative panel, an arched sunburst above and below the front gable, box and enclosed eaves, a central brick chimney with decorative inset, multi-pane upper sashes, decorative plasters, and leaded glass for seches at the second story.

So pursuant to historic preservation ordinance, section 13.48.110 each.

The historic landmarks commission here should consider the following eight criteria in making findings that are proposed for this proposed landmark and and have and uh confirm that they are in sync with these criteria um for special historical architectural cultural aesthetic or engineering interest or value.

And uh, I'm not gonna read them, but I'm just gonna leave them there.

There are eight criteria as you can see on the board.

Um, and I'll leave it for a minute if you want to just go through them.

And so based on um the information in the historic evaluation report prepared by a qualified historic resources consultant, Robert Cartier of archaeological archaeology is resource management.

The building qualifies as a city landmark based on five of these eight criteria, specifically criteria one, four, six, seven, and eight, under the historic preservation ordinance, chapter 13.48.

The findings are as follows.

The house is located in the Reed City Landmark District and retains historical value as a representative example of the late 19th century residential development in San Jose.

The residence also is also embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a new classical revival architectural style.

And the building also exhibits high level of architectural integrity and craftsmanship.

The character defining features include a crosshit roof configuration, prominent projecting front gable, two-story porch, and emphasizes symmetry and verticality.

The structure was also designed by the prominent architectural firm Wolf and Mackenzie with its architectural detailing indicating the significant involvement of Charles McKenzie in the design.

So I'm going on to the second portion of this project, which is the MILSAC contract.

The criteria is listed before you.50540 of the historic preservation ordinance.

The proposed contract is consistent with the 2040 general plan.

It would provide greater protection for the landmark property than is otherwise provided by the provisions of the municipal code chapter 13.48.

And similar to we have the findings that the preservation and rehab of city landmarks advances the goals of San Jose General Plan 2040, specifically goals and policies such as goal 13 and policies LU 13.13 and LU 13.15 as explained in the staff report.

The MILSEX contract requires the property owner to commit to a 10-year work plan to invest in the maintenance and rehab of the house.

And the Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

And I will bring this slide back if you have if you want if the commission wants to discuss particularly on any of these items for the 10 years.

So um, so those are the two options.

Um I'll go back to the 10-year plan just for your um review, but staff recommendation is to um the project uh is to consider the exemption in accordance with CIQA, which is section one five three three one for preservation of historical resources and approve staff recommendation to council to adopt the resolutions for approval of the contract as noted in the resolutions.

Um, and also the recommendation is there on the screen.

I can show that once or we can go back to the recommendations.

That those are the two recommendations.

Um and Vice Chair also um stated those earlier.

So with that, uh I conclude my staff report, and I'm available for questions.

Applicants, uh William Wang is also here.

Can raise your hand and if you have any questions, William, would you like to say a few words?

Yeah, sure.

Um good evening, uh Anna and uh Commission members.

Uh thank you for your time, and uh would wait.

Yeah, name the uh owner of the 647 South Street.

Uh we'd like to begin by thank you staff, especially Arena, for their sorry reviews of this application and for their recommendation of approval.

We appreciate the guidance uh throughout the process and the clarity of the staff report.

Our intent with this project has consistently been to preserve and to respect the history character of this uh property while make it necessary long-term investment in its structural integrity and the building systems over the course of the work.

We have focused on maintaining the original exterior characters as much as possible by upgrading the foundation.

We put a new foundation up.

The foundation is just uh perhaps the new foundation there, but a new electrical planning and other core system to ensure the building can be safely and sustainably used going forward.

We recognize the responsibility that it comes with the owning and working our historical resource, and we have approached each step with that in mind.

The goal has not been to change what makes the building significant, but to ensure to continue to stand and serve for years to come.

Uh we are aligned with the finest in the staff report and the support the recommendation of the approval.

Thank you again.

Thank you, sir.

Good to have a question.

Um, I think we'll turn it over to public comment first.

Okay.

Yeah, okay.

Oh, and no public comment on this item.

Awesome.

Okay, so now I'll turn it over to commissioner question in the comments.

Any questions and comments?

Yes, no, this is the work.

So um for what they want to how long we build the property.

Let's see if you have it about seven, maybe six, seven years.

Six, seven years, right.

Well, I'd always appreciate anybody who's willing to take care of a historic property.

Yeah, we like it.

Right.

Well, we have to give it's gotta be a passion.

Yeah, yeah.

Just keep writing checks.

Everything else is part of it.

The contract saying a hundred years ago, someone was here.

So I'm sitting here, I can feel.

Right.

Well, and um, you know, I don't know about the other commissioners.

I was surprised that it's uh McKenzie, well, McKenzie, I just doesn't fit the profile that I'm I'm used to seeing.

You know, maybe Sally's more of an expert on it.

So very surprising.

Um, so no, I think that's great that you're going through this.

Um could you put the mills act back up?

Yeah, I think I'll have to ask my battery went out.

Oh, I'd love to go.

Um I don't have your updated presentation.

Oh, uh I can maybe just show the old yeah, the slide.

Okay.

Yeah, I didn't realize it wasn't in the packet or I would have printed what it was.

It was there in the package.

It's one of the it's the last attack.

Yeah, I'm sorry, what were you looking for?

Oh, the 10 year plan.

Okay, it's in the slides.

Jeez.

I think it was the blue link clickable.

Oh, yeah, yeah, but it's not right, right.

I didn't think it was here.

It's not in here.

Yeah, that's what I said.

I would have printed it.

Um, um, I think uh Rena, is it on the presentation you said?

Yes, can you please uh it's the second last time?

It has a 10, it says 10 year plan.

Can you just do it just as a backup?

Perfect.

Always, always laptops that it doesn't they don't have enough battery yet.

And we always keep it charged, so uh I just got a new one, which is the only reason why I think working longer.

So when you oh, Stephanie, are you sharing?

Yes, I'm pulling it up one second, yeah.

Sure.

Are you planning on um renting it or oh just living in it?

Right now, it's ranging renting.

Is it this one here?

Yes.

Uh no, go go down.

And people like to keep going.

Yeah, there you go.

That's all that yeah, you can zoom in a little bit if you can.

Will it be like a mixed property?

Oh no, yeah, you're already apartments.

Oh, sorry, just apartments.

Yeah, because they did.

So you did the you they built one, that's good.

Some foundation work, yeah, thank you whatever 10 years ago, and then you did more work to add another market.

We didn't do anything before.

Uh we just replaced the whole foundation because I mean it's uh breaks sort of cracks here, cracks there.

Oh, yeah.

Right, yeah, yeah, because I saw two permits on on foundation work.

Oh, the older one they never did actually.

