CITY OF SAN MATEO
Out CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 16 Section Name: OLD BUSINESS Account Number: 25-3112 File ID: 25-10745 TO: City Council
FROM: Alex Khojikian, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Community Development Department
MEETING DATE: January 26, 2026
SUBJECT:
Historic Policy Effort – Update on Draft Historic Policies and Council Direction RECOMMENDATION:
Receive a presentation on the Draft Citywide Historic Context Statement and Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance Update, receive public comments, and provide staff with direction on how to proceed with updating the draft policy documents and the timeline for scheduling public hearings.
BACKGROUND:
San Mateo's General Plan 2040 sets the policy framework for how issues such as historic resources and preservation should be addressed. The Community Design and Historic Resources Element addresses the topic of historic and cultural resources, and includes goals, policies, and actions that outline the framework for how the City should approach historic resources and preservation. Specifically, Goal CD-5 addresses preserving historic and culturally important resources to maintain San Mateo's special identity and continuity with the past and includes seven policies and six actions to support achievement of this goal.
On June 17, 2024, the City Council held a study session to consider options for how to proceed with updating the City's local historic policies and codes pursuant to the actions in the General Plan. The study session resulted in the Council directing staff to prioritize updating the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance and preparing a Citywide Historic Context Statement. The work would include creation of a framework for the designation of historic resources and districts, establishment of review and permitting procedures for historic alterations and demolitions, consistency with Federal and State standards and guidelines, and alignment with the other goals and policies outlined in the General Plan.
In the summer and fall of 2024, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a qualified historic consultant to support the historic policy update work directed by Council. Based on overall professional experience, quality of proposal, responses to interview questions and composition of the consultant team, staff identified Rincon Consultants, Inc. as being the best qualified to support the City's historic policy update effort. On January 21, 2025, the City Council voted to appropriate funding to complete the historic policy update effort and to approve a professional services agreement with Rincon Consultants to support this historic policy work.
On June 2, 2025, the City Council held a study session to receive an update on the policy effort and provide staff with direction ahead of community outreach and engagement. Following receipt of a presentation that outlined the background of San Mateo’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, key issues and opportunities for improving the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the outreach and engagement strategy, and a review of different approaches to key elements of an effective historic preservation ordinance, including owner consent, the Council provided direction to shape the Historic Preservation Ordinance update. Direction from Council included that the Historic Preservation Ordinance update should include a concise set of definitions; update existing ordinance language that is too rigid, inconsistent, and/or detailed; and
CITY OF SAN MATEO
establish a reviewing body. The Council also directed staff to assess if the Community Relation’s Commission (CRC) instead of the Planning Commission was the most appropriate reviewing body to support administration of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. The Council agreed that the local historic designation criteria should generally align with the California Register of Historical Resources criteria, but advised that the criteria could potentially include additional criteria to acknowledge the city’s unique history and be informed by the results of community engagement efforts. Council also confirmed that the Historic Preservation Ordinance should include a mechanism to designate local historic districts, and such designations should require owner consent but did not set the level of consent that should be required for a district application to move forward. Finally, Council provided direction that the Historic Preservation Ordinance update should include owner consent for local listing in the form of affirmative consent, i.e. the affected property owner‘s clear agreement, for all local listings.
Since the June City Council study session, the project team has held a number of public outreach and engagement activities to introduce the project to the community and gather their feedback to be incorporated into the Historic Context Statement and updated Historic Preservation Ordinance, as outlined in the Outreach and Engagement Plan published in May 20251. To date, outreach activities have included three focus group meetings, two virtual workshops, and three pop- up events and have reached over 200 community members. Key takeaways have included a general recognition of the value of San Mateo’s cultural heritage and a desire for a clear, consistent process for identifying and regulating the City’s historic resources.
DISCUSSION:
Below is a summary of the work and activities that have happened over the past six months since the June City Council study session and an overview of some key policy questions that staff is seeking direction on before final drafts of the Historic Preservation Ordinance and Citywide Historic Context Statement are published and public hearings are scheduled.
