View Full Version : New 300-square ft. apartments proposed for Manhattan
http://news.yahoo.com/nyc-asking-developers-test-tiny-apartments-172510045.html
Mayor Bloomberg is speaking our language! :cool:Tiny apartments in Manhattan are nothing new, but according to this article, the current minimum for new construction is 400 sq. ft. If this new proposal is approved, the minimum would be lowered to 300, they would only be rented to one-or two-person households, and would be more affordable (by Manhattan standards, anyway).
"In recent years, small homes have been celebrated by design aficionados who argue that minimal space, less clutter and simpler living is both financially and spiritually freeing..."
Simpler living in New Yawk City?! What's this world coming to?! ;)
I heard this on NPR! Fabulous design challenge.
iris lily
7-10-12, 12:49am
"...not much bigger than a dorm room"
My single room in the graduate dorm was great. It was the high ceiling, at least 9 feet, that made is seem spacious.
ApatheticNoMore
7-10-12, 12:52am
http://news.yahoo.com/nyc-asking-developers-test-tiny-apartments-172510045.html"In recent years, small homes have been celebrated by design aficionados who argue that minimal space, less clutter and simpler living is both financially and spiritually freeing..."
Simpler living in New Yawk City?! What's this world coming to?! ;)
Well it is a very green way of living (New York city already has the lowest carbon use per person anywhere in the country supposedly), though admitedly that is not the first type of green I think about when I think Manhatten.
Ok, I'm going to be the wet blanket here.
I'm all into going smaller/simpler. My house is too big for me and I'd really like to go smaller in both the house and size of the yard. It's simply too much for one person and 2 animals.
However, doesn't there come a point where it's so small you feel like a caged animals pacing the perimeters of your apartment/house? Seriously, if my home were that small, I'd just want to be OUT of it as much as possible. And I like to be in my home. I like that it's a retreat for me. I don't want it to become a prison.
However, doesn't there come a point where it's so small you feel like a caged animals pacing the perimeters of your apartment/house? Seriously, if my home were that small, I'd just want to be OUT of it as much as possible. And I like to be in my home. I like that it's a retreat for me. I don't want it to become a prison.
I get a little claustrophobic in tight spaces. The key for me personally is to have outdoor space that is an extension of the living space. Enough windows that I have views to visually expand the space and outdoor sitting/eating/lounging area(s) to actually expand the space when the weather is cooperating. That's easy to get here in Nebraska. I suspect it is quite a bit more challenging in Manhattan. I'm very curious to see what kinds of clever, space saving ideas the various developers will come up with.
Why don't we try to cut back on population........then we wouldn't need as many houses/rooms.
Would these be in high-rise type buildings? How much would they cost?
I do think Bloomberg is trying to deal with some good issues though.
Are they for homeless people?
I've seen a couple of examples of tiny spaces - and the people inhabiting them seemed to really like them. Small, (relatively) affordable, and in a very good location worked for them.
sweetana3
7-10-12, 11:07am
If I lived a NY lifestyle, I could easily live in and enjoy a small space. A common theme is they don't cook at home, don't store excess junk in their living spaces and have convertible furniture.
I would build in a Murphy Bed with fold out desk/table. Chairs would be foldable and hangable. One comfortable sitting chair. Storage for clothes and misc built in everywhere. I love IKEA for such ideas and they even had a complete apartment of this size built in their store.
If I lived a NY lifestyle, I could easily live in and enjoy a small space. A common theme is they don't cook at home.....
All my friends that live in NYC constantly flood my FaceBook with beautiful food photos - I'd have to agree they don't eat at home!
Wet blanket here, too, Bunnys.
I, too, am all for downsizing and reduction, but it amazes me what people will do (accommodation wise) to reside in certain cities. There is no city (or life) that could convince me to live like a caged animal.
A relative of mine "Shared" this on Facebook. I can't find the original on that site's Web page (Interesting Engineering (http://www.interestingengineering.com)) so this will have to do:
http://i48.tinypic.com/29dbonb.jpg
If I could get that view in an affordable apartment, I think I'd live with that amount of space.
To add, I wonder where the dividing line ends, related to those who are cooped-up like chickens in a pen, where they long for a barefooted wander through freshly-cut green grass? In their own yard? Or to work the beds of planted flowers and trees? Or sit outside on a patio, with a barbeque and friends/family, and celebrate well into the night, never worrying about tenants/owners? Strikes me as being a pretty boring and stale lifestyle to say the least...
