6 ms·

> Minus the bridge and a few landmarks, the city looks kinda bland. Too low-rise for such a popular place. But there's hills and natural features that are quite

> Minus the bridge and a few landmarks, the city looks kinda bland. Too low-rise for such a popular place. But there's hills and natural features that are quite spectacular. Victorian houses on hills make SF one of the most beautiful city in the US in my opinion. It has decent transit (which should be better !), walking around is pleasant in most neighbourhoods, the parks are amazing (ever been to Glen Canyon ? Land's end ?)

Xcelerate 8y ago
> Victorian houses on hills make SF one of the most beautiful city in the US in my opinion. From a distance, they look beautiful. Up close, most are sort of gross looking and not well maintained. You’d think the cost of taking care of a little house would be negligible compared to the price of the house itself.
- VHRanger 8y ago
  If the house is being rented there's no incentive to make it nice given the housing shortage.
  - almost_usual 8y ago
    Home owners should still maintain the homes. If you have a leaking window and you don't fix it you might need to eventually replace an entire wall. Not cheap, especially in San Francisco where good contractors are on a wait list.
  - acchow 8y ago
    It's moreso because rent can't be increased to match the market price of the home.
    - gnopgnip 8y ago
      There is no rent control for single family homes anywhere in CA.
      - almost_usual 8y ago
        >There is no rent control for single family homes anywhere in CA. "Rent control is in effect for all San Francisco renters who reside in buildings constructed before June 1979. This means your rent can only increase by a governmentally mandated percentage each year, based on the cost of living index, and with a 30-day notice. If your landlord has improved the facilities in your building, he can petition for an additional increase, but the Rent Board must approve his request, which can't exceed 10 percent. If a landlord is negligent in his maintenance of the building or units, you can make application for a rent decrease to the Rent Board." https://homeguides.sfgate.com/san-francisco-rent-control-information-43270.html https://homeguides.sfgate.com/san-francisco-rent-control-inf... Original Victorians definitely fall in the pre June 1979 category.
        gnopgnip 8y ago
        Costa Hawkins is a state wide law. Under Costa Hawkins rent control does not apply to single family homes, or homes constructed after 1995, or individually owned condos.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        taysic 8y ago
        Many of those Victorians were actually converted into units back in the day and rent control applies. Some are being converted back into single family homes now.
      - grandmczeb 8y ago
        I don’t have a stat to back this up, but many Victorian houses in SF (especially the areas that a tourist would visit) have been split into multiple units and are not single family homes.
- almost_usual 8y ago
  There is a huge shortage of good contractors in San Francisco. They probably make more money than most Software Engineers at this point. Good earthquake retrofitters are even more costly, I know of people spending $2000 for someone to come by and look at their house for an hour. It's definitely not cheap to own a Victorian in San Francisco even with renters.
  - lhorie 8y ago
    If it's not a huge reno, you could always do things yourself. I'm pretty scrawny and renovation-illiterate but I've manage to rent and use one of those huge ass insulation blowing machine from Home Depot before, and on top of saving money - despite having to rent a van - I got a better job done than most commercial contractors would do, because they are known to skimp on both material quantity and quality to minimize costs (source: I was redoing the insulation on top of two existing layers).
    - almost_usual 8y ago
      Definitely, any small plumbing work or electrical work I've been able to take care of. Beats getting charged hundreds of dollars for a 20 minute job. I'm also a firm believer in trying to do as much maintenance myself as possible whether it's home/vehicle. If you own something you're going to care about it more and go the extra mile to make sure the work is done correctly. There are some jobs though where I know it's over my head.
- grecy 8y ago
  > Up close, most are sort of gross looking and not well maintained Up close a lot of the USA looks unmaintained compared to Europe/Australia. Every time a foreign friend visit me there it would only take a couple of hours for them to say something like "...everything looks kind of half finished" , or "wow, this place is falling apart"
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > You’d think the cost of taking care of a little house would be negligible compared to the price of the house itself. Why would you think that? Sure, SF has high real estate costs, but it also has high labor costs (including, for most people who can afford to live there through work, high opportunity costs of diverting personal labor to maintenance.)
AnimalMuppet 8y ago
I wouldn't consider Glen Canyon or Land's End to be part of the attractions of San Francisco. Yes, you're closer to them than you are in New York. No, you're not close to them. If you want to be close to them, go to Salt Lake or Phoenix. If you had said Yosemite, I could agree with you.

