A blog about Marinwood-Lucas Valley and the Marin Housing Element, politics, economics and social policy. The MOST DANGEROUS BLOG in Marinwood-Lucas Valley.
Media captionBBC Economics Editor Kamal Ahmed: Mark Zuckerberg says there are threats to "common understanding"
Mark Zuckerberg has revealed deep-seated concerns that the tide is turning against globalisation.
In an interview with the BBC, the Facebook founder said that fake news, polarised views and "filter bubbles" were damaging "common understanding".
He said people had been left behind by global growth, sparking demands to "withdraw" from the "connected world".
In a call to action, he said people must not "sit around and be upset", but act to build "social infrastructures".
"When I started Facebook, the mission of connecting the world was not controversial," he told me.
"It was as if it was a default assumption that people had; every year the world got more connected and that seems like the direction things were heading in.
"Now that vision is becoming more controversial."
Losing hope
He told the BBC: "There are people around the world that feel left behind by globalisation and the rapid changes that have happened, and there are movements as a result to withdraw from some of that global connection."
Image captionAnti-globalisation protests, such as this one in the Philippines, have broken out across the world.
Mr Zuckerberg's interview comes alongside the publication of a 5,500-word letterhe has written about the future of Facebook and the global economy.
In it Mr Zuckerberg quotes Abraham Lincoln who spoke of acting "in concert", and talks about "spiritual needs", civic engagement and says that many people have "lost hope for the future".
"For a couple of decades, may be longer, people have really sold this idea that as the world comes together everything is going to get better," he said.
"I think the reality is that over the long term that will be true, and there are pieces of infrastructure that we can build to make sure that a global community works for everyone.
"But I do think there are some ways in which this idea of globalisation didn't take into account some of the challenges it was going to create for people, and now I think some of what you see is a reaction to that.
"If people are asking the question, is the direction for humanity to come together more or not? I think that answer is clearly yes.
"But we have to make sure the global community works for everyone. It is not just automatically going to happen.
"All these different kinds of institutions, whether they are governments, or non-profits, or companies, need to do their part in building this infrastructure to empower people so that it creates opportunities for everyone, not just some people.
"If you are upset about the direction things are going in, I hope you don't just sit around and be upset, but you feel urgent about building the long term infrastructure that needs to get built," Mr Zuckerberg said.
Global challenges
I asked him whether he felt President Trump agreed with his view that "bringing people together" and "connecting the world" would lead to greater progress.
Mr Zuckerberg did not, famously, attend the round-table of technology leaders hosted by the new president.
"I don't think I am going to speak to that directly," he answered carefully. "You can talk to him, you can look at what he has said to get a sense of that.
"The thing that I will say is that a lot of folks will look at this through the lens of one or two events, and I really do think this is a broader trend.
"I have been talking about this for a long time, since before recent elections both across Europe and Asia and the US.
"A lot of today's biggest opportunities will come from bringing people together - whether that is spreading prosperity or freedom, or accelerating science, or promoting peace and understanding."
Image captionThe charitable foundation set up by Mr Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan is giving billions of dollars to charity.
Mr Zuckerberg said: "A lot of challenges we face today are also entirely global - fighting climate change or ending terrorism, or ending pandemics, or when a civil war in one country leads to a refugee crisis across different continents.
"These are inherently global things and require a different level of infrastructure than we've had historically."
Political ambitions?
Would you like to meet President Trump? I asked.
"I would like that not be the focus of this. I don't really have much comment on that. It somewhat detracts from the focus of what we are trying to do here."
There has been speculation that Mr Zuckerberg could be contemplating a political career, and even suggestions that he will run for US president in 2020 - rumours he has flatly denied.
I said the political tone of the manifesto would do little to dampen speculation about where he sees himself longer term.
Could he imagine himself going into politics? "I am not doing that now, it's not the plan," he said. "The thing I really care about is connecting the world."
