San Francisco Blows Housing Deadline, Prompting Standoff with State Regulators
California’s move to pressure San Francisco over missing a key housing-planning deadline has reignited arguments over who should control land use: local voters, who often slow or block new construction, or the state, which now threatens to strip cities of zoning power via the “builder’s remedy.” Commenters debate whether SF is already “dense enough,” how much responsibility it has to accommodate would‑be residents and regional workers, and whether state funding or legal structure should change when cities resist growth. Broader themes include the capture of zoning by incumbent property owners, comparisons to high-density models like Singapore, and proposals ranging from behavioral-only zoning to land value taxation as ways to reduce housing scarcity and intergenerational inequality.
State vs. Local Control & “Builder’s Remedy”
- Many welcome state intervention, arguing municipal zoning is captured by incumbent landowners and blocks needed housing.
- Others defend local control, saying SF is already the densest city in CA and residents should be able to “go slow” on development.
- Counterargument: local decisions create statewide harms (high rents, exclusion), so the state is justified in overriding cities.
- Some suggest tying state funds to housing compliance; others note cities legally exist at the discretion of the state.
Property Rights, Zoning, and Externalities
- Libertarian view: landowners should largely be free to build what they want; if government wants control, it should buy and build housing directly.
- Pushback: zoning arose to prevent real harms (pollution, dangerous uses, discriminatory practices), not just aesthetics.
- Some advocate Japanese-style “behavioral” rather than “structural” zoning (noise/smell limits instead of height/use limits).
Density, Regional Context & New Cities
- Several argue SF is not actually very dense compared with Manhattan or dense Asian cities; huge areas are low-rise.
- Others stress SF has already done more than wealthy low-density suburbs (Atherton, Woodside, Brisbane), and the housing crisis is regional.
- Discussion of failed “new town” attempts (e.g., California City) and proposals for tech-built “utopian” cities; skepticism about success.
Singapore & International Models
- Singapore cited as proof that state-built housing can work; critics note HDB constraints, long waits, lease expirations, and recent supply throttling to keep existing owners happy.
- Some argue Singapore’s tight residency rules and labor underclass make it hard to copy.
Affordability, Rent Control & Redevelopment
- Debate over whether “builder’s remedy” and SB 330 (requiring replacement of demolished rent-controlled units) yield win‑win outcomes or are uneconomic.
- Concerns that rent control creates “lottery” winners who resist redevelopment; others say the main blockers are zoning and permitting, not rent control itself.
Infrastructure & Implementation
- Questions raised about who pays for water/sewer/electric upgrades for large new towers under builder’s remedy.
- Response: SF utilities already investing billions; per‑capita infrastructure cost tends to be lower for apartments than for single-family homes.
Land, Generational Equity & Land Value Tax
- Some highlight that newborns inherit no property but must live with past privatization of commons, risking “gerontocratic” democracy.
- Henry George–style land value tax proposed: land belongs to society; taxing land rents at market rates seen as more moral and economically efficient than current property taxation.