No one that lives anywhere near this community is a "little person". The woman that lodged the complaint is likely very, very wealthy as well. Hence the previous mocking (and accurate) comment about, "multi million dollar inherited homes and land..."

I live in San Francisco and I have never heard of this building. The threshold for what gets considered "historic" in this town is exteremely low. That, combined with the chronic housing shortage makes it difficult for me to feel contempt for the owner.

Historic doesn’t mean well known necessarily. Sometimes historians are the only ones who recognize the significance of a structure. It might still be valuable to preserve for the future.

Part of history and archeology is trying to understand the past better. But part of it is also realizing that future generations will have knowledge and tools that we don’t, and some level of preservation should be done as a matter of course, so that hidden knowledge isn’t erased before its salvage becomes feasible.

I can’t argue for this specific house, just that being famous isn’t the only reason to keep something.

Actually, in some ways it’s the famous locations that could be harmlessly torn down: the historic information has mostly been extracted, and many popular locations are merely a curiosity for tourists to stick in their cap.