Mini-Apartments

[ricco67]

Reading Sarnoff's Blog; The section talking about mini apartments caught my eye. While 350sf is a bit too small for what I have in mind, it is in line what I wouldn't mind moving into, but perhaps 600sq. With all the new apartments that were built recently, I often wondered why they don't try for someone like me that doesn't NEED 1,000sq +.

Do you think anyone would be building these here in the near future? I'd love for something like this to be built in the Montrose, Midtown, or Galleria area. Hell, I'm sure those fresh out of college would appreciate a small place that doesn't require a roommate to help afford it.

[porTENT]

Design fees are generally higher for projects like this.

[kylejack]

It's not so much about the square feet in Houston, and with prices already so low compared to other cities of similar size, I don't think there could be much savings. Besides, new construction has a hard time being competitive with the wealth of old 4-plexes in Montrose and etc. As an example, Camden Midtown has a 660 square foot apartment available right now...for $1100.

[AtticaFlinch]

These are just efficiency apartments. It's weird that they're talking about these as if they're a new idea.

[porTENT]

These are just efficiency apartments. It's weird that they're talking about these as if they're a new idea.

But efficiency apartments typically are not lofted.

[little frau]

These are just efficiency apartments. It's weird that they're talking about these as if they're a new idea.

Exactly my thought. Only I didn't want to bring that up for fear of dating myself. The first two apartments I had after getting a job at Gulf Oil were efficiencies. Yay for Murphy beds!! You don't ever have to make the bed.

The thought of living in a furnished apartment now is not something I'd want but back in the 60's, we thought it was cool. All that and bills paid too. 100 bucks.

[little frau]

But efficiency apartments typically are not lofted.

I've been away from the city and down on the farm too long. What makes a space lofted? Is it the 17 ft. ceilings or the elevated area for the bed or what? I'm thinking it's not the open concept alone as both efficiencies I lived in were totally open. Except for the bathroom door.

[porTENT]

Lofting in architecture typically refers to the sectional aspect of having double height ceilings and is usually a split level design with a "lofted" space that overlooks the main space. In this case it is one rectangular space in plan (like an efficiency) and sectionally lofted.

I've stayed in an efficiency with standard 9' ceilings in a dingbat complex and it would seem that they are hard to rent and worse (like most dingbats) they are poorly maintained (I think I had a direct hole to the outdoors in my bathroom ceiling where an exhaust fan had once been). I also think the term "efficiency" in modern real estate jargon has a negative connotation too.

[editor]

Reading Sarnoff's Blog; The section talking about mini apartments caught my eye. While 350sf is a bit too small for what I have in mind, it is in line what I wouldn't mind moving into, but perhaps 600sq. With all the new apartments that were built recently, I often wondered why they don't try for someone like me that doesn't NEED 1,000sq +.

My first apartment was 400 sqft (Charleston).

My second was palatial at around 500 (Cincinnati).

After that, I had an 830, a 1,200, a 1,450 (all Houston).

Then I started downsizing, with an 800, a 930, and a 475.

I'm in 620 now, and it feels very comfortable (especially after 475). It's really all about how the apartment is designed, rather than the actual square feet. The 475 in Chicago felt way bigger than the 500 in Cincinnati, or even the 830 in Houston.

Nothing will ever compete with the 1,450, though. I needed two Roombas to keep that hardwood floor clean.

Two people can live very comfortably in 475 square feet. 350 is pushing it, it smacks of SRO. But a roomy hotel room is about 400 sqft. Add a few feet more for closet and kitchen, and you're home!

[TheNiche]

Sorry that I'm late to the party...

There has been a general trend toward developing smaller units in urban developments for some time now. When you're trying to squeeze every last penny out of a four- or five-story project on a tight parcel of land, smaller units can command a higher rent per square foot and are definitely the way to go.

However... There are diminishing returns. Consider that very-small one-bedroom units or efficiencies require approximately the same fixed costs as a larger one-bedroom unit where kitchens, bathrooms, (some) common areas, and amenities are concerned. Adding a little bit of floor area is relatively inexpensive, in comparison. Additionally, very small units (even at the high end) tend to attract a more transient kind of tenant and have higher turnover rates; the extra operating costs do add up, and as the property ages over time, that kind of tenant can 'poison the well' so to speak.

[TheNiche]

Lofting in architecture typically refers to the sectional aspect of having double height ceilings and is usually a split level design with a "lofted" space that overlooks the main space. In this case it is one rectangular space in plan (like an efficiency) and sectionally lofted.

I've stayed in an efficiency with standard 9' ceilings in a dingbat complex and it would seem that they are hard to rent and worse (like most dingbats) they are poorly maintained (I think I had a direct hole to the outdoors in my bathroom ceiling where an exhaust fan had once been). I also think the term "efficiency" in modern real estate jargon has a negative connotation too.

Lofting to developers usually means brick accent walls, skimping out on bedroom doors, or other trite and cliched design accents. Ceilings are usually in the 10' to 14' range, frequently with the top floor having higher ceilings. But developer-speak with respect to new construction is obviously intended to lure people that are seeking to leverage their material wealth to achieve status and improve their reproductive opportunities. Beyond the advertising, it is mostly irrelevant.

[TheNiche]

Two people can live very comfortably in 475 square feet. 350 is pushing it, it smacks of SRO. But a roomy hotel room is about 400 sqft. Add a few feet more for closet and kitchen, and you're home!

This isn't specifically an apartment-related comment, but I just wanted to plug Katie Nichols, an acquaintance of mine and owner of Numen Development, since she has plans for sale for 360-square-foot and 450-square-foot homes built from shipping containers.

The idea behind 360 was to be able to comfortably accommodate two people as permanent residents and two guests staying for up to two weeks at a time. I've toured the work in progress, and I have to say...it is a testament to good design.

[WAZ]

These are just efficiency apartments. It's weird that they're talking about these as if they're a new idea.

Small is certainly not new. The houses in Levittown were originally only 750 square feet, and they weren't efficiency apartments. They had a kitchen/dining area, living room, two small bedrooms, and a bathroom on the first floor. (The second floor was an unfinished attic). The houses that Frank Sharp developed in Oak Forest and Sharpstown weren't much bigger - many were around 1,000 sf.