You got me on that one, I'd never have thought of that being a problem!
We've heard reports of bears here (northern WV) but I've never actually seen one.
What do you do with a big house?
- Thread starter mountainsoft
- Start date
You got me on that one, I'd never have thought of that being a problem!
We've heard reports of bears here (northern WV) but I've never actually seen one.
RunningBum
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 13,235
We get 2-3 dozen bear break-ins at our small resort. A few years ago we had over 30 house break-ins. People got better about doing things like shutting ground level windows, but visitors with cars are still leaving them unlocked.You got me on that one, I'd never have thought of that being a problem!
I used to keep my side garage window cracked, but I had a bear yank it somewhat off the hinge and was looking at climbing in when I shooed it away. Amazingly I could get the window back in but can't open it anymore, not that I want to. I've also had one pawing at my front door latch, and only my deadbolt kept it from getting in.
eytonxav
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Our house is not quite 2500 ft2. It has 3 br, 2 full baths and two half baths. The living room, kitchen and dinning room are all in an open floor plan with vaulted ceilings. One of the bedrooms was converted to a library for DW. Upstairs is a game room that has a big screen and serves as my office. As I indicated in another post, I like the house, but wish the garage was larger and would also prefer to have another large walk in closet. Our lot is small as this is a zero lot line gated neighborhood. If the lot was 2X it would be more to my liking.
Honest answer: You just pay more on utility bills and taxes. The extra space does not serve ANY purpose what-so-ever. We are just trying to break free of this "American Super Dream" to more sensible single-family ranch house with 2300 sqft. No-one warned me but you have been warned!
We bought a huge house because it was in a neighborhood we wanted to live in. We bought a lot of huge solid wood furniture to go inside. Office room, craft room, guest room were all full of stuff. The one thing that was nice was parking in the garage. Other than that it was just a lot of work.
Since retiring in 2000 we’ve lived in a 350 sqft motorhome. It’s very liberating to only own what you need. We clean the kitchen floor with a paper towel and a few squirts of windex. We value where more than what.
Since retiring in 2000 we’ve lived in a 350 sqft motorhome. It’s very liberating to only own what you need. We clean the kitchen floor with a paper towel and a few squirts of windex. We value where more than what.
mountainsoft
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
True, but I don't think most people keep a car long enough to matter whether it lasts longer in a garage. Obviously, finishes will be better preserved out of the weather, but garages are more for the comfort of the owner than the car.
Of course, your local climate makes a big difference. We're in a mild climate and the cars are shaded from the sun most of the day anyway.
Besides, the few people that park their cars in their garages still drive to work or the mall and park outdoors most of the day anyway.
mountainsoft
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
I don't like my woodworking shop smelling like gas, or sawdust on my lawnmower, so all of my mowers, tillers, snowblowers, etc. are in a separate 8x12 shed. I have slowly been replacing my gas powered tools with battery powered tools, so even the shed is starting to smell better.
rk911
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
first two...yup. disagree on #3. it’s all about personal taste.
goingtotravel
Recycles dryer sheets
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2018
- Messages
- 176
We built a custom home in our 30's and still live there. Over 4,200 sq ft on the first 2 floors and another 2,000 sq ft of finished basement. Only two of us, 4 bedroom, 4 1/2 baths. We use almost every room - 2 offices, hobby room, guest bedroom, etc.
No plans to move at the current time. Why? We have a lot of land which we love, our house is very well built so our utilities are reasonable, it's very quiet, no neighbors peering in our windows from their house like when we lived on a 1/4 acre. Low taxes due to land use, lots of options for doctors, hospitals nearby, close to multiple airports for travel in RE, just under an hour from the big city for lots of cultural options. Already paying to have the property mowed and that is worked into our budget.
We don't always love the weather (mid-Atlantic area) and have been looking around the country for a new RE home but cannot come up with anything we like better than where we are today. Maybe that will change once we FIRE. We will have to make the house more accessible eventually and will need to do a cost/benefit analysis but we are not in danger of pricing ourselves out of our area even with improvements so maybe we will just keep rattling around a large home in our old age.
