While I do support infill development, San Francisco is already a dense city (the second-densest city in the US after New York City, unless you count much smaller municipalities), and the idea that everyone must, must, must be given the opportunity to live in San Francisco proper is naïve, as is the idea that any but a tiny minority of the homeless in the city would ever be able to afford any kind of market-rate housing even with a wholesale program of infill development.<p>You say &quot;there is nowhere else to build.&quot;  Sure there is.  There is Daly City and Colma and Millbrae and so forth down to San Jose and out into the east bay and even the north bay.  Not everyone is going to live in the 49 square miles of SF, even if it becomes considerably more dense.<p>Now, we should also build higher-density housing in SF.  But that&#x27;s not going to change the homelessness situation in any meaningful way.