Oh, they didn't do it.

Oh, okay, got it.

Great.

Um, so um one thing, and I'm I'm not trying to give anybody a hard time, but I'm very careful on the mills act, um, because when I was on this commission previously, the um uh the county was really on our butt on the mills act, and they did at one point try to get rid of it.

So that was a fight.

Um, so I I think we've gotta, and that's one of the reasons that uh um they've asked the city to regulate more of the VIP Mills Act to make sure that people are in compliance because no one is regulating it, everybody's getting a break.

None of that.

So that's where this is coming from.

Um putting a uh plaque on the property is not Mills Act, that it won't qualify.

Um and to stay on that.

I would not wherever you want to put it is up to you.

Um, if you want to do a plaque, that's great.

I would not put it on the fence.

They'll steal it.

Oh, you know you will only.

They trust me, they you would be amazed.

Um, I've got a grant from for South Third Street, and we did uh 10 plaques on horse hitching posts, beautiful bronze plaques, and um they kick them down, they you would be amazed.

Yeah, so it's can't be within reach that somebody can pull it off.

So it's better to put on a higher yes, yes.

Okay, yeah, yeah.

In fact, they just was on the news last week, they stole 15 plaques from Santa Clara for the um, and they found them.

It was a mine, it was uh for the um fallen uh police officers, and somebody went and ripped all the bronze plaques off of each one of the monuments for the officers, and a couple others in the county, and they got them back, but yeah, so should we put there?

Yeah, bronze is worth a lot of money.

Um, but you but it can't be on the mills act, it doesn't qualify.

Um you have on there the um the windows to be redone.

The windows you already redid them, and then you have it again.

Uh no, the year four, no, year four, repair wood windows and install screens, but you already did all the windows.

Uh no, so you can extend.

Go ahead.

We we just did a single fix.

So I think our business is someplace where we want to fix completely it's uh so we know the uh they cannot open.

So we know they crack.

So okay, because I looked at it the wood, I mean the outside looked great, and I so we just pen, so you don't see it.

Right, so we know it cannot open up.

Okay, okay, great.

So then when you do the windows, to um stay within the repair to the original Kenisian, yeah.

Right, yeah, don't pull them out and put final windows in.

That's it.

Right.

And um, and if you need the name of someone, sorry, if you need the name of someone that can do the repairs, I have somebody.

I just found them two days ago because everybody else I've used is retired, so I can help you with that.

Okay.

Very hard to find somebody that won't charge you a ridiculous amount.

Um, so um what you may want to put in is the concrete steps going up to the front of the house are shy.

There's three steps where the where the um railing is have got to be replaced.

Okay.

So you may want to put those in in replace of the plaque.

Okay.

Right.

Okay.

Um and I would hope that you would do those to match the way they are because obviously they were original.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Question about the concrete stuff since I I don't know whether they're original or not, whether it's part of that story.

I think that though when we bought it, it's a break.

So it's break, but I don't think the break is the only one.

Well, what I was looking at was concrete, the three steps that go up before now it's concrete.

Yes.

It's concrete.

Yes.

Right.

And so I mean, landscaping and fencing and stuff has always been a back and forth thing, whether it qualifies for the Mills Act.

So it's never been set in stone for like a better term.

The main steps.

The main steps entry.

Right.

Well, the the three steps from the sidewalk going through the uh oh, I see.

That's what I just have to be.

They're not visible in the photos here, but yeah, it looks to me like Are you talking about because it's erased lot?

Right.

The steps, okay.

Right.

Right.

So, you know, I would just swap that out.

So we we we need it through the hole still or just uh no, just the three steps, the three concrete steps between their entry readings, right?

The gate that opens.

Oh, remember we talked about it.

Yeah, you know how it breaks, there's the steps.

And they're broken, kind of broken right now.

They're totally broken.

Okay, yeah, they're so you know, I would yeah, I would that's why I'd put them in year one.

I would do that as a landlord.

That's good, yeah.

That's a suit.

Um, so I would do that.

Um, and um, you did the window the roof recently, do you know?

Yeah, you did.

Yeah, okay.

Because I wasn't sure about that.

Um, the only bad thing that I saw was the tile that you did on the front entryway at the front door.

Um has you in the curdy thing, the curved, sorry?

Sorry.

Uh right when you go to the front door, right?

You did you rebuilt the front stairs there, uh uh the treks, and then you've got the um porch, yeah, right?

Yeah, the tile that you did on the floor to that porch and wrapping around it is so you don't like the tile, there's there's something that I'm not a finishing and what goes around it has nothing to do with the house.

It's so inappropriate.

Um it looks like you just did it.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Um just uh originally need to wood.

It was wood, right?

And and uh um it should be wood.

If you're gonna do a preservation on the house and you're gonna get the mills act for it, um sorry, but that I saw that and it was like I look the rest of the house is so beautiful.

I looked at that like oh my god.

Oh, okay.

That's why I asked you how long you own the house for, because it looked like it was new, but um, uh that I mean if we're if you're gonna get the money for the mills act, and I know it's a good benefit.

I have three of them.

Um that as a commissioner and a big preservationist, I would ask that you pull those that out and go back to the original.

You know, and when you walk out of in or out of a Victorian house and you step on the wood or original wood porch, that to me is an experience.

So that's need to be wood.

It's supposed it's it was wood originally.

Yeah, yeah, that's true.

And it should go back to wood.

And why you did that big wrap around uh all around the side?

Um, I can't even imagine.

Okay.

But it just it's just it's it's not preserving.

My personal opinion is I don't like it, but it's not preservation, which is what we're here for.

And that's something that you can also put in your mill sign, yeah.

Is redoing that.

Yeah, other than that.

More power two, yeah.

Would that be regulated?

So that improvement or modification that he made.

Correction.

Would that be regulated under the sort of preservation permit now if if it is a landmark, or was it would it have been regulated?

Can you explain to me like the permitting process for that?

Those types of improvements on the building.

Yeah, it was the denier plan before presenting it to the council.

So I think talking about the 2022.

I'm just asking that for this for this historic building, in order to actually put in changes, right?

I mean, I I think it would have to be Secretary of the Interior Compliance.

It would have to be a review done to make sure that you're, you know, using the right materials and and maintaining character.

So wouldn't that be regulated all through the permitting process?

Well, using this as an example, if you were to take that out, it probably would just be like an adjustment.

Yeah, they would have to stop level to change anything on the house.

Is that what you say?

Yeah.

Right now we're just uh writing the plan, but then they really changed anything on the house, they have to come to us, or you know, Dina for the adjustments.

Right, but I guess I'm just to your concern about like improvements not fitting the character of the building, uh, wouldn't that just be regulated through the process of permitting for this for the site?

