One of the things I've learned, watching real estate in the Bay, is that it's rarely one factor in particular that's to blame for everything. Instead it's the c

One of the things I've learned, watching real estate in the Bay, is that it's rarely one factor in particular that's to blame for everything. Instead it's the cumulative force of many factors shaping what does get built, where, and when. For instance, NIMBYs requiring near-infinite shadow studies in SF. It doesn't prevent building, but by raising the costs and extending the timelines it helps reduce the amount that gets built. What does get built costs more. The result is fewer and pricier units, and what maybe could have been a 25% subsidized building is now 10% in order to make the numbers work. Or maybe a building goes from five stories to three and no longer has any affordable housing at all. At scale, lower-margin proposals go from further down the list while still being in the black to being in the red and never being built. Which is to say that developments in progress should not be taken as proof that there are no problems with zoning or NIMBYs. Just that it's possible to overcome them if there's enough money to be made.