These are badly needed in SF assuming that the pricing is also low. The cost of living in SF is outrageous. There is already demand for microapartments, but so far there have been mostly only illegitimate residences that are set up in places where they're not zoned for living spaces (I know people that have lived in them). If SF doesn't have these it will be completely unlivable for people that encounter financial difficulties.
The thing that frustrates me, though, is that public transit in SF works really goddamn well. You can get from Oakland to Downtown in 20 minutes for a couple bucks. And in Oakland, you don't have to pay $975 for 225 square feet of efficiency loft. I worry that an emphasis on pill bottles to decant yourself into after a hard day's work rather than a reasonable transportation infrastructure to get you to somewhere you can actually stretch your legs does not, in the end, benefit the urban core or the 'burbs. Families are not going to live in 225 sqft. You won't be entertaining your friends. The girlfriend is not moving in. 225 sqft is a commitment to solitude, and that's never good for communities.
If these units were created as part of a larger community structure, it might work out. I imagine a possible roof courtyard or park, a common foyer/atrium with couches and wifi, maybe a small gym room, and a cafe that opened to the street. If these are targeting younger singles, you could make these units part of a greater whole. Like an old folks home for urban youngsters. But I don't think these are being planned much beyond the individual unit.
"Check your lease man, cause you're living in fuck city" -watch at 1:53. If you're not an Arrested Development fan, ignore.
Edit: I would also argue that having a place this small will spur people to be less hermit like. When you have a small place you tend to be outside of it except for when you are sleeping. You find friends that have larger places to "chill at" and you go out to parks, the library etc. -Anywhere but your small piece of shit apartment. You tend to stay in more when you have a nice, comfortable place. This is my experience.225 sqft is a commitment to solitude, and that's never good for communities.
I think that this may be taking it a bit far. I used to live in a 1 bedroom apartment because during that period of my career development, that's what I could afford. Eventually I got 2 bedrooms, eventually I rented a full home and eventually I bought one. Could be that the micro-apartment is just a rung on the ladder, right? It's not necessarily a declaration of perpetual solitude.
Man I'm a glutton for space. My gym alone is bigger than 220. Fuck, my deck is 400. My gf and I shared a 600 sq ft apt for a year, and it was hell (mainly because she has such a ton of shit). 220 is not even a dorm room. Move to fuckin Oakland. They can use the injection of capital more anyway.
I've lived in plenty of 1-bedroom apartments. They were usually around 600-800 square feet. I lived for a summer above the bathroom of a quanset hut. Including the bathroom, I had 130 square feet. I gotta tell ya - there's a real difference. You can have someone over to drink a beer when you've got 600 square feet. When you've got 130? Not so much. As far as your edit, you're essentially capitulating on the fact that this "apartment" would not, in fact, be a home - it would be a dwelling. Might as well live in a van. At least that way your stuff is always where you need it. Hell, I had a number of friends who lived in school buses - that's an easy 30x10, or nearly half again as big as these apartments (and they didn't have bathrooms or kitchenettes).
"might as well be a van". -Exactly. If you live in a van, chances are you aren't clamoring to spend much time in it. I think those that are inclined towards solitude will seek it out regardless. That said, you are right that nobody will be beating down your door to come visit. It would be more of a one way street, with you visiting others and not the other way around. A two story quanset hut? Interesting, bet there's a story there.
Quanset huts themselves are a good 30 feet tall. Build an 8x8 box in one corner. Put a sink and a toilet in it. Now build a ceiling on top of it and lean a step-ladder against it. Viola. 128 square feet. Subtract 4 square feet for the hot water heater and six for the synthesizer I had up there and you've got "how I spent my summer internship." I've got a picture somewhere.
Sounds lovely. Happy thanksgiving. I recall you being quite the lover of a properly raised, expertly cooked turkey. -hope its a good one.
It's worth noting that San Francisco's population density ranks pretty well. I've always thought that this post put it in perspective well.
I've been to some studio apartments in Boston that weren't much bigger. As long as the occupancy of these are limited, I don't see much of an issue either. IMO some of the resistance comes from people not wanting a bunch of poor folk squeezing into their expensive neighborhood. I'm pretty sure that with the limited number, they are going to fill them with upwardly-mobile youth.