Post

I have YIMBY planner friends who swear up and down that these views are anything but hegemonic in planning but they’re not. The planning profession by-and-large believes the San Francisco model works. It’s near a consensus position.

I have, in different capacities, both volunteering and professional, spoken to hundreds of planners across the state of California about these issues. These views are not unique! There is something deeply wrong with how planning is taught at American universities and practices in planning depts.

i think this stuff appeals because it *looks like* you are sticking it to the developers, even if it in the end it harms housing affordability for everyone

People think that IZ requirements force developers to take lower profit margins. In reality, developers have to deliver competitive returns to investors so IZ means nothing gets built until market rate rents are high enough to cover development costs *and* the necessary cross subsidy for BMR units.

Planners like this policy because they want to create subsidized housing but lack the power to tax and spend. They assume the market will always take care of middle class people and do not think about the projects that never get proposed because the margins are too thin to survive this process.