January 26, 2026
Historic Policy
Update Study
Session
Project Team
City of San Mateo Consultant
Community Development Rincon Consultants
• Zachary Dahl, Director Margo Nayyar, Principal-in-Charge • Sung Kwon, Deputy Director JulieAnn Murphy, Architectural Historian • Joanna Winter, Planning Manager Kassandra Gale, Community Engagement Manager • Somer Smith, Senior Planner
• Mary Way, Administrative Tech
City Attorney’s Office
• Prasanna Rasiah, City Attorney
• Mazarin Vakharia, Assistant City Attorney
2 Study Session Objectives and Overview
• Project Basis
• Implement General Plan 2040
• Action CD 5.8 – Update the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance • Action CD 5.9 – Prepare a Citywide Historic Context Statement • Staff Presentation
• Community Outreach and Engagement Overview
• Draft Historic Context Statement Overview
• Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance Overview
• Next Steps
• Public Comments
• Council Discussion and Direction 3
Project Timeline
4 Community Outreach and Engagement
5 Activity Date Estimated # of
Participants
Focus Group 1 July 8, 2025 4
Focus Group 2 July 16, 2025 5
Workshop 1 July 28, 2025 42
Workshop 2
(Mobile Workshop 1)
September 18, 2025 50
Workshop 2
(Mobile Workshop 2)
September 25, 2025 25
Workshop 2
(Mobile Workshop 3)
October 7, 2025 20
Focus Group 3 December 11, 2025 7
Workshop 3 January 21, 2026 55
• Participation Goals
• Reaching at least 20 attendees per
workshop
• Collecting 50 Digital Time Capsule
contributions
• Engaging 8-10 participants per
focus group
• Expanding email sign up list over
the course of the project
Community Outreach and Engagement
6 • Results
• Heard from and engaged with over
200 residents
• There have been 11 Digital Time
Capsule contributions and 13
reactions
• Focus groups have been slightly
smaller in scale, but provided
opportunities for focused, small
group perspectives
• Email list has grown significantly
and has 175 subscribers
Community Outreach and Engagement
7 • Key Takeaways – Focus Group Discussions
• Residents Cautious of Preservation Efforts
• Desire for transparency, owner consent, and local control • Concern about financial and procedural burdens
• Conditional support for a historic context statement
• Residents Supportive of Preservation Efforts
• Preservation seen as essential to community identity
• Need for stronger tools, standards, and professional oversight • Support for inclusive, educational, and adaptive approaches • Business, Real Estate, and Development Community
• Need for clear, practical guidance, including coherence across plans • Support for flexible solutions for historic buildings • Concern about financial burdens to projects
Community Outreach and Engagement
8 • Key Takeaways – Workshops
• Broad recognition of San Mateo’s cultural
and architectural diversity
• Desire for transparent, consistent, and
educational preservation processes
• Support for inclusive storytelling and
representation in the Historic Context
Statement
• Interest in balanced policies that protect
heritage while allowing flexibility for
property owners
Community Outreach and Engagement
9 • Key Takeaways – Time Capsule and Written Comments
• Interest in knowing more about San Mateo's history and development • Expressed appreciation for historic places and events that shaped San Mateo • A desire to understand the role of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in relation to historical resources
• Concerns over the future recognition and treatment of Glazenwood and Baywood
• Input on how to address owner consent in the ordinance update • Desire to understand the effects of local designation Community Outreach and Engagement
10 • Key Takeaways – Workshop #3
• Questions and concerns over the recognition of Glazenwood and Baywood • Thresholds for consent for local designation of historic districts • Audience poll (46 respondents)
• General support for more incentives for designated properties • A desire for more information on how Mills Act contracts would be administered • Interest in understanding the relationship between the local ordinance and CEQA • Desire to understand effects of designation
Community Outreach and Engagement
11 A simple majority (50% +1) 26%
A super majority (2/3) 24%
A super majority (3/4) 41%
None 9%
• Planning document that highlights
trends and patterns of development
• Provides a framework/consistency for
evaluating a property organized into a
series of context and
themes/subthemes
• Draft San Mateo Historic Context
organized by:
• Significant Periods
• Themes
• Property Types
Draft Historic Context Statement
12 • Significant Periods
• Precontact History
• Spanish and Mexican Period (1769-1848)
• Early Settlement (1849-1893)
• Incorporation and Suburban Growth (1894-1940)
• World War II and Post-War Development (1941-1979)
• Modern San Mateo (1980-2025)
• Themes
• Residential Development
• Commercial Development
• Civic and Institutional Development
• Transportation Infrastructure
• Industrial Development
• Cultural and Ethnic Groups
• Property Types
Draft Historic Context Statement
13 • Overview of Architectural Styles
• Biographies of Architects, Developers,
Builders (under development)
• Guidance for Assessing Significance
(under development)
• Draft provided for public review November
2025
Draft Historic Context Statement
14 • Tells the how, when, and why of San Mateo’s development. • Focuses on development trends and property types.