No plans to move at the current time. Why? We have a lot of land which we love, our house is very well built so our utilities are reasonable, it's very quiet, no neighbors peering in our windows from their house like when we lived on a 1/4 acre. Low taxes due to land use, lots of options for doctors, hospitals nearby, close to multiple airports for travel in RE, just under an hour from the big city for lots of cultural options. Already paying to have the property mowed and that is worked into our budget.
We don't always love the weather (mid-Atlantic area) and have been looking around the country for a new RE home but cannot come up with anything we like better than where we are today. Maybe that will change once we FIRE. We will have to make the house more accessible eventually and will need to do a cost/benefit analysis but we are not in danger of pricing ourselves out of our area even with improvements so maybe we will just keep rattling around a large home in our old age.
TimeMeasure
Recycles dryer sheets
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2017
- Messages
- 101
Haven’t posted here in a few years, but this thread caught my eye, as we recently moved to our retirement house.
Originally, we had thought we would be downsizing, from a 2200 square foot house which felt ample. The main goal was a 1st floor MBR and full bath, to make aging in place easier. But our other criteria kept steering us away from downsizing:
- Nature and privacy.
We looked at 55+ communities, which otherwise would have been ideal, but even those with single family detached houses were tightly packed: Houses 10’ apart from each other, looking in each others’ windows.
- Decent town.
As someone mentioned, it may not be politically correct to say so, but to have a better chance of living near folks with compatible values, and respect for the law and each other, can correlate, not perfectly but somewhat, with more expensive towns... which correlates somewhat with larger houses.
- Quality of housing.
In our part of New England, to find a ranch house usually means a 70+ year old house, which comes with its share of maintenance issues.
- Distance to hospitals and airports.
We wanted to stay within a certain radius, and in this area, proximity to the city, which also meets the other criteria, tends to involve larger houses.
We looked at independent and assisted living in CCRCs, but those we visited did not feel like “home,” but just like “housing,” and we concluded that, although we would no doubt adapt, it would be with a discouraged feeling. Combining all the other criteria kept leading us back to a larger house.
Also in the back of our mind was that DW has a progressive neurological condition. We don’t know whether we have 1 more year of “normal” living... or 2... or more... before the curtains close... but DW’s sentiment was that we should “seize the day” and live as normally, and happily, as we can manage, in the time we have remaining. With that as backdrop, what might otherwise look impractical and unwise... takes on a certain wisdom, or at least becomes more understandable.
So, in the end, we “downsized” to a 3500+ square foot house... and DW has been very happy here so far, which was one of the main goals.
As far as the actual original question (how do people use all that space) -
We use it in much the same way as in the old house, just more spread out. The number of rooms is similar, but furniture etc. was somewhat packed together in the old house... so now we just have more room to live.
And that is a somewhat more subtle answer to “how do you use the space” - for psychological well-being. On very hot, or cold, or snowy / drizzly days... when one tends to be inside all day... a small house, especially with open floor plan, can feel like being caged inside “one big room” - like being stuck in a dorm room or hotel room. Even with good company, it can feel restrictive. Being able to wander around a larger space feels less confining. A luxury, absolutely, and not one we take for granted - but it is part of “how do you use that space.”
Originally, we had thought we would be downsizing, from a 2200 square foot house which felt ample. The main goal was a 1st floor MBR and full bath, to make aging in place easier. But our other criteria kept steering us away from downsizing:
- Nature and privacy.
We looked at 55+ communities, which otherwise would have been ideal, but even those with single family detached houses were tightly packed: Houses 10’ apart from each other, looking in each others’ windows.
- Decent town.
As someone mentioned, it may not be politically correct to say so, but to have a better chance of living near folks with compatible values, and respect for the law and each other, can correlate, not perfectly but somewhat, with more expensive towns... which correlates somewhat with larger houses.
- Quality of housing.
In our part of New England, to find a ranch house usually means a 70+ year old house, which comes with its share of maintenance issues.
- Distance to hospitals and airports.
We wanted to stay within a certain radius, and in this area, proximity to the city, which also meets the other criteria, tends to involve larger houses.
