Skip to comments.Seattle looks to downsize living spaces (an upscale Obamatown)
Posted on 05/01/2013 3:09:06 AM PDT by markomalley
Developers in Seattle have been leading the U.S. in building hundreds of tiny apartments some about the size of a generous parking spot to cater to solo young workers, retirees who prefer city living, students and others looking to downsize.
Now, some residents are complaining that micro-apartments crowd too many people together, aren't compatible with some neighborhoods, don't encourage people to put down roots, and circumvent a design review process meant to get public input.
They're pushing for a building moratorium and more regulation of such projects.
"They're maxing out what they can do under the land use code," said Patrick Tompkins, who lives in the Capitol Hill neighborhood where some projects have replaced single-family homes, sometimes without much warning.
The city code allowing such tiny units has been around for at least three decades, but micro-apartments have taken off in the last three years, said Bryan Stevens with Seattle's planning department.
"It's really coincided with the recession. Apparently there's pent-up demand," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I guess that's something to which Obamabots can aspire.
There are two reasons for this Sardine Apartment Condo growth: 1)encourage stupid young white liberal yuppies that living in a downtown urban area is safe thus bringing the fruits of their labor nearer, and 2) maximizing the 'floorplan' allows for more taxable properties to be created.
Basically, it's liberal greed for more money all rolled up in one big bag of "hey, we can also control their lives, too! Oh Goody!"
Of course they are.
It's what they do.
...condo with park view and lanai
They’re boarding houses with private amenities.
Nothing wrong with that and never should have been outlawed in many communities.
If people want to live in small apartments, that is their right. There is no reason for ‘urban planners’ to think that they have to run anyone’s life.
For some people this sort of living is fine. I can imagine a young college student or a beginning professional living in these. Even a person whose “real” home is quite a commute away would look at one of these as alternative to spending $$$$ on transportation every day.
On the other hand if they are trying to improve the general economy by getting people to spend money, I would see these units as a discouragement to that sort of behavior.
When your living arrangements start to resemble a chicken coop you gotta start to wonder... am I the chicken in this equation?
It’s what they have in mind for all of us.
Is the left never satisfied? They cry when a family buys a McMansion and now they complain about some dude wanting to sleep in an over-sized closet never dreaming of more than his fair share. What’s the problem? They’re on the left coast, which is the proper place for it.
Increasing population density is the key driver of bigger government. The closer people live together the more rules and regulations that must be followed and the more freedoms people must surrender. These apartments are packed in so tight they are almost jail cells, and the level of personal freedom they permit is similar. The more someone values their freedom the more they should move to where there are fewer people per square mile.
They remind me of my first place right out of college. Efficiency apartments are perfect for the young and single.
“When your living arrangements start to resemble a chicken coop you gotta start to wonder... am I the chicken in this equation?”
This is a perfect illustration of our standard of living falling to meet the rising standard of living in Asia. Our cars are shrinking (and unsafe), our salaries are falling in real purchasing power, and now we live in closets.
I’m married and have two children at home, I realize that these apartments weren’t designed for folks like my family but we have more sq. footage of closet space than these places have living area.
(an upscale Obamatown)
Exactly. No need to force people to pay a third to a half of their income on housing in high-cost cities.
Agenda 21 (whatever that is).
I’ve got no problem with people wanting this, but a big problem with it being forced.
Ask your average sailor how much personal space he got on the ship.
Americans usually have large houses and yards so they have a place to keep all the stuff they buy and never use. Irrational consumerism.
Read the book “Agenda 21” from Glenn Beck (with another author- sorry I don tknow the name)
Everyone lives in government ordered housing, maximum efficient cubes, children BELONG to the government, everyone is fed the same nurishment cube, walks on a treadmil to generate “energy” while squirrels and other animals run free and are protected from harm and are well fed, etc...
Its becoming reality
Just like Europe or Hong Kong slums.
Globalism, Communism, Authoritarianism. Take your pick.
And yes these prison cell sized apartments are straight out of the Agenda 21 guidelines.
Oh, and don’t forget that while “everyone” is living this way,
there will be a few elite that are enjoying the “unspoiled countryside”.
in boston they were single without children apartments. (aka apartments with homosexuals in mind)