• Provides a basis of information that can aide in the identification, evaluation, and treatment of historic resources.
• Facilitates a better understanding of the relative importance of resources.
• Provides a framework for evaluation, does not designate.
Draft Historic Context Statement
15 City Council Direction – June 2, 2025
16 1. Should staff proceed with drafting updates to the Historic Preservation Ordinance to:
Direction from Council How/where it was incorporated in draft ordinance Identify the enabling authority 27.66.101-Purpose and Intent Establish a reviewing body Council advised against creating a new reviewing body and suggested Community Relations Committee. Draft language leaves committee unnamed pending final direction.
Provide procedures for designation of resources 27.66.060-Procedure for Designating Listed Resources
27.66.070-Procedure for Designating Historic District
Recognize the economic effects of designation 27.66.060(d)-Certificate of Appropriateness – Economic Hardship
27.66.120-Incentives for Preserving Historic Resources
Describe appeals and enforcement provisions 27.66.060-Procedure for Designating Listed Resources
27.66.070-Procedure for Designating Historic District
27.66.140-Enforcement and Penalties
Include a set of concise definitions 27.66.020-Definitions Update language that is too rigid, inconsistent, and/or detailed?
All Sections
City Council Direction – June 2, 2025
17 2. Should the criteria for a local historic designation conform to the California Register of Historical Resources requirements, or should additional criteria be included to acknowledge the City’s unique history and development?
Direction from Council How/where it was incorporated in draft ordinance Yes. Suggested that local designation
criteria should align with California Register
criteria, but allow for additional criteria based
on information and responses collected
from outreach and engagement activities
27.66.040-Designation Criteria
Draft designation criteria language mirrors the
California Register.
No additional criterion have emerged from outreach to
date, but revisions are possible.
Designation Criteria
18 • Is associated with events that have made a
significant contribution to the broad patterns of San
Mateo’s or California’s history and cultural heritage;
or
• Is associated with the lives of persons or
communities important to San Mateo’s or
California’s past; or
• 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.
City Council Direction – June 2, 2025
19 3. Should the Historic Preservation Ordinance include a mechanism to designate historic districts locally? If yes, should owner support be required and at what level? Direction from Council How/where it was incorporated in draft ordinance Yes. Council provided direction that the ordinance
should provide for a way to designate local historic
districts. Owner support should be required.
Council expressed support for a majority of owner
support, but no specific threshold was decided, with
direction to get additional feedback on this question.
27.66.070-Procedure for Designating
Historic Districts
Outlines the process for designating a local
historic district. It includes a petition requirement
that a certain percentage of property owners must
support the application for designation to occur.
City Council Direction – June 2, 2025
20 4. What form of owner consent should be included in the Historic Preservation Ordinance - affirmative, expressed consent; owner veto, or protest provisions? And should the owner consent requirement apply to all local designations or just to historic districts? Direction from Council How/where it was incorporated in draft ordinance Affirmative consent. Council provided direction that
affirmative consent, the requirement of the property
owner’s clear agreement to designation, should be
required for designation of local individual resources.
27.66.060-Procedure for Designating Listed
Resources
The nomination to add a Listed Resource to the San
Mateo HRI shall be made by application of the
property owner.
Affirmative consent. Council provided direction that
affirmative consent, the requirement of the property
owner’s clear agreement to designation, should be
required for designation historic districts.
27.66.070-Procedure for Designating Historic Districts
• Application. The application shall be made by property owner(s) in the proposed district.
• Notification. The application must include documentation that all potentially affected property owners were notified of the application.
• Petition. The application requires a petition that a
threshold percent of property owners support the application. • Community Meeting. Requirement for community meeting
once nomination application is deemed complete.
Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance
21 Purpose
Enabling Authority
Establishment of a Preservation
Commission
Procedures and Criteria for Designation
of Historical Resources
Procedures and Criteria for Actions
Subject to Review
Consideration of Economic Effect of
Designation or Review of Action
Appeals
Enforcement
Definitions
Purpose
Enabling Authority
Establishment of a Preservation
Commission (Planning Commission)
Procedures and Criteria for Designation of
Historical Resources
Procedures and Criteria for Actions Subject
to Review
Consideration of Economic Effect of
Designation or Review of Action
Appeals
Enforcement
Definitions
San Mateo| Chapter 27.66 Recommended
Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance
22 Establishes the San Mateo Historic Resources
Inventory (HRI)
Local register of historic resources
Ordinance will no longer include references to specific listed resources or districts
Does not include state (CRHR) or federal (NRHP) listings automatically
Provides eligibility requirements and procedure for adding resources to the San Mateo Historic Resources Inventory 27.66.090 - Procedure for Development Proposals
Added for clarity and transparency – it’s an existing requirement under CEQA to assess when a Planning Application includes a site with a structure over 45 years old.
Effects of Designation - Certificate of Appropriateness 23 A Certificate of Appropriateness is the approval document issued by the City to approve an alteration to a Listed Resource or Contributor within a Historic District listed in the San Mateo Historic Resources Inventory.
