|
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Cheers, Jeers for Bloomberg’s Plans to Downsize Dwellings, Soda Pop
Smaller is better, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the other day while visiting the Center for Architecture of the New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects.
Bloomberg was talking about “micro-unit” apartments—dwellings totaling only 300 square feet, which Bloomberg and the city’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development say are needed to provide affordable housing for the city’s growing share of one- and two-person households.
Meanwhile outside, the mayor was taking his lumps on another size-reduction program—his proposal to put New Yorkers on a diet of fewer and smaller sugary beverages.
That’s right, the mayor wants to put the squeeze on sales of jumbo-sized soft drinks.
We’re not sure if these two ideas are connected, although one could conclude that smaller residents will fit better into smaller apartment dwellings.
The smaller-apartment idea, however, appeared to be going down better.
“If you want to kill yourself, I guess you have the right to do it. We’re trying to do something about it.” Bloomberg said of a protest staged in opposition to his plan to ban the sale of soda and other sugar-heavy drinks larger than 16 ounces in size at restaurants, movie theaters, sports arenas, delis, and other outlets.
 |
|
Photos: Edward Reed |
| Bloomberg at the New York Center for Architecture, announcing the adAPT NYC Competition. |
Critics, participating in what was billed the “Big Gulp March,” said the mayor is cutting into personal freedoms and choice by imposing his calorie-conscious dictates.
The media had a field day with this one, with publications from the New York Times to the Vending Times bubbling forth with zingy headlines like “Controversy fizzing over Bloomberg’s soda ban.”
The “Million Big Gulp March” was actually considerably smaller, but participants were convinced of the weight of their arguments, reports suggested.
"Hands off my Bladder" read one sign held by a protester, according to a report in the New York Post.
 |
| The mayor and New York Commissioner of City Planning Amanda Burden check out the footprint of a “mini-unit.” |
Bloomberg might find the concept of smaller apartments to be an easier sell. At the New York AIA Center for Architecture, he announced the adAPT NYC Competition, a pilot program to develop a new housing model for the city’s growing small-household population.
At the news conference, the mayor announced a contest seeking a developer for about 80 micro units at a city-owned parking lot on E. 27th St. in the Kips Bay neighborhood of Manhattan.
The adAPT NYC competition “seeks to create additional choices within New York City’s housing market to accommodate the city’s changing demographics,” the mayor’s office said. “Currently New York City has 1.8 million one- and two-person households, but only one million studios and one-bedrooms.”
The design competition involves a Request for Proposals for a rental building composed primarily, or completely, of micro-units—apartments smaller than what is allowed under current regulations.
More on the competition: adAPT NYC Competition announcement.
Rick Bell, executive director of AIA New York, said the group supports the adAPT NYC initiative, under which he said “New York City’s housing supply will more nimbly provide space for the growing number of young and creative individuals looking to move to our city or remain here.”
“Decent apartments of small size can be provided in all five boroughs that meet the demand of a growing population for whom location, value and design matter,” Bell said.
The acerbic New York media wasn’t quite as adulatory.
“Larger than a jail cell, but smaller than a mobile home,” remarked the New York Daily News, which noted that the mayor’s Upper East Side townhouse is about 40 times larger. (See Mayor launches contest for development of tiny apartments.)
But how many Big Gulps will fit in the kitchen?
More items for
Color + Design
Tagged categories:
American Institute of Architects;
Architecture;
Housing;
Residential Construction;
Residential contractors
|
Comment from Janis Anderson, (7/11/2012, 8:09 AM)
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/nyregion/25bloomberg.html
300 sqft isn't good enough for the Mayor, his place is 12,500 sqft.
|
|
|
Comment from John Fauth, (7/12/2012, 10:09 AM)
|
Yet another example of what European socialist policies are bringing to our shores, under the guise of what's "good for you" (as if you were unable to determine that for yourself). Meanwhile, the intelligentsia will maintain their spacious dachas, increasingly in rural areas away from prying eyes that invite conclusions of hypocrisy.
|
|
|
Comment from Paul Braun, (7/13/2012, 8:27 AM)
|
Exactly what is European or socialist about this?
|
|
|
Comment from John Fauth, (7/13/2012, 11:31 AM)
|
Paul, when government is making choices rather than the free market, like deciding what size dwelling people should live in, what size beverages should be available to them, what wattage lightbulbs is good for them... it is socialism (to be kind, as there are other less appealing descriptions that would fit). Calling it "European" in nature distinguishes it from Soviet-era socialism, in which free markets no longer exist (as opposed to markets which are heavily influenced/regulated, but are no longer free).
|
|
|
Comment from Paul Braun, (7/16/2012, 1:15 PM)
|
If I accepted the premise that this is in any way an example of socialism, I would probably describe it as democratic socialism, which doesn't reveal the political bias that "european socialism" does.
