There’s a difference between affordable and low-income. Don’t get lost in the terms. Affordable just means the rent if 30% of the average income in the county. That means if the average income in SF county is $126k, affordable rent is approx. $3150. Thanks to CEQA and other useless red tape, driving up the cost of construction, which cost developers about $80k-100k per unit, the cost is passed on to buyers and renters.
That lady talking about how the city’s priorities are misplaced infuriates me. What do you think is causing the problem of unaffordability? The city has been putting off building new units market rate or otherwise for years limiting the number of units available therefore raising the demand, which leads to unaffordable prices. It’s gotten to the point that people in and outside of the city have forced them to build.
Yeah turn the old Nordstrom into affordable housing. We could have it all up and running this time next year if we get some commitment. It will certainly help with the homeless problem
People really don't understand supply and demand. Housing prices depend on how much housing stock there is. New housing will push prices down if there is enough supply. Luxury apartments built 30 years ago is regular apts now. Same will be in the future.
I don't believe anyone can reach adulthood without understanding basic concepts like supply and demand. The city council decides projects on pure patronage, no idiotic argument can distract from that.
They have been relying on rent control and just-cause eviction laws to manage the chaos they have created. If this six-to-three court tosses out those laws, they will wish they had built more housing.
The problem is both ends. Landlords, Landlord groups, and corporations like BlackRock are hoarding up vacant units, jacking up the price, and also not enough new units being built or built in time.
San Francisco has the second highest population density of any city in America. We need to stop focusing on trying to increase housing in already overpopulated cities. There's plenty of farmland in California where you could build new residential cities. In fact, there's more than 2100 square kilometers of farmland in California that is not even being farmed right now. But all you need is to purchase 25 square kilometers of farmland within commuter distance of San Francisco, Sacramento, and San Jose. And you could build a high rise city of condominiums and rent controlled apartments that could easily accommodate 4 to 8 million people. San Francisco's population is barely 800,000 people.
You guys are NIMBYS, you just don't more housing in your community. It's what's causing the housing crisis idiot. New York is doing the right thing when they realize they need to build more housing, unlike San Francisco which makes up excuses like change of "character" and "pollution". How would you feel when you can't afford a tiny apartment near your workplace. Because NIMBYS constant block more desperately needed housing. You see why you guys are viewed with disdain, you're literally increasing the housing crisis, you do not deserve a voice.
No such thing as affordable housing. Cost to construct requires no less than 3k a month on rent just to break even. You won't see any affordable housing built unless it's subsidized with tax dollars. Even then, I doubt anyone will consider the rent as affordable.
There is only one problem on our entire planet. Not war. Not poverty. Not greed. Not affordable housing. Not even politics, although it would come in a close second. The problem is too many people ! The planet reached it's limit in 1970. What are we going to do about that ? I also had an affordable housing problem. I didn't whine about it. I moved to a place where I could afford to live !
Affordable house is not possible in SF; land is too expensive. They need to build outside of the major cities where land is cheaper. Most of the addicts living on the street are not even from SF; they are there because they can do drugs openly.
Washington Post: The poor are better off when we build more housing for the rich If San Francisco and Washington are becoming rapidly unaffordable to the poor, why build more apartments for the rich? Economists typically counter with a lesson about supply and demand: Increase the sheer amount of housing, and competition for it will fall, bringing down rents along the way to the benefit of everyone. Particularly in the Bay Area since 2000, the researchers found, low-income neighborhoods with a lot of new construction have witnessed about half the displacement of similar neighborhoods that haven’t added much new housing. Places without much new market-rate construction have more displacement.
More luxury appartments lighten the demand burden on the rest of the housing stock. Every single new unit built on the net incrementally makes the rest of housing incrementally cheaper. Basic microeconomic principles.
This is awesome. I'd like to see SF become a megalopolis now that developers aren't constrained by the city anymore. Now is actually the best time to get started with developments, because land prices are lower due to market conditions. If developers secure entitlements now, they can wait a year or two before they start construction, at which point interest rates will be lower and market conditions will be better (SF is improving btw). Good time to purchase some rundown buildings or vacant lots and submit plans for new mid-rise or high-rise buildings, then build them a few years later.
That city is plum ripe to pick off and develop the heck out of. This time I agree the state should take over and screw over the environmentalists who stop housing projects. The environmentalists are the same dodos that want uncheck immigration. That City is uncontrollable so maybe the newer residence can drown out the commies that live there.