Not required for non-contributors within a Historic District Two types of projects subject to COA
Minor Alteration – An alteration that has been determined to have a limited potential to affect the defining character and architectural style of a resource. Removal of insignificant exterior features (non-historic or lacking historic integrity) Replacing windows in-kind
Reroofing
Demolition of a detached garage
Major Alteration – An alteration that results in significant changes or modifications affecting the exterior visual and/or historical qualities of the property. Demolition
Addition of square footage and/or architectural features to street-facing elevations Historic District Designation Process
24 27.66.070 Procedure for Designating Historic Districts
1. Application. Application made by property owner/group of property owners within HD boundary. Application includes:
Description of significance/applicability of local criteria for designation Documentation that notification was provided to all potentially affected property owners Documentation that % of potentially affected property owners support the application
2. Application Review. Application is reviewed by Planning Division to assess application if application is complete and if notification/consent information was included.
3. Community Meeting. Applicant holds a community meeting to provide information to potentially affected property owners on the status of the application.
4. Designation Recommendation. The reviewing body reviews the application at a public meeting and makes a recommendation to City Council.
5. Designation Action. City Council holds a public hearing to consider the application and adopt a resolution to approve or deny the application.
• Thresholds for Affirmative Owner
Consent in Historic Districts
• 27.66.070 Procedure for Designating Historic
Districts
• (a)(1) Owner Notification and Consent. (C) Documentation by petition establishing at least XX percent of property owners in the proposed historic district as listed in San Mateo County’s most recent property ownership assessment roll support the potential designation by affixing their signatures to the petition
Owner Consent
25 • 22.66.030-San Mateo Historic
Resources Inventory
• Comprised of two types of resources:
• Individual Resources = Listed Resources
• Historic Districts
• Other options for Listed Resources
• Landmarks
• Historic Resources Inventory Property
• Protected Resource
• Designated Resource
Ordinance Naming Convention
26 • Responsibilities
• Consider applications for San Mateo Historic Resources Inventory and make determinations that Listed Resource and Historic Districts meet the eligibility requirements for designation and make recommendations for City Council action. • Consider applications to remove properties from the San Mateo Historic Resources Inventory. Determinations to be based on a finding that the property meets conditions that warrant removal.
• Review applications for Certificates of Appropriateness for projects that are making Major Alterations and evaluate the project against the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Design Guidelines, as applicable.
• Review applications for Mills Act contracts and make recommendation on their approval to City Council.
Ordinance Reviewing Body
27 • Considerations
• Professional qualifications
• Tasked with providing recommendations on
preservation and design review. Credentials and
expertise should be consistent with responsibilities.
• If interested in pursuing Certified Local Government
program later, at least two professionally qualified
members (history, architectural history, historic
architect, landscape architect, archaeology) are
required.
• Many communities have reviewing bodies made up of
a mix of professionally qualified members and lay
members.
Ordinance Reviewing Body
28 • Staff research found the following:
• 1989 Survey noted Glazenwood appeared to meet NRHP criteria for a historic district
• 1994 Study Session on potential district designation, but no subsequent action • 1995 ordinance update noted downtown district, but not Glazenwood • 2009/2010 General Plan Updates noted Glazenwood as a historic district • But no mention of a local designation action or supporting documentation • Evidence/documentation supports Glazenwood as an NRHP eligible historic district
• Neighborhood subject to historic review under CEQA
• But local action by City Council required to apply Historic Preservation Ordinance Glazenwood Neighborhood Questions
29 • Will the updated ordinance be applied to eligible historic resources? • No - the Ordinance only applies to locally listed historic resources • Downtown Historic District and two properties
• Assessment of all eligible, or potentially eligible, historical resources is based on CEQA requirements.
• Only a small percentage of properties subject to additional review due to age and potential historic eligibility
• Over past three years, over 500 single-family applications with exterior alterations, additions and/or new construction.
• 28 were identified as potentially eligible resources that required preparation of an HRE • Only six (1%) were identified as eligible, which required some design modifications to avoid any potential impacts under CEQA before permits could be issued Historic Preservation Ordinance Applicability
30 • Final Focus Groups (February)
• Underrepresented
Communities
• Youth
• Revisions to Policy Documents (February)
• Final Drafts Published (February/Early March)
• Ordinance and Context Statement
• Planning Commission Public Hearing (March)
• City Council Adoption Hearing (April)
• Post Adoption Workshop #4 (Late Spring/Early Summer)
Next Steps
31 • Outreach and Engagement
• Should any additional activities be completed before public hearings are scheduled? • Historic Context Statement
• Any updates or revisions to the draft document?
• Historic Preservation Ordinance
• What percentage of property owners within a proposed historic district should be required to support a historic district nomination?
• Any additional criteria that should be included in the local designation criteria? • Any opinion on the drafted naming conventions?
• Any other updates or revisions to the draft ordinance? • Historic Review Body
• Which commission should be the reviewing body for the Historic Preservation Ordinance? Council Direction
32