Developer's Plans for Tiny Apartments in SF (San Francisco: rent, living in)

[18Montclair]

Looks much more livable than I thought it would---was expecting to see a blank white minimalist space so it was a pleasant surprise, but I couldnt possibly live in a space that small and maintain the lifestyle that I am accustomed to.

But then, to each his own. I dont see why having this as an option should be opposed when it is environmentally better than how people like me live.

[LeftyTrav]

$900 for that? Assuming it won't even have so much as a kitchenette, you'll spend near the rent in eating out.

Good luck parking cheaply if you have a car.

Yeah, sounds like a real bargain. SF'ers will fall for it thought.

[sav858]

I kind of like it, seems very functional. It seems to have most of what you need in a kitchen to make meals; there was the 2-burner hot plate, small fridge, microwave, and convection oven. If it was $500-600/month in SF I would consider living in it by myself.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by 5thgenSF

anybody choosing a studio surely doesn't have the money to eat OUT!

I eat out plenty, and could afford to live in a different place, but:
a. I don't feel like moving unless I am buying something
b. I don't want to spend a larger percentage of my income on rent (currently it is about 18% of my take-home pay)
c. I don't want to buy loads of furniture that wouldn't be flexible/functional when I want to move
d. I don't need additional space (I could use a bit more storage, but that is true of any place)
e. I haven't seen a rental that is worth the effort of moving for

So there you go, I am living in a studio on purpose. And I have seen plenty of apartments that have pretty much the same amount of usable space as I have now.

[fashionguy]

There you go. If I choose to live in a studio. It will be the same mindset.

I almost always eat out, but I used to live with too roommates in a 3 bedroom townhouse. Not that I can't afford anything better, but at that time that was all the space I needed and I want to save up.

Originally Posted by jade408

I eat out plenty, and could afford to live in a different place, but:
a. I don't feel like moving unless I am buying something
b. I don't want to spend a larger percentage of my income on rent (currently it is about 18% of my take-home pay)
c. I don't want to buy loads of furniture that wouldn't be flexible/functional when I want to move
d. I don't need additional space (I could use a bit more storage, but that is true of any place)
e. I haven't seen a rental that is worth the effort of moving for

So there you go, I am living in a studio on purpose. And I have seen plenty of apartments that have pretty much the same amount of usable space as I have now.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by sav858

I kind of like it, seems very functional. It seems to have most of what you need in a kitchen to make meals; there was the 2-burner hot plate, small fridge, microwave, and convection oven. If it was $500-600/month in SF I would consider living in it by myself.

To me, that's the most important point. After reading about it, and watching the video of them showing off the model unit, I actually liked it and the concept. I especially like how efficient and sustainable this kind of construction could be. However, starting at $900, I'm having a hard time getting excited about this. Only a few years ago, $900 would have gotten you a decent studio in almost all of SF. And now this is what you get for the same amount?...and I doubt these things won't go up in price. I guess it's part of the new reality of SF.

But, let's get real here: these kind of developments are fueled more by a desire for developers to get a higher return on investment than on the general idea of providing housing to bring down prices across the board in SF. I understand developers want the biggest return on investment that they can't get (goes without saying), but I think it's a little disingenuous to flaunt this as some kind of all-mighty smart development solution for high prices in SF. Don't hide behind that, just say what it really is: a desire to make more money on the same amount of land.

$500-$600 a month? OK, that seems reasonable. Close to $1,000 a month? Asinine. But, considering what people are paying for these days in SF, there will people lining up for these units, I'm sure.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

To me, that's the most important point. After reading about it, and watching the video of them showing off the model unit, I actually liked it and the concept. I especially like how efficient and sustainable this kind of construction could be. However, starting at $900, I'm having a hard time getting excited about this. Only a few years ago, $900 would have gotten you a decent studio in almost all of SF. And now this is what you get for the same amount?...and I doubt these things won't go up in price. I guess it's part of the new reality of SF.

But, let's get real here: these kind of developments are fueled more by a desire for developers to get a higher return on investment than on the general idea of providing housing to bring down prices across the board in SF. I understand developers want the biggest return on investment that they can't get (goes without saying), but I think it's a little disingenuous to flaunt this as some kind of all-mighty smart development solution for high prices in SF. Don't hide behind that, just say what it really is: a desire to make more money on the same amount of land.

$500-$600 a month? OK, that seems reasonable. Close to $1,000 a month? Asinine. But, considering what people are paying for these days in SF, there will people lining up for these units, I'm sure.

At $900 a month....... well it better be in the best possible location. But frankly, I'd take my chances in other parts of the bay. At $700, when I just finished college, in the right neighborhood? I would have totally moved in there.

[Isebiel]

What gets me about this proposal, is that (according to the article) the developers want to build these 12x12 apartments in "new high-rises." WHAT new high-rises? If developers built new high-rises here, there wouldn't be so much of a housing crunch! Oh, I suppose it wasn't going to be profitable enough with full size studio apartments? Please.

[Natural510]

It seems very....Japanese. That's not a bad thing, if one can tolerate it, and as 18 stated it's very environmentally sound.

[Ceece]

I see this as temp housing. A place for people to land when the move to SF or for the right out of college crowd. Even a vacation rental?

It is the dorm concept so it's nothing new. NY is considering something similar but at 300sq ft, which is much more practical for most people.