For the past three years, GrowSF has regularly polled on the popularity of various housing proposals. From upzoning, to homeless shelters, to high rises, and the cost of living, we've been keeping track of what people want.
Now with Mayor Lurie's family zoning proposal on the table, we thought it was the right time to publicly disclose much more of our housing data. Below, you'll find our results and cross-tabs for the first time, and you'll see that housing is, in fact, super popular:
Family Zoning commands 74% support
High‑rises near transit earn 68% approval citywide—peaking at 81% among 18–39‑year‑olds
5–8 stories along major streets attracts 67% support
Guaranteed permit approvals for code‑compliant projects is backed by 62% of respondents
These results underscore that, far from fearing big buildings or fretting about “developer giveaways,” San Franciscans want more homes—and they want the city to approve them.
First, some background
California is short 4 million more homes. Our housing shortage has raised the cost of living for everyone and forced millions of people to move to other states, like Texas and Florida, that are actually building homes. To end this shortage, bring the cost of living back under control, and make California a great place for families to live, the state has finally issued legally binding growth targets for every city in the state.
San Francisco must build 82,000 new homes between 2022 and 2030. So far, San Francisco has only built about 3,000 units. If nothing changes, we will miss our legally required goals and the state will strip San Francisco of local control over zoning, land use, and building permits. It may even withhold millions of dollars.
74% support Family Zoning: Neighborhood‑Scale Density
Mayor Lurie's family zoning plan aims to get the city back on track by allowing huge swathes of the west side of SF to subdivide and add units to their homes–for the academics, this is called "density decontrol." It also raises height limits along major corridors like Van Ness. Economists and researchers predict that it will boost land values while lowering the cost of individual homes, because more homes will be built on the same amount of land.
In July, 2025 we asked over 400 San Francisco voters how they felt about family zoning. With a margin of error of ±3.5%, we found 74% of people support the family zoning plan.
First, we established a baseline by asking if they had heard of it--roughly 35% of voters had. We then asked those 35% for their opinion:
Question: Generally speaking, do you support or oppose Mayor Daniel Lurie's "Family Zoning" plan?
Overall
Group
Response Distribution
SupportOppose
N
MOE
Overall
32%
33%
12%
11%
Support: 65%Oppose: 23%
N=281 MOE=±5.8%
Overall
32%
33%
12%
11%
65%23%
281
±5.8%
Housing Status
Renters
36%
26%
20%
8%
Support: 62%Oppose: 28%
N=140 MOE=±8.3%
Renters
36%
26%
20%
8%
62%28%
140
±8.3%
Owners
28%
41%
14%
Support: 68%Oppose: 18%
N=141 MOE=±8.3%
Owners
28%
41%
14%
68%18%
141
±8.3%
Ethnicity
Latino
63%
7%
29%
Support: 63%Oppose: 36%
N=21 MOE=±21.4%
Latino
63%
7%
29%
63%36%
21
±21.4%
White
33%
31%
14%
8%
Support: 63%Oppose: 22%
N=149 MOE=±8%
White
33%
31%
14%
8%
63%22%
149
±8%
