Chair Gutierrez, Vice Chair Nunez, and Members of the EPC,
In addition to the letter written by Livable Mountain View, we would like to add some comments about the five properties described as “ineligible properties” on pages 13-15 of the staff report. The staff report states: “Staff recommends developing a process whereby these properties have an opportunity to improve their integrity within five years before being removed from the MV Register. The property owners of these five properties would need to submit an application with an analysis showing that the improvements would return sufficient integrity to be eligible for continued listing in the MV Register. “
The architectural integrity of the building is not the sole criterion by which the historical status of the building should be judged. For example, the Rogers building at 142-156 Castro Street is historically significant because it was the site of Mountain View’s first post office.
Furthermore, the building, which was constructed in 1894 and rebuilt after the 1906 earthquake, is an integral part of Mountain View’s historic retail district H. Allowing it to be demolished would destroy the look and feel of the core of that district. Furthermore, this property has already been granted Mills Act status. Removing that status without the consent of the owner could be viewed as a taking, subjecting the city to lawsuits. For these reasons, we oppose revoking the building’s Mills Act status.
As for the four other buildings, the staff report does not include enough information to determine whether their historic merits rise above the narrow characterization of historic status based on architectural integrity alone. Most detailed analysis should be done by staff and the consultants before the EPC and council deems these buildings to be “ineligible properties”.
Robert Cox and Louise Katz
