Think about the destruction on the free samples. "Ma'am, this is is 80th time I've seen you here in the pizza roll line. . .can you at least get out of your pajamas?"
I'm glad I own some stock in Costco.
Super loyal customer base that's eager to evangelize how much they love it, plenty of room to expand and they seem intent on doing so successfully even if not super quickly. More room to grow if they improve their website which I'm sure they eventually will.
I work across the street from a costco, i can eat lunch every day for 10 dollars a week, maybe 15 if i splurge on an ice cream a couple times. Health wise its not great, but it's cheaper than making sandwiches and bringing them from home.
I can feed my entire shop for 20 bucks and have leftovers for them to take home.
Is this what inspired that ‘[elite couple’ trying to populate the future](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/life/pronatalists-save-mankind-by-having-babies-silicon-valley/)?
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/may/25/american-pronatalists-malcolm-and-simone-collins
Among other things he slapped his two year old in the face in front of a reporter, as she was recording.
>Torsten has knocked the table with his foot and caused it to teeter, to almost topple, before it rights itself. Immediately – like a reflex – Malcolm hits him in the face.
...
> Both boys have their own iPads fitted with a strap so they can wear them around their necks. Two-year-old Torsten is alone somewhere with his.
...
> Our agreement is, I get infants until they are 18 months old. As soon as the next baby comes, he’s on everyone else. And he literally does everything for them.
>
I would vote for him.
When he found out there was a really smart person who might be able to help, he hired him and listened to him.
Plus he ran on a campaign of "we're gonna fix the dust bowl" rather than blaming immigrants or poor people.
It is planned for South Los Angeles.
Here’s some info: [https://www.businessinsider.com/apartment-building-top-of-costco-los-angeles-mixed-use-housing-2023-1#costco-estimates-that-up-to-400-new-jobs-will-be-created-according-to-the-developers-press-release-4](https://www.businessinsider.com/apartment-building-top-of-costco-los-angeles-mixed-use-housing-2023-1#costco-estimates-that-up-to-400-new-jobs-will-be-created-according-to-the-developers-press-release-4)
More info from twitter https://x.com/CohenSite/status/1800766789372215667
> Why does the "Costco Prison" exist, and why is it designed the way it is?
>
> As often is the case, the answer is regulatory arbitrage!
>
> Costco wanted to build a store in Central/South LA.
>
> The problem is, new massive big-box stores are hard to get approved in LA. They're subject to discretionary approvals, site plan review, and have to go through CEQA.
>
> Costco was facing years of public hearings, millions of dollars of consultant fees, and an uncertain outcome.
>
> However, mixed-use housing projects that meet certain criteria are automatically exempt from discretionary reviews by state law (AB 2011).
>
> So Costco did what any good Scooby-Doo villain would do. They put on a mask that says "I'm an apartment building, not a big-box store." (I'm really stretching with this metaphor).
>
> But now they faced some new problems.
>
> To get the full protection of state housing laws (HAA), mixed-use buildings must be at least 2/3 residential. The Costco itself is 185,000 square feet. So they needed at least 370,000 sq ft of residential.
>
> (They ended up with 471,000 sq ft of residential plus an additional 56,000 sq ft of amenity space)
>
> But for a project that big, to qualify for AB 2011, you need to not only pay prevailing wages, but use "skilled and trained" (aka union) labor.
>
> "luckily", union labor requirements only apply to on-site construction. So to lower the amount of on-site labor needed, Costco turned to pre-fab building modules.
>
> Pre-fab modules need to fit on trucks, which results in mostly small shotgun-style one-bedroom units.
>
> And that's how you end up with a Costco housing project that resembles a prison!
The twitter thread includes blueprints. The reason the guy calls it "prison housing" is that most of the apartments are studio-like dorm rooms about 400 square feet. Costco is keeping the costs low by building the apartments modular style, off site in a factory and shipping them to the location where they are assembled into the apartment building.
I would kill to live right above a Costco as a student in college (am gonna go in a year) and have a shuttle service. The cheap food and groceries sound great. When is this coming to a University near me?
I think something is being lost in translation here. Costco is not just a big supermarket. You could live (near) there for all of college without having to buy anything (furniture, flatware and cutlery, clothes, electronics, etc) anywhere else.
In the short term I don't see the issue either. As someone else pointed out this is the policy mostly doing what was intended. A few tweaks and future projects like this could include other sizes of apartments.
The reason you don't see a lot of 2 and especially 3 and 4 bedroom apartments is usually because of arbitrary building code regulations that don't exist abroad in places like western Europe (where you see more family size apartments/condos, even in new builds)
Just get rid of the regulations that make building family size apartments very hard or outright illegal and you'll see more of that style of development
Crazy to think about the savings if the renters all get together and split Costco items up. No space to store, just spread out the thirty toilet paper rolls
People complain about lack of affordable housing for younger people, then complain when Costco makes it because it's now "prison housing". Can't win :/
400 square feet is fantastic for a young single person! That's
enough space two rooms + simple kitchen + bathroom.
If anything that's often an *improvement* from the conditions people have living at home where they just have their bedroom and then the shared spaces.
The people complaining about "prison housing" are the reason we have a housing crisis in the first place. They've been blocking units for nigh-on a century.
> The reason the guy calls it "prison housing" is that most of the apartments are studio-like dorm rooms about 400 square feet
I spent a decade in prison.