Facebook has been attacked for not doing enough to tackle "fake news" - untrue stories which claimed, for example, that the Pope backed Mr Trump - which have appeared prominently on its news feeds.
In Germany, there has been controversy after a Green MP was quoted in a Facebook post defending an asylum seeker from Afghanistan who had raped and murdered a German student.
The MP, Renate Kuenast, had never said what was attributed to her by a right-wing extremist organisation.
Ms Kuenast said she found it hard to accept that "Zuckerberg earns billions, shows off with all his charitable donations, and at the same time allows Facebook to become a tool of extremists".
Mr Zuckerberg said he understood the importance of tackling fake news.
Freedom of opinion
"Accuracy of information is very important," he said in the 5,500-word letter, published on Thursday. "We know there is misinformation and even outright hoax content on Facebook.
"We've made progress fighting hoaxes the way we fight spam, but we have more work to do.
"We are proceeding carefully because there is not always a clear line between hoaxes, satire and opinion."
But Mr Zuckerberg added: "In a free society, it's important that people have the power to share their opinion, even if others think they're wrong.
"Our approach will focus less on banning misinformation, and more on surfacing additional perspectives and information, including that fact checkers dispute an item's accuracy."
He told me that "polarisation and sensationalism" also undermined "common understanding".
And he admitted that social media - which deals in short, often aggressive, messages - had been part of the problem.
"In some places [it] could over simplify important and complex topics and may push us to have over simplified opinions of them," Mr Zuckerberg said.
"And I think it is our responsibility to amplify the good effects and mitigate the negative ones so we can create a community that has a common understanding
"There is a lot of research that shows we have the best discourse when we connect as whole people rather than just opinions.
"If I get to know you on the values that we have in common or even the interests that we share it is a lot easier to have a debate about something that we disagree about productively than if we just meet and go head to head on something without understanding our common humanity."
'Setting an example'
Some may argue there is a question of legitimacy here, that no one voted for Mark Zuckerberg and question his right to outline - and attempt to execute - a vision of the world.
And what about those controversies over taxes paid, or privacy, or vast profits in an age when inequality is as much a factor behind the present dim view of many in the political and business establishment as any perceived failures of globalisation.
"There are a lot of areas that I know we need to improve and I appreciate the criticism and feedback and hope we can continue to do better on them," Mr Zuckerberg said, pointing out that he is donating 99% of his Facebook shares - worth £36bn ($45bn) - to the charitable foundation he runs with his wife, Priscilla Chan.
"Being a good corporate citizen is really important," he said. "We operate in a lot of different countries all around the world.
"We need to be help build those communities and that is what I am trying to do in my personal philanthropy - setting an example hopefully for other entrepreneurs who will build things in the future for how you should give back to the community and to the world.
"I care deeply about all of this, and it is a work in progress."
Pressure Mounts in Marinwood Plaza Toxic Waste Case As Water Board Looks For Answers
Toxic Waste was discovered at Marinwood Plaza in 2009 (or earlier) and has not been cleaned up yet.
SUMMARY: In a Regional Water Board hearing last week, residents, their County Supervisor, and members of the Water Board took a property owner to task for missing deadlines, lack of a project manager, and failure to demolish the building as ordered by the state. SAN RAFAEL, Calif. - February 13, 2017 - Residents of Marinwood, an unincorporated neighborhood in Northern Marin County, along with their county supervisor, Damon Connolly, testified in front of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board last Wednesday during the Regional Water Board Meeting and redirected a usually low-key status update to focus on several concerns related to the Marinwood Plaza PCE cleanup project. Issues they addressed included a missed February 1st deadline for soil excavation at the source and a failure to follow state ordered building demolition. Following testimony by “interested parties,” Members of the Water Board then voiced their own concerns about the handling of the project and asked the property owner’s representatives for details about cleanup. Following a status report presentation by the Water Board’s assigned staffer, a total of seven “interested parties” came forward to comment on the situation. Rene Silveira, representing her family’s farm, Silveira Ranch, was the first to come before the board, and in a quivering voice, delivered a heartfelt plea, saying, “As I stand here right now, PCE is continuing to migrate toward and onto our property...and that is a very troubling thought, especially since no remediation has yet been done on our property...It really does worry us to think that that we’re going to be waiting another year and a half, or more perhaps, before any actual remediation is conducted on our property.”
Marin County Supervisor, Damon Connolly, also addressed the board with a calm but forceful message highlighting that the February 1st deadline for the completion of source area soil excavation and cleanup had lapsed. Referring to it as a “blown deadline given the ample time line for clean up is very disappointing, and in fact, inexcusable,” Supervisor Connolly made it very clear that he and his constituents are looking for enforcement action from the Water Board. Public backlash directed at the property owners continued from there with almost all speakers repeating a common refrain, requesting a full and proper cleanup and many of them demanding penalties. As soon as the comment section for the agenda item had wrapped up, Water Board members began questioning both the hydrogeology firm contracted by the property owner and Wells Fargo Real Estate Investment Manager, Tom Fitzsimons, about the matter. Board member Kissinger began by asking about the size of the excavation site and verification of the size and depth. Assigned Water Board staff member, Ralph Lambert, explained that his lack of “Level C” hazardous materials certification prevented him from fully inspecting the contamination site. From there, Mr Kissinger pressed on asking Mr Lambert for details about whether demolition of the building where the dry cleaner operated was required, to which Mr Lambert responded, “...it’s mentioned...but that was only a means to get to the soil, the important part is...the dirty soil.” Board members also quizzed Wells Fargo’s Tom Fitzsimons about his role in the property and why he was there representing the owners. New to the Water Board, Jayne Battey, joined in lamenting, “I would really have liked to see the owners here today.” Toward the end of the question and answer portion, board member, Steve Lefkovits, pointedly asked, “Who’s the project manager ultimately responsible for the time line?” When Mr Fitzsimons explained that it’s really the owners, Marinwood Plaza LLC, and presumably its president, Lee Hoytt, Mr Lefkovits persisted, asking: “Is there a specific person who’s overseeing all the work?” The presiding Vice-Chair, Jim McGrath, in an attempt to keep things on track interrupted and reminded everyone that the actual scope of the agenda item was to get a progress report on the remediation action plan addenda recently submitted by the property owner’s geology consultants But the tough questions kept coming as board member, Dr Newsha Ajami, struggled to understand the delays, stating: “...it troubles me me to see that you guys did not come to the conclusion a lot earlier to take on Plan B[internal only demolition] and you were still trying to demolish the whole building, which was obviously, it was a cost savings measure, but it wasn’t essential to what we wanted here. Why didn’t that decision come earlier?” But before Mr Fitzsimons could even answer, new board member, Jayne Battey, piled on, asking, “If you knew in October that you weren’t going to make February [the deadline], was there any effort to contact staff or the board to let us know that you were not going to be compliant? Mr Fitzsimons of Wells Fargo responded by explaining some of the history of getting bids and how future plans for the plaza, once sold, will almost certainly include full demolition of the structure without answering the question of whether they updated the Water Board in a timely manner of the changes. Board member Battey continued, returning to the topic of collecting bids for demolition, claiming, “I have a lot of experience in this area and it’s hard for me not to believe that people really did the best they can do.” Documents available from the Water Board’s website show that starting in November 2016, Wells Fargo was required to provide biweekly progress reports in writing. None of the biweekly reports submitted indicated anything about expected delays in meeting the February deadline. As the Marinwood Plaza portion of the meeting drew to a close, the Water Board’s Executive Officer, Bruce Wolfe, explained that the next steps will include revising its original cleanup order to bring it up to date with current developments. This revised cleanup order will be circulated for public comment and, barring any hurdles, be approved. In his testimony to the board, Mr Wolfe indicated that enforcement against the two violations is being considered. The Clean Up Marinwood Plaza Now Oversight Committee indicated they are in the process of submitting a formal written request to Mr Wolfe to press for adding enforcement and penalties to next month’s agenda.
