“A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree without roots.” — Marcus Garvey.
A few months ago, I checked out the book, “San Mateo, A Centennial History,” by Mitchell P. Postel, from our beautiful downtown library. I grew up in the Bay Area and have lived in San Mateo for almost 14 years, and love learning about its history. What I noticed, is that so many of the buildings pictured in this book are no longer here. The history of San Mateo is disappearing and once it is gone, it is gone.
After some research, I realized there is no organization working to preserve our city’s history, other than the San Mateo Heritage Alliance, recently formed by a group of concerned citizens after the demolition of multiple historic homes in their neighborhood. The city has many competing priorities, but preserving its history should be one of them, and a trip to the San Mateo County History Museum will elucidate why.
To put this in perspective, Redwood City has a strong focus on historic preservation and its website states:
“Preservation of Redwood City’s historic resources is of great significance for those who live and work here today, and for the generations who will be here in the future.
The Historic Resources Advisory Committee advises the Planning Commission regarding the implementation of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and recommends historic designation of local landmarks and districts, performs design review of changes to historic buildings, and is involved in other historic preservation-related activities.”
Redwood City’s Historic Resources Advisory Committee is made up of five members appointed to three-year terms by the Planning Commission.
Redwood City also provides a Historic Preservation Resource Library on its website:
“Redwood City is rich with historic resources. As an owner of a historic resource, it can sometimes be difficult to locate information about historic preservation best practices. This Resource Library is meant to act as a one-stop source for helpful information.”
Redwood City also joins hundreds of other cities across the country to observe National Historic Preservation Month throughout May, during which residents can enjoy historic walking tours and students take part in field trips to downtown buildings listed on the National Register of
Recommended for you
Historic Places. Its website states:
“Preserving our historic resources is vital to ensuring the success of our new vibrant Downtown commercial and residential environment, and to maintaining the character and heritage of our City.”
Perhaps there is an opportunity for San Mateo to work with Redwood City to learn how it is preserving its historical sites, so we can do the same.
I am sad to see so many of these historic buildings disappearing. Another book from the library, Images of America: San Mateo by Gregory N. Zompolis, features a picture of 415 Fairfax Ave., a charming home built in 1933 by Mr. and Mrs. J.M. Chalmers, at the cost of $7,500. It was recently razed.
Another beautiful example of architecture circa 1910, is 615 Hurlingham Ave. It is in pristine condition and set to be demolished, and replaced with a modernist structure. In spite of its excellent condition and likely historic significance, demolition has been approved. This will keep happening until the city understands the importance of what is being lost, but by then it may be too late.
What is puzzling to me, is the recent opposition to creating a historic district in Baywood. The argument about losing property rights seems like a guise, since these individuals seem more interested in making a future profit than saving San Mateo’s disappearing history.
Less Red Tape, the organization created by those opposed to preserving Baywood’s historic homes, has turned the discussion into a smear campaign by attacking neighbors in Baywood. This discussion should not be personal. It is about preserving history, and only that. Preserving history should bring neighbors closer together, not turn them against one another, and this is disheartening to see.
The only red to be seen in saving the history of San Mateo is the big red bow we are wrapping it in, as a gift for future generations.
On Thursday, Feb. 1, the city will be hosting an informational community Zoom meeting on historic resources and districts from 6-8 p.m. It is important that we as residents attend to learn what the city is currently doing and what it is planning for ongoing historic preservation and encourage officials to do more. Please register for the meeting at cityofsanmateo.org/calendar.aspx?EID=16067. To learn more about the San Mateo Heritage Alliance please visit smheritage.org.
Michelle Maccarra works in biotech, is a proud mother, San Mateo resident, fourth generation Bay Area native, member of the San Mateo Heritage Alliance, docent-in-training at the San Mateo County History Museum, and a strong advocate of preserving history and trees.
(19) comments
Thank you, Michelle! Beautifully stated.
Connie, I wish someone could point out that Seema, as a San Mateo Planning Commissioner, proves Michelle Maccara's point! RWC cares about its history and preservation; that value is inherent in its general plan and guides how it treats historic resources. Seema repeatedly argues against historic preservation on social media and is aligned with the YIMBY Coalition. Our Planning Commissioners are supposed to be unbiased and should understand that the City's historic preservation regulations do not apply to historic districts outside of Downtown and Glazenwood historic districts. This is clearly part of the problem that Michelle so eloquently described. The "broad-based support" is for historic preservation" in Baywood.
20/20 Vision, you just did call Seema out, and I thank you! We need our city leaders to listen to residents, not special interests.
All San Mateo Commissioners are appointed by Council Members to represent a broad based set of values that make up our city. Are you suggesting that commissioners are not entitled to free speech just as you are trying to deny individuals their property rights?
They are entitled to free speech but should not be providing incorrect information. Historic Districts bring no obligation to the property or property owner. There are no rights taken away.
The City of San Mateo's Historic District FAQ and Historic Resources handout provide a good overview of obligations and restrictions that historic designation places on property owners:
https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/4784/Historic-Districts---Frequently-Asked-Qu
https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/DocumentCenter/View/64534/Historic-Resources-Info-Handout?bidId=
A member of the San Mateo Heritage Alliance advocating for a historic district? Not surprising at all. What is surprising, and what sticks out most in this letter is the sentence, “The argument about losing property rights seems like a guise, since these individuals seem more interested in making a future profit than saving San Mateo’s disappearing history.” So, essentially, an admission that a historic designation does cause a loss in property values. Something many folks, especially realtors, have been saying. Perhaps if the San Mateo Heritage Alliance provides the money to maintain a historic home as well as paying the difference in sales price to an owner when and if they decide to sell, the heritage alliance would have a more compelling argument. And they’ll have skin in the game. BTW, for an example of how historic designations are working in Palo Alto, check out https://www.paloaltoonline.com/2023/11/09/after-blowback-from-residents-palo-alto-slows-down-push-for-historical-designations/ and https://www.paloaltoonline.com/2023/10/30/palo-alto-homeowners-push-back-against-proposed-historical-designations/.
