• MrMusAddict
    link
    English
    51 year ago

    Assuming the needs of a living space is the same across both populations, this graphic seems disingenuous. The pixel count of the apartment suggests it could fit 6½ of the homes per floor. Across 9 floors that’s 58 homes worth of square footage.

    I assume the homes have garages, which would not account for living space. But garages don’t account for 42% of a homes’ size.

      • MrMusAddict
        link
        English
        6
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        For that to be true, you’d have a 2-car garage attached to at most 400 SqFt of living space…

        Or in other words, for a home with a reasonable 1500 SqFt of living space, you’d need at least an 8 car garage…

      • MrMusAddict
        link
        English
        31 year ago

        True, but what I’m saying is that there are losses in livable square footage represented in the apartment. A home’s SqFt excludes the garage, so a 1500 SqFt home is actually 1740 SqFt with a 1-car garage. I.e. a 1-car garage only takes up 14% of the area underneath a roof of a 1500 Livable-SqFt house. Yet, the represented apartment has lost 42%.

        That implies that if the the houses in the picture are 1500 livable square feet, then the apartments are 1009 livable square feet; a ⅓ loss in livable area.

        Apartment Complex = 58 Homes' worth of area including garage (1,740 × 58 = 100,920 SqFt)
        100,920 / 100 apartments = 1,009 SqFt per apartment
        
      • MrMusAddict
        link
        English
        31 year ago

        Then you’d be closer to genuine compared to what this graphic shows.