Is Bigger Really Better?

I have some of the most interesting discussions with my new friends at the dog park.  Thank you, Pepper, for introducing me to a whole new group of men and women, all dog lovers like me.  Our discussions cover everything from politics to food, to culture, movies and books.

One of our recents conversations had to do with homes, neighborhoods, and the size of our dwellings.  Our point was, that the houses they're building today are so big.  Do we really need such big houses?   Charlene was telling me about an old PBS show that traced the history of man in terms of how he lived, and what worked best.  The program determined that a neighborhood of homes, with a plaza or park in the middle seemed to work best.  Some communities are trying that out today, even though it's a very old idea, at least as old as Pompei.

I began talking about how I would love to develop housing for seniors, giving them very little living space, but lots of community and open space.  My idea would be to have homes of 1000 square feet (I know it sounds small but it is very doable), with central areas  for recreation, computers, art, and sport.  My concept wouldn't work today, because most people feel that bigger is better. 

How much do we really need in the way of material possessions and space? Much less than most of have.  I think of my own upsizing and  downsizing.   First we went up the size ladder, then down.  We started in a 900 square foot apartment, moved to a 1300 square foot house, then a 2400 square foot house, then a 5800 square foot house.  Did we need all that space?  Absolutely not.  Then we started the descent.  We moved to a 3000 square foot house in Westwood, then built at 2600 square foot house in Del Mar, and from there we moved to a 1600 square foot rental in Carlsbad, and are now in a 1250 square foot house in Carlsbad.  I never thought I could be happy in such a small space again, but after doing some major housecleaning, I am.  This house is a perfect size.  So why do they continue to build huge homes?  Arithmetic.  Obviously it's more economical to build a big 2 story home than a small one level home.  I guess it's what people still want.  Some communities do build homes with very small bedrooms for the kids, and lots of open space for the children to play.  This makes sense. 

I saw on the news the other day about a couple who were downsizing.  They sold their home and built a 300 square foot home that could be moved around on a trailer.  They could just put down the house wherever they wanted.  (what about utilities)?  They have everything they need, and no clutter.  Personally, that does not appeal to me, but I could see a senior community of very small homes, and lots of community areas.  That's a project I'll pursue in my next life!  For now, I'll enjoy our 1250 square foot home, and hope that our next move, probably in 18 months, will be to an equally small and efficient home.  Is bigger better?  Not for me. (check out smallhomeoregon.net to see what one community is doing to create smaller, more efficient homes)

Since writing this blog, I have done further research and found that there are other people who feel the need to scale down our homes.  If you're interested to see what others are thinking and doing, check out www.tinyhouseblog.com.  You'll be amazed.  Also, I found small communities in Portland, Oregon, Washington State, and Geneva, Illinois that are creating homes and small communities of this type.  There's even a website that will give you architectural plans for building a small house, anywhere from 75-875 square feet.  Now that's what I call small.