Asian/AAPI
43%
31%
8%
Support: 74%Oppose: 10%
N=64 MOE=±12.3%
Asian/AAPI
43%
31%
8%
74%10%
64
±12.3%
Voters of color
31%
37%
9%
15%
Support: 68%Oppose: 24%
N=131 MOE=±8.6%
Voters of color
31%
37%
9%
15%
68%24%
131
±8.6%
Party Affiliation
Democrat
38%
32%
10%
11%
Support: 71%Oppose: 21%
N=190 MOE=±7.1%
Democrat
38%
32%
10%
11%
71%21%
190
±7.1%
Independent
20%
32%
15%
14%
Support: 52%Oppose: 28%
N=80 MOE=±11%
Independent
20%
32%
15%
14%
52%28%
80
±11%
Republican
9%
58%
16%
5%
Support: 67%Oppose: 22%
N=11 MOE=±29.5%
Republican
9%
58%
16%
5%
67%22%
11
±29.5%
Age
18-39
44%
29%
9%
11%
Support: 73%Oppose: 20%
N=114 MOE=±9.2%
18-39
44%
29%
9%
11%
73%20%
114
±9.2%
40-64
32%
32%
15%
10%
Support: 64%Oppose: 25%
N=106 MOE=±9.5%
40-64
32%
32%
15%
10%
64%25%
106
±9.5%
65+
9%
43%
11%
14%
Support: 52%Oppose: 25%
N=61 MOE=±12.5%
65+
9%
43%
11%
14%
52%25%
61
±12.5%
District
District 1
35%
47%
11%
7%
Support: 82%Oppose: 18%
N=42 MOE=±15.1%
District 1
35%
47%
11%
7%
82%18%
42
±15.1%
District 2
42%
28%
7%
15%
Support: 71%Oppose: 23%
N=30 MOE=±17.9%
District 2
42%
28%
7%
15%
71%23%
30
±17.9%
District 3
28%
31%
23%
Support: 59%Oppose: 23%
N=24 MOE=±20%
District 3
28%
31%
23%
59%23%
24
±20%
District 4
18%
45%
16%
12%
Support: 63%Oppose: 29%
N=22 MOE=±20.9%
District 4
18%
45%
16%
12%
63%29%
22
±20.9%
District 5
43%
22%
10%
15%
Support: 65%Oppose: 24%
N=24 MOE=±20%
District 5
43%
22%
10%
15%
65%24%
24
±20%
District 6
32%
38%
15%
5%
Support: 70%Oppose: 21%
N=30 MOE=±17.9%
District 6
32%
38%
15%
5%
70%21%
30
±17.9%
District 7
19%
25%
15%
Support: 44%Oppose: 15%
N=25 MOE=±19.6%
District 7
19%
25%
15%
44%15%
25
±19.6%
District 8
30%
22%
12%
20%
Support: 51%Oppose: 32%
N=30 MOE=±17.9%
District 8
30%
22%
12%
20%
51%32%
30
±17.9%
District 9
33%
18%
8%
35%
Support: 51%Oppose: 42%
N=30 MOE=±17.9%
District 9
33%
18%
8%
35%
51%42%
30
±17.9%
District 10
43%
32%
8%
Support: 75%Oppose: 8%
N=14 MOE=±26.2%
District 10
43%
32%
8%
75%8%
14
±26.2%
District 11
22%
78%
Support: 100%Oppose: 0%
N=12 MOE=±28.3%
District 11
22%
78%
100%0%
12
±28.3%
Strongly Support
Somewhat Support
Somewhat Oppose
Strongly Oppose
July 10-20, 2025
We then resumed asking the question to all respondents, not just those who had heard of the plan. First, we explained what it will do, and then asked for their opinion:
Question: Mayor Lurie's Family Zoning plan will allow homeowners on the west side of San Francisco to expand their homes, add in-law or backyard units for renters, or even redevelop them into small apartment buildings, so long as they do so within existing height limits. Knowing this, do you support or oppose Mayor Daniel Lurie's Family Zoning plan?
Overall
Group
Response Distribution
SupportOppose
N
MOE
Overall
35%
39%
10%
9%
Support: 74%Oppose: 19%
N=802 MOE=±3.5%
Overall
35%
39%
10%
9%
74%19%
802
±3.5%
Housing Status
Renters
36%
39%
10%
7%
Support: 75%Oppose: 16%
N=395 MOE=±4.9%
Renters
36%
39%
10%
7%
75%16%
395
±4.9%
Owners
34%
38%
11%
10%
Support: 72%Oppose: 21%
N=406 MOE=±4.9%
Owners
34%
38%
11%
10%
72%21%
406
±4.9%
Ethnicity
Latino
22%
51%
10%
9%
Support: 73%Oppose: 19%
N=85 MOE=±10.6%
Latino
22%
51%
10%
9%
73%19%
85
±10.6%
White
40%
36%
10%
8%
Support: 76%Oppose: 18%
N=400 MOE=±4.9%
White