So to the extent something like this is not Secretary of the Interior compliant, does not you know meet the character of the building that's required under the Secretary of Interior standards, it would be denied a permit for something like that.

I just I was trying to understand what that's I'm sorry, let's I am just see where you're coming from.

When it was done, was there any historic designation on the house prior?

No, no, that's not true.

It was in the read city landmark.

Yeah, so so a historic preservation permit wasn't it was issued for for work.

I don't know whether that was part of it or not.

No, so because it's in the read city Landmark district, there was an HP permit.

Uh the HP permit um uh did not regulate uh any of those changes.

Um those changes were done later with the each bag, for me, to come back.

Um, what kind of material to put on the floor, so it's your owner, you need to change the exterior, so it's uh it's a little settled on uh on a floor.

So normally when you walk along the street and it may be fine because we have also a lot of little rules, otherwise you don't see it.

It sounds like two things.

It might have been a slight oversight, but but more so when we're doing a historic preservation permit or an adjustment for a contributing property in the district, we're looking at it with a lot less scrutiny than we would an individual landmark, and particularly when with the Mills Act contract.

So, um, as the owner said that it you know it's not visible, so it may just have either not really been caught or shown on the plans, or or maybe it because it's not visible, it wasn't regulated, right?

Right, because it's not like something that is public facing, and they were primarily looking at you know, changing out windows, materials on the outside, making sure the building form is so we look at it with a different level of scrutiny and eye, you know, for a contributor than we do for an individual.

Okay, so does it stay or does it go?

Well, you can I mean you can recommend changes to the, excuse me, to the plan.

Um and that be incorporated in into the work if you feel like um, but I think you know, in general, it does meet, does it meet the significance?

You know, you were saying you didn't know if it did.

I'm not sure that that would be a deal breaker, but you know, you could require it in in the plan, right?

Yeah.

I personally would like it required in the plan.

I think it's really really important.

So I would hold on to that uh if you're done with your comments and when we get to the motion, just add in you know the things you think need to be changed in the plan.

Um I also wanted to add that in the past uh we have added the bronze black or is the bronze, but yeah, which is the bronze black to the first year, so that kind of gives them an incentive to do it.

I don't know how much uh allocation is provided by the county, you know, the tax.

Every property is different.

Right, right.

So that's why, but it's an incentive as an incentive so that people put the plaque.

That's why it's placed in the first year, and we've done that for a lot of properties that have come to us for landmark and that's act.

Uh so it's more like an incentive.

I know you may say, but it doesn't meet the it doesn't meet the requirements.

Yeah.

Well, I think the requirement by the contract is 10.

I think it's 10% of the savings, right?

For the property tax after 10 years.

After 10 years, 10% of the savings has to go back in for maintenance.

No, every year it's 10%.

Oh, including the Mills Act.

Well, the Mills Act, the Mills Act is the first 10 years.

No, every year you have to spend 10% of what you're saving, right?

Over the requirements of the Mills Act, or in addition to well, it's the same thing.

So that's that's what the plans for.

So likely people are spending more than 10% on some of these things, but whatever your savings is, the requirement is to spend 10% of that on you know the preservation and maintenance.

Right.

After the 10 years, that's the requirement.

No, it starts seven.

The requirements so every single year for 10 years.

Yeah.

I I'm not sure that it really makes a difference because these items are probably gonna.

Oh, yeah, these items are over the 10%.

I mean, but after the 10 years, after you finish your MILS Act, you're required to spend 10% of the savings into the property for the life of the contract.

For the life of the yeah, but you could just say that's for the whole you know, time you're probably going to be spending more, but right.

Not for the life for the MILS Act, the first 10 years is what we see is the requirements after that for the life of the property that you have the Mills Act 10%.

I'm just making the distinction that that's probably your baseline is 10% even in the first 10 years, but you need to do the stuff that you've said you're going to do in your tenure plan.

I think we're kind of missing, but I understand what you're saying.

Yeah, and for as long as you'll like the contract.

Yeah, yes.

Right.

Right.

So yeah, I okay.

So I would like to have that.

I will make that motion when we reach that point.

I just have a couple more questions and bear with me because this is my first mills act contract that I've done while being on the commission, but um has the city attorney like reviewed the contract in terms of like the tenure plan requirements and what I would presume that as part of the review of finalizing this, you're looking at it and you're confirming that like each of these improvements are permitted as a mills act contract, each of them are meet the 10% threshold.

Has that has that work been done?

We don't we don't get to that level of scrutiny from the CAO's office.

They review that we have a standard contract, but they don't get into the actual work.

So who does review the actual work to confirm that?

Just the planning office, okay.

So we don't ask we don't ask for cost estimates or anything like that.

So but there's like an assumption that these will meet the 10%.

Okay, and then but what about um because the the difficulty is if you remember when we were doing those that presentation um for the retreat, there's this last year, but um you don't actually know in advance what that savings is going to be.

So there really isn't any way to do those calculations with that now property audience because they won't they won't tell you until they're actually calculating it when you have an executed contract, so it's a little it's challenging in that way.

Okay, so but to be extended, but it is police the 10% annually.

Well, you will see what let me let me hold on.

So um last summer, um, I don't know if we she came to a meeting.

I don't think she did actually, because she was only here for a month, but we had a student volunteer, um Gabby McGuire, who was an undergraduate student at San Jose State.

Uh I just actually wrote a letter of recommendation for her for the planning master's planning program.

She's going to be planning for next year.

Um, but she put together a um and it's on our work plan a package of monitoring and compliance documents.

Uh with my workload, I haven't had a chance to go through those and you know, make the changes.

Um, but it will be going to I have to the CAO has to review it, and we have to see whether it needs to go to city council or not, because it is a requirement in the contract anyways, but I don't know whether the council has to approve the procedures and things that we've done, but uh we will be putting those in place.

Um it will be a field visit.

Um I think we figured well, we it's so there has to be a field visit.

I think it's every five or every 10 years, I can't remember now.

Five five.

So we'll be there's about 90 contracts now, so we'll be dividing those cycles up into how many we need to do uh to reach every every property by you know the five years, but we we have not I think there may have been some efforts on and off, and that Sally may, I don't know whether she went during her tenure whether anybody did anyone do any MLZAC compliance.

Um reviewing the properties, yeah.

Like visiting them to see how work was being done.

Yeah, there was some of that done.

Yeah, so some has been done off and on.

I I haven't seen a real um ledger or anything like that.

So uh we're trying to put this um implement this so that there are procedures in place, it will be posted on the website so everybody knows what you know what is going to happen, and then we'll be sending out postcards every year, but the annual review is probably gonna be self-certification.

We just don't have the we don't have the resources to to really do it in any other way.

