[capkutay]

Actually San Francisco is building up; they will have thousands of new apartments coming out in the next 5-10 years. There's a ton of high rise development going on in SOMA[0] (the business/metropolitan area) along with less commercial areas like hayes valley.

The problem is that those units will probably still be ridiculously expensive. The best solution is fixing public transportation between SF and the cheaper suburbs to the south. Right now commuting to San Francisco is a nightmare just because getting in out of the city by car is a huge bottleneck. Also, the train only goes about half a mile into the most southern part of the city.. [1]

0: http://vimeo.com/70447799

1: https://www.google.com/maps/search/san+francisco+cal+train/@...

[mapt]

Those units will still be ridiculously expensive only because there aren't enough of those units. Because SF has been building practically nothing compared to the amount of wealth that's flowed into SF, for years. The Bay Area's vastly disproportionate economic productivity should have implied a Beijing-like growth spurt. It should have sucked skilled immigrants out of middle America, depopulating those places by some fraction, because this is where the jobs are.

Construction expenses aren't a major part of the equation here, zoning permission and transportation are balanced against a demand that is the highest in the country. Rent, and for that matter land prices, are expressions of those factors.

It is ridiculous that the national economic engine of our times for the last generation looks like this: https://www.google.com/search?q=population+of+san+francisco

[paulbaumgart]

FWIW, more supply, even of expensive units, will drive down prices so long as they get occupied.

[usaar333]

1. The population of reasonably close southern suburbs (let's say the entire San Mateo County) is actually less than that of San Francisco proper by ~100k people.

2. Caltrain is linked to Muni metro at 4th/King as well as many bus lines. It isn't that hard to get in.

3. Bart goes straight into downtown and offers stations closer than Caltrain for at least a third of San Mateo County's people.

4. The southern and western parts of San Francisco are just as cheap, if not cheaper, than San Mateo county's average. (indeed if you check padmapper, you can see that there is more "cheap housing" available in SF than in San Mateo County.

5. The density of much of San Francisco, especially the outer Western and Southern areas remains low. (somewhere between San Mateo County suburban cities and Brooklyn)

[capkutay]

"2. Caltrain is linked to Muni metro at 4th/King as well as many bus lines. It isn't that hard to get in"

I've never heard anyone defend Bay Area public transportation before. I'd say the amount of busses going from SF to silicon valley/the peninsula are evidence that going in and out of san francisco is NOT easy. I've lived in both the peninsula and SF for years and the consensus is that you're better off living in SF if you work in SF and living in the peninsula if you work in the peninsula (unless you work for a company that busses their employees). I myself drive from SF to the Peninsula. I don't recommend it. Public transportation is not an option for most people purely because of the lack of geographical coverage they offer. For instance, I can't use caltrain or bart because I don't live downtown and it takes 40-50 minutes to get to the train by bus. The fact that caltrain is situated at the most southern point of the city doesn't make it any better when a 2-3 mile muni metro line goes along the most western point of the city where few people live.

[hkmurakami]

Walked through Mission Bay near the new UCSF campus, and I saw this in action. Tons of pristine highrises coming up, with upper-mid range retail and dining out options accompanying them.

But as you said, all these units look like they will be in the $2.5k+ range for a 1br, if not more.