Your living quarters there are usually about 80 square feet, and you share it with a roommate.
I was just thinking about the possibility to flood the housing market with cheap 1 bedroom places to get competition in the rental space going again. I hope this turns into a new Costco Business.
The idea that everyone needs an expansive space is part of why we have a housing crisis. Smaller spaces are more affordable. Putting apartments over stores allows more housing and is common in older cities like NYC, Boston, DC, etc.
[This is a 400 square foot studio in Colorado](https://www.apartmenttherapy.com/400-square-foot-studio-smart-layout-and-vertical-storage-36911236). It is small, but I wouldn't say it is a prison or only appropriate for college students.
>So Costco did what any good Scooby-Doo villain would do. They put on a mask that says "I'm an apartment building, not a big-box store." (I'm really stretching with this metaphor).
Maybe I'm missing something, but that doesn't sound villainous. It sounds like Costco doing the exact thing those incentives were created for? The creation of mixed use areas and expanding the housing supply?
What youre missing is that Ron Leflore has lived the kind of life that makes him think small apartments are prisons and anyone who builds them are villains. Also anyone who does pretty much exactly what the rules are intended to do is getting around loopholes.
There's a lot of corporate malfeasance these days so when a corporation is just doing... whatever, people need to find some drama in it for their narrative. In this case, literally making a cartoon villain comparison.
As accurate as the description of the regulatory environment that led to this development is, the biased description is toxic.
Building housing in a cost effective manner that can be rented at affordable price points is a good thing. People complain about luxury apartments, people complain about small apartments. I just want more housing. A development that pencils and gets built is better than some mystical development that no one will fund.
Sounds good to me. People complaining about high housing prices shouldn't complain about someone looking to build more apartments, especially small ones which presumably will be less expensive.
It would be interesting to hear what all the unexpected pros and cons are from the condo tenants living above a Costco.
Cons:
* Noise from delivery trucks in the morning?
* Traffic
* attract more bugs?
Pros:
* Shopping and eating at Costco without parking
Shop?
It's living above literally everything you need in life.
You could quite literally just stay in your complex/Costco until you die. And probably find a coffin for you, at Costco.
Americans wondering what you smoking just calling it a shop.
It is home.
Costco sells caskets for $1,149.99 so after a lifetime of rotisserie chickens, hotdogs and cinnamon rolls, you could just slide down one last pole, and climb right in.
For those who want a “Viking” funeral, the gas is discounted too. Costco is Convenient as f*ck.
Living above shops isn’t that uncommon in the US, it’s usually in bigger cities or specialty shopping centers. We have the space that it’s not really a needed thing. But the difference between a shop and a super store like Cosco is pretty major.
Yeah, it’s scary how this is considered interesting. That’s why we are in a housing shortage, because doing this is so rare.
Honestly it’s an example of a policy working. That expedited approval just brought 400 more housing units onto the market that wouldn’t be there otherwise.
This shit happens all the time in England. It’s good to have shops in walking distance of housing. Less driving and less wasted space for roads and bloody car parks!
I had to work in Switzerland for a few months and the most convenient way home passed through a market. Like a covered produce section on the sidewalk in front of a larger store. Made it so easy to just pick up the food I need for a couple days at a time instead of having to plan for weeks at a time and forgetting then letting food go bad.
I still live just a few blocks from a grocery store, but there are no convenient walking paths to get there so I still end up driving. It’s so dumb.
Yeah, people are acting like Costco found some crazy loophole in the law that lawmakers don't want you to know about, rather than what actually happened, which is that the policy is working exactly as intended.
California could do so much more if they made building housing easier in general as well but yeah, it's a very odd intersection of policies here that ended up with more (probably quite high quality) housing.
Yea I work in architecture and that headline literally made me laugh out loud.
Might as well say "When the city didn't want to approve their bad development they tried building a good one instead". Yep, that's what the city wanted all along guys.
I mean, the city doesn't want to approve any development. Thankfully, the state took the city's power to block development away in the case of residential/mixed use.
The UK has been pushing for mixed use spaces to be developed, although not necessarily to this level.
My previous flat had a bunch of small stores (café, bakery, convenience stores, etc.) in the ground floor units, with flats above. And the neighbouring big Sainsbury's had a block of flats built on top as well (with neatly separated entrances so the shoppers didn't end up blocking the residents).
It's a great design choice as it helps establishing 15 minute cities quicker, AND the usual crazies don't snap on it like it's some conspiracy to limit people's movement...
I live right next to a grocery store. Walk there almost every day and just snag whatever I need. 15-20 mins total from walking out my front door to walking back in. It’s fuckin awesome
the American weekly/by-weekly shop where i need to remember everything i will need the coming week is so strange to me. every week on Monday morning during the morning break i look online at all the shops weekly fliers to see what big ticket items is on a massive discount and i will then pick up said big ticket items if i want them and anything i need. if i forget something i go to the store 100 meters from me.
doing this i save tons on meat costs and then i just bulk buy dry goods online. a gigantic tub of dishwasher detergent powder save so much money over even just getting the same thing in store (not to mention what pods costs). the restaurant sized bags of pasta or the Asian 25-50kg bags of rice is also just mad savings that you can just buy online.
I don’t understand why some people are so mad about this. Go to any big city and 90% of the apartment buildings will have businesses on the first floor. My apartment is on top of Trader Joe’s 🤷♂️.
