Li 1

Melissa Li
Jaya Dubey
Writing 39C
16 May 2014
Key to the Affordable Housing Crisis: Preserving Housing in San Francisco
Li 2
San Francisco is in the midst of an affordable housing crisis, where housing has
become the most costly in the nation and is creating widespread hardship among the low
income, working and middle classes. The skyrocketing housing prices and evictions has
resulted in gentrification and increasing displacement of visionaries, families, and elderly
citizens. Below is a photograph showing a protest against the eviction of an elderly
immigrant couple who live with their
disabled adult daughter. According to the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, housing is considered
affordable when families pay no more than
30 percent of their household income
towards housing expenses. A study by the National Low Income Housing Coalition
explained that 41 percent of San Francisco residents spend 30 to 50 percent of their
income on housing. In Figure 1, data provided by the Harvard Joint Center for Housing
Studies, a center that advances understanding of housing issues, demonstrates that renters
with severe cost burdens spend
about $500 more each month on
housing than their counterparts
living in affordable units. These
cost burdens put a strain on
households and severely affect
the quality of life since people
Figure 1. Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University,
America's Rental Housing: Evolving Markets and Needs Web. 09
Dec 2013.
Li 3
are skimping on other basic necessities, which lead to detriment of their health.
Furthermore, spending a disproportionate share of income on housing stifles economic
growth. (Center for Housing Policy) People who are either evicted or unable to afford
housing in San Francisco are moving to
neighboring cities where the environment and
social conditions may be lacking and
experience direct impacts on mental and
psychological wellbeing. To address the
affordable housing crisis, Mayor Edwin M. Lee
outlined his ambitious housing goal of creating
30,000 new and rehabilitated housing units by 2020 in his State of the City address, and
has pledged at least 30 percent would remain permanently affordable to low and
moderate income families. (Office of the Mayor) In response to the increasing frustration
of residents, Mayor Lee explained, What our housing crisis demands are real solutions
and a shared vision, not easy slogans and divisive scapegoating. Although Mayor Lee
has advocated for reform, housing legislation needs to be improved at a quicker rate in
order to ensure tenant protection and to reduce the migration of families and elderlies
who are on a fixed income, as housing has now become an unaffordable luxury even for
individuals in the middle class.
The affordable housing crisis continues to persist and is one of the major
challenges in San Francisco due to several historical trends, which lock out the low-
income population by making the city one of the least affordable in the country. The
history of anti-growth development from effective lobbying by local NIMBY (Not in My
The American Dream for every
family has at its core a
comfortable home in a safe
neighborhood, a home available
to buy or rent at a cost within
the family budget, a home
reasonably close to the wage
earners place of work.

-Thomas H. Kean

Li 4
Back Yard) groups who oppose additional or
different types of housing units in their
neighborhoods and communities has resulted in
restrictive and excessive government land use and
development regulations. Enrico Moretti, a professor
of economics at UC Berkeley, explains that, it takes years, harsh political battles and
seemingly endless appeals to approve a new housing project.
In addition Scott Weiner, a San Francisco supervisor who is an advocate of new housing
describes, San Francisco has been unwilling to prioritize smart housing production of
market-rate and affordable units,
even while our laws state that
housing is to be encouraged. The
current technology boom, which
started in the late 2000s, has
exacerbated the housing crisis
since an influx of young and
wealthy technology workers who
are able to afford the steep housing
prices have migrated to San
Francisco. The failure to reform housing laws such as the Ellis Act, passed in 1985, has
allowed speculators who utilize the loophole of the Ellis Act to evict longtime residents
who live in rent controlled apartments into condominiums. In Figure 2, real estate data by
Trulia, a real estate website which tracks housing prices nationally and locally, indicates
A record number of rent-
stabilized tenants have trouble
paying their rent. And they face
the highest increases in five
years while landlords profit.

