The debate over San Francisco’s proposed Affordable Housing Bonus Program (AHBP), which would allow developers to build up to three stories higher than currently zoned in exchange for providing more below-market-rate units than currently required, is heating up.
While the terms of the proposed program have been amended to exclude any project that results in the demolition of any existing rent-controlled units from being allowed to participate, concerns about creating “a financial incentive for [developers] to demolish existing sound housing stock” and neighborhood displacement remain.
If adopted by both the City and developers, the program would add the potential for building another 16,000 units of housing in specific areas of the city, as mapped above and distributed below, an increase of roughly 4 percent over the 380,000 units that currently exist.
And in terms of timing, while Planning staff had recommended the Commission’s potential vote for adoption be pushed back to April in order to continue its refinement and review, yesterday the Commission voted to formally review the proposed program on February 25, although that date could be continued as well.
Like concept. Does this mean 26% of 16,000 AHBP will be built in Western Addition? Where? And why would the additional three levels be across city when zoning, topography, neighborhood infrastructure vary so dramatically?
yes, the city’s goal is to root out the few remaining black people in SF
What makes you think the city cares one way or the other?
More hyperbole please!
There it is…”exclude any project that results in the demo of a rent controlled unit” = another useless zoning program. So all those low rise mixed use bldgs on Geary, with ONE frickin residential unit are off limits. Idiots! What if they demo that, and put 3-4 affordable units on a larger structure? You could have several affordable units in seated of the original one.
But why should I complain? Useless programs brought on by nimbys and their de facto leader peskin always benefit current property owners like moí. But I’m trying to do the right thing morally by speaking out against such nonsense, which hurts our middle class. Tsk, tsk.
You’re not only speaking out to support the middle class, you’re helping to make the city smarter, more diverse, and open to wider audience rather than just super rich old people and the desperately poor living on welfare (that’s where the city is headed now).
Not useless at all! Peskin has to show the people he’s doing something, this is that something! Look how he fights for the people!
“…all those low rise mixed use bldgs on Geary, with ONE frickin residential unit are off limits.”
Actually, rent control only applies to buildings with more than one residential unit. But I understand and concur with your point.
Mission Mission Mission…ugh…<1%. No wonder it is ground 0 for ELLIS ACT…prime location with low rise, no rent control buildings. SF policy is 100% responsible for high rate ELLIS ACT displacement in the Mission!
Expect the biggest battles arising from this to be from people living on lower parts of hillsides, where views are precious and priced accordingly. A lot of people who think that their existing views are protected by zoning may be in for a surprise if this passes.
Would it not perhaps be more equitable and effective for all new residential projects to include a BMR unit or units, regardless of type or size, while maintaining existing height and bulk standards – a solution being discussed in Provincetown and Aspen and other communities with significant housing affordability issues.