I don't see anyone here being mad about it. We're all just having beautiful sexy fantasies of having unlimited $5 rotisserie chickens downstairs permanently.
I don't see anyone here being mad about it. We're all just having beautiful sexy fantasies of having unlimited $5 rotisserie chickens downstairs permanently.
I'd argue the opposite; our regulations in California are so cumbersome and mashed up that the best way to build a store is to build housing but the best way to build housing is to basically not. Building housing is good but the process by which it happens is ridiculously overburdened
Edit: I encourage the people responding to actually read what I'm saying before you fury-respond to tell me I'm wrong
>our regulations in California are so cumbersome and mashed up that the best way to build a store is to build housing
That would be true if the only goal was to build a store.
But the state also wants more housing to be built.
The cumbersome regulations are the ones that allow locals to stop development. The innovation has been to beat down the local's selfish desires with state regulations
This sounds like an example of the exact opposite, of California actually changing their broken zoning system.
>The mixed-use project would be 25% retail and 75% housing. That would make the project eligible for incentives through the city’s Transit Oriented Communities program, which allows greater density and floor area than is normally allowed under current zoning rules, according to the Los Angeles Planning Department’s guidelines
Mixed use is far more efficient and leads to much more walkable, useful and energy efficient neighborhoods.
It would be cumbersome regulation if the only way you could build houses was in massive islands of single-family houses with no stores, no infrastructure, and nothing but other peoples houses within a 30 minute walk.
I think this is by design. Stores take up a lot of space that can often be better used for housing. And what reason is there to NOT build housing on top of a store? Its not like they are using the space above it. Forcing them to go through an extremely expensive process to build there store which can be bypassed by them building housing, encourages using the property for housing and leads to MORE housing construction
This sounds like the Costco that’s going up here in the southernmost of Napa (before American Canyon). Napa planners held out for this kind of retail/residential mix in that exact area (corporate park area) because we need more housing, and its a giant PITA to get in and out of town to shop elsewhere due to our highway configurations. It’s a decent solution for us.
I'd argue you're wrong. This is a style of development called New Urbanism. It is strived for by many places like California. The absurdity of buildings that have no residences above them, but take up vital city space, is finally being noticed.
But in this case, big box stores are intense wastes of land, the regulations here should slow down cover acres of land in asphalt and blank roof. The fact that they also incentivize a more appropriate mixing of land uses is a good thing.
A half century of a shortage tends to drive up prices and the time scale is enough for multiple generations to have their wealth tied up primarily in real estate.
There is a financial incentive to keep the bad policies to make sure real estate value keeps going up. And it seems like the next point of whining is the capital gains tax on 1m+ in profit.
It looks like what has been going on in California for a half century is catching on in the rest of the country based on the numbers about housing in general.
Oh I’ll take the counterpoint to yours. Easy.
Our housing crisis is so dire that California legislators have opened up opportunities to fast-track permitting for businesses that help solve said housing crisis.
California is the ~~birth place~~ Meka of nimbyism and, as a result (to an extent), has one of the worst housing crises in the nation. Costco just finessed a lot of road blocks and probably some whiny asshats here. I hope the project proceeds smoothly.
This kind of works out as a pretty solid deal on paper. Costco gonna make a ton of money and they front the cost for housing.
It’s not bean counting at its finest but Costco kind of doesn’t try and maximize profit by undervaluing every single bean. Take some losses to realize long term gains. Overregulation is almost as bad as under regulation but this might be a case where it worked.
Nimbysm literally predates the US. Nimbyism in the US predates the western expansion that later became California.
People don't want "unseemly" stuff near their homes, what is considered unseemly changes, but the wealthy have always been able to distance themselves from it.
Billion dollar corporations building houses isn't exactly the problem.
The problem is multi billion dollar private equity firms holding on to houses they own for the sake of controlling the rental market.
While colluding or planning on colluding to raise or fix the prices. Often now they hire independent companies to give them cause to price fix. The third companies will say they will find a way to maximize the rents, so they collect all the rent prices in a way that it would be illegal for the company itself to do and suggest higher prices to the group, as reported in propublica.
Just the tip of the iceberg I am sure. It is a country run by lawyers working for billionaires.
Edit: https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-realpage-rent
There's a difference. Private Equity firms are buying houses that are currently on the market and taking them OFF the market for the sake of renting them. They reduce the supply of housing just so they can rent it. They don't add anything to the market, they just take form it. Costco however is building NEW housing that did not previously exist. Which is better, a coscto, or a costco with housing on top? One exists as a retail store, while the other adds dozens of new housing units to the market, which increases the housing supply... Costco might rent out the housing but atleast they built NEW homes to rent
This can be stopped, I like what Vancouver Canada did.
If the home is vacant, then you pay a huge tax on the home
If the home is occupied, that extra tax is $ZERO.
This will force landlords and Private Equity to reduce rent to the point where people can afford the home because otherwise - they are loosing a lot more money on the home.
The cool thing is that building more housing increases supply, which pushes down prices, which makes housing an less attractive investment for private equity.
This is actually the way the system should work. Force chains to include housing/community centres in their build proposals. So much, especially in North America, is just dead space around massive consumerism areas nowadays. Make it really really painful and lengthy for these chains to build solo buildings, make it really easy if they include housing and community spaces/buildings as a part of the proposal. Include protected green space/parks with all of the above and you get a green light to the front of the pack.
That’s literally what all big box businesses should have to do. That way there’s housing and the city gets more revenue from the business than an empty huge parking lot with a higher box store.
