Scott Wiener seems to be a big part of the problem in terms of increasing the regulatory burden on new development. Have I missed something in his actual record that indicates he is removing restrictions on new housing development?
http://www.scottwiener.com/more_affordable_housing_not_a_hou...
Alternatively, read his post on Medium titled, "Yes, Supply & Demand Apply to Housing, Even in San Francisco":
https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/yes-supply-demand-apply-to-...
> These trends are exactly why the supply-and-demand deniers pose such a significant challenge to actually fixing our housing problem. As we work hard to try to produce new housing — through market-produced housing, below-market-rate housing, new types of housing such as co-housing and micro-units, and more flexibility toward in-law units — we have a vocal and influential set of advocates pronouncing that we shouldn’t even bother to build market-produced housing, since, according to them, doing so won’t lower housing costs and may even raise housing costs. This argument, to the extent it succeeds, not only reduces the amount of housing produced in San Francisco but actually slows the production of below-market-rate housing, since market-produced housing, through our inclusionary housing program, is the most significant source of new affordable units coming online.
I'd also like to point out that Wiener strongly advocated solar panel and beautification requirements for new construction. Requiring solar panels on homes is a great way to pat yourself on the back, but not a great way to generate electricity. Let's build solar power plants, not require every new apartment to cover it's roof in panels regardless of the economic sensibility of doing so.