Posted on 09/24/2012 7:15:27 PM PDT by Steelfish
San Francisco To Vote On Apartments The Size Of Two Prison Cells
San Francisco may soon give new meaning to the word "downsizing." Supervisors are set to vote on Tuesday on a proposed change to the city's building code that would allow construction of among the tiniest apartments in the country.
Under the plan, new apartments could be as small as 220 square feet (a little more than double the size of some prison cells), including a kitchen, bathroom and closet, the Los Angeles Times reported. Current regulations require the living room alone to be that size.
Schematics for 300-square-foot units planned for San Francisco's South of Market neighborhood include window seats that turn into spare beds and beds that turn into tables.
Proponents say the smaller apartments would provide a cheaper option for the city's many single residents, who have been priced out of the rental market as the region experiences a resurgent technology industry.
San Francisco apartments rented for an average of $2,734 in June, up 13 percent from a year ago, according to the research firm, RealFacts. The micro-units, in contrast, are expected to rent for $1,200 to $1,700 a month, San Francisco Supervisor Scott Wiener told the Los Angeles Times. Wiener drafted the legislation for the smaller apartments.
It allows them to accommodate up to two people and requires an additional 100 square feet of space for each occupant above that number.
"Although in our fantasy world everyone would live in a single-family home or a huge spacious flat, the reality of life is that not everyone can afford that," Wiener said.
(Excerpt) Read more at bottomline.nbcnews.com ...
Huh? Since when is it a city's business to decide how large an apartment should be? That should be determined by the free market.
Next thing you know, cities will be regulating soft drink sizes.
Oh, wait...they're already doing that.
I don’t have a problem with this if somebody wants to live there. The problem is ten years from now it will be mandated. Any body that wants to live bigger will be taxed appropriately. The overlords know what is best.
When I was young these types of apartments were called “Batchelor Apartments”. I lived in several of them before, and after my military service, and before I got married. They were adequate, and they were cheap rent. Just needed a place to sleep in those days.
Lots of cities made the old single-room occupancy boarding houses illegal when they had become filled with lowlifes.
This is really just a way to bring back a sensible solution slightly upgraded for our times.
None with Bwaney in the room. Unless he’s playing with himself. No one else would fit!
????!?
In the very nice UES of Manhattan there are many, many , many 475 SQ studios available for 14-1,600.
My gf had one for two years before we moved into a 1000sqft 2bed two full path with 15X7 foot terrace.
I’ve been blessed to afford that with two incomes, but you’re figures are way off sir.
No one is forcing people into these units (yet). If I were single in a city, I’d consider it - relative to having roommates. It’s just a different lifestyle.
I think the idea of forcing units to be a minimum size goes against basic property rights, in my opinion.
Glorified barracks housing for servant help.
until they become filled with lowlifes...
History will repeat its self.
Thomas Sowell has written about the CA real estate market and how zoning laws really crank up the cost of housing in the greater SF area.
People are upset with Bloomberg for looking to make the zoning more lenient in NYC so smaller apartments can be built. I believe the average cost of a 1-bedroom rental in Manhattan is now over $3,000 a month.
Oh for cryin out loud!!! my kitchen is bigger than that !!!!
The biggest downside for me would be the lack of yard work. I’m a bit like Hank Hill, I do enjoy mowing and such.
I do think Americans are a bit too spoiled when it comes to apts/homes. Not everyone needs a 3 bedroom, 8 1/2 bath apt or house.
“A lot of people in Europe have lived like this for generations.”
So have rabbits and chickens!!!!
wow.. I have .33 acres of land, a 1700 square foot home AND 20 feet of lake front on a 1800 acre lake and I pay 1/3 of that.
And my payments end... Rent just goes on and on and on (and up!)
no one “needs” a larger home.
We WANT a larger home.
As long as we are paying the bill who case what we buy with our money? (or borrowed money with agreed terms)
I could live in 420 square feet with my wife and 2 kids.
I’d probably jump out the window at some point. But I guess I could.. for a while..
None of their business. If someone wants to rent 100 sq ft, and someone will lease it, let ‘em. There’s rather an active community of “tiny home” afficianados. If you’re not one, respect that others are.
While Sen. Feinstein has a massive mansion overlooking the SF Golden Gate Bridge!
You could take a crap, cook supper, and do laundry all without getting off the toilet.
LOL!
Ah, so when I revoked her bond this afternoon, my ex is moving to Leftist utopia. I will remind her of this fact when I get that expletive filled phone call from jail Thursday. She is an Obama lover, that should work out well for her lol.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.