Funny how for a country with such a short history, they seek to preserve some things as young as 75 years old but love to forget other things such as how much of the modern U.S.A. was Mexico until halfway through the nineteenth century. Selective or what?

Let the man do what he wants.

It's funny how some see a large, but generic and dilapidated 75 year old house as "historic".

My girlfriend owned a 250 year old home. The only reason it is called historic is because it was the 2nd oldest house in town. But the thing was so crusty and so heavily modified over the years that it'd be hard to claim that it is what it was. It has some vinyl siding even!

And it used to be 'owned' by the natives who lived here for centuries before the Mexicans took it over. Of course, the east coast used to be owned by the English until some rabble-rousers caused a ruckus to gain independence.

What's your point? Should we be giving back the southeast to the mexicans?

Testudo, once again you need to check your facts (once again). The Southwest was once owned by Mexico, (Actually Spain) and the "Southeast" your talking about included Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming and Colorado. Oh yeah, and Florida. Also the correct way to define persons living in Mexico are "Mestizos" And nowhere was anyone talking about giving any land back to anyone. My state has the birth place of President Ford in it. Texas has the Alamo, a Spanish Mission, that is considered a National Landmark. The only thing this house "did" was to "in its own way" set the standard for Santa Barbara's unique architectural "look." No one of any major historical value lived here in the house. (Steve Jobs doesn't count)

And what facts do I need to check? That I didn't call Mexicans 'mestizos', a term I've never heard anyone use, and only defines a group of people living in that country, not all peoples? Or that I mistakenly said 'southeast'? Oh, the horrors.

Or that I didn't go into a long discussion into the actual land claims of the 1800s? Next time we talk California, I'll be sure to include the long history of the peoples, back to the ice age.

It belonged to the Mammoths and Bears, and Sloths and stuff. So what?

Steve probably ought to schedule demolition for tomorrow before the nay sayers get a chance to organize and tell him how to spend his money.

Go Steve Jobs. That old house was a wreck. Tear it down and put up one with a glowing Apple logo on it just to stick it to those crybabies.

Funny how some people jump all over anyone who dares to suggest that we remember genocide.

No one is worried about giving Cali to Mexico or the Arapaho or to the giant sloths.

Take the reality check for what it is and resist the knee jerk reaction to have to always attack anyone who sounds even remotely pc. If you don't care about the past, fine, but modern houses mcmansions are replacing older homes at a fast enough rate. Personally freedom and the ability to tear down old things is still alive and well.

Its just that a city has the right to occasionally look at historic preservation and it has the authority to zone as well. So stop your fake bravado and stupid need to call anyone who thinks of things other than personal gratification as "crybabies." You whine more than even the one "no" vote on the town council.

Betcha $10 the new one's gonna be a glass cube :)