I love, love ,love tiny spaces!! Could definetely live in 300 sf and feel very comfortable. I'd take Stevein MN apt over a big McMansion anyday. While I'm not a fan of IKEA (although I love their coffee) I really enjoy their little showrooms of small spaces (although too cluttery for me). I think the samllest is around 245 SF and very cute and livable. I also like to whole concept of designing small spaces for urban dwellers and making them (and urban areas in general) as green, sustainable and user friendly as possible. I think those New Yawkers are on to something. "McMansions? Fugetaboutit youse guys !!"
I love "smaller" spaces, too, Spartana. but being caged in a room-sized environment 365, seems so clinical and institutional.
We just moved with our cat to a space that's about 500 sq. ft. It's nothing like the wonderful space pictured above - sure wish it were. I think you can live in a smaller space and make it functional and aesthetic - but if you do that, you sort of have to go vertical when you can't go horizontal.
We lived in a comparable space when we first got here, but the ceilings were vaulted, and I felt better psychologically. It felt spacious because - it was! Actually there was a lot of room, though it was up near the ceiling. Okay, so it was technically wasted space, but the mental feeling of height and airiness made living in fewer square feet underfoot totally doable. I'd even say it was exhilarating.
Now we're in a dark, cramped space. Some things we have now I love - a pergo floor that looks like cherry, but will be impervious to all the things our cat can do to wood floors. I have a modern kitchen with a granite counter top, which I love so much I want to sleep on it! And a biggish bathroom with slate tiles. Compared to what we had before, in a turn-of-the-century rundown space with no counters and two outlets in the entire apartment, it's heaven.
Main issue - no closet space, so we've had to buy retail clothing racks on wheels. He's got more clothes than I have (my fault, I'm always buying it for him - and he just got promoted at work, so he needs nicer duds). So the racks have two rails apiece, and they're wide. They occupy what would normally be our living space - and our bed takes up the rest of the room.
If one of us was handy, we might be able to custom build some kind of unit for storage, like what the guy did in that photo. If I were my money's-no-object father, I'd hire a carpenter to create something for us. Barring that, I have no idea how we'll solve this.
Maybe I'll post some before pics and solicit your suggestions. And then post the afters if we ever figure out something that makes it work!
I love "smaller" spaces, too, Spartana. but being caged in a room-sized environment 365, seems so clinical and institutional.
I find it very cozy and sort of cocooning - snug as a bug in the rug... ;-)! But then I don't spend 24/7 365 in any place I live - big or small - and I find that the living in a small space with minimal stuff gives me much greater freedom. It means less time caring for things, doing chores, maintaining or repairing things and cleaning (you know how i hate that :-)!) and more time for fun, spending time with family and friends, being social and getting involved with my community. So I have never felt like a caged animal in a small space - it gave me a greater sense of freedom. It suits my personality but I know it isn't for everyone.
these small spaces and McMansions are 2 ends of a very long continuum. Mrs M., I think people who would like to live in those small apts in New York, just absolutely love the city and the crowds and all the places to go. People like you and I don't understand that, because our needs are different. Its sort of a completely different mind set. Those people would probably go nuts out here in the country. haha
I think I could live in a small place.........as long as it had acres of fields, woods and no other people around it!
I think I could live in a small place.........as long as it had acres of fields, woods and no other people around it!
I think someone wrote a book about a place like that once...
these small spaces and McMansions are 2 ends of a very long continuum. Mrs M., I think people who would like to live in those small apts in New York, just absolutely love the city and the crowds and all the places to go. People like you and I don't understand that, because our needs are different. Its sort of a completely different mind set. Those people would probably go nuts out here in the country.
While I'm not willing to move (back) to New York City, I would much rather have the pictured apartment than acres and acres of meadowland miles away from anyone and anything else. I'd much rather spend my money on concerts and museum admissions and charitable causes than on maintaining property. Such a small place also enforces simplicity, IMHO -- you just don't have room for lots of stuff. To each their own, certainly, but a small apartment does not cage its occupant like an animal. It's a matter of choice, and we'll all make different choices, maybe even at different stages of our lives.
awakenedsoul
7-10-12, 8:51pm
When I lived in New York, I was always out with friends, going to auditions, taking dance classes, seeing shows, going to watch my friend in New York City Ballet, etc....Most people move to NYC because they want to "make it." My friends and I all had success there. There were some really cool apts. Tiny, but efficient, beautiful, and well designed. A lot of it depends on the rest of your life. I lived in four different places in NY. One was crummy, but the others were great! (They were sublets.) I lived in an even tinier space in Vienna, Austria. It was a very nice hotel, but Europeans don't have the kind of space that Americans do. I was happier than I've ever been. I was in a hit Broadway show, in love with a Viennese painter/sculptor, and had wonderful friends. For young single people, their lives are not so home centered. We traveled to Salzburg, the Swiss Alps, etc...we were so free. No responsibilities but work. There was a lot of art and culture.
