How fitting... I am currently living in a 950sq ft townhome with my two kids, and am going to check out a 600 sq ft cottage this afternoon... Serious downsize, especially since two years ago we lived in 2400sq ft. I recently got laid off and need to cut expenses somewhere, and am hoping that a significantly smaller home will help with that....

You'd need an unusual temperament to share a space that small, but for one person I think it would be great.

I appreciate small homes but there is a definite limit for me as to how small I would be willing to go. I grew up in houses around 1,100 square feet or so. My parents had 5 kids. 3 bedrooms and 1 bathroom. Looking back on it now... I would not want to do it again. Ive lived in apartments from about 550 to 850 square feet also. currently, I live alone in a modest sized 1,700 square foot house (well I live with my critters). It's a good size for me. I could probably go a little smaller, but not much. Unless there was some pressing financial or other reason to downsize.

I want to downsize too.. Planning on selling my 1200 sq ft condo and buying a small house with my equity- don't want to have a mortgage payment anymore! That gone and my frugal living expenses I will then be living LARGE! ;)

That's both a strong, young, self-sufficient person's adventure and a pleasant daydream for me. Freedom from maintaining my suburban haven's surplus space, material possessions, and related unnecessary complications sometimes seems very attractive. I may come closer to living the dream someday, although a city studio home would lack the apparent quiet and solitude of Christopher Smith's home.

We are a family of three living in 600 sf one-bedroom. It's plenty of space for us and could even fit another child if necessary. We dream of a small house of our own though.

I grew up in a 1200 sf house, there were five of us and it always seemed spacious, still does. We don't need or want that much.

I'm in 1700 square feet right now and I just told the kids I think they are going to have to go outside for the rest of the day. I was kidding, but sharing your space seems to make you need more. We've got 5 people here and 2 dogs and we do school at home and I work at home. If I lived in 130 square feet with these other 4 people, I'd need to go outside a lot more, that's for sure. Or they would.

melissacj, I hope you are soon working in a job you enjoy. Been there.

1,700 sq ft for one person? Wow. We have 1,800. If I could design from scratch and have the layout we need, we'd probably have 1,500-1,600.

My studio is about 300 square feet and feels just right. I can't imagine a single, childless person needing much more space than that. It's definitely forced me to think twice about buying more stuff and has encouraged me to whittle down the stuff I already have.

Decluttering tip: When going through things you saved from your past, consider donating to a local historical association. Many colleges and universities also have archives departments. That way, your memories will be preserved without you having to store them yourself.

ELFay, you do not have much of an imagination ... there are many reasons why a single, childless person would need more than 300 square feet of living space- perhaps you like to entertain more than 2 or 3 people frequently, perhaps you have frequent overnight guests, perhaps you work from home, perhaps you cook a lot and need more than an efficiency kitchen, ... etc. I rarely comment on articles such as this because it always stirs up the "holier-than-thou" crowd with their myopic view of the world. Too many people forget that everyone is unique. People have different needs and the things that you need are not necessarily the same as the things that other people need.

So I'll go back to my unnecessarily large and wasteful 1,700 square foot house in the suburbs and do something more productive with my time. g'day.

Well, I'm in an active city neighborhood so if I have guests I usually take them out. There are quite a few great independent coffeehouses within walking distance of me.

Family of three here with two giant rescue dogs. We do great in an 800 square foot home. I'm currently in purge mode though. Why am I keeping my notes from university? Do I ever use them? No it's more because I paid so darn much for them... I'm learning to be more strict and harsh with my emotional "attachment" to things and purging is good for the body and soul. We sold both of our sets of couches on kijiji and used that money to buy a designer one we love. People need to learn to live more sustainable and less wasteful. Heating a 1700sq foot home for one person IS wasteful and gross negligence. And yes that's a holier than thou statement but come ON!

Some people (not me, I have two) say having pet dogs is bad, because feeding them takes resources that would be better used in feeding hungry people. Still others relish dog meat. Every AT reader who isn't homeless has a home life that somebody else would condemn as offensively wasteful. The question of what constitutes "the" right home can't be resolved because it is simplistic and falsely shaped. People are too varied for any one formula, so that old conflict seems just a poor excuse to be contemptuous and antagonistic. In contrast, I appreciate AT's focus on environmental protection in relation to residential interior design.

I think we're all missing the point, there are many factors to consider when deciding on the size of your home. I'm intrigued by the tiny houses but in the frozen north it's a little hard to spend a lot of time outdoors in the winter but in warm climates that might be a great way to live. I think the point is don't just go for the biggest house you can afford, really consider what you need to live comfortably and don't waste resources heating and maintaining space that you could easily live without.

@andreainmaine, Agreed. Thanks for your clarity.

