top of page

Below are upzoning questions we should ask of SF Planning Department, our elected representatives, and candidates seeking office - see Impacts of Height Increases.

  • What infrastructure plans and funding exist before approving upzoning for a 25% population increase? How will essential services like water, sewers, transit, schools, and emergency services be addressed? What has been done to assess the traffic congestion impacts that will result from an increased population and new building construction on already difficult transit corridors (i.e. 19th Avenue, Lombard Street)?

  • How can you justify upzoning heights that attract luxury condos rather than affordable units?

    • Even if developers include some affordable housing, does this strategy effectively address the city's affordable housing needs?

  • How do you defend upzoning proposals that will unquestionably harm our pedestrian-friendly business corridors?

    • Small business owners in San Francisco already face challenges, and when you upzone a business corridor to 8 stories, it substantially raises the lot values, attracting corporate developers and leading to gentrification. 

    • Moreover, the increased height creates long shadows, transforming the once walkable streets into dark, cold, and windy spaces.

  • For Supervisor Engardio: In your District 7 acceptance speech, you mentioned the neglect of the 'middle' demographic. How does this align with your 2017 stance on 5-story housing above retail on transit corridors and preserving single-family homes? What's your current position? Additional questions:

    • Have you discussed the effects of upzoning with Sunset constituents?

    • Do they understand the housing element's impact?

    • How might upzoning affect Sunset's neighborhood retail, and will they cope with highrise developments on transit corridors?

    • How will affordable housing be financed?

    • What are the implications for infrastructure and population growth with upzoning?

    • Is this truly affordable housing?

  • Why accept RHNA numbers of 82,000 new units by 2031 when a State audit revealed inaccuracies and local officials acknowledged their aggressiveness?

    • Are you aware of the potential negative impact of the builder's remedy if the mandate isn't met?  (Builder's Remedy is a suspension of our city’s development standards and zoning laws, granting developers the freedom to build without constraints.)

    • Why are you not pushing back on this false narrative?

  • Why subject San Francisco to a one-year audit unique in the state, influencing local legislation against residents' interests?

    • Why haven’t you challenged this carve out for San Francisco?

    • How will you navigate the punitive builder's remedy and its consequences?

  • By applying San Francisco's existing project pipeline, our target decreases to building approximately 30,000 units, including 15,000 affordable ones.

    • With measures like the State Density Bonus, 4- & 6-plex upzoning, ADU upzoning, streamlining, and the potential Prop C to convert offices to housing, why not prioritize these options before introducing extensive upzoning?

    • Aren't these measures already adequate to fulfill the state mandate for housing? If yes, then why upzoning?

  • Why has the Planning Department claimed that the recent rezoning of all 120,000 single-family homes to 4 and 6 units only delivers a paltry of 30,000 to 40,000 units?

    •  Shouldn’t we have a zoning capacity of 480,000 units with this rezoning change?

  • Can SF Planning provide precise data on below-market units created in high-rise (8+ floors) residential buildings in SF over the past 20 years? We seek specifics on the number constructed in approved projects versus those developers deferred or avoided by contributing to a fund. Understanding the potential impact on affordable units from high-rise construction is crucial in evaluating the current zoning proposal. 

  • Can you name any other “well-resourced” suburban city in California that has upzoned its zoning capacity with similar increased heights and density as in San Francisco? 

    • Why is San Francisco the only city in California that has been subjected to these radical changes?   Sacramento city, touted as the “good child” for meeting their housing targets has focused on building these 4-6 story multiplexes without added penalties.

    • So why penalize SF?​

bottom of page