Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-09-14 Historic Resources Board Agenda PacketHISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD Regular Meeting Thursday, September 14, 2023 Council Chambers & Hybrid 8:30 AM Boardmember Mike Makinen Remote Call‐In Location:851 University Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Boardmember Christian Pease Remote Call‐In Location:537 Summit Trail Drive, Hillsborough, NC 27278 Pursuant to AB 361 Palo Alto City Council meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participate from home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending in person. The meeting will be broadcast on Cable TV Channel 26, live on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen Media Center https://midpenmedia.org. Commissioner names, biographies, and archived agendas are available at https://bitly.com/paloaltoHRB.  VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/96800197512) Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512    Phone: 1(669)900‐6833 PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutes after the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org and will be provided to the Board and available for inspection on the City’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subject line. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson's presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually. The Chair may limit Public Comments to thirty (30) minutes for all combined speakers. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak on Study Sessions and Actions Items to two (2) minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted only by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT  Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 1.Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and Assignments ACTION ITEMS Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Ten (10) minutes, plus ten (10) minutes rebuttal. All others: Three (3) minutes per speaker. 2.PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI‐JUDICIAL. 340 Portage [23PLN‐00226]:  Request for Historic Resources Board (HRB) Recommendation on Resident’s Request for Historic Designation of the Cannery Building located at 200‐404 Portage Avenue as a Category I or II Resource on the City’s Local Historic Inventory. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) In Accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Zoning District: RM‐30 (Multi‐family Residential). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Raybould at Claire.Raybould@cityofpaloalto.org BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s). ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org. 2. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, click on the link below to access a Zoom‐ based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in‐ browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up‐to‐date browser: Chrome 30, Firefox 27, Microsoft Edge 12, Safari 7. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted  through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions above. 4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Board. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN    Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512   Phone:1‐669‐900‐6833 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329‐2550 (voice) or by emailing ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service.  1 Regular Meeting September 14, 2023 HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARDRegular MeetingThursday, September 14, 2023Council Chambers & Hybrid8:30 AMBoardmember Mike Makinen Remote Call‐In Location:851 University Avenue, Palo Alto, CA94301Boardmember Christian Pease Remote Call‐In Location:537 Summit Trail Drive,Hillsborough, NC 27278Pursuant to AB 361 Palo Alto City Council meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with theoption to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safetywhile still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose toparticipate from home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe andparticipate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged ifattending in person. The meeting will be broadcast on Cable TV Channel 26, live onYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen MediaCenter https://midpenmedia.org. Commissioner names, biographies, and archived agendas areavailable at https://bitly.com/paloaltoHRB. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/96800197512)Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512    Phone: 1(669)900‐6833PUBLIC COMMENTSPublic comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or anamount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutesafter the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance tohrb@cityofpaloalto.org and will be provided to the Board and available for inspection on theCity’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subjectline.Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified aspresent at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson's presentation will be allowed up tofifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non‐speaking membersagree not to speak individually. The Chair may limit Public Comments to thirty (30) minutes forall combined speakers. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak on Study Sessions andActions Items to two (2) minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted only by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT  Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 1.Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and Assignments ACTION ITEMS Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Ten (10) minutes, plus ten (10) minutes rebuttal. All others: Three (3) minutes per speaker. 2.PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI‐JUDICIAL. 340 Portage [23PLN‐00226]:  Request for Historic Resources Board (HRB) Recommendation on Resident’s Request for Historic Designation of the Cannery Building located at 200‐404 Portage Avenue as a Category I or II Resource on the City’s Local Historic Inventory. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) In Accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Zoning District: RM‐30 (Multi‐family Residential). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Raybould at Claire.Raybould@cityofpaloalto.org BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s). ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org. 2. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, click on the link below to access a Zoom‐ based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in‐ browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up‐to‐date browser: Chrome 30, Firefox 27, Microsoft Edge 12, Safari 7. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted  through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions above. 4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Board. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN    Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512   Phone:1‐669‐900‐6833 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329‐2550 (voice) or by emailing ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service.  2 Regular Meeting September 14, 2023 HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARDRegular MeetingThursday, September 14, 2023Council Chambers & Hybrid8:30 AMBoardmember Mike Makinen Remote Call‐In Location:851 University Avenue, Palo Alto, CA94301Boardmember Christian Pease Remote Call‐In Location:537 Summit Trail Drive,Hillsborough, NC 27278Pursuant to AB 361 Palo Alto City Council meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with theoption to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safetywhile still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose toparticipate from home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe andparticipate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged ifattending in person. The meeting will be broadcast on Cable TV Channel 26, live onYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen MediaCenter https://midpenmedia.org. Commissioner names, biographies, and archived agendas areavailable at https://bitly.com/paloaltoHRB. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/96800197512)Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512    Phone: 1(669)900‐6833PUBLIC COMMENTSPublic comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or anamount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutesafter the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance tohrb@cityofpaloalto.org and will be provided to the Board and available for inspection on theCity’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subjectline.Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified aspresent at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson's presentation will be allowed up tofifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non‐speaking membersagree not to speak individually. The Chair may limit Public Comments to thirty (30) minutes forall combined speakers. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak on Study Sessions andActions Items to two (2) minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted onlyby email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received,the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strongcybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are notaccepted.CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALLPUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker.AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONSThe Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management.CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS1.Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and AssignmentsACTION ITEMSPublic Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Ten (10) minutes, plus ten (10) minutes rebuttal. All others: Three(3) minutes per speaker.2.PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI‐JUDICIAL. 340 Portage [23PLN‐00226]:  Request for HistoricResources Board (HRB) Recommendation on Resident’s Request for Historic Designationof the Cannery Building located at 200‐404 Portage Avenue as a Category I or II Resourceon the City’s Local Historic Inventory. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from theProvisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) In Accordance with CEQAGuidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Zoning District: RM‐30 (Multi‐family Residential). ForMore Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Raybould atClaire.Raybould@cityofpaloalto.orgBOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS ANDAGENDASMembers of the public may not speak to the item(s). ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org. 2. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, click on the link below to access a Zoom‐ based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in‐ browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up‐to‐date browser: Chrome 30, Firefox 27, Microsoft Edge 12, Safari 7. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted  through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions above. 4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Board. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN    Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512   Phone:1‐669‐900‐6833 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329‐2550 (voice) or by emailing ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service.  3 Regular Meeting September 14, 2023 Item No. 1. Page 1 of 1 Historic Resources Board Staff Report From: Jonathan Lait, Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: September 14, 2023 Report #: 2308-1961 TITLE Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and Assignments RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Historic Resources Board (HRB) review and comment as appropriate. BACKGROUND Attached is the HRB meeting schedule and attendance record for the calendar year. This is provided for informational purposes. If individual Boardmembers anticipate being absent from a future meeting, it is requested that it be brought to staff’s attention when considering this item. No action is required by the HRB for this item. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: 2023 HRB Meeting Schedule & Assignments AUTHOR/TITLE: Amy French, Chief Planning Official Item 1 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 4     Historic Resources Board 2023 Meeting Schedule & Assignments 2 4 0 8 2023 Meeting Schedule Meeting Dates Time Location Status Planned Absences 1/12/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 1/26/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled 2/09/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 2/23/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled 3/09/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 3/23/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled 4/13/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 4/25/2023 6:00 PM Hybrid Community Meeting 4/27/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled 5/11/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Heinrich 5/25/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 6/08/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Willis, Makinen 6/22/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Makinen 7/13/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled Eagleston-Cieslewicz 7/27/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled 7/28/2023 5:30 PM Hybrid Retreat Makinen 8/10/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Canceled 8/24/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 9/14/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Heinrich, Rohman 9/28/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Cancelled 10/12/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Rohman 10/24/2023 6:00 PM Hybrid Community Meeting 10/26/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Cancelled 11/09/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 11/23/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled Thanksgiving 12/14/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 12/28/2023 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled Christmas 2023 Subcommittee Assignments January February March April May June July August September October November December Item 1 Attachment A-2023 HRB Meeting Schedule & Assignments     Packet Pg. 5     Item No. 2. Page 1 of 6 Historic Resources Board Staff Report From: Jonathan Lait, Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: September 14, 2023 Report #: 2308-1962 TITLE PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 340 Portage [23PLN-00226]: Request for Historic Resources Board (HRB) Recommendation on Resident’s Request for Historic Designation of the Cannery Building located at 200-404 Portage Avenue as a Category I or II Resource on the City’s Local Historic Inventory. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) In Accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Zoning District: RM-30 (Multi-family Residential). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Raybould at Claire.Raybould@cityofpaloalto.org RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the HRB consider the proposed request and forward a recommendation to the Council for decision. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On August 23, 2023 a local resident, Terry Holzemer, filed an application to designate the cannery building located at 200-404 Portage Avenue as well as the adjacent building at 3201- 3225 Ash Street as Category I or Category II historic resources on the City of Palo Alto’s local Historic Inventory pursuant to the procedures set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.49.040. In accordance with the procedures, because there is a pending application on file that affects the exterior of the building at 200-404 Portage, this hearing was scheduled for the first HRB meeting following the receipt of the application. The HRB’s recommendation on the proposed application is forwarded to the City Council for a decision within 30 days of the HRB’s recommendation. The Council is anticipated to deliberate on the proposed redevelopment application for this site on September 12, 2023, following the publication of this report, but prior to the HRB’s hearing of the request. A staff report to City Council summarized the proposed redevelopment, which includes partial demolition of the cannery building; the report is available online and was Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 6     Item No. 2. Page 2 of 6 published on August 24, 2023,1 a day after this request was filed. The report noted the submittal of the subject application for local historic designation. Council’s deliberations will include consideration of a request for certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and approval of a resolution making overriding considerations for the significant and unavoidable impact identified on the subject historic resource located at 200-404 Portage Avenue (herein referred to as 340 Portage). The City, in coordination with its consultant, Page & Turnbull, previously prepared a Historic Resources Evaluation (HRE) in 2019 to evaluate the former cannery site to determine if it would be eligible for listing on the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). The evaluation concluded that the cannery site, including 340 Portage and 3201-3225 Ash, is eligible for the CRHR. The HRE for this site is included in Attachment C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is a request to designate the former cannery building located at 340 Portage and the adjacent office building at 3201-3225 Ash Street as Category I or Category II historic resources on the City’s Local Historic Inventory. The HRB purview includes evaluating such requests and making a recommendation to the City Council. A location map is included in Attachment A. The applicant’s request letter is included in Attachment B. BACKGROUND The City initially evaluated the site’s eligibility for the CRHR in 2019 as part of its due diligence associated with the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) planning effort. The NVCAP has not yet been adopted, though a draft plan was released in June 2023. This background section summarizes the hearings and applications that have been filed related to 340 Portage and 3201-3225 Ash Street since 2021 as well as the findings of the HRE. This section also discusses the designation process and protections afforded to historic resources. Council Hearings and Redevelopment Applications for the Subject Site On April 7, 2021, Sobrato submitted a formal application (File No. 21PLN-00108) to construct 91 townhomes on the site (“200 Portage Townhome Project” or “SB 330 Housing Project”). At approximately the same time, the City and Sobrato were engaged in a dispute regarding permitted commercial uses on the site. The June 14, 2021 and September 13, 2021 staff reports to Council2 provide a history of zoning of the property and details of the code section that currently governs nonconforming uses at this property. 1 September 5, 2023 Council Report ID #2306-1663: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/City-Clerk/Citys- Meeting-Agendas/Meeting-Agendas-and-Minutes 2 September 13, 2021, Council report ID#13411: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendasminutes-reports/agendas-minutes/city-council- agendas-minutes/2021/09-september/20210913/20210913pccsmamended-linked-final-council-qa.pdf; June 14, 2021, Council report ID#12271: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/reports/city-manager-reportscmrs/year-archive/2021/id-12271.pdf Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 7     Item No. 2. Page 3 of 6 On September 10, 2021, Sobrato submitted a letter3 asserting that the City’s proposed interpretation regarding the permitted commercial uses on the site would subject the City to significant litigation risk. To facilitate resolution of the dispute, and in light of the pending housing application, on October 25, 2021 City Council established an ad hoc committee (committee) consisting of then Vice Mayor Kou and former Councilmember DuBois to negotiate with Sobrato on potential terms to guide future development at Sobrato’s 14.65-acre property located at 200-404 Portage Avenue, 3040-3250 Park Boulevard, 3201-3225 Ash Street & 278 Lambert Avenue.4 In a closed session on June 20 and 21, 2022 the City Council voted 7-0 to direct staff to prepare a tolling agreement that would suspend the processing of the pending SB 330 housing application. The suspension was to allow Sobrato to pursue a development agreement, based on general terms negotiated with the committee, for the redevelopment of the 14.65-acre property. The City and Sobrato executed a tolling agreement in July 2022.5 Council held a study session on August 1, 2022 to allow for public comment as well as Council input on the general terms that resulted from the negotiation.6 The study session served as the prescreening meeting required for a proposed Development Agreement and legislative changes, including Planned Community rezoning, in accordance with PAMC Chapter 18.79. Following the study session, Sobrato filed project plans associated with the Development Agreement project under the address, 3200 Park Boulevard (File No. 22PLN-00287). From August 2022 through July 2023 the City held over 15 public hearings and study sessions related to the proposed redevelopment of the site. The proposed Development Agreement project would include partial demolition of the cannery building at 340 Portage, which has been identified as a CRHR eligible resource. The Development Agreement project includes the retention of the 3201-3225 Ash building in its existing condition. Council began proceedings for consideration of the proposed development agreement on September 5th and deliberations regarding the proposed development will be heard by Council on September 12, 2023. The staff report for the proposed Development Agreement Project was published on August 24, 2023, the day after the resident filed a request for designation of 340 Portage to the City’s local register.7 3 September 10, 2021 letter from Tamsen Plume to Jonathan Lait: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development-services/new- developmentprojects/200-portage/letter-to-september-13-2022-city-council.pdf 4 Summary Minutes of the October 25, 2021 Council hearing: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/city- councilagendas-minutes/2021/10-october/20211025/20211025amccs.pdf 5 The Tolling Agreement is available online on the project website at: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Current-Planning/Projects/3200- Park-Boulevard 6 August 1, 2022, Council report ID #14548: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendasminutesreports/agendas-minutes/city-council- agendas-minutes/2022/20220801/20220801pccsmlinked.pdf 7 September 5, 2023 Council Report ID #2306-1663: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/City-Clerk/Citys- Meeting-Agendas/Meeting-Agendas-and-Minutes Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 8     Item No. 2. Page 4 of 6 Designation Process In accordance with PAMC Section 16.49.040, any individual or group may propose designation as a historic structure. Such proposals shall be reviewed by the Historic Resources Board, which will make its recommendation to the Council. Proposed designations shall be considered within 60 days of the receipt of the proposal. In a case where an application for a planning or building permit affecting the exterior of a building is pending concurrently with a proposal for designation, the recommendation of the HRB shall be made within twenty days of receipt of the proposal. The city council may approve, disapprove or modify a recommendation for designation, and their decision is final. If Council designates a structure Category I or II, and the building is proposed for demolition, Section 16.49.070 would be in effect. This Section states the Chief Building Official may not take action on the demolition permit for 60 days (aka moratorium) following receipt of a complete application. During the 60 days, the CBO shall refer the demo permit to the ARB. The ARB shall refer the application to the HRB. The ARB, the HRB, or any interested person may recommend that Council extend the 60 day moratorium. Council shall review these recommendations and may extend the 60 day moratorium for a period of up to one year. Other protections for historic resources are contained within the review of a proposed project. Demolition is not allowed without an approved development project. Also, through environmental review (aka CEQA), demolition of a historic resource would be considered a significant impact. ANALYSIS This analysis section summarizes the different routes this project could take based on Council’s approval or denial the Development Agreement on September 12, 2023. Development Agreement Approval Due to the timing of the request, Council is already scheduled to deliberate the proposed Development Agreement prior to this HRB hearing. Because 340 Portage is already protected as a historic resource in accordance with CEQA, the City prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to evaluate the project’s impacts on a historic resource. The EIR evaluated and publicly disclosed the significant and unavoidable impact to this historic resource (evaluated as Alternative 3 within the 200 Portage Townhome Project EIR). Therefore, if the City Council chooses to approve the proposed Development Agreement, it would also be required to certify the EIR and make findings of overriding consideration in accordance with CEQA for impacts to this historic resource. In short, in doing so, the site as it exists today would presumably not be placed on the City’s register. However, in accordance with the HRB’s recommendations for the proposed Development Agreement, presented to the HRB on May 25, 2023, a condition of approval has been added to require evaluation of the site at the end of construction and nomination of the buildings to any of the registers that they would still be deemed eligible for, including the local historic inventory. Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 9     Item No. 2. Page 5 of 6 Development Agreement Denial If Council chooses not to approve the Development Agreement project, local designation of this building is still not anticipated to affect the owner’s alternatives because the City’s historic preservation code only prohibits demolition of historic buildings in the Downtown area. For significant buildings in other areas (Category I and Category II), the code requires review and recommendation by the ARB and HRB. However, the code expressly states that compliance of the property owner with HRB recommendations shall be voluntary, not mandatory. Where a significant building outside of Downtown is proposed to be demolished, the code sets a 60-day moratorium on the demolition to allow for this review and recommendation. Therefore, designation of the building on the City’s Historic Inventory would not protect the resource from demolition.8 Further, the applicant has expressed that if the proposed Development Agreement is denied, they intend to move forward with the proposed 200 Portage Avenue Townhome Project (91- unit development), which was placed on hold via a tolling agreement, but for which an EIR was already prepared and circulated in accordance with CEQA (200 Portage Townhome Avenue Project EIR, SCH#2021120444). While further processing of that application would require recommendations from the ARB, HRB, and PTC and a final decision from Council, further evaluation of that project in accordance with CEQA to address the new designation would not be warranted because the evaluation reflects baseline conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation was released in December 2021. Historic Resource Evaluation The Historic Resources Evaluation for this site, including the cannery building (340 Portage) and the 3201-3225 Ash Street building is included in Attachment C. The analysis that was completed evaluated the project for its eligibility for the California Register and does not speak to its eligibility for the local register. It is unclear from the HRE under what category of the local register it may be eligible for. Additional analysis in coordination with the City’s historic consultant and/or input from the Historic Resources Board would be necessary to help make this determination. However, given its eligibility for the California Register it would certainly be eligible as a Category 3 or 4 resource. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires notice of this public hearing be published in a local paper and mailed to owners and occupants of property within 600 feet of the subject property at least ten days in advance. Notice of a public hearing for this project was published in the Daily Post on 8 Staff notes that if a building were to be designated on the City’s Inventory in accordance with PAMC 16.69.040 prior to a discretionary action on a proposed demolition and the project was previously assumed to be exempt, additional analysis, public disclosure, and findings in accordance with CEQA would be required prior to issuing a decision. However, the subject site is already protected under CEQA Guidelines 15064.5 as a CRHR eligible resource, and the highest level of environmental analysis has already accordingly been prepared. Therefore, local designation would not grant further protections in accordance with CEQA for this property. Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 10     Item No. 2. Page 6 of 6 September 1, 2023, which is 12 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on August 30, 2023, which is 14 days in advance of the meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The project has been assessed in accordance with the Authority and Criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Specifically, the project has been determined to be exempt from CEQA in Accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that designation of the building as a historic resource would not have an impact on the environment. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Location Map Attachment B: Resident’s Request for Historic Designation Attachment C: Historic Resources Evaluation AUTHOR/TITLE: Claire Raybould, Senior Planner Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 11     24 24 MC20_08_20 PARKING GARAGE 199.7' 149.7' 65.6' 149.7' 65.7' 199.7' 50.0' 199.7' 50.0' 199.7' 50.0' 199.7' 50.0' 49.9' 166.4' 32.5' 1.9' 108.2' 270.2' 100.0' 100.0' 199.7' 116.5' 55.4' 116.5' 55.4' 105.0' 25.0' 105.0' 25.0' 55.4' 116.5' 55.4' 116.5' 55.4' 116.5' 55.4' 116.5'55.4' 116.5' 55.4' 116.5' 9.8' 69.0' 4.6' 45.4' 78.8' 50.0' 75.0'105.0' 75.0'105.0' 90.0' 55.0' 120.0' 25.0' 47.1' 120.0' 120.0' 50.0' 120 50.0'45.0' 28.8' 105.0' 28.8' 105.0' 25.0' 105.0' 25.0' 105.0' 78.8' 55.0' 78.8' 55.0' 50.0' 51.6' 3.4'.1'.1'.4' 49.5' 105.0' 50.0' 120 65.0' 120.0 120.0' 50.0' 60.0' 55.0' 30.0' 47.1' 25.0' 60.0' 5560.0' 55.0' 90.0'55.0' 139.6' 50.0' 139.6' 50.0' 567.5' 754.2' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 233.0' 282.3' 116.5' 151.0' 143.4' 105.0' 105.0' 50.0' 105.0' 50.0' 105.0' 50.0' 55.4' 116.5' 55.4' 116.5' 50.0' 105.0' 50.0' 105.0' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 137.6' 158.7' 39.0' 88.7' 78.0' 7.3' 50.0' 98.9' 50.1' 98.9' 50.0' 103.2' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 105.0' 75.0' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 116.5' 49.2' 49.2' 80.2' 103.2' 79.9' 110.2' 116.5' 49.2' 116.5' 49.2' 60.0' 90.0' 44.8' 90.0' 44.8' 134.5' 60.0' 90.0' 44.8' 90.0' 44.8' 0 44.8' 90.0' 0.0' 50.0' 134.5' 50.0' 134.5' 55.3' 65.0' 79.4' 60.3' 79.4' 52.7'95.9' 50.0' 95.9' 51.8' 109.3' 50.0' 109.3' 51.1' 119.7' 50.0' 119.3' 55.3' 105.6' 119.7 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.6' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 119.7' 50.0' 32.0' 17.5'34.6' 97.9' 165.0' 137.0' 50.0' 134.5' 50.0' 134.5'50.0' 134.5' 50.0' 134.5'50.0' 134.5' 50.0' 134.5'50.0' 134.5' 50.0' 134.5'60.0' 134.5' 60.0' 134.5' 60.0' 134.5' 60.0' 134.5' 60.0' 134.5' 60.0' 134.5' 48 134.5' 48.7' 134.5' 48.8' 134.5' 48.7' 45.0' 45.0' 134.5' 45. 134.5' 45.0' 134.5' 60.0' 134.5' 60.0' 134.5' 60.0' 134.5' 60.0' 134.5'134.5' 60.0' 134.5' 60.0' 50.0' 134.5' 50.0' 134.5' 50.0' 134.5' 50.0' 134.5' 67.8'90.0'90.0' 66.7'90.0' 66.7' 59.0' 134.5' 70.0' 60.0' 134.5' 60 4.0' 50.0' 221.4' 221.4' 186.2' 186.2' 159.0' 159.0'159.0' 159.0' 98.0' 98.0'159.0'159.0'159.0' 159.0' 24.6' 24.6' 77.9' 77.9' 159.0' 159.0' 91.7' 91.7' 134.5' 134.5' 48.8' 48.8' 148.7' 51.0' 148.7' 200.0' 200.0' 200.0' 200.0' 150.0' 99.8' 199.7' 165.4 85.1 34.6 150.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 149.7' 149.7' 149.7' 115.7' 165.7' 100.0'50.0' 85.1 199.7' 149.7' 250.0' 67.2' 119.5' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 20.0' 78.5'78.5' 198.4'291.2' 370.9' 188.2' 427.3' 13.9' 56.2' 123.4' 164.9 199.7 109.85' 458.75' 239.70' 129.85' 308.64' 129.85' 102.65' 129.85' 102.56 129.85' 205.99' 129.85' 206.05' 478.7' 21.8' 109.8' 19.8' 38.4' 38.4' 15.1' 15.1' 43.1' 47.3' 50.2' 133.3' 49.2' 49.2' 92.2'92.2' 116.5'116.5' 110.8' 78.3' 22.4' 35.9' 447 429 4 3159 411 435 3250425 435 3200 455 460 3200 3201 395 385 375 450 430 325 3421 3394 320 358 356 401 411 425 320 3290 300 280 271 261 251 231 221 211 210 220 230 241 231 221 3300 211 291 3101 210 365 345 315 305 295 285 245 265 275 3040 3045 178 2822 2832 2840 2858 130 120 110 2800 2876 2886 289 2891 2831- 2835 2893 28 3225 400 3250 2867 2869 252 3360 3215 410 2999 3348 3201 290 292 3260 3225 3239 3255 337-343 345-351 417 415 391 405 399 400 360 381 3420 350 3370 307 355 365 3395 281 3350 315 30 268 270 3275 3261 3251 220 230 336 340 370 380 250 264 274 290 270 271 260 281 255 250 3357 3341 3350 3346 2799 149 129 3197 2773 2781 2 28 2889 3291 3241 2821- 2825 2811- 2815 2877- 2885 2871 2865 2857- 2863 2841- 2845 3127 3111 3333 440 3180 360 200 429 3335 3360 3335 2858 278 419 LAMBERT AVENUE E EL DORADO AVENUE EMERSON STREET LAMBERT AVENUE CHESTNUT AV ENUE ASH STREET BIRCH STREET BIRCH STREET RK BOULEVARD PARK BOULEVARD ALMA STREET ACACIA AVENUE PORTAGE AVENUE ORINDA STR PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD RM-30 PF PF RM-30 R-2 GM M-20 M GM GM (AD) CS (AD) CS John Boulware Park Park Blvd Substation This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Project Site 0' 209' Attachment A: Location Map CITY OF PALO ALTOI N C O R P O R A T E D CAL I F OR N I A P a l o A l t o T h e C i t y o f A P R I L 1 6 1 8 9 4 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Alto chodgki, 2023-09-01 13:31:21 (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) Item 2 Attachment A     Packet Pg. 12     August 21, 2023 Dear Ms. Raybould, Below is my request to have the Historic Resources Board review and determine the historic designation of the former Fry’s site (known as 340 Portage) and its associated Ash office building (3201-3225 Ash). I understand that any citizen or individual can ask for this historic review, you don’t have to be the property owner of the stated property to request this review. I have included in the document below (as outlined in the Code 16.49.040) the various steps/details that are requested for this historic review. A) Official request for a City historic site designation for 340 Portage Avenue and 3201-3225 Ash Avenue (APN 132-38-071) and adding these two existing buildings to the City’s official Historic Inventory, under Categories 1 or 2. Other storefront addresses, including 200, 210, 220, 230, 336, 360, 370, and 380 Portage use the main cannery building, however, 340 Portage is the largest space in the building, so 340 Portage -- in this document -- refers to the entire building. B) 340 Portage is the recent, former home of Fry’s Electronics, but was originally built in 1918 by Thomas Foon Chew, one of California’s first Chinese-American minority entrepreneurs. 340 Portage became one of the principle operational sites of the Bayside Canning Company, which became the 3rd largest cannery operation in the world in the early part of the 20th century. Today, our city, state, and nation still struggle with the consequences of centuries of mistreatment of minorities as well as discrimination that continues to this day. The significance of Thomas Foon Chew’s extraordinary accomplishments in face of the enormous obstacles of his time can not be overstated. For a city such as Palo Alto, which prides itself on equality for all, to lend its hand to the destruction of one of last surviving and most impressive monument to Chew’s achievements is wrong, Item 2 Attachment B     Packet Pg. 13     especially because it completely unnecessary. No legal nor financial obstacle exists to the preservation of this extraordinary building, 340 Portage. We should designate it as historic so that we and generations to come can truly honor Chew and his legacy. C) Requested by the City, details on the building’s significance and its historic resource evaluation were officially done by Page & Turnbull in early 2019 and the Page and Turnbull Report was issued on April 11th, 2019. As outlined in that report, 340 Portage and its associated former office building, 3201-3225 Ash Street were found to be both eligible for listing in the California State Register of Historical Resources at the local level of significance under Criterion 1 (Events) for its association with the history of the canning industry in Santa Clara County. City Staff and the HRB should review the April 11th 2019 Page & Turnbull report for specific details. D) The current condition of 340 Portage is now under threat of a significant demolition of the site (over 40%), which will directly impact its historical value as outlined in the 200 Portage Townhome Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR). As the EIR clearly indicated, destroying 40% of this historic structure will also end its historic significance. Quoting the EIR, “The most substantial impact would occur through the demolition of 89,639 square-feet of the eastern portion of the building, constituting a loss of approximately 40 percent of the building. The proposed demolition would result in the removal of distinctive materials like the removal of canning platforms and cooling porches, the loss of several character-defining features, such as the form and massing and varied roof forms and structures and would, therefore constitute material impairment to the historical resource. The proposed demolition would significantly diminish those characteristics of the historical resource that convey its historical significance and justify its eligibility for listing in the CRHR”. In addition, the proposed permanent modifications to the remaining “monitor roofs” section of the 340 Portage/cannery building will be so significant that its historic value will also be lost forever, if allowed to Item 2 Attachment B     Packet Pg. 14     be done by the developer. This was clearly outlined in the May 25th Staff Report to the HRB. E) Restoration and adaptive reuse of 340 Portage is possible and needs further study and planning by both the developer and City staff. Destroying an important historic resource that gave hope to thousands of local migrants and impacted the lives of everyone in the Bay Area in the 20th century should not be considered nor tolerated. F) All sketches, drawings, photographs, and other descriptive materials can be found in the Page & Turnbull Report, April 11, 2019. I encourage HRB members and City staff to be read this P&T report and become familiar with its analysis and conclusions. G) Supporting documents (in addition to the Page & Turnbull report) include: “Historic Bay Area Visionaries”, by Robin Chapman, 2018, The History Press – a full length chapter on Thomas Foon Chew is included, pp. 91-108. In addition, another Chapman book, “The Valley of Heart’s Delight”, 2022, The History Press. Includes an update on Thomas Foon Chew and the Bayside Canning Company. Item 2 Attachment B     Packet Pg. 15     imagining change in historic environments through design, research, and technology Page & Turnbull 340 PORTAGE AVENUE HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA [16252P] PREPARED FOR: CITY OF PALO ALTO APRIL 11, 2019 DRAFT Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 16     Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 17     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 Page & Turnbull, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................... 2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................... 3 II. CURRENT HISTORIC STATUS .............................................................................. 4 NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES ............................................................................................ 4 CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES ............................................................................... 