All those people who work in San Francisco City Hall ever want is to tax more and more so they can increase their own salaries. Yes, this will make homes cost more because builders have to pass on the cost to the consumers. Then consumers have to sell at higher prices or charge more rent to cover the cost of the house. So, in the end, it is not the builders that are greedy, it is Mayor Greed and her league of corrupt politicians causing the housing crisis. What a convenient way to blame it on the builders and homeowners while charging tons of taxes (even when the housing market is going down). Did you know that City Hall can still charge you more tax even if you bought your home for a cheaper price?
OMG please elect Elon Musk for California Governor.... He is hard on crime and a business man not a politician. It's so tiring hearing about all of the dumb ass issues with SF... Get your shit in order.
It needs to be less expensive to build. It costs almost a million dollars per unit to build "affordable" in California. The rent on that amount of money is $5,000-$10,000 a month.
I feel it isn't the people that cause most of the trouble of getting low cost housing - it is where to put their cars. Letting non-car owners have cut-rate housing would not strain existing neighborhood parking resources and bring money to neighborhood businesses. Could it legally be done? Trying would set a good example.
Hopefully they get this through. Housing is probably the biggest issue of the modern bay area.
1:30 Doesn't know what supply and demand is.
She is delusional
Right answer to the Wrong problem.
There’s a difference between affordable and low-income. Don’t get lost in the terms. Affordable just means the rent if 30% of the average income in the county. That means if the average income in SF county is $126k, affordable rent is approx. $3150.
Thanks to CEQA and other useless red tape, driving up the cost of construction, which cost developers about $80k-100k per unit, the cost is passed on to buyers and renters.
That lady talking about how the city’s priorities are misplaced infuriates me. What do you think is causing the problem of unaffordability? The city has been putting off building new units market rate or otherwise for years limiting the number of units available therefore raising the demand, which leads to unaffordable prices. It’s gotten to the point that people in and outside of the city have forced them to build.
Yeah turn the old Nordstrom into affordable housing. We could have it all up and running this time next year if we get some commitment. It will certainly help with the homeless problem
supply demand.. it applies to everything in life the more housing the lower the price becomes ..
Convert the old Nordstrom into affordable apartments for the homeless
Incompetence exemplified.
Why? Where we gonna put em ?
presidio is a nice area, maybe twin peaks can go and oh yeah golden gate park.. this should be a good start for high-rises @@davidwright873
People really don't understand supply and demand. Housing prices depend on how much housing stock there is. New housing will push prices down if there is enough supply. Luxury apartments built 30 years ago is regular apts now. Same will be in the future.
I don't believe anyone can reach adulthood without understanding basic concepts like supply and demand.
The city council decides projects on pure patronage, no idiotic argument can distract from that.
They have been relying on rent control and just-cause eviction laws to manage the chaos they have created. If this six-to-three court tosses out those laws, they will wish they had built more housing.
The problem is both ends. Landlords, Landlord groups, and corporations like BlackRock are hoarding up vacant units, jacking up the price, and also not enough new units being built or built in time.
Look at the new firestation on the bay.
Plenty of empty office spaces 😢
"Expeditiously!"
Is there any one worse than Scott Wiener
Trump?
"The city faces a tough task"--this is flat out wrong. All they have to do is legalize housing. It costs the city nothing. Bad, biased reporting.
Pelosi has an extra bedroom.
😂...hammer time.
Remember, they can't meet in person at the courthouse. It was deemed too unsafe.
San Francisco has the second highest population density of any city in America. We need to stop focusing on trying to increase housing in already overpopulated cities.
There's plenty of farmland in California where you could build new residential cities. In fact, there's more than 2100 square kilometers of farmland in California that is not even being farmed right now. But all you need is to purchase 25 square kilometers of farmland within commuter distance of San Francisco, Sacramento, and San Jose. And you could build a high rise city of condominiums and rent controlled apartments that could easily accommodate 4 to 8 million people. San Francisco's population is barely 800,000 people.
You guys are NIMBYS, you just don't more housing in your community. It's what's causing the housing crisis idiot. New York is doing the right thing when they realize they need to build more housing, unlike San Francisco which makes up excuses like change of "character" and "pollution". How would you feel when you can't afford a tiny apartment near your workplace. Because NIMBYS constant block more desperately needed housing. You see why you guys are viewed with disdain, you're literally increasing the housing crisis, you do not deserve a voice.
Densest city in America is a low bar, most cities here are primarily zoned for single family housing.
They better start painting there roofs Passover Blue.
No such thing as affordable housing. Cost to construct requires no less than 3k a month on rent just to break even. You won't see any affordable housing built unless it's subsidized with tax dollars. Even then, I doubt anyone will consider the rent as affordable.
There is only one problem on our entire planet.
Not war. Not poverty. Not greed. Not affordable housing. Not even politics, although it would come in a close second.
The problem is too many people ! The planet reached it's limit in 1970.
