San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash • Hacker News Board

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#171

Post by bluejekyll » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:27 PM UTC

darth_avocado wrote: post #127

The city officials are asleep at the wheel. Blame it on remote work and pandemic as much as you want, but the reality is that the city was in decline even before that. It is too expensive to live in the city. It is too expensive to commute to the city. It is too expensive to feed yourself in the city. Crime is rampant. Drug use and filth is everywhere. Most importantly city has been hostile to tech and business owner…

> Crime is rampant

According to the data, crime in SF is lower that it was a few years ago: https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-San-Francisco-Californ...

> Drug use and filth is everywhere.

Voters can’t seem to wrap their head around better housing policies to get people off the street. It’s disappointing, the entire Bay Area is guilty of this.

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#172

Post by evr1isnxprt » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:28 PM UTC

darth_avocado wrote: post #127

The city officials are asleep at the wheel. Blame it on remote work and pandemic as much as you want, but the reality is that the city was in decline even before that. It is too expensive to live in the city. It is too expensive to commute to the city. It is too expensive to feed yourself in the city. Crime is rampant. Drug use and filth is everywhere. Most importantly city has been hostile to tech and business owner…

Elites constrain candidate choice and voters are too distracted staying afloat to demand different. City officials are not expected to do better.

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#173

Post by commandlinefan » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:28 PM UTC

darth_avocado wrote: post #127

The city officials are asleep at the wheel. Blame it on remote work and pandemic as much as you want, but the reality is that the city was in decline even before that. It is too expensive to live in the city. It is too expensive to commute to the city. It is too expensive to feed yourself in the city. Crime is rampant. Drug use and filth is everywhere. Most importantly city has been hostile to tech and business owner…

I suspect this will inevitably be blamed on greedy capitalist building owners, but the crazy tax assessors have some blame here, too. They value these buildings in the hundreds of millions of dollars and asses taxes based on that valuation - and that was "ok" because the building owners could extract that kind of value from the buildings by raising the rents. Now they can't - but the valuation and the taxes owed stay the same. If they hadn't tried to squeeze every last tax dollar out of the real estate market in the first place, the buildings wouldn't have become so expensive to begin with.

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#174

Post by malnourish » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:28 PM UTC

gfodor wrote: post #154

inamberclad wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drug use isn't associated with crime and filth until we make it so via harsh city policies. I would, however, like someone to clean the 4 different instances of poop I saw on my 3 block walk this morning.

You think drug use doesn't lead to crime?

What crimes will drug users commit if drugs are legally available like alcohol?

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#175

Post by innagadadavida » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:28 PM UTC

bragr wrote: post #2

Give the corresponding housing crisis in the Bay Area, one wonders if the solution is to "simply" start converting office space to living space until the corresponding demand for office space recovers from a combination of increased demand and decreased supply. Now I'm sure there are all kinds of challenges to doing that, engineering, zoning, other practicalities, but it seems overall reasonable to me, though perhaps…

Agree, but will never ever happen thanks to commercial RE mafia errrr lobby... Most of the commercial RE is vacant but still somehow get tax breaks and they also keep the rents very inflated. I don't buy this argument of "this is not fit to be a home" - neither are the streets, parks and sidewalks. The commercial RE mafia err the lobby is very powerful and they will protect their interests no matter what. These spaces are already up to code for fire and habitability. They have bathrooms. All you need to do is put more bathrooms and have small 10x10 rooms like they have in Japan with a bed, coat hanger, table and chair. This is just temporary to house the homeless and get them off the streets. Give preference to folks that have a job. To make is sweeter for the owners, the city can keep the tax breaks that they already get for keeping the place vacant and get rid of all other tax breaks given to the commercial RE folks.

