5 ms·

"The San Francisco units will rent for $1,595 a month." Even in this property market, even downtown, that's just ridiculous for a dinky 160 square feet. Even fu

"The San Francisco units will rent for $1,595 a month." Even in this property market, even downtown, that's just ridiculous for a dinky 160 square feet. Even furnished. "a reconfigured bathroom and the addition of a washer/drier." Only 160 square feet and you install a washer/drier instead of in-building laundry or a laundromat up the street? That's not really the epitome of "sustainable" / "urban infill" either. "It’s a regulatory thicket in San Francisco." Yes. It's true. We suck.

akurilin 15y ago
I hear of downtown SF studios going for up to 2500/mo. Perhaps they're betting that demand will keep rising uncontrollably over the next decade, making their prices comparatively reasonable.
anigbrowl 15y ago
$10 per square foot per month is almost double the commercial real estate rate in SF.
- shasta 15y ago
  Presumably, rent costs don't remain linear as you approach 0 square feet.
fragsworth 15y ago
At 1600 per month I am guessing his target market requires at least a few perks. I think the point is mostly that lots of these people have no need for the extra space.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
grayrest 15y ago
> The San Francisco units will rent for $1,595 a month. I was wondering about this pricing. I pay the same amount for a 850 square foot apartment in Upper East Side Manhattan (83rd and 1st so a 10 minute walk from the 4/5/6 but still...). I started reading with the thought "I'd pay ~$800 for that if it was decently located". I split an apartment in Cole Valley SF in 2006-7 and think we were at ~$1800 for a two bedroom but it was a pretty crappy apartment for the area.
- hack_edu 15y ago
  Yes, this is way higher than a studio over twice this size would be in the building next door. Not sure what value they claim to be adding... But, prices are up >15% since you were here. You can thank the explosion in population of and increased income of the demographic that reads this very site.
- Drbble 15y ago
  That's half the price of every similar Manhattan apartment I have seen. That is a DC price, not an Upper East Side price. Long term rent control?
  - grayrest 15y ago
    It's a small/non-doorman building and I got it in late 2009 and the landlord had just remodeled, had a number of vacancies in the building (coincidence, not a building problem) and really wanted to rent it. I got a good deal on it but I've talked to other people in the area with similar apartments in the $1800-1900 range. If I were closer to Central Park or the river, the price goes way up.
    - Drbble 15y ago
      Or when the new 2nd Ave subway is finished...
      - grayrest 15y ago
        Thought has occurred to me but I'm looking forward to this! Will be neat to be able to go from home to work without actually walking a full block at either end. Pretty sure one of the 86th street entrances is coming up on my block because they dug a ~40 foot deep hole and have a giant white truss sitting on my corner.
- fennecfoxen 15y ago
  $1800 will get you only a 1 bedroom in Cole Valley these days - and not even a nice one. Tech Bubble 2.0 and all that. Anything on the east side of the city is through the roof, really, especially if it's a nice neighborhood like Cole Valley or Duboce. Moreover, as soon as Facebook goes IPO everyone expects alllll the Noe Valley homes to get bought up by the new millionare types. But you can still get a good 2BR in the Inner Sunset or the Inner Richmond / north of the Panhandle (near USF) for the low-to-mid $2000s, and it will easily be five times as big as this place. You can do even better in the outer mission or Ocean View / Taraval (near CCSF), and quite fine in the southwestern corner by the main UCSF campus. Mission Bay students have it a little harder if they're not in on-campus housing - perhaps somewhere in the Bayview? Of course, Mission Bay campus is a short walk from the Caltrain depot, as well, and the transfer to a streetcar from BART is doable. I still suspect that apartment is for PARTYING PARTYING every night and living the Bohemian lifestyle where you're mostly in your place to sleep and occasionally study. Their parents are paying for it. The price premium is because "we can easily sell this to the rich parents who are only in town a short period of time".
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
MrMatters 15y ago
I don't know much about living in SF, but would people actually pay that much? It seems like people would only go for this if it was cheaper (to me). >Or for any modern city dweller for whom home need not mean much more than where you wake up and go to sleep. Unless it costs less, it'd be just as easy to use a regular sized wake-up-and-go-to-sleep place, wouldn't it? I'm just baffled.
busted 15y ago
It really is ridiculous. For around that much you can get a nice, if small, studio in most desirable places in the city that is at least twice that size. And that would still hurt to pay for.
blvr 15y ago
>"The San Francisco units will rent for $1,595 a month." Even in this property market, even downtown, that's just ridiculous for a dinky 160 square feet. Even furnished. Even for a carbon-nuetral home? Eco-homes are pretty expensive usually. http://www.zetacommunities.com/interactive-graphic.html http://www.zetacommunities.com/interactive-graphic.html

akurilin 15y ago

I hear of downtown SF studios going for up to 2500/mo. Perhaps they're betting that demand will keep rising uncontrollably over the next decade, making their prices comparatively reasonable.

