[kevinburke]

This goes for everyone in this thread but please don't only be cynical about this - there's a lot we can do around the margin

- Approve HOME SF - a Katy Tang plan to provide bonuses for dense housing near transit

- Approve the Safai/Breed housing plan, which would require 18% of units to be affordable, vs 28%

- Show up to the Brisbane Baylands meetings and voice our support for a plan that includes 4400 units of housing, vs zero units

- Support SB 35, which would fast track projects that are near transit and include affordable housing

- Support SB 167, which would allow the state to be a lot more aggressive pursuing violators of the Housing Accountability Act.

[acchow]

  a Katy Tang plan to provide bonuses for dense housing near transit

Can you explain why this is needed? In other cities, the value of physical land goes up near subway stations which naturally increases the density of developments to meet profitability.

[kevinburke]

Whether a development would be profitable has little to do with whether it would be politically viable in San Francisco. In particular areas near transit aren't necessarily zoned for high density. Follow Kim-mai Cutler or go to a SF Yimby newbie meeting to learn more.

[acchow]

My point was typically you don't need to provide bonuses for higher density developments near transit. Developments will naturally become higher density because they have to.

You can't purchase a lot of land and bulldoze it for a 3-story building near a subway station. It's just not profitable. The building will naturally be a high-rise. No "bonuses" needed to induce that.