I've lived on this comfortably for months at a time, sometimes with 1-2 other people, and it is ~300 sq. ft. inside, and a fair bit of space is "wasted" on things you wouldn't need in a typical apartment.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-sN44EbqQaVE/TWwsbcX5DSI/AAAAAAAACPw/8A1nzSBFC3Y/s576/103-0375_IMG.JPG
You get another bit of space out on the decks, and the view is OK, which helps.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-5rIlOOZ2phI/TIQmXqrs8aI/AAAAAAAABR0/F-JRXiCQFRE/s576/115-1543_IMG.JPG
That is a magnificent view. Both the foggy mountainous spot and the NY skyline.
iris lily
7-10-12, 10:42pm
Give me a bed sitter in a Chelsea (London) or San Francisco Victorian with 12 foot ceilings, and I'm there.
Give me a bed sitter in a Chelsea (London) or San Francisco Victorian with 12 foot ceilings, and I'm there.
You can even manage these for short times, they are pretty convenient actually:
http://img.izismile.com/img/img2/20100108/capsule_hotel_00.jpg
By myself, I could do it. With my son, probably not.
I feel like the 600 sq ft we have is really comfortable. DH and I talk about buying and building, and we are considering 800-1000 sq ft, two story homes in the modern design family. There were a couple built in Philadelphia lots that would fit the bill (in so far as size goes), but there were weird layouts with the windows if you ask me. trying to be too catchy looking, I think.
Anyway, the plot we are on would be great. I'd probably do a 400 sq ft print with two stories, which would allow us to utilize a bit more yard (i.e., set the house back a smidge to have an outdoor space out front to enjoy the view). The whole front would basically be glass, with the back having those long, narrow windows which bring in some light, but are looking dead into a hillside so it's not like you need big windows there for the view.
our friend, an architect, did a quick mock-up drawing, and he reckons that a roof top deck would be a pretty sweet addition, if we don't have a front porch sort of area and go with a more 500 sq ft print (taking us up to 1000 sq ft).
Anyway, it's a dream for the now, but it's a pretty great design that uses the light well. And he got a good grade on the project, too. LOL
Btw, we have also considered living on a boat. My friend's parents are retiring, and they have a sailboat. So far, my friend lives on it in Auckland, but they could easily move it to Wellington and then teach us how to live on it. It has a large bedroom in the back (double/queen sized bed) which would be great for the now when we are all sleeping together. Then in the front, it has a big cushy bed area. And then the lounge/dining/kitchen area has a twin and a fold-out double.
So, we are considering it for sure. It would probably be about 300-400 sq ft. I don't really know. :)
You can even manage these for short times, they are pretty convenient actually:
Intriguing! What's the story on these cozy-looking little cubbies? Are they intended for overnight stays, for mid-day naps, or ? Are they long-term or one-day rentals? I'm guessing Tokyo?
By myself, I could do it. With my son, probably not.
Anyway, the plot we are on would be great. I'd probably do a 400 sq ft print with two stories, which would allow us to utilize a bit more yard (i.e., set the house back a smidge to have an outdoor space out front to enjoy the view). The whole front would basically be glass, with the back having those long, narrow windows which bring in some light, but are looking dead into a hillside so it's not like you need big windows there for the view.
our friend, an architect, did a quick mock-up drawing, and he reckons that a roof top deck would be a pretty sweet addition, if we don't have a front porch sort of area and go with a more 500 sq ft print (taking us up to 1000 sq ft).
Anyway, it's a dream for the now, but it's a pretty great design that uses the light well. And he got a good grade on the project, too. LOL
That sounds wonderful! Hope you get to make it happen. When you do, be sure to post photos!
I've lived on this comfortably for months at a time, sometimes with 1-2 other people, and it is ~300 sq. ft. inside, and a fair bit of space is "wasted" on things you wouldn't need in a typical apartment.
You get another bit of space out on the decks, and the view is OK, which helps.
For that view, the sounds and motion of the water, the exhilarating air, the privacy, peace, quiet, immersion in the natural world, I could live blissfully ever after in <300 well-designed sq. ft.