I watched the interesting teaser twice. Its statements that the average US home size doubled since 1970/in the last 40 years are puzzling. Did the producers-directors mean just that the average size of newly constructed single-family, detached houses is larger than it was in 1970? That's very different from the average US home size literally having doubled in size since 1970. I was born in '59 and think I'd have noticed the latter. I also doubt that the latter happened in part because many Americans' homes are apartments and most Americans live in older homes. I look forward to the documentary spelling out points more fully. If Tiny were to appear to be deliberately misleading, then that would be used to discredit the sustainability and tiny house movements. Besides, those odd statements make Americans' lifestyles appear bizarre to people who don't think them through, and the facts are grim enough.

I lived for years with another person in about 140sq ft. When we moved into 760 sq ft this felt like the lap of luxury.

I could live well in 350 sf, especially if 50=screened porch. Easy on the utility bills and, with built-ins, it could be easy to clean.

What are the advantages of building a wood house on wheels from scratch? Why not just haul a finished metal trailer or train car or transport container or something similar up to the site, then add a porch? The trailer option seems much easier, and possibly sturdier and cheaper, than the wood house from scratch option. Trailers are deathtraps here in Miami due to hurricanes, but might be OK in the CO mountains. Either way, how would such a tiny home be kept warm enough to live in during the winter? Or, is it intended as a summer home? Are we talking no electricity? No running water? It's clearly doable because those and indoors plumbed toilets weren't options until relatively recently historically. It will be interesting to see in the documentary whether the insulation and so on can make such a home viable by current standards.

I'm reminded of a deserted, one-room wood construction I found while walking on a Costa Rican huge farm-vacation place. Maybe it had been used by some one to watch livestock no longer there. He'd left just an equally roughcut, raw table in the middle of it. There was no outhouse. It was just a walled rain shelter out in the middle of that naturally beautiful empty expanse. Even so, indoors he'd carefully drawn a cross centered over the one door and the three window holes, whether by custom or because the solitude and silence affected him. That space so intrigued me that I still think of it often.

We just moved from our 650 sq. ft. home with two adults, one toddler, one baby, a big dog, and two cats. We made it work, but I found I didn't enjoy relaxing at home very much. I also found my patience to be tapped a lot more when there was always a kid or animal underfoot. We now live in 1500 sq. ft. of pure bliss. It's a great size for us, but doesn't feel like too much. Like many of you said, it all depends on what kind of life you're living. I'm a stay at home mom, and need to be at home a lot, so having room to breath is important. When it was just my husband and I and we both worked out of the house, 650 sq. ft. seemed like more than enough room. It depends on so many factors.

@mamaceli, For sure, and as the kids grow and start to crave privacy the increased square footage will be even more welcome.

If I lived alone I'd have done it by now. As it is, I live with two other adults and four cats in 860sq ft and it's not bad. Sometimes the space seems huge, other times too small. I think that means it's about right. :)

I'm also a minimalist-ish; I've downsized a LOT and don't buy much new stuff, but I do have a few categories where I'm still anything but minimal. It HELPS in small spaces!

@Miami's Elaine: From what I understand the average new home size, though older homes would have been going up in size due to flippers performing foundation level tear downs and expansion/refinishing jobs. That said, the 70's was the end of an era of post war housing booms. There was a ton of small, cheap construction going on. I live in a neighborhood of houses that are mostly 1920-40's built homes, with no expansion, and they mostly sit in the 2000-2500 sqft range. I think what is more telling is density. I would be curious to know the average family unit size occupying new homes then and now.

i DRREAM of this! my husband and i purchased a 3000 square foot home to give us room to grow. we grew and no longer wanted and realized we didnt need that space. last year we downsized to 1900 and it still feels full of wasted space. we are now a family of four and possibly moving into a 900 sq ft, 2bd/1bt home on 18 acres. it feels amazing at the idea of purging and having only what we need. i cant wait to see this!

@kamikazetedibear, Thanks for your explanation. So, you'd also guess that those Tiny teaser statements mean just that the average single-family detached house constructed in the US during 2010 had twice the square footage of the one built during 1970? It seems plausible that they may be well-intended shorthand for that.

I agree with you that many older houses were given some additional square footage between 1970 and 2010. I just doubt that that and new construction literally doubled the square footage of the average American home in that time. A 100% increase doesn't seem plausible even excluding non-house homes from the calculations, which if done should have been noted since those words aren't synonymous. I wonder if the many vacant Mcmansions were included even though they're homes for nobody.

Your question about density change is interesting. There'd be more to a good answer than just the point that the average American has fewer and later kids. I notice that cities are presented as environmental villains less these days. Spreading houses out over what had been farm land or homes for wildlife is seen as even more problematic, so suburbs currently are bigger environmental bad guys. The recent headlines on the approaching population milestone also drive home the importance of affordable housing.