The anti-development myth in SF

Apparently Matt Smith brought to Bay Citizen from SF Weekly the unsupported notion that development in San Francisco has long been hindered by an anti-development movement. In today's Bay Citizen/NY Times: "After more than a decade in which San Francisco politics was partly defined by antidevelopment and historic preservation forces, a backlash has begun." 

Like the lie that the Fell/Masonic intersection is dangerous, the claim about the existence of a significant anti-development movement in San Francisco is apparently now firmly established in local journalism. The opposite is the case, as progressives and the Planning Dept. subscribe to the "smart" growth, dense development doctrine that holds that we can build as much housing as we want along major city traffic corridors. 

C.W. Nevius insists on the mythical existence of an anti-development movement in SF, as does Matt Smith, who, with John King, SPUR's Gabriel Metcalf, and the SF Planning Dept., also wants to build a lot of residential highrises in San Francisco. Smith thinks lining Golden Gate Park on Lincoln Avenue and Fulton Street with residential highrises is a great idea.