As discussed last month, the Board of Supervisors today is debating an affordable housing density-bonus program, endorsed by the mayor and drafted by Planning. The deal for developers, as anticipated: Receive two extra stories of height on your project — even in areas zoned for low-height buildings — if you make 30 percent of your units affordable. Want three extra stories of height? Then build 100 percent affordable.

The Chronicle lays out the Mayor's new program pretty favorably — especially in comparison to the paper's tepid reelection endorsement. They do note that "[u]nlike state and federal affordable housing programs, the measure is primarily directed at encouraging builders to provide units for middle-income families rather than low-income." That is to say that of those 30 percent affordable housing units, 18 percent are for families of four making about $122,000 to $142,000 — roughly 120 to 140 percent of area median income. The remaining 12 percent of units would serve "low- to moderate-income people."

The inspiration for the proposal is a similar, statewide density bonus law that was obscure and widely ignored until a 2013 Napa County Lawsuit. In fact, San Francisco has been out of compliance with it for years. But, said Planning Director John Rahaim, "The State Density Bonus Law does not fully meet the needs specific to San Francisco and does not incentivize middle-income housing," hence the local emphasis on the middle.

Some have been more pointed in their criticism of that emphasis. “[W]e question if that is the income level we should be developing programs for,” said Fernando Martí, co-director of the Council of Community Housing Organizations, which will remain neutral on the measure.

Although — in the words of the Mayor — San Francisco has been “successful in delivering significant amounts of affordable housing through large-scale, high-rise development" especially in areas zoned for higher buildings "we need to do more... With this new program, smart, sensible and well-designed infill development can also contribute, by adding thousands of permanently affordable homes throughout the city,” Lee said.

Kearstin Dischinger of the Planning Department has pinpointed 240 sites across San Francisco that could be affected — from Geary Boulevard to the Excelsior. “They are pretty evenly distributed throughout the area,” she said. “It’s a nice way to imagine the city growing, as opposed to the concentration of development we are experiencing in SoMa and Mission Bay.” If all these sites were, in fact, developed, 16,000 units would be added to the city's store — about 5,000 of them affordable.

Above is the "study area" for the density bonus from the planning department, encompassing lots of retail corridors and areas zoned back in the 1970s for four or six stories.

By 2020, Lee's office has pledged to make way for 10,000 new units of permanently affordable housing. For that to be feasible, of course, San Francisco needs money to buy up housing, so voters would need to pass the mayor's proposed $310 million affordable-housing bond, coming to a ballot near you this November. As Dischinger explained the relationship between the 2020 pledge and the new affordable housing bonus program proposal: “This can fill those gaps that we are not comfortable investing public subsidies on.” In fact, the density bonus is “the centerpiece of our middle-income housing program.” according to Jeff Buckley, who is senior adviser to the mayor on housing.

But, as previously noted, maybe this isn't something to get too excited about too soon. Gabriel Metcalf of SPUR notes that "There’s nothing in this reform that will make it any easier to get permission to build housing."

Previously: Will The Sunset Finally Get Housing Density?
Planning Study: SF Is Losing Affordable Housing Almost As Fast As We're Building It