Joe Volponi
I’m not opposed to historical things, but the world changes rapidly whether we like it or not. Trying to keep things static in a dynamic environment doesn’t make sense. Changes often happen in ways we never foresee. Â
When we were growing up, very few of us ever would have imagined that we’d have exponentially more computing power on our cellphones than NASA had in its entirety when it put a man on the moon. Much less that every home would have a computer.
Going to work used to mean heading to a physical location outside your home. Now, it often means going to a different room.
Today, cars are bigger than ever. Fifty years ago, most families drove sedans that were just large enough for their family. Now, trucks and SUVs make up nearly 50% of the vehicles on the road.
With all the change we’ve seen in our lifetime, and the impact it has had on the requirements for our homes (i.e., additional rooms for the home office, larger garage needs, increased demand for technology, etc.), isn’t it reasonable to think that the requirements for our homes will need to change going forward in ways we can’t even imagine today?  Â
There is currently an effort to officially designate San Mateo’s Baywood neighborhood as historic. To qualify as a true historic district, a neighborhood must be significant at the national, state or local level and meet at least one of three criteria. Baywood meets none of these.
1). Baywood is a wonderful neighborhood but, as a whole, it isn’t associated with events that have made a significant contribution to local or regional history.
2). I don’t know the history of every home in Baywood and some may be associated with a person who made a significant contribution to local, California or national history. In those cases, the owners of those homes have the absolute right to apply for a historical designation.
3). Homes must embody the distinctive characteristics of a certain period or method of construction that represents the work of a master or has high artistic values. Baywood is an eclectic mix of homes built at different times with many substantially remodeled along the way.
When it is clear that Baywood wouldn’t qualify for a historic district designation on its merit, one certainly has to question the motivation of those who push for it. Are they just seeking control? The proponents would have you believe that it imposes no restrictions on homeowners. That completely defies logic and common sense. If that were the case, why have it at all?
If Baywood becomes a national historical district, many hidden consequences come with it for both current homeowners and future owners. It severely restricts the improvements a homeowner can make, creates a more bureaucratic approval process and ultimately lengthens the time required and cost to make home improvements.
Further, it burdens all future owners with unreasonable limitations. This adversely impacts resale value. When a potential buyer realizes that they can’t modify the home to meet the changing needs of their family, they will not buy the property.
Most significantly, it grants a small committee the authority to impose requirements on homeowners without regard to practicality, difficulty or the cost that will be borne by the homeowner.
Is a historic district designation something that we really need? It is an issue that is dividing our community without a lot of upside and potentially significant downside. Individual homeowners purchase homes in Baywood for a variety of reasons but virtually all of them are looking to increase their property values. They should be the ultimate deciders as to what happens to their properties. There isn’t a shred of evidence to suggest that the new construction in Baywood has done anything but improve property values overall. It makes no sense to have a small committee substituting their judgment as to what is good for neighborhood property values for that of the actual investor in the property. Â
It isn’t necessary to impose a blanket designation on all Baywood homeowners when the unintended consequences are so great. For most people, their home is their most valuable asset and the owners need to have the flexibility to make changes to their property to accommodate the specific requirements of their family.
Joe Volponi has lived in San Mateo for 44 years and recently retired after more than 40 years as CEO of the California Casualty Management Company. He holds a Bachelor of Science in Statistics and is a Fellow in the Casualty Actuarial Society.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(8) comments
People are entitled to apply for an individual historic designation if they choose. Do not force this designation on the rest of us who do not want our homes encumbered any further with more regulation.
I live in baywood and have heard arguments on both side. My mind is open, but lets get the facts straight (your article is rather misleading)
(a) I haven't head anybody saying there is no impact on home renovations - yes the there will be but only to road facing front elevation. It doesn't impact what you do inside or in the back. Can we add ADU, yes! can you convert a spanish style into modern ranch probably not
(b) Historic designation infact protects home values. There are a few studies online.
I purchased all four sides of my home. I do not surrender the rights of the street side of my home to anyone else’s interference or opinion. We already have enough regulations through the planning department.
Its a valid point of view, I am just correcting facts. Also, this is by definition a community issue - i.e. what is the right thing for the community which almost always comes at sacrifice of individual liberty (e.g., is vaccination). I just encourage we keep open minds and listen both sides, and decide what is the best thing for baywood 20-30 years from now. And not spread false information.
This isn't false information. It is a FACT that you won't be able to change the front of your house or enlarge your garage if it is visible from the street. An individual's home should not be a community issue unless it poses some danger, like a blighted condition might. Just because you and some others want to make it one because you PREFER a certain style of house doesn't mean homeowners should be forced to lose rights on property that they paid for and own.
to be clear, this is false information in the article "The proponents would have you believe that it imposes no restrictions on homeowners." I've attended townhalls and it was clear what the implications are.
You are comparing a public safety (community health ) vaccination issue to a private property issue. Common areas like parks and streets are a public issue, but private property is called private for a reason listed in the 14th amendment. No one is prohibiting anyone from applying for an individual historic designation. But a blanket designation forces everyone to comply. Both sides can be respected equally. Let's see what the next forum reveals. It should be interesting.
(a) If CEQA is triggered -- and it may be by projects other than solely "street facing", you'll face major impacts in terms of cost and duration. The SMHA approach to create a district will place obligations on homeowners that they're not even remotely aware of as we sit here today.
(b) Maybe for completely remodeled homes. How about that home down the street in disrepair? No buyer that isn't flush with cash for the major restoration and rehab will touch that for "market value".
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.