About The Marinwood Plaza Toxic Waste Spill
Originally discovered in 2007, a case with the SF Bay Regional Water Board was opened in 2008 as a result of one or more PCE spills that occurred on the property by former dry cleaning businesses. California law holds the property owner responsible for any and all cleanup caused by such a chemical spill. The Marinwood Plaza owners were ordered by the Regional Water Board to supply an approved remediation plan by September 1st, 2016 and clean up the source of the PCE plume by February 1st, 2017. While a cleanup plan has been submitted, it was late adn hasn’t yet been approved. The source excavation cleanup is still incomplete. California Water Code Section 13350 allows the Regional Water Board to impose fines of up to $5,000 per violation day. Oversight committee members say they will be demanding the maximum fine allowed. Video recording of February Water Board Meeting
Editor's note: The minimum size of apartments has been changed to 220 square feet in Marin County. We expect builders will take advantage of these new downgraded standards.
Beriot, Bernardini ArquitectosNew York City has a housing problem. Currently, it has 1.8 million one- and two-person households, and only one million studios and one-bedroom apartments. The obvious solution seems to be to develop more small residential units. But how small is too small? Should we allow couples to move into a space the size of a suburban closet? Can a parent and child share a place as big as a hotel room? In January, Bloomberg’s office announced the winner of its 2012 competition to design and build a residential tower of micro-units—apartments between 250 and 370 square feet—on a city-owned site at East 27th street in Manhattan. According to the Mayor’s press release, the winning proposal, by the Brooklyn-based firm nARCHITECTS , was chosen for its innovative layout and building design, with nearly 10 foot ceilings and Juliet balconies that give residents “substantial light and air.”
But as New York City’s “micro-apartment” project inches closer to reality, experts warn that micro-living may not be the urban panacea we’ve been waiting for. For some residents, the potential health risks and crowding challenges might outweigh the benefits of affordable housing. And while the Bloomberg administration hails the tiny spaces as a “milestone for new housing models,” critics question whether relaxing zoning rules and experimenting with micro-design on public land will effectively address New York’s apartment supply problem in the long run. “Sure, these micro-apartments may be fantastic for young professionals in their 20's,” says Dak Kopec, director of design for human health at Boston Architectural College and author of Environmental Psychology for Design. “But they definitely can be unhealthy for older people , say in their 30’s and 40’s, who face different stress factors that can make tight living conditions a problem.”
Home is supposed to be a safe haven, and a resident with a demanding job may feel trapped in a claustrophobic apartment at night—forced to choose between the physical crowding of furniture and belongings in his unit, and social crowding, caused by other residents, in the building’s common spaces. Research, Kopec says, has shown that crowding-related stress can increase rates of domestic violence and substance abuse. For all of us, daily life is a sequence of events, he explains. But most people don’t like adding extra steps to everyday tasks. Because micro-apartments are too small to hold basic furniture like a bed, table, and couch at the same time, residents must reconfigure their quarters throughout the day: folding down a Murphy bed, or hanging up a dining table on the wall. What might seem novel at the beginning ends up including a lot of little inconveniences, just to go to sleep or make breakfast before work. In this case, residents might eventually stop folding up their furniture every day and the space will start feeling even more constrained. Susan Saegert, professor of environmental psychology at the CUNY Graduate Center and director of the Housing Environments Research Group, agrees that the micro-apartments will likely be a welcome choice for young New Yorkers who would probably otherwise share cramped space with friends. But she warns that tiny living conditions can be terrible for other residents—particularly if a couple or a parent and child squeeze into 300 square feet for the long term, no matter how well a unit is designed.
