apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

The editors of ReadyMade consider a 1500 sq. ft. home to be "undersize."

Hmmm.

I was just going to say the same thing - who considers 1500 sq ft small? That's actually kind of huge.

Not everyone lives in Manhattan. : )

Actually, that's pretty large by any standards!

I think they are thinking, "Good Design for Non-rich People"

From NPR: "The average American house size has more than doubled since the 1950s; it now stands at 2,349 square feet. "

1,500 is pretty small compared to the average.

Actually, pretty much everywhere else in the country thinks you New Yorkers with your 500 sq ft homes are kinda strange :-). Here in Atlanta, houses over 2000 sq ft are the norm, and over 3500 sq ft are very common.

I live in by far the smallest house of all my family and friends. It's 1700 sq ft., but it's in an older, historic in-town neighborhood.

I took a day trip up the Palisades side of the Hudson a few month back. I was amazed at how many huge, new homes were being built in what was clearly woods/countryside only a few years ago. It was kind of sad. And although 2500 sq ft might be the norm in non-NYC America, it certainly isn’t the norm around the world. The rest of the world sees us as excessive consumers. And well, we are. I’m not saying that non-NYC Americans are selfish and just devour all of our natural resources because they can. But I think we haven’t, until recent years, had to consider the ramifications of such excess. It really is excess. Eventually that big home with all that distance between itself and the neighbors is going to be surrounded by other big houses on tiny plots of land. That’s just reality. But just because we have access to an abundance of land in the US today, doesn’t mean we should just scarf up every inch of it.

Think, too, about the ubiquitous global warming discussion. Don’t we need to be conscious of how much energy we expend on all of our square footage? I know plenty of people who live outside of NYC who do indeed have a couple/few thousand square feet of living space, and I’ve got to say, most of their extra rooms and space simply become dumping grounds for things they’d be wise to purge themselves of, because they’re things they’ll unlikely use again. Baggage man, baggage.

And one thing most New Yorkers seem to have in common, is a great appreciation for every inch of space they have. Like the creators of this website, we sometimes trade space and material abundance for a home that brings us a different kind of pleasure: a lovely neighborhood, great communal parks, access to a wealth of cultural experiences that are unique to New York, etc. And I get why that’s not everyone’s cup of tea. But we’re not “strangeâ€�. It’s just a very different mentality.

So Harley, if you found a beatiful 2200 sqft townhouse on the upper west side for $1000 a month you won't jump to live there because it was too big?

That's right, Archie. Not unless I had like 10 kids or something.

Very noble of you. However, I doubt most NYCers share your nobleness.

Way to go Harley! I totally agree with you.

I personally have 1,500 sq ft set as my maximum home size, if its going to be just me and another person. What do you need the rest of the space for? We hardly have enough time to spend in our homes as it is after work and commuting. So in the time that we do have why avoid yourfamily by being spread out all over the place?

Archie, I'd say no to that offer too. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

my dream home is not a McMansion nor a 400 sq ft apartment, the taste in decor is modern but I prefer older homes, a bungalow with 3 bedrooms and 2 baths sound just about right

Harley, ever see that special on TLC about the family with about 16 kids and how they were building their dream home, it was huge even with the kids sharing rooms, but I guess it would need to be to accommodate that large of a family.

Older homes generally have only one bathroom. Before 1960 or so, that was fine for a family.

I was going to say that 2200 square feet is actually not big enough for 10 kids. But then I remembered seeing this Aarp story about a Dorian Paskowitz, who actually raised 9 children with his wife in a tiny little camper. No kidding. (Of course, they had no privacy whatsoever.)

http://www.aarpmagazine.org/health/doc_paskowitz_healthnut.html

I couldn't find the photos of their camper on-line. The print edition photos are hard to believe. Of course, it must have helped that all their time was spent outside their home, surfing.

I can barely keep my 2 cats' names straight, let alone 9 or 16 kids! Dang!

Add another "no" to the offer of a cheap 2200 SF condo. Once you have that space, you have to do stuff with it -- furnish it, heat and cool it, clean it. It's not just space: it makes its own demands. It's only a joy if you have a use for it.

While I'm not devoted to the goal of living in the absolute smallest space that's physically possible, I'm also not taking on rooms for which we have no use, nor asking our furniture to huddle miserably in a space that's too large for it.