Such a nice landlord.
$300/m rent? Wow. That’s affordable housing for you.
Well, the landlord wasn’t lying when she advertised that laundry facilities were onsite…
Love how SF uses lawyers instead allowing builders to solve the problem…
Ever seen a lawyer build a house or create one building unit… All their rules and regulations create less housing not more …Shame on the city of SF… they are as morally bankrupt as this slumlord
But builders aren’t going to offer $300/m rents. The moment that building gets replaced, the rents will be $2K and up.
I’m having a hard time figuring out who is being hurt here. No one died, but people got affordable housing.
If builders were let loose there would be a surplus of housing… there would be plenty of lower quality places left over for the poor… But still much higher quality than the laundry slum shown here
Right, maybe it is time to really, really think out of the box. Do we prefer people to be in tents out on the street or at least in something like this? Take your pick.
The assholes that run SF politics will never say Mia Culpa… Much rather blame slumlords and greedy developers… Of course when developers have been dead for 40 years like Eichler they become canonized… lol
Now, somebody in Hillsborough will be losing more than his underwear.
(including penalties of up to $500 per day for both past or present violation of San Francisco’s Building Code and up to $1,000 per day for fire code violations)
By the way, isn’t that the way landlords want any city to turn on? What you guys call it? Densification? The more tenants, the better. I forgot the meaning.
Not a problem, surely there is a crusty old pair in the laundromat somewhere…
Brings up an story where my sister was telling me people were stealing her bras from her wash at the laundromat. I said, why, you’re flat as Mom’s mah jong table. She said bras are expensive (hey, why would I know) so people were taking them. Sad… (or maybe it was a conspiracy by Victoria’s Secret to make people go out and have to buy new ones…)