XP: San Francisco apartment rentals

That story doesn't surprise me; renting is a tough business and renting a unit in the house you live in is even tougher. I was wondering more about the reasons the more commercial type of landlord -- even with, say, a 3 or 4 unit building that they don't live in -- would leave the units unrented. (re the damage risk, and difficulty of evicting, I think that even the size of the security deposit is limited to 2 months rent in SF, or maybe in all of CA.)
 
Back to the original question, I'd advise patience. I found a place with a friend in 2008 and found a studio last year, both in areas that I really like and both for not-unreasonable prices. Have all your info ready (landlord references, credit report, pay stubs or a letter of employment), have a solid idea of your budget and be prepared to pay first month, last month, and a deposit, and also have a pretty solid idea of what you're looking for so you don't waste your time.

It makes it a little easier finding a decent place if you know you're looking for a studio or jr one bedroom for $1600 and you want to live in the Inner Richmond, Lower Pac Heights, or Noe Valley, for example. You'll still probably spend a few months looking, but I think you're better off doing that and using AirBnB (as much as I dislike it) until you find a place rather than desperately running to horrible cattle-call roommate interviews for places you may or may not actually like. Good luck to him!
 
originally posted by kirk wallace:
That story doesn't surprise me; renting is a tough business and renting a unit in the house you live in is even tougher. I was wondering more about the reasons the more commercial type of landlord -- even with, say, a 3 or 4 unit building that they don't live in -- would leave the units unrented. (re the damage risk, and diffiuclty of evicting, I think that even the size of the security deposit is limited to 2 months rent in SF, or maybe in all of CA.)

1. If you've got a unit where you are living, taking it off the market makes your place easier to sell, and I presume increases the overall value.

2. For larger units, I think it is less common to take whole buildings off the market, but I know of at least one large building (about 10 stories) in Pacific Heights (fancy part of SF) that was taken off the market ca. 2000 under the Ellis Act, which provides that if you take the building off the market for ten years, you can evict all the tenants (who otherwise are basically unevictable). It was a bet that SF rents would continue to skyrocket. Just a little premature, i guess.

3. SF rent control laws originally didn't cover buildings of fewer than four (or was it five?) units, but that was changed by the voters a few years ago.

4. My sympathies are definitely with tenants -- for most of my adult life, I've been a tenant, and during the dotcom bubble, I had a landlord who was trying to evict me into a market with vast price escalations -- but I don't think that the SF ordinances (taken as a whole) work in favor of most tenants, including me when the landlord was trying to evict me.
 
originally posted by Peter Creasey:

originally posted by Larry Stein: Is his new job near public transportation?

Larry, Sorry, I had forgotten you asked this.

His office will be in the financial district.

. . . . . Pete

Using public transportation won't be an issue. BART will get him closer to this job, but Caltrain will be fine, too.
 
He should look around the Balboa Park Bart station - outer mission/excelsior. Much cheaper, some great food. Plenty of students. Quick trip downtown.
 
FWIW, in graduate school I did some econometrics analysis of the effect of rent control in New York city combining some social survey about apartment quality, QOL and the like looking at rent control. It used a bunch of census data as well to control for neighborhood effects, etc.

I called it the shitty scale (my adviser had a good sense of humor).

Bottom line, rent control = shittier apartments and distorts prices in the greater rental pool.

This study was never published and only subjected to peer review within my research group.

I have no idea where the code and paper might be.
 
originally posted by Scott Kraft:
He should look around the Balboa Park Bart station - outer mission/excelsior. Much cheaper, some great food. Plenty of students. Quick trip downtown.

If I were moving to SF, I would heed Scott's advice.

I'd live with Cory and Em until I found a place.
 
Given the "grimness" that can be expected when government intervention counters market forces, it is hard to fathom why such a policy is still employed.

. . . . . . Pete
 
originally posted by Cory Cartwright:
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Larry Stein:
originally posted by VLM:

I'd live with Cory and Em until I found a place.

You'd be the guest that would never leave and also drink their stash while you were at it.

I'd be like a son to them.
So you'd never leave and drink my stash. Larry was right.

And say goodbye to your wifi!
 
originally posted by Peter Creasey:

Given the "grimness" that can be expected when government intervention counters market forces, it is hard to fathom why such a policy is still employed.

. . . . . . Pete
You're talking about Ginnie, Freddie and the VA, right? And the tax deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes?
 
originally posted by Peter Creasey:

Intervention/control/disruption versus incentives...no comparison!

. . . . . Pete
Exactly my point. The incentives you favor have a much larger effect on the eceonomy. Have you forgotten the Great Recession?

Rent control and your incentives each cut down on labor mobility.
 
interventions - government action I disagree with
incentives - government action I agree with

special interests - political mobilization I disagree with
the will of the people - political mobilization I agree with
 
Back
Top