Xcelerate 8y ago

> Victorian houses on hills make SF one of the most beautiful city in the US in my opinion. From a distance, they look beautiful. Up close, most are sort of gross looking and not well maintained. You’d think the cost of taking care of a little house would be negligible compared to the price of the house itself.

VHRanger 8y ago
If the house is being rented there's no incentive to make it nice given the housing shortage.
- almost_usual 8y ago
  Home owners should still maintain the homes. If you have a leaking window and you don't fix it you might need to eventually replace an entire wall. Not cheap, especially in San Francisco where good contractors are on a wait list.
- acchow 8y ago
  It's moreso because rent can't be increased to match the market price of the home.
  - gnopgnip 8y ago
    There is no rent control for single family homes anywhere in CA.
    - almost_usual 8y ago
      >There is no rent control for single family homes anywhere in CA. "Rent control is in effect for all San Francisco renters who reside in buildings constructed before June 1979. This means your rent can only increase by a governmentally mandated percentage each year, based on the cost of living index, and with a 30-day notice. If your landlord has improved the facilities in your building, he can petition for an additional increase, but the Rent Board must approve his request, which can't exceed 10 percent. If a landlord is negligent in his maintenance of the building or units, you can make application for a rent decrease to the Rent Board." https://homeguides.sfgate.com/san-francisco-rent-control-information-43270.html https://homeguides.sfgate.com/san-francisco-rent-control-inf... Original Victorians definitely fall in the pre June 1979 category.
      - gnopgnip 8y ago
        Costa Hawkins is a state wide law. Under Costa Hawkins rent control does not apply to single family homes, or homes constructed after 1995, or individually owned condos.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        taysic 8y ago
        Many of those Victorians were actually converted into units back in the day and rent control applies. Some are being converted back into single family homes now.
    - grandmczeb 8y ago
      I don’t have a stat to back this up, but many Victorian houses in SF (especially the areas that a tourist would visit) have been split into multiple units and are not single family homes.
almost_usual 8y ago
There is a huge shortage of good contractors in San Francisco. They probably make more money than most Software Engineers at this point. Good earthquake retrofitters are even more costly, I know of people spending $2000 for someone to come by and look at their house for an hour. It's definitely not cheap to own a Victorian in San Francisco even with renters.
- lhorie 8y ago
  If it's not a huge reno, you could always do things yourself. I'm pretty scrawny and renovation-illiterate but I've manage to rent and use one of those huge ass insulation blowing machine from Home Depot before, and on top of saving money - despite having to rent a van - I got a better job done than most commercial contractors would do, because they are known to skimp on both material quantity and quality to minimize costs (source: I was redoing the insulation on top of two existing layers).
  - almost_usual 8y ago
    Definitely, any small plumbing work or electrical work I've been able to take care of. Beats getting charged hundreds of dollars for a 20 minute job. I'm also a firm believer in trying to do as much maintenance myself as possible whether it's home/vehicle. If you own something you're going to care about it more and go the extra mile to make sure the work is done correctly. There are some jobs though where I know it's over my head.
grecy 8y ago
> Up close, most are sort of gross looking and not well maintained Up close a lot of the USA looks unmaintained compared to Europe/Australia. Every time a foreign friend visit me there it would only take a couple of hours for them to say something like "...everything looks kind of half finished" , or "wow, this place is falling apart"
dragonwriter 8y ago
> You’d think the cost of taking care of a little house would be negligible compared to the price of the house itself. Why would you think that? Sure, SF has high real estate costs, but it also has high labor costs (including, for most people who can afford to live there through work, high opportunity costs of diverting personal labor to maintenance.)

AnimalMuppet 8y ago

I wouldn't consider Glen Canyon or Land's End to be part of the attractions of San Francisco. Yes, you're closer to them than you are in New York. No, you're not close to them. If you want to be close to them, go to Salt Lake or Phoenix. If you had said Yosemite, I could agree with you.