40%
36%
10%
8%
76%18%
400
±4.9%
Asian/AAPI
30%
39%
12%
9%
Support: 69%Oppose: 21%
N=200 MOE=±6.9%
Asian/AAPI
30%
39%
12%
9%
69%21%
200
±6.9%
Voters of color
30%
41%
10%
9%
Support: 71%Oppose: 20%
N=400 MOE=±4.9%
Voters of color
30%
41%
10%
9%
71%20%
400
±4.9%
Party Affiliation
Democrat
42%
37%
8%
7%
Support: 79%Oppose: 15%
N=499 MOE=±4.4%
Democrat
42%
37%
8%
7%
79%15%
499
±4.4%
Independent
23%
45%
15%
8%
Support: 68%Oppose: 23%
N=244 MOE=±6.3%
Independent
23%
45%
15%
8%
68%23%
244
±6.3%
Republican
27%
26%
9%
23%
Support: 52%Oppose: 32%
N=58 MOE=±12.9%
Republican
27%
26%
9%
23%
52%32%
58
±12.9%
Age
18-39
43%
35%
10%
6%
Support: 78%Oppose: 15%
N=308 MOE=±5.6%
18-39
43%
35%
10%
6%
78%15%
308
±5.6%
40-64
31%
40%
10%
10%
Support: 71%Oppose: 20%
N=299 MOE=±5.7%
40-64
31%
40%
10%
10%
71%20%
299
±5.7%
65+
28%
42%
11%
11%
Support: 70%Oppose: 22%
N=195 MOE=±7%
65+
28%
42%
11%
11%
70%22%
195
±7%
District
District 1
29%
36%
19%
14%
Support: 66%Oppose: 33%
N=73 MOE=±11.5%
District 1
29%
36%
19%
14%
66%33%
73
±11.5%
District 2
31%
37%
8%
11%
Support: 69%Oppose: 20%
N=80 MOE=±11%
District 2
31%
37%
8%
11%
69%20%
80
±11%
District 3
27%
46%
9%
14%
Support: 73%Oppose: 22%
N=66 MOE=±12.1%
District 3
27%
46%
9%
14%
73%22%
66
±12.1%
District 4
32%
35%
13%
13%
Support: 68%Oppose: 26%
N=72 MOE=±11.5%
District 4
32%
35%
13%
13%
68%26%
72
±11.5%
District 5
46%
32%
7%
Support: 78%Oppose: 12%
N=73 MOE=±11.5%
District 5
46%
32%
7%
78%12%
73
±11.5%
District 6
36%
47%
9%
8%
Support: 83%Oppose: 17%
N=73 MOE=±11.5%
District 6
36%
47%
9%
8%
83%17%
73
±11.5%
District 7
26%
36%
10%
9%
Support: 62%Oppose: 19%
N=58 MOE=±12.9%
District 7
26%
36%
10%
9%
62%19%
58
±12.9%
District 8
43%
37%
10%
Support: 79%Oppose: 13%
N=95 MOE=±10.1%
District 8
43%
37%
10%
79%13%
95
±10.1%
District 9
33%
44%
5%
11%
Support: 77%Oppose: 16%
N=73 MOE=±11.5%
District 9
33%
44%
5%
11%
77%16%
73
±11.5%
District 10
42%
39%
6%
Support: 81%Oppose: 10%
N=66 MOE=±12.1%
District 10
42%
39%
6%
81%10%
66
±12.1%
District 11
35%
36%
16%
5%
Support: 70%Oppose: 21%
N=73 MOE=±11.5%
District 11
35%
36%
16%
5%
70%21%
73
±11.5%
Strongly Support
Somewhat Support
Somewhat Oppose
Strongly Oppose
July 10-20, 2025
Every demographic in every district supports Lurie's family zoning plan, but substantial margins. The lowest support is District 7, with 62% support / 19% oppose, and the highest is in District 6 with 83% support / 17% oppose.
Build Near BART
San Franciscans aren't afraid of tall buildings, despite what you may have heard. They want 20 story towers near BART stops and downtown and 6-8 stories along major streets. The major determinant of support is age - young people are wildly supportive, and 65+ only somewhat.
68% Want Highrises Near BART
It's time to build some more towers near transit! They are overwhelmingly popular across almost every single demographic in the city. Notably, Mission neighborhood groups have historically opposed growth, but our polling shows that residents of the Mission support highrises near BART at 71%!
Question: The City should allow 15- to 20-story apartment buildings within half a mile of BART stops, including throughout the Mission District.
Overall
Group
Response Distribution
