They pulled out all the stops in Brooklyn (or most of them) and let me tell you it is not pleasant. Unless you like "modern" looking condos that fall apart in five years.
But I guess people don't move to SF for the sturdy quaint old houses. Apparently there's not much love for an urban-looking Brooklyn either. Generic rules.
The whole "we need to preserve the architecture of my city" is a first world problem. What comes before that is the ability for the middle and lower class to survive in the city. Cities are living dynamic entities and should be capable of change.
I can see why it's tempting to think about it as a supply and demand problem. But be realistic about the motivations of developers, too.
And it's not like "affordable housing" requirements work, either, when those are defined relative to average income.
That's why we're all "build baby build": Increase supply enough to meet demand and you can get prices to drop. It's worth it in order to help maintain the existence of affordable housing.