“I’ve studied children in crowded apartments and low-income housing a lot,” Saegert said, “and they can end up becoming withdrawn, and have trouble studying and concentrating.” In these situations, modern amenities—such as floor to ceiling windows, extra storage and a communal roof deck— won’t compensate for a fundamental lack of privacy in a child’s home every day. She also doubts whether it’s a valid public goal to develop smaller units on city land. “In New York, property is just gold,” she points out. “Isn’t this something a developer could do in a [Brooklyn] neighborhood like DUMBO and make a lot of money?” By the same token, if micro-apartments are indeed the wave of the future, Saegert argues, they increase the “ground rent,” or dollar per square foot that a developer earns and comes to expect from his investment. So over time, New Yorkers may actually face more expensive housing, paying the same amount to rent a studio in the neighborhood where they used to be able to afford a one-bedroom. With the gradual erosion of zoning rules, the micro-apartment could very well become the unit of the future, the only viable choice for a large number of renters. Beyond the economic impact of smaller spaces, our homes also serve an important role in communicating our values and goals, or what scientists call “identity claims.” We tend to feel happier and healthier when we can bring others to our space to telegraph who we are and what’s important to us. “When we think about micro-living, we have a tendency to focus on functional things, like is there enough room for the fridge,” explained University of Texas psychology professor Samuel Gosling, who studies the connection between people and their possessions “But an apartment has to fill other psychological needs as well, such as self-expression and relaxation, that might not be as easily met in a highly cramped space.” On the other hand, Eugenie L. Birch, professor of urban research and education and chair of the Graduate Group in City Planning at the University of Pennsylvania, says this certainly isn’t the first time we’ve had this debate over micro-living. New York has grappled with the public health costs of crowded living conditions and minimum apartment standards throughout its history. “Over time, New York City developers conceived of many ways to address the need for affordable housing,” said Birch. “They built slums in the 19th century that reformers fought against. Other solutions have been boarding houses, missions, shelters, and what came to be known as single room occupancy units or SROs.” While it might be stressful to live in crowded conditions, consider the alternative.
Rolf Pendall, director of the Urban Institute’s Metropolitan Housing and Communities Policy Center asks: Where would all these people be doing business and living without the density? Would they be commuting longer distances or earning less, and is living farther from economic opportunities “better” for them? In that context, Pendall says he welcomes micro-apartments as long as they fit within the larger housing ecology of the city, and don’t ultimately displace other types of units for families. The problem is, there’s often a discrepancy between housing standards and actual housing conditions. Countless New Yorkers illegally share apartments, and current zoning rules can create poor living environments—dilapidated kitchens or dark, dingy rooms with a window that opens onto a brick wall. A worst case scenario would yield hundreds of thousands of micro-apartments and poor conditions. For this project, while New York may be taking a step backwards in terms of square footage, Eric Bunge, a principle at nArchitects, (the firm that created the winning micro-apartment design), is adamant that the city is taking a big step forward in terms of actual living conditions. “The city sees this initiative as one mechanism in a set of complex issues,” Bunge says. “Nobody is claiming that micro-apartments will be a silver bullet.” By his calculus, the East 27th street building does address concerns of mental and physical well-being. For example, residents might be losing physical space, but they’re gaining access to a series of amenities, like a gym with floor-to-ceiling park views, a lobby with a public garden, and yes, a Juliet balcony. And for that, many city dwellers might happily trade away 75 square feet and a freestanding bed.
As I've admitted before, I adore a great tiny home, an apartment or house so amazingly minimalist as to demand ingenuity in how people live, how we design furniture, how we conceive of a place. Tiny homes can be a space for brilliant innovation. They can make those of us just in it for eye candy reconsider what's truly essential in our own living spaces. They can also, on a practical level, help make city living more affordable for many people.
