Measured Growth

Two years ago, residents in the Sunset were up in arms over a proposal to build a 589-foot apartment project and retail complex at 2700 Sloat Blvd. Renderings of the project showed the proposed building towering over neighboring homes, appearing out of place given the predominantly by one- and two-story buildings surrounding it.

For people skeptical of or explicitly against the pro-housing movement, 2700 Sloat represented their worst nightmare coming true. It fueled a classic anti-housing viewpoint that the pro-growth, pro-housing movement would produce gaudy skyscrapers clashing with the historic charm and aesthetic of a city like San Francisco or a neighborhood like the Sunset.

While the 2700 Sloat project was unlikely ever to be built, the underlying reality remains undeniable: San Francisco's Westside must become denser if we want to address our housing crisis. More multifamily housing in low-density neighborhoods like the Sunset, Richmond, and Noe Valley is essential to creating a more affordable city.

Fortunately, this vision of a denser, more affordable Westside could soon become a reality. City officials recently unveiled a proposed rezoning map that would transform large portions of Western and Northwestern San Francisco—a response to state mandates requiring more housing in "high resource" neighborhoods.

Measured Growth

Predictably, many Westside residents have opposed these zoning changes. Similar to the outcry over the 2700 Sloat project, neighbors are worried about preserving the look and feel of their neighborhoods. NIMBY talking points aside, I can understand where they’re coming from. Pro-housing urbanists can advocate for growth while also caring about how the city evolves aesthetically.

But thinking that growth means ugly skyscrapers and overly crowded neighborhoods is flawed thinking based on a scarcity mindset.

This mindset is the antithesis of my post last month, where I lauded Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson's new book, "Abundance," for popularizing the idea that to create a more prosperous society, we need to build more of what we need. San Francisco is moving past NIMBY politics. We need to build more housing, and the Westside of the city is the logical place to build it.

But even among people who agree with the abundance agenda, there may still be consternation about what a "build, build, build" era will look like. I think it's perfectly reasonable to want a city to grow and to be apprehensive about what that growth looks like.

A Thoughtful Approach to Rezoning

Which is why I am so optimistic about the city's rezoning effort. The details of the zoning map illustrate how intentional city planners were about facilitating moderate growth. Here are some of the highlights of the new zoning map:

• Four- to six-story buildings would become permissible in residential neighborhoods, creating opportunities for small apartment buildings and multi-family housing.

• Six- to eight-story buildings would be allowed along key corridors, maximizing housing along streets that already feature commercial activity.

• High-rise buildings (14–30 stories) would be concentrated in transit-rich core areas, placing density precisely where our infrastructure can support it.

San Francisco will become denser, but not in a haphazard way — buildings like 2700 Sloat won't start popping up in Noe Valley. Rather, the zoning changes are based on accommodating the type of housing suitable for the specific area. Four to six-story apartments do not look all that different than two-story single-family homes built on a large lot.

Beyond Zoning

Of course, rezoning alone doesn't solve our housing crisis. While this effort fulfills part of our state-mandated Housing Element, actually building those homes represents the greater challenge. Process improvements matter only when they produce desired outcomes, and we remain far from an idealized San Francisco.

In "Abundance," Klein and Thompson point out that liberals are often quick to pat themselves on the back for throwing money or new initiatives at a problem. Approving a multimillion-dollar bond to build affordable housing or creating a new agency to tackle homelessness are treated as major wins. Instead, we should judge success by outcomes, asking whether government effectively solves our most pressing problems.

The new zoning map is no doubt cause for celebration. This effort was years in the making, and we should appreciate the city planners and officials for putting together a plan that organizations in the pro-housing urbanism space, like HAC, SPUR, and SFYIMBY, think is smart and well put together.

But zoning represents just one piece of the homebuilding puzzle. Significant barriers persist: our permitting processes remain inefficient and disorganized. And financing challenges continue as economic uncertainties and development fees make projects financially precarious.

The rezoning map is a crucial first step — now the real test is whether San Francisco can align its policies, processes, and politics to actually build the homes it just made legal.