4 ms·

Scott Wiener seems to be a big part of the problem in terms of increasing the regulatory burden on new development. Have I missed something in his actual record

Scott Wiener seems to be a big part of the problem in terms of increasing the regulatory burden on new development. Have I missed something in his actual record that indicates he is removing restrictions on new housing development?

mikeyouse 10y ago
Wiener is really good on housing, much better than the Peskin group of Supes. Read his post when he came out against the Mission Moratorium to get a sense of his housing views: http://www.scottwiener.com/more_affordable_housing_not_a_housing_moratorium_is_what_we_need_in_san_francisco http://www.scottwiener.com/more_affordable_housing_not_a_hou... Alternatively, read his post on Medium titled, "Yes, Supply & Demand Apply to Housing, Even in San Francisco": https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/yes-supply-demand-apply-to-housing-even-in-san-francisco-193c1b0c190f#.b56wxd854 https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/yes-supply-demand-apply-to-... > These trends are exactly why the supply-and-demand deniers pose such a significant challenge to actually fixing our housing problem. As we work hard to try to produce new housing — through market-produced housing, below-market-rate housing, new types of housing such as co-housing and micro-units, and more flexibility toward in-law units — we have a vocal and influential set of advocates pronouncing that we shouldn’t even bother to build market-produced housing, since, according to them, doing so won’t lower housing costs and may even raise housing costs. This argument, to the extent it succeeds, not only reduces the amount of housing produced in San Francisco but actually slows the production of below-market-rate housing, since market-produced housing, through our inclusionary housing program, is the most significant source of new affordable units coming online.
- mgraczyk 10y ago
  As I said, these essays propose and defend additional restrictions on building new housing. His restrictions are slightly less sinister than moratoriums, and come in the form of affordable housing requirements. He is still adding regulatory burden to the legal code, just slightly less burden than some of his peers have proposed. I'd also like to point out that Wiener strongly advocated solar panel and beautification requirements for new construction. Requiring solar panels on homes is a great way to pat yourself on the back, but not a great way to generate electricity. Let's build solar power plants, not require every new apartment to cover it's roof in panels regardless of the economic sensibility of doing so.
  - owlmonkey 10y ago
    It's politics. You can't survive here politically proposing as-of-right building permits and across the board upzoning. But you can move the needle in the right direction.

mikeyouse 10y ago

Wiener is really good on housing, much better than the Peskin group of Supes. Read his post when he came out against the Mission Moratorium to get a sense of his housing views: http://www.scottwiener.com/more_affordable_housing_not_a_housing_moratorium_is_what_we_need_in_san_francisco http://www.scottwiener.com/more_affordable_housing_not_a_hou... Alternatively, read his post on Medium titled, "Yes, Supply & Demand Apply to Housing, Even in San Francisco": https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/yes-supply-demand-apply-to-housing-even-in-san-francisco-193c1b0c190f#.b56wxd854 https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/yes-supply-demand-apply-to-... > These trends are exactly why the supply-and-demand deniers pose such a significant challenge to actually fixing our housing problem. As we work hard to try to produce new housing — through market-produced housing, below-market-rate housing, new types of housing such as co-housing and micro-units, and more flexibility toward in-law units — we have a vocal and influential set of advocates pronouncing that we shouldn’t even bother to build market-produced housing, since, according to them, doing so won’t lower housing costs and may even raise housing costs. This argument, to the extent it succeeds, not only reduces the amount of housing produced in San Francisco but actually slows the production of below-market-rate housing, since market-produced housing, through our inclusionary housing program, is the most significant source of new affordable units coming online.

mgraczyk 10y ago
As I said, these essays propose and defend additional restrictions on building new housing. His restrictions are slightly less sinister than moratoriums, and come in the form of affordable housing requirements. He is still adding regulatory burden to the legal code, just slightly less burden than some of his peers have proposed. I'd also like to point out that Wiener strongly advocated solar panel and beautification requirements for new construction. Requiring solar panels on homes is a great way to pat yourself on the back, but not a great way to generate electricity. Let's build solar power plants, not require every new apartment to cover it's roof in panels regardless of the economic sensibility of doing so.
- owlmonkey 10y ago
  It's politics. You can't survive here politically proposing as-of-right building permits and across the board upzoning. But you can move the needle in the right direction.