Thank you Terence Y. Beautifully stated! And those articles are great.
Terrence, you are being fooled here - the developer and construction contractor are looking to line their own pockets, and not anyone else. They make money by tearing down and rebuilding things. The rest of us in the neighborhood make money by ensuring our homes are cared for and surrounded by the beauty that makes this neighborhood special. Historic designation helps, not hinders, us.
Connieuweiss, thank you for your response but you’ll need to explain why you feel I’m being fooled. (I believe there’s a word limit for comments of close to 750 words so feel free to elaborate and provide support for your arguments.) Speaking of arguments, an argument can easily be made that anyone working for a paycheck is lining their own pockets. In the case of a construction contractor, their overall prices may be higher because a historic designation and associated design guidelines may require specialized materials of construction, along with additional permitting and inspections. And you’ll need to expand on how anyone in the neighborhood makes money because per the LTE, there’s already an admission that historic designations cause a loss in property values (in agreement with just about all articles on the subject). Technically, you can make an argument that you may make money via higher property values, but not as much money as if you weren’t saddled with a historic designation.
BTW, for those interested in follow-ups to Gennady Sheyner’s reporting, see also https://www.paloaltoonline.com/2024/01/03/objections-mount-to-palo-alto-proposal-to-expand-historic-building-inventory/ and https://www.paloaltoonline.com/2024/01/12/board-no-historical-listings-without-homeowner-consent/. Of note are the interviews regarding whether some homes have historic significance. Perhaps only homeowners with skin in the game should decide whether a historical designation is desired for their home. They can decide whether they’re willing to live with potentially lower property values and potentially higher costs when remodeling.
Terrence, it’s not my style to drown people in words, but state things as clearly and succinctly as possible. Please see: https://www.smheritage.org/faqs/exploding-the-myths - myth #2 covers property values. Have you walked through the beautiful Glazenwood district in Hayward Park? It is a registered historic district and no one is saying they worry for their property values there. And I would hope the construction contractor would focus his business on restoring historic homes rather than use scare tactics, misinformation, and attack neighbors to push his agenda.
I have met with Less Red Tape to listen to their concerns and I see no evidence that they are motivated by "profit" or "lining their own pockets". On the contrary, they seem to be a broad coalition of regular homeowners and neighbors who are concerned about the increased cost and difficulty of maintaining and upgrading their homes. In fact, their concerns sound similar in nature to those I hear about Reach Codes, which I know several San Mateo Heritage Alliance Board members have expressed concerns about as well.
The only mention of profit I've seen is on San Mateo Heritage Alliance's website which calls out increased property values as a benefit of historic designation.
Connieuweiss, a decidedly unsatisfying response. You say it’s not your style to drown people in words but you’ll attempt to drown me in words via a site created and curated specifically for historic preservation? The use of “may” and “should” is also understood to mean “may not.” And I need a little help on Myth #2... What is the cache (sic) that sets historic designation apart? What is it they’re storing or hiding for future use? Regardless, the LTE author in favor of historic designation is also under the impression historic designation causes a loss in property values, in agreement with realtors and objective reporting.
But again, if increased property values is what the San Mateo Heritage Alliance believes, Heritage members should have no problems providing additional funds to maintain historic homes as well as paying the difference in sales price to an owner when and if they decide to sell. Oh yes, let’s not forget reimbursing the homeowner for additional time and money spent dealing with more red tape. Instead of only talking about increased value, how about the Heritage Alliance standing behind their assertions by putting skin in the game rather than using misinformation and attacking neighbors to push their agenda (and that’s just in this thread). Why wouldn’t the Heritage Alliance be willing to do that? It’s a win-win.
More misinformation from a red taper. The key opponents are a contractor and a SF condo developed. As we have stated, home values are higher in Glazenwood Historic District.
Palo Alto is an inappropriate comparison because the article describes individually eligible properties, not a historic district. For facts go to www.smheritage.org.
Thank you Michelle. You speak from the heart. Redwood City seems to be way ahead of us here in SM in terms of preserving a charming downtown. We enjoy our old home in SM, and it not at all more expensive to maintain. We did upgrades like energy efficient windows.... matched to the old style. Not an extra cost due to age of house. Same with roof and solar. And we have helped maintained the historical charm of our neighborhood.
I find it troubling that someone would want to spend $2.5M-$3.0M for something they do not like and want to destroy and spend another $1-$2M to rebuild.
Hi Thomas, Did anyone ask you to make a donation to help them shoulder the cost?
I agree, Thomas.
Many residents want to be exempted from this dubious honor. How can we
be exempted? The Alliance is depriving us of a voice as property owners.
The Alliance could have chosen from two other options, but they chose
the one that deprives us a voice. Go ahead and get your own individual
historical designation. Give people the right to chose what happens to
their property.
Blanket Historic Districts encumber our properties forever. Now Mayor
Nash plans to follow suit and support her husband who is a founding
member of The Alliance and get an ordinance written to codify historic
districts city wide. Just wait and see on this one. People told me
this from the beginning.
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.