Dueling Lawsuits Challenge Lurie’s Family Zoning Plan

San Francisco’s recently approved Family Zoning plan is under fire from both sides of the housing debate, with dueling lawsuits challenging the city’s newly adopted blueprint for growth.

In December, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved Mayor Daniel Lurie’s rezoning plan that allows for more housing options in neighborhoods with greater access to growth-supporting economic opportunities and services like public transit, parks, retail and community facilities. One lawsuit alleges the city’s plan doesn’t go far enough to increase housing supply, while the other claims the ordinance threatens neighborhoods and needs further study before implementation, the San Francisco Examiner reported.

The opposition lawsuit, filed last month by a coalition of neighborhood and small business groups including Neighborhoods United SF and Small Business Forward, claims the city rushed a “haphazard” plan through and “approved [it] with little meaningful analysis.”

The complaint claims that the California Environmental Quality Act requires additional consideration. According to the groups, the final plan is “dramatically” different from the city’s 2023 housing element and includes provisions for denser and taller development in historic northern neighborhoods that were not studied as part of the earlier housing element. Opponents believe the Family Zoning plan will incentivize speculative redevelopment, strain infrastructure and displace rent-controlled tenants and small businesses.

“It was the ultimate game of goalpost moving,” Romalyn Schmaltz, a 20-year North Beach resident and one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, told the Examiner of the development process behind Lurie’s law. “The Family Zoning plan was inappropriately planned and was rushed through without sufficient input and was understudied.”

A second lawsuit, filed by pro-housing groups YIMBY Law, the California Housing Defense Fund and Californians for Homeownership, argues the rezoning doesn’t go far enough to meet state housing production targets and unlawfully deviates from the housing element’s commitments. The organizations cite city projections showing the plan could yield as few as 8,500 to 14,600 units by 2045, well short of the 82,069 units that San Francisco is required by the state to plan for by 2031.

“The Family Zoning plan is not good enough,” Sonja Trauss, executive director of YIMBY Law, told the Examiner. “It doesn’t implement what was promised in the housing element. Maybe it’s better than what we had before, but it’s not going to produce the 82,000 units the city needs.”

San Francisco Supervisors approved the upzoning plan to avoid missing a Jan. 31 state deadline, after which the city faced the potential implementation of builder’s remedy, forcing officials to approve any proposed projects that meet basic standards, as well as the loss of more than $100 million per year in state funding. Lurie’s office is standing by the approved plan.

“As the cost of housing continues to rise, the Family Zoning Plan is going to help ensure that the next generation of San Franciscans can afford to raise their kids here,” a Lurie spokesperson told the Examiner. “But our administration is not going to hand the keys to Sacramento. We’re going to meet state requirements while protecting what’s so special about our neighborhoods and our city.”

— Chris Malone Méndez