anigbrowl 15y ago

$10 per square foot per month is almost double the commercial real estate rate in SF.

shasta 15y ago
Presumably, rent costs don't remain linear as you approach 0 square feet.

fragsworth 15y ago

At 1600 per month I am guessing his target market requires at least a few perks. I think the point is mostly that lots of these people have no need for the extra space.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

grayrest 15y ago

> The San Francisco units will rent for $1,595 a month. I was wondering about this pricing. I pay the same amount for a 850 square foot apartment in Upper East Side Manhattan (83rd and 1st so a 10 minute walk from the 4/5/6 but still...). I started reading with the thought "I'd pay ~$800 for that if it was decently located". I split an apartment in Cole Valley SF in 2006-7 and think we were at ~$1800 for a two bedroom but it was a pretty crappy apartment for the area.

hack_edu 15y ago
Yes, this is way higher than a studio over twice this size would be in the building next door. Not sure what value they claim to be adding... But, prices are up >15% since you were here. You can thank the explosion in population of and increased income of the demographic that reads this very site.
Drbble 15y ago
That's half the price of every similar Manhattan apartment I have seen. That is a DC price, not an Upper East Side price. Long term rent control?
- grayrest 15y ago
  It's a small/non-doorman building and I got it in late 2009 and the landlord had just remodeled, had a number of vacancies in the building (coincidence, not a building problem) and really wanted to rent it. I got a good deal on it but I've talked to other people in the area with similar apartments in the $1800-1900 range. If I were closer to Central Park or the river, the price goes way up.
  - Drbble 15y ago
    Or when the new 2nd Ave subway is finished...
    - grayrest 15y ago
      Thought has occurred to me but I'm looking forward to this! Will be neat to be able to go from home to work without actually walking a full block at either end. Pretty sure one of the 86th street entrances is coming up on my block because they dug a ~40 foot deep hole and have a giant white truss sitting on my corner.
fennecfoxen 15y ago
$1800 will get you only a 1 bedroom in Cole Valley these days - and not even a nice one. Tech Bubble 2.0 and all that. Anything on the east side of the city is through the roof, really, especially if it's a nice neighborhood like Cole Valley or Duboce. Moreover, as soon as Facebook goes IPO everyone expects alllll the Noe Valley homes to get bought up by the new millionare types. But you can still get a good 2BR in the Inner Sunset or the Inner Richmond / north of the Panhandle (near USF) for the low-to-mid $2000s, and it will easily be five times as big as this place. You can do even better in the outer mission or Ocean View / Taraval (near CCSF), and quite fine in the southwestern corner by the main UCSF campus. Mission Bay students have it a little harder if they're not in on-campus housing - perhaps somewhere in the Bayview? Of course, Mission Bay campus is a short walk from the Caltrain depot, as well, and the transfer to a streetcar from BART is doable. I still suspect that apartment is for PARTYING PARTYING every night and living the Bohemian lifestyle where you're mostly in your place to sleep and occasionally study. Their parents are paying for it. The price premium is because "we can easily sell this to the rich parents who are only in town a short period of time".

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

MrMatters 15y ago

I don't know much about living in SF, but would people actually pay that much? It seems like people would only go for this if it was cheaper (to me). >Or for any modern city dweller for whom home need not mean much more than where you wake up and go to sleep. Unless it costs less, it'd be just as easy to use a regular sized wake-up-and-go-to-sleep place, wouldn't it? I'm just baffled.

busted 15y ago

It really is ridiculous. For around that much you can get a nice, if small, studio in most desirable places in the city that is at least twice that size. And that would still hurt to pay for.

blvr 15y ago

>"The San Francisco units will rent for $1,595 a month." Even in this property market, even downtown, that's just ridiculous for a dinky 160 square feet. Even furnished. Even for a carbon-nuetral home? Eco-homes are pretty expensive usually. http://www.zetacommunities.com/interactive-graphic.html http://www.zetacommunities.com/interactive-graphic.html