We looked at independent and assisted living in CCRCs, but those we visited did not feel like “home,” but just like “housing,” and we concluded that, although we would no doubt adapt, it would be with a discouraged feeling. Combining all the other criteria kept leading us back to a larger house.
Also in the back of our mind was that DW has a progressive neurological condition. We don’t know whether we have 1 more year of “normal” living... or 2... or more... before the curtains close... but DW’s sentiment was that we should “seize the day” and live as normally, and happily, as we can manage, in the time we have remaining. With that as backdrop, what might otherwise look impractical and unwise... takes on a certain wisdom, or at least becomes more understandable.
So, in the end, we “downsized” to a 3500+ square foot house... and DW has been very happy here so far, which was one of the main goals.
As far as the actual original question (how do people use all that space) -
We use it in much the same way as in the old house, just more spread out. The number of rooms is similar, but furniture etc. was somewhat packed together in the old house... so now we just have more room to live.
And that is a somewhat more subtle answer to “how do you use the space” - for psychological well-being. On very hot, or cold, or snowy / drizzly days... when one tends to be inside all day... a small house, especially with open floor plan, can feel like being caged inside “one big room” - like being stuck in a dorm room or hotel room. Even with good company, it can feel restrictive. Being able to wander around a larger space feels less confining. A luxury, absolutely, and not one we take for granted - but it is part of “how do you use that space.”
Andre1969
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
One thing I've noticed, with me at least, is that it's easy to get used to a larger home, to where it feels "normal" and not so special any more. Hedonic creep or whatever you call it.
I moved a couple years ago, but haven't sold the old house yet. The old house is about 1500 square feet, and no basement. The new house was listed at 2872 square feet by the real estate listing, but then I figured out that 432 of that is a sunroom, which realistically is only a 3-season room. But, it's finished off, has electric, heat (electric baseboard), a/c (a big 220V unit in the window), so I guess it counts for advertising purposes. It has a basement, which is another 960 square feet. What I'd call "semi-finished". It was originally a finished basement, but in 2008 the house was renovated and seriously altered (main level mostly changed and enlarged, second level added, new kitchen/baths/electric) so as a result much of the ceiling, as well as some of the paneling on the outside walls, was torn out and not replaced.
Anyway, the house seemed HUGE when I first bought it, but now it's like no big deal. As for use? Well, the main level has the aforementioned sunroom off to the side, an entry foyer that's maybe 9x9 feet, and a large, open-area livingroom/kitchen/dining combination. Off to the other side, there's a half-bath, and a large master suite that's about 15x23 feet, plus a walk in closet, large master bath, and a small room/nook between the bedroom and bathroom that's big enough to put a couple pieces of furniture.
The plan is for my uncle to move into the master bedroom, which is almost sort of like a big hotel room/efficiency. We don't really do much with the living room on the main level. There's a loveseat there, and in the winter I put some of the plants in that room. The sunroom has a second refrigerator, a bowflex, an old dining room table my Mom gave me years ago, and, in one corner, admittedly, some junk that's piled up. The dining room table is useful for when we have cookouts and pool parties and such, to set food up on for people to help themselves, and then go outside to the pool, patio, etc.
Upstairs, there's three bedrooms, one large full bath, and a family/rumpus room. Each bedroom is around 11.5x13.5 feet...so not huge, but not glorified walk-in-closets, either. Two bedrooms do have walk-in closets, while the third has a closet that takes up most of one of the narrow walls. The rumpus room is about 15x23 feet. Anyway, one of the bedrooms that has a walk-in-closet is mine, one is my house mates, and the third bedroom is a spare/guest/junk room. We probably spend most of our time in the upstairs rumpus room. There's a sectional sofa, big screen tv, home computer, and now that I'm working from home, the work computer.
In the basement, there's a pool table that the previous owner left, as well as a little bar, so it's great for parties. My house mate also put some workout equipment down there. There's also a few closets, and one side of the basement, where washer/dryer/etc are, is mostly storage.
