6 ms·

New bill would revive single-room occupancy apartments in NYC

25 points by geox 11mo ago

CraigRo 11mo ago
Challenge is that NYC regulates the operation of sros so much that you'd have to be insane to build them under the current rules. Kind of a shame, as lots of people basically just want a room to sleep in and a place to sit
garciasn 11mo ago
I’m interested to see what this does to rents overall. I assume these will not be as affordable as everyone would like/assume, at least not in the next few years, and will drive up rents in larger spaces. But I’m glad we’re trying SOMETHING in order to combat the problems with affordability; let’s just hope we don’t even up reviving how the other half lives.
- appreciatorBus 11mo ago
  Why would they drive up the rents in larger spaces? At least part of the demand in larger spaces is from roommates who would prefer to live alone, some of them might decamp for options like these, or studios and one bedroom apartments, etc., if they are available. As with all types of housing, there is no one type of housing that solves the problem. Whether we live under capitalism or socialism, the only way we solve housing is when everyone who wants to live in New York, can, everyone who wants to live in Kansas, can, everyone who wants to live in Fort Myers, can. With markets, a shortage results in high prices and rates. Without markets a shortage results in long waitlists. There’s no way out, without quantity. If we want people to live in large indoor spaces, and not SROs, we can’t get there in 99% of our land use regime is focussed on limiting the total amount of floor space that is allowed to exist within a given area. Legalizing SROs is insufficient, but necessary, just like legalizing larger apartment buildings in more places, abolishing single-family zoning, etc.
  - clickety_clack 11mo ago
    Well said. The only 2 ways out of a housing crisis are to: - turn the place into a hellhole nobody wants to live it - build more There’s no other option.
    - pfannkuchen 11mo ago
      I think the whole problem is that global market access plus nearly limitless product replication (software, media) has resulted in extreme differences in money availability for different subsets of the population. So we have some people who can buy many properties, and some people who can’t buy a single property. This low level of product sales friction and reach hasn’t really happened before in human history, and I’m not sure classical free market economic theory accounts for it. Back in the day there were only so many boats/shoes/whatever one company could physically sell. Continuing to grow the population under these conditions doesn’t help either.
      - Schiendelman 11mo ago
        There's basically no evidence that big companies own enough property to matter in the market. Even if every individual unit was owned by a different person, you'd see exactly the same outcomes we do today.
      - appreciatorBus 11mo ago
        If this was true, it would be true of other durable goods like appliances and cars. But people with lots of money know that investing in appliances and cars is pointless because millions of new ones are created constantly. There is no scarcity to benefit from as an asset owner. Unfortunately, in North America and other Anglosphere countries, we have decided that a scarcity in residential floor space is a public good and our planning rules tend to create such scarcity and enforce it. This allows incumbent homeowners to profit, and they fight for vociferously to protect that profit. Of course, if a company also invests in residential floor space they can also profit, but it’s not clear why we are so concerned with who profits, rather than the fact that we are enforcing the scarcity that produces the profits.
HardwareLust 11mo ago
They should build these like the capsule hotels in Tokyo.
- Schiendelman 11mo ago
  There are capsule hotels in New York as well!
  - HardwareLust 11mo ago
    Really! Did not know that.
Wowfunhappy 11mo ago
I feel like there is a huge difference between a shared kitchen and a shared bathroom. I'm fine with the former, and I would personally take that if the price was right. But the latter is gross.
- subpixel 11mo ago
  It doesn’t need to be. I had shared bathrooms in college dorms and in a European facility for unmarried adult asylum seekers and in various hostels and they were absolutely fit for purpose.
  - RandomBacon 11mo ago
    The bathrooms at my workplace are fit for purpose too, but that doesn't stop people with bad hygiene from leaving a line of fecal matter at the rear of the seat (where the cheeks meet) and not wiping away sweat, lint, and hairs, or prevent them from missing and peeing on the floor. I feel like a toilet, shower, and sink could be added to an efficiency apartment for 3m². If people want to see how small a room could get, see ships, especially crew quarters. I could probably design something with a kitchen, bathroom, washer and dryer, bed, desk, and storage for 15m².
- EE84M3i 11mo ago
  This type of housing is somewhat common in Japan. It's called a "share house"
nradov 11mo ago
SROs can't work in cities with strong tenant protections. If some junky trashes the shared kitchen and bathroom then the landlord needs to be able to evict them immediately (like in a hotel). Good luck doing that in NYC.
- namlem 11mo ago
  Yep. If eviction rules aren't loosened, these SROs will only be rented to people with >700 credit scores just like normal apartments. The people who need them most still won't get them.
add-sub-mul-div 11mo ago
It might be beneficial and necessary given where we are, but if it becomes normalized we must all see it for what it is. More austerity ultimately (regardless of the immediate causes) stemming from the massive transfer wealth to the few. Just like the generations-long shift of families needing two incomes instead of one. Like the growing share of renters vs. homeowners. Like the growing ratio of home prices to income. You reading this may believe you're among the few because you've stayed ahead of it so far, but you're not.
spir 11mo ago
Good to see more recognition that the housing shortage in the West is actually caused pretty much entirely by policies that made it illegal for the market to provide sufficient housing, and not landlord greed as a popular belief.
- fragmede 11mo ago
  While the story in NYC wasn’t as simple as greedy landlords made SROs illegal in the first place, we would do well to examine the role of large developers did have in making SROs illegal during the 80's, lest we suffer a repeat in 20 years.