And then there is this tiny home, recently described in TheNew York Times within the "economic underbelly" of Hong Kong:
Twenty-two men live in this particular 450-square-foot apartment in the neighborhood of Mong Kok, in cubicles each hardly larger than a single bed, stacked above one another along two narrow passageways that end in a dank toilet and shower room.
Each cupboardlike cubicle has a sliding door, a small television, some shelves and a thin mattress. Most of the men have lived here for months, some for years.
At least 170,000 people in Hong Kong, the Times reports, live in a situation remarkably like this one. These are people so poor in a high-cost city that they can't afford the luxury of standing upright in their own homes.
An elderly resident poses in his cubicle in Mong Kok district in Hong Kong. (Bobby Yip/Reuters)
A staffer checks a column of lockers at a mini storage service provider inside an industrial building in Hong Kong. With more than half private dwellings now measuring less than 538 square feet, a cottage self-storage industry has mushroomed across Hong Kong, with industrial warehouses diced up into labyrinthine storage cubicles to cater for people whose lives have spilled beyond the walls of tiny homes. (Bobby Yip/Reuters)
These kinds of tiny homes have existed for much longer than the current trend of "micro" apartments in American cities, a topic we're set to discuss next week at CityLab, The Atlantic's summit on city-level innovation. The micro apartments leaders in cities like New York are promoting tend to be chic and thoughtfully crafted to feel larger than they really are (and not necessarily all that affordable). The existence of dwellings like these in Hong Kong is a reminder that micro living can just as easily be not adorable at all.
It's a little hard, though, to pinpoint exactly where the tiny home market veers from intriguing to inhumane. Is it at 150 square feet? Is it when you can't afford the bespoke furniture? Certainly you're there when, as the Times describes, people live in "units fenced off with plasterboard or cagelike wire mesh" – features that evoke a zoo more than a residence.
Recently, it seems as if the Internet has been full of tiny homes that are more ambiguous: 100 square-foot living cubes in Japan, this 100 square-foot apartment in Harlem that's "barely bigger than a prison cell." I'm not sure how I feel about those last two examples, but they hardly evoke the same wonder as, say, this little guy.
Emily Badger is a staff writer at The Atlantic Cities. Her work has previously appeared in Pacific Standard, GOOD, The Christian Science Monitor, and The New York Times. She lives in the Washington, D.C. area. All posts »
Editor's Note: Marin County has reduced the minimum size apartments to 220 square feet or about the size a single parking space. We are unaware of apartments built to this standard but expect to see them soon everywhere in Marin, particularly within 1/2 mile of the 101 Freeway.
Scott Christiansen looks inside the freezer of his 225 square-foot microloft inside the historic Westminster Arcade in Providence, R.I. Gretchen Ertl for The Wall Street Journal
Officials in many of the nation's expensive housing markets have embraced micro apartments in recent years as a way to expand the supply of affordable housing for young renters. Now some mid-size and lower-cost cities are joining the trend. In recent years, officials in many of the nation's most expensive housing markets have embraced "micro apartments" as a way to provide less-expensive housing for young renters. They are betting that the tiny apartments—generally the size of a hotel room for about half the rent of a full-size apartment—will attract young professionals and recent college graduates, helping to revitalize city centers.
In recent years, officials in many of the nation's most expensive housing markets have embraced "micro apartments" as a way to provide less-expensive housing for young renters.
They are betting that the tiny apartments—generally the size of a hotel room for about half the rent of a full-size apartment—will attract young professionals and recent college graduates, helping to revitalize city centers.
Micro apartments are about 300 square feet or smaller, though some developers and cities define them as large as 500 square feet. They sometimes lack a separate kitchen or bedroom.
Developers believe that single people in their 20s and 30s will accept less space in exchange for lower rent, even in cities where rent levels aren't especially lofty. Nationwide, rents have soared as the supply of apartments hasn't kept pace with demand.