Just so I am clear, is any "intrusion" of the government into business an example of socialism?
One could argue that workplace safety regulations, laws on disposal of toxic substances (I am from the pre-EPA generation that saw neighbors pouring their used motor oil down the storm drains and chemical plants pumping their untreated waste into the rivers), zoning laws, traffic laws, automotive safety regulations and the like are socialism.
The city of New York has long provided for the welfare of its citizens by providing affordable housing, public parks, public hospitals, public schools (including universities), a fine library system, and public transportation. Should Bloomberg continue the long proud tradition of looking out for the little guy, or should we go back to the free market ideal of stinking tenements and unregulated business that led to the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire?
The big soda ban deserves eyerolling, but to elevate it to the downfall of society is a bit silly, don't you think?
On the other hand, I think that safe affordable housing for the needy is in the best tradition of American values.
|
|
|
Comment from Tom Schwerdt, (7/16/2012, 2:44 PM)
|
I see nothing wrong with the city encouraging (not mandating) the development of some micro apartments. Affordable housing is a big problem in NYC.
|
|
|
Comment from John Fauth, (7/16/2012, 4:54 PM)
|
Paul, I have no issue with calling it "democratic socialism". A rose by any other name and all that. No, I don't see regulation of workplace safety or environmental pollution to be "intrusions" or examples of socialism. I believe they are a necessary part of social structure. But if we are unable to discerne between necessary regulation, and the rejection of personal responsibility, personal choice, and personal empowerment in favor of the nanny-state... well, it does not bode well for our future. Personally, I don't want my government to look out for my welfare... there are always strings attached. Just ask the folks stuck in the maw of generational poverty provided to them via governmental largesse. Nearly every "benefit" you mentioned stems from private philanthropy, from the Carnegie library system to land donated for public parks and the many hospitals whose care is paid for by private donations. Just because government takes credit for spending other people's money or throws a plaque over the doorway of someone else's donation does not make it our benefactor. No, the big soda ban isn't the downfall of society. But then, I never claimed it was. You propped up that straw man in order to appear superior by knocking it down. Shrug.
|
|
|
Comment from John Fauth, (7/17/2012, 8:19 AM)
|
Tom, I would be more likely to agree with you if the article didn't specifically mention that apartments of this size are "smaller than what is allowed under current regulations". In other words, the market (ie: real people expressing their personal preferences) may have already developed these micro apartments, if it were not for bureaucratic interference. I suppose they must have had a compelling reason to forbid micro apartments at the time those regulations were enacted. Has that reason ceased to exist, or is it just not as compelling? Might there soon be a "quota" for micro apartment construction that a future bureaucrat will consider "inhumane"?
|
|
|
Comment from John Fauth, (7/17/2012, 8:29 AM)
|
Paul, I neglected to mention that nowhere in the article does it say that micro apartments are for the "needy". Does it change your opinion of the project if, as the article states, Mayor Bloomberg infers that all one and two person households should live in studio and one bedroom apartments? I say "all" because he specifically mentions the inequity between 1.8 million one and two person households in the city, but only one million studio and one bedroom apartments. As if all one and two person households "should" (by Mayor Bloomberg's estimation)live in studio or one bedroom apartments.
|
|
|
Comment from Tom Schwerdt, (7/20/2012, 9:43 AM)
|
John, I suspect the minimum apartment size originates from a social reaction to the industrial age tenement squalor in NYC and many other large cities. It was probably needed at the time.
|
|
|
Comment from John Fauth, (7/20/2012, 2:32 PM)
|
Tom, I suspect you're correct. I further suspect that if this proposal were initiated by private enterprise, the terms "tenement" and "squalor" would be used to describe them. Finally, I predict those terms will become repopularized if, as Paul suggested, the "needy" are directed towards these micro apartments.
|
|
|
Follow us on Twitter
Join us on Facebook
