Board approves HomeSF density-bonus ordinance after debate over legacy businesses and District 9 protections

San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors approved, on first reading, an ordinance establishing the HomeSF voluntary density-bonus program and related zoning changes, after more than three hours of debate and several roll-call votes on amendments.

The ordinance, introduced and presented by Supervisor Sandra Tang, allows developers who opt into HomeSF to build up to two stories above existing height limits along designated transit and commercial corridors in exchange for providing increased on-site affordability and family-sized units. Tang and planning staff said the City estimates HomeSF could produce roughly 5,000 permanently affordable homes over 20 years.

Supporters said HomeSF expands eligibility to serve middle-income households that often fall outside existing affordable programs. “This program is designed to provide 30 percent of units on-site as affordable housing with expanded income brackets to help middle-income families, teachers, social workers and entry-level public safety staff remain in the city,” Tang said during her remarks. She described several technical and policy amendments she and staff were offering, including unit distribution and family-size requirements.

The measure includes requirements intended to preserve family-sized units: 40 percent of HomeSF units must be two- or three-bedroom units and 10 percent must be three-bedroom units. Tang also described a proposed distribution for both rental and ownership tiers (12 percent at the lowest tier, 9 percent at the middle tier and 9 percent at the top tier) and said ownership tiers would be priced at 80 percent, 105 percent and 130 percent of area median income for their respective brackets.

Supervisor Hillary Ronen proposed two narrowly targeted amendments. One, already accepted by Tang and incorporated into the text, suspends HomeSF in District 9 parcels when the board directs planning to study an area plan for that district, to avoid preempting a future lot-by-lot rezoning there. Ronen’s second amendment would have excluded buildings that house registered legacy businesses on the legacy business registry from HomeSF if the program would demolish or remove space rented by a legacy business. Ronen said the registry—created by Proposition J—reflects businesses deemed “historic and cultural assets” and that the proposed change would protect a small number of businesses the city has already vetted and listed.

City staff and other supervisors pushed back. Planning staff and Supervisor Tang said HomeSF already contains multiple protections for small businesses, including notifications to business owners and the Office of Economic and Workforce Development, conditional-use findings for certain ground-floor uses, an 18-month notification process tied to the environmental review, and ground-floor square-footage replacement requirements intended to preserve “like-for-like” retail space. Tang warned that adding more restrictions could push developers to use the state density-bonus law or other state programs that do not include the same local protections.

Supervisor Ronan’s legacy-business amendment failed on a roll-call vote (4 in favor, 7 opposed). Supervisor Mark Farrell and others said they supported the overall ordinance but had concerns about adding the legacy-business carve-out at this time; others warned carve-outs invite more carve-outs and could undermine the program. A separate amendment from Supervisor Gordon Mar that would have excluded Ocean Avenue between Paloma Avenue and 19th Avenue also failed on a roll-call vote (4 in favor, 7 opposed) after Tang said Ocean Avenue had been part of the program all along and warned against a cascade of geographic carve-outs.

Tang offered two technical corrections on the floor to resolve language conflicts in various ordinance versions; those technical amendments passed without roll-call objection. After the amendment votes, the board approved the ordinance as amended on first reading by a vote of 10–1 (Supervisor David Chiu [note: vote recorded in transcript as “Yi”] cast the lone no), moving it forward for further hearings/second reading as required by law.

Why it matters: HomeSF would be a voluntary, city-level incentive program that aims to accelerate affordable and family-sized housing along transit corridors. Supporters argued it specifically targets units for middle-income households who have seen their representation decline in San Francisco’s housing stock; opponents and some supervisors worried about potential commercial displacement and urged careful monitoring and follow-up legislation.

What happens next: The ordinance passed first reading; the planning department and mayor’s housing office will continue implementation planning. Supervisors and staff said they expect further legislative steps, community outreach tied to area plans and possible “trailing legislation” on specific protections if necessary.

Votes and formal actions recorded on the HomeSF item included multiple motions to amend (some adopted, some defeated) and the final first-reading passage of the ordinance as amended.