The very big issue in San Francisco is the severe lack of affordable housing. When renovations become significantly more expensive, those costs inevitably get passed on to renters: making the crisis even worse.

If regulations like these are necessary, they should be applied in areas without a housing affordability crisis. But somehow, it’s always the high-cost cities that get hit with even more burdens.

▲

wyre 3 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, it is an issue that SF doesn't have affordable housing. Any price increase by requiring induction stovetops is a rounding error compared to inflation, or is an excuse for greedy landlords to increase rents heavily.

Also, any desirable part of the country with jobs is facing a housing affordability crisis. High rents are caused by greedy landlords and the protections given to them by the government, not because of regulation requiring them to spend a little bit more on an electric range.

	▲	tlogan 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		San Francisco home prices have increased approximately 2.5 to 2.6 times over the past 25 years after adjusting for inflation [1]. Nominal prices in San Francisco grew by over four‑fold in 25 years. I bet the reason for this rule that house price in SF are finally in step with inflation. Anyway Im not against doing this but let’s be honest here: this is going to make houses just less affordable. The are some benefits of this rule but affordability is not the one. [1] https://www.redfin.com/city/17151/CA/San-Francisco/housing-m...
	▲	culopatin 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It’s not just the stove that you need to change. You need to get power to the stove. Cutting the wall open, conduit, drywall if you’re lucky, in SF you’ll most likely have the old lath and plaster then electrician and paint. If rent is 3k, inflation say 3%, that’s 1k. The change is at least 3x that