Sometimes I do wish I had gotten a bigger house. However, the way a house is laid out is every bit as critical as the square footage. When I was house hunting, I saw homes that were much larger, but not laid out nearly as well. One limiting criteria I had, though, is that I wanted a place with either a first-floor master suite, or a walkout basement that could accommodate one, as having my uncle move in with me had always been part of the plan.
One advantage to the new house, though, is that it doesn't have all sorts of little nooks and crannies like the old place did, that lend themselves to storage and hoarding junk. The old house had a back bedroom that did nothing but collect junk, as well as an old porch on the main level that had been enclosed and converted to living/storage space back in the 80's. With the new new house, we have been throwing a bit too much down in the basement, and the spare bedroom and sunroom have collected a little bit. But, if it gets junked up too much, it just looks bad. So, it does motivate me a bit more to get rid of stuff, rather than just shove it in a back room and forget it.
On, and every time I go back into the old house now, my first thought is, "GOOD LORD, how did we ever live in this tiny thing all those years?!"
I moved a couple years ago, but haven't sold the old house yet. The old house is about 1500 square feet, and no basement. The new house was listed at 2872 square feet by the real estate listing, but then I figured out that 432 of that is a sunroom, which realistically is only a 3-season room. But, it's finished off, has electric, heat (electric baseboard), a/c (a big 220V unit in the window), so I guess it counts for advertising purposes. It has a basement, which is another 960 square feet. What I'd call "semi-finished". It was originally a finished basement, but in 2008 the house was renovated and seriously altered (main level mostly changed and enlarged, second level added, new kitchen/baths/electric) so as a result much of the ceiling, as well as some of the paneling on the outside walls, was torn out and not replaced.
Anyway, the house seemed HUGE when I first bought it, but now it's like no big deal. As for use? Well, the main level has the aforementioned sunroom off to the side, an entry foyer that's maybe 9x9 feet, and a large, open-area livingroom/kitchen/dining combination. Off to the other side, there's a half-bath, and a large master suite that's about 15x23 feet, plus a walk in closet, large master bath, and a small room/nook between the bedroom and bathroom that's big enough to put a couple pieces of furniture.
The plan is for my uncle to move into the master bedroom, which is almost sort of like a big hotel room/efficiency. We don't really do much with the living room on the main level. There's a loveseat there, and in the winter I put some of the plants in that room. The sunroom has a second refrigerator, a bowflex, an old dining room table my Mom gave me years ago, and, in one corner, admittedly, some junk that's piled up. The dining room table is useful for when we have cookouts and pool parties and such, to set food up on for people to help themselves, and then go outside to the pool, patio, etc.
Upstairs, there's three bedrooms, one large full bath, and a family/rumpus room. Each bedroom is around 11.5x13.5 feet...so not huge, but not glorified walk-in-closets, either. Two bedrooms do have walk-in closets, while the third has a closet that takes up most of one of the narrow walls. The rumpus room is about 15x23 feet. Anyway, one of the bedrooms that has a walk-in-closet is mine, one is my house mates, and the third bedroom is a spare/guest/junk room. We probably spend most of our time in the upstairs rumpus room. There's a sectional sofa, big screen tv, home computer, and now that I'm working from home, the work computer.
In the basement, there's a pool table that the previous owner left, as well as a little bar, so it's great for parties. My house mate also put some workout equipment down there. There's also a few closets, and one side of the basement, where washer/dryer/etc are, is mostly storage.
Sometimes I do wish I had gotten a bigger house. However, the way a house is laid out is every bit as critical as the square footage. When I was house hunting, I saw homes that were much larger, but not laid out nearly as well. One limiting criteria I had, though, is that I wanted a place with either a first-floor master suite, or a walkout basement that could accommodate one, as having my uncle move in with me had always been part of the plan.
One advantage to the new house, though, is that it doesn't have all sorts of little nooks and crannies like the old place did, that lend themselves to storage and hoarding junk. The old house had a back bedroom that did nothing but collect junk, as well as an old porch on the main level that had been enclosed and converted to living/storage space back in the 80's. With the new new house, we have been throwing a bit too much down in the basement, and the spare bedroom and sunroom have collected a little bit. But, if it gets junked up too much, it just looks bad. So, it does motivate me a bit more to get rid of stuff, rather than just shove it in a back room and forget it.