-Jaron Benjamin

Figure 2. Trulia, 5 Truths of Tech-Hub Housing Costs Web. 6
Feb 2014

Li 5
that San Francisco had the highest prices per square foot and had the lowest number of
new construction permits. As the population continues to increase, the local government
has not provided sufficient supply to meet the rising demand.
The disparities of housing equity in San Francisco has been drastically rising
throughout recent years and will continue to persist unless a significant change is
introduced and implemented. In order to resolve the complications of the housing
shortage, the revitalization of current housing is essential to prevent further displacement
of disadvantaged long-term residents. The preservation of existing low-cost housing
units, which was proposed in 2013 by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, would not only decrease gentrification and displacement, but would also
provide various economic and social benefits. Even though displaced residents would
benefit, there would still be opposition primarily from homeowner associations and
speculative buyers who have a financial incentive to restrict affordable housing.
Compared to improving current units, an alternative solution of easing housing
regulations to expedite the production of new affordable housing would not protect
existing residents and construction would be less cost-effective. By sustaining and
promoting economic diversity, the redevelopment of existing housing will provide
opportunities for residents to limit gentrification. The preservation of housing is the most
viable solution since it has proven successful in other cities. The collaborative support
among different levels and branches of government and nonprofits play a substantial role
in protecting current tenants and confronting future housing demand.
Preservation of current affordable housing would not only reduce the
displacement of visionaries such as artists, activists, and small businesses who have
Li 6
shaped the culture and history, but also residential segregation of the low-income,
working, and middle classes. Families migrate to other cities as it has become difficult to
raise children due to financial stress. The displacement of primarily low-income and
minorities causes an economic burden on neighboring cities, which results in income
inequality and residential segregation. The primary example of severe gentrification is in
the Mission neighborhood, Between 1990 and 2011, the number of Latino households in
the Mission decreased by 1,400, while the number of White households increased by
2,900, examined by advocacy group Causta Justa (Causta Justa 7). Causa Justa, a
grassroots organization building community leadership to achieve justice for low-income
San Francisco and Oakland residents, advocates for the implementation of a No Net
Loss policy at the city level to require all affordable units lost through renovation,
conversion, or demolition be replaced within the same neighborhood if possible and
within the same city at a minimum (Causta Justa 67). This is a method of preservation
that sustains long-term neighborhood and city-level affordability by ensuring that the
overall supply of affordable units does not decrease over time. This would also reduce the
lack of low-cost housing options, which undermines quality of life for families, forcing
difficult tradeoffs in both housing quality and spending on other vital needs (Harvard
Joint Center for Housing Studies). Although the preservation of existing affordable units
would benefit current residents, Marisa Lagos, a staff writer who covers politics for the
San Francisco Chronicles, explained that several homeowner and realtor groups have
challenged two new laws intended to protect tenants and preserve rental housing.
Homeowners have a strong economic incentive to restrict supply because it supports
price appreciation of their own homes. (Cutler) By adequately enforcing preservation
Li 7
polices such as the no net loss policy, it may be the most effective way to guide
preservation efforts within a city as they create a comprehensive and accurate portrait of
affordable housing supply. (Causa Justa)
Implementing the no net loss policy would ensure preservation of all housing
units in the public or private market that are affordable for low-income households. The
city council must conduct an assessment of current affordable housing units by
neighborhood and affordability level. This inventory would include information on
number of units, rent level of units, household size, and income of inhabitants. Future
housing activity within San Francisco would be measured against the preservation goals
set in each income bracket. The no net loss policy would be a cost effective method to
gain control of affordable housing assets, and to stabilize market value of residential real
estate to facilitate the acquisition and development of additional affordable housing
assets.
Li 8
Improving the existing supply of low-cost rental properties offers the region an
affordable housing
strategy that is both
cost-effective and
high impact.
According to the
National Housing Trust, a national nonprofit organization formed to preserve and
revitalize affordable homes explained rehabilitation projects require almost 40% less tax
credit equity per unit than new construction developments. Preserving affordable
housing also saves energy in four primary ways- in reusing an existing building, in using