SupportOppose
N
MOE
Overall
40%
28%
12%
13%
Support: 68%Oppose: 25%
N=610 MOE=±4%
Overall
40%
28%
12%
13%
68%25%
610
±4%
Housing Status
Renters
38%
29%
15%
12%
Support: 67%Oppose: 27%
N=279 MOE=±5.9%
Renters
38%
29%
15%
12%
67%27%
279
±5.9%
Owners
43%
26%
11%
15%
Support: 69%Oppose: 26%
N=288 MOE=±5.8%
Owners
43%
26%
11%
15%
69%26%
288
±5.8%
Ethnicity
Latino
43%
29%
13%
12%
Support: 72%Oppose: 24%
N=61 MOE=±12.5%
Latino
43%
29%
13%
12%
72%24%
61
±12.5%
White
43%
24%
12%
14%
Support: 67%Oppose: 26%
N=308 MOE=±5.6%
White
43%
24%
12%
14%
67%26%
308
±5.6%
African American
11%
32%
20%
21%
Support: 43%Oppose: 41%
N=27 MOE=±18.9%
African American
11%
32%
20%
21%
43%41%
27
±18.9%
Asian/AAPI
41%
35%
12%
7%
Support: 76%Oppose: 19%
N=156 MOE=±7.8%
Asian/AAPI
41%
35%
12%
7%
76%19%
156
±7.8%
Voters of color
38%
30%
13%
12%
Support: 68%Oppose: 26%
N=284 MOE=±5.8%
Voters of color
38%
30%
13%
12%
68%26%
284
±5.8%
Party Affiliation
Democrat
39%
28%
11%
16%
Support: 67%Oppose: 27%
N=406 MOE=±4.9%
Democrat
39%
28%
11%
16%
67%27%
406
±4.9%
Independent
43%
30%
13%
5%
Support: 73%Oppose: 18%
N=151 MOE=±8%
Independent
43%
30%
13%
5%
73%18%
151
±8%
Republican
35%
27%
22%
13%
Support: 62%Oppose: 35%
N=53 MOE=±13.5%
Republican
35%
27%
22%
13%
62%35%
53
±13.5%
Age
18-39
48%
33%
7%
6%
Support: 81%Oppose: 13%
N=224 MOE=±6.5%
18-39
48%
33%
7%
6%
81%13%
224
±6.5%
40-64
40%
26%
14%
13%
Support: 66%Oppose: 28%
N=230 MOE=±6.5%
40-64
40%
26%
14%
13%
66%28%
230
±6.5%
65+
28%
25%
16%
24%
Support: 53%Oppose: 40%
N=155 MOE=±7.9%
65+
28%
25%
16%
24%
53%40%
155
±7.9%
District
District 1
30%
28%
23%
16%
Support: 58%Oppose: 39%
N=62 MOE=±12.4%
District 1
30%
28%
23%
16%
58%39%
62
±12.4%
District 2
36%
24%
14%
16%
Support: 60%Oppose: 31%
N=56 MOE=±13.1%
District 2
36%
24%
14%
16%
60%31%
56
±13.1%
District 3
45%
37%
6%
11%
Support: 81%Oppose: 17%
N=58 MOE=±12.9%
District 3
45%
37%
6%
11%
81%17%
58
±12.9%
District 4
39%
22%
13%
15%
Support: 61%Oppose: 27%
N=58 MOE=±12.9%
District 4
39%
22%
13%
15%
61%27%
58
±12.9%
District 5
38%
22%
15%
14%
Support: 61%Oppose: 29%
N=43 MOE=±14.9%
District 5
38%
22%
15%
14%
61%29%
43
±14.9%
District 6
58%
18%
16%
6%
Support: 76%Oppose: 22%
N=52 MOE=±13.6%
District 6
58%
18%
16%
6%
76%22%
52
±13.6%
District 7
30%
28%
23%
16%
Support: 58%Oppose: 39%
N=59 MOE=±12.8%
District 7
30%
28%
23%
16%
58%39%
59
±12.8%
District 8
49%
26%
5%
19%
Support: 75%Oppose: 24%
N=74 MOE=±11.4%
District 8
49%
26%
5%
19%
75%24%
74
±11.4%
District 9
51%
20%
8%
17%
Support: 71%Oppose: 24%
N=60 MOE=±12.7%
District 9
51%
20%
8%
17%
71%24%
60
±12.7%
District 10
31%
40%
15%
Support: 71%Oppose: 18%
N=43 MOE=±14.9%
District 10
31%
40%
15%
71%18%
43
±14.9%
District 11
27%
40%
16%
14%
Support: 67%Oppose: 29%
N=43 MOE=±14.9%
District 11
27%
40%
16%
14%
67%29%
43
±14.9%
Strongly Agree
Somewhat Agree
Somewhat Disagree
Strongly Disagree
April 2-13, 2025
Of course, how the question is worded matters. If voters aren't reminded that these homes will be built near high-quality transit, and only mention the neighborhood, support drops but still stays in the majority for every demographic except 65+
Question: The City should allow 15- to 20-story apartment buildings throughout the Mission District.
