What are a person's housing options if they want to keep their lodging expenses under $1,000 a month in SF? (San Francisco: lease, condo)

[NorCalLover]

SROs are also available in that price range. One rents a room with a mini-fridge and microwave, with a bathroom down the hall. Many of them, especially the ones around 6th street in the Tenderloin and SOMA, are filled with the formerly homeless and recovering addicts who don't have other options. They're not my cup of tea but are an option for someone desperate for a room in SF proper.

[LongNote]

Originally Posted by NorCalLover

SROs are also available in that price range. One rents a room with a mini-fridge and microwave, with a bathroom down the hall. Many of them, especially the ones around 6th street in the Tenderloin and SOMA, are filled with the formerly homeless and recovering addicts who don't have other options. They're not my cup of tea but are an option for someone desperate for a room in SF proper.

Thanks! People who are destined for success can work up under a disadvantage.

[tikkasf]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

That would mean that like 80% of the city can't afford to live in the city, which is obviously absurd. (they live here already!).

I'm sure it can be done quite easily, but you need to get a share. There are shares even in Manhattan for under $1,000 a month, so if all you need is a bed and shower, you can find a place.

A fair number of those people you refer to are likely long term tenants of a rent controlled unit. I pay a bit under $1K rent myself for a one bedroom apt in the Richmond Dist with a parking spot in a indoor garage....moved to this apt in 1989....... others with moderate income not in my rental situation are very likely in shared rental situations....some maybe even sharing the same room with another person in a apt/flat/house with multiple # of tenants living there.

[Chuck5000]

Re: the immediately preceding post by tikkasf -- Nola 101 is definitely wrong, *most* people who live in SF right now could not afford to move there now and achieve an equivalent living situation. For some renters, this is because of rent control, but only some. This is especially true of home owners, many of whom have owned their SF home for 10, 20, 30 years and do not make 250k+ per year.

This is also true of Manhattan, which I know well, and probably also true of many cities that have seen rapid appreciation in the last 25 years.

It's not absurd, it's reality.

[NOLA101]

Originally Posted by Chuck5000

It's not absurd, it's reality.

No, it's completely absurd. The previous claim was that a single person has to make 250k a year to afford a room in SF. That's complete nonsense. People move to SF every day making low salaries, and find a way to make it work.

There are people washing dishes in SF restaurants, and they live in the city. You can make it work. There are undocumented immigrants from Central America. You think they have assets?

I know because I did the same thing, in NYC, a few years ago. I was almost under the poverty line, while going to grad school but made it work, and in Manhattan, no less. And Manhattan makes SF look dirt cheap. I'm sure the OP can find a bed for under 1k (probably considerably under 1k).

[john3232]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

No, it's completely absurd. The previous claim was that a single person has to make 250k a year to afford a room in SF. That's complete nonsense.

That`s not what I wrote:
//www.city-data.com/forum/40100342-post28.html

The point is you`ve got to have money to live here and used I my property as an example.

$1000 a month will likely get you a room at best.

[Chuck5000]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

No, it's completely absurd. The previous claim was that a single person has to make 250k a year to afford a room in SF. That's complete nonsense. People move to SF every day making low salaries, and find a way to make it work.

There are people washing dishes in SF restaurants, and they live in the city. You can make it work. There are undocumented immigrants from Central America. You think they have assets?

I know because I did the same thing, in NYC, a few years ago. I was almost under the poverty line, while going to grad school but made it work, and in Manhattan, no less. And Manhattan makes SF look dirt cheap. I'm sure the OP can find a bed for under 1k (probably considerably under 1k).

What I wrote about current residents not being able to afford to recreate their current situation - not some claim that somebody made about 250k for a room (who would really believe that? That writer meant something else) -- is absolutely is the truth.

When I lived in the Haight, on a great block full of $2-3m houses, only a small fraction of the people around me (I knew a lot of my neighbors, some of whom are friends) were tech salary workers. The rest were regular people who had bought in or rented many many years back. Same story when I lived in the Sunset.

BTW, I'd guess that most service workers do not live in SF, they commute from elsewhere. Undocumenteds, if they are living in the city, almost certainly live in truly squalid rooming houses. Much more likely they are out of SF.

Really the bigger issue is not can you scrape by on 1k, but why would you want to scrape by indefinitely given how high the bar is to do better than scrape?

[clongirl]

People, people, people......

Prior to wasting all the time/energy on this, try to figure out if the poster is just a bored troll with no intention, job, schooling, ability to even move here. Read prior postings to get a clue.

FYI--There's no way in heck that 1k a month is gonna happen. San Francisco has the highest rents (not to mention the choosiest landlords, in the nation). I paid 750$ for a studio in the fog belt WAAAYYY back in 89'. That was a long time ago before any tech industry.

It's not gonna happen here, nor should it. The folks in those SRO's/room shares are people on the margins of society--generally locals that have had this life (drugs, addiction, mental illness, major disabilities, etc) for decades. San Francisco does not need anymore romantic "dreamers"/runaways coming here. Do not encourage this or pretend that life can just happen if you just "dream big"/want something bad enough. OP never even mentioned what "it" is...so cop on, folks

Even most students looking for roommate situations are not looking for a roommate without a job or legitimate career/student path, nor should they be.

[LongNote]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

No, it's completely absurd. The previous claim was that a single person has to make 250k a year to afford a room in SF. That's complete nonsense. People move to SF every day making low salaries, and find a way to make it work.

There are people washing dishes in SF restaurants, and they live in the city. You can make it work. There are undocumented immigrants from Central America. You think they have assets?

I know because I did the same thing, in NYC, a few years ago. I was almost under the poverty line, while going to grad school but made it work, and in Manhattan, no less. And Manhattan makes SF look dirt cheap. I'm sure the OP can find a bed for under 1k (probably considerably under 1k).

I'm glad someone here understands my question. My question is, "What are a person's options in SF if they want to keep their lodging expenses under 1k..." Some people here are throwing in replies like, "NO! You can't rent or buy a mansion or nice 3 bed 3 bath condo for under 1k a month in SF!" ... Ummm ooook, thanks I guess . I never said anything about mansions, condos, luxury apartments or anything remotely similar to being able to afford any of those things by myself in SF.

Some posters here seem not to be able to look past their pathetic elitist attitude, because that's probably all they have in life. Just try to stay on topic people. It look as though my option(s) are going to be renting a room or renting an SRO. Thanks to everyone who gave intelligent and useful advice, am I the only one who feels this thread has run it's course?

[john3232]

Originally Posted by LongNote

I'm glad someone here understands my question. My question is, "What are a person's options in SF if they want to keep their lodging expenses under 1k..."

And I wasn`t addressing your post with my initial comment. I wrote about the cost of housing based on my experience as a SF landlord.

Originally Posted by LongNote

...Some posters here seem not to be able to look past their pathetic elitist attitude, because that's probably all they have in life.

I own eight rental properties (although not all in SF.)

Originally Posted by LongNote

..People who are destined for success can work up under a disadvantage.

Unfortunately, I don`t think that`s you.