What are we going to do about that ?
I also had an affordable housing problem. I didn't whine about it. I moved to a place where I could afford to live !
Agreed! Overpopulation is the source of the majority of our issues these days.
Hopefully the state can take over and build, build build. How can the environmentalists not want new housing for the uncheck immigration they crave?
Affordable house is not possible in SF; land is too expensive. They need to build outside of the major cities where land is cheaper.
Most of the addicts living on the street are not even from SF; they are there because they can do drugs openly.
" 1:20 👀"
Please construct additional affordable housing. The city does not require any more luxury apartments.
Washington Post:
The poor are better off when we build more housing for the rich
If San Francisco and Washington are becoming rapidly unaffordable to the poor, why build more apartments for the rich?
Economists typically counter with a lesson about supply and demand: Increase the sheer amount of housing, and competition for it will fall, bringing down rents along the way to the benefit of everyone.
Particularly in the Bay Area since 2000, the researchers found, low-income neighborhoods with a lot of new construction have witnessed about half the displacement of similar neighborhoods that haven’t added much new housing.
Places without much new market-rate construction have more displacement.
Make it affordable to build.
More luxury appartments lighten the demand burden on the rest of the housing stock. Every single new unit built on the net incrementally makes the rest of housing incrementally cheaper. Basic microeconomic principles.
Is this old news? Did we forget that more people are leaving SF than coming in?
This is awesome. I'd like to see SF become a megalopolis now that developers aren't constrained by the city anymore. Now is actually the best time to get started with developments, because land prices are lower due to market conditions. If developers secure entitlements now, they can wait a year or two before they start construction, at which point interest rates will be lower and market conditions will be better (SF is improving btw). Good time to purchase some rundown buildings or vacant lots and submit plans for new mid-rise or high-rise buildings, then build them a few years later.
That city is plum ripe to pick off and develop the heck out of. This time I agree the state should take over and screw over the environmentalists who stop housing projects. The environmentalists are the same dodos that want uncheck immigration. That City is uncontrollable so maybe the newer residence can drown out the commies that live there.
All those people who work in San Francisco City Hall ever want is to tax more and more so they can increase their own salaries. Yes, this will make homes cost more because builders have to pass on the cost to the consumers. Then consumers have to sell at higher prices or charge more rent to cover the cost of the house. So, in the end, it is not the builders that are greedy, it is Mayor Greed and her league of corrupt politicians causing the housing crisis. What a convenient way to blame it on the builders and homeowners while charging tons of taxes (even when the housing market is going down). Did you know that City Hall can still charge you more tax even if you bought your home for a cheaper price?
chew: The real estate industry is greedy, though.
it means nothing... you think laws, regulations, "mandates", or citizens' opinions mean much to the public leaders of SF?
Or basically HOW TO STEAL MONEY FOR HOUSING WITHOUT BUILDING A SINGLE UNIT. Welcome to San Francisco.
LONDON BREEDER DONT CARE
Nothing to see here folks. This is what happened when you put inclusion equity diversity over merits 😂
too worried about the homeless
Build Baby build
This Scott guy is the worst
OMG please elect Elon Musk for California Governor.... He is hard on crime and a business man not a politician. It's so tiring hearing about all of the dumb ass issues with SF... Get your shit in order.
Shocker!
Democrat Utopia… always complain about the same problems they create…. But blaming others…
But = By
Republican utopia, the problem of mass shootings with more guns... But blaming others.
Lolol. San Francisco demoRAT lunecy. Hilarious.
Its easybto build in S.F. just bribe the staff at the building department
Lmao more like everything is to expensive. Not that they need more
So just like Marin county has not abeided by HUD's desegregation laws now san francisco too😂
Lol..wheres the mayor or board of sups😂😂😂😂
LOWER THE RENT!!!! Seriously, what's the point of building more places if people can't afford the high rent that is charged?
Do you understand supply and demand? Prices will go down when supply goes up.
It needs to be less expensive to build. It costs almost a million dollars per unit to build "affordable" in California. The rent on that amount of money is $5,000-$10,000 a month.
goodbye california
Go live in a poor red state like west virginia.
I feel it isn't the people that cause most of the trouble of getting low cost housing - it is where to put their cars. Letting non-car owners have cut-rate housing would not strain existing neighborhood parking resources and bring money to neighborhood businesses. Could it legally be done? Trying would set a good example.
she's correct.. there's enough housing. make it affordable...
how do we make it affordable when there are people with high budgets fighting for the same units?
He is unbelievable! Where are the lands to build housings for 82 ,000.00. Convert the empty office buildings to housing!
They know we don’t need more housing we need cheaper rent. Stop using SF for your weird money laundering/development contracts.