> “Doesn’t sound cheap or impressive”
Let me introduce you to the glory of construction experience in San Francisco[0] and how ridiculous it gets.
Direct quotes from the article:
* “It takes 523 days, on average, for a developer to get the initial go-ahead to construct housing — and another 605 days to get building permits.”
* “And after spending five years and more than $500,000 to design bespoke trash cans — with the prototypes costing more than $12,000 apiece — the city has shelved a plan to put 3,000 of them on street corners because of a budget deficit.”
* “The toilet project broke down the minute taxpayers realized the city was planning an event to celebrate $1.7 million in state funds that local politicians had secured for the lone 150-square-foot structure. That’s enough to purchase a single-family home in San Francisco — with multiple bathrooms.”
What I am getting from this is that the whole mini-apartment cost the construction workers in the OP about as much to build as it cost for the city to produce 4 trash cans (that all got shelved anyway). Or about 2.9% of how much it cost the city to build a single 150sqft public bathroom (or, in other words, you could build around 34 of those mini apartments for the cost of 1 public bathroom).
Not going to lie, at this point, I would much rather see the people responsible for those spending decisions to be charged, as opposed to two random construction dudes who dont even own that mini-apartment they built.
0. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/24/us/san-francisco-toilet.h...
edit omg it didn't. that city is so f'n corrupt that a guy trying to build affordable housing was eventually forced to sell to a hotel magnate. That's hilarious.
> For a mere $42,000, Navarro allegedly installed a kitchenette, shower, plumbing and security cameras [to an existing office].
Doesn’t sound cheap or impressive when you are doing it yourself instead of hiring someone and still managed to spend $42k.