From several westside neighborhood groups:
Why We Oppose the Mayor’s Family Zoning Plan
As a coalition of neighborhood groups, merchants and families from across San Francisco’s west side, we are writing to express our deep concern regarding the massive upzoning and density decontrol proposal under consideration for the west side, as well as other San Francisco neighborhoods. We recognize the City’s urgent need for truly affordable housing, but this plan will undermine the stability and livability of our diverse communities while failing to deliver on its core promises.
The Plan Does Not Meet the City’s Need for Affordable Housing
We support the goal of increased affordability and housing for families, but these proposals create the opposite – luxury developments, with only a token number of affordable units. We need a housing policy that supports San Francisco’s working and middle-class families, not investors and the ultra-wealthy. Too many new developments on the west side have yielded units listed far out of reach for most San Franciscans. Also, rather than adding family-sized homes, this plan shrinks the number that will be available, replacing single-family and multi-generational units with studios and luxury condos.
San Francisco needs targeted efforts for affordable housing, involving specific site-selection, funding and construction approaches. The proposed blanket upzoning and density decontrol provides neither new policies nor funding for affordable housing. This plan amounts to a land grab and giveaway to developers, ignoring the needs of most San Franciscans.
The Plan Will Displace Small Businesses, Renters and Families
Blanket upzoning will have profound human consequences. Small businesses – the lifeblood of our unique neighborhoods – will be pushed out. Business owners will lose their livelihoods as housing speculators profit by erecting high-rise, high-rent buildings. Apartments above beloved storefronts will be razed, displacing longtime tenants and shrinking what is left of our affordable housing stock. Families will be priced out and pushed out.
While recent proposals by Supervisors Connie Chan and Myrna Melgar seek to mitigate the displacement of small businesses, more work is needed to protect them and tenants from greedy developers.
Density Decontrol Must be Eliminated
The most recent plan designates a “sea of blue” that would open these neighborhoods (consisting of mostly single-family homes and small two- or three-unit buildings) to density decontrol. Under this scheme, corner lots of any size and mid-block properties over 8,000 square feet could be redeveloped into multi-unit buildings up to 65 feet high. Meanwhile, nearly every other home on these residential streets could be replaced by four-story structures containing ten, twelve – or potentially even more – units. If fully implemented, this approach could pave the way for up to 800,000 new units, an increase more than tenfold the number required by the state.
An extreme policy like this one defies common sense. It dramatically exceeds state housing mandates and radically transforms the character of our neighborhoods. This density decontrol provision is a recent and deeply concerning addition to the plan. For the sake of our city’s future, it must be rejected.
Lack of Infrastructure: A Recipe for Failure
Western San Francisco’s infrastructure is under strain: sewer systems are at capacity, high-pressure hydrants needed for firefighting are lacking, and hospital access is limited across the west side. Public transit options remain sparse when compared to eastern neighborhoods, and even heavily used lines, like the 38R Geary and N Judah, are overcrowded and now threatened by budget cuts. Many residents still rely on cars to commute to jobs in Silicon Valley. The proposed upzoning will place further pressure on our fragile infrastructure including the elimination of parking requirements for new housing. It will push our infrastructure closer to collapse.
Green Space: The Lungs of Our City
Western San Francisco’s parks, green belts and coastal areas are among the City’s greatest assets. Yet, these are precisely the areas targeted for upzoning. The plan threatens our precious open space, marring the natural beauty that drew many to this area. The loss of sunlight, views and access to green space will be felt by all San Franciscans, not just those living on upzoned blocks.
Consider Alternatives
We do not oppose all development. But, instead of a massive upzoning and density decontrol plan that will create disruption, displacement and environmental damage, we support the following:
- Targeted rezoning and development.
- Community participation in all development decisions.
- Protections for tenants and businesses.
- The revitalization of downtown San Francisco by converting offices to residences.
- Policies that encourage the leasing of housing and commercial properties currently vacant.
- Consideration of environmental issues, infrastructure needs and transit planning.
The plan was recently approved by the Planning Commission and will now be considered by the Board of Supervisors. We look forward to working with Mayor Daniel Lurie and the Board to assure that new zoning will be equitable and effective. We urge a careful reconsideration of the “Family Zoning Plan.”
Signed by:
Geary Boulevard Merchants Association
Jordan Park Association
Lincoln Manor Association
Mid Sunset Neighborhood Association
Planning Association for the Richmond
Save Ocean Beach / Friends of Sutro Park
Save Our Neighborhood SF
Sunset-Parkside Education and Action Committee
Categories: Commentary
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 
“but these proposals create the opposite – luxury developments, with only a token number of affordable units” – This really is the crux.
It’s also proof that the YIMBY agenda isn’t actually doing anything to lower housing prices or rents – the opposite is true – and their entire slogan-based existence is a shiny veneer on Billionaire developer dollars pumped through “non-profits” and industry groups to put a “grassroots” spin on gentrification through redevelopment.