Draft Historic Context Statement
The Draft Citywide Historic Context Statement (Attachment 1) was developed based on research into San Mateo’s history, feedback from community members and guidance from the National Park Service and California Office of Historic Preservation. The Historic Context Statement highlights trends and patterns of development, as well as their relationship to significant eras, moments, communities and people in San Mateo’s history. It is also a policy document that provides a valuable framework to guide consistent evaluation of the historic significance of properties and their potential eligibility for local listing.
The Historic Context Statement does not include property evaluations or any in-depth surveys. The Historic Context Statement follows industry best practices, and is organized by significant periods, themes, and property types and presented chronologically. Information gathered from community outreach events where we asked people what places in San Mateo are meaningful to them are reflected in the property types that were identified as well as in the buildings, places, and development trends that were included in the narrative. The draft is still being updated with information on notable architects, builders, and designers and guidance for assessing significance. The draft was made available to the public for review the week of November 24, 2025 and was a key focus of the January 21, 2026 community workshop. All community input received since the first draft was published will be considered and, as applicable, incorporated into the final draft that is published later this winter.
Council Direction
Based on the draft that was published, and the subsequent public comments received, does the City Council have any comments or direction related to the draft Context Statement? Community Outreach and Engagement
The Outreach and Engagement Strategy to support the Historic Policy Update Effort focused on multiple entry points for community participation. The strategy was designed to offer a range of opportunities for residents, organizations, and interested parties to share input and perspectives to inform the update process. Project outreach began in February 2025 1 Outreach and Engagement Strategy link
CITY OF SAN MATEO
and will extend though the adoption hearings in Spring 2026. To date, the project team has conducted two City Council Study Sessions, three focus groups, two community workshops, online outreach and an engagement tool (digital time capsule), and three mobile workshops designed to reach a broad range of community members. The key takeaways, thus far, have been that the community generally recognizes that San Mateo has cultural and architectural diversity that should be preserved, but desires improved clarity and transparency in the process of identifying and managing resources.
Participants in public outreach activities were generally interested in a balanced approach to policies that protect San Mateo’s heritage while allowing for reasonable flexibility for property owners. Additional information about the outreach activities, community input and key take-aways can be found in the Outreach and Engagement Summary Report (Attachment 2). All written public comments that have been submitted through January 16, 2026 are included as an appendix to the Report. Additional public comments received after this date are included as Attachment 4.
Most recently, a virtual community workshop was held on the evening of January 21, 2026. The event included 55 attendees and provided an overview of the draft context statement and draft ordinance, examples of how the updated ordinance would be applied, multiple polling questions, and multiple comment periods to receive input and answer questions. One of the polling questions sought input on the consent threshold that should go into the updated ordinance, and 60% of the respondents (45) expressed support for requiring a super majority (66% or 75%) of the properties within a proposed district to affirmatively consent. Some of the reoccurring questions/comments included support for Glazenwood as a historic district and clarification on its current status (an eligible historic district), what properties will be subject to the updated ordinance (locally listed resources only), will contributors in historic districts and individually listed properties require Certificates of Appropriateness for exterior alterations (yes, but non-contributors will not be subject to any additional review), clarification that state/federal listings will require a local listing action to be added to the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, and clarification about when CEQA review is required per State law. Additional details from this community workshop will be provided as part of the staff presentation at the meeting.
Additional planned outreach and engagement activities include two more focus groups – one focused on youth and one focused on underserved communities – and one additional community workshop. The purpose of the remaining focus groups is to provide a checkpoint with underrepresented communities to support broader dialogue on the components of historic preservation and add additional feedback to support the representation of San Mateo’s diverse communities within the historic policy effort. The last community workshop, which is currently scheduled to happen post adoption, is intended to provide technical guidance on how to use the Historic Context Statement and Historic Preservation Ordinance and their associated tools and guidance documents. Resources to support community understanding will include screening criteria to assess properties for potential historic eligibility ahead of a historic resource evaluation being required, detailed overviews, submittal requirements for local listing and proposed projects on locally listed historic resources and updated FAQs.