Overall
Group
Response Distribution
SupportOppose
N
MOE
Overall
26%
33%
14%
20%
Support: 58%Oppose: 33%
N=609 MOE=±4%
Overall
26%
33%
14%
20%
58%33%
609
±4%
Housing Status
Renters
23%
32%
10%
26%
Support: 55%Oppose: 36%
N=273 MOE=±5.9%
Renters
23%
32%
10%
26%
55%36%
273
±5.9%
Owners
32%
32%
17%
13%
Support: 64%Oppose: 30%
N=282 MOE=±5.8%
Owners
32%
32%
17%
13%
64%30%
282
±5.8%
Ethnicity
Latino
19%
36%
14%
24%
Support: 55%Oppose: 39%
N=61 MOE=±12.5%
Latino
19%
36%
14%
24%
55%39%
61
±12.5%
White
32%
26%
15%
23%
Support: 58%Oppose: 37%
N=311 MOE=±5.6%
White
32%
26%
15%
23%
58%37%
311
±5.6%
African American
19%
48%
18%
10%
Support: 67%Oppose: 29%
N=22 MOE=±20.9%
African American
19%
48%
18%
10%
67%29%
22
±20.9%
Asian/AAPI
18%
43%
11%
19%
Support: 61%Oppose: 30%
N=148 MOE=±8.1%
Asian/AAPI
18%
43%
11%
19%
61%30%
148
±8.1%
Voters of color
18%
41%
13%
18%
Support: 59%Oppose: 30%
N=281 MOE=±5.8%
Voters of color
18%
41%
13%
18%
59%30%
281
±5.8%
Party Affiliation
Democrat
29%
30%
14%
18%
Support: 59%Oppose: 32%
N=411 MOE=±4.8%
Democrat
29%
30%
14%
18%
59%32%
411
±4.8%
Independent
20%
39%
15%
20%
Support: 59%Oppose: 36%
N=154 MOE=±7.9%
Independent
20%
39%
15%
20%
59%36%
154
±7.9%
Republican
17%
35%
36%
Support: 51%Oppose: 40%
N=45 MOE=±14.6%
Republican
17%
35%
36%
51%40%
45
±14.6%
Age
18-39
35%
36%
12%
7%
Support: 71%Oppose: 19%
N=109 MOE=±9.4%
18-39
35%
36%
12%
7%
71%19%
109
±9.4%
40-64
25%
33%
15%
21%
Support: 58%Oppose: 36%
N=257 MOE=±6.1%
40-64
25%
33%
15%
21%
58%36%
257
±6.1%
65+
15%
29%
13%
33%
Support: 44%Oppose: 46%
N=162 MOE=±7.7%
65+
15%
29%
13%
33%
44%46%
162
±7.7%
District
District 1
28%
26%
21%
23%
Support: 54%Oppose: 44%
N=60 MOE=±12.7%
District 1
28%
26%
21%
23%
54%44%
60
±12.7%
District 2
14%
35%
17%
25%
Support: 49%Oppose: 42%
N=66 MOE=±12.1%
District 2
14%
35%
17%
25%
49%42%
66
±12.1%
District 3
26%
31%
9%
13%
Support: 57%Oppose: 22%
N=39 MOE=±15.7%
District 3
26%
31%
9%
13%
57%22%
39
±15.7%
District 4
24%
25%
12%
26%
Support: 48%Oppose: 38%
N=64 MOE=±12.3%
District 4
24%
25%
12%
26%
48%38%
64
±12.3%
District 5
29%
50%
10%
6%
Support: 79%Oppose: 16%
N=55 MOE=±13.2%
District 5
29%
50%
10%
6%
79%16%
55
±13.2%
District 6
39%
29%
13%
15%
Support: 68%Oppose: 28%
N=33 MOE=±17.1%
District 6
39%
29%
13%
15%
68%28%
33
±17.1%
District 7
29%
31%
14%
19%
Support: 61%Oppose: 32%
N=63 MOE=±12.3%
District 7
29%
31%
14%
19%
61%32%
63
±12.3%
District 8
25%
36%
12%
22%
Support: 60%Oppose: 35%
N=84 MOE=±10.7%
District 8
25%
36%
12%
22%
60%35%
84
±10.7%
District 9
21%
25%
18%
24%
Support: 46%Oppose: 42%
N=49 MOE=±14%
District 9
21%
25%
18%
24%
46%42%
49
±14%
District 10
36%
25%
15%
14%
Support: 60%Oppose: 29%
N=42 MOE=±15.1%
District 10
36%
25%
15%
14%
60%29%
42
±15.1%
District 11
20%
44%
9%
21%
Support: 64%Oppose: 31%
N=54 MOE=±13.3%
District 11
20%
44%
9%
21%
64%31%
54
±13.3%
Strongly Agree
Somewhat Agree
Somewhat Disagree
Strongly Disagree
April 2-13, 2025
71% Want Highrises On the East Side
What about 30 story residential towers in SOMA, the Financial District, Dogpatch, and Mission Bay? Super popular.
Question: The Board of Supervisors may propose a change to city zoning laws in order to allow up to 30-story residential buildings in SOMA, the Financial District, Dogpatch, and Mission Bay. This would allow many more homes and offices to be built in these neighborhoods. Would you support or oppose these changes?
