This page is referenced by:

• 1 media/BK_BedSty-187-Hancock-8296_HR-1024x612.jpg 2022-11-22T15:38:14-08:00 Painted Ladies: NIMBYism and ‘Historic Character’ in San Francisco 23 Case Study: San Francisco plain 2022-12-12T13:26:36-08:00
  
  San Francisco is home to “Postcard Row” – a famous block of Victorian houses that appears in all sorts of media, from the titular postcards to shows like Full House. When thinking of buildings worth preserving, a block like "Postcard Row" is inevitably what springs to mind: historic, but also famous, iconic, recognizable. Ask someone what they think of when asked about Victorian architecture in America, and they’ll likely picture a quaint, colorful San Francisco row house with lacy gingerbread woodwork overlooking the Golden Gate Bridge. This picturesque architecture is worth preserving. What complicates preservation, however, is the truth that the entire city of San Francisco is full of similarly gorgeous examples of American Victorian architecture – many with comparable historic value, even if less TV-famous – and using this logic of preservation leads to tensions between the idea of the city as living history and visible beauty, versus the at-times ruthless pragmatism of the city as a place where people need to live.
  
  San Francisco is not just home to beautiful historic architecture; it has also been plagued with a shortage of affordable housing since the 1990s. It is currently one of the least affordable cities to live in the country. While onerous building codes are partly to blame, the crisis has been exacerbated by NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) interests opposed to multiple-family development, frequently citing the “historic character” of San Francisco's many neighborhoods as a reason to block denser housing. The idea of “historic character” isn’t just used to keep old buildings from being torn down. It’s actively used to prevent new development just in the area, like a proposed 7-storey, 90 unit building in the Haight-Ashbury neighborhood replacing a McDonald’s. The building was rejected as being “too tall” and “degrading [to] the historic value” of the neighborhood. All too often, “historic character” means allowing only single-family homes that are far beyond the economic means of many in the city. This data map shows neighborhoods where only single-family housing is allowed in red: 
  
  

   

  While historic conservation is a valuable goal, it shouldn't come at the cost of housing accessibility. The Preservation League of NYS explains the importance of making sure historic preservation benefits all:

  The League champions historic preservation as a tool to help build more just, sustainable, and resilient communities. But viewing preservation through this lens requires us to consider how to incorporate affordable housing into our work. Communities, whether they are rural or urban, are not equitable if only a certain socioeconomic class can afford to live there.

  The issue of historic preservation and housing availability is complex, however, and not well-served by reducing it to the single narrative of NIMBY homeowners opposing development and driving up rents. Plenty of cities are more than willing to knock down old buildings to make room for new developments, although this can cause just as many problems as stubbornly resisting change.