Kitoko Studio fills 8sqm Parisian apartment with hidden amenities (2014)
designboom.com
designboom.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd4nKJPmWGA (80s Italian movie)
Look at the before&after pictures on the original http://kitoko-studio.com/projects/interior/maids-room-renova... - you'll see it's more an exercise in trying to sell every last bit of space in existing buildings.
I guess in this case "luxury" => "doesn't contain second-hand furniture".
Also http://www.independent.co.uk/property/studio-flat-with-bedro... (clearly they should of opted for a single bed too facepalm)
The structure of these buildings is quite interesting. The stratification of classes through the floors they occupy (the first floor is called "piano nobile" for a reason), but you're probably French and you know all about Haussmann's renovation.
They are also built on the cheap so the nice finish doesn't even last.
You'd be a complete idiot to build the affordable housing.
Planning laws and NIMBY are limiting the amount of buildings builders can make all around the world, so naturally the only buildings they bother making are the luxury ones with the big, fat, juicy returns, unless they are forced.
A lot of things about the modern market are more about volume than quality; this explains how e.g. common electronics have become relatively cheap, but tend to die within 3-5 years - they're cheaper and the profit margins are lower, but in the long run you sell more of them.
It's why smartphones will remain in the <$1000 range, so that, unlike e.g. a gold smartwatch, people will be more likely to replace them within 3 years. Or why the bio-industry is a thing - why make quality meat at a price point where people can only afford to have it once or twice a week, when you can make it dirt cheap so they eat it daily?
Also, the cost of making a luxury apartment vs a cheap one, fittings, etc. is trivial compared to the sale value in today's market in Paris.
The choice isn't 1 v 20, it's 1 v 2. You can't make 20 cheap apartments in the space of one expensive one.
Hence why I used 2 instead of 20.
So making a building that's not luxury is essentially leaving money on the table. It's a minor investment that produces a large return.
Of course, since everyone is doing it, the market for luxury apartments gets saturated while the more affordable market is underserved.
I find it strange that small houses are being promoted to somehow solve the housing shortages in cities while they're really space inefficient. I guess renovating "maid's apartments" and attics is somewhat reasonable, given that these are in coveted areas and targetted at young people with a vivid social life in the city.
Everything points at urbanization being a ongoing trend, but affordable housing seems to be a problem worldwide.
I'd gladly move out of the city to have some space for myself but unfortunately the jobs tend to be in cities and remote work is still relatively rare.
The US is big enough for everyone to live comfortably, for houses to be affordable and spacious (and houses in the suburbs generally are far more spacious than e.g. European suburbs), for people to live where they work and have a reasonable commute, etc.
I'm not sure other cities are optimized for this form of living, though.
It comes down to housing being the primary investment vehicle for most Americans; downward pressures on housing prices are fought by everyone possible.
- Storage and bathroom occupy half of the space.
- Closet for 3 shirts and a pillow?
- Stairs are weak and will break eventually.
- There is no cooker or even a microwave.
- No chair to watch a tv, bed usually serves as coach.
I have seen plenty of tiny apartments. Basic idea is to minimize space occupied by furniture, not to bring gigantic wardrobe which occupies most of it.