
Do You Support the Mayor’s Upzoning Plan?
A Westside Observer Special Election Feature
• • • • • • • • • • June 25, 2024 • • • • • • • • • •
Mayor Breed has proposed an unprecedented rollback of San Francisco’s height and density limitations that would allow six-eight story buildings in areas previously zoned for one and two-story construction. All three candidates for Supervisor in District 7 have responded.

Supervisor Melgar Responds
I support upzoning commercial and transportation corridors consistent with the SF Housing Element, which was passed unanimously by the Board of Supervisors last year.
District 7 must build all kinds of housing to help San Francisco meet its targets, but it must also do it to meet the needs of our own people today and tomorrow. We have a diverse population - we need housing for middle-class folks, and we need low-income housing. We need larger units for families, and we also have an aging population so we need smaller units for seniors. We need housing for students — District 7 is home to SFSU, City College and UCSF Parnassus. This past year we made it much easier for homeowners to add in-law units, up to 3 more units to their single family homes.

The draft plan that the Planning Department has shared with the public still needs work, and as Chair of the Land Use and Transportation Committee of the Board of Supervisors, I will work to ensure this plan responds to the needs of our district, and meets our commitments by the 2026 deadline.”
As a City, we have also committed to climate action goals, so we are planning to build the most housing where it is close to public transportation so that future generations can be less car dependent. We have several large sites that are already entitled for denser housing, like the Balboa Reservoir, which will be 50% affordable and Stonestown.
The draft plan that the Planning Department has shared with the public still needs work, and as Chair of the Land Use and Transportation Committee of the Board of Supervisors, I will work to ensure this plan responds to the needs of our district, and meets our commitments by the 2026 deadline.

Stephen Martin-Pinto Responds:
The plan needs further refinement.
It does not consider limitations of street size, infrastructure, and geologic conditions in many locations. For example, according to the planning department webpage, it shows the 19th Avenue corridor slated for high-rise upzoning between Sloat and Junipero Serra Boulevards, even though the properties indicated are on Stonecrest and Denslowe Drives, two very narrow residential streets inappropriate for high-rise development.
It would be more appropriate to shift this development onto Stonestown, Parkmerced, or San Francisco State University property. The greenbelts on Junipero Serra Boulevard and Brotherhood Way should remain – we have few greenbelts and park neighborhoods in San Francisco, and these should be protected.
I agree that we can add stories to buildings along West Portal and Ocean Avenues, however I do think that the 85 foot height-limit is too aggressive for those streets and likely to cause unnecessary and avoidable blowback. I think that 2-6 story limits are an acceptable building height limit in most locations on those corridors, and even modest height increases can yield substantial housing stock in a minimally contentious way.

I believe that, with some policy adjustments, we can stabilize and even reduce housing costs in San Francisco. The permitting process for new construction should be audited, and permits that are unclear, unnecessary, and contradictory should be deconflicted and eliminated.”
Ultimately, it's about striking a balance of protecting and preserving our neighborhoods and communities while providing for more housing in the least contentious and most sensible manner, and the mayor's proposed zoning change plan does not meet this objective. To me it’s evident that the mayor’s plan was drafted by someone who is not quite familiar with the neighborhoods of San Francisco.
Furthermore, I object to the term "well-resourced" and its role in shaping zoning changes. Zoning changes should not be based on politics, but rather common sense and practicality. Furthermore, the methodology for determining what differentiates a well-resourced area from a non-well-resourced area is based on subjective, complex, and unclear methodology, and even by its own standards, seems to have been applied inconsistently across San Francisco.
I believe that, with some policy adjustments, we can stabilize and even reduce housing costs in San Francisco. The permitting process for new construction should be audited, and permits that are unclear, unnecessary, and contradictory should be deconflicted and eliminated.
Rent control policies should be modified to entice more landlords to enter the market and increase housing supply. Affordable housing requirements should be replaced with a voucher system that allows for more freedom of choice and flexibility in living locations and situations.
These policy adjustments would add to the supply of available housing in the most expedient, least disruptive way, but are not a part of the mayor's comprehensive housing plan.
Links: Planning Department webpage: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/6e0e399f9c82456dbda233eacebc433d/
Well-Resourced methodology: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2024/draft-2024-opportunity-mapping-methodology.pdf
Inconsistent application of well-resourced neighborhoods: https://generalplan.sfplanning.org/images/I1.housing/Well-resourced_Neighborhoods.pdf
Dr. Edward Yee Responds:
Simply put... doesn’t make financial sense.
Infrastructure needs to be integrated into this zoning plan.
It must be sequentially implemented as one change will cause perturbation and possible unforeseen ripples.
Matt Boschetto Responds:
I believe the upzoning plan has been politically disastrous in District 7. While most West Side residents want to build more housing, they also care deeply about quality of life, neighborhood character, and community voice. For District 7 voters, these priorities are not mutually exclusive and must be balanced thoughtfully. Any plan that overlooks this fact either misunderstands or disregards what many constituents want.
I understand the logic behind upzoning to satisfy the state's housing mandate. However, the extent of the upzoning has caused significant opposition, hampering progress on housing issues in our district. I firmly believe District 7 can meet its housing goals without compromising our neighborhoods. By focusing on the least contentious and highest probability parcels, we can build more units while preserving community harmony.
There are excellent examples of this approach in District 7, with nearly ten thousand units, many of them affordable, in the pipeline at the Balboa Reservoir, Park Merced, and Stonestown developments. This volume demonstrates that our district can produce housing effectively while uniting the community rather than dividing it.
As District 7 Supervisor, I promise to stand up for residents while prioritizing sensible housing development across the city. My focus will be on market dynamics and finding solutions that incentivize developers to break ground. If we are to prioritize housing, we must stop overburdening landlords and developers with excessive subsidies and regulations. From cumbersome planning processes to overly stringent rent control policies and affordable housing requirements, the current environment has made real estate investment too risky and stagnant.
Further movement in this direction by leaders more familiar with City Hall politics than market dynamics will only hinder our progress toward a more affordable and abundant housing market. I am committed to bridging this gap and ensuring that District 7 can grow responsibly, maintaining the unique character and quality of life that our residents cherish."
This is a special election feature to inform readers in District 7 about the candidates positions. Got a question? Send it to the editor.
June 25, 2024