Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

riffler24 t1_j7luo49 wrote

I have to wonder the point if it's still rental based. You're basically just making a large number of studio apartments, except less efficient because they all need their own systems and hookups.

I guess the point is to be entirely separate, but that's not really going to solve the housing problem. In the footprint they fit 44 individual tiny homes, you could probably have fit well over 100 apartment units and probably for cheaper too.

6

vexingsilence t1_j7mp5q3 wrote

At least it's something different. Less of an eye sore than large apartment buildings.

−4

riffler24 t1_j7msaio wrote

Sure it's wasteful of space and materials, but at least it's not a large apartment building

4

vexingsilence t1_j7mt4ld wrote

If space and materials were our primary motivators, we'd all be living in the equivalent of a jail cell. Own nothing, live in a pod, eat bugs.

−2

riffler24 t1_j7myh0j wrote

Except these are apartments, you don't own them either. If you could own them it would actually make sense, but you can't so there's no actual, logical reason to do it instead of an apartment building. You would pay less for the same amount of space, the same level of "ownership" and the same amenities. You could house more people with basically any other option than 44 individual houses, and it wouldn't be some towering monstrosity either...which again: should barely be a footnote in the plans for something like this

4

vexingsilence t1_j7ptdng wrote

Like I said, at least it is something different. I'm not evaluating the value proposition here. There has been some interest in tiny homes in this sub, these are some tiny homes. Fine, they're rentals.. but it if this developer can get the ok to build them, it opens a path for others.

−1