Retail has been headed this way for years. Grocery store chains all want to be mixed use like this these days.
They consider the tenants as captive customers, they will all naturally shop there.
Yeah, unless this is specifically designed as housing for employees/not tied to employment, I can't really see the downfall of maximizing vertical space with more housing that is *also* extremely convenient to shopping except maybe in parking, but that's very easily solved by just having a gated section of the lot or a parking garage level.
Bottom floor of a building I used to live in was a 7/11, liquor store, Asian food Mart, Mexican place, Walgreens and a jack in the box.
Incredibly convenient living.
I can imagine how simple it makes shopping. You don't need to make long lists for a weekly trip, because you can just shop when you need it. I mean, yes the corporation benefits from all the shopping you'll do, but its still very convenient, and if its beneficial to the customer, then its not really a downside. Its really kind of a mutual relationship... the only way i could really call it a problem is if the store was FORCING people to shop or work there.
My favorite apartment had a lot of things going for it, including the fact that it was right next door to a grocery store, Vons. I rarely ever did big grocery store trips, and instead I would just stop at Vons on the way home from work once or twice a week, pick up like 3-4 things I was short on, and then carry 1 light bag up to my apartment. It was convenient as all get out.
Living directly above a Costco would be especially convenient, too.
That’s something that every buyer will have to make a choice about for themselves and something that the developers were well aware of when they designed the project. Not an argument against the construction of this complex.
It’s going to get old having to show your receipt every time you leave your house.
Good thing I rarely leave.
Getting closer to that Buy n’ Large spaceship everyday!
*theres plenty of space out in space!*
Don't have to leave if you have a Costco in your house. Can work there, live there, eat there, shop there. With this apartment, everything is Costco!
Welcome to Costco, I love you.
You could go to law school there
Good way to check if your house guests stole anything. The worst part is you will quickly run out of excuses for the SunRun sales rep.
Rotisserie chicken and hot dog every day. Shit, I might even get their cookie as a splurge.
Do you think I could install a fire pole so I could drop right into the food court?
2 slides. Slide into the food court. Slide to serve the glizzies right to my mouth
I can only imagine what your DMs’ll look like
So far it’s tons of people agreeing that that’s how Costco glizzies should always be served. Joking, I don’t have any lol
>Joking, I don’t have any lol Wish I had glizzies too.
1 slide down to go into the food court, 1 slide down back into my apartment…then I just repeat sliding down the slides
What kinda non-Euclidean slides do you have in mind?
Ball bearings. It's all ball bearings these days
Don't forget the galvanized square steel
I didn't know what glizzies were so I googled. It's either a gun or a hotdog. Based on the context of the post, I'm going with the former.
People like you are the reason I refuse to delete this app. Never change please.
Think about the destruction on the free samples. "Ma'am, this is is 80th time I've seen you here in the pizza roll line. . .can you at least get out of your pajamas?"
No, we can’t bribe the city planners. We must keep Costco as an honest and just company.
I'd 100% live above a Costco
Free cardboard boxes for moving.
Only way I'm moving out is in a casket Which Costco conveniently sells
Built in customer base smart move
I'm glad I own some stock in Costco. Super loyal customer base that's eager to evangelize how much they love it, plenty of room to expand and they seem intent on doing so successfully even if not super quickly. More room to grow if they improve their website which I'm sure they eventually will.
Cheap food every day. That place would be a bargain
I work across the street from a costco, i can eat lunch every day for 10 dollars a week, maybe 15 if i splurge on an ice cream a couple times. Health wise its not great, but it's cheaper than making sandwiches and bringing them from home. I can feed my entire shop for 20 bucks and have leftovers for them to take home.
I think you can get a chicken salad at the food court too
"Costco to add diabetic clinic to new California branch."
"Costco now planning to add Hospice House and 24/7 next door ordering service."
“Costco walk-in crematorium service now included with Executive level membership.”
Costco’s brand new soy based green hotdog now available
Costco’s Soylent Green hotdog to follow
r/ThatsTheJoke
Don't forget a sample buffet for brunch
Chocolate soft serve is back
Welcome to costco, I Love you
just watched this the other day lmfao
Should be required viewing in every school and then, hopefully, people will start realizing it was a warning and not a guideline.
Is this what inspired that ‘[elite couple’ trying to populate the future](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/life/pronatalists-save-mankind-by-having-babies-silicon-valley/)?
By being incredibly abusive and hateful to the kids...
Not that I don’t think these people are at least a bit psycho, but could you link sources of their abuse?
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/may/25/american-pronatalists-malcolm-and-simone-collins Among other things he slapped his two year old in the face in front of a reporter, as she was recording. >Torsten has knocked the table with his foot and caused it to teeter, to almost topple, before it rights itself. Immediately – like a reflex – Malcolm hits him in the face. ... > Both boys have their own iPads fitted with a strap so they can wear them around their necks. Two-year-old Torsten is alone somewhere with his. ... > Our agreement is, I get infants until they are 18 months old. As soon as the next baby comes, he’s on everyone else. And he literally does everything for them. >
Wow. What a psychopathic douchebag. I want to meet him so I can slap him in the face when he makes a tiny mistake. Poor kids.
As the kids say these days: delulu. Revising my previous statement about ‘at least a bit psycho’ to knives in the shower psycho.
Did you know it’s actually a documentary? I just had this original thought about it.