4 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCE STATUS CODE ............................................................................... 4 PALO ALTO HISTORIC INVENTORY .......................................................................................................... 4 PALO ALTO HISTORICAL SURVEY UPDATE .............................................................................................. 5 III. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION ........................................................................ 7 340 PORTAGE AVENUE .......................................................................................................................... 7 SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD ...................................................................................................... 20 IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT .......................................................................................... 22 MAYFIELD/PALO ALTO HISTORY ............................................................................................................ 22 THE CANNING INDUSTRY IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY .......................................................................... 25 SITE HISTORY ....................................................................................................................................... 28 CONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY .......................................................................................................... 34 BUILDING OWNERS AND TENANTS..................................................................................................... 36 V. EVALUATION ........................................................................................................ 44 CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES ............................................................................. 44 INTEGRITY ............................................................................................................................................ 46 CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES ...................................................................................................... 48 VI. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 50 VIII. REFERENCES CITED.......................................................................................... 51 PUBLISHED WORKS ............................................................................................................................. 51 UNPUBLISHED RECORDS .................................................................................................................... 51 INTERNET SOURCES ............................................................................................................................ 52 NEWSPAPER ARTICLES ......................................................................................................................... 53 Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 18     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 1 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. I. INTRODUCTION This Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) has been prepared at the request of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department for the former cannery property (referred to as the “subject property” in this report), which consists of the former cannery building at 340 Portage Avenue and the associated former office building at 3201-3225 Ash Street (APN 132-38-071) in Palo Alto, California (Figure 1). Other storefront addresses—including 200, 210, 220, 230, 336, 360, 370, and 380 Portage Avenue and 3200 Park Boulevard—are used at the main cannery building; however, 340 Portage Avenue occupies the largest space in the building and is, therefore, being used to refer to the building as a whole. The building at 340 Portage Avenue was initially built for the Bayside Canning Company, owned by Thomas Foon Chew, in 1918 and subsequently expanded by the Sutter Packing Company in the 1930s and 1940s. These expansions included the construction of the extant office building at 3201-3225 Ash Street. The subject property is located on the west side of Portage Avenue between Park Boulevard and El Camino Real, immediately west of Matadero Creek. The subject property sits on an irregularly-shaped 12.5-acre lot; parking lots border 340 Portage Avenue to the northwest and southeast. Figure 1: Assessor Block map. The subject property, inclusive of the former cannery at 340 Portage Avenue (shaded orange) and the former office building 3201-3225 Ash Street (shaded blue). Source: Santa Clara County Assessor. Edited by Page & Turnbull. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 19     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 2 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 2: Aerial view of the subject property. The former cannery building is shaded orange. The former office building is shaded blue. Source: Google Earth, 2019. Edited by Page & Turnbull. The subject property has not been previously listed or found eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register), California Register of Historical Resources (California Register), or local City of Palo Alto Historic Inventory, nor is it located within the boundaries of any recorded historic district. METHODOLOGY This Historic Resource Evaluation provides a summary of previous historical surveys and ratings, a site description, historic context, and an evaluation of the property’s individual eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. Page & Turnbull prepared this report using research collected at various local repositories, including the Palo Alto Historical Association, City of Palo Alto Development Center, Ancestry.com, and various other online sources. Page & Turnbull conducted a site visit in January 2019 to review the existing conditions and to photograph the property in order to prepare the descriptions and assessments included in this report. All photographs were taken by Page & Turnbull in January 2019, unless otherwise noted. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 20     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 3 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Upon evaluation of the subject property, inclusive of the former cannery at 340 Portage Avenue and the former office building at 3201-3225 Ash Street, Page & Turnbull finds the former cannery property to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources at the local level of significance under Criterion 1 (Events) for its association with the history of the canning industry in Santa Clara County. Thus, the property appears to qualify as a historic resource for the purposes of review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 21     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 4 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. II. CURRENT HISTORIC STATUS The following section examines the national, state, and local historical ratings currently assigned to the subject property. NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES The National Register of Historic Places (National Register) is the nation’s most comprehensive inventory of historic resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service and includes buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local level. 340 Portage Avenue and 3201-3225 Ash Street are not currently listed in the National Register of Historic Places individually or as part of a registered historic district. CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register-listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens. The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places. 340 Portage Avenue and 3201-3225 Ash Street are not currently listed in the California Register of Historical Resources individually or as part of a registered historic district. CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCE STATUS CODE Properties listed by, or under review by, the State of California Office of Historic Preservation are assigned a California Historical Resource Status Code (Status Code) between “1” and “7” to establish their historical significance in relation to the National Register of Historic Places (National Register or NR) or California Register of Historical Resources (California Register or CR). Properties with a Status Code of “1” or “2” are either eligible for listing in the California Register or the National Register, or are already listed in one or both of the registers. Properties assigned Status Codes of “3” or “4” appear to be eligible for listing in either register, but normally require more research to support this rating. Properties assigned a Status Code of “5” have typically been determined to be locally significant or to have contextual importance. Properties with a Status Code of “6” are not eligible for listing in either register. Finally, a Status Code of “7” means that the resource either has not been evaluated for the National Register or the California Register, or needs reevaluation. 340 Portage Avenue and 3201-3225 Ash Street are not listed in the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) database as of 2012. This means the buildings have not been formally evaluated using California Historical Resource Status Codes and/or the status code has not been submitted to the California Office of Historic Preservation. PALO ALTO HISTORIC INVENTORY The City of Palo Alto’s Historic Inventory, completed in 1979, lists noteworthy examples of the work of important individual designers and architectural eras and traditions as well as structures whose background is associated with important events in the history of the city, state, or nation. The survey that produced the inventory encompassed approximately 500 properties and was largely limited to areas in and near the historic core of Palo Alto. The inventory is organized under the Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 22     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 5 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. following four Categories: ▪ Category 1: An “Exceptional Building” of pre-eminent national or state importance. These buildings are meritorious works of the best architects, outstanding examples of a specific architectural style, or illustrate stylistic development of architecture in the United States. These buildings have had either no exterior modifications or such minor ones that the overall appearance of the building is in its original character. ▪ Category 2: A “Major Building” of regional importance. These buildings are meritorious works of the best architects, outstanding examples of an architectural style, or illustrate stylistic development of architecture in the state or region. A major building may have some exterior modifications, but the original character is retained. ▪ Category 3 or 4: A “Contributing Building” which is a good local example of an architectural style and relates to the character of a neighborhood grouping in scale, materials, proportion or other factors. A contributing building may have had extensive or permanent changes made to the original design, such as inappropriate additions, extensive removal of architectural details, or wooden facades resurfaced in asbestos or stucco. The subject property is not listed in the Palo Alto Historic Inventory under any category.1 PALO ALTO HISTORICAL SURVEY UPDATE Between 1997 and 2000, a comprehensive update to the 1979 Historic Inventory was undertaken by the historic preservation firm Dames & Moore. The goal of this update was to identify additional properties in Palo Alto that were eligible to the National Register. This effort began with a reconnaissance survey of approximately 6,600 properties constructed prior to 1947. The reconnaissance survey produced two Study Priority lists. In January 1999, Dames & Moore prepared an interim findings report that listed preliminary evaluations of the National Register and California Register eligibility of Study Priority 1 and 2 properties.2 Approximately 600 properties were identified as Study Priority 1, indicating they appeared individually eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion C (Architecture). Approximately 2,700 properties were identified as Study Priority 2, representing those properties that did not appear individually eligible to the National Register under Criterion C (including common local building types) but retained high integrity. The reconnaissance survey was followed by an intensive-level survey of all Study Priority 1 properties.3 Historic research was conducted on the owners, architects/builders, and past uses of the Study Priority 1 properties. Research also informed the preparation of historic context statements on topics such as local property types, significant historical themes, and prolific architects and builders, in order to identify any potential significant associations of Study Priority 2 properties. Dames & Moore found 291 properties to be potentially eligible as individual resources to the National Register and California Register. The survey found that 1,789 other properties were potentially eligible to the California Register only. The survey update effort concluded with California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms prepared for those 291 properties that initially appeared eligible for listing in the National 1 “Palo Alto Historic Buildings Inventory.” http://www.pastheritage.org/inventory.html 2 Dames & Moore. “Study Priority 1 and Study Priority 2 Properties: Preliminary Assessments of Eligibility for the National Register or California Register.” Prepared for the City of Palo Alto Planning Division. January 1999. 3 Dames & Moore. “Final Survey Report – Palo Alto Historical Survey Update: August 1997-August 2000.” Prepared for the City of Palo Alto Planning Division. February 2001. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 23     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 6 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Register. Of the 291 properties, 165 were ultimately found to be eligible to the National Register. These DPR 523 forms were submitted to the California Office of Historic Preservation. Because the survey focused on determining National Register eligibility, the project did not finalize the preliminary evaluations regarding potential California Register eligibility. The City of Palo Alto did not formally adopt any findings from the Dames & Moore study. The subject property was not surveyed in either the Study Priority 1 or 2 categories, and thus was not identified as a property for preliminary evaluation. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 24     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 7 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. III. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION 340 PORTAGE AVENUE 340 Portage Avenue is located on an irregularly shaped, 12.5-acre parcel at the north end of Portage Avenue between Park Boulevard and El Camino Real in Palo Alto. Although 340 Portage Avenue appears to consist of a single, large building, it is composed of roughly ten buildings that were constructed at various times between 1918 and 1949 and are attached, in some form, to one another. Some of these buildings are almost entirely encased between other structures and have very limited exterior exposure; sometimes only a single wall is visible. The buildings range in size but generally have a regular, rectilinear plan and concrete foundations. Access into the site is achieved through large surface parking lots that are accessible via Park Boulevard to the northwest, Ash Street to the southeast, and Portage Avenue and Acadia Avenue to the southwest. The separate, yet associated building to the southeast of 340 Portage Avenue is described in the “Landscape Features and Outbuildings” section that follows. The façades of the building, as described in this report, are outlined in the diagram below (Figure 3). The main volume of the building features a pair of monitor roofs, which are capped with composition shingles (Figure 4); the remainder of the building features a variety of roof shapes, including flat, gabled, shed, and arched roofs. The building is primarily clad in concrete or corrugated metal with some sections on the rear clad in wood siding. Fenestration is minimal but includes some metal doors and fixed metal windows on the first story, wood clerestory ribbon windows, and wire glass skylights. Figure 3: 340 Portage Avenue, facades labeled and colored. Source: Google Maps, 2019. Edited by Page & Turnbull. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 25     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 8 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Primary (Southeast) Façade The primary (southeast) façade faces a surface parking lot on Portage Avenue. To further describe the physical characteristics that are visible along the southeast façade, it will be divided into three sections: south (left), middle, and north (right). The far left (south) portion of the southeast façade is clad in board formed concrete and features two arched roofs with a flat parapet fronting Portage Avenue (Figure 5 and Figure 6). A raised concrete platform with a simple metal railing extends north from an entry for 380 Portage Avenue. The entry consists of an aluminum frame glass door, sidelight, and transom windows that appear to have replaced an earlier garage door opening. A metal ladder with safety cage to permit roof access is located to the north of this entry (Figure 7). To the north of this ladder, the concrete platform is covered by a long, shed awning with a wood post-and-beam and horizontal wood railing; the awning is covered in corrugated metal and asphalt (Figure 8). The middle portion of the southeast façade features the building’s most distinctive feature: a pair of monitor roofs covered with composition shingles and clad with corrugated metal (Figure 9). The monitor roofs run perpendicular to the façade. Exterior walls throughout this section are also clad in corrugated metal siding. Below the monitor roofs, the shed awning, wood post-and-beam supports, concrete platform, and horizontal wood railing continue from the south along the full length of this section (Figure 10). A number of entries permit access to the interior of the building from this section of the southeast façade. The primary entrance to the building consists of a pair of aluminum frame, automatic glass doors and a single aluminum frame glass door, both with exterior wood trim; the entries are situated below a roll-up garage door opening (Figure 11). Fenestration to the left (south) and right (north) consists of a number of metal doors, aluminum frame glass doors, and fixed, aluminum frame windows. In several locations, a combination of aluminum frame glass doors, sidelights, and transoms have been installed to fill former garage door openings (Figure 12). In other locations, larger, earlier openings have been filled with simple metal doors and blind transoms with wood trim (Figure 13). Concrete ramps and steps permit access to the concrete platform from the parking lot in a number of locations and at the platform’s extreme north and south ends. The far right (north) portion of the southeast façade features painted concrete block cladding, a parapeted roof, and two sets of aluminum frame, double glass door entries (Figure 14). The entry to the left also features large glass sidelites and two rows of transom windows beneath an arched metal awning with two metal supports; this appears to have replaced a former garage door opening (Figure Figure 4: 340 Portage Avenue. View northwest from the parking lot located southeast of the building. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 26     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 9 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. 15). The entry to the right, the furthest entrance to the north on this façade, is smaller and features narrow sidelites and a concrete walkway framed by landscaping (Figure 16). Additional roof shapes and materials were not visible from street level in this location. Figure 5. Southeast façade. View north. Figure 6. The south end of the southeast façade features two arched roofs. View southwest. Figure 7. Concrete platform extends from an aluminum frame glass entry at the far south end of the southeast façade. View northeast. Figure 8. A shed awning with wood post-and- beam supports extends nearly the full length of the southeast façade. View northeast. Figure 9. A pair of monitor roofs dominate the middle section of the southeast façade. View southwest. Figure 10. Concrete steps permit access to entries located on the concrete platform. View northwest. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 27     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 10 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 11. The primary entrance to the building from the southeast façade at Fry’s Electronics. View northwest. Figure 12. Many historic doors and openings have been replaced with aluminum frame glass windows and doors. View northwest Figure 13. A metal door with blind transom and wood trim. View northwest. Figure 14. The north end of the southeast façade. Breezeblocks have been added beneath the awning in some locations. View north. Figure 15. An arched metal awning over an altered entry at the far north end of the southeast façade. View northwest. Figure 16. An altered aluminum frame glass entry and oncrete walkway framed by landscaping at the far north end of the southeast façade. View northwest. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 28     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 11 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Northeast Façade The northeast façade faces Park Boulevard and features corrugated metal cladding, a taller central portion, and two entries (Figure 17). The primary entrance is for 3200 Park Boulevard and is located approximately at the center of the façade. It is set into a curved recess that is supported by two square concrete pillars. The lintel above features graduated horizontal lines, which, along with the recess’s curved shape, are reflective of the Streamline Moderne style. Aluminum frame double glass doors with multilite sidelights and a transom above sit at the center of this recessed entry; a large multilite window is located immediately to its right (west). This entry is accessed by a small set of concrete steps and a curved concrete ramp, both of which have metal railings (Figure 18 and Figure 19). The second entry is located at the left (east) end of the façade and consists only of a single aluminum frame glass door with a single sidelite to its left and a narrow transom window above (Figure 20). Much of the façade is covered in ivy. Figure 17. Northeast façade. View west. Figure 18. Recessed entry. View southwest. Figure 19. Curved, recessed entry with concrete ramp and steps, and aluminum frame glass doors and windows. View west. Figure 20. The second entry on the northeast façade. View southwest. Rear (Northwest) Façade The rear façade of 340 Portage Avenue displays a variety of roof forms, structures, and features (Figure 21 and Figure 22). To further describe the physical characteristics that are visible along the northwest façade, the façade will be broken down into three sections: north (left), middle, and south (right). Starting at the far north end of the façade, a wide, raised concrete platform, originally used as a loading platform or part of the cannery’s cooling porch, extends south for nearly the entire length of Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 29     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 12 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. the property. The platform is covered by a long, shed awning with wood post-and-beam supports and wood trusses. At the extreme north end of the building, the concrete platform has been converted for use as a patio. Here, a horizontal metal or wood railing and stairs have been installed at the edge of the platform, exterior walls have been clad in vertical wood siding, and former garage door openings or truck loading bays have been replaced with aluminum frame glass windows and doors (Figure 23). An asphalt ramp rises up to the height of the concrete platform, reflecting some continued use for loading and unloading. Above this section, a parapet with a clipped north corner rises above the awning, which is covered in acrylic roofing material. Exterior walls on the rest of the façade that have not been previously mentioned are clad in corrugated metal siding. Proceeding along the façade to the south, the height of the building increases; the first raised section is fronted by a square parapet that obscures a shallow gabled roof (Figure 24). This is followed by a smaller gabled roof and then by the large pair of monitor roofs that are the building’s dominant feature. As at the primary southeast façade, these monitor roofs run perpendicular to this façade, are clad with corrugated metal siding, and are covered with composition shingles. A gabled rooftop addition and a smaller addition with a flat roof are attached to the south side of the south monitor roof and set back from the rear façade (Figure 25). These additions are also clad with corrugated metal siding. A low wood chimney is visible on the south slope of the gabled structure, and a ribbon of wood sash clerestory windows wraps around its northwest and southeast sides. Similar windows are present on the smaller flat-roofed section (Figure 26). As one proceeds south along the façade, shallow gabled roofs are visible in some places above the awning. The concrete platform and shed awning with wood post-and-beam construction continue at the middle section of the façade; however, some sections to the north are fenced in and are not visible from street level. A larger section further to the south remains open (Figure 27). Doors in this location are primarily paired and made of metal. The outline of small, shallow gabled roofs that have been incorporated into the larger existing structure are visible beneath the awning (Figure 28). At the end of the concrete platform, two gabled warehouses clad with corrugated metal are visible (Figure 29). The south section of the northwest façade is taller than and protrudes forward (northeast) from the previously described sections. The double-height walls of this section are clad with board formed concrete (Figure 30). It features four arched roofs that are covered in acrylic roofing material and a broad awning with a flat roof that extends the entire length of the section (Figure 31). The area beneath the left (north) portion of this awning is enclosed by a chain-link fence that rises from the pavement to the underside of the roof. The area beneath the right (south) portion of the awning has been converted into a patio and landscaped with planting boxes and tall hedges to create a privacy screen (Figure 32). Figure 21. Middle section of the northwest facade. View southeast. Figure 22. Middle section of the northwest façade. View northeast. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 30     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 13 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 23. The loading platform or cooling porch converted into a patio with replacement aluminum frame garage door window. View northeast. Figure 24. Rooftop parapet and small gabled roof in middle section of northwest façade. View northeast. Figure 25. Gabled addition attached to the southernmost monitor roof of 340 Portage Avenue. View northeast. Figure 26. Close-up of the gabled and flat- roofed additions. View northeast. Figure 27. A portion of the concrete loading platform or cooling porch with its shed awning and wood post-and-beam supports in the middle section of the northwest façade. View northeast. Figure 28. Outlines of shallow gabled roofs are visible along the concrete platform. View southeast. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 31     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 14 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Southwest Facade The southwest façade consists of a solid double height board formed concrete wall that has been painted. The façade is accessed via Ash Street, a narrow street located between 340 Portage Avenue and a neighboring property at 411 Portage Avenue (Figure 33). The remnants of numerous filled and repaired cracks cover the surface of the wall (Figure 35). A lighted channel letter sign for Fry’s Electronics is mounted on the upper corner of the wall at the far east end of the façade (Figure 36). Figure 33. Southwest façade. View southeast. Figure 34. Painted board formed concrete on the southwest facade. View northeast Figure 29. Gabled structures at the south end of the middle section of the northeast façade. View northeast. Figure 30. Double-height concrete structure with a wide flat-roofed awning and chain-link fence at the far south end of the northeast façade. View south. Figure 31. Arched roofs at the south end of the northwest facade. View southeast. Figure 32. Wood post-and-beam construction under the awning at the south end of the northeast façade. View south. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 32     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 15 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 35. Repaired cracks on the southwest façade. View northeast. Figure 36. Southwest façade with lighted sign for Fry’s Electronics. View north. Interior The following is a brief description of the interior spaces within the former cannery building that were accessed during the site visit. These include the publicly accessible interior spaces of 340 Portage Avenue, occupied by Fry’s Electronics, and the primary interior space of 380 Portage Avenue, occupied by Playground Global and which was opened to the surveyor during the site visit. The interior of 340 Portage Avenue has been converted for commercial use and features a large, open plan layout with wood post-and-beam construction and an exposed wood truss ceiling (Figure 37). The wood truss of one of the monitor roofs is visible from the main store area (Figure 38). Ceilings are typically covered with corrugated metal; however, in some areas, ceiling material is obscured by insulation. Upper sections of the interior walls are also clad with corrugated metal, while those that are at ground level typically consist of painted drywall. Floors are covered in linoleum and fluorescent lights have been suspended from the ceiling. Other features related to the space’s commercial use include the addition of offices, bathrooms, a café, and other store display areas, particularly around the perimeter (Figure 39). The interior of 380 Portage Avenue has been converted for use as an office space and design studio for technology start-ups. Like the 340 Portage Avenue retail space, it features a large, open plan with wood post-and-beam construction and an exposed wood truss ceiling; however, the wood trusses in this space consist of rows of repeated bowstring trusses (Figure 40). According to the occupants, the space retains its original concrete floors and wood and concrete support columns, which were purposely left unfinished and unpainted; painted numbers and letters remain visible on the upper sections of these posts (Figure 41, Figure 42, and Figure 43). While original concrete floors have been left exposed in many locations, others have been covered in carpeting. Other visible alterations include the construction of glass and drywall partition walls along the perimeter to create private office spaces and laboratories; the addition of a kitchen, café, and restrooms; and the installation of new HVAC equipment on the ceiling (Figure 41). Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 33     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 16 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 37. Interior of 340 Portage Avenue, occupied by Fry’s Electronics. Figure 38. Exposed wood of a monitor roof, visible in 340 Portage Avenue. Figure 39. Interior of 340 Portage Avenue with café addition on right. Figure 40. Interior of 380 Portage Avenue, occupied by Playground Global. Figure 41. Interior of 380 Portage Avenue with kitchen, dining area, and partitioned office additions. Figure 42. Preserved concrete floors in 380 Portage Avenue. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 34     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 17 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Landscape Features 340 Portage Avenue fills roughly half of the northwestern portion of its irregularly-shaped parcel and is oriented along a northeast-southwest axis. Landscape features primarily consist of low planting beds or medians with concrete curbs that are part of the landscaping of large surface parking lots that are located to the northwest and southwest of the building. The southwest parking lot is dotted with these landscaped medians and bordered by planting beds along Park Boulevard (Figure 45). Matadero Creek borders the parking lot to the southeast (Figure 47). The northwest parking lot, meanwhile, contains landscaped medians that are planted with rows of evenly spaced, mature eucalyptus trees (Figure 48 and Figure 49). These plantings roughly follow the route of a removed spur railroad track that formerly bordered the building. The parking lot is bordered by a concrete block wall and additional planting beds with small trees to the northwest (Figure 50). Planting beds have also been installed directly against the façades of 340 Portage Avenue in a number of locations. At the extreme northeast corner of the building, a concrete walkway is framed by low planting beds, which are filled with small bushes, cypress trees, and a tall evergreen tree (Figure 51). At the southeast corner, planting beds are filled with tall evergreen trees, and a smaller planting bed in front of a sign for Fry’s Electronics is planted with flowers (Figure 52). At the rear, northwest façade, a planting bed with a row of small deciduous trees is located along a stretch of the concrete loading platform (Figure 53). Landscaped park strips, typically planted with sycamore trees, border the building’s northeast façade along Park Boulevard (Figure 54). Former Office Building at 3201-3225 Ash Street A one-story, wood frame building with a long, multipart floorplan is located to the southeast of the 340 Portage Avenue (Figure 2; Figure 55). This building appears to have been built as a dormitory for cannery employees sometime between 1918-1925, and was moved in 1940 to its current location. Its primary, northwest façade features a front-gabled roof, wraparound porch with a shed roof, and a symmetrical arrangement of windows and doors (Figure 56). The building has double-hung wood sash windows and wood lap siding. It is surrounded by a wood fence on the northeast side, which separates the building from the southeast parking lot. The house is landscaped with a small lawn that is interspersed with low hedges and deciduous trees (Figure 57 and Figure 58). Figure 43. Original wood and concrete posts and concrete floors in 380 Portage Avenue. Figure 44. Painted numbers and letters remain visible on unfinished wood posts in 380 Portage Avenue. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 35     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 18 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 45. The parking lot to the southwest of 340 Portage Avenue is landscaped with planting beds and trees. View northwest. Figure 46. A landscaped park strip borders the southwest parking lot along Park Boulevard. View southeast. Figure 47. Matadero Creek borders the southwest parking lot. View south. Figure 48. The parking lot to the northwest of 340 Portage Avenue is landscaped with curving rows of planting beds and eucalyptus trees. View southwest. Figure 49. Eucalyptus trees in the northwest parking lot. View southeast. Figure 50. A concrete block wall borders the parcel to the northwest. View northwest. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 36     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 19 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 51. Planting beds are planted with trees at the northeast corner of the building. View southwest. Figure 52. A planting bed with flowers is located in front of a sign for Fry’s Electronics at the southeast corner of the building. View north. Figure 53. A planting bed with small deciduous trees along the cement loading platform at the rear façade of the building. View southeast. Figure 54. Park strips planted with sycamore trees are located along the northeast façade of the building. View southwest. Figure 55. The one-story, wood frame former office building to the southeast of 340 Portage Avenue. View south. Figure 56. The primary façade of the former office building to the southeast of 340 Portage Avenue. View southeast. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 37     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 20 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 57. A portion of the southwest façade of the former office building. View northeast. Figure 58. The rear portion of the southwest façade of the former office building. View northwest. SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD The subject property is located in the Ventura neighborhood, which is surrounded by the Evergreen Park, St. Claire Gardens, Charleston Meadow, Barron Park, Neal, and College Terrace neighborhoods in Palo Alto. The immediate surroundings of the subject property consist of office and commercial buildings, several of which appear to have been influenced by the industrial architecture of the property at 340 Portage Avenue, and parking lots associated with these properties (Figure 59 to Figure 62). Single-family residential buildings along Olive Avenue border the subject property to the west (Figure 63). Figure 59. A neighboring property on Park Boulevard to the east of Matadero Creek. View southeast. Figure 60. An office building at 3101 Park Boulevard. View northeast. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 38     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 21 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 61. Neighboring properties to the south of the subject property on Portage Avenue. View south. Figure 62. A row of commercial and office buildings to the south of the subject property on the block between Acacia Avenue, Ash Street, Portage Avenue, and El Camino Real. Figure 63. Single-family houses border the subject property to the northwest along Olive Avenue. View northwest. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 39     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 22 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT MAYFIELD/PALO ALTO HISTORY The earliest known inhabitants of the current-day location of Palo Alto area were the Ohlone people. The region was colonized by Gaspar de Portola in 1769 as part of the Spanish territory of Alta California. The Spanish and Mexican governments carved the area into large ranchos, and the land that later became Palo Alto belonged to several of these land grants, including Rancho Corte Madera, Rancho Pastoria de las Borregas, Rancho Rincon de San Francisquito, and Rancho Rinconada del Arroyo de San Francisquito.4 These land grants were honored in the cession of California to the United States during the 1840s, but parcels were subdivided and sold throughout the nineteenth century. The township of Mayfield was formed in 1855 in what is now southern Palo Alto. It was the earliest settlement in the Palo Alto area and grew up around James Otterson’s hotel, which opened on El Camino Real at California Avenue in 1853. The hotel was patronized by travelers en route between San Francisco and San Jose and by lumbermen driving down from the mountains. Mayfield received its name from Mayfield Farm, owned and developed by Elisha Crosby. The land was originally owned by Don Secundino Robles.6 In 1875, French financier Jean Baptiste Paulin Caperon, better known as Peter Coutts, purchased land in Mayfield and four other parcels, which comprised more than a thousand acres extending from today's Page Mill Road to Serra Street and from El Camino Real to the foothills. Coutts named his property Ayrshire Farm. Leland Stanford began buying land in the area in 1876 for a horse farm, called the Palo Alto Stock Farm. Stanford bought Ayrshire Farm in 1882. By that time, Mayfield was home to a stately row of houses on Lincoln Street (now California Avenue).7 4 “Palo Alto, California,” Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Alto,_California#cite_note-12. 