[IkmoIkmo]

Yeah 9m2 is pretty crazy...

If you ask me, I'd be a proponent of limiting to above 15m2 units with shared spaces, and possibly age-limited.

In the Netherlands we have homes which are for youth only, can only rent them until age 27. I think such an age limit would make sense for such small units. The idea being that the image and culture of these buildings are focused on instilling the notion that these spaces are temporary.

I think it's fine you live in a 15m2 unit at age 20 as a student. But if you want to do that at age 40, it's super likely that it's not by choice. And that's not something we ought to necessarily allow.

The successful concepts I've seen typically have high-quality washer/dryers separate. A large communal kitchen to supplement a small private kitchen. A communal hangout space.

And finally, a private event room you can rent, e.g. 10 times a year, to say host parties, music, poetry, debates etc. If you've got say 360 days out of the year and a morning, noon and evening slot, you've basically got about 1000 slots to fill each year. If you share such a space with 25 units, each unit could rent the room almost every month.

None of this is perfect, particularly the age-limit is hard to enforce, and you start to touch on the gov vs personal-freedom debate. But I think the above minimum guidelines would be the least bad solution that finds a reasonable balance.

It really depends on the city though. If there's a ton of housing shortage and you've got people forced into 3-hour commutes, illegal dwellings, homelessness, >60% rent/income etc, aspects of which you see for example in Manilla, it makes sense to allow 15m2 units. In a city where there's no such housing shortage, I think it makes sense to set the minimum legal standard a bit higher.

[zkms]

> But if you want to do that at age 40, it's super likely that it's not by choice. And that's not something we ought to necessarily allow

If you mandate luxury in housing, everyone who cannot afford that level of luxury will go without housing -- or will end up in illegal and unsafe sublets with abusive landlords, which is far worse than an apartment of one's own that happens to have a floor area that is below your idea of luxury.

[IkmoIkmo]

Replace 'luxury' by 'standards', among which size, but also fire hazard standards, noise standards, pollution, accessibility, height etc, and you can see why it's silly to take this libertarian idea to the extreme.

You have to find a balance. That balance will differ from city to city. But to mandate some minimum living standard makes a lot of sense. Breaking the law is not free of consequences, illegality is not the norm, it's a strong disincentive for anyone to engage in a housing practice which we as a society deem unacceptable. A line has to be drawn somewhere. From there you can, as a government, implement programs to help people meet those standards, and provide sufficient resources to do so.

Whether you think the line should be at 3m2, or 15m2, or 50m2, you can argue. What society deems acceptable is up for debate. I fully agree there. But the notion no mandated 'luxury', or minimum standard, should be set, and for government to just allow anything, without standards, because hey, otherwise you might create a situation where almost everyone lives according to an acceptable standard, except for a few edge cases temporarily breaking the standard illegally... I think that's silly.

[antepodius]

The point is that by setting regulations like this, you're going to increase homelessness.

[IkmoIkmo]

You realise you're talking about building regulations that already exist?

I take it then, you're of the opinion we should have no regulations at all?

[tokyodude]

Japan has a similar setup but without the age restriction. they are called Social Apartments.

https://www.social-apartment.com/eng

I've considered living in one but the prices are not any lower and sometimes even higher than renting my own apartment. Maybe if I knew they had a community organizer that planned activities most days I'd consider paying the premium.

Some apparently have a theme like "musicians" so you have people the jam with and they have practice rooms.

[IkmoIkmo]

Yeah I run into a similar story here, small modern units aren't necessarily cheaper, unfortunately.

Normally you'd expect this to generate a lot of turnover because there's a decent chance you can find a better deal on a $/m2 basis within a year or so. Which is tricky for normal landlords, because you need to organise viewings and find another tenant, which leads to temporary vacancy and lost income.

But these hotel-room like units tend to be so so uniform and modern, that, like hotels, you can easily get them booked via an online system without even having to organise viewing days or whatever, or better, generate a waiting list online of tens of people who're willing to move into one the moment one becomes available.

We have small apartments that aren't age-limited here, too, but they start (based on building regulations) at 18m2. The 'really' small units of 15m2 are allowed only for student rentals, which are typically linked to an age (27) or university enrolment requirement, or both.