zlacker

Moderates believe supply and demand applies to housing, and that building more housing, regardless of whether it is explicitly "low income", is the most important thing to improve housing affordability. In practice, this means favoring upzoning (allowing duplexes/triplexes/apartment buildings in more places), and minimizing burdens on developers. Eg, advocating against "inclusionary zoning requirements" that require X% of a given building to be rented out at below market rate and against long development approval processes.

Progressives believe that allowing developers to build housing will only create "luxury" housing that is unaffordable to all but the rich, increasing gentrification and displacement. Therefore it's necessary to mandate things like "inclusionary zoning" and tight review of every single development project.

Empirically, the progressive stance results in a lot less housing of any sort getting built, whether "affordable" or otherwise, and consequently higher housing prices for all but the lucky lottery winners who grab the limited number of BMR ("Below Market Rent") units. Some would say that that's actually the goal of progressives (ie, they're using "progressive" window dressing to preserve property values/neighborhood aesthetics of the very rich).

>>akavi+(OP)
Again, progressives oppose development regardless of affordability. They, for example, opposed amending the city charter to exempt affordable housing projects from discretionary review. They are suing UCSF over hospital expansion and opposed it constructing new housing for its staff. They organized against state bill SB35 and various density bonuses that allow for the construction of new affordable housing. They opposed the height and density proposed for a 100% affordable housing project through HANC and dragged proposals for redevelopment at Potrero Yard and CCSF through decades of process. Progressive political consultants worked for Livermore NIMBYs to spin a lawsuit against a proposed downtown affordable housing project. I could go on.

20 years ago, progs would admit outright that they thought new development was undesirable. Since, it has become more inappropriate to say that out loud so they dress it in concerns about only supporting housing under economically infeasible conditions.