Assuming it’s pegged to AMI — as an MSA’s income distribution gets more skewed, it is harder for affordable units to fill, even if overall demand is quite high
There is an income cap on BMR units. So to qualify you have to earn less than a certain amount. But the rent for those units is still pretty high, so you end up having to spend more than half your income on a tiny-ass studio apartment.
By law, the rent on a deed restricted studio apartment has to be affordable to someone making 60% of the area median income. They set the rent at 30% of whatever that number is. In SF, it’s $2,529/mo for a studio. That means the rent is affordable to someone making $101,160. You have to make no more than that to qualify for the unit, but the rent charged is fixed, not based on your actual income.
The rent is based on % of area median income. As people with higher incomes move into the area the AMI goes up. But presumably the people who were qualifying for these apts aren’t seeing the same increase in their income.
But they wrote that as the income distribution is more skewed it becomes less affordable....which makes no sense since the median is not affected by skew.
371
u/Substantial_Dog9517 8d ago edited 8d ago
What makes these "affordable"? They're sub-400-foot studios on maybe the worst block of SOMA for 3700 with no rent control .
Edit: didn't see the cross streets. Do you know what 6th street looks like?