On, and every time I go back into the old house now, my first thought is, "GOOD LORD, how did we ever live in this tiny thing all those years?!"
Last edited:
bjorn2bwild
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
My biggest gripe about living in a bigger house (although at a little less then 3,000 SF it's not "large" compared to some of our neighbors) is all the freaking HVAC filters. I am very happy that there are 3 zones, but that means there are 5 (yes, FIVE) filters that I get to change once a month. 3 of them are pretty high, so I get to drag around a 20 foot ladder all around the house to change them. First world problems, right?
Wow, you must live in a dusty environment. This house has a split system with four filters. I get away with taking them down and blowing out with compressed air once a year.
As an indicator, they fit loosely in their housing so make a ticking noise when enough dust builds up suck them up when cycling on and dropping down on the off cycle.
In this climate we don't use the central system for heating, just cooling for about half the year.
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2010
- Messages
- 10,733
Smaller houses could be made more pleasing to live in than large ones if designed better.
Not the same scale, but think of a cruise ship cabin. Of course you're bumping into each other at that scale, but expand just a bit, and you're not. Each activity and what you need to do it are within reach.
But there's no motivation in the pricing dynamic for fewer square feet. Say you have a super efficient kitchen layout with storage volume X in a 10 x 12 and the same storage in a 15 x 20. The bigger kitchen is really harder to use, but the pricing models are going to apply $150/ft2 or whatever. Makes no sense, but that's the way it works.
We also have a lot of special purpose rooms. I read a sci-fi story once that had everyone living in two room houses. They'd just tell the house what they wanted to do (bathe, cook, sleep), and the appropriate furniture and appliances would slide out of panels in the walls!
We build boxes to live in, then add stuff to the interior of the boxes. What would happen if we started with an activity and what we needed to do that activity, then repeat that, and merge spaces if that made sense, or separate spaces if that made sense.
Not the same scale, but think of a cruise ship cabin. Of course you're bumping into each other at that scale, but expand just a bit, and you're not. Each activity and what you need to do it are within reach.
But there's no motivation in the pricing dynamic for fewer square feet. Say you have a super efficient kitchen layout with storage volume X in a 10 x 12 and the same storage in a 15 x 20. The bigger kitchen is really harder to use, but the pricing models are going to apply $150/ft2 or whatever. Makes no sense, but that's the way it works.
We also have a lot of special purpose rooms. I read a sci-fi story once that had everyone living in two room houses. They'd just tell the house what they wanted to do (bathe, cook, sleep), and the appropriate furniture and appliances would slide out of panels in the walls!
We build boxes to live in, then add stuff to the interior of the boxes. What would happen if we started with an activity and what we needed to do that activity, then repeat that, and merge spaces if that made sense, or separate spaces if that made sense.
mountainsoft
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Our small house has a fairly open floor plan, but there is enough separation that rooms still have individual purpose and any privacy we could want. We have never felt cramped or restricted. To the contrary, when one of us says something, the other gets up, walks to the other side of the house, and says "I can't hear you from in there".
My mom lives in a small 350 sq/ft studio apartment in assisted living. Now THAT is small. Most hotel rooms have more space than her apartment does, but she pays over $4000 per month to live there. Ridiculous. We looked at every assisted living facility in the county and hers had the best layout for the small space. All she does is sit and watch TV all day anyway, so extra space wouldn't be of much use. I don't know that I could live in a space that small, at least not the way it's laid out.
brett
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2010
- Messages
- 5,925
We made three great decisions. Retire early. Sell our house. Stored what we wanted to keep and traveled for seven months or so. Ten years later we are so very thankful that that we made each of those decisions.
W2R
Moderator Emeritus
I like that idea! For example, for me (as an older adult living alone), I have always thought it would be so sensible to have my laundry, closet space, and dressing area merged.
ExFlyBoy5
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
I am fine with my BMI of 24, and the two homes that I own.
But I will never refuse additional money. Money is just nice to have, even if I will not flaunt it.
