Planning Commission hears divided public on 2022 housing element as staff urges rezoning and reparative measures

Planning Department staff on April 7 presented a draft 2022 Housing Element that frames housing as a racial and social equity imperative and proposes sweeping changes — including targeted rezoning, streamlining review processes and community‑driven investments — to meet a state‑set Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) that officials said will be roughly triple the city’s recent targets.

The presentation, led by Planning Director Miriam (Joan) Hillis and senior staff including Kimia Herrera, laid out the department’s case: state law and HCD expectations require San Francisco to significantly increase its housing capacity over the next eight years. Staff said the plan aims to add roughly 20,000 units of development capacity through small‑ and mid‑rise upzoning, rezoning of well‑resourced neighborhoods, and incentives for mixed typologies. It also proposes a reparations framework that would target home‑ownership opportunities and preference certificates toward communities harmed by past discriminatory land‑use policies.

Why it matters: staff estimates an annual funding gap to deliver the proposed affordable housing commitments of between $1.5 billion and $2 billion, and warned that relying solely on federal and state subsidies — particularly low‑income housing tax credits — will not be sufficient absent new local revenue and sustained advocacy at the state and federal levels. The plan’s authors told commissioners they will seek state feedback beginning in May, circulate a draft environmental impact report and aim for adoption next winter with certification by May 2023.

Public comment was extensive and sharply divided. Tenant advocates and coalition groups including Race and Equity in All Planning (REP) argued the draft weakens crucial protections: they pointed specifically to Policy 26 as written, which would reduce conditional‑use review for some demolitions, and warned that streamlining and removal of public‑review triggers could accelerate the loss of rent‑controlled homes. Multiple speakers urged stronger anti‑displacement measures, neighborhood‑based accountability and clearer funding plans.

Supporters — including housing developers, neighborhood organizations and some planning advocates — said the city must expand supply, especially in underbuilt West Side neighborhoods, and praised the plan’s emphasis on equity geographies and reparative investments. Agency partners joined the discussion: the mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development said it has 11 affordable projects breaking ground this year and reaffirmed coordination on funding and implementation; the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing emphasized housing‑first and permanent supportive housing as essential to ending homelessness.

Commissioners focused their questions on implementation details: how the pipeline and "sites inventory" were modeled, whether large development agreements and stalled projects were counted, infrastructure capacity (water, sewer and fire systems) in rezoning target areas, the legal stability of RHNA numbers given a state audit of HCD methodology, and where potential new local revenue would come from. Staff said they will refine the pipeline analysis, perform neighborhood‑level rezoning work over the rezoning program timeline, include infrastructure assessments in the draft EIR, and continue advocacy for state and federal funding tools.

The hearing produced no vote on the element itself — the session was informational — but commissioners asked for additional detail on funding options, objective design standards (to speed permit review), neighborhood‑level implementation plans and stronger tenant protections and monitoring. Staff reiterated a multi‑stage schedule of additional hearings, EIR release and followups to address the technical and equity concerns raised.

Next steps: staff expects to publish the draft EIR and seek a round of state comments beginning in May, continue rezoning and engagement work, and return to the commission in subsequent hearings toward adoption of a revised element.