Hacker News Reader

Comment by sourcepluck | Hacker News Reader

Finally. I've been wondering how long before more companies get involved in the "tiny-sleeping-pod" business. Everything seems to be pointing in that direction.

View on HN

Interestingly Moscow Mayor Sobyanin signed a decree banning apartments under 28 sqm, aiming to limit small-sized housing construction.

“The area of apartments (excluding the areas of balconies, loggias, terraces, cold storage rooms and apartment vestibules) should be at least 28 square meters for one-room apartments, including apartments in which the living room is not separated from the kitchen by intra-apartment partitions, and at least 44 square meters for two-room apartments,” provides the document published on the ConsultantPlus portal.

The decree came into force on August 1.

The fact that Moscow decided to abandon the construction of studios and apartments with an area of less than 28 square meters became known in May, when Moskomexpertiza sent out an information letter indicating that it would issue negative opinions on construction projects involving the construction of apartments with an area of less than 28 square meters

I wonder why they did this. I thought things were cheap over there and they had a huge amount of land?

To keep out undesirables?

moscow, like all major cities in the world, does not have a huge amount of available land.

Disagree with that; the administrative city district outside the major ring road extends to the south west and has a huge amount of undeveloped land.

Maybe its because tiny apartments are often marketed as “affordable,” but the phenomenon can contribute to gentrification? Apparently when developers prioritize small units to maximize profit per square meter, housing becomes less accessible to larger families or lower-income residents, changing the socio-economic profile of neighborhoods. Larger apartments could potentially promote more diverse occupancy types, attracting families and potentially keeping communities more balanced. Dunno.

What do you do with 28sqm? In my house that's not much more than a single room and then trying to fit in a tiny bathroom.

While studying, I lived in a 12sqm room in a shared flat. You can do a lot with 28sqm if you have to.

If you need to, sure. the structure makes sense for some cheap motel where rooms are probably not much more than 10sqm (and the bathroom is communal).

But I can't imagine comfortably raising a family in such a situation.

9m2, for 9 months, two people, would have stayed too but something came up. We'd a bunk bed with no bottom bunk where I'd my keyboard set up for giving piano classes. We'd plastic plates and cups which we would hurl down into the sink from the top bunk when we were done. Absolutely loved that place, it was like Alice in Wonderland.

Can you imagine that people were building smaller apartments :rofl:

I've seen it. I've slept in it. I just wouldn't call them comfortable.

It works when you're young and single, but I can't imagine building "homes" and claiming 28sqm is anymore than a barrak to survive in, not a place to raise a family. If you're not building barraks with this structure (which these capsule hotels really are) a minimum space requirement makes sense if you want to sell people "homes".

I lived for a few years in 21m². It was nice, very central Helsinki, well thought-out layout. When I wasn't living alone, we upgraded to 30m². Even better layout, in multiple levels. In effect you had a separated bedroom, living room, dining room, and bathroom.

In Berlin we had 60m², which was a ridiculous amount of space. Enough to host multiple guests.

Now we live on a 9.3m long sailboat. Square meters are a bit difficult to calculate. Maybe 16m² for the interior space?

If they can keep the prices of apartments cheap or at least reasonable, then it could make sense. I'd have to know more about the law on that to really judge.

Japan already had this goin on and I remember the 'coffin hotels' in Neuromancer being written about in the 80s so shieeeeeeeeet it's been a long time coming.

It's a waste of time and resources for hotels to have me stay for ten hours during a layover. They'll need to wash the sheets, vacuum the room, and clean out the bathroom for my six-hour nap. The airport is too uncomfortable but the hotel is overkill. Pods would be a nice in-between for <12-hour stays. I wouldn't even mind if the pods were in the hotel because then I get to passively benefit from the hotel's security precautions.

> I wouldn't even mind if the pods were in the hotel because then I get to passively benefit from the hotel's security precautions.

You wouldn't passively benefit.

You'd pay premium to stay in a pod in a hotel and get the benefits.

Value is in the eye of the beholder. If the hotel charged less for pods compared to standard rooms, I'm sure many people would pay "premium."

The older Japanese variation of this is as a hotel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsule_hotel

According to Brownstone’s planning application for 12 Mint Plz https://sfplanninggis.org/pim/?tab=Planning+Applications&sea..., the proposed use is Residential (which is Principally Permitted) rather than Hotel (which requires Conditional Use Authorization from the Planning Commission), and also I do not see an Intermediate Length Occupancy application (which would be Principally Permitted), so they are only permitted to offer year-long leases at this time.

Time for funeral homes to pivot.

Daily Recurring Renting…

Reply on news.ycombinator.com