Gosh, we need more condos for millionaires

|
(58)

I guess it's really, really important for San Francisco to build more housing for the very rich because there's just such a profound need for it. In fact, the demand for million-dollar condos is so high, and the supply so tight, that the folks at Rincon Tower (which is hideous) are bringing in celebrities to try to sell the last few units.

You don't find many mid-range and affordable units sitting on the market; in fact, there's a long waiting list and a lottery for affordable housing. Because there's more demand than supply. On a policy level, one would think that the city would seek to match supply and demand (since the free market clearly isn't doing it). But no: SF continues to approve housing for people who don't need it and won't balance that out with the level of affordable housing that IS desperately needed.

Smart.

Comments

He sees everything in black and white, so "rich" = "bad", and "poor" equals "good", as well as "interesting" and "diverse" and all the other code words.

Tim wants to micro-manage the city's demographics so that we're all like him. That is, not "diverse" at all.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 22, 2012 @ 10:17 am

Tim has just come out and published the obviously bigoted statement that rich people are 'boring'.

But what you are saying is quite true. I'm thinking of 2 projects (555 Washington and 8 Washington) that he went ballistic on.

The # of affordable units that would have been lost because of the two projects? Zero.

The amount of money that would have been raised to build affordable housing? $24 million.

Yet he could not have worked harder against both projects. So it isn't really about affordable housing, it's about not having boring people vote in elections.

Posted by Troll on Jun. 22, 2012 @ 10:27 am
Posted by Guest on Jun. 22, 2012 @ 10:42 am

Always have- Sleek and swanky- much better than the Intercontinental Hotel-ugliest building ever. It doesn't mean I want to see neighborhoods overrun and bulldozed. 8 Washington is a non issue for me but it generates lots of lobby and legal revenue and keeps the planning dept busy- so I guess other projects may have easier approvals.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 22, 2012 @ 12:16 pm

I live in a place that could be considered "affordable housing". It is a Below Market Rate condo, which is only available to people who do not exceed certain income limits - I believe this year it's nobody who makes over $72K is eligible. The flip side is the annual appreciation is capped, based on a regional index. I bought this place 9 years ago.

In short... my place is now completely unsellable. The low end of the market has fallen hard enough to almost be on par with the cost of a "Below Market Rate" condo. As a result, people will not buy these units, opting for one that doesn't come with income or resale restrictions.

There is no line for affordable housing of my type. None. The building has experienced a number of foreclosures.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 22, 2012 @ 4:43 pm

Anyone who looks into the rules even casually can see the problems with it.

BMR housing should only be rental. But if it is for owner-occupiers then, yes, of course, the price should be capped. Otherwise you're just gaming the system to make a profit.

It's supposed to be cheap housing for the poor, and 72K pa is not poor - it's about average. You're lucky you're getting susidized at all. Quit whining.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 23, 2012 @ 6:29 am

The people buying these condos are not billionaires. They are well off.
So is Heather Fong who gets a 250K pa pension and rumor has it she never made a felony arrest in her entire "career" as a public employee.

Let the millionaires come and I hope they bring all their rich friends. Let SF become the playground for the rich and famous. Let the average income of SF rise to 1M per year. I guess it will be a total hell hole then, if the only people who lived in SF were the people that could afford to.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 23, 2012 @ 4:47 pm

you should want SF to have people like these overpaying for SF homes and taxes, so the rest of us can enjoy their largesse. Being poor and depressed like Detroit is not an ambition.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 23, 2012 @ 5:13 pm