Most Bay Area cities laughingly behind on their own housing goals
Have you ever made goals that you eventually realize it would take several lifetimes to accomplish? Perhaps some New Year resolutions you followed stringently for about a month before the effort somehow fizzled away? You can maybe take comfort that the city of Concord had set a 22 year housing goal that would take 966 years to achieve, if the current housing trend continues. Unfortunately, when cities fail this spectacularly, it adversely affects tens of thousands to millions of people.
The San Francisco Chronicle reports how many Bay Area cities are lagging far behind their targeted housing growth by 2040 and includes a link to a handy map by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. The housing goals are set by a governmental agency called the Association of Bay Area Governments and the projections are based on housing growth between 2010 and 2017.
Aside from that, several undisclosed regions in the south bay that are ahead of schedule, and that San Francisco is "only" 23 years behind schedule, just about everything else is bad news. Nearly every city that has large housing growth needs are decades behind schedule of their own targets. Oakland, for example, is one of the largest cities in the Bay Area and is 255 years behind schedule. MTC director Steve Heminger reported, "Every single county is over-performing its job forecast, some by massive amounts, and every single county is under-performing its housing forecast, almost all by a wide margin."
It's not all dark skies ahead, however. Although I'd much prefer its application to be broader and prescription to be less complex, hopefully Scott Wiener's SB35 would help on that front. In a nutshell, the bill, signed by Governor Brown last year, requires streamlining the permitting process for certain housing types in cities that lack adequate housing supply. According to the first report (PDF) from SB35 released several months ago, 97.5% of jurisdictions in California lack adequate housing and are subject to the streamlining process.
It is a special level of absurdity in local governments setting goals for themselves then furiously blocking the one thing that would help them achieve their goals: letting people build.
The San Francisco Chronicle reports how many Bay Area cities are lagging far behind their targeted housing growth by 2040 and includes a link to a handy map by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. The housing goals are set by a governmental agency called the Association of Bay Area Governments and the projections are based on housing growth between 2010 and 2017.
Every single county is over-performing its job forecast, some by massive amounts, and every single county is under-performing its housing forecast, almost all by a wide margin.Many of the results are unsurprising. On the bright side, many of the peripheral cities are meeting their housing goals, though unfortunately, this pushes people out while jobs stay within the inner Bay Area, creating traffic congestion as people are forced to commute much longer distances. Also unsurprisingly, the city of Dublin is ahead of schedule. Dublin has been fantastic at allowing developers to build, although now there is a growing sentiment among residents to stop growth. Recently, a public notice was issued for a hearing on a 300+ unit apartment building near the East Dublin BART station, stating that it had previously been denied at city council and a lawsuit against the city has been filed. I wouldn't be surprised to see Dublin regress quickly if this assessment is done again in the future. Marin surprisingly has a few cities that are ahead of schedule, though it appears the growth targets for those areas seem to be underwhelming in the first place.
Aside from that, several undisclosed regions in the south bay that are ahead of schedule, and that San Francisco is "only" 23 years behind schedule, just about everything else is bad news. Nearly every city that has large housing growth needs are decades behind schedule of their own targets. Oakland, for example, is one of the largest cities in the Bay Area and is 255 years behind schedule. MTC director Steve Heminger reported, "Every single county is over-performing its job forecast, some by massive amounts, and every single county is under-performing its housing forecast, almost all by a wide margin."
It's not all dark skies ahead, however. Although I'd much prefer its application to be broader and prescription to be less complex, hopefully Scott Wiener's SB35 would help on that front. In a nutshell, the bill, signed by Governor Brown last year, requires streamlining the permitting process for certain housing types in cities that lack adequate housing supply. According to the first report (PDF) from SB35 released several months ago, 97.5% of jurisdictions in California lack adequate housing and are subject to the streamlining process.
It is a special level of absurdity in local governments setting goals for themselves then furiously blocking the one thing that would help them achieve their goals: letting people build.
Comments