There's just me and maybe interns sometimes.

So we'll be sending out postcards, having people return them and you know, submit documentation about what they've done.

So to answer your question, okay.

No, yeah.

Okay.

There hasn't been any formal like every year somebody goes out and looks or every two or three years.

Um there's been some spot checks, but um that's about it.

It you know, it's interesting because when Gabby did all her research, um I don't know that there was anybody that actually had a program in place because people just municipalities just don't have the staff to do it.

So everyone's like, send us your material.

So it's not uncommon, unfortunately.

Yeah, and the assessor doesn't uh um I heard of one where the assessor pulled the contract and I never followed through the source was extremely reliable.

Um, and I was sort of surprised because I never heard of that happening before.

Um, but the assessor also doesn't have anything in place to write once they look at and look at the contract, they look at everything's gone through uh and um they determine how much of the break it's gonna be.

Um I never hear from them again.

They did for a while uh send out um uh requests for how much you were spending on maintenance to each property owner.

Uh, and that was something that I brought up because they were using a very low number on maintenance, and um they changed that number back to what it should have been.

Uh, and then I haven't seen that in uh I don't know, six or seven years.

Well, there's a new person who's taken over in the last couple years.

I think it's Norman Arias, it's probably been the last three years or so, and I asked him if he sent things out because in the course of all this, and he said that they don't, but I'm surprised because I don't know whether they still do, but when I worked for the county, I was also in charge of the Williamson Act contracts and compliance because we had a lot of properties that were not in agriculture as they were required to do for this um tax break, and they we sent out questionnaires annually that people had to return, and if they didn't, we would just non-renew them.

So I don't know why they would do it for one program that's very that's almost the exact same thing and not do it for another, but and I don't know whether they're still doing it for the Williamson Act anymore either, right?

That was 15 years ago.

So I think the big picture is at this point in time, it's not regulated, you know, because I've had people come back to me and say, hey, this property's got landmarked, it got some mail back, it looks like crap, they're not doing anything.

But by 2027, we expect to have something in place and to start that review.

Yeah, okay.

And I mean, obviously, this this property seems deserving of it.

It's a beautiful property.

I think in theory, the Mills Act is a great tool to allow people to preserve things and at least recruit some of the you know, cost of it, but I do share your concern that if it's not policed over time, it becomes a mechanism to potentially abuse the system, but also more importantly, to, you know, we just saw right the the Union Pacific building and what happens to these structures oftentimes when they're left alone.

Um nothing that's gonna happen here.

So I I have no other questions.

I think it's um it looks like a deserted property thing.

Yeah, so I do have one other question.

Um the whole front you the property is raised and the whole front is heartscape.

Is that allowed in the city?

I thought you you couldn't do that, that you had to have aside from the side along the fence.

So these are is uh we don't seal them, so autoscue can go and swim those uh people.

Yeah, there's some right, but I thought that you weren't allowed to, and this is raised up, so it's a little bit.

Yeah, that's a good uh that's a municipal code, but he probably provided some kind of conditions to because that was done with the moving permit.

So, how do we special?

So normally when you do the pavement, they see it, the water can on our treatment.

But uh we'll just use send.

So, right, but it's not the fact perennial or not, but but the this the city code says that you cannot pave more than 50% of you the front of your property, it's gotta be green area, uh, unless you get a waiver because there's a parking issue or something like that.

Um and that's where I was curious that the whole front is pavers.

Is that one of the requirements that nobody checks?

Yeah, I don't know what happens.

I feel like it's one of those kind of uh areas where there's sort of a trapdoor where built building doesn't really check it because it's a landscape thing.

Uh it you a code enforcement will enforce it.

I've had three properties where I stop them from pouring concrete.

So this is not concrete.

Is that semi-purpose?

So maybe they have that 50%.

It's gotta be green, but um, it does just it's just purvious and impervious.

It's not green, doesn't say that in the book.

Sure.

Yes, green and dirt is is considered pervious, but papers have been allowed recently in the in the co by building perfect.

Uh I mean I highly doubt there's a code requirement that requires grass given that it's a high water.

Not grass, but or landscape, landscape some sort of like what you put some plants and some bark down or something like that.

Uh they do along the fence, along the fence, right?

Along the fences.

So maybe.

I mean, I think it's primarily just about drainage.

I don't think it's necessarily about anything else.

Um I don't know.

I always thought it was aesthetics, but I couldn't.

No, it's not about aesthetics.

I'm not a planner, so for this and I think it has to do with drainage.

So if there's a lot of rain, but yeah, versus that too, yeah.

That is the great okay.

Yeah, but I'll keep it.

Thank you.

Any other comments, questions?

Um who's your contract?

Are you using general contractor or preservation architect?

We use the general contract.

Okay.

Okay.

So I think we can have all there you have around.

Okay.

I think we can move to uh make a motion to um adopt a resolution designating 647 South 6th Street as a city landmark, especially historical architectural cultural aesthetic and engineering, infrastructure value of historic nature and adopt a resolution approving the historical property mills act contract for 647 South Sixth Street between the city of San Jose and property owner Zhang Zhu William Wang.

Yeah, you're recommending I'm recognized that we make a motion to recommend to the city council.

No, I'm actually making a motion to recommend to the city council.

So did you want to want to talk about it?

Well, do you want is it one motion for historic and one motion for mills now?

No, it's all this since it's all one, we can do that.

So you could just make a friendly amendment, yeah.

Okay, yeah, I'd like to make a friendly amendment that we remove the plaque uh on item one, and um we replace it with repairing the concrete going up, and that um we also add on the uh the I'm gonna call it a correction for the front entry porch area, and that it should become historic back to the way that the property was originally built.

So the area after you climb on the step and you're on the well, even the railing.

Oh the art, that's there.

That's part of the yeah, you have to restore that.

Uh in some year, I think one of the I think he's saying that's not historic.

No, not the layer.

No, the the stairs.

They were originally brick, I think, right?

Yeah.

Are you gonna restore it?

That's what I well, I know I'm not gonna say that the stairs because the track is the only way to go.

And year nine is repair, restore the exterior stair for scan rail baseboard and the ram.

Actually, it would that cover everything that we're talking about, including the the tiling.

Tile we can add.

So a so in year nine is repair restore the exterior stair porch can rail baseboard and trim to their original condition.

So if we just add in year nine, uh remove the tiling and go back to the original material, original material, original material would be wood, right?

Um is that okay?

Because I don't want him to say, okay, I don't want it.

You're trying to preserve the form.

Remember, right now it's just a recommendation.

Okay, so uh the move tile instead of the porch.

I don't know, friendly request that we keep the plaque for just year one of the first tenure contract, along with the concrete steps to give them a little incentive to put the plaque, otherwise I'll never see it.

