clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

No Demolition Without Promising Similar Replacements?

New, 10 comments

With an eye toward the city's goal of increasing housing supply, a new piece of legislation on the table would make it illegal to demolish residences without building replacement homes that are of the same affordability. This comes after the city's Planning Commission earlier this year approved the demolition of three rent-controlled apartments to make way for an expansion of the Drew School's Pac Heights campus. Their reasoning: that the "social benefits" of allowing the school's expansion outweighed the loss of those three apartments. Indeed, the Planning Commission would like to retain such discretion on a case-by-case basis— but it sounds like the legislation's moving forward anyway, if with a little more finessing. Generally, the demolition of housing has led to even more housing after replacements get built, this last case being a rare recent one where housing demolition actually led to a net total loss of residences. Would this endanger luxury condo developments too, we wonder?
· New law would limit housing demolitions [SF Examiner]

[Demolished house courtesy Whole Wheat Toast]