Mar 14, 2016 0 Comments in Affordable Housing, Ballot initiative, Inclusionary Housing by

What effect would the 25% on-site Inclusionary requirement in the proposed June charter amendment have on our housing market? Is there a connection between the affordability increase and a loss of housing? That’s what Chief Economist, Dr. Ted Egan and his team were asked to answer in only 5 weeks. Using data from 2001 – 2013, the Controller and his team created an economic model used to estimate which zoning, structural, and market factors statistically explain which City parcels added new housing over the 12-year period. The goal was to predict the impacts of the proposed Inclusionary changes. Dr Egan visited RegComm last Friday to share his 17-page report and discuss his conclusions. These include:

  • Increased private investment in affordable housing would improve affordability for low-income residents who already spend at least half of their income on housing.
  • However, this would increase development costs, resulting in a slowdown in the market. This would have an overall negative impact on the housing market by putting an added strain on the existing supply.
  • Policy changes that make market-rate housing infeasible raise the price of existing housing.

His study is a preview of what’s expected to come in a more lengthy economic feasibility analysis due later this spring.

If you don’t have time to read the full 17 page report, these four pages explain each scenario. 

Page 11 - On-site findings

Screen shot 2016-03-14 at 6.47.04 PM Screen shot 2016-03-14 at 6.46.38 PM Screen shot 2016-03-14 at 6.35.37 PM

About the Author

Tim Colen

Tim is a Senior Advisor to SFHAC and the former Executive Director. His passions, in no particular order, include urban environmental issues, politics and baseball. A really cool future job would be comparative studies of cities around the world. He can be reached at

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *