The way the Chron describes it, the debate over the city's updated Housing Element is all about density. And that's part of the issue, no doubt: For years, people on the west side of town have resisted any increased density, meaning all the new housing has to get crammed into the eastern neighborhoods. And increased density, on some level, is going to have to be part of the future in San Francisco.
But there's another, more important, piece of the puzzle. The Housing Element draft acknowledges that, based on community needs, more than 60 percent of all new housing in San Francisco should be affordable -- that is, below market rate. And the draft admits that's not about to happen:
However, even with these strategies the City will not likely see the development 31,000 new units, particularly its affordability goals of creating over 12,000 units affordable to low and very low income levels projected by the RHNA.
In other words: Existing city policy is inadequate to meet the needs that the city formally agrees must drive public policy.
The Planning Department won't come right out and say it, but the message is pretty clear: Our current planning and housing policy -- driven primarily by the needs of the private sector -- is not going to come remotely close to solving the housing crisis. Either San Francisco has to come up with a huge amount of public money -- billions of dollars -- to underwrite new affordable housing construction or there has to be a much greater requirement that private developers chip in.
Building market-rate condos in San Francisco is a lucrative business. It does nothing to meet the city's needs. There's a disconnect here, and until we resolve it, the affordable housing crisis will continue.