|
Tiny rear end sleeping space and a common kitchen, aren't those just called quads like for [college] campus housing?
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:04 |
|
|
If I'm going to live in a walk-in closet, I at least want my own kitchen(ette).
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
Ditocoaf posted:What? I'm probably missing the actual issue at stake here, but what I said is true. I think the joke is that the only "affordable" housing in Seattle is tent cities.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
People have an tendency to believe that if they wouldn't enjoy living a certain way than certainly no one would ever enjoy living a certain way. If I were young and single i'd be in a micro apartment or what resembles a micro apartment because i'd live in 1 house with 5 other people anyway in order to save money. Home is for sleeping and loving around on the computer. I spend most of my day out and about. Why waste money on space you don't need? But that's my preference.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
Rent is ballooning out of control and we need to make sure the cost of living doesn't go down. Popping this bubble now would be bad for the economy, imho. Instead, let's keep the price per square foot steady on the same upward trajectory, but we'll just make the apartments smaller. As a goonlord shut-in I certainly wouldn't mind living in a casket, and no one my age even knows how to cook so why do I even need a kitchenette?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:Rent is ballooning out of control and we need to make sure the cost of living doesn't go down. Popping this bubble now would be bad for the economy, imho. Instead, let's keep the price per square foot steady on the same upward trajectory, but we'll just make the apartments smaller. As a goonlord shut-in I certainly wouldn't mind living in a casket, and no one my age even knows how to cook so why do I even need a kitchenette? Yes, yes. Criticize the people who want small dwellings, not shitlords with 4-10,000 square foot houses and above. *squeals* It's youuuuuu! It's you I blame!
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:Rent is ballooning out of control and we need to make sure the cost of living doesn't go down. Popping this bubble now would be bad for the economy, imho. Instead, let's keep the price per square foot steady on the same upward trajectory, but we'll just make the apartments smaller. As a goonlord shut-in I certainly wouldn't mind living in a casket, and no one my age even knows how to cook so why do I even need a kitchenette? Talk to me about the broader economical impact of these micro-apartments, I'm clueless about that poo poo and I really do care. Half the reason I spoke up just now was to talk about that stuff. Contentless derisive laughter isn't talk. But as far as where I manage to live come January, I'm happy cooking in a shared kitchen and I only need a place to park my computer, a twin bed, and shower. Not trying to say this sort of poo poo is acceptable for anyone other than myself. The only thing I said is that I would be willing to live there, if it's actually any cheaper than just getting a room in a place with a bunch of roommates.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Yes, yes. Criticize the people who want small dwellings, not shitlords with 4-10,000 square foot houses and above. *squeals* It's youuuuuu! It's you I blame!
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:You're right, I should unquestionably put my trust in the invisible hand of the free market. Only through freedom will we achieve Liberty. These are your only choices!
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:These are your only choices!
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:You're right, I should unquestionably put my trust in the invisible hand of the free market. Only through freedom will we achieve Liberty. Talk to me about how these things are bad for poor people. I'm perfectly ready to be against these things on principle. I didn't say "I support the creation of these things, stop hurting our ~job creators~ and the ~free market~", I said "I'd be willing to live in one if it comes to that". anthonypants posted:You told me I can't be mad at property developers Ditocoaf fucked around with this message at 06:03 on Oct 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
Ditocoaf posted:Talk to me about how these things are bad for poor people. I'm perfectly ready to be against these things on principle. I didn't say "I support the creation of these things, stop hurting our ~job creators~ and the ~free market~", I said "I'd be willing to live in one if it comes to that".