Overall
Group
Response Distribution
SupportOppose
N
MOE
Overall
50%
21%
7%
11%
Support: 71%Oppose: 18%
N=212 MOE=±6.7%
Overall
50%
21%
7%
11%
71%18%
212
±6.7%
Ethnicity
Latino
57%
6%
14%
11%
Support: 63%Oppose: 25%
N=23 MOE=±20.4%
Latino
57%
6%
14%
11%
63%25%
23
±20.4%
White
53%
22%
7%
12%
Support: 75%Oppose: 18%
N=100 MOE=±9.8%
White
53%
22%
7%
12%
75%18%
100
±9.8%
Asian/AAPI
41%
39%
7%
Support: 80%Oppose: 10%
N=53 MOE=±13.5%
Asian/AAPI
41%
39%
7%
80%10%
53
±13.5%
Voters of color
48%
21%
8%
10%
Support: 70%Oppose: 18%
N=108 MOE=±9.4%
Voters of color
48%
21%
8%
10%
70%18%
108
±9.4%
Party Affiliation
Democrat
47%
22%
9%
9%
Support: 69%Oppose: 18%
N=134 MOE=±8.5%
Democrat
47%
22%
9%
9%
69%18%
134
±8.5%
Independent
58%
23%
10%
Support: 81%Oppose: 13%
N=64 MOE=±12.3%
Independent
58%
23%
10%
81%13%
64
±12.3%
Republican
45%
10%
29%
Support: 45%Oppose: 39%
N=15 MOE=±25.3%
Republican
45%
10%
29%
45%39%
15
±25.3%
Age
18-49
56%
24%
7%
8%
Support: 79%Oppose: 14%
N=117 MOE=±9.1%
18-49
56%
24%
7%
8%
79%14%
117
±9.1%
50+
43%
18%
8%
15%
Support: 61%Oppose: 23%
N=95 MOE=±10.1%
50+
43%
18%
8%
15%
61%23%
95
±10.1%
65+
38%
13%
11%
22%
Support: 51%Oppose: 33%
N=49 MOE=±14%
65+
38%
13%
11%
22%
51%33%
49
±14%
District
District 1
35%
36%
10%
Support: 71%Oppose: 10%
N=19 MOE=±22.5%
District 1
35%
36%
10%
71%10%
19
±22.5%
District 2
49%
28%
12%
11%
Support: 78%Oppose: 22%
N=21 MOE=±21.4%
District 2
49%
28%
12%
11%
78%22%
21
±21.4%
District 3
42%
17%
6%
21%
Support: 58%Oppose: 28%
N=15 MOE=±25.3%
District 3
42%
17%
6%
21%
58%28%
15
±25.3%
District 4
61%
25%
Support: 65%Oppose: 25%
N=19 MOE=±22.5%
District 4
61%
25%
65%25%
19
±22.5%
District 5
35%
27%
11%
6%
Support: 62%Oppose: 18%
N=21 MOE=±21.4%
District 5
35%
27%
11%
6%
62%18%
21
±21.4%
District 6
56%
23%
9%
5%
Support: 80%Oppose: 14%
N=19 MOE=±22.5%
District 6
56%
23%
9%
5%
80%14%
19
±22.5%
District 7
59%
11%
6%
Support: 70%Oppose: 10%
N=19 MOE=±22.5%
District 7
59%
11%
6%
70%10%
19
±22.5%
District 8
67%
17%
5%
Support: 85%Oppose: 9%
N=23 MOE=±20.4%
District 8
67%
17%
5%
85%9%
23
±20.4%
District 9
44%
20%
25%
Support: 64%Oppose: 25%
N=19 MOE=±22.5%
District 9
44%
20%
25%
64%25%
19
±22.5%
District 10
49%
19%
32%
Support: 68%Oppose: 32%
N=19 MOE=±22.5%
District 10
49%
19%
32%
68%32%
19
±22.5%
District 11
49%
28%
9%
Support: 77%Oppose: 9%
N=17 MOE=±23.8%
District 11
49%
28%
9%
77%9%
17
±23.8%
Strongly Agree
Somewhat Agree
Somewhat Disagree
Strongly Disagree
February 1-6, 2025
61% Want Denser Commercial Corridors
San Franciscans want to live in a dense, walkable city. Unfortunately, it's illegal to build in most American cities and largely illegal in San Francisco. We can – we must – change the laws to legalize housing.
Question: The Board of Supervisors may propose a change to City zoning laws which would allow 8-story buildings along major streets and near major public transit stops, and 5 to 7 stories on some commercial corridors, plus up to 20 stories along Van Ness north of Market and on California east of the Richmond district. Would you support or oppose this change?
