apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

11. - Better ecologically -- take up less of the planet, require less resources for heating/cooling, and tend to be located near mass transit. Use less water for cleaning.

Great list.

Hmmm...not always cheaper. Not cheaper than the big places beyond the bridges and the tunnels.

Every space becomes small if we do not organize the house or if we do not have a good layout
I have heard people saying that "1800 square foot is small for a family of 3.

12. Small kitchens = better food. When you don't store much, you eat fresh. When you eat fresh you go for quality. Going to the market more often is inspirational for meal planning and following the seasons.

(unless you don't cook!)

13. No "extra" rooms that you might as well chop off because no one wants to go there anyway.

It took us years to figure out that a one-bedroom with generous closets was better *for us* than a two-bedroom.

Amen to #3.

I was able to buy things I really wanted since I only had a studio to furnish. If I had to fill a whole house or a big space I'd have had to compromise a lot more.

Um, I know this is treason, but I don't really feel like small spaces are better than big ones. I like big ones better. I'm kind of forced to live in a smaller space because of money here in NY, but would really prefer more room. I celebrate those who make small spaces work, but aren't we doing a little 'fox and the grapes' self convincing about the small space issue sometimes?

CFM -- It's a sort of defense mechanism against all the people who ask, "When are you moving to the 'burbs and getting a *real* house?"

No way would I ever do a 250-sq-ft studio. It's not that I have an immoral fixation on "stuff" -- it's that I'm a large person and need a certain amount of air space to not feel squished.

On the other hand, 700 to 800 sq ft is "just right" for us, while 2100 was way too big.

But, Max, just wait until you have kids!

Size means different things to different people. There's nothing inherently bad about either small spaces or large spaces, as long as they're laid out and used appropriately. It's like what you choose to wear or what colors you choose to look at in your home (assuming that you have a choice)--it varies from person to person.

That said, there does tend to be a tilt in this country toward bigger everything, so an occasional defense of small spaces is not amiss.

#14 -- Small spaces tend to be in big places.

Yeah, I could have a thousand square feet in a nameless, faceless personality-free suburb. But why would I want to be there?

P.S. to Joan - well said.

You can keep your cats out of trouble more easily.

I'd like a thousand square feet in my neighborhood, plus outdoor space! A girl can dream, right? ;-)

Rob -
YES! One of my favorite things about living in the city is that even when I had a REALLY small apartment (284 sq.ft.), it's like ... although I really made it VERY homey and even had people over sometimes -- and yes, even out-of-town guests -- it really only needed to be my bedroom.

Because the city is your living-room/dining-room! Or at least it certainly can be! And depending on how social you are, it CAN be your extra bedroom, heh heh heh hehhhhhh.

pics please!

I'll ditto all of Maxwell's reasons and add this:
I left a bad marriage and a 4 bedroom 2 bath house in upstate NY for a 250 s/f studio in the Village. The house was too small for my ex-husband and me b/c the relationship was horrible. The studio was a great place for me to start anew and eventually became a wonderful bubble to be in with my now second husband. I'm reminded of the lines from John Donne's "The Good Morrow" in which the true love, "Makes one little room an everywhere."

C'mon has the world gone mad? Like every single person I know wouldn't trade their apartment for one with 2x the square feet if they could get it for the same price.

I'm all for making due with the best you can afford, or living in a smaller space cause you like the neighborhood but c'mon.

"Keep your cats out of trouble," "cook fresher," "spend more time at the local coffee shop"???? Get your heads out of your butts!

Congratulations, littledebbiet! You've just broadened your circle of acquaintances to people who aren't necessarily craving more space. Isn't it fun to discover different points of view?

If prices here plummeted, I'd keep the same size apartment, enjoy the lower rent, and splurge on some fabulous antique rugs and custom shelving. Having furnished and cleaned 2100 sq ft in the past -- never again!

Well, I suppose there is such a thing as *too* small, depending on one's stage of life. I wouldn't want two kids in a 350 square foot studio. That sort of thing tends to require solutions that are more expensive than renting an extra 300 square feet or so.

Meanwhile, my current arrangement (soon to be family of four in about 800 square feet) - to me it's like having a spare but very carefully chosen wardrobe. Rather than look at an overstuffed closet of clothes and thinking, "I have nothing to wear," everything you need is already there. What you miss in variety you make up for in quality.

