Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Office And Jobs Trends topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff: San Francisco captured a larger share of regional job growth in the last decade; implications for Prop M and housing
Summary
Planning Department presentation showed San Francisco’s job growth accelerated sharply over the last decade and questioned whether the city can sustain that pace; commissioners and public commenters urged linking office allocations to housing and transit investments and preparing for pressures on price‑sensitive users.
Planning Department staff delivered a data‑rich presentation on April 28 reviewing job and office trends in San Francisco from 1985 through 2015 and the likely near‑term pipeline.
The staff analysis showed that while San Francisco grew more slowly than the region for decades, the city’s pace accelerated over the past 10 years: average annual job growth climbed from roughly 7,500 per year to about 13,000 per year, and in the most recent five‑year window the city added roughly 30,000 jobs per year. Staff emphasized that recent office pipeline (about 7 million square feet in construction/entitlement) and low vacancy mean the city is approaching capacity constraints that will require tradeoffs with housing and transportation policy.
Many commissioners and members of the public pressed staff on the implications. Commissioner Richards and others raised concerns about Prop M allocations accumulated during slower years and suggested stronger mechanisms to time allocations, such as higher impact fees for projects using older allocations. Community speakers and nonprofit representatives highlighted risks to nonprofits and middle‑income workers as office rents rise: "National headquarters located in San Francisco for a hundred years...is moving to Oakland next month, because they have been priced out," a speaker said, noting loss of PDR and nonprofit office space.
Staff said the presentation was the first in a series and that forthcoming briefings would examine housing and transportation links and how Plan Bay Area projections should be interpreted for local planning decisions. Commissioners asked staff to add deeper peer‑city comparisons and to analyze how different office product types (class A vs. smaller price‑sensitive spaces) are affecting displacement. The presentation was informational; no formal action was required.
