Re-evaluating S.F. historic preservation framework

[M II A II R II K]

Re-evaluating S.F. historic preservation framework


May 2, 2011

By John King



Read More: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MNVJ1J9C89.DTL

If any western city shows the value of historic preservation, it's San Francisco. And if any city shows how broadly this value can be defined - not always for the best - it's San Francisco as well. But when a Board of Supervisors committee meets today to explore whether the cause of preservation has been carried to extremes, here's something else to keep in mind: The balancing act here between old and new works more often than not.

- The language of the hearing request goes further, asking bureaucrats to report on "the impact of historic preservation policies on other major public policy goals" and "whether legislation is warranted to ensure that all of these policy goals are met." The fuss might puzzle a layperson who thinks of preservation as something reserved for the likes of the Ferry Building. But critics say that too often the net is cast too broadly, turning anything built more than 45 years ago into a "historic resource" that triggers time-consuming reviews if changes are contemplated. There's also criticism that development foes seek landmark status for anything they want protected, regardless of its historic value.

- The sad thing is that the future of historic preservation should be discussed in this and other cities - but with a level head. One starting point in San Francisco would be to look at the list of 34 structures that have been declared landmarks since 2001. There's City Lights Bookstore and the Old Mint. Four cottages on timelessly picturesque Filbert Street and one of the kitschy dog's heads from the defunct Doggie Diner chain. The building that housed the AIDS Memorial Quilt and the Music Concourse at Golden Gate Park. In other words, they range from unquestioned architectural or cultural landmarks to objects of local lore. You and I can quibble with specific entries, but on the whole they're a selective representation of how today's San Francisco views the past.

- The dilemma with preservation today is that in an ever-more-subjective world, true believers - or politically adroit cynics - can make the case for almost anything. Defenders of the North Beach library include fans of modern architecture who feel that the style doesn't get the respect it deserves. But others use preservation arguments to draw out the process and derail efforts to build a new library on the same block. Tactics like this are nothing more than spite - as in a similar Berkeley dispute right now that involves some of the same "concerned library users" as the ones who are battling change in North Beach.

.....