Census figures show that single-person households made up almost 27.8% of all U.S. households in 2012, up from 25.8% in 2000. While the elderly account for some of the growth, economists and demographers also attribute it to Generation Y, the roughly 80 million Americans 18 to 34 years old.
Mr. Christensen looks at a unit in Providence, R.I., where he will stay during frequent commutes from Chicago. Gretchen Ertl for The Wall Street Journal
"This is not a short-term phenomenon," said John Infranca, an assistant law professor at Suffolk University in Boston who specializes in land-use law and has studied micro-apartment projects in several cities. "There is going to be demand for this housing going forward. The [trend] of an increasing number of singles in cities is staying steady across the country."
In Cleveland's University Circle district, an employment and cultural hub five miles east of downtown, developer Coral Co. plans to start construction next year on 50 micro apartments as part of a large, mixed-use project. The 300-square-foot units will rent for $600 a month, compared to the area's typical range of $800 to $1,500 for one-bedroom apartments. Target renters are graduate students and medical residents, including those at the nearby Cleveland Clinic.
In downtown Providence, the 185-year-old Arcade retail building was converted this year to 48 micro apartments. In Worcester, Mass., a newly built complex of 55 micro apartments has leased more than two-thirds of its units, including to students at the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences.
"We're trying to encourage more residential development downtown for college students and professionals," said Paul D. Morano Jr. , director of business assistance for Worcester, a city of 181,000 people.
Micro apartments started gaining popularity decades ago in large cities coping with rising rents, including New York, Seattle and Washington, D.C. The complexes often have communal spaces such as large lobbies and restaurants where tenants can socialize. Developers reason that many young tenants would prefer communal space to personal space and would rather spend money socializing than on rent.
A national tally of micro apartments couldn't be found. But real estate data provider CoStar Group Inc. CSGP in Your ValueYour ChangeShort positioncounts 26 micro-apartment projects totaling 2,000 units built or under development since 2011 in six of the nation's most expensive markets: San Francisco, Washington, Los Angeles, Boston, New York and Seattle.
Some real-estate executives aren't sure that micro apartments would work in smaller or less expensive cities because rents aren't sufficiently high to induce enough renters to give up space. "In smaller markets, the rent differential is such that, if you have a good job, you can typically afford the rent of a…full-size apartment," said Jeffrey I. Friedman, chief executive of Associated Estates Realty Corp. , which owns 14,000 apartments averaging 975 square feet in 10 Midwestern and East Coast states.
Another potential problem for smaller cities is that they don't always have the mass transit, night life and cultural facilities to lure younger workers to live downtown. "You can't just drop these [micro apartments] in communities that don't have the amenities to serve that kind of lifestyle," said Kelly Saito, president of Gerding Edlen, the developer of the first of Boston's new wave of micro apartments.
Developer Evan Granoff, who owns the Arcade in Providence, has found that some renters are commuters using the units as second homes. "They're people who have a 45-minute to one-hour commute to work and want to have a place downtown," Mr. Granoff says. "It's people looking for party crash pads. The rents are pretty reasonable, so it's an attractive alternative to staying in a hotel."
Scott Christensen, a 51-year-old information-technology director, frequently commutes between Chicago, where his wife and three children live, and Providence, where he works at a law firm. He plans to move this month into one of the 225-square-foot apartments that Mr. Granoff is offering starting at $550 a month.
"I'm kind of the perfect tenant," Mr. Christensen said. "I won't be in the micro unit all of the time because I travel. While I'll cook some, I'll be in the restaurants downtown constantly."
In March, 25-year-old entrepreneur Ross Chanowski moved into a 464-square-foot apartment in Boston. The unit is large enough for his queen bed, a short couch, a flat-screen TV and a table that doubles as a desk.
"What you don't get in space… you get in the co-living space in the lobby" or on the rooftop patio, Mr. Chanowski said. "If you're the type who likes to be in your apartment all the time, this probably isn't the lifestyle for you."