6 “Mayfield,” Palo Alto Wiki. Website accessed 11 June 2013 from: http://www.paloaltowiki.org/index.php/Mayfield 7 “Palo Alto, California,” Wikipedia. Website accessed 11 June 2013 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Alto,_California Figure 64. Corner of Sherman Avenue and 3rd Street (now Park Boulevard), Mayfield, 1887. Source: William H Myrick, 052-066 Palo Alto Historical Association, Guy Miller Archives (1887- 02-05)Source: Palo Alto Historical Association. Figure 65. Main Street (now El Camino Real) in Mayfield, 1909. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 40     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 23 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. According to local historian and resident Matt Bowling, In 1886, Senator Leland Stanford met with local Mayfielders on the corner of California and El Camino Real (then known as Lincoln and Main) to inform the locals about his big plans for a university in their town. He wanted the entrance gates to the university to be situated on Stanford Avenue near Hanover Street. One catch though --- Stanford wanted the town to go “dry” --- no more alcohol. Mayfield, with its 13 saloons, voted no thanks. Rejected, Stanford turned his eyes north and convinced his friend, Timothy Hopkins of the Southern Pacific Railroad, to buy 700 acres of private property and sell lots. The collection of homes that grew up around the university (originally called University Park) eventually became Palo Alto… Mayfield soon fell on hard times. Workers who had lived in Mayfield during the building of Stanford University eventually chose to live in Palo Alto --- free from liquor, home to a university and a better place to raise children. As the wet, poorer in relation to Palo Alto, Mayfield began to acquire an unsavory reputation. As grocer Frank Backus said at a Board of Trustees Meeting in 1904, “Mayfield people are tired of having the roughs from all around the country come here, get drunk and raise a row. We’re tired of renting our cottages for $5 and $6 a month…when a house can’t be had in Palo Alto for $20-$25.” … In 1904, Mayfield voters, realizing their earlier mistake, finally did ban the saloons. … But Mayfield continued to be overshadowed in competition with their northerly neighbor. In 1905, Mayfield accused Palo Alto of “unsisterly conduct,” claiming Palo Alto had blocked the building of a road from Mayfield to Stanford’s main quad. … Plagued by money problems, bad roads and little leadership, a group of residents began an effort in 1918 for Mayfield to be annexed by Palo Alto. A first attempt at annexation was voted down in 1924, but a second passed, 357 to 288, less than a year later. Palo Altans agreed to the annexation, and the two communities officially consolidated on July 6, 1925.8 8 Matt Bowling, “The Meeting on the Corner: The Beginning of Mayfield’s End,” Palo Alto History.com. Website accessed 11 June 2013 from: http://www.paloaltohistory.com/the-beginning-of-mayfields-end.php Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 41     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 24 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. The depression of the 1930s impacted the design, construction, and financing of buildings across the nation. In many areas, there was little to no building in the 1930s; however, this was not the case in Palo Alto. While Palo Alto did suffer through the Great Depression, new development did not come to a halt. The United States government assisted in providing housing through several programs in the 1930s. Architectural journals and newspapers showed a substantial amount of construction between 1931 and 1944. Eight hundred buildings were built between these years, most before 1941.9 The United States’ involvement in World War II brought an influx of military personnel and their families to the San Francisco Peninsula. When the war ended, Palo Alto saw rapid growth. Many families who had been stationed on the Peninsula by the military or who worked in associated industries chose to stay. Palo Alto’s population more than doubled from 16,774 in 1940 to 33,753 in 1953.10 Stanford University was also a steady attraction for residents and development in the city. The city greatly expanded in the late 1940s and 1950s, as new parcels were annexed to house new offices and light industrial uses (Figure 67). As a result of this development, the city evolved somewhat beyond its “college town” reputation.11 Palo Alto annexed a vast area of mostly undeveloped land west of the Foothill Expressway (Interstate 280) between 1959 and 1968. This area has remained protected open space. Small 9 Dames & Moore Final Survey Report Update pg. 1-9. 10 “Depression, War, and the Population Boom,” Palo Alto Medical Foundation- Sutter Health, accessed March 24, 2016, http://www.pamf.org/about/pamfhistory/depression.html. 11 “Comprehensive Plan,” section L-4. Figure 66. Sanborn Fire Insurance Map, December 1924, showing the extent of Mayfield in red with Stanford University campus and Palo Alto to the left. Edited by Page & Turnbull. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 42     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 25 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. annexations continued into the 1970s. Palo Alto remains closely tied to Stanford University, its largest employer. The technology industry currently dominates other sectors of business, as is the case with most cities within Silicon Valley. THE CANNING INDUSTRY IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY Before the technology industry rose to prominence in Palo Alto in the 1960s, growing and canning fruit were the city’s largest industries.12 In fact, agriculture and its related industries dominated the regional economy and everyday livelihoods of residents across Santa Clara County prior to this period. The Santa Clara Valley possesses over 1,300 square miles of some of the most fertile land in the country that stretches south for approximately 60 miles from the southern end of the San Francisco Bay. In the early twentieth century, the Santa Clara Valley gained a reputation as “one of the richest and best known agricultural and horticultural districts not only in California, but in the world,” a reputation that earned the valley the nickname, “The Valley of Heart’s Delight.”13 During the Spanish and Mexican periods, the economic activity in the region was based largely on cattle-raising and limited agriculture that took place at the expansive ranchos that covered the Santa Clara Valley. These ranchos primarily consisted of vast tracts of unfenced land on which cattle roamed but also typically included houses, corrals, a garden, grain fields, and a small orchard.14 missionaries recognized the valley’s agricultural potential and planted some of the first orchards and 12 Douglas L. Graham, “The Story of Our Local Bayside Sutter Cannery, Featuring Barron Park Apricots, Pears and Tomatoes,” Barron Park Association Newsletter, Summer 2010, 9. 13 Ibid., 2. 14 Archives and Architecture, LLC, County of Santa Clara Historic Context Statement, 2012 , 30. Figure 67. The expansion of Palo Alto from 1894 to 1952. Source: Branner Earth Sciences Library and Map Collections, Stanford University. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 43     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 26 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. vineyards. Cuttings from these early orchards and vineyards were later used to establish some of the earliest commercial orchards and vineyards in the Santa Clara Valley after California achieved statehood in 1850. In 1853, B.F. Fox established a plant nursery at the Rancho El Potrero. The nursery imported fruit trees to the Santa Clara Valley and, for a time, was the major supplier for plant material in the valley. Growers began to experiment with planting different types of fruit trees, and by the 1860s, orchards were being set out in East San Jose, Milpitas, and in northern parts of the valley.15 By 1890, over 4 million fruit trees had been planted in the Santa Clara Valley.16 In 1920, the United States census recorded the value of all farm property in the county at over $149 million and estimated the income from fruit and nuts at over $19 million, easily beating out all other industries as the largest in the region. 17 With such an abundance of fruits being grown in the region, canning and packing companies sprung up alongside Santa Clara County’s orchards to take advantage of being in close proximity to one of the most lucrative fruit producing regions in the state. Canned goods were an essential food product during the Gold Rush, when floods of newcomers, with little knowledge of the land and its climate, entered California with the hope of striking it rich in the gold fields. Prospective miners brought canned goods with them to sustain them as they traveled west and continued to rely upon them upon their arrival in California’s boomtowns and mining camps, where food supplies were often limited and unreliable. Canned goods also allowed California’s newcomers to enjoy the comforting taste of familiar foods from the homes they had left behind.18 Canning, however, required a factory setting and a high degree of precision in order to produce enough product to make a profit. Repackaged processed foods were initially shipped to San Francisco by Provost & Co. of New York during the Gold Rush. In the 1860s, Cutting & Company became the first company to can fresh fruit in California. The industry soon spread throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, with a number of other major canneries emerging throughout the region in the 1870s and 1880s.19 In 1871, Dr. James Dawson established the first successful commercial canning operation in Santa Clara County.20 15 Ibid., 38-39. 16 Mark Robertson, “Looking Back: Canning in the Valley of Heart’s Delight,” San Jose Public Library blog, May 23, 2013, accessed February 5, 2019, https://www.sjpl.org/blog/looking-back-canning-valley-hearts- delight. 17 San Jose Chamber of Commerce, “Valley of Heart’s Delight” pamphlet, 1922, San Jose Public Library, California Room, 11, accessed at Online Archive of California, 7. 18 Stephanie Esther Fuglaar Statz, “California’s Fruit Cocktail: A History of Industrial Food Production, the State, and the Environment in Northern California” (PhD diss., University of Houston, 2012), 16, 41. 19 Ibid., 43. 20 Archives and Architecture, LLC, 41. Figure 68: Santa Clara Valley prune orchards in bloom, ca. 1910-1920. Source: California State Library. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 44     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 27 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. The completion of the transcontinental railroad through San Jose in 1869 also aided the growth of the canning and fruit production industries in Santa Clara County. The railroad connected the valley’s cities, towns, and rural areas to new markets across the country and opened up new opportunities for land use and development.21 Initially, transporting goods by railroad was too expensive for most companies and business owners in the county. Industrial development, including canning operations, instead centered around ports and bodies of water from which goods could more affordably be shipped by boat. As railroad transportation became more affordable, canneries were increasingly constructed along railroad lines. In addition to access to transportation, canneries also required a large and reliable supply of water to operate. This requirement also played a role in determining where many canneries were built.22 Fruit production, packing, and canning continued to expand in Santa Clara County through the turn of the twentieth century, as the industries increased production to meet the region’s growing population. By the early twentieth century, these industries were the county’s primary economic focus. The canning industry reached its peak in the 1920s.23 In 1922, a pamphlet published by the San Jose Chamber of Commerce on Santa Clara’s “Valley of Heart’s Delight” boasted that the region was home to “both the largest fruit drying houses and the largest fruit canneries in the world.”24 It added, “Beyond question, this valley is the very center of the nation’s fruit industry, having more canning and packing plants than any other county in the United States.” At the time, 40 canning plants were located in Santa Clara County, which produced approximately one-third of California’s entire output of canned foods. The region’s influence stretched beyond California, as well. It was estimated that of the approximately 100,000 tons of canned products that Santa Clara County produced each year, 20 percent was exported abroad.25 The United States’ involvement in World War II created an increased demand for food products both on the home front and to feed American and Allied troops fighting abroad. The agricultural sector of the national economy, including the canning industry, expanded greatly to meet the demand.26 Canned goods, in particular, were ideal for feeding soldiers, who might find themselves in locations where freshly cooked meals were not always available and were rationed.27 Consumers were 21 Ibid., 40. 22 Statz, 86. 23 Robertson. 24 San Jose Chamber of Commerce, 1-2. 25 Ibid., 9. 26 Dr. Kelly A. Spring, “Food Rationing and Canning in World War II,” National Women’s History Museum, September 13, 2017, accessed February 13, 2019, https://www.womenshistory.org/articles/food-rationing- and-canning-world-war-ii. 27 Tanfer Emin Tunc and Annessa Ann Babic, “Food on the home front, food on the warfront: World War II and the American diet,” Food and Foodways 25, no. 2 (2017): 101-106, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07409710.2017.1311159; Statz, 144. Figure 69: Postcard image of workers at Flickinger's Orchard Cannery in Santa Clara County, ca. 1915- 1920. Source: San Jose Public Library. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 45     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 28 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. encouraged to grow “victory gardens” and can their own food to reduce their reliance on commercially produced canned goods, which were reserved for the troops.28 The military purchased large quantities of the canning industry’s total output, and government contracts provided a stimulus for the industry throughout the war. In the end, canned goods accounted for roughly 70 percent of the food items eaten by American troops during World War II.29 After the war, the food processing industry in Santa Clara County went into decline. During this period, the local business community began to shift its attention toward attracting non-agricultural industries to the region. Attracted by new job opportunities, increasing numbers of people moved into the county, causing its population to grow from 95,000 to 500,000 between 1950 and 1975. Orchards and farmland that had characterized much of the landscape and economic livelihood of Santa Clara County for nearly a century were uprooted and replaced with new residential subdivisions and shopping centers to meet the demand for housing for this expanding population.30 Continued development has since removed much of the physical vestiges of Santa Clara County and Palo Alto’s agricultural and canning past. SITE HISTORY Prior to the first decades of the twentieth century, the site on which 340 Portage Avenue sits appears to have been largely undeveloped land, located outside of the main developed center of Mayfield. The site was not included in maps of the town created by the Sanborn Map Company prior to 1925 (Figure 71). Development of the site began on April 24, 1918, when Thomas Foon Chew, a Chinese immigrant and owner of the Bayside Canning Company in Alviso, purchased four acres of land in Mayfield for $200,000 and announced that he planned to build a second canning plant on the site.31 According to articles published in the local Daily Palo Alto newspaper, progress on the construction of the cannery was well underway in June that same year, and operations began at the cannery in July.32 Just one year later, Chew was already expanding his operations. Before the start of the canning season that year, nineteen houses were constructed for the Bayside Canning Company’s workers on land to the south of the cannery, and a large new warehouse was added.33 The workers’ houses, four larger dwellings, and a rooming house are shown as part of the complex of “employee cabins” located at the cannery site in the 1925 Sanborn fire insurance map of Mayfield. At the time, the 28 Jessica Stoller-Conrad, “Canning History: When Propaganda Encouraged Patriotic Preserves,” NPR, August 3, 2012, accessed February 13, 2019, https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/08/02/157777834/canning- history-when-propaganda-encouraged-patriotic-preserves. 29 “Canning Industry,” in Dictionary of American History, ed. Stanley I. Kutler (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons/The Gale Group, 2003), accessed at Encyclopedia.com, February 13, 2019, https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/canning-industry. 30 Archives and Architecture, LLC, 46-47. 31 Lillian Ledoyen Kirkbride, “Bayside Canning Company – Sutter Packing Company,” The Tall Tree, October 1992, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2. 32 “New Cannery to Start July 8,” Daily Palo Alto, July 3, 1918. Accessed at Newspapers.com. 33 Graham, 10. Figure 70. Boxes of Santa Clara Valley prunes. Source: San Jose State University Library Special Collections & Archives. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 46     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 29 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. cannery consisted of a large cooking and preparing facility with a two-story staging section and a warehouse connected to its north side, both with concrete floors and roofs supported by rows of wood posts. The buildings were sited alongside a spur track of the Southern Pacific Railroad’s Los Gatos branch at the intersection of Third Street (now Park Boulevard) and Portage Avenue. To the south of the preparing facility, there was a loading platform and small syrup room. Four small outbuildings, including a restroom and office, were located to the southeast of these buildings. A scale was situated along Portage Avenue, and an in-ground oil tank was located alongside the railroad spur. A separate one-story dwelling and small outbuilding were located to the north of the cannery, facing Third Street.34 Over the next several decades, the canning complex continued to expand. Records of historic building permits at the Palo Alto Historical Association reveal that in 1929, the Sutter Packing Company, which by then operated the cannery although it continued to be owned by Thomas Foon Chew, had received a permit to build another warehouse on the site at 310 Portage Avenue. A permit to build yet another cannery building, this time at 300 Portage Avenue, was issued in 1937. The role or purpose of this building was not recorded. Just three years later in 1940, the Sutter Packing Company received another permit to spend $13,000 on a warehouse expansion at 380 Portage Avenue; however, newspaper articles show that construction work at the site was much more extensive. In June 1940, The Palo Alto Times reported that the company was planning to spend $175,000 on improvements to the canning plant that would result in 50,000 square feet of additional storage and increase the plant’s capacity 25 to 30 percent. These improvements included: ▪ Extending two warehouses at a cost of $13,000 ▪ Erecting a new 140 x 250-foot, reinforced concrete storage warehouse on Portage Avenue at a cost of $27,675 ▪ Relocating an office building from Portage Avenue to a site fronting on First Street ▪ Moving the cafeteria to the opposite side of First Street ▪ Replacing the kitchen ▪ Erecting a new timekeeper’s building adjacent to the main office ▪ Installing a third water tube boiler with a 500-horsepower capacity 34 Sanborn Map Company, “Mayfield, Santa Clara Co., Cal.” February 1925, Sheet 1, Sacramento Public Library. Figure 71. 1925 Sanborn map. Source: Sacramento Public Library. Edited by Page & Turnbull. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 47     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 30 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. ▪ Installing a 50-ton, 60-foot scale in front of the new loading platform “being erected” on Portage Avenue ▪ Adding a “catsup” bottling line ▪ Landscaping work, including setting out 120 trees and 300 ornamental shrubs35 A photograph of the cannery, taken the same year, shows the middle section of the main cannery building, although it is not clear if the extensive improvement work had started when it was taken (Figure 72). The two-story cannery is visible with two parallel monitor roofs and ribbons of windows on the first and second stories. The smaller, one-story buildings to its right also have a mix of roof shapes including two additional monitor roofs, gabled roofs, and what appears to be a flat roof with a shed awning. The small peeling shed is visible to the left, and the separate warehouse to the southeast of the main building is visible in the foreground. An aerial photograph from 1941 shows the newly expanded canning plant (Figure 73). By this time, the Sutter Packing Company’s cannery filled the entire block stretching from Third Street on the north to First Street (now Ash Street) on the south and from the curving banks of Matadero Creek on the east to the Southern Pacific Railroad spur tracks on the west. Additions and new canning facilities had been constructed one next to the other with no space between them so that, although it is possible to discern multiple distinct rooflines and facilities in the aerial photograph, the cannery largely appeared as one solid mass. The site also consisted of a number of smaller, detached buildings. Three long narrow buildings were sited along Matadero Creek. One, oriented parallel to the main cannery complex, was attached by what appears to be an enclosed bridge. A fourth building with two attached gabled roofs, identified as a warehouse in the 1945 Sanborn map of the site, was located to the south of these narrow buildings. On the northwest side of the main cannery complex, two additional buildings, a machine shop and boiler house, sat alongside the spur tracks.36 A single row of employee cabins remained intact to the south of the cannery. Also shown in the 1941 aerial photograph is the extant one-story office building on First Street. This was likely the office building that was moved from Portage Avenue to First Street in 1940. It is possible that it was formerly a dormitory constructed sometime between 1918-1925 that was originally located by the employee cabins. The dormitory appears in the 1925 Sanborn map as a long building with a covered porch on one short end, fronting Portage Avenue, in reverse orientation to the extant office building. The cannery continued to grow as production ramped up in response to World War II. In 1942, Sutter Packing Company was issued a permit to spend $39,500 on another warehouse at 300 Portage Avenue. 37 This building is likely the southernmost portion of the existing building that extends across Ash Street over the site of the last row of employee cabins; it does not appear in the 1941 aerial but shares the same reinforced concrete construction, massing, and arched wood truss roof structure as the warehouse on the north side of Ash Street. In 1945, additional improvements took place at the cannery. Work included: ▪ Building a 42.5 x 70-foot jam and jelly housing facility; ▪ Converting a loading platform into an office building and laboratory near Second Street; ▪ Constructing of a shed over the loading platform near Third Street; ▪ Adding a one-story office building on Portage Avenue near First Street; and ▪ Repairing the roof.38 35 “Sutter Packing Co. Spends $175,000 on Improvements,” Palo Alto Times, June 6, 1940. 36 Sanborn Map Company, “Mayfield, Santa Clara Co., Cal.,” May 1945, Sheet 1, Sacramento Public Library. 37 Palo Alto Citizen, August 7, 1942. 38 “Sutter Plant,” Palo Alto Times, January 27, 1945; “New Building Projects at Sutter,” Daily Palo Alto Times, March 15, 1945. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 48     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 31 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Figure 73: 1941 aerial photograph of the Sutter Packing Company. Subject property outlined in orange. Office building outlined in blue. Source: Fairchild Aerial Surveys, Flight C-7065, Frame 92, Collection of UC Santa Barbara. Edited by Page & Turnbull. Figure 72. Sutter Packing Plant, 1940. Source: Palo Alto Historical Association. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 49     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 32 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. A Sanborn map from 1945 only shows the portion of the site that contained the main cannery complex; the area along Matadero Creek, most of the office and warehouse buildings to the southeast, and the south side of First Street are cut off (Figure 74). The map reveals that after years of extensive expansion at the site, the main cannery building contained roughly 24 spaces, including the cannery at the center, sandwiched between four general warehouses, one large packing warehouse, a box and nailing shop, a peeling shed, a staging area, retorts (area for sterilizing food cans), and a small syrup room. These spaces were separated by standard fire doors. The complex was primarily one-story tall, except at the cannery in the center, where it rose up to two-stories, and was primarily constructed with concrete floors and roof structures supported by rows of wood posts. The newest warehouses, located at the far south end of the complex along First Street, were made of reinforced concrete with plastered walls, and wire glass skylights in the roof.39 In spite of decades of nearly constant activity and expansion of the operations at the cannery site, Sutter Packing Company went into decline after World War II and finally closed its doors in 1949.40 A portion the larger cannery complex on Lambert Avenue was initially leased to Coca-Cola to function as a bottling plant, but records do not confirm Coca-Cola’s presence at the subject property.41 Research did not uncover any additional information about the use or changes to the site until the 1960s, by which time the former cannery had been subdivided into several smaller spaces, which were leased to a variety of tenants. In 1964, the Southern Pacific Railroad removed its spur tracks from the site. The same year, a portion of the building was occupied by Maximart, a large commercial store that sold home goods and appliances.42 The building at 340 Portage Avenue appears to have undergone some exterior alterations between the construction of the Bayside Canning Company’s first building in 1918 and the closure of the 39 Sanborn Map Company, “Mayfield, Santa Clara Co., Cal.,” May 1945, Sheet 1, Sacramento Public Library. 40 Kirkbride, 6. 41 Graham, 11. 42 “More Holiday Fun with These New Kelvinators to Help You,” San Francisco Examiner, November 16, 1964. Accessed at Newspapers.com. Figure 74: 1945 Sanborn map of subject site. 340 Portage Avenue is outlined in orange. The office building is outlined in blue. Source: Sacramento Public Library. Edited by Page & Turnbull. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 50     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 33 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Sutter Packing Company in 1949. The limited number of historic photographs of the building make it difficult to discern which alterations date to the company’s extensive expansion and improvement program during the 1940s or were completed after the cannery’s closure. An aerial photograph from 1948 appears to show that the existing parapet was added along the front façade prior to this date, perhaps as part of an effort to unify the building’s many facades. Additionally, 340 Portage Avenue appears to have the same shape and general form in a 1965 aerial of the site as it does in the 1941 aerial, with the exception of the additional warehouse from 1945 on the south side of First (Ash) Street (Figure 75). By then, the three long buildings along Matadero Creek had been removed and the area to the southeast of 340 Portage Avenue had been converted into a parking lot. The surrounding area shows the effects of rapid residential growth in Palo Alto during the post war period and is densely packed with single family houses.43 No building permits were uncovered for the period between 1949 and 1985, indicating that alterations to the building were minimal during the decades immediately after canning operations ceased. By 1978, Maximart had moved out, and the site was under the ownership of WSJ Properties. One- third of the buildings were vacant, and the company proposed to redevelop the property for mixed use development with 175,000 square feet of office space and 117 apartment units. The project does not appear to have come to fruition, as no apartment units were built. Alterations that are documented in recent building permits primarily document interior tenant improvement work to convert the building’s many spaces for commercial and office use; however some exterior modifications are recorded, including re-roofing, the addition of a few external doors and wheelchair accessible ramps, the installation of metal framed windows and doors, the addition of insulated wood frame walls, removal of unreinforced elements as part of seismic stabilization, modifications to the parking lot, and landscaping work. 43 April 30, 1965 Figure 75: 1965 aerial of the subject property. 340 Portage Avenue outlined in orange. Related office building outlined in blue. Source: Cartwright Aerial Surveys, Flight CAS_65_130, Frame 4-10, Collection of UC Santa Barbara. Edited by Page & Turnbull. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 51     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 34 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. CONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY The following table and accompanying narrative provide a timeline of construction activity at 340 Portage Avenue based on historic building permits on file at the Palo Alto Historical Association, building permits and plans available at the City of Palo Alto Development Center, and historic newspaper articles. It focuses primarily on exterior construction work but also includes permits that document notable interior alterations.44 Date Permit # Scope of Work April 1918 N/A Thomas Foon Chew buys four acres of land in Mayfield for $200,000 and announces plans to build a cannery on the site.45 July 1918 N/A Bayside Canning Company Plant No. 2 and begins operation. 1919 N/A A warehouse and 19 houses for workers are constructed before the start of the canning season.46 1928 N/A $20,000 is spent to renovate and purchase new machinery for the cannery.47 8/31/1929 PAT 8/31/1929 Warehouse at 310 Portage. Sutter Packing Co, owner; R.O. Summers, builder. 2/16/1937 PAT 2/16/1937 Cannery building at 300 Portage. Sutter Packing Co., owner and builder. 6/7/1940 PAT 6/7/1940 Warehouse expansion at 380 Portage, $13,000. Sutter Packing Co., owner; WP Goodenough, builder. 7/2/1942 PAT 7/2/1942 Warehouse at 300 Portage, $39,500. Sutter Packing Co., owner. 5/8/1946 PAT 5/8/1946 Plant and lab building at 300 Portage, $2,500. Sutter Packing Co., owner and builder. 5/5/1948 PAT 5/5/1948 Alterations at 300 Portage, $3,000. Sutter Packing Co., owner; Preston Construction Co., builder. 3/21/1985 85-ARB-52, no. S 6148 Installation of a wood sign at the loading dock at 210 Portage Avenue. 3/21/1985 85-ARB-52, no. S 6149 Installation of a wood sign at the loading dock at 220 Portage Avenue. 44 Work recorded in the construction chronology table focusses primarily on exterior alterations. A limited number of interior modifications have been included 45 Kirkbride, 2. 46 Kirkbride, 2. 47 “$20,000 to be Spent on New Machinery of Cannery in Mayfield,” Palo Alto Times, May 17, 1928. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 52     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 35 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Date Permit # Scope of Work 3/21/1985 85-ARB-52, no. S 6150 Installation of a wood sign at the loading dock at 230 Portage Avenue. 4/17/1985 85-ARB-52, no. S 6151 Wood sign for Basket Galleria, Inc. on loading dock 5/2/1990 90-1057 Alterations for new Fry’s Electronics facility. Exterior alterations include parking modification, new ramps, new guardrails, a new door opening, and filling in an existing concrete ramp. 7/19/1990 90-ARB-105 Installation of wall and free-standing signs and associated landscaping for Fry’s Electronics. 5/12/1994 94-1237 Alterations for conversion to Fry’s Corporate Offices. 9/19/1994 Unpermitted Sign at driveway at 320-380 Portage Avenue. 10/5/1994 94-1237 Alterations for corporate expansion of Fry’s Electronics. Exterior alterations include a new exterior door and handicapped parking area on rear of building. 11/26/1997 97-3263 Expansion of Fry’s Electronics store, including the construction of wood framed walls with fiberglass insulation at all exterior facades and ceiling, interior demising walls, roofing alterations, and installation of metal windows. 6/30/1998 98-1846 Earthquake stabilization work 7/9/1998 98-1846 Relocation of supporting post and replacement of damaged beam of storefront canopy 7/31/1998 97003262 Replacing damaged columns and beams and putting back columns that had been taken out 7/31/1998 97003262 Structure for handicap exist ramp at back exterior of building 12/18/1998 98001065 Add ADA guardrail from entry to ramp at 210 Portage Avenue 5/29/2003 03-0533 Addition of rear mandoor and exterior stair; Title 24 accessibility upgrade, installation of “teak patio” at 230 Portage Avenue. 7/19/2006 06-1520 New rooftop, modifications to lobby, and expansion of 210 Portage Avenue into 3180 Park Boulevard by adding two restrooms at rear of building, 8/9/2007 07-1908 Re-roofing at 230 Portage by overlaying foam coating over existing metal decking Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 53     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 36 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Date Permit # Scope of Work 5/14/2008 08-315 Repair cracks in bottom chord of roof truss at 380 Portage Avenue 8/8/2008 08-2009 Install acrylic polyester roof system over existing built-up cap sheet 10/2/2009 09-1857 Reinforce existing bow string truss at 370 Portage Avenue where bottom chord and web member cracks have been observed 10/2/2009 09-1858 Reinforce existing bow string truss at 380 Portage Avenue where bottom chord and web member cracks have been observed 3/16/2010 10-0330 Voluntary reinforcing of existing bow string trusses 4/12/2010 10-525 Voluntary reinforcing of existing bow string trusses, total of 9 in “Lyncean” tenant space 8/12/2010 10-1539 Removal of unreinforced CMU walls and parapets. Replacement with wood frame walls, connect new wood frame wall to existing CMU wall with bolts and epoxy 4/4/2016 15-2594 Interior remodel for Playground Global, including installation of metal suspended ceiling system, seismic bracing, and addition of a variety of interior facilities. 2/16/2017 16-3216 Removal of existing accessible ramp, wooden guardrail, exterior wall, and storefront doors and glazing at 200 Portage Avenue. Doors and glazing salvaged for re-use and re-installation. Visual observation indicates that additional alterations, which are not recorded in recent building permits, have occurred. Notably, nearly all of the windows and doors that are visible in the 1941 photograph of the cannery have been filled in or covered. More recently, historic window and door openings appear to have been replaced with aluminum frame glass features in a number of locations. BUILDING OWNERS AND TENANTS Ownership History The Santa Clara County Assessor was not visited during research for this report, and therefore, detailed deed transactions are not known. The following table is based on historic building permits on file at the Palo Alto Historical Association, building permit applications available at the City of Palo Alto Development Center, and historic newspaper articles. Biographies of the Bayside Canning Company and Sutter Packing Company are included below. Years of Ownership/Occupation Name(s) of Owner Occupant Occupation (if listed) 1918 - 1933 Bayside Canning Company Bayside Canning Company Fruit and vegetable canning Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 54     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 37 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Years of Ownership/Occupation Name(s) of Owner Occupant Occupation (if listed) 1933 - 1946 Sutter Packing Company Sutter Packing Company Fruit and vegetable canning 1946-1949 Safeway Sutter Packing Company Grocery stores and food processing 1949 - ca. 1978 Unknown Various tenants Unknown ca. 1978 – ca. 1998 WSJ Properties Various tenants Real estate and development ca. 1998 – ca. 2002 Unknown Various tenants Unknown ca. 2002 – ca. 2010 Robert Wheatley Properties (El Camino Center) Various tenants Real estate and development Unknown – Present The Sobrato Organization Various tenants Real estate and development Occupant History Occupants of the subject property have generally consisted of canning, packaging, and distribution companies and, more recently, commercial businesses and offices. The following record of occupants is based on historic building permits on file at the Palo Alto Historical Association, building permit applications available at the City of Palo Alto Development Center, and Palo Alto city directories available at Ancestry.com.48 It begins with businesses that occupied the entire cannery building at 340 Portage Avenue and then proceeds alphabetically by the address within the building under which the occupant was listed in the records listed above. Entire Building 1918-ca. 1928 Bayside Canning Company, fruit and vegetable canning ca. 1928-1949 Sutter Packing Company, fruit and vegetable canning 3200 Park Boulevard ca. 1964 – ca. 1978 Maximart, home goods 203 Portage Avenue 1962 James R W Packaging, packing, crating, and shipping 210 Portage Avenue 1997 Euphonics 250 Portage Avenue 1969 Malanco of California Inc, paper converters 48 Years of occupation are approximate based on Palo Alto city directories, public records available through Ancestry.com, and building permits at the City of Palo Alto Development Center. These records do not always specify the exact date of occupation. For the purpose of this table, only the known years of ownership or occupation are included. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 55     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 38 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. 