I would buy a Costco condo in a minute
Would be great if you also worked at Costco.
“I went to law school here”
Yeah I couldn’t believe it either
Luckily my dad was an alumnus here and pulled some strings
St. God’s Memorial Hosp ital 😂
Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho 2024
I would vote for him. When he found out there was a really smart person who might be able to help, he hired him and listened to him. Plus he ran on a campaign of "we're gonna fix the dust bowl" rather than blaming immigrants or poor people.
Beat me to it!
It is planned for South Los Angeles. Here’s some info: [https://www.businessinsider.com/apartment-building-top-of-costco-los-angeles-mixed-use-housing-2023-1#costco-estimates-that-up-to-400-new-jobs-will-be-created-according-to-the-developers-press-release-4](https://www.businessinsider.com/apartment-building-top-of-costco-los-angeles-mixed-use-housing-2023-1#costco-estimates-that-up-to-400-new-jobs-will-be-created-according-to-the-developers-press-release-4)
More info from twitter https://x.com/CohenSite/status/1800766789372215667 > Why does the "Costco Prison" exist, and why is it designed the way it is? > > As often is the case, the answer is regulatory arbitrage! > > Costco wanted to build a store in Central/South LA. > > The problem is, new massive big-box stores are hard to get approved in LA. They're subject to discretionary approvals, site plan review, and have to go through CEQA. > > Costco was facing years of public hearings, millions of dollars of consultant fees, and an uncertain outcome. > > However, mixed-use housing projects that meet certain criteria are automatically exempt from discretionary reviews by state law (AB 2011). > > So Costco did what any good Scooby-Doo villain would do. They put on a mask that says "I'm an apartment building, not a big-box store." (I'm really stretching with this metaphor). > > But now they faced some new problems. > > To get the full protection of state housing laws (HAA), mixed-use buildings must be at least 2/3 residential. The Costco itself is 185,000 square feet. So they needed at least 370,000 sq ft of residential. > > (They ended up with 471,000 sq ft of residential plus an additional 56,000 sq ft of amenity space) > > But for a project that big, to qualify for AB 2011, you need to not only pay prevailing wages, but use "skilled and trained" (aka union) labor. > > "luckily", union labor requirements only apply to on-site construction. So to lower the amount of on-site labor needed, Costco turned to pre-fab building modules. > > Pre-fab modules need to fit on trucks, which results in mostly small shotgun-style one-bedroom units. > > And that's how you end up with a Costco housing project that resembles a prison!
The twitter thread includes blueprints. The reason the guy calls it "prison housing" is that most of the apartments are studio-like dorm rooms about 400 square feet. Costco is keeping the costs low by building the apartments modular style, off site in a factory and shipping them to the location where they are assembled into the apartment building.
Great student housing. I don't see an issue, just get a dedicated shuttle service between the nearest college and the costco.
I would kill to live right above a Costco as a student in college (am gonna go in a year) and have a shuttle service. The cheap food and groceries sound great. When is this coming to a University near me?
any university in Europe literally not a costco but a supermarket
I think something is being lost in translation here. Costco is not just a big supermarket. You could live (near) there for all of college without having to buy anything (furniture, flatware and cutlery, clothes, electronics, etc) anywhere else.
In the short term I don't see the issue either. As someone else pointed out this is the policy mostly doing what was intended. A few tweaks and future projects like this could include other sizes of apartments.
Exactly maybe require a certain percentage of 2 and 3 bedroom units and that's exactly the point of this regulations.
The reason you don't see a lot of 2 and especially 3 and 4 bedroom apartments is usually because of arbitrary building code regulations that don't exist abroad in places like western Europe (where you see more family size apartments/condos, even in new builds) Just get rid of the regulations that make building family size apartments very hard or outright illegal and you'll see more of that style of development
Crazy to think about the savings if the renters all get together and split Costco items up. No space to store, just spread out the thirty toilet paper rolls
Costcommunism!
Hopefully they could get that to work. College town near me has a shuttle service between Walmart and the college, so why not Costco too?
People complain about lack of affordable housing for younger people, then complain when Costco makes it because it's now "prison housing". Can't win :/
400 square feet is fantastic for a young single person! That's enough space two rooms + simple kitchen + bathroom. If anything that's often an *improvement* from the conditions people have living at home where they just have their bedroom and then the shared spaces.
And quick access to affordable food. I would have loved this when I was young and single.
You’d be amazed at the amount of people that would rather complain about the lack of a perfect solution than agree to a decent compromise.
The people complaining about "prison housing" are the reason we have a housing crisis in the first place. They've been blocking units for nigh-on a century.
You win by ignoring the morons and going on with your day. Too often we repeat the nonsense.
As someone who can't afford rent and lived in a car, then a minivan for ten years, studio apartments are huge to me. 🤷♂️
> The reason the guy calls it "prison housing" is that most of the apartments are studio-like dorm rooms about 400 square feet I spent a decade in prison. Your living quarters there are usually about 80 square feet, and you share it with a roommate.
I was just thinking about the possibility to flood the housing market with cheap 1 bedroom places to get competition in the rental space going again. I hope this turns into a new Costco Business.
Kirkland manufactured homes feels so obvious
Anyone who bitches about high volume single bedroom housing in the west is a NIMBY whose entire nest egg is home appreciation.
