Live data from Hacker News

Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

centerforbuilding.org

81–90 of 215 posts

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#81

I'm not an expert on building codes but a large difference in North America is there is much more space in general when building new so I don't quite think the argument is valid. Americans simply want a lot more space. If a developer built smaller sized 3 or 4 bedroom apartments they would have trouble selling to the price point they want.

> Americans simply want a lot more space.

Americans will pay the most for the smallest spaces, such as in NY.

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#82
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Europe a closet is furniture, not a built in room.

I do not think stuffing everyone in ever smaller boxes is a good policy.

Forcing people to spend more money on a bigger box than they want isn't great, either

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#83

This is something I noticed in China. I lived in a 3-bed, 1450 sqft apartment in Xicheng, Beijing that had a great layout. It went up six stories and had a single staircase, four apartments per story. Having light on both sides of an apartment makes the whole apartment brighter and improves air circulation. Almost every apartment I visited had a similar layout—totally unlike apartments I've seen in the U.S. A townhom…

4 story townhomes including the garage are pretty common, and when American building codes heavily restrict buildings over 5 stories (and encourage parking spaces) then it makes perfect sense to build 3/4 bedroom housing stock as townhomes rather than apartments

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#85
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Land value taxes assume real estate values always increase, which they don’t

How is this assumption required by the LVT system? My basic reading of LVT suggests that the assessed tax value of land could increase or decrease just as the current property tax system can increase or decrease.

When is the last time your property tax valuation decreased?

Where I am the rate increases are capped but if they want more money they just work around that by increasing the valuations.

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#86
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Just everything in Europe is tiny. T i n y. And frankly, it's not that much cheaper over here either. I would argue the other way, as a European, I've been to multiple places Asia and the Middle East and everything is either the same size or smaller than in Europe. I haven't been to Africa or the Americas, but I'd say from my perspective, that things in the US are just extra large.

> I would argue the other way, as a European, I've been to multiple places Asia and the Middle East and everything is either the same size or smaller than in Europe. The parent commenter moved from America to Europe, so the size difference is obvious. I agree that many parts of Asia have similar size standards. Things in America are just very large.

> Things in America are just very large.

Maybe harsh, but North Americans just love to consume consume consume planetary consequences be damned.

Per capita CO2 emissions (aka carbon footprint):

- 15.5 Canada (?!)

- 14.5 USA

- 8.5: China

- 3.3: Vietnam

- 15.5 Australia

- 3.7: Sweden

- 8.2: Germany

- 7.8: Netherlands

- 5.5: Italy

- 1.9: Morocco

- 6.8: South Africa

- 3.6: Mexico

- 2.2: Brazil

If you live at nearly x2 the CO2 footprint of West/Central Europeans, and above x4 for most of the planet, it gets a lot easier to live large.

Of course, North America having a lot of space geographically makes it easier to build big, and there is probably a ton of other factors as well. But it is an important thing to note.

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#88
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally not the case in a lot of HCOL areas. For example in NYC, most new developments are built out something like this: 4 bedrooms - less than 5%, 3 bedrooms - 10%, 2 bedrooms - 30%, 1 bedrooms - 40%, studios - 15%. As a result, the larger units are not just more expensive due to square footage, but the pricing scales non-linearly per square foot because 3+ bedroom units are a rarity. Typically you'll see a 3BR h…

Seems like an easyish solution would be to have some modular walls. Like imagine if you had a repeating layout like - [ 2br | studio | 2br ] where the | represent say a section of wall that is designed to be disassembled and removed. Then either 2br can be converted into a 3br by unbricking the doorway, so to speak. If neither 2br needs it it can be rented out on it's own as a studio. Or even take out BOTH walls and…

Some commercial buildings are designed to be renovated repeatedly like this. They have an open steel support structure where you can have an entire floor completely empty and add walls where ever you want.

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#89
post #44

America is mostly suburban by choice. Most people do not want to live in an apartment or condo long term if they plan on raising or have a family if they live basically anywhere that isn’t NYC. I find the YIMBY assumption that everyone wishes every city and town was more NYC to just be untrue. People just want detached houses to be cheaper. Most aren’t dreaming about affording a 3 or 4 bed apartment.

There are other dense cities besides NY, and they have the highest rents.

You are welcome to your own preferences, but why is it important to insist that others can't have different ones? What is it to you if people like cities?

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just Bobby Fijan, there's also Michael Elias, an architect, who has been trying to build family suitable apartments in the US after experiencing them in Germany. The problem really is the hallway cutting the building in half. It puts such restrictions on what can be built in sensible ways.

You might mean Michael Eliason, who is part of the OP's organization: https://www.centerforbuilding.org/our-team

Oops, two mistakes on my part here, the spelling, and somehow missing that he's in one of the early paragraphs of the linked article... I've been following Eliason's work for a long time so I can't believe his name didn't pop out to me in the article!
Post reply on HN