To Wende in San Fran, I'm 6'4" and I live in a 250 sq foot studio...trust me you can do it. It was rough when my 6'1" girlfriend was living with me for a summer, but even then, we managed. I do have 11' ceilings, for "airspace" though.

I went from a 1400 sq.ft. house in CA to a 450 sq.ft. apt. in NYC, and while I sorely miss my Maytag Neptune washer/dryer, I wouldn't go back for anything, and it's not even just because I love the city so much. I couldn't afford to furnish that much house, and the backyard, and the landscaping...and then there was all the cleaning, and the gardening, and the weeding, and clearing the gutters, and pruning the rosebushes...way too much work. Now I can clean my floors on my knees in 15 minutes and go for a walk in beautiful Central Park. It's a lifestyle choice!

OMG, Red! The husband's goalee equipment alone would have eaten half your closet space!

One thing I love about AT -- and I'm not being facetious -- is that by AT standards, we have a *lot* of stuff. In real life, I'm the only person in my gene pool who has ever gotten rid of anything -- and quel horreur! I collect one thing *only* and not much of that. It's good to be among people who see me as conservative rather than as a whacked-out radical anti-possessions type.

Basically, I just want to go clothing shopping with your 6'1" girlfriend.

YAY Wende in San Fran!!

I am glad in this world of bigger, more, more, excess to the point of excess, waste, to have an entire group of blog readers on the same page. The idea of having a fridge full of food and nothing to eat, or a closet full of clothes and nothing to wear is not possible in a small place.

Number 17 (or wherever the list got): a small space forces you to reassess those little crevices (or big closets) of stuff (literal or not) that you are afraid to deal with, and you either decide to keep them or get rid of them. Like with life, at some point, you realize you belong to this workd, it does not belong to you.

Thanks for sharing the small space of the planet with 5+ billion people and me!

Obviously people would take the bigger apartment if all factors were equal. To me, this list was about the choice between, say, living in a tiny apartment in the East Village versus having a larger apartment in Park Slope. The Park Slopers are always bragging about size, but I brag about the things mentioned on the list. Even though my apartment is small, people still seem to envy me a bit more than my Park Slope friends.

Not ALWAYS cheaper. Even a small place in NYC can get pretty pricey.

I live in a 100 sq. ft (yes, 7x14) mini-studio in Soho and I am happier here than in any of the larger places of my last 6 years in nyc.

For some people it's ALL about location and view.

I have an ultra-simple life and now I have the place (and the very cheap rent) to match.

7x14!?!?!

Anya -- you have to do a house tour!

Great debate. I envy all you small space people. I could probably do it except that I own a few thousand books.

I guess I'm the odd man out here, I lived in a 400sf apartment for 6 years and loved it. Though I wouldn't want to go much smaller than that. And now that I make my living as a photographer I live in a 3,000 sf 'studio' (read warehouse) and I love this too. I don't love it because its bigger, I love it because it suits my needs. And isn't that what it's all about? Finding a space that fits your needs?

The only problem I see is too many people fall into the madison ave trap the life isn't complete unless you have a house in the burbs, 2.5 kids and a white picket fence.

The real trick is to find a space that's you (regardless of size) and to enjoy life to the fullest, and as I read here, many people have. Bigger isn't better its just different.

I agree that it's all about your circumstances but also a lot about upbringing and 'expectations'. I live in 475 sf and can't imagine having anything bigger -I have everything I need and no extra! With environmental changes looming - shoudn't we all be more concerned with how much 'waste' we produce? As Gandhi said 'we must be the change we wish to see in the world'. Talking about cutting back on waste and actually LIVING IT ( selling your car and minimizing waste )are two totally different things.

'I could probably do it except that I own a few thousand books.'

Claire me too... pick the 10 books you absolutely could not live without and dump the rest... after all this is a 10 for post... ok 20 if you must...

Trying to cut back, Arty

"Less is more" does not apply to books! I have a lot of books and they are the only possessions I really prize, perhaps along with a few pieces of art I picked up during my travels. I give away ones that I will never read/reference again, but that tends to be very few. The key is finding a way to keep them well-organized. Also, small does not have to equal city. My dream is a small house on a lot of land, or abutting a park... a cozy little home in nature.