I say this as someone who believes in historic preservation, loves the look of mid-Century architecture, and thinks that having the designation makes sense.\u00a0 But this fellow paid for his house, neither of the complainants did.\u00a0 To sandbag a guy after he’s bought a house and tell him he has to live in it as is or re-sell it is absurd.\u00a0 Property is more than the dollar value assigned to it.\u00a0 It’s the right (externalities aside) to use it as one wishes, to not use it at all, and to prevent or permit others to use it as one wishes.\u00a0 It is also – painful though this may be – the right to destroy it and replace it with something better.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

There’s a principle in historical research that thing used are not preserved, while those preserved are not used.\u00a0 There’s no reason to believe that what holds for households shouldn’t also hold for houses.\u00a0 Eventually, these preserved buildings will appeal to a narrower and narrower slice of owner, until they turn into museums.\u00a0 Again, I have no problem with preserving some of these buildings.\u00a0 I’m not a big fan of HOAs, but if Belcaro homeowners want to get together and sign off on never changing their homes, they can do so.\u00a0 It’s their own rights they’re signing away, and anyone buying the house can do so knowing the rules.<\/p>\n