Thank you for your excellent 4/28/26 editorial exposing the dangerous flaws in San Mateo’s proposed historic ordinance. However, none of your recommended actions are included in the latest draft ordinance to go in front of the City Council on Monday, May 4. Despite what city staff might have you believe, the structures listed in the 1989 survey will not be included in the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI). While they have been added to the definition of Historic Resources, they will be treated no differently than any other property. A careful reading of Section 27.66.090 (a) reveals that only a regular planning application review will be required for a major alteration/addition to eligible historic resources, such as 1989 survey properties. So while city staff asserts that review will be required for properties included on the 1989 historic survey, this review is no different than the process required for major alteration/additions to any home in San Mateo, and not subject to the Certificate of Appropriateness process required for properties on the HRI. So while on its face it looks like historic structures identified in the 1989 survey are included; in reality, they will not be afforded any additional protection. Don’t be fooled.
I urge residents to e-mail the City Council immediately. Ask them to implement the recommendations outlined in the editorial. “May the 4th” be with the almost 200 historic properties that give character to our neighborhoods and make our city so special.
Folks, don’t be fooled by the rhetoric around historic structures and the attempts to change the proposed historic ordinance. These folks want to create more red tape and make it more expensive for homeowners to make changes to their (yes, their) homes. Do you want someone else dictating what you can do to your home? Just because “they” think it is historic? Remember, just because something is old doesn’t make it historic.
Everything over a certain threshold, whether it be 50, 75 or 100 years old should be assessed for its historical relevance and integrity. Not everything old should be considered worthy of protection. The historic resource commission can determine on an individual basis.
Thanks for your response, Ms. Weiss, but who determines what is historic and worthy of protection? One person’s historic is another person’s regular house, so to speak. To wit, Confederate statues were toppled by those who felt “the other side’s” history wasn’t worthy. Feel free to use as much private/donor money to determine historical relevance as often as you want. The ultimate decision, however, should be made by the owner. Just remind yourself whether you want to “save” houses by historic figures. To wit, is anything named after Cesar Chavez going to remain historic?
If you attended last night’s City Council meeting, you will know that there will be a Historic Resources Commission that will be staffed with professionals that understand his historic significance.
Lisa, thank you for this information. Growing up on the East Coast, we cherish our history as represented by the architecture of the time. It’s confounding to me that so many people here have been convinced that historic status is cumbersome when, in fact, it’s an honor and makes the area much more attractive for people to live in or visit. We’ve just seen how truth has led to jubilant celebration on the historic Glazenwood community. Let’s not stop there and risk losing the unique character our historic buildings provide for a lovely San Mateo.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(5) comments
Folks, don’t be fooled by the rhetoric around historic structures and the attempts to change the proposed historic ordinance. These folks want to create more red tape and make it more expensive for homeowners to make changes to their (yes, their) homes. Do you want someone else dictating what you can do to your home? Just because “they” think it is historic? Remember, just because something is old doesn’t make it historic.
Everything over a certain threshold, whether it be 50, 75 or 100 years old should be assessed for its historical relevance and integrity. Not everything old should be considered worthy of protection. The historic resource commission can determine on an individual basis.
Thanks for your response, Ms. Weiss, but who determines what is historic and worthy of protection? One person’s historic is another person’s regular house, so to speak. To wit, Confederate statues were toppled by those who felt “the other side’s” history wasn’t worthy. Feel free to use as much private/donor money to determine historical relevance as often as you want. The ultimate decision, however, should be made by the owner. Just remind yourself whether you want to “save” houses by historic figures. To wit, is anything named after Cesar Chavez going to remain historic?
If you attended last night’s City Council meeting, you will know that there will be a Historic Resources Commission that will be staffed with professionals that understand his historic significance.
Lisa, thank you for this information. Growing up on the East Coast, we cherish our history as represented by the architecture of the time. It’s confounding to me that so many people here have been convinced that historic status is cumbersome when, in fact, it’s an honor and makes the area much more attractive for people to live in or visit. We’ve just seen how truth has led to jubilant celebration on the historic Glazenwood community. Let’s not stop there and risk losing the unique character our historic buildings provide for a lovely San Mateo.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.