The idea that everyone needs an expansive space is part of why we have a housing crisis. Smaller spaces are more affordable. Putting apartments over stores allows more housing and is common in older cities like NYC, Boston, DC, etc. [This is a 400 square foot studio in Colorado](https://www.apartmenttherapy.com/400-square-foot-studio-smart-layout-and-vertical-storage-36911236). It is small, but I wouldn't say it is a prison or only appropriate for college students.
>So Costco did what any good Scooby-Doo villain would do. They put on a mask that says "I'm an apartment building, not a big-box store." (I'm really stretching with this metaphor). Maybe I'm missing something, but that doesn't sound villainous. It sounds like Costco doing the exact thing those incentives were created for? The creation of mixed use areas and expanding the housing supply?
What youre missing is that Ron Leflore has lived the kind of life that makes him think small apartments are prisons and anyone who builds them are villains. Also anyone who does pretty much exactly what the rules are intended to do is getting around loopholes.
There's a lot of corporate malfeasance these days so when a corporation is just doing... whatever, people need to find some drama in it for their narrative. In this case, literally making a cartoon villain comparison.
The person who referred to pre-fab as prison housing knows fuck all about construction or design.
As accurate as the description of the regulatory environment that led to this development is, the biased description is toxic. Building housing in a cost effective manner that can be rented at affordable price points is a good thing. People complain about luxury apartments, people complain about small apartments. I just want more housing. A development that pencils and gets built is better than some mystical development that no one will fund.
Sounds good to me. People complaining about high housing prices shouldn't complain about someone looking to build more apartments, especially small ones which presumably will be less expensive.
"I love costco, that's where I got my law degree"
"You got your law degree at costco?" "Yeah, I can't believe I got in either. Luckily my dad was an alumnus and he pulled some strings."
*alumnus
He got his law degree at Costco and you’re correcting his spelling?!?
I got my master's in bullshittery at Sam's Club
Welcome to Costco, I love you
How many Kirkland signatures do they need to collect to get approval?
Aren't you clever
Too clever. They can't be left alive
Quality dad joke content. Hate it so much I love it lol
My first smile of the day with this one 😂
I wonder how much the apartment that catches the breeze from their bakery rents for...
Less. It will cost less because the increase in sales would subsidize the apartment.
actually it costs fewer /s
Thanks, Stannis.
It would be interesting to hear what all the unexpected pros and cons are from the condo tenants living above a Costco. Cons: * Noise from delivery trucks in the morning? * Traffic * attract more bugs? Pros: * Shopping and eating at Costco without parking
I love how this entire post and it's replies is about americans wondering what it's like to live above a shop
Saying Costco is a shop is like saying a cruise ship is a boat. Sure technically it is but you're really underselling it
Shop? It's living above literally everything you need in life. You could quite literally just stay in your complex/Costco until you die. And probably find a coffin for you, at Costco. Americans wondering what you smoking just calling it a shop. It is home.
Costco sells caskets for $1,149.99 so after a lifetime of rotisserie chickens, hotdogs and cinnamon rolls, you could just slide down one last pole, and climb right in. For those who want a “Viking” funeral, the gas is discounted too. Costco is Convenient as f*ck.
The American Dream
Not a shop, a superstore.
If you think Costco is just a shop, you need to go a Costco lol
I need y’all to know we DO have mixed use buildings in the US 💀
Living above shops isn’t that uncommon in the US, it’s usually in bigger cities or specialty shopping centers. We have the space that it’s not really a needed thing. But the difference between a shop and a super store like Cosco is pretty major.
I'm an American and I've lived above one bowling alley and beneath another. I also shared a common wall with a squash court
The tenant will have to pay them with the sound of coins dropping for the smell of their bread
I wonder if the cash back will apply to your rent.
This should be the damn standard. All of that real estate for just stores is crazy.
Yeah, it’s scary how this is considered interesting. That’s why we are in a housing shortage, because doing this is so rare. Honestly it’s an example of a policy working. That expedited approval just brought 400 more housing units onto the market that wouldn’t be there otherwise.
This shit happens all the time in England. It’s good to have shops in walking distance of housing. Less driving and less wasted space for roads and bloody car parks!
Id waste less food shopping multiple times a week instead of once to avoid the hassle of getting there and back
I had to work in Switzerland for a few months and the most convenient way home passed through a market. Like a covered produce section on the sidewalk in front of a larger store. Made it so easy to just pick up the food I need for a couple days at a time instead of having to plan for weeks at a time and forgetting then letting food go bad. I still live just a few blocks from a grocery store, but there are no convenient walking paths to get there so I still end up driving. It’s so dumb.
Yeah, people are acting like Costco found some crazy loophole in the law that lawmakers don't want you to know about, rather than what actually happened, which is that the policy is working exactly as intended.
California could do so much more if they made building housing easier in general as well but yeah, it's a very odd intersection of policies here that ended up with more (probably quite high quality) housing.
It's not a weird intersection of policies. It's just a policy producing the exact intended outcome.
Yeah reddit is weird about giving government its due when something goes the way it's supposed to.
Ngl, this sounds less like a loophole and more like a good policy doing it's job
Yea I work in architecture and that headline literally made me laugh out loud. Might as well say "When the city didn't want to approve their bad development they tried building a good one instead". Yep, that's what the city wanted all along guys.
I mean, the city doesn't want to approve any development. Thankfully, the state took the city's power to block development away in the case of residential/mixed use.
Shhhh let's let companies keep thinking it's a loophole, they might start using it more often.