Really?

Yeah, and they're expensive, yeah.

But it's five crazy expensive.

No, yeah, they're five.

I don't know what year plaque looks like.

Okay, but I know they've gone way up because they are maybe more.

I don't know, right?

Last I saw were four or five brand at least, and then they will delay that and delay that, and you know, I'll never see it.

So right, um, fine.

So you want to keep the plaque and the concrete stuff, okay.

That's the bad.

Yes, I can live with that.

Yeah, okay.

I was just looking to see what the front looked like, yeah.

So, what does that look like?

So the concrete steps and the raised, you know, I guess that was that was original.

I don't know what material that is.

What's that look like?

Oh, we go back a little that looks like wood.

Well, outside, I don't know, it's hard to tell.

Anyways, that's what it originally looked like.

There's an old fence on the no.

So I don't know.

I wouldn't restore this.

There's nothing to restore for the wood stairs over there.

Um, I don't know whether you want to require reconstruction of the stairs or not.

Um, sorry, which stairs are we talking about?

The front stairs.

Oh, the three in the front, these ones.

No, not those.

I because again, there is a green.

One for the porch.

Because there was an item about restoring the stairs, yeah, but that's already in the mills contract.

Um, you have to restore to the original, the exterior stairs.

Yeah, but I'm saying don't restore it the way it is, the way it exists now.

Restore it to the original.

Yeah, because those they're just they're not that's not a historic design that's on there now, right?

It's just they well, they took down the it's just what stairs, yeah.

I don't know whether that's stone or brick.

See the so I I think it's brick, but I'm not sure.

I saw the house next door had brick and wood, and I told him to restore it to what it looked like.

So I can add that in that year.

Maybe it's clarify, it's not the way it is, but uh no, yeah.

Maybe include a photo or something like that to clarify um, yeah, when we're not here, people won't think that it's original materials.

Well, and design materials, I'm just saying.

I I really like to understand whether the tiling is historic or not.

Cause I while I I understand your point, I think this is a aesthetic thing.

I would hate to make him rip it out.

Which tiling?

No, no, we're talking about the floor, so no, no, but I'm going back to the tiling.

Um, I know, but oh, sorry.

So not we're not talking about these, it's it's the money.

He's talking about the tiling.

No, no, no, no.

He talked about these.

Yeah.

No, but she's now going back to his original tiling on the floor and wrapping the side of the porch.

No, no, not the right.

Well, no, I mean she's going back to that.

You're good, but she's now going back now.

No, I understand that, but she's thinking that we're gonna ask them to remove the exterior clad.

No, no, no, no.

We were never that's not no, she next to that.

She's yeah, not the end.

No, I just in terms of the motion to recommend remove it like modernized one percent.

That's yeah, all that tile.

Yeah, this time the flooring.

Right.

Wasn't that what you're the flooring and the flooring was what?

If you saw if you went to the house and saw it, you would understand my passion.

And the tile all around the side that the porch.

So is this an is this a new photo or an old photo?

That's a new photo.

It's just in black and white.

Yeah, because you can see the paint colors on the front door, it's still there.

And so, can you just reiterate what you're what you're the tiles on the floor and the side tiling, or just the tiles on the floor?

No, and the side tiling that all is absolutely inappropriate.

Okay, do you recollect uh William?

What was there?

So we uh waiting babies to get a better waterproof stage, it's not the feeding, the Victorian stuff, so right, and the tile along the side was all wood clad.

I'm sure that's what they always use.

Yeah, no, I don't I don't debate that it probably originally was wood.

I think I'm just um if it's not really visible from the street unless you walk up, and I just would hate to if you put money into already putting it in, and there's a lot of money for him to spend on other items of the house.

I I would personally prefer not to make him do that and spend that money on other things for the exterior.

Um, so that's why I'm just trying to understand like is that part of was that part of the historic fabric of it?

Like how far into the historic designation go.

No, that's not far enough.

Okay, because based on my street view of it, so you're saying it's just like a character defining piece.

Yeah, I think you're you have a good point.

Okay, so it depends where where you are looking at the house.

Because the house is raised up, it's not as obvious off the street.

But if you go three steps up and look at the house, it's it's sticks out like a so it's I feel like there's something in the con in the mill sack that says that like it has to potentially be opened like once a year or once already.

Isn't there something like that in there?

So uh you know, I suppose there's for a private home, yeah, because it's a contract, yeah.

Yeah, that's true.

You never supported that.

We've never done it.

We've never done it.

I think that's what the state law says.

Yeah, that also can be requested to be to view the really interesting, yeah.

Okay, yeah, no, I would I would like to leave that.

That's the only thing I could think of.

Right.

Right.

This is a this is a break.

But it's not listed, like if you look at the character defining features that are in the deep paper form, you're not gonna see.

Right.

And this this is you gotta realize that how this the mills act uh uh uh incentive oh for the property tax is for the life of the property.

There's a huge savings, it's not just 10 years, it's a life of the property, right?

And then because you get your you the value is discounted, okay.

When they when they go and look on the property listing for the assessor, they're gonna say instead of the property being worth two million dollars, where it's you know, the um we're gonna change it, and now the property is gonna be listed as one million dollars, right?

So the so the assessment is on one million dollars.

When our property taxes go up, as I usually do, the two percent, the property increase each year is on a million dollars, the two percent, not two million dollars, just the base value right so over a period of time the savings is huge so to do something like this I don't feel bad I'm sure Mr.

Wayne will survive I think she's just you know tell me if I'm not if I'm speaking wrong but I'd rather see wood windows you know and other things if you can move it there'll be plenty of money there's plenty of money to do that uh I I also feel like um if he was permitted to do it and it's not historic I I feel like asking him to rip it out is more of a personal aesthetic.

But this wasn't permitted uh that I'd have to include it sound like we don't know about that but uh building permit was secure another one doesn't need a yeah but there's there's no trigger to move it for that well then we wouldn't look at that when it wasn't a landmark and it was just a contributing structure so it's not a violation right but this one it wasn't permitted it's because it doesn't have to be permanent well no so that's not really an accurate statement to say it wasn't permitted because there's you know there's never it it assumes that that's a violation when it's oh okay yeah no I think what right on it I'm not saying it was a violation just saying it did it yeah no I think it's really important so how do we do this if we have a motion with amendments that not everybody supports um I think you have to vote on the motion and if it dies then we need to make an option okay so is there a it isn't really the historic commission is more of like a recommendation anyways and then kind of the planning commission no not on this on the list well this will go to the council for sign off well he he's right I mean it is a recommendation right um but really you know it would be rubber stamped well no excuse him say no to our talking with the council it would be up to the planning staff to really decide you know what to do I mean if you make a recommendation and you all agree on it then you know we'll bring that forth but if you don't all agree on it then we're not gonna bring that forth as a recommendation so I I think you all need to decide whether you support that from like from the amendment or not so final approval is the council or if you want to take but but if we even if we bring it forth it's possible that they won't accept it the city council is going to be on consent they're not even that yeah so that's getting it the weights are not this this is the body that cares for the house so what will you recommend as a as a one voice will be cutting for uh mr and what what would you I mean what was the cost of making those changes and what would be the cost I mean you might not be able to answer that.

