3 ms·
It's almost impossible to demolish structures in San Francisco, because somebody considers each one historic in some sense. A great example was the recent "hist
by ggreer 8y ago
It's almost impossible to demolish structures in San Francisco, because somebody considers each one historic in some sense. A great example was the recent "historic laundromat" in the mission.[1]
The concept of property rights in SF is basically a joke. You can't do anything to your home unless you spend months and thousands of dollars navigating the bureaucracy. The burden is so onerous that it leads to people going rogue and ignoring all building codes and safety regulations. I have friends who live in places where the internal structure is totally different from what the city has on file. The electrical wiring and plumbing are a haphazard mix of amateur and professional work. The elevators haven't worked in years. But I'm sure if the property owner wanted to tear the place down and build something new (the only sane choice), they would be blocked.
1. https://reason.com/blog/2018/02/21/san-francisco-man-has-spent-4-years-1-mi https://reason.com/blog/2018/02/21/san-francisco-man-has-spe...
- chrisseaton 8y agoSounds like there's local politics or pervious experiences in SF that I don't know about that might be driving people's negative reactions. Where I live I cherish the work that's been done to preserve old buildings so I can see them today, and I hope they're preserved so my ancestors can see them as well.
- delfinom 8y ago>Where I live I cherish the work that's been done to preserve old buildings so I can see them today, and I hope they're preserved so my ancestors can see them as well. Hmm Ancestors, are past tense. Tear em down boys!
- chrisseaton 8y agoObviously it’s a mistake and I meant descendants. Don’t be so snide.
- kansface 8y agoMuch of the existing bureaucracy in SF is purposefully byzantine in response to the urban renewal of the 50s and 60s which saw the "redevelopment" of the Western Addition, Fillmore, Japan Town, and the construction of the interstate highways which bisected neighborhoods. In the case of the former, victorians in historically black neighborhoods (see also: redlining) were torn down to be replaced with projects which went about as well as you can imagine. In the case of the later, we have the Loma Prieta earthquake to thank for restoring Hayes Valley and the Embarcadero to booming, walkable neighborhoods. Instead of learning from its mistakes, SF did a full 180 and landed on the opposite extreme - nothing may change unless all agencies, stake holders, and onlookers alike are perfectly satisfied. In practice, agencies are in the dozens (SF has no right to build, even when meeting all zoning restrictions!). Onlookers are neighbor homeowners who like increasing housing prices and less traffic and organizations like Calle 24 which are indistinguishable from protection rackets.
- captainperl 8y agoYeah, I've been following the laundromat saga. If he can't develop a property like that one, then nobody can in SF.