Downsizing

There is a lot of buzz these days about "downsizing" and small homes.  HGTV even has a series about it.  Unfortunately I don't believe many people think through all that the concept implies.  True, moving from a 6,000 square foot home to a 5,000 square foot home is technically "downsizing", but it's hardly a sacrifice.  But what about cutting your space in half, or less?

For decades I've made a living by building BIG homes for others.  If you have a family of 4 or 5 or more, downsizing is hard to do.  For them, bigger is always better.  If you have a home stuffed with fine furniture you've bought or inherited over a lifetime, and if you're unwilling to part with any of it, downsizing is virtually impossible.  But if the kids are grown and out of your space, if you don't have a lot of overnight company, if you don't throw big parties, and if you aren't married to your "stuff", downsizing is a great way to de-clutter and live simply.

I can, and did, many years ago, and here's how it all started:  One evening (back when I was single) I noticed my closet shelves were dusty.  I took everything out, cleaned every surface, then started to put things back in.  That's when it dawned on me I had tons of stuff I never, and I mean NEVER, used or wore.  Like jeans that *ahem* must have shrunk in the dryer, and shirts that went out of style back during the Clinton administration.  And empty boxes that I kept in case the contents turned out to be defective and I had to send back, but of course never did.  When I put back in only those things I used, I realized my closet was waaaaaay bigger than I needed.

That got me to thinking about what else I might be holding on to that was just taking up space.  Soon I was like a commando on a mission.  Every closet, the linen cabinets, every chest and drawer, underneath every lavatory, everything got inspected and culled.  Then I began thinking about furniture.  Why do I need a sofa and 3 big chairs in a den when I only have one butt?  And what's the point of having bedrooms that never were used?  (I finally gave up on the Swedish Bikini Team ever paying me a surprise visit.)  Or a dining table with 2 leaves and 6 chairs...or was it 8 chairs?...and a hutch?

Then I put a pencil to what all this was costing me.  The payments for a large house that I didn't need, plus the taxes, utilities, insurance, maintenance and upkeep, that @%&# yard....it was depressing!  Eventually I met and married K and we decided (me enthusiastically, her grudgingly at first) that we could do just fine with half the space.  The "For Sale" sign went up, a deal was struck, and then it was time to put my money where my mouth was. 

By the time the movers arrived we had given some stuff away to friends and family, put some in storage (it's still there), took some with us, and sold some on Craig's List.  My moment of truth was when I was packing up my 450 +/- books.  K asked me if I ever re-read any of them, and I said no.  Then she pointed out that all I really had were 450 hardcover dust catchers.  *Hmmm, good point*  I kept a few volumes that were special to me and gave away/sold the rest.  Today I pretty much read only kindle books.

We moved into temporary quarters in a 2 bed, 2 bath apartment, but found it such easy living we decided to just stay put and let maintenance handle all those pesky old chores I so hated.  We have since downsized from even that as we still had more space than we needed.  I'm now thinking about 1000-1200 square feet, or about the size of the den and kitchen shown in the photo at the top of this post, would be perfect.

My friend who lives full-time on a 35' boat in St Pete, FL would be proud of me.  He taught me to keep only what I needed and nothing else.  That's only a slight exaggeration.  We do have to stay vigilant as it's easy to backslide and buy things that wind up stuffed in the back of the closet a few weeks later.

I would consider building a home again if I could ever find the right site to put it on.  Not to sound picky or anything, but I could probably be happy in a small, cozy little place like this, complete with a similar view, of course. 

S

Bigger is better....truth or myth?

Wonder who it was that first came up with the slogan "bigger is better"?  I will agree that in a few very specific circumstances bigger might indeed be better, but generally speaking bigger just means "bigger headaches".

I read in the paper yesterday that now that the US economy is recovering, the size of newly built homes is growing again.  It said that new homes now average over 2200 square feet, but I can tell you that around here (Dallas), that's a relatively modest starter house.  The vast majority seem to be well in excess of 3000 feet.  For families with kids this might make sense, but not for empty nesters (and there are a lot of us).