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:Do you know what a supply and demand chart looks like? Do you know what happens when supply is low but demand is high? If supply is the vacancy rate, and demand is everyone who wants to live here, why would tiny apartments keep the cost of living low? Especially when there are suckers who will live in tiny apartments solely for the prestige of Living In Seattle, or Portland, or San Francisco, or New York City, etc. OK then, socialist revolution. I'm all for it; but do you have any suggestions for people looking to move within the next year or so? Should they just grit their teeth and pay 2/3 of their income for three times more space than they want or need, in the meantime? e: oh wait "the prestige of Living In Seattle, or Portland, or San Francisco, or New York City" I guess I see where you are coming from now. I guess those people should live in Kent and drive four hours a day, yes?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:OK then, socialist revolution. I'm all for it; but do you have any suggestions for people looking to move within the next year or so? Should they just grit their teeth and pay 2/3 of their income for three times more space than they want or need, in the meantime? http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2024716220_microapartmentsxml.html posted:Councilmember Kshama Sawant voiced concern about affordability before voting for the bill, but said rent control and public housing, rather than micro-apartments, are what Seattle needs most.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
Yeah there are actual reasons I have to move to Seattle. But I guess this conversation is going to go nowhere since you seem hell-bent on assigning me the role of defending the developers. I don't actually think that these microapartments are good for anybody or that they'd keep the cost of living down or whatever it is you think I'm saying.quote:Councilmember Kshama Sawant voiced concern about affordability before voting for the bill, but said rent control and public housing, rather than micro-apartments, are what Seattle needs most. Ditocoaf fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Oct 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The issue is the parking is reserved for temporary private use, you can't sit your car in a space for a year. Also, from what I have seen most of the spaces we are talking about are used and are productive, cars are still of utility to the city. It isn't going to be much use for tax revenue because we don't have a sales tax in Oregon, and business taxes are quite low. Also, the city has previously allowed businesses to take over the street for very little. Also, part of "reducing crime" is going to be chasing out any homeless people who use the sidewalk. Once private businesses take over an area they make the rules, including against the homeless who actually are frequently in that area. I suspect part of the plan is to push them into the street. Portland's mass transit isn't a problem when you're going downtown, which is what we're (both?) talking about here. Right now transit is basically built to get you downtown and not really from one exurb to another. I will gladly concede that it is lacking in many other areas. But again, parking is free in most parts of the city, and stupidly cheap downtown. The cost of parking is not driving anyone anywhere. Cars vs. transit is not a class issue in the sense that "cars are for rich people" or whatever, but it is a class issue in that the lack of good mass transit forces poor people to own cars in order to get to their jobs. And again, this isn't relevant to the issue of 3rd ave or downtown parking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:26
|
|
|
Lets be fair here. I lived in a small apartment with one of those shittastic galley kitchens in greenwood. No one who lives with a tiny galley kitchen really wants to cook in it anyway. Its cramped you can barely open the drat oven and invitably the cabinets were rotting through anyway. This was pre amazon boom in a 800sqft 2bd for 700 a month. I'd have preferred they just left off the lovely kitchenette for 200 bucks a month off my rent. I also voted for Sawant. VVV I prepared some nice meals in it but most of the time I was just angry that I had no counter space anyway. A big shared kitchen would have been nicer, imo. I seriously love cooking and its my relaxation activity now that i've got a house with a big kitchen but i'd have panic attacks and go into tears because I didn't even have the counter space or storage space to make a drat pie. Kitchens are communal spaces. Not tiny cram boxes. silicone thrills fucked around with this message at 07:02 on Oct 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:26
|
|
|
Yeah I voted for Sawant and I totally agree with her. I also agree with her that Boeing workers should seize the means of production but uh do you have an answer to my question? How can people live affordably in the political climate that we have right now? e: also get real people, many gourmet meals have been prepared in the tiniest of kitchens.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:How can people live affordably in the political climate that we have right now? Move out of Seattle.  It's sad but true, the cheap places are just going to keep moving north and south. Downtown Seattle in 5-10 years is just going to be a glimmering Emerald city of Amazon, Starbucks, Microsoft, etc. with the munchkins to run all the restaurants and clean the bathrooms being brought in by rail from Tacoma and Bellingham.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
Tacoma's actually a pretty great place to live and the Sounder can be super convenient sooooo, I guess get in on the ground floor?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
For going to Seattle from Tacoma, the Sounder cost quite a bit more compared to taking the 590/94. Maybe I'm just biased towards buses. Not that it isn't nice that we have that choice, tho. Speaking of, when can we get the light rail down to Tacoma already...?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
Chenghiz posted:Portland's mass transit isn't a problem when you're going downtown, which is what we're (both?) talking about here. Right now transit is basically built to get you downtown and not really from one exurb to another. I will gladly concede that it is lacking in many other areas. It can take quite a while to get over to Downtown on a local bus, and I don't blame someone from Tigard taking a car downtown. The transit options there just aren't very good. Also, I wouldn't call parking "stupidly" cheap Downtown, it is cheap compared to Seattle or San Francisco but that is comparable to the cost of living. Making parking more expensive than inflation is just pricing a lot of lower-middle class/working class people from the suburbs out of downtown. Anyway, I am all for pretty transit but as we just discussed, there are actually limited options for expansion unless significant capital investment made and to be honest, a Trimet ticket (2.50) is really expensive for a smaller city like Portland. More needs to be done on that front. As for 3rd Ave, I would feel a lot better if the city made the businesses there have to treat that are as a true public space not just an expansion of their property. I don't think they should be able to infringe on people's right to sit on a sidewalk for example.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 07:35
|
|
|
Ditocoaf posted:What? I'm probably missing the actual issue at stake here, but what I said is true. The joke is that you're asking to be turned into a battery chicken.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 07:41
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Yes, yes. Criticize the people who want small dwellings, not shitlords with 4-10,000 square foot houses and above. *squeals* It's youuuuuu! It's you I blame! Now that they have formally won 70 square feet at the absolute floor, they will just try and chip away at the restrictions as to how many (and where) they can put those. Old 900 square foot apartment for 1500? No anymore! Looks like 10 cells for 1100 each! Ditocoaf posted:What? I'm probably missing the actual issue at stake here, but what I said is true. If you want worse deals theres always Manhattan or SF...