25 points by geox 11mo ago

Challenge is that NYC regulates the operation of sros so much that you'd have to be insane to build them under the current rules. Kind of a shame, as lots of people basically just want a room to sleep in and a place to sit

garciasn 11mo ago

I’m interested to see what this does to rents overall. I assume these will not be as affordable as everyone would like/assume, at least not in the next few years, and will drive up rents in larger spaces. But I’m glad we’re trying SOMETHING in order to combat the problems with affordability; let’s just hope we don’t even up reviving how the other half lives.

appreciatorBus 11mo ago
Why would they drive up the rents in larger spaces? At least part of the demand in larger spaces is from roommates who would prefer to live alone, some of them might decamp for options like these, or studios and one bedroom apartments, etc., if they are available. As with all types of housing, there is no one type of housing that solves the problem. Whether we live under capitalism or socialism, the only way we solve housing is when everyone who wants to live in New York, can, everyone who wants to live in Kansas, can, everyone who wants to live in Fort Myers, can. With markets, a shortage results in high prices and rates. Without markets a shortage results in long waitlists. There’s no way out, without quantity. If we want people to live in large indoor spaces, and not SROs, we can’t get there in 99% of our land use regime is focussed on limiting the total amount of floor space that is allowed to exist within a given area. Legalizing SROs is insufficient, but necessary, just like legalizing larger apartment buildings in more places, abolishing single-family zoning, etc.
- clickety_clack 11mo ago
  Well said. The only 2 ways out of a housing crisis are to: - turn the place into a hellhole nobody wants to live it - build more There’s no other option.
  - pfannkuchen 11mo ago
    I think the whole problem is that global market access plus nearly limitless product replication (software, media) has resulted in extreme differences in money availability for different subsets of the population. So we have some people who can buy many properties, and some people who can’t buy a single property. This low level of product sales friction and reach hasn’t really happened before in human history, and I’m not sure classical free market economic theory accounts for it. Back in the day there were only so many boats/shoes/whatever one company could physically sell. Continuing to grow the population under these conditions doesn’t help either.
    - Schiendelman 11mo ago
      There's basically no evidence that big companies own enough property to matter in the market. Even if every individual unit was owned by a different person, you'd see exactly the same outcomes we do today.
    - appreciatorBus 11mo ago
      If this was true, it would be true of other durable goods like appliances and cars. But people with lots of money know that investing in appliances and cars is pointless because millions of new ones are created constantly. There is no scarcity to benefit from as an asset owner. Unfortunately, in North America and other Anglosphere countries, we have decided that a scarcity in residential floor space is a public good and our planning rules tend to create such scarcity and enforce it. This allows incumbent homeowners to profit, and they fight for vociferously to protect that profit. Of course, if a company also invests in residential floor space they can also profit, but it’s not clear why we are so concerned with who profits, rather than the fact that we are enforcing the scarcity that produces the profits.

HardwareLust 11mo ago

They should build these like the capsule hotels in Tokyo.

Schiendelman 11mo ago
There are capsule hotels in New York as well!
- HardwareLust 11mo ago
  Really! Did not know that.

Wowfunhappy 11mo ago

I feel like there is a huge difference between a shared kitchen and a shared bathroom. I'm fine with the former, and I would personally take that if the price was right. But the latter is gross.

subpixel 11mo ago
It doesn’t need to be. I had shared bathrooms in college dorms and in a European facility for unmarried adult asylum seekers and in various hostels and they were absolutely fit for purpose.
- RandomBacon 11mo ago
  The bathrooms at my workplace are fit for purpose too, but that doesn't stop people with bad hygiene from leaving a line of fecal matter at the rear of the seat (where the cheeks meet) and not wiping away sweat, lint, and hairs, or prevent them from missing and peeing on the floor. I feel like a toilet, shower, and sink could be added to an efficiency apartment for 3m². If people want to see how small a room could get, see ships, especially crew quarters. I could probably design something with a kitchen, bathroom, washer and dryer, bed, desk, and storage for 15m².
EE84M3i 11mo ago
This type of housing is somewhat common in Japan. It's called a "share house"

nradov 11mo ago

SROs can't work in cities with strong tenant protections. If some junky trashes the shared kitchen and bathroom then the landlord needs to be able to evict them immediately (like in a hotel). Good luck doing that in NYC.

namlem 11mo ago
Yep. If eviction rules aren't loosened, these SROs will only be rented to people with >700 credit scores just like normal apartments. The people who need them most still won't get them.

add-sub-mul-div 11mo ago

It might be beneficial and necessary given where we are, but if it becomes normalized we must all see it for what it is. More austerity ultimately (regardless of the immediate causes) stemming from the massive transfer wealth to the few. Just like the generations-long shift of families needing two incomes instead of one. Like the growing share of renters vs. homeowners. Like the growing ratio of home prices to income. You reading this may believe you're among the few because you've stayed ahead of it so far, but you're not.

spir 11mo ago

Good to see more recognition that the housing shortage in the West is actually caused pretty much entirely by policies that made it illegal for the market to provide sufficient housing, and not landlord greed as a popular belief.

fragmede 11mo ago
While the story in NYC wasn’t as simple as greedy landlords made SROs illegal in the first place, we would do well to examine the role of large developers did have in making SROs illegal during the 80's, lest we suffer a repeat in 20 years.