Council Direction
Staff is looking for Council input and direction on the remaining community outreach and engagement activities that are planned. Has there been sufficient outreach and engagement for this policy update effort to move forward with public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council, or are there specific additional activities that should be completed before public hearings are scheduled? If additional outreach and engagement are directed, the timeline for project completion may be extended and/or additional money from the project’s contingency fund may be necessary to complete the work.
Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance
The Historic Preservation Ordinance update has been drafted in response to City Council direction and community input, and to meet current best practices and include all essential elements for an effective historic preservation ordinance. The draft Historic Preservation Ordinance update includes the following features, which are missing from City’s existing Historic Preservation Ordinance:
Establishment of a reviewing authority;
Procedures and criteria for designating local historic resources; Consideration of the economic effects of designation;
Establishment of appeals processes;
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Provisions for enforcement; and
Clear and concise definitions.
In addition to formerly missing elements, the Historic Preservation Ordinance update includes improved and clarified procedures for actions subject to review, and provides a clarified process for the types of actions that would be required to go to the reviewing authority versus decisions that can be made at the staff level. A sentiment repeated through ongoing community outreach and engagement was the desire for a transparent, consistent, and clear process in the nomination and project review process for historic resources. The additions and improvements included in the Historic Preservation Ordinance update are aimed at providing that desired clarity. It should also be noted that, as currently drafted per earlier Council direction, the ordinance is only applicable to locally designated historic resources. Resources designated at the State or Federal level would not be added to the City’s Historic Resources Inventory or subject to the updated Ordinance unless a subsequent local designation occurs.
Of particular interest to San Mateo residents, as heard through community input efforts, was the identification and treatment of local historic districts. In response to community feedback and Council direction, the process proposed for nominating a local historic district includes a robust notification requirement with a community meeting obligation and a strong element of affirmative owner consent that requires both an owner-led application process as well as a petition of the effected property owners, confirming that a specified percentage of affected property owners support the application.
That percentage is currently undetermined in the draft ordinance as staff is seeking Council direction on that topic. The Historic Preservation Ordinance update was made available for public review the week of December 15, 2025 and was a key focus of the January 21, 2026 community workshop.
Council Direction
Staff are looking for Council direction on the following items related to the Historic Preservation Ordinance update:
Thresholds for Owner Consent in Historic Districts:
oCity Council previously provided that eligibility requirements for listing local historic districts should include a majority threshold for owner consent but held off on setting a specific percentage. Thresholds may be a simple majority (50% + 1) or a supermajority (2/3 or 3/4).
oWhat percentage of property owners within a proposed historic district should be required to support a historic district nomination for it to proceed to City Council for designation? Eligibility Criteria:
oTo date, the public outreach and engagement process has not resulted in the identification of local criteria for designation in addition to the CRHR criteria, which are as follows:
Association with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of San Mateo’s or California’s history and cultural heritage;
Association with the lives of persons or communities important to San Mateo’s or California’s past; Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to prehistory or history. oAre there any additional criteria that should be included in the local designation criteria? Naming Conventions:
oThe local inventory is drafted to be called the “San Mateo Historic Resources Inventory,” which would be comprised of individual locally designated properties called “Listed Resources” and locally designated historic neighborhoods called “Historic Districts.”
oOther options for naming conventions include: Landmarks, Historic Resources Inventory Property, Protected Resource, Designated Resource, etc.
oDoes the Council have any opinion on the drafted naming conventions? Historic Review Body
As currently proposed in draft Historic Preservation Ordinance, the reviewing body will be responsible for tasks such as making recommendations on applications to add and/or remove properties to the San Mateo Historic Resources Inventory, reviewing applications for Certificates of Appropriateness (alterations to a Listed Resource or Contributor within
CITY OF SAN MATEO
a Historic District), including evaluating proposed projects against applicable design guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, and making recommendations on applications for historic preservation (Mills Act) contracts. Council previously directed staff to evaluate if the Community Relations Commission (CRC) would be the appropriate reviewing body to administer the Historic Preservation Ordinance as outlined above.