PS. Right now, I wish for a larger lot. My wife would have more room to do gardening, and I can have my solar farm. Lots of land at my high-country home, but there's no need for power up there to run AC. And people cannot grow much up there due to the erratic weather.
Last edited:
gayl
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
I'm fine with my BMI (24 pre-lockdown vegging out has me way over that) and 2050 sq ft house. I rarely use the livingroom, music room, guest room (S is living in it now), and office but when all 10 of us are here it's nice.
My ideal would be a 2 bedroom cottage but on this lot because it's half way between my son & dtr. It's just not here
My ideal would be a 2 bedroom cottage but on this lot because it's half way between my son & dtr. It's just not here
Last edited:
My house is 3500 sq ft and I use a good amount of it. My problem is that since I bake, yes I need a big kitchen. Lol. Tiny houses usually have small kitchens, and I almost knifed my husband when he suggested a house with a galley kitchen.
I may down size now that my kids are gone but truthfully one thing this stay at home thing has made me realize is I need space.
I doubt I could deal with less than 1200 sq ft
I may down size now that my kids are gone but truthfully one thing this stay at home thing has made me realize is I need space.
I doubt I could deal with less than 1200 sq ft
Single guy here, 3 bed 2 bath 2300 sq ft home. I worked with an architect to design this, so the size and layout was intentional. Seems just right to me, not surprisingly. I have a master, office, and a guest bedroom. The guest bedroom doesn't get used much, but I'd hate to be without it.
I used to live in a 1600 sq ft 3/2 in silicon valley, that was mostly OK with the exception that the bedrooms were all small by today's standards. The master wasn't large enough for a king bed and a dresser.
I used to live in a 1600 sq ft 3/2 in silicon valley, that was mostly OK with the exception that the bedrooms were all small by today's standards. The master wasn't large enough for a king bed and a dresser.
Beachcomber
Recycles dryer sheets
Pertinent topic for retirees. We just downsized from a 4k sq ft with an upstairs that was strictly used for guests and storage to a "55 +" active community.
They put big houses on tiny lots here. We downsized to a 3200 sq ft open concept with 10' ceilings, etc.
It is hard to downsize, but worth it. DW got the home & kitchen she always wanted. Sewing room, and master BR suite. I got my mancave upstairs and 2 1/2 car garage.
Community has all the amenities we could ask for, but with covid-19, it is somewhat on hold except the pool.
They put big houses on tiny lots here. We downsized to a 3200 sq ft open concept with 10' ceilings, etc.
It is hard to downsize, but worth it. DW got the home & kitchen she always wanted. Sewing room, and master BR suite. I got my mancave upstairs and 2 1/2 car garage.
Community has all the amenities we could ask for, but with covid-19, it is somewhat on hold except the pool.
LastBoomer
Dryer sheet aficionado
I am not trying to criticize people’s lifestyle choices, its a free country (hopefully), but for retired folks I think smaller is better. Less ongoing operating expenses.
I own a 1942 two-bedroom, one-bath 900 square foot home I purchased in 1999.* I live in a first-ring suburb of Minneapolis, where many houses similar to mine were constructed from the 1930's through the 1950's.* These little 2-bedroom houses are known as "minimal traditional" by architects, or unofficially, "midcentury modest" (credit: www.retrorenovation.com).* Turns out there are close to 30 million of them around the country.* They were built as a result of the FHA legislation in 1934, in which the federal government began backing home mortgages (Before this time, if you wanted a house you pretty much had to pay for most of it up front).* This enabled millions of people to own these homes with small down payments.
These "exuberant, optimistic" houses, while small, were very well constructed.* They were designed by professional architects, hungry for employment during the Great Depression.* In order to qualify for FHA-backed loans they were required to have a minimum of two bedrooms and be modern, meaning electricity indoor plumbing, central heating.* And they couldn't cost more than $10,000.* In order to meet these criteria most homes built were two-bedroom, one-bath homes, appliances included.* The common 3-bedroom Ranch came later, during the 1950's.