These are not an issue uh what fine you if you want to we make change the weekend okay okay um what was the but I think you did mention that the reason why you put that in is just because of wear and tear it's actually you you're you know the picture of the four us it it looks better and the second it looked better uh yeah yeah so it was like aesthetically you liked it better than what the the original original okay and it was maintenance wise you thought it was easier than wood yeah okay but you you wouldn't mind having to replace it in certain years I don't mind but uh I you like the tiles obviously well what if we compromise and you leave the tile on the floor but get rid of the tile around the side.

That's the point.

How's that?

Yes.

All right.

Well, what would you like to boost with you have two that's the title?

Oh, cladding, the original wood cladding.

Wood cladding.

Oh, the wood siding, the wood siding.

It's on the right, isn't it?

The cladding on the right yeah, it is.

Yeah.

You mean uh you mean the panels?

You mean like these siding this kind of side?

Down down below.

Down right there.

Well, these are on the right side.

Where your finger is here?

Yeah, sure.

There.

The bigger one, the wider siding.

Okay.

I have to specify that in my sense.

It's the wider siding.

Is that what was there?

Was it the wider or the narrower siding?

Because you're talking about the wider.

Was it wider forwards like this?

Or was it the original?

Yeah.

Just give me a mean this uh house.

Oh this is not the release.

So over here, these are these.

So we want to replace the I don't care which it is.

It could have been the it could have been the smaller cladding.

Was was this over there?

These are the original.

Okay, originally the white one.

The wide one.

Yeah, okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Otherwise, I mean, it might have been available to do something like Hardy board or something that would have a similar profile that might have a little more weather perfect.

Yeah, that side stuff doesn't weather.

The floor, I can see the floor is a wear and tear item.

Okay.

So you want to amend your motion?

Yes, I am in on my emotion that the tile along the uh um side gets removed and replaced with uh I'll call it wood cladding.

We'll just look at that, so Steve, I just want to make sure.

So you what do you want to change it?

Is this this one, right?

Correct.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, and that'd be part of your middle second.

No, you're what you're doing, where they are doing the restoration of the staircase to the original design.

And materials.

Okay, do we have a second for that motion?

The second okay, so take a vote.

Uh Commissioner Baywall.

Yes, Commissioner Kogura?

Yes.

Yes, maybe.

Yes, passes you hands.

Just okay.

All right, so bear it with us.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Now you gotta buy a house.

That's for sale two doors down.

Okay.

Oh, it needs it.

The one that is that house for sale two doors down.

Now you gotta buy it.

Which one guys?

It sucks.

We got um structuring the back.

It's forward.

Oh, really?

They couldn't need to use the back.

No, we the the other structure of many use of the oh, in addition, like uh, so but uh it's totally not uh you know, S styles uh historian stuff.

No, that's not doing that.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, next item is planning referrals, no items.

Uh next item number five is general business, no items, uh item sixes, referrals from city council boards, commissions, or other agencies, no items.

Item number seven is open forum.

Um Sally?

Hi.

You go first.

Um hi, I'm here tonight for PACSJ.

I'm Sally Zarnowitz, and just wanted to update you on some things for historic preservation month.

Um, since we're an advocacy for historic preservation.

Um, a couple of things which you might hear about later.

Uh this is preservation month.

And May 12th, the council doing a proclamation, we understand.

So our executive director will be there, a counsel for that.

Um other things that are going on, we will uh unveil the endangered eight that we do every year during preservation month, sometime in May.

And then also uh the warehouse that we have to raise money for the cause.

Uh we're gonna do our first open for our first Thursday on May 28th.

There'll be a members only uh opening at the warehouse.

And of course, we sell memberships at the door if anybody wants to join that evening.

Um, so the Thursday is now the going to be addition to Saturday.

Yeah, so this is your second day as part of the lease.

Yeah, we're just starting.

We're just starting to open on Thursday.

And the first time we do it, it'll be members only.

So that'll be May 28th.

Um we and I I think the other, oh, also during preservation month, we're doing two tours with Japanese American Museum of San Jose.

And the proceeds from that will benefit the um reconstruction of the Sokkaway House uh history park.

So I think those are all the things a lot, you know, some of the things, main things we wanted to highlight that are going on this month.

Um, and also um I think that was the main thing.

Oh, also just to say we're also watching all the state legislation, which I'm uh assuming that you know everybody's watching this.

Um, the SB 79, which affected historic properties, as well as now there's um the chamber is putting forth the California Chamber of Commerce, I guess.

I know there was such a thing, but they're putting first the um Bill Affordable California Act, Baca, which is gonna really uh change CEQA uh in many ways.

And so um, CPF, California Preservation Foundation, they're meeting right now, they have their conference.

So I don't know if staff is going to that.

Okay, but um they'll be talking about this legislat uh legislation too, just how it's affecting all of the local preservation programs throughout the state and just how it's affecting you know the design of our cities.

So those are things we're all watching, but no, not not the point.

SB79 has it.

Right, but the other one hasn't no both has not one and SB 79.

We were hoping for some amendments that might make it a little bit more uh workable with historic properties, but we have not seen those happen.

So we seem to be stuck there.

So we're focusing on the positive for May and trying to celebrate our successes and um continuing to raise money for the Sockaway House.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Edward.

Uh Sally covered all the package stuff, thankfully, so I will pivot and uh there was a piece of it, a piece of written correspondence.

Thank you, Steve, for getting that in there.

Uh, I should say, my name is Edward Salm.

I've spent eight years on the HLC, six as chair.

I've been the planning and land use director for the Chef and Hansa Park Neighborhood Association for 13 years now, and I'm on PACSJ's advocating committee.

Uh, the thing that brought me here this evening is in the proposed budget message is the closure of the California room to the public, where the majority of many of the historic artifacts, historic documents that the city has, but right now from 10 to 5, five days a week, anybody can go in and potentially take a look at to close the budget.

They will close that to public access.

About 10 to 12 percent of the total archives is digitized.

And the response that uh the chief librarian put, well, he'll still be able to get that.

Ask Franklin Manji, ask Christopher and Lamb, whenever they come across additional materials in the researches, they give them to the California room going, oh now.

