EDITORIAL: A case study in how to create a housing crisis

Communities across California have a history of using zoning, environmental and other procedural obstacles to block housing projects. The perfectly predictable result is a housing crisis of major proportions.

For a microcosm of how the Golden State got to this point, consider one Bay Area resident’s struggle to build a home on a longtime vacant lot in San Francisco.

In a recent report, Reason.com traced the frustrating experience of professional architect Troy Kashanipour, who has been trying to build a code-compliant home on his own property. The small, odd-shaped lot in question had long been vacant, “save for a small, overgrown community garden planted in the 1990s,” Reason reports.

Before he even bought the property, Mr. Kashanipour spent time with city planners to ensure the project and its design would be in compliance with San Francisco’s codes and ordinances. Confident that he had followed all the rules, he bought the parcel in 2015 and expected to glide through the planning process.

But this is California, after all.

San Francisco law, Reason explains, requires builders of new construction projects to hold meetings allowing nearby property owners and neighborhood groups to weigh in. More than 40 people attended the first meeting, Reason reports, and many in the mob weren’t happy with the plan.

At a later Planning Commission hearing, one neighbor argued that the lot was home to some endangered garter snakes. Another said the roof deck in Mr. Kashanipour’s design was at odds with “the character of this working-class neighborhood.” Another emailed comments ahead of the meeting, claiming that the “‘piece of pie’-shaped home nestled inappropriately where it clearly does not belong” and would create a flood of tourists and traffic problems.

Still more complained, according to Reason, that removing the community garden — the overgrown community garden — would “take away valuable joy” from passers-by.

Despite the opposition, Mr. Kashanipour went out of his way to interact with his soon-to-be neighbors, handing out his contact information and offering to meet individually with anyone who was concerned about the project.

After much back and forth and continued controversy, the planning commissioners imposed seven conditions on Mr. Kashanipour’s project earlier this year. Mr. Kashanipour appealed that decision but agreed to four of the seven conditions. A few weeks ago, the Board of Appeals threw out some of the new demands but kept a prohibition on the building of a fourth floor. Both he and his immediate neighbor can appeal that decision. If they don’t, Reason reports, Mr. Kashanipour will have to present new plans to the board, which would then send them off to city bureaucrats for another round of approvals — after which he might finally be allowed to build his home.

And how long could that take? Nobody knows, says a Board of Appeals staffer interviewed by Reason.

All of this for one house. As Reason concludes, “This is how you create a housing shortage.”