Build 'em big.  Build a lot of 'em.  

I haven't built a home smaller than 5500 square feet in years.  Right now I'm adding on to a 6300 square footer I built 2 years ago ^ , bringing it up to around 9000 feet.  I can't imagine living in a house that large.  It just isn't my thing.  (But of course, if they're intent on giving their hard earned money to a builder, it might as well be me. ;)

I had a large(-ish) home myself a few years ago, but with the recession of '08 approaching I knew that its value was only going to drop, so I bailed when I could and did fairly well.  

The main reason I bailed, however, was because I was tired of paying all the property taxes, the insurance, the utilities, the maintenance, the yard upkeep, the cleaning, etc.  I was getting no satisfaction from ownership, and in fact it was an albatross around my neck.

I began thinking about it and realized we actually only used about 1300 square feet, the rest just being space that was never used.  All that hassle wasn't worth it to my teeny ego.  Or maybe I'm just lazy? (Full disclosure.)

We rented a 2 bed-2 bath apartment* in a nice area and found it to be plenty big enough....after getting rid of everything we knew we were never going to use again.  Before long we realized even that was too much (the spare bedroom became a catch-all junk room) so we downsized again to a one bedroom apartment.  The peace of mind knowing that I have virtually no chores to do around the house/apt is very liberating.

This would do just fine.

But now here's the crazy part:  I sometimes think it would be nice to build another home for K and me.  I could make it state-of-the-art, energy efficient, super durable, etc, but I would want absolutely no more than 1,000 square feet, and there's the rub.  No city around here will allow a home to be built that small.

Why, you ask?  (Go ahead, ask.)  Because the cities like all the property tax $$$$ big houses bring in.  Screw what the people want, this is what the cities want.  The tail is wagging the dog.  

So the next time you hear some bureaucrat from the Department of Overpaid Gubment Employment preach that we need to preserve water and power, use less everything, recycle more, live smarter and such, remind them of this hypocrisy.

S

* Sometime I should write about my downsizing experience.

My take on small homes

I like small homes.  I've been a disciple of architect Sarah Susanka since I first read her book, The Not So Big House, years ago.  Bigger is NOT better.  (Hey, I'm talkin' housing here, OK?)  Huge rooms with 20-foot ceilings are not cozy.  They're cold and echo-y.  I should know....I've built enough of them.

I build BIG houses because that's what people pay me to do.  As Willie said, "If they've got the dime, I've got the time."    Most are well over 5,000 sq ft.  But for myself, I want the comfortable, cozy, affordable lifestyle a small home offers.  Here's an example:

This is a 2012 small house award winner by Seattle architect Matt Hutchins and featured in Fine Homebuilding Magazine.  It's about 900 sq ft and is actually in the back yard of their 1926-vintage primary residence.  They no longer needed 3,000 sq ft as their family is now grown, so they built this in order to stay close to their friends and their long-time neighborhood and then leased out their big house.

Most of my clients request I install in their kitchens $35,000 ultra-high-end appliance packages when truth be told, they rarely use anything but the microwave.  Something like this (again the Seattle award winner) would work just fine for 99% of us....me for sure.

The trick is to learn to put every single nook and cranny to use, like this entertainment space (TV, old vinyl records, CD's, etc) tucked under the stairs.  I have a thousand ideas such as this that can make 1,000 square feet live like twice that much.

Something like this is what I want to some day build for K and I.  Fortunately she and I think alike, at least on this.   ;)  

The objection will come from the cities who don't want small houses.  Their rationale is they'll have to provide police and fire protection, water and sewer service, trash collection, parks, streets, etc, and small homes won't generate enough tax revenue to pay for those services, while a 4,000 square footer will provide way more than enough.  It's all just a numbers ($$$) game to them.  Today small homes are usually "zoned out".

One option would be to go out in the country and build....cities have no jurisdiction there....but I refuse to live out in the sticks.  I have no idea if I can pull this off, but I'm gonna try.  It may take years for all the stars to line up, but it'll be worth the effort if it works.  Wish me luck.

S