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#176

Post by babyshake » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:28 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #137

darth_avocado wrote: post #127

The city officials are asleep at the wheel. Blame it on remote work and pandemic as much as you want, but the reality is that the city was in decline even before that. It is too expensive to live in the city. It is too expensive to commute to the city. It is too expensive to feed yourself in the city. Crime is rampant. Drug use and filth is everywhere. Most importantly city has been hostile to tech and business owner…

> city officials are asleep at the wheel Eh, San Francisco's voters have been drinking crazy water for some time. New developments blocked by renters. Stringent building codes and environmental reviews defended by those who think they're being compassionate to the poor. Scolding tech companies for hiring in the city and then panicking when they stop hiring in the city. This obviously isn't all of them. But it's not l…

> New developments blocked by renters.

I wonder how much of this is renters who feel they are just one IPO or acquisition away from being owners.

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#177

Post by colechristensen » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:28 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #137

darth_avocado wrote: post #127

The city officials are asleep at the wheel. Blame it on remote work and pandemic as much as you want, but the reality is that the city was in decline even before that. It is too expensive to live in the city. It is too expensive to commute to the city. It is too expensive to feed yourself in the city. Crime is rampant. Drug use and filth is everywhere. Most importantly city has been hostile to tech and business owner…

> city officials are asleep at the wheel Eh, San Francisco's voters have been drinking crazy water for some time. New developments blocked by renters. Stringent building codes and environmental reviews defended by those who think they're being compassionate to the poor. Scolding tech companies for hiring in the city and then panicking when they stop hiring in the city. This obviously isn't all of them. But it's not l…

It's fine to block new residential developments if you also block new commercial developments.

Maintain a ratio of residential to commercial and you don't have housing crunches and can keep your city at the density your residents choose.

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#178

Post by inamberclad » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:29 PM UTC

gfodor wrote: post #154

inamberclad wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drug use isn't associated with crime and filth until we make it so via harsh city policies. I would, however, like someone to clean the 4 different instances of poop I saw on my 3 block walk this morning.

You think drug use doesn't lead to crime?

Look at what happens when drug use is legalized and regulated. Did crime spike with weed legalization in any major city?

Other drugs are worse on both user and their environment (including alcohol), but they're not the source of the other problems. Rather, we are, when we reject such people and force them to live in squalor with no options.

I don't think _anyone_ has a legitimate justification to be smoking mystery substances on the street corner like I see, but that alone doesn't make them criminals unless _we_ make it so through our policies.

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#179

Post by gofreddygo » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:29 PM UTC

darth_avocado wrote: post #127

The city officials are asleep at the wheel. Blame it on remote work and pandemic as much as you want, but the reality is that the city was in decline even before that. It is too expensive to live in the city. It is too expensive to commute to the city. It is too expensive to feed yourself in the city. Crime is rampant. Drug use and filth is everywhere. Most importantly city has been hostile to tech and business owner…

In The city You're screwed when you rent a home or office. You're screwed when you own a home. You're screwed when you eat. You're screwed when you drink. You're screwed when you commute. You're screwed when you walk the streets. You're screwed when you (pay) park your car on the street.

homeless? neglected commuters? neglected business owners? neglected public workers? neglected tourists? neglected

I just don't know what sort of people the city wants ?

Re: San Francisco braces for commercial real estate crash

#180

Post by JumpCrisscross » Tue, Sep 06, 2022, 6:29 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #166

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> city officials are asleep at the wheel Eh, San Francisco's voters have been drinking crazy water for some time. New developments blocked by renters. Stringent building codes and environmental reviews defended by those who think they're being compassionate to the poor. Scolding tech companies for hiring in the city and then panicking when they stop hiring in the city. This obviously isn't all of them. But it's not l…

Yea, people love blaming (elected) city officials but NIMBYism and "Housing is an investment that should only go up in price" will eventually kill any market.

> "Housing is an investment that should only go up in price" will eventually kill any market

It doesn't have to. Housing can be affordable while going up in nominal terms.

Neither do I think most San Francisco homeowners think about housing supply strategically. They're pissed off about a specific view being blocked. Or construction noise. Or their area's average rent going up. (?!?) Alternatively, they're comfortable and can't imagine someone might be better off housed in worse conditions, cheaply, than struggling to make rent in a decked-out flat.