{"id":44890,"date":"2025-11-04T12:38:12","date_gmt":"2025-11-04T20:38:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/?p=44890"},"modified":"2025-11-04T12:38:13","modified_gmt":"2025-11-04T20:38:13","slug":"new-study-makes-clear-the-wiener-lurie-plan-will-not-bring-down-housing-prices","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/2025\/11\/04\/new-study-makes-clear-the-wiener-lurie-plan-will-not-bring-down-housing-prices\/","title":{"rendered":"New study makes clear: The Wiener-Lurie plan will NOT bring down housing prices"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Yimbys are furious that a new report says upzoning won’t produce much new housing. The bigger story is that it will fail to produce affordability<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Tim Redmond<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

October 31, 2025 (48hills.org)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The most remarkable element of the report by the city economist on the mayor\u2019s Rich Family Zoning Plan<\/a> is not what most of the news media have reported: That the zoning changes won\u2019t lead to anywhere near the amount of housing the state wants to see.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The far more important conclusion is that, even if the city allows developers to build all they want everywhere they want, it won\u2019t bring housing prices down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
State Sen. Scott Wiener has forced this on us, and it\u2019s going to fail.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

That directly contradicts the central thesis of the Yimby agenda.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are already hearing from Yimby activists that the city needs to do even<\/a> more to \u201climit obstacles\u201d to new market-rate housing:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Jane Natoli, San Francisco organizing director for YIMBY Action, said that while the group supports the Family Zoning Plan, it has tracked the removal of provisions that could have allowed for more housing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe\u2019re in this to solve a housing shortage, not a math problem,\u201d Natoli said. <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

They\u2019re talking about more cuts in fees, even more upzoning, and all sorts of other ways to give public money and value to for-profit luxury developers so they can get enough return for the international speculative capital investors that they might decide to build a few units.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Yimby group California Housing Defense fund says the city has to make sure 36,200 new luxury units are built, not just allowed in zoning:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe City must rezone as promised in its housing element \u2014 it must upzone enough to produce (not merely attain capacity for) 36,282 units based on an analytical model that assesses the probability of development for rezoned parcels under current economic conditions,\u201d the group stated. <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

More:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

YIMBY Action wrote a letter Thursday to state housing officials urging them to \u201cgive San Francisco clear guidance on how to fix its housing plan to assure it\u2019s in compliance with state law.\u201d The group said the city should \u201clook at policy changes that would make it significantly easier to build \u2014 like fee reductions, single stair reform, and pre-approved plans \u2014 or by doing more rezoning.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

That\u2019s beyond silly: The city is already doing single stair reform and fee reductions. But nothing the city does can force private developers to build. Developers aren\u2019t interested in housing, they\u2019re interested in profits; you can eliminate all zoning, all fees, all hearings, and developers still won\u2019t build if they can\u2019t get financing, which depends on factors far beyond the ability of the City and County of San Francisco.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sponsored link<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Help us save local journalism!<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Every tax-deductible donation helps us grow to cover the issues that mean the most to our community. Become a 48 Hills Hero and support the only daily progressive news source in the Bay Area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Learn more<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

But far more important: Ted Egan, the city\u2019s economist, says what many other economists and planners have been saying for years now<\/a>: More market-rate housing\u2014even lots and lots of new market-rate housing\u2014won\u2019t bring down prices to the level that most local workers can afford.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Egan is not a lefty by any measure. If anything, he\u2019s a Yimby. From the report:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

When the City relaxes zoning controls, by reducing density restrictions or increasing allowable heights, more development projects will become financially feasible, and the supply of housing in the city will rise. This increased supply will put downward pressure on housing prices in the city. Cheaper housing benefits city residents who move within the city, and also makes San Francisco more affordable for new arrivals.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Classic Yimby stuff.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But here\u2019s the real news: The best-case scenario, which he calls the \u201chigh growth\u201d scenario, would lead to reductions in housing costs of 2.5 to 4.2 percent. That means that average apartment would cost $125 a month less than it would if the plan isn\u2019t implemented.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That\u2019s a tiny, tiny amount. It means a $3,000 a month apartment might instead cost $2,875. The median priced condo might be $820,000 instead of $900,000. The impact on affordability is so small that it\u2019s not even worth measuring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Best case, prices will come down by a tiny, irrelevant amount.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

And that\u2019s in the best-case scenario.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Meanwhile, the displacement of local business could cost the city a lot of money:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

 Annual business disruption and relocation costs range from $16 to $28 million, in today\u2019s dollars.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

That\u2019s far more than the $8 million Sup. Myrna Melgar is proposing for business relocation expenses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The bottom line: Allowing developers to build more luxury housing won\u2019t do what the Yimbys say. It won\u2019t make housing more affordable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And that\u2019s from the city\u2019s relatively conservative economist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sup. Myrna Melgar told the Chron that <\/strong>\u201cI am doing this job because I want to leave a better city for my daughters.\u201d And she has done plenty of work in her five years to make this a better city.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the mayor\u2019s upzoning plan won\u2019t make the city better for anyone. It will mean more displacement, more evictions, density that will overwhelm the existing infrastructure, including Muni\u2014and housing prices will not<\/em> come down to the level that most workers can afford.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s say that again: Housing prices under this plan will not<\/em> come down to the level most workers can afford.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have listened to the supes argue over amendments to the Lurie bill, and some of them are critical to saving tenants. But nobody is saying the truth:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

State Sen. Scott Wiener and his colleagues have forced on us a damaging plan that will harm tenants and small businesses\u2014and that is based on a fundamentally false premise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Density doesn\u2019t mean affordability. The old neoclassical economic theory of supply and demand that I learned in Econ 101 in 1977 might have made sense in housing markets 50 years ago. But the data is clear that housing markets in an urban area like San Francisco don\u2019t work that way in 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are letting Wiener and Lurie deeply damage the city\u2014for no return.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Will someone, anyone, at City Hall please step up and tell the truth?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

48 Hills welcomes comments in the form of letters to the editor, which you can submit\u00a0here<\/a>. We also invite you to join the conversation on our\u00a0Facebook<\/a>,\u00a0Twitter<\/a>, and\u00a0Instagram<\/a>.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tim Redmond<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tim Redmond has been a political and investigative reporter in San Francisco for more than 30 years. He spent much of that time as executive editor of the Bay Guardian. He is the founder of 48hills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Yimbys are furious that a new report says upzoning won’t produce much new housing. The bigger story is that it will fail to produce affordability By Tim Redmond October 31, 2025 (48hills.org) The most remarkable element of the report by the city economist on the mayor\u2019s Rich Family Zoning Plan is… Continue reading → <\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44890"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=44890"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44890\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":44891,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44890\/revisions\/44891"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=44890"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=44890"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=44890"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}