The CRC’s current powers and duties, as outlined in San Mateo Municipal Code (SMMC) Chapter 2.21, include hearing administration of federal grants (CDBG), advancing the City's equity and inclusion objectives, working and coordinating with the County’s Human Relations Commission, supporting Housing Element implementation of policies and programs related to tenant protections and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH). Further, the CRC is currently supported by Housing Division staff and is generally composed of residents who have backgrounds and experience that do not significantly overlap with the skills and experience to support administration of historic policies and review of historic projects. Backgrounds that would typically have knowledge in this area include architects, city planners, design professionals, architectural historians and/or individuals with demonstrated local historical knowledge. So, in order to ensure that the CRC has the knowledge and expertise to review historic projects and make recommendations to the City Council, significant additional training would be necessary, additional Planning staff and potentially a City historical consultant would need to support the CRC when reviewing historic items, and the desired background experience for future commissioner appointments would need to be revised.
As an alternative, the Planning Commission is an existing City commission that includes powers and duties and commissioner experience that more closely aligns with the experience necessary to be an effective reviewing body for the Historic Preservation Ordinance. The Planning Commission’s duties and responsibilities include administration of the City’s General Plan, Zoning Code and associated policy documents, and making recommendations to the City Council on policies and codes related to land use, development and urban design policy. Desired background experience for commissioners includes experience in architecture, construction, law, and local history. While additional training would be necessary to ensure that the Planning Commission has the knowledge and expertise to review historic projects and make recommendations to the City Council, the current work and background experience appears to be a better fit for Historic Preservation Ordinance administration.
Council Direction
Which City commission should be the reviewing body for the Historic Preservation Ordinance? CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION:
Based on the information shared in this agenda report, staff is seeking direction from Council on the following questions:
1. Historic Context Statement – Are there any updates or revisions to this draft document?
2. Outreach and Engagement – Are there additional activities that should be completed before public hearings are scheduled?
3. Historic Preservation Ordinance
a. What percentage of property owners within a proposed historic district should be required to support a historic district nomination for it to proceed to City Council for designation? b. Are there any additional criteria that should be included in the local designation criteria? c. Does the Council have any opinion on the drafted naming conventions? d. Any other direction on updates or revisions to the draft ordinance?
4. Historic Review Body – Which City commission should be the reviewing body for the Historic Preservation Ordinance?
NEXT STEPS:
Following this study session, staff will continue to work to refine and finalize the Historic Context Statement and the updated Historic Preservation Ordinance. Work will include integrating additional feedback we receive from City Council and the community through our ongoing outreach and engagement activities. Upcoming outreach activities include two additional focus groups, which are anticipated to be scheduled in February 2026, and one additional workshop to serve as a primer for the public to understand how to use the Historic Context Statement and Historic Preservation Ordinance and their associated tools. The outstanding workshop will be executed in late Spring 2026, depending on City Council direction.
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Updated drafts of documents will be circulated when available and are expected in late February or March, depending on City Council direction. Based on the current timeline, it is anticipated that a Planning Commission public hearing will happen in March 2026, and a City Council public hearing for approval will happen in April 2026.
BUDGET IMPACT:
This work is being completed as part of the professional services agreement with Rincon Consultants that was approved by City Council on January 21, 2025. The work is funded by the Advance Planning Fund (Fund 225) and does not have an impact on the City's General Fund.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This Study Session is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5)) NOTICE PROVIDED:
All meeting noticing requirements were met. In addition, meeting notifications were sent out to the interested parties list, included in the City’s weekly eNews and pushed out through the City’s social media channels.
ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 – Draft Citywide Historic Context Statement
Att 2 – Outreach and Engagement Summary Report
Att 3 – Draft Updated Historic Preservation Ordinance
Att 4 – Additional Public Comments
STAFF CONTACT
City of San Mateo Rincon Consultants
Zachary Dahl JulieAnn Murphy Margo Nayyar
Director Community Development Senior Architectural Historian Cultural Resources Principal [email protected]