Governor Brown's housing proposal could mean sweeping Bay Area changes
This would address an important element of high Bay Area housing costs: the discretionary project veto by local authorities. This is the main reason why only super-high end luxury stuff gets built in San Francisco.<p>In most parts of the US, there are certain local zoning laws. You apply to the local government for review of your project. This is expensive, as you must prepare detailed professional studies for the proposal.<p>If the project conforms to all of the zoning laws, it must receive a permit. They can only deny you a permit if your project does not comply with some specific zoning law.<p>In San Francisco and several other nearby cities, the local government can arbitrarily withhold a permit even when a project conforms to all local zoning laws in every respect, usually under the vague and arbitrary guise of &quot;not fitting in with the neighborhood&#x27;s character.&quot;<p>Since applying for a permit is an expensive and time consuming process, most developers simply don&#x27;t bother to even try in San Francisco. They just go elsewhere, where their project can&#x27;t be arbitrarily vetoed by local authorities despite conforming to all applicable zoning laws.<p>The main exception is luxury developments: since the profit margin on luxury construction is so high, it&#x27;s worth the extra cost and risk associated with navigating San Francisco&#x27;s permit process.<p>If this law passes, then municipalities will not wield the power of arbitrary veto anymore. There will still be extensive zoning regulations, of course; the difference is that development restrictions will have to be spelled out in the law, in advance, rather than made up on an ad hoc, per-project basis by local officials. This greatly reduces the risk involved in starting a development project, and makes non-luxury developments much more likely to be profitable and thus undertaken by developers.