People don't have to come to me, they can go and see the public record.

So tangible work that historic preservation architects have done to bring project before this commission, the materials that they've gathered, then they wanted to make public now to close a budget hole.

And it's not scaling back hours, which is where we talked to the council member to say an alternative say they have they have scaled back hours previously.

This has happened, but one time before it was closed when it was gone with San Carlos, materials weren't even secured.

Materials went missing, materials got damaged.

The materials in the vault, including the big maps, the plaque books are the most interesting best resources.

Odds are will not be available even by appointment when there is a page that can go get the specific thing.

The cynic in me, the too many, too many years on city commission.

So it's become far too cynical.

Cynically, if you want to make it harder to prove historical value of a given property, this is a real good way to do it.

So there are many other mechanisms that can be done to close this budget hole.

And I know I'm not the only one that will be asking the council member.

There is a compromise position here.

And it is not leaving it be the 2.9 employees, seven days, seven hours a day, five years closing it completely is a guaranteed way to reduce access to the history of the city, the history of every house included by 1905 farmhouse.

If you want to deny people access to city the city's history, that will be a real good way to do it.

So and I know I already spoke, but uh uh on that item, Packers Day is going to have a petition.

We're gonna have a um call to our members to contact uh council and the city librarian about this, and council's gonna be hearing this.

We understand Monday morning the 11th at night, starting at 9 30.

Unfortunately, I noticed it was on planning commission's budget.

And they were there, which is the same time that they'll be discussing the potential changes and cuts to the uh animal care and control.

Yeah.

So the 90 minutes to cover that animal care control could cover 90 minutes times four, given when the advocates and those passionate for so it is important.

I'm I'm already scheduled to take time off where it to be there because that needs to be heard.

The council members need to hear it's too late for the HLC to take action forward, et cetera.

But as I did as an individual on the commission, if you don't cite your specific rule here, but cite your interest in historic preservation, et cetera.

You can personally advocate to your council member and or the council liaison to the HLC.

I do yeah, just I do with those of constantly with the neighborhood association.

So we know that I'm just giving them good natured grief.

It's important that if you want people to be able to have access to these resources that you say that, and that you say that budget compromise can be made, which will still give people access.

My daughter wants to go with me to see the stuff I found about our house.

We will not be able to after this.

She was literally has lived her entire life in that house, and now she won't be able to go and see it.

Do we have data on how utilized it is and then how many employees there are what the cost of keeping it open?

2.9 employees, 388,159.

There were 5,442 visits to the room in 2025.

And uh it opened seven days, five days.

And the five, uh, five days a week.

Okay.

Um, okay.

And a compromise could be that it's not open as often because it did have limited much more limited hours for many, many years.

There are means to do this, right?

That can just cut the hours but not close the doors and put a lock on it, and not make it so like a page when you have appointments and find certain things, but they won't necessarily have access to the vault to the big ticket things, stuff they can really find in my bring to, but they may be oh, it's not really available.

I can't find it.

Sorry.

So that's a real convenient way to limit access to the city's history.

How about the photo collection that's in the other room?

The Sarah.

That's not open either, really.

It's a by appointment or something.

That I believe is by appointment.

Will that be closed as well?

Not that we're aware.

Not that I'm aware of it's it's the staffing of people sitting in the California room from 10 to 5 to five days a week that that they're saying to do.

And if they have if what happened to Western Carlos, they proved that they could close it and then not to be in detriment, that'd be one thing, but there's precedent for that being a nasty answer, and it's pressing to reduce hours and not limit access to the public to the city's history complete.

So, what budget section is that?

Do you know, John?

Uh it's it's under um, neighborhood services.

In the library section, neighborhood neighborhood services.

Okay.

Yeah, they have four under library department budget.

On the agenda, what comes up first for the Monday?

They're both the same 9:30 to 11 because this neighborhood services the block, that block is both basically the animal shelter and then the same.

Yeah.

Well, there are the budget is sort of um chunked into uh service delivery.

So, like the plan department is chunked into a lot of other stuff, economic development, uh, housing, um, and others, and and so that's what these different blocks are that um are going to the 9 30 to 11 is neighborhood services and then public safety of 11 to 2 30.

So if precedent holds, what happens sometimes is the advocates will get 20 or 30 people to fill out the card.

Someone will show up at nine and drop them all at once.

What's the Monday?

Monday, yeah.

That'll be zoo.

Yep.

I'll be in one of the chairs, but this time I'm gonna happen till it's my chair.

Well, but if they're that limited on time and that's gonna be 60 seconds and that much to hear, then what are they gonna do when you have 300 cat lovers that all want their one minute?

Exactly.

I mean, um there's precedent going to 30 seconds.

There is so but that's why we'll always also emphasize anybody that's gone to commission meeting to a SAG meeting, whatever it's like both do what I'm doing here, speak it.

Always put it in red and also because comments get condensed down to bullet points, but then get put on a page and loop them with other ones.

Always put stuff in writing.

And if you ever send it to any council member, send it to Tony, the city clerk, too.

Just I mean, never assume that a spoken word is enough.

Always put it in writing as well.

And copy anybody and everybody you can possibly.

Okay, Sally.

Oh, are we still public?

I think it's on a different.

Yeah, that's a different item.

Oh, yeah.

Sorry, okay.

That's okay.

That's an item A.

What is that?

Okay.

All right.

So I think we're done with all the farmer eight eight report from Secretary of Planning Commission and City Council verbal update on the status of planning approval by the city council planning commission and planning director of projects with a historic resource component.

No updates.

Summary of communications received by the historic landmarks commission.

So I think that's um what Sally's commenting on.

So um Commissioner Cohen uh submitted this um spreadsheet that I don't know if you want to uh yeah, there's a um internal once-in-a-while external group within the city that meets about uh the vacant properties and doing updates and what's going on, and it's everybody code enforcement, you know, the whole menage at 3.

Uh it you know, I got two meetings where it was open to the public.

The last one was over a year ago.

Um, but they have been uh through Rosalind through the mayor's office and code enforcement.

You know, when they do meet internally, um, they have been not kind enough to send me uh the updates on what's happening.

Um and um the church of Christ, of course, for this commission is a big issue.

Um, and if you look at it, they are now they have made more of a motion to use uh legal pressure on the developers and or owners to get their act together, and uh um there's been fines.

You'll notice like the Church of Christ, the fine they've the penalties have hit 100,000, which is the max.

Um at that point in time when they started finding it, the max has been increased to five hundred thousand dollars.

So there are other projects like the uh um the decal um restaurant and the whole market on South Third and William Street, not historic, but it backs up to historic properties.

Literally, we're waiting for them to set that on fire.