Not single, are you, bae? ;)
I guess I'm kind of schizophrenic in that I am very happy both in pretty isolated rural areas as well as in the middle of an urban metropolis. While our current apartment is quite spacious (around 200 sq meters of living space, or about 2150 sq feet), we have lived happily in much smaller spaces, including a tiny studio and two tiny dorm rooms when we were first married. The thing I love about living in the country is the peace and quiet, and connection to nature. But the city can be amazing as well, with everything in walking distance and great stuff to do/good public transit. I love that photo SteveinMN posted -- I could totally live in a place like that if it was just me/DH.
lhamo
catherine
7-11-12, 10:01am
I agree that if there was an affordable 300-sq foot place, I'd love to take advantage of it. If they're well-designed and efficient, I'm sure they're perfectly livable. There are plenty of people who live in teeny spaces in Manhattan anyway, much smaller than 300 sq ft. I stayed with my DD when she was dog-sitting one of her friends who lived in NYC, and they had a studio with a VERY small kitchen area, and the rest of the space was taken up by one double bed, with a small hall off the bathroom. Two people lived there. THAT I could not do. DH and I would kill each other eventually.
Japan has tons of good design models for small space living.
Ugh... I feel my claustrophobia kicking in just looking at those cubby-hole pictures.
Many great points, Spartana and CathyA.
SteveinMN
7-11-12, 11:39am
Intriguing! What's the story on these cozy-looking little cubbies? Are they intended for overnight stays, for mid-day naps, or ? Are they long-term or one-day rentals? I'm guessing Tokyo?
They're called "capsule hotels" ("kapuseru hoteru" [say it fast a few times] in Japanese). They're cheap ($30-50 a night; inexpensive for Japan) and they're easily found in Japan's major cities. They originally were created for serusumen (businessmen) who were drunk from post-business partying and who missed the last train home and just needed some place to sleep for the night. They're also popular with the adventurous traveler and sometimes with people looking for an upgrade from a typical youth hostel. Bathrooms are communal (though separated by gender). Capsules come with a little TV and audio system, a screen for privacy, and fresh bedding every night. I've never stayed in one (we preferred to stay in ryokan, or Japanese inns), but it would be something to do in Japan that you can't do just everywhere!
I've lived on this comfortably for months at a time, sometimes with 1-2 other people, and it is ~300 sq. ft. inside, and a fair bit of space is "wasted" on things you wouldn't need in a typical apartment.
You get another bit of space out on the decks, and the view is OK, which helps.
ex-Hubby and I lived on our small sailboat for quite awhile while we were fixing it up for the planned "Great Bluewater Cruise Around the World" that never materialized. It was much smaller than 300 SF but add in the decks (smaller on a sail boat than a motorboat) and the nice surroundings of living in a marina and it was great! of course both of us had spent years in VERY confined spaces aboard ships with a bunch of other people while in the Coast Guard so 300 sf was like a palace. Gary (AKA Simply Gib) and his then-wife lived for many years on his house boat (and he still has it but only uses it part time) which was about 250sf. Janet Lures did a write up of his experiences in one of her simple living books (can't remember the name). For me, living small - whether in an apt, a condo, a tiny house on a postage stamp sized yard, and RV or a boat - is the way to go.
Btw, we have also considered living on a boat. My friend's parents are retiring, and they have a sailboat. So far, my friend lives on it in Auckland, but they could easily move it to Wellington and then teach us how to live on it. It has a large bedroom in the back (double/queen sized bed) which would be great for the now when we are all sleeping together. Then in the front, it has a big cushy bed area. And then the lounge/dining/kitchen area has a twin and a fold-out double.
So, we are considering it for sure. It would probably be about 300-400 sq ft. I don't really know. :)
Hubby and I did this and it was great except for clothes storage. We both wore uniforms for our jobs that coul dbe folded rather than hung so that made it easier, but otherwise hanging clothes was a problem. our sailboat also had a queen-sized bed at the rear (aft for you salty dogs :-)!) and a small kitchen, dining area and "lounge" in middle and storage in the front (bow). It was very comfortable but we both worked full time and one or the other of us was often gone for long periods of time so it never seemed too cramped. Plus we spent most time on deck in good weather. when we were "home".
A timely article (http://shine.yahoo.com/decorating/couple-lives-240-square-foot-apartment-213500626.html)about a couple living in 240 sq.ft. in NYC.
A timely article (http://shine.yahoo.com/decorating/couple-lives-240-square-foot-apartment-213500626.html)about a couple living in 240 sq.ft. in NYC.
I love it! Nicely decorated too - spartan but sweet (just like me -NOT :-)!). Sometimes those small living spaces get too cluttered up and look claustophobic but this one is neat and simple. I was in Northern Calif recently and was looking at tiny houses around the wine country area. Had lots of very cute tiny places on little lots right in downtown areas of smallish cities /biggish towns (Santa Rosa, Petaluma, Napa, Ukiah, etc...) that would be my idea of perfect. Unfortunately, they must be alot of other people's idea of perfect too based on the outragously high prices. Probably nice little place out where you live that are similair but more affordable.
