California’s housing department has given a much-needed rubber stamp to Mayor Daniel Lurie’s plan to increase housing construction in San Francisco.
It’s wind under Lurie’s sails as his proposed “family zoning plan” hurtles toward a key vote Thursday afternoon before the San Francisco Planning Commission.
The upzoning effort is expected to pass, due in no small part to the political makeup of the commission, which is majority-held by members appointed by the mayor’s office. The commission's approval is needed to advance the plan to the Board of Supervisors.
ADVERTISEMENT
Without the blessing of the state, which requires all cities to meet certain targets for building new housing, San Francisco risks losing local control of the approvals process for housing production.
The nod by the California Department of Housing and Community Development is a blow to some San Francisco progressives and housing preservationists who have asked for a slew of amendments to protect tenants and small businesses from displacement.
The state’s approval is preliminary — and tenuous if substantial changes are made to the zoning plan. Progressives are threatening a lawsuit should Lurie's plan not include substantial protections for tenants. But a housing expert said the letter from the state may offer significant legal protections for the city.
The California housing department found Lurie’s plan to be in “substantial compliance” with the state’s housing element law, a senior program manager wrote in a Sept. 9 letter to the San Francisco Planning Department.
“While preliminary, the notice from the state affirms that this rezoning package will deliver the housing we need to avoid losing local control,” Planning Director Sarah Dennis-Phillips said in a statement. “It’s important that we maintain state approval for the final adopted (new zoning plan) so San Francisco can stay on track to deliver the homes future generations need to afford to live here.”
By contrast, a coalition of more than 50 local groups called Neighborhoods United SF alleged this week that the zoning effort runs afoul of the city’s general plan.
“This plan would reshape San Francisco for generations without clear predictability on what gets built or where,” said Lori Brooke, cofounder of the coalition. “San Franciscans deserve full transparency about the land‑use decisions that will shape every neighborhood.”
The preliminary state approval is a relief for the Planning Department and the mayor’s office. The new zoning maps, pending approval by the Board of Supervisors, must be in place by January.
The Lurie administration has taken its lumps for the plan, which would see the construction of taller housing on the west side, in the Sunset and Richmond districts, and north in the Marina district.
Those areas contain mostly single-family homes — and many residents like it that way. Lurie secured backing for his plan from the San Francisco Firefighters Union Local 798 and San Francisco Police Officers Association.
Lurie announced Thursday that he would accept proposed amendments from progressive Supervisor Myrna Melgar, and introduce some of his own, including early notifications for businesses when new housing project applications are filed, grants to assist businesses displaced by new construction, and height allowance bonuses for developers if they offer improvements that help businesses move in.
Cynthia Huie, president of the San Francisco Small Business Commission, praised the plan.
“The family zoning plan is a thoughtful step to boost foot traffic, increase worker housing, and strengthen community connections — essentials for helping our businesses thrive and preserving the unique character of our city,” Huie said.
At a neighborhood gathering Wednesday night, more than 80 residents packed into the Richmond Recreation Center on 18th Avenue. Their concerns were many. Will small businesses face displacement under the zoning plan? Will taller buildings create wind tunnels? Will towering high-rises erode neighborhood character? Will new housing be spacious enough for families?
“Are we going to rely on market-rate developers to build what we need in terms of affordable housing?” asked Christin Evans, owner of The Booksmith on Haight Street, and a leader of the progressive group Small Business Forward. “They’re not even building now, because they’re waiting for market rates to decrease so they can make more profits.”
At the meeting, Supervisor Connie Chan, who represents the Richmond, told constituents they have to strike a balance between tempering “extreme upzoning” and running afoul of the state. If San Francisco doesn’t come together over a plan, “we will be in violation,” she said, “which is really a threat coming from the state saying, ‘If you don’t build it, we’ll build it for you.’ And all hell breaks loose.”
Still, Chan said, “can we make that plan better? I most definitely think we can.” Chan submitted a letter to the Planning Commission Sept. 9 asking that it make numerous changes to the rezoning plan. She proposed boosting affordable family housing, tenant protections, historic preservation, prevailing wage and labor standards, and small business support, among other tweaks.
Chris Elmendorf, a UC Davis law professor and housing expert, said Chan’s edits could come into conflict with the state. In its letter of support to the city, the state housing department said its preliminary stamp of approval could be yanked if revisions include “potential constraints on development,” among other adjustments.
“Basically, everything [Chan is] asking for is in conflict with that letter,” said Elmendorf.
He said the state’s letter provides some protection to the city against legal challenges that may try to stop the zoning plan from moving forward.
“It is always possible that a third party will bring a lawsuit,” said Elmendorf. “If a city is sued, it is very much to that city’s advantage to be able to point to a letter that the city has done all that it needs to do.”