it's not. It's necessary within current constraints to ensure production of housing at all levels of affordability
-
-
the Mission can support higher %s *because* market-rate rents are high enough to subsidize the BMR. So if you wanted higher %s in Oakland, one might have to wait for rents to get high enough for those %s to pencil if they're otherwise not feasible. https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2017/06/22/sf-strux-2017-residential-real-estate-mission.html …pic.twitter.com/g2Gbfqnjen
-
that has to be communicated to the public. Do they want a higher % of deed-restricted units if that means they have to wait for the entire rental market to rise to the price level that can then finance/subsidize that %? Are they OK with the consequences of that if that means
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
That's why it's a crappy local "fix" to the problem. I'm with ya'll on that. But does it actually make the situation worse? I don't think so.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.