Setback for itty bitty City apartments

I get it, I get it: We live in an urban setting where the living spaces tend to be a little on the small side. That’s what happens when you choose to live in The City.

How-e-ver, there really isn’t any reason for our living quarters to get any smaller. No no no no no.

So upon reading in the SF Public Press that a new proposal to make San Francisco apartment spaces even smaller had “hit a snag,” you know what I thought? Good freaking riddance.

Supervisor Scott Wiener delayed a vote on his plan to reduce the minimum square footage of an SF apartment’s living space to 150 square feet — as opposed to the current minimum of 220 square feet. Supporters told the Public Press they were “scrambling” to line up the votes needed to pass the proposal.

Keep in mind that the 150 or 220 square feet applies only to the living area, not the kitchen, bathroom or closets.

This proposal — calling these Polly Pocket domiciles “efficiency housing” — has already been amended a couple of times since it was first put before the Board in June.

One big change for these little apartments was to allow them only for new construction, to prevent owners from slicing current units into lots of smaller ones and dropping them from rent control.

A Planning Department report showed most of the new efficiency units would be created in Supervisor Jane Kim’s South of Market district. Kim didn’t sound too keen on the idea when interviewed by the Public Press:

“Will tech workers with some of the highest salaries in the city really want to live in a 150-square-foot efficiency space when they could rent a larger apartment with roommates? … If developers want to go ahead and build 220-square-foot units, I’m not crazy about it…”

Good point: Who’s going to want to pay the same price for a smaller living space when they can just double up with someone else in larger living space and fore-go the Caboodle-sized apartments all together?