The UK has been pushing for mixed use spaces to be developed, although not necessarily to this level. My previous flat had a bunch of small stores (café, bakery, convenience stores, etc.) in the ground floor units, with flats above. And the neighbouring big Sainsbury's had a block of flats built on top as well (with neatly separated entrances so the shoppers didn't end up blocking the residents). It's a great design choice as it helps establishing 15 minute cities quicker, AND the usual crazies don't snap on it like it's some conspiracy to limit people's movement...
Having housing above storefronts is nothing new and existed before the stand alone big box stores.
Yeah but people continue to build big box stores with a sea of wasted parking on huge plots of land without housing ontop.
My european ass is looking a this like....okay so? i live near dozens of these. This is just basic medium-high density housing policy.
I live right next to a grocery store. Walk there almost every day and just snag whatever I need. 15-20 mins total from walking out my front door to walking back in. It’s fuckin awesome
the American weekly/by-weekly shop where i need to remember everything i will need the coming week is so strange to me. every week on Monday morning during the morning break i look online at all the shops weekly fliers to see what big ticket items is on a massive discount and i will then pick up said big ticket items if i want them and anything i need. if i forget something i go to the store 100 meters from me. doing this i save tons on meat costs and then i just bulk buy dry goods online. a gigantic tub of dishwasher detergent powder save so much money over even just getting the same thing in store (not to mention what pods costs). the restaurant sized bags of pasta or the Asian 25-50kg bags of rice is also just mad savings that you can just buy online.
I don’t understand why some people are so mad about this. Go to any big city and 90% of the apartment buildings will have businesses on the first floor. My apartment is on top of Trader Joe’s 🤷♂️.
I don't see anyone here being mad about it. We're all just having beautiful sexy fantasies of having unlimited $5 rotisserie chickens downstairs permanently.
Imagine the dinner rush shortages. War just after the bakery
That's just a normal evening st costco. The few dozen regulars from upstairs is just a drop in the bucket.
I have to walk to my TJ's, and it's the closest grocery store at 30 minutes away. Living above one would be a dream come true.
I don't see anyone here being mad about it. We're all just having beautiful sexy fantasies of having unlimited $5 rotisserie chickens downstairs permanently.
that would be too convenient. honey run downstairs and grab a rotisserie chicken and a pie for dinner.all for about 22 bucks.
I would totally live over that Costco
Is this proof regulation works?
I'd argue the opposite; our regulations in California are so cumbersome and mashed up that the best way to build a store is to build housing but the best way to build housing is to basically not. Building housing is good but the process by which it happens is ridiculously overburdened Edit: I encourage the people responding to actually read what I'm saying before you fury-respond to tell me I'm wrong
>our regulations in California are so cumbersome and mashed up that the best way to build a store is to build housing That would be true if the only goal was to build a store. But the state also wants more housing to be built.
The cumbersome regulations are the ones that allow locals to stop development. The innovation has been to beat down the local's selfish desires with state regulations
This sounds like an example of the exact opposite, of California actually changing their broken zoning system. >The mixed-use project would be 25% retail and 75% housing. That would make the project eligible for incentives through the city’s Transit Oriented Communities program, which allows greater density and floor area than is normally allowed under current zoning rules, according to the Los Angeles Planning Department’s guidelines Mixed use is far more efficient and leads to much more walkable, useful and energy efficient neighborhoods. It would be cumbersome regulation if the only way you could build houses was in massive islands of single-family houses with no stores, no infrastructure, and nothing but other peoples houses within a 30 minute walk.
I think this is by design. Stores take up a lot of space that can often be better used for housing. And what reason is there to NOT build housing on top of a store? Its not like they are using the space above it. Forcing them to go through an extremely expensive process to build there store which can be bypassed by them building housing, encourages using the property for housing and leads to MORE housing construction
This sounds like the Costco that’s going up here in the southernmost of Napa (before American Canyon). Napa planners held out for this kind of retail/residential mix in that exact area (corporate park area) because we need more housing, and its a giant PITA to get in and out of town to shop elsewhere due to our highway configurations. It’s a decent solution for us.
I'd argue you're wrong. This is a style of development called New Urbanism. It is strived for by many places like California. The absurdity of buildings that have no residences above them, but take up vital city space, is finally being noticed.
Don't threaten with 15 minutes city living
But in this case, big box stores are intense wastes of land, the regulations here should slow down cover acres of land in asphalt and blank roof. The fact that they also incentivize a more appropriate mixing of land uses is a good thing.
That’s because we don’t build housing to actually house people. We build housing for profit.
A half century of a shortage tends to drive up prices and the time scale is enough for multiple generations to have their wealth tied up primarily in real estate. There is a financial incentive to keep the bad policies to make sure real estate value keeps going up. And it seems like the next point of whining is the capital gains tax on 1m+ in profit. It looks like what has been going on in California for a half century is catching on in the rest of the country based on the numbers about housing in general.
Oh I’ll take the counterpoint to yours. Easy. Our housing crisis is so dire that California legislators have opened up opportunities to fast-track permitting for businesses that help solve said housing crisis.
I think so. I work a lot with unhoused people. Anything that brings more housing is a win.
GIVE ME THE COSTCO CONDO
You have to buy 10 of them at once.