That one is gone over $90,000 about three weeks ago, and that one the form not Bow Town, the next one, that um uh will go up to half a million dollars because it falls under the new ceiling, you know.

So um uh so it'll give you an idea that the city is trying, code enforcement is trying with the tools that they have, um, what each developer or property owner's breaking point is, we don't know.

I mean, you know, the like I said, the property on South Third.

Um, why Gary Dilabau who owns it would spend a hundred thousand dollars and counting on fines, it goes up a thousand dollars a day, uh, and not just tear the damn thing down.

No one will know.

Um, the other one I did want to point out is the Bank of America building.

Um, it should yeah, it's still on the list further down.

Oops, I think I'm yeah, I think you missed it.

It showed the bottom of it.

There it is.

Um, Italy or Bank of America.

Sorry, which one are we that used to be?

Used to be, yeah, that used to be Bank of Italy.

Right.

So um now then it became Bank of America.

Um, that property was originally cited.

Um, I think the biggest issue was the broken windows on the first floor, all around the first floor.

Um, that is a very interesting property.

And I don't know if we can if we can have someone from code, maybe Wayne come down and give us an update on some of these.

They put scaffolding, they did a groundbreaking six weeks ago because instead of being offices, it's now going to be residential after they've been in there for like six or eight years.

Um, and so they went, they did a groundbreaking, they surrounded the entire building with scaffolding, and from two extremely reliable sources, no one is inside doing anything, nobody.

So the building is sitting there in pieces.

I my I was also told by these sources that the floors have been torn, you know, the inside is all torn out because they had to tear it out.

Now you got to do plumbing and electric and all that to make it from small offices to uh residential, but they're not doing anything, it's just sitting.

Um, and that the whole uh the assumption is that the whole reason they put the scaffolding up around the building is to make it look like they're doing something, but no one has been working on it.

They said the most people they've seen is two, and then we're told there would be 120 workers inside, so um, so that'll give you sort of an idea of those two.

You can look at the others.

Uh, when we get another update from the city, I will forward it to this commission, and you guys so everybody can see it.

Um, but it's a very slow process, and sometimes a frustrating one.

And it seems like all we could do is legally, right?

Go through the channels.

And it's just at least it's happening.

I mean, I gotta tell you, it took a long time to for the city to be able to pull things together, figure out what they could do legally, get the tools like raising the the fine to half a million dollars, and now we it's just sort of a sit and wait game, I guess, right?

Dana is that well, I don't know.

I mean, it says here um uh enhanced compliance order issued.

So I'm not sure what what legal remedies is any they're pursuing.

I mean it's it's difficult because it's a developer that has half a dozen projects in the city, so right.

But is that current the enhanced compliance order issue?

Or is that like this is from April, so I'm not sure.

Um this isn't my document.

So yeah, it's the last update that the there's an internal.

Like I said, there's an internal group to handle the the vacant buildings, and um, this is the last update that they put out.

It's a mayor's office, code enforcement, you know, just go down the list, city manager's office.

So, I just wanted to point out that not all the buildings on here are stored resources, right?

This is their vacant and abandoned buildings program that also includes a surf resources, but the whole list is not as well as right, right.

That's absolutely true.

And and um, especially like the the the south Third property, the issue we have is that a lot of these, as we have learned today, get set on fire.

We've lost so many of them to fire.

And the concern is that, you know, they set they set Bow Tow town on fire a block away.

They set this one on fire, they've constantly been breaking into it.

Our street people, um, it backs up to uh Victoria's some are landmarks some are structures of merit I mean literally backs up to them you know so the concern is let's take care of this problem or else we're gonna lose some more properties and the ones they back up to are not empty there are people living there so there you have it.

So that was um Sally's comment yeah um yeah PAC looked at the list and we actually were interested in the historic resources like thinking it would be a good idea to list on the table uh what what is a historic resource on there there I mean I think we counted first Church of Christ Bank of Italy Lawrence Hotel Dr.

U building Greyhound bus depot now and uh this residence 1880s residence on North 6 is a eligible contributor to Japan town national registered district so quite a few of them and it would be also it'd be fantastic if there could be some note that you know there are incentives for preservation like every or don't even call it preservation call it rehab uh such as the state historic building code all those buildings have access to that they have access to mills well maybe mills act or now you know federal tax credits just to kind of put a point on you know what the tools are there to help with restoring um our historic buildings.

Right and I did ask uh Amber um when she sent me this you know I said can you can you also add to that uh a proposed timeline of when something may happen to these you know how you know such as um uh how each property is getting are they getting fined a thousand dollars a day and then when will they meet that limit you know or the next step like the Church of Christ has met the 100,000 what's the next step in the city taking the property over if that's what they're going to do.

So that's a lot of work I don't know if she can if she can do that she's been terrific she's been very helpful uh um and Rosalind from the mayor's office has been terrific so yeah yeah um next item is verbal update on historic preservation proclamation and launch of my San Jose interactive website um yeah we were scheduled to do the proclamation um before city council on may 5th and that's been moved to May 12th um to provide more visibility there wasn't enough um time with the city manager's presentations to to do presentations on the fifth so we'll be on the 12th um and then we'll also be doing a um somewhat soft uh launch due to capacity of the my San Jose website um and then a harder probably a second push um this year's uh theme uh for historic preservation month that was issued by the National Trust for Historic Preservation is um all people are created equal um so we're kind of tying that into the my San Jose project to lift up everyone's voice and lots of diverse um stories um and so uh it's tied into the nation's birthday at 250 years and so we will also be pushing it again as we get closer to the 4th of July we'll hopefully have more time to uh calm state to do that great uh next item is next historic landmarks commission meeting is June 3rd 2026 in San Luis City Hall Tower third floor conference room T 332 um next items report from committees design review subcommittee no meetings held in uh in April next meeting is scheduled in May 21st, 2026 at 11 a.m.

Did you say there wasn't going to be a we're not going to have a June meeting?

No.

So it'll be canceled.

Oh okay yeah but I mean, it's scheduled.

Right, but it's gonna be canceled prior to that yeah oh so the June third will be cancelled.

Okay, yeah.

All right.

Um okay, approval of action minutes.

Uh recommendation approve action minutes for the historic landmarks commission meeting of April 1st, 2026.

And you want to make a motion?

Sure.

Okay, I second it.

I approved.

Commissioner Kabura.

I approved.

Approved.

Um all right, status of circulating environmental documents, no items.

That's it.

We're done.

That's it, folks.

That's all folks.

You're doing a great job.

Fabulous.

Fabulous.

Thank you, Stephanie.

Thank you, Stephanie.

Thank you all.

Have a good evening.

Drive safe.

Oh Lord, I just found him yesterday.

Hi, there's a number of.