Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public asks commission to challenge RHNA numbers; planning staff says regional allocations remain in effect
Summary
A public commenter urged the Planning Commission to request changes to San Francisco’s RHNA allocation based on updated state population projections; Planning Department staff said RHNA numbers and housing‑element obligations set by ABAG remain in effect and any adjustment would need action by HCD, ABAG or the State Legislature.
During general public comment at the March 13 meeting, Claire Mills urged the Planning Commission to push back on the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for San Francisco, arguing the state Department of Finance’s updated population projections render the city’s mandated unit targets excessive.
Mills told the commission the Department of Finance’s September 2024 projections show a much smaller population increase for San Francisco (she cited a projection of roughly 2,683 new residents by 2030) compared with the RHNA requirement that the city plan for 82,069 new units. She urged the commission to ask ABAG and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to account for units already in the pipeline and to negotiate a recalculation of San Francisco’s allocation.
Planning staff responded that neither HCD nor ABAG has revised RHNA allocations in light of the Department of Finance projections and that San Francisco remains subject to the RHNA numbers set by ABAG under state law. Staff suggested that the mayor’s office and Board of Supervisors representatives on ABAG would be the appropriate channels to raise the issue.
Commissioners and staff did not take any formal action at the hearing. Staff noted the city’s housing element and RHNA obligations remain in effect unless changed by ABAG, HCD or the Legislature. Mills requested the commission consider sending a representative to ABAG or otherwise coordinating with other Bay Area jurisdictions seeking flexibility.