They're called "capsule hotels" ("kapuseru hoteru" [say it fast a few times] in Japanese). They're cheap ($30-50 a night; inexpensive for Japan) and they're easily found in Japan's major cities. They originally were created for serusumen (businessmen) who were drunk from post-business partying and who missed the last train home and just needed some place to sleep for the night. They're also popular with the adventurous traveler and sometimes with people looking for an upgrade from a typical youth hostel. Bathrooms are communal (though separated by gender). Capsules come with a little TV and audio system, a screen for privacy, and fresh bedding every night. I've never stayed in one (we preferred to stay in ryokan, or Japanese inns), but it would be something to do in Japan that you can't do just everywhere!
I gotta agree with Mrs. M. - way too claustrophobic for me. I'd feel like I was being put in my coffin.
Ugh... I feel my claustrophobia kicking in just looking at those cubby-hole pictures.
Yeah, gotta say, I was thinking converted morgue?
To add, I wonder where the dividing line ends, related to those who are cooped-up like chickens in a pen, where they long for a barefooted wander through freshly-cut green grass? In their own yard? Or to work the beds of planted flowers and trees? Or sit outside on a patio, with a barbeque and friends/family, and celebrate well into the night, never worrying about tenants/owners? Strikes me as being a pretty boring and stale lifestyle to say the least...
I think that most people who live in these kinds of small places are probably childless singles or couples who work full time and do most of their sociallizing outside the home. Probabaly empty nesters too who may want to travel half of the year and want a place they can just lock up and never worry about while they are gone. As a single childless person who owned a regular 3 bedroom house with big front and back yard, etc... I can tell you I never once used my yard for anything except for the dog to run around in. I lived a very single person life of working full time then spending my free time away from my home doing other things - and sociallizing was going out alot with friends rather then entertaining in my home. I really hated having to maintain a house and yard that I never used so I imagine that other kidless people like me would also enjoy a small space as compared to a larger space with lawns or gardens to tend. I would probably be happiest in around 600 sf single story condo which had alot of greenbelts and gardens that I could look at and enjoy but didn't have to care for myself.
I lived 12 years in a 250 sq foot apartment in midtown manhattan and truthfully I never felt like it was too small until I was moving out and realized how much crap I actually had. As others have mentioned, NYC is a place where most people do a lot of 'living' outside of their home. In my small apartment I had an eat-in kitchen where I could easily cook for 1 or 2 people and serve dinner as well, my living room had a futon that folded down into a bed, and the bathroom was normal sized. It was plenty of space for one person and one cat. Plus the view out my window was of a charming little park across the street. And best of all I could clean the whole apartment and do laundry in one evening every 2 weeks in about 3 hours time. (Laundromat was just around the corner. I'd put the wash in 2 big washers, go back home and clean the bathroom, go move the laundry to the dryers, go back and clean the kitchen, etc.)
I agree with Mrs. M that people have the desire for wandering through green grass, or sitting outside eating good food with friends, etc. In NYC people just do it differently. I lived near central park and regularly went there and explored or just rode my bike or rollerblades around the big loop, surrounded by trees and grass. It's a fantastic place that's far more interesting then any yard I could ever own. And, like Spartana mentions, I didn't have to do the maintenance of it. If I didn't feel like going to the park I'd put on my rollerblades and head over to the Hudson River bike path. Miles of path with views of NJ and the NY Harbor with things like the statue of liberty to look out at. Or I'd just put on my sneakers and go for a long walk around the city. There's always something interesting to see. And I routinely went out with friends to lovely restaurants with outdoor areas, either in back for quiet, more intimate meals, or out front on the streetside where one can sit and watch the amazing array of humanity that exists in NY.
Back when I lived in NYC I was young and single. I moved there because I wanted to meet people and learn about the world. And believe me, in 12 years I did a lot of both! A cozy home to share with family and have solitude was the last thing I was interested in. I will always remember with much fondness the time that I spent there.
Now that I'm in my 40s and settled down with SO my needs and wants are very different. We spend a lot more time at home. We still live in a large, dense city (San Francisco) but have a really nice, modern, 1200 sq foot apartment. We've actually put effort into decorating it and making it cozy. It's right for us now because we both still like taking easy advantage of city life, and it's convenient for our jobs. Eventually though I can see us moving out of the city. We've shifted a lot in the 10 years we've been together, in terms of what we like to do and what is important to us. At some point in the next few years I can easily see us buying a place outside the city with some private outside space that's just ours. And I'm fine with that. I don't think there's any one right answer of how to live, and I don't think that any one person has to stay locked into a particular lifestyle forever.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.