Small is beautiful
Today, the New York Times published an article about the growing popularity of living small. According to the article, complete homes of a thousand square feet or less are taking off in popularity, presumably in response to the falling values of larger homes and the rapidly increasing cost of living in them.
I'm a big believer in living small. In my early twenties, I spent two years living in about 200 square feet in Japan, and it was great discipline for learning not to accumulate a lot of clutter. My current home is all of 577 square feet, but it works really well for me. I think the key is that it's very well designed: the prior owner was an architect, so he essentially gutted the place and redid it with an open kitchen (the closed-in, windowless kitchens in other apartments in my building line feel claustrophobic to me), added custom kitchen cabinets, lot of built-ins and other clever storage ideas, and even had a bed built in place (which he left for me) that contains six storage drawers below in the base on one side and a large cabinet for linens on the other. According to the New York Times article, clever design in small spaces is hardly unusual these days: as more people are turning towards living in less physical space, they're spending an increasing amount on smart design that's both high quality and makes the best possible use of limited space.
Living small is smart for so many reasons: heating and cooling costs are lower, it's more environmentally friendly, it forces people to be realistic about clutter and limiting their possessions, and it requires a heck of a lot less maintenance in terms of cleaning, fixing, and upgrading than large, sprawling homes. Having said that, although I think I could shrink my living space by a hundred square feet or so if I really had to, I'd have a hard time making a go of the hundred square feet total that some dedicated small-livers have embraced.
Could you live in a hundred square feet? How much living space do you have now, and how well does it work for you?
16 retorts. What say you?
One hundred? No. We have 838 sq ft, and it's full....way too full. On the other hand, we use it all too. To most people I'm sure it looks cluttered. But there are very few nick knacks; but lots of furniture; including my wife's piano. I worried about the piano; it's been a long-time dream of my wife's; I was afraid she would stop practicing but she's at it every day. We use our second bedroom for a homestay student, so it generates income and some interesting times. I don't think we could downsize. But I think it's ok as long as we are using everything.
I'd like to see even smaller homes, say 400-500 sf. Homes small enough that two or four can be built on a standard lot. Homes that even a hamburger flipper could afford to own. Homes that would allow hamburger flippers to stabilize their housing costs and build wealth.
thats funny, i did a post on the same thing. I've been obsessed with these house since reading about them on a blog.
Small is defintely the way to go :)
I live in a townhouse right now which is small by the standards of the sprawling suburbs but not by any objective standards.
Have you ever taken a look at http://www.tumbleweedhouses.com/ ?
They have home plans that start at 65 square feet. It is fun to think about what it would be like to live in one of their designs.
RDS
http://financialvalues.blogspot.com/
We live in about 900 sf. I think it is the most space that we could ever want to have- when we get a house, it will probably be about this size. More would mean more cleaning for me! My goal is to never live in a place- or have more stuff- than I can clean in an hour. It is ridiculous to have more things than one can reasonably take care of oneself. If you need a cleaner, you have too much stuff.
We are a family of 5 living in 1300 sq. foot town house. 100 sq. feet? I don't even want a hotel room that small...
We live in a fairly small home, it's 1000 sq ft. That being said we run 2 businesses out of and with all that equipment & stuff we probably couldn't do much smaller. But this house is so cheap to heat & cool, not to mention fewer rooms means fewer utlities and less taxes.
I'm sure it would be a lesson in paring down the essentials. But I don't think my husband and I could handle anything much smaller than what we have right now, which is a 1 br apartment (648 sq ft). The reason we need space? We're both home all day, every day. It looks like he's going to start working from home, and I'm on disability/slowly finding work from home.
Of course, we discussed the space issue, and one way we're going to keep from stepping on each other's toes is a laptop. He has promised to be more mobile when he starts working and take advantage of wi-fi in and around the city. This way, he doesn't get cabin fever and we don't feel as claustrophobic.
We are a family of five living in about 650 square feet. Yes, it's tight, but it keeps us more organized! Plus, we spend a lot of time together...
Interesting stories! I think the togetherness aspect of living small is generally good for building a stronger family life. I laughed about not wanting a 100 square foot hotel room. When I was in Paris five or six years ago, I stayed in a hotel room that was so small that I woke myself up smacking my elbow into the bathroom door. That was way too small for my liking.
The tiny houses really are cute. I'd be interested in seeing what they're like on the inside.
I live in a 500 sq. foot apartment and I think it's perfect for one person. It's not designed especially well (bedroom is too small, living room is too big, etc.) but overall it works for me. My boyfriend stays over often, and even with two people it feels like plenty of space. I grew up in a McMansion and have no desire to ever own one; my most distinct memory is my mother exhausting herself trying to keep it clean, well-decorated, etc. I never want to live in such a swollen home, and I also don't want the lifestyle that comes with it.
In this same vein, I'm reading a great book right now called House Lust by Daniel McGinn. It's about how Americans have become so obsessed with their homes in recent years, and includes some really fascinating interviews with homeowners, builders, contractors, etc. I strongly recommend it for anyone interested in this topic.
anon - thanks for your input. The book sounds fascinating; I'll check the library for it. It's great being able to clean your home in an hour, right? I think that's the part about living small that I really love the most.
My partner and I have a large city rowhome (~2100 sq ft). We rent the top floor to two friends, and we have two large dogs plus cats. It's a very large house for two people--I still feel conflicted about buying a home this size. But our options were limited in our neighborhood, which consists of a few types of rowhomes built in the early 1900s. We could either buy a smaller home (~900-1100 sq ft) and be stuffed to the gills with our pets, or buy a larger home for the same price with more than enough room for everyone, and generate some rental income. We obviously chose the latter. We keep the heat very low in the winter (55 degrees) and do our best to conserve as much as we can. It's expensive to upkeep though, no doubt about it.
I live in a house that is about 450 square feet. Good for one, would probably be tight for two. My biggest dislikes with the house is no storage space (no attic,basement, or garage) and a poor floor layout. One third of my house is kitchen space and not planned out well.
Plus I have some dogs and too much stuff. I'm in a clutter dispersment mode. It's been hard to give up my "stuff" but I'm slowly going through the old boxes of my life.
I do live on a lake and make use of my outdoors as soon as and as long as I can.
Right now, I'm in a somewhat inefficient 900-square foot, 2br 1.5 bath apartment. It works for my husband and I, and we'll be having a little boy in a few months and I imagine it'll work for him, too.
For a few years when I was little, my family of four lived in a 524 square foot apartment. It was efficient and surprisingly, it worked!
I think design is critical.
Wandering through Ikea, I loved looking at their tiny sample "homes" to get storage ideas.
With the right design, I would be perfectly content with a house of 1,000 square feet or so.
Interesting additions - thank you all. I think you're quite right about the role of clutter and design in making a small home more or less enjoyable.
Even at 577 square feet, I'm not sure how well I'd do at sharing. I love my SO and I love having him here, but I kind of like it when he goes home, too.
Post a Comment