Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 97 posts

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#51

Post by Androsynth »

cletus wrote: post #30

The more I read about the housing market in SF the more it looks like a disaster. Compared to SF, NYC has done a number of things better: 1. No new rent control leases since 1973 (IIRC) although you can inherit a rent control apartment if you've lived there for two years. I'm sure this system is abused but the SF equivalent is a huge number of units being left vacant largely due to rent control; 2. Exit clauses on re…

good points, but new construction in SF wouldnt be a good thing. New buildings stick out like sore thumbs in SF, as they arent made of wood. People want to live in the old, creaky wood buildings with the over the top bay windows. Not in plaster boxes, they can get that anywhere else in the bay area.

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#52

Post by jseliger »

cletus wrote: post #30

The more I read about the housing market in SF the more it looks like a disaster. Compared to SF, NYC has done a number of things better: 1. No new rent control leases since 1973 (IIRC) although you can inherit a rent control apartment if you've lived there for two years. I'm sure this system is abused but the SF equivalent is a huge number of units being left vacant largely due to rent control; 2. Exit clauses on re…

The more I read about the housing market in SF the more it looks like a disaster

Because it is. I submitted this article a while back: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2012/05/face... and it generated this discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4032046 , but the issue is simple economics: supply for a place is being held constant through political rules (as Matt Yglesias, the author of the linked article, likes to say, housing costs can be kept down through complex technologies like steel and elevators) while demand soars because the place is a highly desirable one.

The result is higher prices.

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#53

Post by saalweachter »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #43
tptacek wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. And why do we have codes that demand working heating? People should be able to choose to buy lots of blankets instead.

Just curious, what do you believe is the justification for laws demanding minimum apt sizes/minimum heating requirements? The ordinary arguments about externalities certainly don't seem to apply... As an anecdote, while I was poor, I didn't turn the heat on because I couldn't afford it. Do you believe the law should have forced me to turn the heat on? If not, why not?

In New York City, heat isn't something individual units control. All heat in every apartment I have ever lived in or visited is generated by a boiler controlled by the landlord. Consequently, the laws in New York City aren't mandating what individual homeowners must do, they are mandating what landlords must do, namely, that when the temperatures drop below a certain point, they must provide heat to their tenants.

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#54

Post by eshvk »

mmagin wrote: post #44
fiatmoney wrote: post #24

The problem isn't that SF is running out of square footage for luxuriously spacious apartments. The problem is that SF doesn't allow the construction of high-density housing, or much new housing of any kind. They gained all of 50-something market-rate housing units in 2011. http://www.forbes.com/sites/timothylee/2011/09/19/zoning-law... http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/05/san_franciscos_to...

This is probably the biggest factor. So much of SF is covered very low density housing.

I am in two minds about this: One hand, it does preserve the historic beauty of the house. While personally, I wouldn't want to live in a Victorian/Edwardian house because I like central heating, tiled floors too much, they are beautiful and so many people enjoy living there. I guess one possible solution is to attempt a urban renewal project of one of the more shadier neighborhoods (Hunter's point e.g.) and build high density buildings there. Of course, this would have to be coupled with enough percentage of the units being available for low cost housing so that it doesn't become the usual act of gentrification.

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#55

Post by xyome »

vipervpn wrote: post #17
axefrog wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect pet owners are not the target market for this type of living space.

Sure, although it's common for single people to have a pet. I don't know about the US, but in Canada I think it's illegal for renters to discriminate against pet owners. Many still do however.

In the province of Quebec you can specify a "no pet" rule in a lease. You can even be more specific and allow for a certain number and type of animal (e.g. max 2 cats, no dogs).

There's a lot of stuff you can't discriminate on, but animal ownership isn't a fundamental right.

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#56

Post by Androsynth »

vipervpn wrote: post #14

I'm concerned about house pets (like dogs and cats) in such a small apartment. Are these micro apartments fit for dwelling in for long periods of time? I don't think so. Cats and dogs need space too, and they don't have the freedom to come and go whenever they please.

Thats ridiculous. If you had a big apartment and a big dog, wouldnt it be just as bad on the dog? 700 sq ft with no yard and a 50 lb dog would be miserable. Your argument doesnt scale at all.

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#57

Post by [deleted] »

MrFoof wrote: post #28

I've downsized a few times over the years. 1080 > 920 > 720 > 660. How much have I missed having a bigger space? None. I could probably drop down to about 550 tomorrow and still have tons of room. The first thing is "usable square footage". In the larger units (> 720) I had things like hallways. Closets for a water heater or furnace. Etc. When I dropped down to 720, I actually had more usable square footage than when…

[deleted]

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#58

Post by bickfordb »

cletus wrote: post #30

The more I read about the housing market in SF the more it looks like a disaster. Compared to SF, NYC has done a number of things better: 1. No new rent control leases since 1973 (IIRC) although you can inherit a rent control apartment if you've lived there for two years. I'm sure this system is abused but the SF equivalent is a huge number of units being left vacant largely due to rent control; 2. Exit clauses on re…

It seems like the absurdity of the local public transit forces a lot of the high density construction downtown. When MUNI isn't halted (it regularly is) it often takes me 25 minutes to get to SOMA (Ballpark) from the Mission on MUNI even though straight line distance is less than one mile. Each MUNI ticket are is $2. The total system cost is $750MM and fare revenue is $150M which makes the real value of a MUNI fare $10. $10 to go less than one mile for half an hour!

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#59

Post by hisyam »

seiji wrote: post #27
CPops wrote: post #25

It's sort of silly that a minimum apartment size is even legislated in the first place. Somebody who chooses to live in a small apartment does so because it's their best available option.

Crazier: when you find a place you like, apply, then they say you can't have it because your salary is too high. Each apartment complex (by law) has a percentage of units leased only to people making less than a certain amount.

I'm guessing they're prioritizing the low wage earners first?

Re: Micro-apartments next for S.F.?

#60

Post by radio4fan »

290 sq ft is about 27 sq m, which is about normal for a studio here in Lyon, France.

http://seloger.com has 2700+ apartments in central Paris alone which are smaller than 27 sq m.

I have no opinion on whether it would be good for SF.

Smallest I can find on seloger in Paris is 86 sq ft, which does seem a bit on the small side...

Post reply on HN