Overall
Group
Response Distribution
SupportOppose
N
MOE
Overall
48%
20%
16%
Support: 67%Oppose: 19%
N=423 MOE=±4.8%
Overall
48%
20%
16%
67%19%
423
±4.8%
Ethnicity
Latino
55%
14%
5%
18%
Support: 69%Oppose: 23%
N=47 MOE=±14.3%
Latino
55%
14%
5%
18%
69%23%
47
±14.3%
White
51%
18%
15%
Support: 70%Oppose: 18%
N=199 MOE=±6.9%
White
51%
18%
15%
70%18%
199
±6.9%
Asian/AAPI
42%
24%
21%
Support: 66%Oppose: 23%
N=106 MOE=±9.5%
Asian/AAPI
42%
24%
21%
66%23%
106
±9.5%
Voters of color
47%
21%
16%
Support: 67%Oppose: 20%
N=205 MOE=±6.8%
Voters of color
47%
21%
16%
67%20%
205
±6.8%
Party Affiliation
Democrat
51%
16%
16%
Support: 67%Oppose: 19%
N=266 MOE=±6%
Democrat
51%
16%
16%
67%19%
266
±6%
Independent
42%
28%
13%
Support: 71%Oppose: 17%
N=127 MOE=±8.7%
Independent
42%
28%
13%
71%17%
127
±8.7%
Republican
40%
11%
6%
28%
Support: 51%Oppose: 34%
N=30 MOE=±17.9%
Republican
40%
11%
6%
28%
51%34%
30
±17.9%
Age
18-49
55%
23%
11%
Support: 79%Oppose: 13%
N=233 MOE=±6.4%
18-49
55%
23%
11%
79%13%
233
±6.4%
50+
38%
15%
5%
22%
Support: 53%Oppose: 27%
N=190 MOE=±7.1%
50+
38%
15%
5%
22%
53%27%
190
±7.1%
65+
27%
18%
8%
25%
Support: 45%Oppose: 33%
N=97 MOE=±10%
65+
27%
18%
8%
25%
45%33%
97
±10%
District
District 1
38%
9%
29%
Support: 47%Oppose: 33%
N=38 MOE=±15.9%
District 1
38%
9%
29%
47%33%
38
±15.9%
District 2
50%
20%
12%
Support: 70%Oppose: 16%
N=42 MOE=±15.1%
District 2
50%
20%
12%
70%16%
42
±15.1%
District 3
52%
7%
10%
19%
Support: 59%Oppose: 28%
N=30 MOE=±17.9%
District 3
52%
7%
10%
19%
59%28%
30
±17.9%
District 4
44%
21%
19%
Support: 65%Oppose: 24%
N=38 MOE=±15.9%
District 4
44%
21%
19%
65%24%
38
±15.9%
District 5
40%
29%
7%
9%
Support: 69%Oppose: 16%
N=42 MOE=±15.1%
District 5
40%
29%
7%
9%
69%16%
42
±15.1%
District 6
75%
9%
9%
Support: 84%Oppose: 9%
N=38 MOE=±15.9%
District 6
75%
9%
9%
84%9%
38
±15.9%
District 7
36%
27%
26%
Support: 64%Oppose: 29%
N=38 MOE=±15.9%
District 7
36%
27%
26%
64%29%
38
±15.9%
District 8
51%
27%
11%
Support: 78%Oppose: 14%
N=47 MOE=±14.3%
District 8
51%
27%
11%
78%14%
47
±14.3%
District 9
43%
20%
15%
Support: 63%Oppose: 15%
N=38 MOE=±15.9%
District 9
43%
20%
15%
63%15%
38
±15.9%
District 10
57%
8%
19%
Support: 65%Oppose: 19%
N=38 MOE=±15.9%
District 10
57%
8%
19%
65%19%
38
±15.9%
District 11
37%
35%
11%
Support: 72%Oppose: 13%
N=34 MOE=±16.8%
District 11
37%
35%
11%
72%13%
34
±16.8%
Strongly Agree
Somewhat Agree
Somewhat Disagree
Strongly Disagree
February 1-6, 2025
Majority Demand The Right to Build
San Franciscans are tired of the neighborhood NIMBY sticking her nose in everyone's business. An absolutely stunningly high proportion of San Franciscans want to let people build, to let homeowners add rooms and roof decks, and for homebuilders to shake off the yoke of discretionary review.
Question: Which of the following statements comes closest to your personal opinion?