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
I still don't see how this is my fault. I need to be in Seattle instead of Port Angeles for reasons I'm not going into here. If the cheapest place to put my computer and bed happens to be a closet, then I'm going to live in a closet. Because dealing with substandard living conditions is currently a more plausible option for me than, I don't know, waiting for the city to fix its housing policy. I'll probably instead end up in a situation with a long commute and a half-dozen roommates, honestly. I'll see what I can manage to find, and you guys can tell me how my decision affects the housing market. Ditocoaf fucked around with this message at 09:11 on Oct 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 09:08
|
|
|
Ditocoaf posted:I'll probably instead end up in a situation with a long commute and a half-dozen roommates, honestly. I'll see what I can manage to find, and you guys can tell me how my decision affects the housing market.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 09:44
|
|
|
Ditocoaf posted:I still don't see how this is my fault. I need to be in Seattle instead of Port Angeles for reasons I'm not going into here. If the cheapest place to put my computer and bed happens to be a closet, then I'm going to live in a closet. Because dealing with substandard living conditions is currently a more plausible option for me than, I don't know, waiting for the city to fix its housing policy. Just grit your teeth and lease a giant idiot's apartment for idiots and their idiot babies and dogs. Because if apartments become small, then they'll all become small and then all the small apartments will become as expensive as the giant idiot apartments, or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Just grit your teeth and lease a giant idiot's apartment for idiots and their idiot babies and dogs. Because if apartments become small, then they'll all become small and then all the small apartments will become as expensive as the giant idiot apartments, or something. God forbid you actually are one of those "idiots" with those frivolous extras like a spouse, a pet, or a child, or anything physical at all. You should only own things in The Cloud, and be ready to move to where you can be stuffed. SEDUs are way better as a baseline than what we had before, especially under Mayor Density-is-its-own-virtue and aligned with the light rail expansions. Marginal living with 200 of your closet economic relatives isn't solving the housing market in a transit desert like Seattle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
Gerund posted:God forbid you actually are one of those "idiots" with those frivolous extras like a spouse, a pet, or a child, or anything physical at all. Pet slavery is a hate crime against animal rights and the starving homeless. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
Shoreline / Lynnwood / Mountlake Terrace / Edmonds are all somewhat-acceptable alternatives to living directly in Seattle, as the prices aren't awful for apartments there. The commute into Seattle is pretty gross, since I-5 becomes a parking lot headed southbound. You can go to the park and rides and catch a bus headed through downtown, though, and hopefully the carpool lane isn't as much of a mess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
It is possible to find somewhat reasonable stuff in Seattle if you're watching craigslist and don't live completely alone. I was renting a one bedroom lower floor apartment on Sandpoint Way right on the water for about $850. It was horribly maintained, and had almost no privacy because it had huge bay windows right onto a common beach lawn that you had to share with approx four other apartments and the landlord. But it had a nice view and a huge kitchen. I also don't really have that much comparison I guess if thats really high compared to other places, I might just be used to it. I don't know that rents are too much more reasonable anywhere else in the puget sound area though, I'm currently in Olympia and paying about $900 for a two bedroom that is probably only slightly larger than that one bedroom, just all the rooms are smaller. Living in tiny spaces is frustrating and I think I'd go crazy if I had to share a kitchen with strangers because I can hardly share a kitchen with my spouse. At least when you're living with actual roommates there are solutions to kitchen defilers because in the end you have to live with that person and you know for sure who it was that made the mess. I really think that the sardine can style is probably not the best approach because I feel like it could really easily lead to slummy nasty conditions over time and my understanding is that those sardine can apartments aren't even that much less than a basement on the outskirts of Seattle though I haven't looked at the prices myself. Rent control seems like a better alternative and also just reasonably designed spaces.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
Gerund posted:God forbid you actually are one of those "idiots" with those frivolous extras like a spouse, a pet, or a child, or anything physical at all. You should only own things in The Cloud, and be ready to move to where you can be stuffed. Wow, children and pets? Maybe you're not cut out for living where real estate prices are high. Maybe you should live in Covington  That's right, the worm has turned.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