1972 Bemiss & Jason Corp, shipping, receiving, paper products manufacturing 300 Portage Avenue 1962 Tubes & Cores Inc, paper products 1976 Ceilcote Company Inc, distribution office 303 Portage Avenue 1961-1965 Advance Transformer Co 1961-1976 James R W Packaging, packing, crating, and shipping 340 Portage Avenue 1985 Basket Galleria, Inc. ca. 1990-Present Fry’s Electronics 370 Portage Avenue 2002-2004 Lyncean Technologies 380 Portage Avenue 2006 Danger, Inc. 2016 – Present: Playground Global, technology Select Owner and Occupant Biographies The following biographies have been researched for longer-term owners and occupants. Thomas Foon Chew (1887-1931) and the Bayside Canning Company (1918-1936) Thomas Foon Chew was born in China around 1887, likely in the Loong Kai District of Guangdong Province, and became one of the richest and most influential Chinese- Americans in California. His father, Sai Yen Chew, emigrated to San Francisco when Thomas was a child, where he founded a small canning operation, Precinta Canning, around 1890. According to family members, Chew brought his son, Thomas, from China to San Francisco sometime around 1897, where he gained his first introduction to the canning business. Precinta Canning was located near Broadway and Sansome in San Francisco’s old Chinatown. The small cannery was equipped with a single 40- Figure 76: Thomas Foon Chew with two foremen at his canning plant in Alviso. Source: Our Town of Palo Alto. https://ourtownofpaloalto.wordpress.com/2016/12/30/histor y-of-mayfields-chinatown/ Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 56     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 39 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. horsepower boiler, focused solely on canning tomatoes, and produced no more than 100,000 cases of canned goods a year.49 During the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, the cannery was destroyed. Sometime after, Sai Yen Chew moved his business and family to the town of Alviso in Santa Clara County, where land was more affordable, weather was better, and where his business could be closer to the source of agricultural products for canning. Alviso had another advantage. As the main port town for shipping products from Santa Clara County to San Francisco, it offered the benefit of being able to more cheaply and efficiently transport goods. It was in Alviso that Sai Yen Chew brought Thomas into the family business and renamed it the Bayside Canning Company (Figure 76).50 While Sai Yen Chew’s cannery operation had been modest in size and output, Thomas brought a vigorous energy, determination, and innovative new methods to the business that transformed Bayside Canning into one of the largest companies in the region and, eventually, the world. Many of his innovations were aimed at improving production and efficiency. They included creating a machine to wash tomato boxes on an assembly line, using the cannery’s trucks to help workers from the surrounding region commute to his factories, and building boarding houses and cabins near his canneries to provide housing for his workers in a time when racial discrimination made it difficult for many Chinese immigrants to find housing. However, the innovation Chew is most known for is one that also gave him his nickname, “The Asparagus King.” Around 1920, Chew and his employee William de Back devised a method for canning green asparagus, something that had never been done successfully up to that point because the fragile vegetable would break or turn to mush using existing canning methods. By carefully sorting and trimming the asparagus and using square-shaped cans, Chew was able to surmount these challenges and begin canning asparagus for market. During his lifetime, Chew greatly expanded Bayside Canning beyond the first plant in Alviso. In 1918, he built the company’s second canning plant, the subject of this report, in the town of Mayfield near Palo Alto. This new cannery was strategically located along a spur of the railroad tracks known as the old “Los Gatos Cutoff,” where the Southern Pacific Railroad’s branch line to Los Gatos split off from the Southern Pacific’s main line. Railroad access was essential to the cannery’s operation, as it allowed for easy shipment of the plant’s canned goods to markets across the country.51 It was also built beside Matadero Creek, which provided a vital source of water that was necessary for the cannery’s operation. The Daily Palo Alto newspaper celebrated the arrival of the company and its new cannery as “a credit to the community which it graces” and a development that would “provide a dominant factor in the future prosperity of the Palo Alto section.”52 When the cannery opened in July of 1918, it employed a workforce of 350 workers, many of whom were women, who earned $4.75 a day.53 In addition to employing large numbers of workers at the plant itself, the cannery was also anticipated that it would create new employment opportunities at nearby farms and orchards. “It means that all untilled land will eventually be brought under cultivation, which is bound to result in the entire district feeling a beneficial effect from the prosperity that will surely accrue,” the newspaper predicted. “New homes will necessarily have to be erected in the vicinity of Mayfield and in South Palo Alto.”54 The cannery appears to have also spurred the construction of additional 49 Robin Chapman, “Thomas Foon Chew: The Vision of the Entrepreneur,” in Historic Bay Area Visionaries (Charleston, SC: The History Press, 2018), Kindle edition. 50 Ibid. 51 Graham, 9. 52 “New Cannery to Start July 8.” 53 Kirkbride, 2. 54 Ibid. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 57     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 40 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. canneries in the Palo Alto area. As construction neared completion on the Bayside cannery in 1918, three groups of investors sought to secure land in Palo Alto to build new canneries.55 Chew continued to expand his business, eventually operating another cannery in Isleton on the Sacramento River, and purchasing interest in the Field and Gross fish cannery in Monterey. He also started Tom Foon Chew Land Co., under which he bought extensive tracts of land in Yuba City and Merced County on which he planted rice and peach orchards.56 The Mayfield and Alviso canneries focused on the canning of peaches, pears, and tomatoes, while the cannery in Isleton specialized in packing asparagus. Despite continued discrimination against Chinese immigrants and Chinese-businesses, by 1920, Thomas Foon Chew had turned his Bayside Canning Company into the third largest canning company of fruits and vegetables in the world, behind only Del Monte and Libby.57 At its peak, the company produced 600,000 cases of canned goods a year and employed thousands of workers throughout California. For a time, the Mayfield cannery was the largest employer in the mid- Peninsula.58 The company hired not only Chinese workers, but also employed Japanese, Filipino, and European immigrant as well (Figure 77). 55 “Palo Alto May Get Another Cannery,” Palo Alto Times, May 7, 1918. 56 “Wealthy San Jose Canner Succumbs,” Oakland Tribune, February 24, 1931. Accessed at Newspapers.com. 57 “Santa Clara Valley Lives: Thomas Foon Chew: The Man who Made a Difference,” Los Altos Town Crier, October 10, 2018, accessed February 1, 2019, https://www.losaltosonline.com/news/sections/community/177-features/58700-santa-clara-valley-lives- thomas-foon-chew-the-man-who-made-a-difference 58 Jon Kinyon, “Mayfield’s Chinatown and Palo Alto’s Earliest Chinese Entrepreneurs,” Our Town of Palo Alto, December 20, 2016, accessed February 1, 2019, https://ourtownofpaloalto.wordpress.com/2016/12/30/history-of-mayfields-chinatown/. Figure 77: Workers at the Bayside Canning Company's plant in Mayfield in 1918. Source: Palo Alto Historical Association. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 58     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 41 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Chew, himself, became an influential figure in his community. He was the first Chinese-American man in Santa Clara Valley to join the Masons and was also a Shriner. By the time of his death, he was the richest Chinese-American in California. The company’s success was largely due to Chew’s drive and acumen as a business leader. He worked tirelessly and dealt with near-constant stress from running his business. He was also a smoker and suffered from asthma. In 1931, he died suddenly of pneumonia. Local newspapers reported that he was 42-years-old at the time. His death was a notable event across the state. Twenty-five thousand people attended his funeral, including the mayor of San Francisco, city manager of San Jose, and president of the California Chamber of Commerce.59 Without Chew at the head and with the effects of the Great Depression worsening, the Bayside Canning Company slid into receivership soon after Chew’s death. The company sold off its second plant in Mayfield section of Palo Alto in 1933 and finally ended operations at all of its facilities, including its first plant in Alviso plant, in 1936, just five years after Chew’s death. In 1973, the Bayside Canning Company’s Plant No. 1 in Alviso was listed on the National Register of Historic Places as part of the Alviso Historic District, which is now within the city limits of San Jose. The City of San Jose has renamed a street in Alviso his honor and placed four bronze historical markers to commemorate him.60 Sutter Packing Company (1928-1949) The Sutter Packing Company was a consortium of the largest peach growers from Sutter County that was based in Yuba City. The company formed in order to maximize the growers’ profits by cutting out the middle man and purchasing and running their own cannery. Around 1928, the Sutter Packing Company began operating the Bayside Canning Company’s cannery in Mayfield.61 As mentioned previously, the company spent $20,000 on new machinery at the cannery and on office renovations with the intention of tripling the plant’s capacity and increasing its workforce to 400 employees.62 In 1933, after Thomas Foon Chew’s death and the end of Bayside Canning Company’s operations at the site, the Sutter Packing Company purchased the cannery.63 Henry Carmean was the manager of the cannery from 1934 until the cannery’s closure in 1949.64 Employees largely consisted of local residents, migrant workers, and high school students, who often worked at the cannery during the summer months. Migrant workers lived in company cottages next to the cannery; and single men slept in a two-story bunkhouse nearby.65 The packing season began with spinach in spring, followed by apricots, peaches, pears, and lastly tomatoes in the summer. Peaches arrived at the cannery by rail from Yuba City, while spinach and tomatoes were transported by truck. After being sterilized in the retorts, trays of cans were transported to a cooling porch at the rear of the cannery. The following day, the cans were taken to the warehouses, where they were labeled and packed into cases to fill orders. Afterward, the cases would be loaded onto freight cars on the spur tracks along the cooling porch. The plant also included 59 Chapman. 60 Ibid. 61 Kirkbride, 3. 62 “$20,000 to be Spent on New Machinery of Cannery in Mayfield,” Palo Alto Times, May 17, 1928. 63 Graham, 10. 64 “Packing Company Has New Executive,” Palo Alto Times, December 18, 1934; “Prospective Buyer is Not Yet In Sight,” Palo Alto Times, 1949. The date of this article was cut off. 65 Kirkbride, 4. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 59     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 42 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. a laboratory where hot sauce and ketchup was tested for its bug content.66 The cannery’s machinery, meanwhile, was leased on a royalty basis.67 By 1940, it had become clear that the United States was headed for involvement in World War II. Recognizing that the war would mean an increased demand for canned goods around the world, Sutter Packing Company began a series of largescale improvement projects at the cannery complex on Portage Avenue. As mentioned previously, the company spent $175,000 in 1940 alone on improvements at the cannery, including constructing a new warehouse, extending two additional warehouses, relocating an office building, purchasing new machinery, and landscaping the site. The goal of these improvements was to increase the cannery’s capacity by 25 to 30 percent and expand its output by 50 percent.68 The company succeeded in increasing its production during the war, reserving 35 percent of its total production at the plant for the armed forces. In 1942, the company employed 1,500 men and women. Nevertheless, with so many men fighting in the war, the company struggled to find enough workers to meet the increased demand and repeatedly published urgent appeals in the local newspapers for more labor.69 In an effort to attract more laborers, the company constructed a tent city across from the cannery on El Camino Real to provide housing for 300 nightshift workers, complete with toilets, showers, and laundry facilities.70 The company was commended for its contribution to the war effort, receiving the “A” flag for its “outstanding food production” in 1942.71 After the war ended, the demand for canned goods remained high, as soldiers returned home and started families. The Sutter Packing Company continued to appeal for more workers to maintain its high levels of production during this period.72 In 1946, Sutter Canning Company came under the management, and later the ownership, of Safeway. Safeway used the cannery to supply canned goods for its chain of grocery stores. However, the relationship was short-lived. Just three years later, in 1949, Safeway closed the cannery on Portage Avenue. Spokesmen from Safeway cited the high price of wages to farmers and union workers in Palo Alto compared to San Jose and towns in the Central Valley.73 Safeway was also shifting its attention to backward integration and looked to acquire its suppliers, believing it could “obtain canned goods from other packers cheaper than it [could] process its own foods.”74 At the time of its closure, the company was the largest employer in Palo Alto, with approximately 1,000 workers on its staff. When the Palo Alto Times announced the closure of Sutter Packing Company, it lamented the loss of a “million-dollar industry” in Palo Alto due of the one million dollars in payroll that would disappear. The end of Sutter Packing Company, the newspaper wrote, meant the “unemployment of thousands of cannery workers who for a quarter of a century depended on the plant for their livelihood,” as well as the loss of an important buyer for local farmers.75 When the company finally closed its doors, approximately 1.5 million cases of processed foods were stored in its warehouses, which had to then be quickly shipped to other Safeway sites.76 66 Ibid. 67 Kirkbride, 4-5. 68 Graham, 10. 69 Kirkbride, 5. 70 Graham, 10. 71 Kirkbride, 5; “Sutter Packing Co. Given Army Award,” Palo Alto Citizen, August 11, 1942. 72 Graham, 11. 73 Million Dollar Industry Closes Down in Palo Alto,” Palo Alto Times, March 19, 1949; Graham, 9. 74 “Hope to Avert Shutdown At Sutter Co.,” Palo Alto Times, March 21, 1949. 75 Graham, 9, 11; “Million Dollar Industry Closes Down in Palo Alto.” 76 “Million Dollar Industry Closes Down in Palo Alto.” Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 60     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 43 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Since the end of canning operations at 340 Portage Avenue, the building has had a number of owners, primarily real estate developers, and the smaller buildings of which it is comprised have been leased out to a variety of commercial tenants. In 1949, at least a portion of the Sutter Packing Company complex was leased to Coca-Cola, who used it as a bottling plant for a time. In the 1960s and 1970s, tenants largely consisted of shipping, packaging, distribution, and paper product manufacturing businesses. Since the 1980s, the building has primarily been occupied by technology- related stores and offices. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 61     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 44 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. V. EVALUATION CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register-listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens. The California Register of Historical Resources follows nearly identical guidelines to those used by the National Register, but identifies the Criteria for Evaluation numerically. In order for a property to be eligible for listing in the California Register, it must be found significant at the local, state, or national level, under one or more of the following criteria. ▪ Criterion 1 (Events): Resources that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. ▪ Criterion 2 (Persons): Resources that are associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history. ▪ Criterion 3 (Architecture): Resources that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values. ▪ Criterion 4 (Information Potential): Resources or sites that have yielded or have the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation. The following section examines the eligibility of 340 Portage Avenue for listing in the California Register. Criterion 1 (Events) 340 Portage Avenue and the associated former office building to the southeast appear to be individually significant under Criterion 1 in association with historical events important to the history of Palo Alto. Agricultural industries, including fruit and vegetable canning, were once the dominant industries in Santa Clara County. The oldest portions of the cannery building, itself, were constructed in 1918 for the Bayside Canning Company, which was owned by Chinese immigrant and prominent canning mogul, Thomas Foon Chew. Under Chew, the Bayside Canning Company rose to become the third largest fruit and vegetable cannery in the world in the 1920s, behind only Libby and Del Monte. After Chew’s death, the cannery was subsequently purchased and operated for more than twenty years by the Sutter Packing Company, another fruit and vegetable cannery. The Sutter Packing Company significantly expanded the cannery building and its operations throughout the 1930s and 1940s as it prepared for and raced to meet the demands of World War II. The expansion projects included the construction of the extant office building at 3201-3225 Ash Street to the southeast of cannery building at 340 Portage Avenue. For a time, the cannery was the largest employer in the Mid- Peninsula, and when it closed in 1949, it was the largest employer in Palo Alto. The trajectory of canning operations at the plant —which began in the early twentieth century, peaked in the 1920s, increased production to meet the demands of World War II, and then quickly declined as residential Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 62     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 45 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. development and new industries began to replace agricultural industries in the postwar period— corresponds closely to the broad pattern of the history of the canning industry in Santa Clara County. The building is a rare surviving example of Palo Alto’s and Santa Clara County’s agricultural past. As a result, the building at 340 Portage Avenue does appear to be individually significant at the local level under Criterion 1. The period of significance under this criterion begins in 1918, when canning operations began at the site under the Bayside Canning Company, and ends in 1949, when the Sutter Packing Company’s canning operations at the building ended. Criterion 2 (Persons) The building at 340 Portage Avenue was originally built by Thomas Foon Chew in 1918, as the second canning plant for his Bayside Canning Company, and continued under his ownership until his death in 1931. Although Chew’s father had founded the cannery in Alviso (and an earlier cannery in San Francisco), Thomas Foon Chew is regarded as the primary driving force behind the Bayside Canning Company’s growth into the third largest fruit and vegetable cannery in the world by 1920. Chew introduced pioneering techniques and innovations that not only paved the way for his company’s success, but also impacted the wider canning industry, notably through his introduction of a successful method for canning green asparagus. “The Asparagus King,” as he became known, was one of the richest and most influential businessmen in the region at the time of his death and is commemorated regionally today through historical markers and a street in San Jose that bears his name. In spite of his association with 340 Portage Avenue and its continued use as a cannery until 1949, the building was not the first canning plant constructed by Chew, which is part of the National Register- listed Alviso Historic District, nor was it the site of his pioneering asparagus canning innovations, since the Bayside Canning Company primarily canned asparagus as its plant in Isleton. It is not clear from the historic record how the scale of operations or production at the Mayfield plant compared to Chew’s numerous other canning facilities and properties. In addition, the building was extensively expanded after Chew’s death, primarily when it was owned and operated by the Sutter Packing Company, and no longer bears a resemblance to its appearance during his lifetime. The building, therefore, does not retain enough integrity to be significant for its association with Thomas Foon Chew. Research did not identify any significant individuals related to the Sutter Packing Company or later occupants or owners of the building. As a result, the subject property, inclusive of the former cannery at 340 Portage Avenue and the former office building at 3201-3225 Ash Street, does not appear to be individually significant under Criterion 2. Criterion 3 (Architecture/Design) 340 Portage Avenue consists of what were originally several connected cannery facilities and associated warehouse buildings. It is primarily constructed of reinforced concrete with utilitarian wood post-and-beam construction and no ornamentation, consistent with their functional design. The former office building at 3201-3225 Ash Street, meanwhile, is a plain wood-frame building built in a vernacular style. Neither of the buildings appear to exhibit artistic value, nor are they distinctive examples of cannery building or industrial warehouse typologies. They also do not display innovative engineering or design elements. Therefore, the buildings do not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 3. Criterion 4 (Information Potential) The “potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of California” typically relates to archeological resources, rather than built resources. Evaluation of the subject property under Criterion 4 (Information Potential) is beyond the scope of this report. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 63     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 46 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. A windshield survey and preliminary research of buildings 50 years of older within the NVCAP Planning Area did not identify any potential historic resources or districts. The subject property, therefore, would not qualify as a contributor to a potential historic district. INTEGRITY In order to qualify for listing in any local, state, or national historic register, a property or landscape must possess significance under at least one evaluative criterion as described above and retain integrity. Integrity is defined by the California Office of Historic Preservation as “the authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity by the survival of certain characteristics that existing during the resource’s period of significance,” or more simply defined as “the ability of a property to convey its significance.”77 In order to evaluate whether 340 Portage Avenue retains sufficient integrity to convey its historic significance, Page & Turnbull used established integrity standards outlined by the National Register Bulletin: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Seven variables, or aspects, that define integrity are used to evaluate a resource’s integrity—location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. A property must stand up under most or all of these aspects in order to retain overall integrity. If a property does not retain integrity, it can no longer convey its significance and is therefore not eligible for listing in local, state, or national registers. The seven aspects that define integrity are defined as follows: Location is the place where the historic property was constructed. Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plans, space, structure and style of the property. Setting addresses the physical environment of the historic property inclusive of the landscape and spatial relationships of the building(s). Materials refer to the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern of configuration to form the historic property. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history. Feeling is the property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. Location: The subject property retains integrity of location because the former cannery and office buildings have not been moved since their construction. Setting: The subject property does not retain integrity of setting. Throughout the period during which the property was in use as a cannery, it was set between a railroad spur and Matadero Creek in 77 California Office of Historic Preservation, Technical Assistance Series No. 7: How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historical Resources (Sacramento: California Office of State Publishing, 4 September 2001) 11. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 64     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 47 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. a largely undeveloped area outside the main urban core of Palo Alto and surrounded primarily by farmland and scattered single-family residences. The subject parcel, itself, contained smaller ancillary warehouses and industrial buildings that were part of the cannery’s operation. Although Matadero Creek remains, the railroad tracks and majority of these associated industrial buildings have since been removed. Additionally, the surrounding area has become densely packed with residential and commercial development. Although there appears to have been an effort to incorporate industrial design elements into recently constructed infill, the area no longer reflects the sparsely developed industrial character of its historic setting. Design: The subject property retains integrity of design. Sanborn maps and historic and current aerial photographs indicate that the overall shape and massing of 340 Portage Avenue and 3201-3225 Ash Street have been minimally altered since the end of their use as a cannery in 1949. 340 Portage Avenue also retains a number of important exterior features that were essential to its function as a working cannery, including its original concrete loading docks and rear cooling porch with wood supports and an overarching shed awning. The prominent monitor and arched roofs, reinforced concrete walls, and interior wood truss ceilings and concrete floors remain intact and are visible evidence of its utilitarian, industrial design. 340 Portage Avenue has been repeatedly altered throughout its history; however, the majority of these alterations appear to date to the building’s period of use as a cannery. The building retained an appearance of several individual buildings in 1941; however, extensive construction and alterations were undertaken by the Sutter Packing Company over the following years that appear to have made an effort to unify the exterior appearance so that it appeared as a single building, much as it does today. The alignment of the building’s front facade along a common axis and raising of shorter, earlier rooflines appears to date to this period. A comparison of aerial photographs from the late 1940s and 1960s also indicates that the parapet across the primary northeast façade was present in 1948, when the building was still in use by the Sutter Packing Company. No building permits were found that identify major construction work at the building between 1949 and 1985. More recent alterations since the 1990s have been primarily limited to the replacement or filling in of windows and doors; re-roofing; addition of paved surface parking lots, wheelchair accessible ramps, and landscaping elements; earthquake stabilization; replacement of a small area of cladding with wood siding; and interior tenant improvements. The overall design of the former office building at 3201-3225 Ash Street appears to have been minimally altered since its use as part of the canning operations at the subject property. A comparison of the 1945 Sanborn map with historic and current aerial photographs show that the building has retained almost the same size, scale, and overall footprint over time. It remains a long, linear one-story wood frame building with double-hung wood windows and a wraparound porch. Despite the previously mentioned alterations, the subject property retains its most important design features, including the division of interior spaces at 340 Portage Avenue that represent the accretion of additions during its cannery use, and retains overall integrity of design. Materials: The subject property retains integrity of materials. 340 Portage Avenue continues to display its identity as an industrial building through its use of utilitarian materials, including its original reinforced concrete walls, concrete loading docks, wood post-and-beam construction, upper story wood frame windows, and corrugated metal cladding. Recent exterior material alterations identified by building permits and visual observations include the replacement of several exterior openings with aluminum frame windows and doors, re- roofing, and replacement of some sections of cladding along the rear façade with wood siding. Although they do not affect the building’s overall integrity, interior spaces also retain their original concrete floors and wood roof structures and supports, which, in some cases, Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 65     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 48 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. also display their original finishes. These strengthen the building’s overall retention of original materials. The former office building also retains its essential material character, including wood lap siding, double-hung wood windows, a wood wraparound porch, and shingled roof. Based on the known record of alterations and overall scale of the individual buildings, the subject property appears to retain the majority of its key exterior materials dating from its period of use as a cannery. Workmanship: The subject property retains integrity of workmanship. The skill and craftmanship required to construct 340 Portage Avenue remain visible in its wood post-and- beam construction and exposed wood truss ceilings, most prominently its paired monitor roofs and four bowstring trusses. Horizontal markings and indentations on the building’s walls, particularly at the south end of the building, are evidence of the process of creating the building’s board formed, reinforced concrete walls. Feeling: The subject property retains integrity of feeling. With its prominent monitor roofs, massive scale, and retention of recognizable industrial features and materials, such as corrugated metal and reinforced concrete walls, wood post-and-beam construction, and concrete loading docks and cooling porches, 340 Portage Avenue continues to convey its identity as an industrial building. Despite alterations to the building’s fenestration and setting, the building’s overall aesthetic and historic sense has been retained. Likewise, the building at 3201-3225 Ash Street also continues to convey the character of an early to mid- twentieth century office building, particularly in its orientation toward the cannery building, and retains its integrity of feeling. Association: The subject property retains integrity of association. Through its industrial materials, design, workmanship, and feeling, the building at 340 Portage Avenue retains enough physical features to convey its historic character as a historic canning facility, dating from the early to mid-twentieth century. Likewise, the former office building retains enough elements of its original design, materials, workmanship, location, and feeling to convey its association with the cannery at the subject property. Overall, the subject property retains integrity. CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES For a property to be eligible for national or state designation under one of the significance criteria, the essential physical elements (or character-defining features) that enable the property to convey its historic identity must be evident. To be eligible, a property must clearly contain enough of those characteristics, and these features must also retain a sufficient degree of integrity. Characteristics can be expressed in terms such as form, proportion, structure, plan, style, or materials. As an individually significant historic resource under Criterion 1 with a period of significance of 1918-1949 (date of cannery operations), the character-defining features that convey the building’s association with the history of canning in Santa Clara County, include: 340 Portage Avenue (Main Former Cannery Building) ▪ Form and massing o Long, linear massing o Composition of multiple smaller buildings o Primarily one-story, double-height volumes with taller central cannery section ▪ Varied roof forms and structures o Prominent paired monitor roofs Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 66     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 49 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. o Arched roofs o Visible gabled roofs ▪ Exterior wall materials o Reinforced, board formed concrete o Corrugated metal cladding ▪ Exterior cannery features o Concrete loading platforms o Cooling porch at rear of building o Exterior shed awnings with wood post-and-beam construction ▪ Fenestration o Wood frame windows o Garage door openings o Wire glass skylights over former warehouses • Landscape Features o Preserved curved path of the removed railroad spur tracks, represented in shape of parking lot pavement o Channel of Matadero Creek • Interior features o Exposed wood truss ceilings o Wood and concrete post and beam construction o Concrete floors 3201-3225 Ash Street (Former Office Building for the Sutter Packing Company) ▪ Form and massing o One-story, three-part linear massing o Orientation along Ash Street (formerly First Street) with primary entrance facing 340 Portage Avenue o Front-gabled roof o Wrap-around porch starting at front, northwest façade, and extending along the southwest façade. ▪ Exterior wall materials o Wood lap siding ▪ Fenestration o Double-hung, multi-lite, wood frame windows • Landscape Features o Channel of Matadero Creek Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 67     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 50 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. VI. CONCLUSION The former cannery building at 340 Portage Avenue was initially constructed in 1918 and greatly expanded during its continued use as a cannery through 1949, when the cannery closed. The property, including the former cannery and an associated former office building at 3201-3225 Ash Street, is eligible for individual listing in the California Register at the local level of significance under Criterion 1 for its association with the history of the canning industry in Santa Clara County. The buildings retain integrity. Thus, the property appears to qualify as a historic resource for the purposes of review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 68     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 51 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. VIII. REFERENCES CITED PUBLISHED WORKS California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistant Series No. 7, How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historic Resources. Sacramento: California Office of State Publishing, 4 September 2001. “Canning Industry.” In Dictionary of American History, edited by Stanley I. Kutler. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons/The Gale Group, 2003. Accessed at Encyclopedia.com. February 13, 2019. https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press- releases/canning-industry. Chapman, Robin. “Thomas Foon Chew: The Vision of the Entrepreneur.” In Historic Bay Area Visionaries. Charleston, SC: The History Press, 2018. Kindle edition. Graham, Douglas L. “The Story of Our Local Bayside Sutter Cannery, Featuring Barron Park Apricots, Pears and Tomatoes.” Barron Park Association Newsletter (Summer 2010) 9-11:. Kirkbride, Lillian Ledoyen. “Bayside Canning Company – Sutter Packing Compan..” The Tall Tree 16, no. 1 (October 1992): 2-6. Sawyer, Eugene T. History of Santa Clara County. Los Angeles: Historic Record Co. 1922. Tunc, Tanfer Emin and Annessa Ann Babic. “Food on the home front, food on the warfront: World War II and the American diet.” Food and Foodways 25, no. 2 (2017): 101-106. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07409710.2017.1311159. Ward, Winslow and the Palo Alto Historical Association. Palo Alto: A Centennial History. Palo Alto Historical Association: Palo Alto, CA, 1993. UNPUBLISHED RECORDS Archives and Architecture, LLC. County of Santa Clara Historic Context Statement. 2012. Brown, Mary. San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco Modern Architecture and Landscape Design, 1935-1970, Historic Context Statement, Final Draft. January 12, 2011. City of Palo Alto Building Inspection office. Building permits. “Comprehensive Plan.” City of Palo Alto. Revised 2017. Dames & Moore. “Final Survey Report – Palo Alto Historical Survey Update: August 1997-August 2000.” Prepared for the City of Palo Alto Planning Division. February 2001. Dames & Moore. “Study Priority 1 and Study Priority 2 Properties: Preliminary Assessments of Eligibility for the National Register or California Register.” Prepared for the City of Palo Alto Planning Division. January 1999. Palo Alto Historical Association (Research notes and Property file collection, untitled news clippings from Palo Alto Daily News, Palo Alto Times, and Palo Alto Live Oak). Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 69     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 52 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. Palo Alto Planning Department Files (NA (93-ARB-19)). INTERNET SOURCES “A Flash History of Palo Alto.” Quora. http://www.quora.com/How-is-the-historical-city-Mayfield- CA-related-to-Palo-Alto-CA. Bowling, Matt. “The Meeting on the Corner: The Beginning of Mayfield’s End.” Palo Alto History.org. http://www.paloaltohistory.com/the-beginning-of-mayfields-end.php. Danner, Peter. “A Timeline of the Palo Alto Lawn Bowls Club,” https://www.palbc.org/history/. “Depression, War, and the Population Boom.” Palo Alto Medical Foundation- Sutter Health. http://www.pamf.org/about/pamfhistory/depression.html. “Gamble, Edwin and Elizabeth L. House,” PCAD. http://pcad.lib.washington.edu/building/16676/. “History of Stanford.” Stanford University. http://www.stanford.edu/about/history/. Kinyon, Jon. “Mayfield’s Chinatown and Palo Alto’s Earliest Chinese Entrepreneurs.” Our Town of Palo Alto, December 20, 201. Accessed February 1, 2019. https://ourtownofpaloalto.wordpress.com/2016/12/30/history-of-mayfields-chinatown/. “Leslie I. Nichols,” PCAD. http://pcad.lib.washington.edu/person/5922/ “Mayfield,” Palo Alto Wiki. Website accessed 11 June 2013 from: http://www.paloaltowiki.org/index.php/Mayfield “Old Palo Alto.” www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2009/01/19/old-palo-alto “Palo Alto, California.” Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Alto,_California#cite_note- 12. “Palo Alto Historic Buildings Inventory.” http://www.pastheritage.org/inventory.html Robertson, Mark. “Looking Back: Canning in the Valley of Heart’s Deligh.,” San Jose Public Library blog. May 23, 2013. Accessed February 5, 2019. https://www.sjpl.org/blog/looking-back- canning-valley-hearts-delight. “Roller Hapgood Tinney.” http://www.shoppaloalto.com/rollerhapgoodtinney/?listing.action=about Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Maps. http://archive.org. San Jose Chamber of Commerce. “Valley of Heart’s Delight” pamphlet. 1922. San Jose Public Library, California Room. Accessed at Online Archive of California. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 70     Historic Resource Evaluation 340 Portage Avenue Draft Palo Alto, California April 11, 2019 - 53 - Page & Turnbull, Inc. “Santa Clara Valley Lives: Thomas Foon Chew: The Man who Made a Difference.” Los Altos Town Crier. October 10, 2018. Accessed February 1, 2019. https://www.losaltosonline.com/news/sections/community/177-features/58700-santa- clara-valley-lives-thomas-foon-chew-the-man-who-made-a-difference Spring, Dr. Kelly A. “Food Rationing and Canning in World War II.” National Women’s History Museum. September 13, 2017. Accessed February 13, 2019. https://www.womenshistory.org/articles/food-rationing-and-canning-world-war-ii. Statz, Stephanie Esther Fuglaar. “California’s Fruit Cocktail: A History of Industrial Food Production, the State, and the Environment in Northern California.” PhD diss., University of Houston, 2012. Stoller-Conrad, Jessica. “Canning History: When Propaganda Encouraged Patriotic Preserves.” NPR. August 3, 2012. Accessed February 13, 2019. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/08/02/157777834/canning-history-when- propaganda-encouraged-patriotic-preserves. United States federal census records. Ancestry.com. www.ancestry.com. “Webster Wood Apartments.” https://www.apartmentfinder.com/California/Palo-Alto-Wood- Apartments. NEWSPAPER ARTICLES “$20,000 to be Spent on New Machinery of Cannery in Mayfield.” Palo Alto Times. May 17, 1928. “Hope to Avert Shutdown at Sutter Co.” Palo Alto Times. March 21, 1949. “Million Dollar Industry Closes Down in Palo Alto.” Palo Alto Times. March 19, 1949. “More Holiday Fun with These New Kelvinators to Help You.” San Francisco Examiner. November 16, 1964. “New Building Projects at Sutter.” Daily Palo Alto Times. March 15, 1945. “New Cannery to Start July 8.” Daily Palo Alt. July 3, 1918. “Palo Alto May Get Another Cannery.” Palo Alto Times. May 7, 1918. Palo Alto Citizen. August 7, 1942. “Sutter Packing Co. Given Army Award.” Palo Alto Citizen. August 11, 1942. “Sutter Packing Co. Spends $175,000 on Improvements.” Palo Alto Times. June 6, 1940. “Sutter Plant.” Palo Alto Times. January 27, 1945. “Wealthy San Jose Canner Succumbs.” Oakland Tribune. February 24, 1931. Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 71     Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 72     417 S. Hill Street, Suite 211 Los Angeles, California 90013 213.221.1200 / 213.221.1209 fax 2401 C Street, Suite B Sacramento, California 95816 916.930.9903 / 916.930.9904 fax 417 Montgomery Street, 8th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 415.362.5154 / 415.362.5560 fax ARCHITECTURE PLANNING & RESEARCH PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY www.page-turnbull.com Item 2 Attachment C     Packet Pg. 73