A: If a housing development proposal follows all the rules the City made in advance, City officials should be required to approve it even if neighbors don't like it
B: City officials should be allowed to change or reject any housing development proposal that neighbors don't like even if it follows all the rules the City made in advance
Overall
Group
Response Distribution
SupportOppose
N
MOE
Overall
57%
25%
Support: 57%Oppose: 25%
N=415 MOE=±4.8%
Overall
57%
25%
57%25%
415
±4.8%
Housing Status
Own single family home
57%
31%
Support: 57%Oppose: 31%
N=142 MOE=±8.2%
Own single family home
57%
31%
57%31%
142
±8.2%
Own condo
65%
23%
Support: 65%Oppose: 23%
N=57 MOE=±13%
Own condo
65%
23%
65%23%
57
±13%
Total own
59%
29%
Support: 59%Oppose: 29%
N=200 MOE=±6.9%
Total own
59%
29%
59%29%
200
±6.9%
Rent
59%
19%
Support: 59%Oppose: 19%
N=174 MOE=±7.4%
Rent
59%
19%
59%19%
174
±7.4%
Ethnicity
Latino
57%
34%
Support: 57%Oppose: 34%
N=42 MOE=±15.1%
Latino
57%
34%
57%34%
42
±15.1%
White
58%
22%
Support: 58%Oppose: 22%
N=207 MOE=±6.8%
White
58%
22%
58%22%
207
±6.8%
Asian/AAPI
59%
30%
Support: 59%Oppose: 30%
N=104 MOE=±9.6%
Asian/AAPI
59%
30%
59%30%
104
±9.6%
Voters of color
57%
30%
Support: 57%Oppose: 30%
N=187 MOE=±7.2%
Voters of color
57%
30%
57%30%
187
±7.2%
Party Affiliation
Democrat
62%
22%
Support: 62%Oppose: 22%
N=261 MOE=±6.1%
Democrat
62%
22%
62%22%
261
±6.1%
Independent
52%
30%
Support: 52%Oppose: 30%
N=125 MOE=±8.8%
Independent
52%
30%
52%30%
125
±8.8%
Republican
42%
37%
Support: 42%Oppose: 37%
N=29 MOE=±18.2%
Republican
42%
37%
42%37%
29
±18.2%
Age
18-49
64%
24%
Support: 64%Oppose: 24%
N=229 MOE=±6.5%
18-49
64%
24%
64%24%
229
±6.5%
50+
49%
27%
Support: 49%Oppose: 27%
N=186 MOE=±7.2%
50+
49%
27%
49%27%
186
±7.2%
65+
42%
33%
Support: 42%Oppose: 33%
N=95 MOE=±10.1%
65+
42%
33%
42%33%
95
±10.1%
Required to approve
Allowed to reject
September 22-26, 2024
Voters want building permits to be approved when the builder satisfies the relevant building and safety laws, and they don't want random neighborhood NIMBYs to have the chance to stop it.
Question: When homebuilders apply to renovate or build new homes, which of the following best describes how you think those applications should be handled:
A: Permits for new housing should be automatically approved if a project meets all applicable building and safety laws
B: Permits for new housing should never be approved until residents are given a chance to appeal them
Overall
Group
Response Distribution
SupportOppose
N
MOE
Overall
62%
22%
Support: 62%Oppose: 22%
N=802 MOE=±3.5%
Overall
62%
22%
62%22%
802
±3.5%
Housing Status
Own
62%
21%
Support: 62%Oppose: 21%
N=406 MOE=±4.9%
Own
62%
21%
62%21%
406
±4.9%
Rent
62%
22%
Support: 62%Oppose: 22%
N=395 MOE=±4.9%
Rent
62%
22%
62%22%
395
±4.9%
Ethnicity
Latino
63%
24%
Support: 63%Oppose: 24%
N=85 MOE=±10.6%
Latino
63%
24%
63%24%
85
±10.6%
White
60%
21%
Support: 60%Oppose: 21%
N=400 MOE=±4.9%
White
60%
21%
60%21%
400
±4.9%
Asian/AAPI
65%
22%
Support: 65%Oppose: 22%
N=200 MOE=±6.9%
Asian/AAPI
65%
22%
65%22%
200
±6.9%
Voters of color
65%
22%
Support: 65%Oppose: 22%
N=400 MOE=±4.9%
Voters of color
65%
22%
65%22%
400
±4.9%
Party Affiliation
Democrat
66%
19%
Support: 66%Oppose: 19%
N=499 MOE=±4.4%
Democrat
66%
19%
66%19%
499
±4.4%
Independent
59%
25%
Support: 59%Oppose: 25%
N=244 MOE=±6.3%
Independent
59%
25%
59%25%
244
±6.3%
Republican
44%
26%
Support: 44%Oppose: 26%
N=58 MOE=±12.9%
Republican
44%
26%
44%26%
58
±12.9%
Age
18-49
70%
18%
Support: 70%Oppose: 18%
N=308 MOE=±5.6%
18-49
70%
18%
70%18%
308
±5.6%
50+
61%
19%
Support: 61%Oppose: 19%
N=299 MOE=±5.7%
50+
61%
19%
61%19%
299
±5.7%
65+
51%
31%
Support: 51%Oppose: 31%
N=195 MOE=±7%
65+
51%
31%
51%31%
195
±7%
Approved
Appealable
July 10-20, 2025
Tell your Supervisor
Tell your Supervisor that you're one of the majority of San Franciscans who want to build more housing, and that you support Mayor Lurie's family zoning plan. You can use the email template below, or write your own.
