> The Bay area numbers I gave are from 2021 source included.
That's household income. But sure, put me in the top 20% instead of the top 10%. Still incredibly ridiculous that an 80th percentile earner cannot afford a basic home.
> Here are some current prices
What you linked are apartments/townhomes. These have much higher HOA fees and are priced accordingly. The sticker price seems lower but the monthly payments end up the same as more expensive SFHs. To boot, most of them are really small - everything over 1500 sqft is over 1.3M which is ridiculous. So no, that's not really more affordable. Density doesn't mean everyone lives in a shoebox, it means building taller so the same land can fit 5x more people.
> The 760 one seems within reach
Again, if a 800sqft apartment that looks like it was built 70 years ago is all that's within reach of an 80th percentile household then you need to re-evaluate housing policy.
> The prices are similiar around the world. 1.5-1.8 is the average house price in Toronto
No, it's only similar in places with similarly dysfunctional real estate markets and NIMBYism as CA. Toronto and Vancouver famously have terrible SFH zoning policies. When you look at places like Atlanta, Miami, Austin, Chicago, etc. they are nowhere near the levels seen in CA.
> If New York/NJ is under valued and you can get a similiar home for less I would probably make the move
Or I can keep voting against NIMBYs and vote for densifying the Bay.
Downtown SF manages to have tall buildings. And there are a ton of 5+1 or 6+1 units going up, which in itself will 3-4x density from height and from smaller setbacks.
> Density means accepting smaller
Strongly disagree. You can still have 1200+sqft apartments. Most of the 2 and 3bd luxury apartments near me are around 1000-1100 sqft.
> An 800sqft apartment is larger than any apartment I've rented.
Not sure what kind of apartment you're renting... (or maybe you're out of touch with the market?) 500sqft is a studio and you're not fitting much more than a bed and desk in there. You have to remember that square footage includes things like bathroom, closet, washer/dryer if they're in unit, etc. And that realtors exaggerate so in practice an apartment advertised as 500 sqft is more like 350.
Please just take a look at Zillow/Redfin for one moment and tell me where you see 500sqft condos that look like actual condos rather than studios.
That's household income. But sure, put me in the top 20% instead of the top 10%. Still incredibly ridiculous that an 80th percentile earner cannot afford a basic home.
> Here are some current prices
What you linked are apartments/townhomes. These have much higher HOA fees and are priced accordingly. The sticker price seems lower but the monthly payments end up the same as more expensive SFHs. To boot, most of them are really small - everything over 1500 sqft is over 1.3M which is ridiculous. So no, that's not really more affordable. Density doesn't mean everyone lives in a shoebox, it means building taller so the same land can fit 5x more people.
> The 760 one seems within reach
Again, if a 800sqft apartment that looks like it was built 70 years ago is all that's within reach of an 80th percentile household then you need to re-evaluate housing policy.
> The prices are similiar around the world. 1.5-1.8 is the average house price in Toronto
No, it's only similar in places with similarly dysfunctional real estate markets and NIMBYism as CA. Toronto and Vancouver famously have terrible SFH zoning policies. When you look at places like Atlanta, Miami, Austin, Chicago, etc. they are nowhere near the levels seen in CA.
> If New York/NJ is under valued and you can get a similiar home for less I would probably make the move
Or I can keep voting against NIMBYs and vote for densifying the Bay.