Developments in Development: A Toolkit from Above

Read Mission Local often?

Help grow our newsroom, joining the 3,250 readers who support us by giving below.

Donate today!

Build ye, build ye, lest the housing crisis smite you! That’s what I’m reading this week in the development world – at its highest up, the command came from none other than the president.

The White House has released a “housing and development toolkit” that, among other things, points fingers at a lengthy entitlement process, restrictive zoning, and an unwillingness to build housing as the root causes of housing unaffordability and displacement. Curbed has the rundown on how the toolkit’s recommendations clash with what has been going on in recent development battles, policy by policy. But here’s one bit of interest that I didn’t really see highlighted enough.

The key line from Obama’s new housing toolkit vis a vis Mission District gentrification & opposition to new housing: https://t.co/f2csYh9Bt5 pic.twitter.com/AYYMZ7jYWL

— Joe Rivano Barros (@jrivanob) September 26, 2016

This, to me, could be something of a bridge between the “build-baby-build, why don’t you understand supply and demand” crowd and the “don’t build luxury condos in the Mission” crowd. Attacking this crisis isn’t just about building housing wherever possible and as much as possible – you have to ask low-density, higher-income areas to accept their fair share of new housing (which, to be fair, SFBARF and others are doing — in some cases, they’re not asking, they’re suing, but still).

You also have to consider what’s left once something is built: Did the White House itself just imply a direct link between “housing that does get built” and “causing displacement”? Because that would be in direct conflict, not necessarily with NIMBYs like some are saying this guide is, but with pro-building advocates.

Let’s go back for a second to the low-density areas not building their “fair share” thing. If you thought SFBARF was pushing it by suing the suburbs over not building enough housing, hold onto your hats, because it sounds like supervisor Jane Kim may be suggesting annexing part of Brisbane.

That idea was floated because Brisbane is considering two rival proposals for a former landfill – one with more than 4,000 new units and one with zero. The one with zero is the city’s own proposal. Brisbane will make the decision (or compromise) over the course of several months and San Francisco is unlikely to actually make a land grab, but if you like political drama, get your popcorn ready. That is if you haven’t already had enough from the whole Millennium Tower thing.

Meanwhile it does seem like the crazy skyrocketing days of yesteryear are over. Which doesn’t mean that the bubble has popped or the market has crashed or anything like that – in fact, as SocketSite reports, SF isn’t necessarily officially in a housing bubble but may be approaching one. Curbed has a bit of a discussion this week about why the “median rent” figure that us development commentators like to throw around is a bit of a complicated beast. Those numbers, after all, usually reflect apartments available on the rental market, not what people are actually paying throughout the city.

I’ll close this week with a fun exercise in contrast: Curbed has a deep look inside two Mission buildings. One of them explores the life and home of artist and illustrator Christian Robinson, who rents a room inside a local Victorian. The other is a tour of Rowan, the new nine-story statement building across from Franklin Square on Potrero.