They want us little folks out and have found effective ways to buy votes with essentially unlimited cash that nobody is auditing, ever. And when they get into office as Joel Engardio and London Breed (and hopefully NOT Lurie) have totally demonstrated, they listen to Billionaires writing the big checks, and long-term residents and locals basically not at all.
Never. Trust. YIMBY. Liars.
It’s a for-profit cabal, not your neighbors, not your friends. They care about cash.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Perfect example is the Westerly on Sloat opposite the zoo. Built as a high rise, high density building and it has never sold/rented (about 70% empty). The commercial ground floor units were never leased. And now the developer of the adjacent lot where Sloat Nursery currently operates has reduced his 55 story building to a 22-25 story building after the outcry to the first proposal. If you REALLY want to keep families in SF you need to give options to families that want a single family home with a yard and garage in SF or they’ll move to the suburbs. People that want to live in high rise condos have existing housing in SOMA, Mission Bay, etc. There needs to be a variety of housing types, not just the YIMBY vision of high density high rise buildings.
LikeLiked by 1 person
San Francisco is already maxed out. We’re being told to add 82,000 new homes in just 8 years — that’s huge for a city that’s already built out. Meanwhile, coastal towns like Pacifica (1,892 units), Half Moon Bay (480 units), and Santa Cruz (~3,700 units) have far more land and far smaller quotas.
Why should SF carry the lion’s share of the state’s housing burden while these towns barely budge? If we want a fair solution, Sacramento and regional planners need to increase quotas in coastal towns with room to grow, instead of squeezing SF to the breaking point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Richmond and Sunset voted for Dan Lurie and repeatedly for Scott Wiener who made no secret of their desire to upzone for more housing, along with Engardio in D4. The Sunset also voted for Leland Yee and Ed Jew.
The west side is showing its true colors by demanding that the east side bear all of the unpleasant burdens of the city while extracting our property and business tax surpluses to keep the west side nice.
But the west side voted for these YIMBY lies repeatedly. If SF falls out of state compliance, then the burdens of the builder’s remedy will be borne by the east side already upzoned by west side supervisors and planning commissioners.
There are no “Neighborhoods United” here. There are better off neighborhoods ganging up on weaker neighborhoods to save their own skins.
LikeLike
I didn’t vote for this extreme upzoning. Sure, upzoning that keeps neighborhood character and the sunlight and the coastline enjoyed by the entire city and the tourism world, but not becoming just another 6-8 story midtown extension. A city needs a variety of housing types…who says this model of economy of scale is best for all human beings???? How about builders building walkable cities throughout the US and leave the already dense cities alone???? How about some philanthropy to offset the cost/profit difference between building human-scale 4-story and 6-8 and higher-story buildings???? By the way, east side neighborhoods have asked for parks, but have been told repeatedly there isn’t any money. And yet, miraculously, money has flowed into the west side for another park by a park by a beach…check out this factual piece in Mission Local “‘Sustainability’ dollars paid for Sunset dunes hammocks, skate park” https://missionlocal.org/2025/09/sunset-dunes-skate-park-sustainability-prop-a-phil-ginsburg-larry-mazzola/
LikeLike
How about the west side show some solidarity with the east side, maybe undoing past injustices, before asking for even more favorable consideration that will likely come at our expense?
These upzonings have as much of a chance of producing supply to push down prices as the Egyptian pyramids had of casting the Pharaohs’ souls to the afterlife. The only thing that these projects will dispatch is cash money into the coffers of builders and the lenders who finance them.
The YIMBY are going to demand we allow them to build their pyramids to capital in our neighborhoods because they’ve run the table on local and state politics, with the consistent, reliable help of the west side. For 20 years, Calvin Welch has managed to elicit the exact opposite outcomes from what he’s called for.
LikeLike
It is becoming obvious that the current proposal for San Francisco upzoning benefits primarily the for-profit goals of the lobbying construction industry. What’s really needed is transparency and honest evaluation in accountability for anything that has to do with affordability, checking true cost and profit margins and keeping in check the inevitable conflicts of interest of for-profit builders facilitating affordability. Furthermore, it is in San Francisco’s interest to protect its tourism economy by NOT defacing and darkening its beautiful coastal communities, especially as the rest of the world’s charming coastal communities and cities are becoming less attractive due to a ruthless and unethical building industry that is manipulating public interests. It is our mayor’s responsibility in such case to prioritize an ‘honest-motives’ plan for affordable housing, which would have to involve consulting with independent economists. This may mean standing up to and exposing Sacramento’s ill-informed, misguided political tactics to chase money and power at all costs. Last, how exactly does a city with a revenue potential of being a top tourism destination, as well as the satellite city for the world’s ever greatest IT economy, as well as the home for the few with the largest amounts of wealth in the world, become bankrupt and not able to pave its streets or underground it wires? We need intelligent politicians negotiating deserved incomes and solutions for our city.
LikeLike
“These upzonings have as much of a chance of producing supply to push down prices as the Egyptian pyramids had of casting the Pharaohs’ souls to the afterlife.”
You just have to BELIEVE! LOL great line.
LikeLike