By Keith Menconi : sfexaminer – excerpt (audio)
San Francisco city leaders are trying to add a lot of new homes to The City in the coming years.
If approved, a proposal to upzone large swaths of The City’s north and west would add enough room for the construction of roughly 36,000 new dwellings.
For upzoning supporters, the hope is that all those added homes will help to bend the housing cost curve in San Francisco, and, eventually, reduce The City’s affordability crisis.
But progressive housing advocates, who have been organizing in opposition to the effort, are pushing back with two questions: What kind of housing will get built? And who will those homes be for?…
Those who look more favorably on market-rate developments are making the case that when it comes to new housing, a rising development tide lifts all renters.
“We have both data and anecdotal evidence that shows when we have an increase in housing supply, that helps open up more opportunities,” across the income spectrum, said Jane Natoli, San Francisco organizing director for YIMBY Action… (more)
We have heard all the arguments on both sides, but, no one has seen any of the data or evidence that Jane Natoli claims is out there. And believe me, people have looked for it. There is some evidence that distressing commercial zones by inflicting traffic and parking limitations and allowing anti-social behavior to invade a neighborhood will take a toll on the local tax base. It is hard to miss the damage done to the Market and Van Ness neighborhoods. Those empty office and commercial buildings do not give any credence to the supply and demand in housing supply argument. Please Ms. Natoli, show us your data. Where has added housing stock of the stack and pack variety lowered rents? We see a lot of empty units but not a huge drop in rents. We also see a huge demand for reduced tax assessments and other unintended consequences.
You must be logged in to post a comment.