South San Francisco is joining the controversial conversation about zoning modifications in single-family residential neighborhoods.
The City Council is expected to decide Wednesday whether city staff should analyze changes to single-family zoning to allow for more housing in those neighborhoods. So far, the city’s approach has been focused on developing new housing in areas near transit and jobs, while preserving existing residential neighborhoods traditionally characterized by single-family homes.
But faced with a state-mandated goal to build new 3,957 units — of which 720 must be reserved for moderate-income households — in the next decade, South San Francisco is “looking at every possible tool to be innovative about meeting the current housing crisis,” said Alex Greenwood, director of Economic and Community Development for South San Francisco.
Single-family units make up 67% of the city’s total units and 33.8% of the total land area, compared to duplex, triplex and fourplex housing, which combined constitute 8.1% of total units and 1.5% of the land.
The goal is to produce more housing for the so-called “missing middle,” though specifics of the proposal have not yet been finalized. Any changes to current zoning would require additional public input and would be folded into the General Plan update, which is expected to conclude in about a year, according to Greenwood.
If the idea gains traction, zoning modifications could be on track for approval by early 2022.
Greenwood said the proposal would align the city with state efforts to create higher-density housing in traditionally low-density neighborhoods.
“The state has already had very aggressive permissive laws for accessory dwelling units — so this would be comparable to what is already required by the state with respect to ADUs, but it would allow the city to have better controls on design, parking and some of the other concerns that residents might have,” said Greenwood. “It’s controversial, complex but it's something that we are excited to start the dialogue on and see if it's a good fit for our community.”
The effort places South San Francisco on the heels of Sacramento and Berkeley, which have either approved or are considering changes to current zoning to permit more housing types in single-family neighborhoods, and is complex indeed.
Sacramento’s City Council in January voted unanimously to allow citywide fourplex zoning, and Berkeley’s City Council is expected to vote Tuesday on a resolution that would set the tone for nixing single-family zoning by December 2022.
Peter Cohen, co-director of the San Francisco Council of Community Housing Organizations, said the coalition of community-based housing providers supports increasing density in areas that "make sense," like near transit or close to commercial streets.
"Single-family zoned areas provide opportunities for modest increases in density, from ADUs to fourplexes and maybe some small apartments on slightly larger lots, and who knows, maybe even an affordable housing project every now and then if all the conditions line up right," said Cohen, but added that the "devil is in the details."
"As always when it comes to doing good housing policy, the entry-level question is: What is the goal these cities are trying to achieve? Is it upzoning for density sake, hoping to prime the private real estate market to simply invest in more residential infill development? Or is the goal explicitly about increasing density to increase affordability?" said Cohen.
He added that some of the only areas in the region today with "real racial diversity are zoned for single-family," citing neighborhoods like San Francisco's Bayview and Excelsior districts.
"Permitting denser housing, by itself, does not make it affordable or necessarily result in racial integration," he said. "We should be careful in rezoning single-family areas that this does not result in house-flipping, development speculation and other activities that contribute to the displacement of existing communities."
For Berkeley, the changes are a matter of contending with a long history of redlining and racial restrictive covenants that have “morphed into exclusionary zoning,” said Councilmember Lori Droste, who is spearheading that city's proposal.
“Every time we ask constituents what are your concerns, without fail the top three are homelessness, housing costs and climate change. We actually have an opportunity to address all three,” Droste said.
Separate from a resolution that is up for vote on Tuesday, Berkeley is considering revisions to its zoning code and General Plan to permit developments of up to four units in all residential zoning districts. With consideration of certain criteria, proposed housing developments with up to four units could be approved ministerially. The strategy would come with ramped up tenant protections to prevent displacement, including increased relocation payments and extending right-to-return and relocation benefits to tenants not covered by Berkeley’s Rent Stabilization Ordinance.
About half of the city is currently restricted by single-family zoning, said Droste, who added that she understands those in her community who are feeling “defensive” in regard to the proposed changes.
“We are not saying that if you live in a single-family home that you are bad or racist. I live in one. It's more about why wouldn't we allow the opportunity to have flexibility in our zoning code to allow a grandmother to duplex her house,” said Droste.
State Sen. Scott Wiener, an ardent supporter of both cities' efforts to relax zoning restrictions, described the proposals as “pro-equity” in regard to housing justice.
“Banning apartment buildings and limiting housing to only single-family homes is not equitable. In fact it perpetuates segregation as various studies have shown,” said Wiener.
Last week, Wiener introduced legislation that aims to close a “loophole” that he said enables cities to prohibit multifamily housing on parcels where zoning allows it. Wiener is also the author of SB 10, which would allow cities to "quickly upzone for up to 10-unit buildings without having to go through (environmental review), as long as its not a sprawl area," he said.