Tiny apartments work in other countries. Big cities used to have the same thing everywhere, they were called boarding houses. I don't see why the idea is so unacceptable here. Tons of people already rent out rooms in larger houses they couldn't afford on their own. I've lived in similar arrangements, and for a lot of people that 100-200sqft is all they need or want. Cost of living in Seattle is going up. With how many high paying jobs are moving in its inevitable. What's needed is regulation to ensure these new places are safe, have adequate parking or access to public transit, and comply with density zoning laws. Keep things affordable by raising minimum wage and providing subsidies, not by creating artificial shortages and driving people to the suburbs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
oxbrain posted:Tiny apartments work in other countries. Big cities used to have the same thing everywhere, they were called boarding houses. I don't see why the idea is so unacceptable here. Tons of people already rent out rooms in larger houses they couldn't afford on their own. I've lived in similar arrangements, and for a lot of people that 100-200sqft is all they need or want. SEDUs are designed and designated for the UW and SU student, living in transient housing. And they have greater health, transit, and social regulations than existed before. Having set standards for livability is a success in every category you mention.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
Gerund posted:God forbid you actually are one of those "idiots" with those frivolous extras like a spouse, a pet, or a child, or anything physical at all. You should only own things in The Cloud, and be ready to move to where you can be stuffed. I see you have a family but have you considered the Amazon Prime Child Rental service? Free with your Amazon Prime subscription you can rent a child for a weekend to take fishing, teach how to play baseball, and more! It's all the benefits of being a parent but without the lose of critical working years that might make you lose focus on your career!
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Has rent control ever been shown to actually help housing costs for anyone but the people already living in places? I mean, to me, it just seems like it would be a wealth transfer from people just moving to a city to people already living there. I'm not saying I have, like, THE solution or anything, but rent control doesn't really seem like a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
Now that I'm a bike transportation enthusiast, I am all for denser housing. Get rid of all car parking requirements, subsidizing drivers is dumb; if people want to park, then they can pay market rate at a parking garage for their space. Higher density means walking, biking, and public transportation all get better. I still drive a fair bit right now because I live in an area that kind of sucks for biking, but I'd definitely be ok with paying more/more often for parking if it meant other forms of transportation got better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
I don't have a car, so living in somewhere like Shoreline isn't an option because they don't even have bus service -- at all -- on Sundays. I'm going to be looking for somewhere on the very edges of Seattle's bus network (which is actually pretty good, compared to most places I've seen in the US). (And again -- like with pets, children, spouse, furniture, etc -- I'm not saying "housing policy should be designed around people without these things" I'm saying "I personally don't have these things, so my choice of housing for myself will reflect that." When/if I have these things in the future, I will live somewhere larger, and so I do care about the broader housing situation. But I can't change the broader housing situation with my choice of where to live right this moment.) Ditocoaf fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Oct 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
If poor people want to live in Seattle they can move to rainier beach. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:04 |
|
|
Cicero posted:Now that I'm a bike transportation enthusiast, I am all for denser housing. Get rid of all car parking requirements, subsidizing drivers is dumb; if people want to park, then they can pay market rate at a parking garage for their space. Higher density means walking, biking, and public transportation all get better. You are myopically short-sighted, because the people that use cars are going to deplete the public good of street parking first before they spend a dime elsewhere. Further, the new regulations require decent bike storage on a per-unit basis, which is a good thing to encourage biking-commute alternatives versus a wholly cyclist lifestyle. Further, density for the sake of density is bad civic policy: the infrastructure must be established first, rather than trusting an invisible hand of the free market to act in the public good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 20:59
|
|