Tackle affordability crisis regionally

Condominiums under construction at 1600 Market St. will help to east the housing crunch in S.F., but the problem must be tacked by the region. Condominiums under construction at 1600 Market St. will help to east the housing crunch in S.F., but the problem must be tacked by the region. Photo: Michael Short, The Chronicle Photo: Michael Short, The Chronicle Image 1 of / 1 Caption Close Tackle affordability crisis regionally 1 / 1 Back to Gallery

The debate over San Francisco's affordability crisis has, in too many ways, devolved into a bitter backlash against "techies." This week we saw protesters blocking a Google bus in the Mission District and last week the industry's workers were treated to more mean-spirited graffiti in the neighborhood.

This column has stressed in the past that aiming a rambling set of resentments at a single class of workers is no substitute for public policy changes that address the underlying issues (no matter how intent some entrepreneurs seem on making themselves look obnoxious, entitled and aloof).

San Francisco wasn't affordable before the tech boom and it won't be affordable after it ends. Indeed, many American cities are becoming more expensive and less diverse, after long-running suburban flight patterns shifted into reverse years ago.

As I wrote in June: "Short of some radical plan that allots housing units by skill type or bans tech companies, our only option for solving the part of this problem that we can is to make housing more affordable. We can do that in three basic ways: Build more, set aside a greater portion as affordable and protect the existing stock."

Smart development

San Francisco can and should do all three - any strong city needs affordable homes for its families, teachers, police officers and grocery store clerks. But a report that urban planning organization SPUR will release Thursday underscores a critical supplementary approach - tackling affordability on a regional basis by getting other cities to develop in smarter ways.

The report specifically offers a roadmap for San Jose - a city that was largely laid out in the car-centric postwar era - to create more walkable, sustainable and livable neighborhoods. But the broader message is applicable for cities throughout the Bay Area - and particularly up and down Highway 101.

"Silicon Valley, the most dynamic and innovative economic engine in the world, is not creating great urban places," the report states. "Having grown around the automobile, the valley consists largely of low-slung office parks, surface parking and suburban tract homes. But tastes and values are moving away from strictly suburban lifestyles."

'Demanding urbanism'

"Today's top firms and top talent are increasingly demanding engaging places, diverse experiences and convenient amenities," it adds. "Simply put, they are demanding urbanism."

Walkable neighborhoods are built to accommodate people, with public transit, sidewalks, parks and a blend of art museums, bars, bookstores, concert venues, grocery stores and restaurants. Additional houses and a more urban texture could help make San Jose more attractive to the young tech workers (and other types) who at the moment overwhelmingly want to settle in San Francisco, regardless of where their employers are, SPUR argues.

To the degree that workers are drawn to other cities, it relieves the housing and pricing pressures now disproportionately squeezing San Francisco.

The example of Oakland, the third major population center of the Bay Area, is instructive. Its walkable, mixed-use, transit-oriented - and yes, hip - neighborhoods like Rockridge, Temescal and Uptown are absorbing a considerable portion of the San Francisco overflow. That's why rents are rising there, too. (Full disclosure: I'm a Rockridge renter myself.)

Gabriel Metcalf, executive director of SPUR, said San Francisco can do additional things to improve affordability within its borders. That includes boosting the minimum wage, as Mayor Ed Lee is calling for, and making Muni an efficient and affordable transit option for more residents.

And there should be (and are) debates under way on other technology issues that touch on affordability and fairness in the city, further exploring questions like: How much should private buses pay for using Muni stops? Should sharing-economy companies operate under different rules than their traditional rivals? Do successful tech companies deserve tax breaks, or owe more to the community in exchange for them? And do tenants need stronger legal protections amid the growing financial incentives to evict longtime renters?

But, as the SPUR report underlines, San Francisco isn't operating in a vacuum.

"I think it's really important to acknowledge that not all of the solution can come from within San Francisco," Metcalf said. "We need the cities of the Bay Area to be working together on this."

He is the first to admit that transforming planning mind-sets, much less complete neighborhoods and cities, takes a long time. This is not a quick fix for the current affordability crisis. But then again, no such silver bullet seems to exist.

"We created our current affordability problem over many decades of decisions," he said. "And it will take a long time to dig our way out of the problem."