Skip to content

Past moratoriums show why we need another

June 8, 2015

By sfexaminer – excerpt

The eviction and displacement crisis in San Francisco’s Mission district has been decimating The City’s Latino community for nearly two decades. But now a slow-motion crisis has become urgent. Many neighborhood voices are calling for a moratorium on market-rate housing in the Mission, and the battle has been joined by cheerleaders of market-rate development, blaming affordable housing shortages on NIMBYs and attempting to shame neighborhood advocates into backing down from moratorium demands.

A brief review of recent history is in order. In the last 15 years or so, there have been at least three full stops to market-rate housing construction in the Mission. These moratoriums suggest trickle-down housing extremists like the San Francisco Bay Area Renters Federation might be better served by coming to grips with professional planners and the international capital market, rather than imagined NIMBYs who shout at the clouds, try to preserve the city in amber, and somehow control the City’s housing policy in their volunteer time.

Mission Moratorium No. 1 (2001-2002) was in the form of “interim controls” — a longstanding and necessary tool in urban planning to temporarily hold development while a comprehensive plan for neighborhood growth is devised. The Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors have installed interim controls in dozens of ways over the last couple of decades without much drama. There are interim controls slowing development today on Market Street, 2nd Street and in the Castro and Showplace Square, among other places. This particular set of Mission controls was focused on stopping market-rate office conversions, and supported housing developments where 25 percent of the new units were affordable to low-income residents…

But interim controls expire, and if there’s no comprehensive plan following those controls, we’re back to the same mess we’ve seen before. Which leads us to Mission Moratorium No. 2 (2006-2008), courtesy of 2660 Harrison St. That was a small development at a single address, but when the Planning Commission’s approval of the proposal was appealed to the Board of Supervisors, it highlighted the ongoing affordable housing and displacement crisis in the Mission, and the failure of long-range city planning to address the cumulative impact of multiple projects converting industrial land to market-rate housing.

So the Supervisors overturned the Commission’s approval and insisted that Planning had to complete its stalled re-zoning of The City’s eastern neighborhoods (to protect light-industry jobs and provide for some affordable housing and infrastructure) before approving more market-rate housing. That effectively stopped most development proposals in the Mission until the re-zoning plan was adopted at the end of 2008 — just in time to meet the Great Recession.

The housing market collapse effectively created Mission Moratorium No. 3 (2009-2011): a credit freeze that stalled market-rate construction for years because developers could not attract private financing. Why couldn’t they? Because they couldn’t guarantee enough profit in a competitive, international capital market.

So how, exactly — even if the extreme fans of market-rate development could wave a wand, say “More Housing” and magically make The City’s re-zoning process as streamlined as otters — how would an increased flood of deluxe housing approvals lead to more affordable housing construction? It’s clear from experience that, once prices (and profits) start to decline, funding for market-rate housing goes elsewhere until demand heats up and potential profits (and prices) rise again. That is the supply-demand curve that is really at work in the San Francisco land market, and endless rezonings and construction won’t change that…

A new Mission Moratorium on market-rate housing doesn’t create new affordable housing by itself; neither did the other three. But history tells us that it can help in two ways. As an interim control, it would calm the current feeding frenzy of development in the Mission, while new proposals are created and approved to (finally) correct past planning errors, prevent evictions and build affordable housing. And like a picket line or a boycott, it is also a clear and unmistakable signal to City Hall that business-as-usual cannot continue at the Planning Department and in the City’s neighborhoods…

Tony Kelly is vice president of the Potrero Boosters Neighborhood Association… (more)

Advertisements
No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: