Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

[M II A II R II K]

Micro-apartments next for S.F.?


July 13, 2012

By Carolyn Said



Read More: http://www.sfgate.com/realestate/art...-F-3706648.php

.....

The city is considering shrinking the minimum size of rental units, prompted by a demographic shift toward one-person households along with rising rents and an acute housing shortage. "This seems like a logical, necessary response to housing in an extremely high-cost market like San Francisco," said Tim Colen, executive director of the San Francisco Housing Action Coalition, a largely developer-backed nonprofit that is "solidly behind" cutting the size of the smallest allowable apartment by about a third.

- The new minimum would be 150 square feet plus kitchen, bathroom and closet - 220 square feet in total, about the size of a one-car garage. The current minimum with all rooms included is 290 square feet. "The goal is to provide flexibility to affordable and market-rate developers to produce all sorts of housing," said Supervisor Scott Wiener, whose proposal to reduce apartment sizes will be considered by the Board of Supervisors on July 24. "The fact is 41 percent of San Franciscans live alone. There are a lot of people who don't need or can't afford a lot of space." Some housing advocates dispute the idea that micro-units address escalating rents, saying that the compact dwellings are cheaper simply because they're smaller.

- Patrick Kennedy of Berkeley developer Panoramic Interests hopes to build the micro-units in SoMa on the site of a former guitar store at Ninth and Mission streets - "right in the thick of the new Twittersphere there." He anticipates housing young tech workers, fresh out of college, newly relocated to the city, unencumbered by possessions. "That demographic cohort wants to continue their collegiate experience for an indefinite amount of time," Kennedy said. "I envision this as a launching space as they get established." His planned 160-unit building, now in the entitlement process, will have lots of common areas: a huge lobby, a lounge on every floor and a rooftop deck. It will also have some larger apartments. It's designed for car-free living; the only parking will be for bikes, with a City CarShare spot outside.

- Kennedy built a 160-square-foot prototype "smart unit" in a Berkeley warehouse. As compact and functional as a ship's cabin, the main living/sleeping/eating/cooking room feels larger than its 10-by-11-foot dimensions, in part because of a coved 9-foot-4-inch ceiling and a bay window. Every inch plays multiple roles. A built-in counter doubles as the kitchen work area and computer desk. A dining banquette converts into a guest bed; the couch becomes a queen-size bed. The foyer functions as an entryway, closet, dressing area and "appliance garage" for a refrigerator, microwave and toaster oven. An MIT grad student lived in the unit for three weeks to help work out the kinks. Her feedback will inform some changes in version 2.0 - bigger sinks in the kitchen and bathroom, a pull-down Murphy bed, and most critically, a traditional tub-shower in the bathroom, instead of the "Euro-style" shower that drains right onto the bathroom floor.

.....

[pesto]

This is the de facto reality in NY, London and other very pricey cities.

But are we OK with these becoming places for 8 Indians to live together?

[mhays]

Seattle allows much smaller units than NY or SF...down to 150 sf (anecdotally) including bathroom and kitchenette. I covered this in the thread about NY so not reposting here.

It's a phenomenal idea. In our smaller, cheaper city, rents can be as low as the $500s without subsidy. They target everyone from students to low-wage workers to pied a terres. Never parking of course, as they wouldn't pencil that way.

[WanderingQueen]

Originally Posted by mhays

Seattle allows much smaller units than NY or SF...down to 150 sf (anecdotally) including bathroom and kitchenette. I covered this in the thread about NY so not reposting here.

It's a phenomenal idea. In our smaller, cheaper city, rents can be as low as the $500s without subsidy. They target everyone from students to low-wage workers to pied a terres. Never parking of course, as they wouldn't pencil that way.

I've wanted one of these ever since seeing The Fifth Element for the first time.

• Video Link

[Shawn]

The floor plan in the OP looks just like your standard 6-jo / one room + shower/bath/toilet combo Tokyo apartment. There are literally millions of these throughout the Kanto area. This is where something like 80% of entry-level Japanese employees who don't live with parents reside. Actually, it looks like there's more storage room in the SF floor plan than what's standard here.

[blade_bltz]

^ Yep. I lived in a 220 sq ft place in Yokohama...nothing out of the ordinary.

[HowardL]

Maybe I'm just getting old. Maybe I'm just spoiled by the obscene size of Chicago flats, but I could not do that. For undergrads, it seems passable. For a working professional, no. Not for 20 minutes. Not ever.

[mhays]

Great. The're for undergrads etc., not for working professionals.

[Austinlee]

The smaller sized the condo, the more creative people get with storage and living habits. It's not that fucking hard. People adapt.

[Kippis]

It's not too far fetched since many large cities have living arrangements like this (NY, London, anywhere in Japan, etc.). I live with my fiance in a 750 sf condo and the size is perfect for us since we both work downtown and have easy access to amenities.

However, that's the deal-breaker in my eyes. I mean, I could see that if you were single. Hell, I'd love living in a space like that if I lived by myself. But imagine living in a 250 sf space if you had a spouse, and maybe even a child. The fact that you have virtually no privacy from the other person living with you is not always a positive thing in my mind. It can work, but I know that couples like having some physical barriers sometimes. Dunno, just my two cents...

[ocman]

That's not an apartment. That's a dental office.

[Kingofthehill]

I am pretty sure that Soma's Cubix development already constitutes a "microcondo."

http://sf.curbed.com/tags/cubix

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by Kippis

It's not too far fetched since many large cities have living arrangements like this (NY, London, anywhere in Japan, etc.). I live with my fiance in a 750 sf condo and the size is perfect for us since we both work downtown and have easy access to amenities.

However, that's the deal-breaker in my eyes. I mean, I could see that if you were single. Hell, I'd love living in a space like that if I lived by myself. But imagine living in a 250 sf space if you had a spouse, and maybe even a child. The fact that you have virtually no privacy from the other person living with you is not always a positive thing in my mind. It can work, but I know that couples like having some physical barriers sometimes. Dunno, just my two cents...

This is quite true. 250 sq feet is perfectly doable for a single person just starting out and who doesn't hoard. It forced me to prioritize my purchases and not keep crap I used once every two years. It also teaches you to maximize your space; maybe I am strange, but I actually really enjoyed this aspect.

I now live in a condo just under 850 sq feet with my fiance and it's all the space we need. I have my Man Cave (even though it has two walls of windows) and she has her office, and by "office" I mean "room where all her clothes, shoes and bags live and where the bed and computer desk is strictly an afterthought". This is fine, as unless I'm sleeping I'm never in there anyways.

I'm pretty sure no one is suggesting that these 250 sq foot units are intended for anything other than single occupancy.

[staff]

250 square feet (~23 m²) is small but not extremely small. Pretty common way for singles to live even in medium sized European cities like Stockholm or Copenhagen. In London it's not unusual with even places smaller than that-- in Tokyo even more so I reckon.

[LeeWilson]

The apartment in the article honestly looks nothing out of the ordinary to me when I compare it to what I am most familiar with in Tokyo. I live in an apartment similar in size to Shawn's place, with my wife and nearly 2-year-old daughter. It suits us well enough at the moment, and anyone who visits us seems to think it is pretty spacious.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by ocman

That's not an apartment. That's a dental office.

I could live here...maybe with some different non-dental office finishes but it seems comfortable.

I currently have 720 square feet to myself and use maybe 250 of it 99% of the time. I like my computer near the kitchen so a living room is worthless and only used when friends are over. You could technically have a bed fold down from the wall that would occupy most of the space at night.

As someone pointed out, it's only good if you're single.


That bathroom might not work. It looks like it's 5' x 5'. How is that even possible unless they're forced to wash hands / shave in the sink in the kitchen. You could fit a toilet near the tub and have a pocket door (so there's no door swing).

They'd have to be clear on their occupancy max. This is definitely not multi-family so they're in the clear as far as ADA non-compliance

[ardecila]

Wouldn't the market sort it all out? The claustrophobes will always have the option of larger units at current housing prices, while those who can accept the small size will be able to save money.

8 Indians? Is this a joke? Law for units this small is one or two people max, and enforcement would fall to landlords and the city just the way it is now. Some unscrupulous landlords would look the other way and would get punished accordingly, but it wouldn't (couldn't) become a widespread phenomenon. There just isn't the density of low-income jobs that American industry once provided in cities. I'm getting pretty sick of this canard people keep trotting out, as if adopting global standards for density and unit size will suddenly turn our cities into the Lower East Side circa 1900.

[CyberEric]

I live in London now, and used to live in SF. The average living spaces I see here in London are much larger than most of those that I saw in SF, not even close really. But that's just my on the ground experience.

I am all for this move to smaller units in SF though.

[Minato Ku]

In Paris, such appartement are pretty comon, many are even much smaller.

I am looking a rent real estate website (with appartement for living, not for tourist).
Out 50 appartements, 27 are smaller than 250 sq ft.
10 are smaller than 150 sq ft.
Only 8 are larger than 500 sq ft and when I say larger, I means that most are only a few feet larger.

[rs913]

Originally Posted by HowardL

Maybe I'm just getting old. Maybe I'm just spoiled by the obscene size of Chicago flats

Is this even true? I thought the north side of Chicago has its share of small studios and small 1BRs just like any other desirable prime big city neighborhood, maybe a little bigger than those in NYC and SF, but not "obscene"....