These homes today have the following benefits:
Great locations in walkable and bike-able parts of cities and inner-ring suburbs.*
Neighborhoods are filled with mature trees, and many of these areas are now undergoing major infrastructure investments including efficient LED lighting, bike and pedestrian paths, traffic-calming mechanisms such as roundabouts.* Where I live many people bicycle to/from downtown jobs (< 10 miles).* In addition, these areas are typically well-served by public transportation.* This is important for senior citizens, as it allows them to remain in their homes and still have mobility around the city.
Very efficient use of space, and green (if you care about that) simply because the most green houses are pre-existing houses;
Affordable:* these are not McMansions, and unlike new exurbs, the cities are fully developed:* there are no surprise assessments coming.* Smaller sizes translate into lower ongoing operating expenses such as heating bills, taxes and insurance.* The smaller sizes of these homes (especially closets) force one to always be ruthless about not collecting too many material possessions (clutter!)
Classic designs that have stood the test of time, and will continue to do so.
Very well-constructed, with built-ins, hardwood floors, arched doorways, coved ceilings, double-hung windows made of real wood:* I can place a level anywhere in my house and the bubble is dead center.* This 78 years after construction.*
There are a LOT of these houses still in existence around the country.* I think the Millennials, in particular, will embrace them at some point, simply because they will not be able to afford bigger homes with lifestyles that require multiple cars and long commutes.
I have been criticized by others, including family, for choosing to purchase such an "under-sized" home, when, in their words, "I could afford so much more".* But I paid it off in 18 years, and invested the surplus I would have used for a larger, more expensive property.
I own a 1942 two-bedroom, one-bath 900 square foot home I purchased in 1999.* I live in a first-ring suburb of Minneapolis, where many houses similar to mine were constructed from the 1930's through the 1950's.* These little 2-bedroom houses are known as "minimal traditional" by architects, or unofficially, "midcentury modest" (credit: www.retrorenovation.com).* Turns out there are close to 30 million of them around the country.* They were built as a result of the FHA legislation in 1934, in which the federal government began backing home mortgages (Before this time, if you wanted a house you pretty much had to pay for most of it up front).* This enabled millions of people to own these homes with small down payments.
These "exuberant, optimistic" houses, while small, were very well constructed.* They were designed by professional architects, hungry for employment during the Great Depression.* In order to qualify for FHA-backed loans they were required to have a minimum of two bedrooms and be modern, meaning electricity indoor plumbing, central heating.* And they couldn't cost more than $10,000.* In order to meet these criteria most homes built were two-bedroom, one-bath homes, appliances included.* The common 3-bedroom Ranch came later, during the 1950's.
These homes today have the following benefits:
Great locations in walkable and bike-able parts of cities and inner-ring suburbs.*
Neighborhoods are filled with mature trees, and many of these areas are now undergoing major infrastructure investments including efficient LED lighting, bike and pedestrian paths, traffic-calming mechanisms such as roundabouts.* Where I live many people bicycle to/from downtown jobs (< 10 miles).* In addition, these areas are typically well-served by public transportation.* This is important for senior citizens, as it allows them to remain in their homes and still have mobility around the city.
Very efficient use of space, and green (if you care about that) simply because the most green houses are pre-existing houses;
Affordable:* these are not McMansions, and unlike new exurbs, the cities are fully developed:* there are no surprise assessments coming.* Smaller sizes translate into lower ongoing operating expenses such as heating bills, taxes and insurance.* The smaller sizes of these homes (especially closets) force one to always be ruthless about not collecting too many material possessions (clutter!)
Classic designs that have stood the test of time, and will continue to do so.
Very well-constructed, with built-ins, hardwood floors, arched doorways, coved ceilings, double-hung windows made of real wood:* I can place a level anywhere in my house and the bubble is dead center.* This 78 years after construction.*
There are a LOT of these houses still in existence around the country.* I think the Millennials, in particular, will embrace them at some point, simply because they will not be able to afford bigger homes with lifestyles that require multiple cars and long commutes.
I have been criticized by others, including family, for choosing to purchase such an "under-sized" home, when, in their words, "I could afford so much more".* But I paid it off in 18 years, and invested the surplus I would have used for a larger, more expensive property.
