Browse archives: 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 | 1997 | 1996 | 1995

Published on 06/01/1998 All articles from this issue

A question of historic merit for cottage

printer friendly version

By Joanne Griffith Domingue

Town Crier Staff Writer

It's back to the drawing board for a Los Altos cottage that neighbors want to be designated as historic and the owner wants to tear down.

Because the house is in an unincorporated area of Los Altos near Magdalena Avenue and Interstate 280, it is up to the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors to make the call about what goes onto the county's historic inventory.

And the supervisors, in spite of a unanimous recommendation from the county Historical Heritage Commission to designate the cottage as historical, at their June 2 meeting voted to send the house back to the commission for further review.

"There are legitimately competing issues that need additional care and concern," said Supervisor Joe Simitian, who made the motion.

"There has not been a clear delineation during the process of what the criteria are for designation of historical sites," Simitian said.

"There have been no findings that indicated the factual basis for the designation," he said.

And "fairness to the parties involved requires us to dot the 'i's' and cross the 't's,'" he said.

Simitian pointed out that much of the information regarding the reasoning for the historic designation arrived after the meetings, not before.

Attorney Bradley Matteoni, daughter of attorney Norman Matteoni who represents property owner David Wilson of Saratoga, told the supervisors that they want the historic designation denied.

"The facts do not support the oral history," she said. "We don't think it's historically significant."

The cottage in question sits on one lot that is part of a three-lot parcel, totaling slightly less than a half acre.

The owner had plans to tear down the house and build three houses when the neighbors began their campaign to save the house.

"It's not a historical issue," Matteoni said, "but the neighbors do not want new houses built."

Neighbor Victoria Hambly told the supervisors that she has "unwavering support for preserving the historic house for the community."

Matteoni said research suggests the house was built in 1935, not 1924 as stated in an oral history. And Matteoni said the "architecture and occupants were not notable.

"The occupants simply had no significant historical impact on the community."

Neighbor Joyce Murphree disagreed.

She said that when the house was built, 1924 or 1935, is not the issue.

"It is at least 63 years old. The house is a landmark. It has defined the neighborhood. Once we lose a landmark, it's gone."

The Historical Commission will reconsider its decision at its June 18 meeting.