existing infrastructure, in preserving green space, and in reducing household energy use.
(National Housing Trust) San Francisco developers have prioritized housing for the
wealthy, as shown in Figure 3. The market is producing almost double the number of
housing units for people with Above Moderate incomes, or 120 percent of the areas
median income, as the RHNA says it needs to build. In response, another method of
preservation includes establishing inclusionary zoning policies, which would require
developers to reserve a certain percentage of housing units for low and moderate-income
households, in order to encourage production of affordable housing units within new
market-rate housing developments. The government must dictate the amount of
affordable housing units within new developments. In the New York Times Room for
Debate, Edward Glasear, a professor of economics at Harvard University argued that
inclusionary zoning would essentially add an extra tax on development, making building
more costly and reducing housing supply. Local governments enacting inclusionary
Figure 3. San Francisco Planning Department, Residential Pipeline Entitled
Housing Units 2007 to 2013 Q4 Web.
Li 9
zoning ordinances generally provide the private sector with a variety of economic
incentives to offset some or all of the cost of developing affordable housing. (Homes for
Working Families) Inclusionary zoning is an effective tool for maintaining economic
diversity by providing housing for the local workforce, thus retaining and attracting
business investment. By utilizing public assets for affordable housing preservation efforts
and advocating for increased and renewed funding for affordable housing at the state and
federal levels, there would be significant changes.
Successful preservation outcomes in Los Angeles and Cook County have
provided relief and proved to be beneficial. Los Angeles has also implemented the no
net loss policy in the downtown redevelopment plan, which resulted in increased
funding for extremely low-income housing, local hiring obligations, and strengthened
tenant rights requirements. In addition, through organizational and residential action,
there has been effective preservation of 15,000 homes for Los Angeless lowest income
occupants. In addition, organizational efforts have reversed a unanimously passed
redevelopment plan, preventing displacement for almost 9,000 low-income households in
the heart of gentrifying downtown. On the other hand, Cook County in northeast Illinois
is the nation's second most populous county. About 40 percent of residents in the county,
which includes the city of Chicago, are renters, and more than half of these renters pay 30
percent or more of their income toward housing costs. The Preservation Compact of
Cook County, Illinois is a grant-based initiative that take a highly collaborative and
multipronged approach to affordable rental housing preservation, with strategies focusing
on analyzing data for at-risk properties, facilitating partnership across levels of
government, and reducing operating costs. (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Li 10
Development) The Preservation Compact has saved troubled buildings, reduced energy
costs, increased collaboration among public agencies, and created innovative solutions
for subsidized housing. (MacArthur Foundation) Collaborative action among residents,
organizations, and the government is necessary to prevent the housing crisis from
persisting.
An alternative solution would be to increase the flexibility of housing ordinances
in order to expedite the process of producing new affordable housing units, proposed by
the San Francisco Housing Action Coalition, a nonprofit that advocates for well-design
and well-located housing, at all levels of affordability. Data from 2,649 municipalities
indicate that San Francisco's housing policies are among the most restrictive in the United
States due to stringent land-use restrictions, incredible delays and lawsuits challenging
proposed developments. (Moretti) Majority of San Francisco housing has building height
limits of 4 stories. Furthermore, San Francisco places density limits on new building
projects has been a continuous issue for residents. By removing density limits based on
area, this would result in larger units. Katy Steinmetz explains, City Supervisor Scott
Wiener has proposed that the city raise density limits for any project that is made up of at
least 20% affordable housing units and completely eliminate density limits for any
projects that are 100% affordable housing. This would provide incentives for developers
to focus on building affordable housing rather than luxury condominiums catering to new
tech wealth. San Francisco has room to add places to live without changing the virtues of
the city that we love. We can do this by building in appropriate areas, like downtown and
along the core transit lines; filling in housing and street shopping on vacant lots; adding
housing above the stores on neighborhood shopping streets; and opening up the
Li 11
opportunity for making secondary units (also known as in-law units) within existing
homes in residential neighborhoods. These kinds of infill development bring the benefits
of complete neighborhoods walkability, great street life, safety and strengthened
neighborhood identity. And with these kinds of investments in just a few areas, we could
easily meet our housing needs while making the whole city more livable



Li 12