- Garbage City FC
- Posts
- Oh no, the NIMBYs are at it again
Oh no, the NIMBYs are at it again
These people have worms in their brain
I recently had the INTENSE DISPLEASURE of reading this article, “The mayor’s upzoning plans will deeply damage SF’s neighborhoods,” in 48hills.org. Its author, Dennis Antenore, is very upset at the possibility that someone might build new houses in San Francisco and so he wrote an incredibly misleading and at times disturbing article about that.
(By the way, when did it become “progessive” to violently oppose new housing? My theory is it happened when so-called progressives got old enough to afford houses, but I welcome other theories.)
First, some backstory: San Francisco, as we know, is a very expensive city in which to buy or rent a home. This is because it is very small for a major American city and lots of people want to live here for some reason. There are numerous high-rise housing structures in some parts of the city, but much of the Richmond and Sunset is acres and acres of single-story single-family homes. The mayor proposed letting people build larger structures if they want to:
In all, the area being rezoned makes up about 50% of the city’s land, but those areas have seen just 10% of the city’s housing development over the past 20 years, mostly because the majority of the area is not zoned for high-density projects. This includes areas along Lombard Street in the Marina; 19th Avenue; Taravel, Irving, Judah and Sloat in the Sunset; and Balboa, Clement and Geary in the Richmond. It also includes blocks just off those corridors. In many areas heights would be increased from 28 to 65 or 85 feet; some larger sites on busy intersections would allow towers as high as 140 or 300 feet.
Dennis Antenore doesn’t like letting people build things on property they own so he says some really really misleading and bad shit:
The plan appears to be a contemporary version of redevelopment programs. It envisions massive demolitions, without regard to what is being lost in the process. There is no consideration of the loss of a sense of community and an understanding that we are not isolated individuals but part of something larger.
The proponents have failed to learn from the history of redevelopment programs in San Francisco, particularly in the Western Addition and Fillmore. Thousands of people lost their homes and businesses. A vibrant African American culture was lost and has never recovered. Efforts to bring back what was lost have all failed.
In case you’re not familiar, Dennis is referring to the redevelopment of the Fillmore district, in which mostly black families were forced out when their property was condemned and flattened. The community was destroyed and never really recovered.
That is not, by any stretch, what is happening with the upzoning. No properties are being condemned, and no one is being forced out. It is possible that a building owner might decide to demolish a building and construct a larger one, but the tenant must be allowed to move back into the new building. Sucks for the tenant in the meantime, no getting around that, but comparing it to what happened in the Fillmore in the 60’s is kind of gross.
Let’s continue:
What will be the impact on schools, local businesses as well as the availability of grocery stores, childcare facilities, and playgrounds? The plan is designed to be transit intensive and the new buildings will have little or no parking. Yet, there has been no consideration of either the practicality of or financial feasibility of making the required improvements to the transportation system.
Well, right now the San Francisco Unified School District is losing kids and thus losing federal funds, so getting more kids would actually help a ton! I’m not sure there will be a early-Covid-like run on grovery stores or playgrounds from a few thousand new people either. And more people on Muni would be a good thing for a service that has still not fully recovered post-pandemic.
Since the 2020 census, the population of San Francisco has fallen not increased. The 2020 census found 873,965 residents; the census bureau’s estimate as of July 1, 2022 is 808,427, a decline of 7.5 percent. Is there any solid reason to project a significant population increase?
Actually, Dennis, the population of San Francisco grew in 2022 and 2023, and there is no reason to think it will not continue to grow, except, of course, NOT ENOUGH HOUSING.
There is a vast amount of research showing that building more housing drives down the cost of housing, an economic proposition so basic and understandable that only NIMBYs don’t get it. Hey, I sort of understand; if your fear is that your home will drop in value, you’d want to stop new construction too. But that’s very selfish. No cookie for you.
According to SF Assessor records, someone named “Dennis Antenore” owns a home in the Inner Sunset area. Not even 800 square feet, Zillow values it at over $1 million. It would be a shame to see it fall in value.
Reply