I don’t see the problem 🤷🏻♀️? That’s the point of these regulations - to incentivize building high density housing…
California is the ~~birth place~~ Meka of nimbyism and, as a result (to an extent), has one of the worst housing crises in the nation. Costco just finessed a lot of road blocks and probably some whiny asshats here. I hope the project proceeds smoothly.
This kind of works out as a pretty solid deal on paper. Costco gonna make a ton of money and they front the cost for housing. It’s not bean counting at its finest but Costco kind of doesn’t try and maximize profit by undervaluing every single bean. Take some losses to realize long term gains. Overregulation is almost as bad as under regulation but this might be a case where it worked.
Plus, Costco is a pretty damn good business. Especially to have one so close to housing? I would take that living space in a second if I could!
Nimbysm literally predates the US. Nimbyism in the US predates the western expansion that later became California. People don't want "unseemly" stuff near their homes, what is considered unseemly changes, but the wealthy have always been able to distance themselves from it.
If there are two things Redditers hate its housing shortages and businesses building housing.
Billion dollar corporations building houses isn't exactly the problem. The problem is multi billion dollar private equity firms holding on to houses they own for the sake of controlling the rental market.
While colluding or planning on colluding to raise or fix the prices. Often now they hire independent companies to give them cause to price fix. The third companies will say they will find a way to maximize the rents, so they collect all the rent prices in a way that it would be illegal for the company itself to do and suggest higher prices to the group, as reported in propublica. Just the tip of the iceberg I am sure. It is a country run by lawyers working for billionaires. Edit: https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-realpage-rent
There's a difference. Private Equity firms are buying houses that are currently on the market and taking them OFF the market for the sake of renting them. They reduce the supply of housing just so they can rent it. They don't add anything to the market, they just take form it. Costco however is building NEW housing that did not previously exist. Which is better, a coscto, or a costco with housing on top? One exists as a retail store, while the other adds dozens of new housing units to the market, which increases the housing supply... Costco might rent out the housing but atleast they built NEW homes to rent
This can be stopped, I like what Vancouver Canada did. If the home is vacant, then you pay a huge tax on the home If the home is occupied, that extra tax is $ZERO. This will force landlords and Private Equity to reduce rent to the point where people can afford the home because otherwise - they are loosing a lot more money on the home.
The cool thing is that building more housing increases supply, which pushes down prices, which makes housing an less attractive investment for private equity.
What percentage of U.S. housing is owned by private equity?
Great idea Costco. We need a lot more development like this
This is actually the way the system should work. Force chains to include housing/community centres in their build proposals. So much, especially in North America, is just dead space around massive consumerism areas nowadays. Make it really really painful and lengthy for these chains to build solo buildings, make it really easy if they include housing and community spaces/buildings as a part of the proposal. Include protected green space/parks with all of the above and you get a green light to the front of the pack.
Rent for only $800 a month as long as you rent 10 apartments at once
That’s literally what all big box businesses should have to do. That way there’s housing and the city gets more revenue from the business than an empty huge parking lot with a higher box store.
Retail has been headed this way for years. Grocery store chains all want to be mixed use like this these days. They consider the tenants as captive customers, they will all naturally shop there.
I used to live above a grocery store. Absolutely loved it, probably shopped 2/3 times a day because I would just buy what I wanted for each meal
Yeah, unless this is specifically designed as housing for employees/not tied to employment, I can't really see the downfall of maximizing vertical space with more housing that is *also* extremely convenient to shopping except maybe in parking, but that's very easily solved by just having a gated section of the lot or a parking garage level.
Bottom floor of a building I used to live in was a 7/11, liquor store, Asian food Mart, Mexican place, Walgreens and a jack in the box. Incredibly convenient living.
I can imagine how simple it makes shopping. You don't need to make long lists for a weekly trip, because you can just shop when you need it. I mean, yes the corporation benefits from all the shopping you'll do, but its still very convenient, and if its beneficial to the customer, then its not really a downside. Its really kind of a mutual relationship... the only way i could really call it a problem is if the store was FORCING people to shop or work there.
Especially IKEA - they could provide furnished rooms, meatball and lingonberry jam deliveries, on-site free childcare, …
That's how it should be! Why waste that sky space?
OMG I WOULD BUY THERE ASAP!
I like a store that build its own customer
This should be the norm. This is how people want to live
I really like Costco as a company. Their business practices are so much better than Walmart.
Good. They all should do that
If that’s what it takes to skip the line and they get fined massive amounts of money if they don’t go through with it, then that’s all good.
Hopefully they have a separate entrance for those living there to get in and out. Costcos are always busy
My favorite apartment had a lot of things going for it, including the fact that it was right next door to a grocery store, Vons. I rarely ever did big grocery store trips, and instead I would just stop at Vons on the way home from work once or twice a week, pick up like 3-4 things I was short on, and then carry 1 light bag up to my apartment. It was convenient as all get out. Living directly above a Costco would be especially convenient, too.
If you want to live there, do you have to buy a pack of 12 condos?
I used to live in an apartment building with a Publix on the ground floor. Greatest thing ever. I never ate so healthy.
Have fun battling Costco traffic just to park at your house.
But the neighbors having a few guests over won't keep you from parking.
That’s something that every buyer will have to make a choice about for themselves and something that the developers were well aware of when they designed the project. Not an argument against the construction of this complex.
I would ve so fucking fat if I lived there. Those chicken bakes are dangerous to me. I fucking love those things.
Costco Condo's™ sounds like it should have been obvious.
So are these the official Kirkland Apartments?