Mountain View’s proposed preservation rules would end property owners’ ability to remove a property from the local historic register on their own. After advancing the amendments in a first reading on September 22, the City Council has scheduled second readings for October 13. The changes are expected to take effect in November; a separate vote on the register’s final list is planned for December, according to the Mountain View Voice.
The register decision remains ahead
The amendments and the register update are being handled in sequence: Planning Manager Eric Anderson told the council that adopting the list before the new rules take effect would leave the existing opt-off provisions in place, the Mountain View Voice reported. The list originated in a citywide survey of structures built in 1970 or earlier. The survey identified 99 eligible properties: 41 already on the register and 58 proposed for addition. About two dozen owners of eligible properties told the city they did not want their properties listed, according to the same report.
The council also directed staff to remove some properties from consideration. As reported by the Mountain View Voice, the council recommended excluding properties that are neither on nor eligible for state or federal historic registers and are not already on the local register. It also removed two properties on the city’s housing element inventory: 624 W. El Camino Real, formerly Joe Musso Motor Service, and 1901 W. El Camino Real, formerly Walt’s Texaco Service.
Religious properties were removed from consideration unless their owners asked to be included. The city plans to delist Villa Siena, a senior care facility at 1855 Miramonte Ave.; the Mountain View Voice reported that preparing the environmental impact report required under the California Environmental Quality Act for that delisting is expected to cost about $150,000.
Owners’ concerns and the downtown district
Some owners object to the potential limits on redevelopment. Massimo Prati, who had removed his property from the register in the early 2000s, told the council the changes could harm owners financially and restrict property rights, according to the Mountain View Voice. The debate also intersects with Senate Bill 79, which allows denser housing near major transit stops, including the downtown Caltrain station. Mountain View YIMBY reported that cities can exempt designated historic resources under the law only if they adopted an alternative local preservation plan by July 1, 2026.
The council supported developing a process for a downtown historic district within the area bounded by California Street, Hope Street, Evelyn Avenue and Bryant Street, the Mountain View Voice reported. The same outlet reported that the council also backed removing properties that are not on or eligible for state or federal registers and are not already on the local register. Councilmember Ellen Kamei said the city’s preservation criteria and inventory no longer reflected changes to the community and its building stock.
Incentives and next steps
The city’s proposed supports for owners of newly listed properties include municipal fee reductions, plaques, conditional use permits for historic uses, reduced parking requirements and Mills Act tax-abatement contracts, according to Citizen Portal. The city’s Environmental Planning Commission had recommended the ordinance changes in August and also asked the council to consider owner incentives and require a five-vote supermajority for historic districts affecting designated housing sites.
The next scheduled steps are the October 13 second readings and, after the amendments take effect in November, a December council vote on the finalized register list. Until that vote, the proposed additions—and the requests from owners who do not want to be listed—remain unresolved.
