In a situation where housing supply is well below demand, obviously developers are going to prioritize the most profitable projects, i.e. “luxury” housing, as l

In a situation where housing supply is well below demand, obviously developers are going to prioritize the most profitable projects, i.e. “luxury” housing, as long as the imbalance persists. Since economists estimate the Bay Area needs to expand housing by 50% just to keep prices stable, that’s not happening anytime soon. One of the most powerful tools is Scott Wiener’s SB35, which basically allows a developer to just ignore all the obstruction from NIMBYs and cities if the development has a certain proportion of affordable units (every building has its less desirable units, so they are it), as used here: https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/How-one-S-F-housing-project-is-using-state-laws-16375684.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/How-one-S-F-housing-p... Obstructionism uses stalling tactics to make developers give up because their costs keep running while nothing happens. While a unit with 50% affordable housing may not be as profitable as a 100% market rate one, the option value of not having to deal with the red tape and rank hypocrisy is so high I expect it will be used increasingly, and there will probably be NIMBY efforts to overturn SB 35.