WSJ Article on the Shrinking Size of the Vacation Home
Last week the Wall Street Journal ran an article on the shrinking size of the vacation home. Recently, throughout the blog world and various trade magazines, there has been a great deal of talk of how, after many years of expansion of the average size of US homes, things are starting to shrink. For the first time in over a decade the average size of a new home shrank last year. Many expect that trend to continue. There are a combination of reasons.
One, there is a bit of a backlash towards the McMansion expansion of the suburbs over the past 15 years. Two, the sustainable movement has people more aware of the ramifications on the environment and their checkbooks than ever before. At the same time there is a pretty nasty recession going on that you may have heard about … and the reality is that smaller houses tend to cost a bit less than huge ones to buy and then to operate. The recession will, eventually, pass. The sustainable movement, I suspect, will not (though it has come and gone in the past with energy prices, etc., I think it has staying power this time around).
Most people in the sustainable building industry have a knee-jerk reaction to big homes. There seems to be quick “this isn’t green” reaction to any home that is over 2,500 ft. or so on sites such as Jetson Green (take a look at the comments on this link, as an example) - even if the home is LEED certified, Net Zero Energy, and/or generally built responsibly. This attitude perplexes me, and it is one I don’t agree with or think is fair in many cases.
First, let me say that I fully embrace the smaller home movement. I think many large homes are wasteful in every way. They use more resources to build and to operate than is needed. More than anything, for many people they simply don’t make sense. As Steve Midouhas likes to say, “people build houses for the two weekends a year that everyone they know is around”.
The homes we have designed start at 1,250 sq. ft (very small for new construction in our market) and currently top out under 2,300 (also small for the market). We think they fit many people’s lifestyles perfectly, allow us to build sustainably, and make sense both financially and aesthetically with their scale. They also allow us to sell them for less and make good design more accessible, but that’s a post for another day.
While I am fully in support of smaller and more sensible homes, I refuse to be one of the people that, upon seeing a larger home (say 4,000 ft), instantly turns my nose at it. If it’s a 4,000 ft home with fake columns, vinyl siding, three more bedrooms than are ever used, an HVAC system that is poorly sized for the home, and a concrete yard — yeah, that really turns me off.
Yet, if the home is built with a nice scale, uses real and sustainable materials as much as possible, is right-sized for the family, and uses non-toxic and highly efficient finishes on a well landscaped lot - well then who am I to criticize? Some people need and want a larger home. That they should do so and also prioritize responsible design is a good thing, not a bad one. If the home is LEED certified, Net Zero Energy, or something else sustainably tangible, and is built with some style and care for the community it shares, I refuse to dismiss its’ owner’s responsibility just because of its’ size. Sure, all things being equal, a smaller home built with the same commitment to design would use less resources. That would be great, and it is when it is the choice. However, if that is not what people want, if they want a larger home, it would not be built in the first place. It’s responsible of architects and developers to encourage and promote smaller homes. Especially for vacation homes (but main residences too), most people think they need way more space than they do. The industry is moving to smaller and more efficient standards and we’d like to think that we are very much going to be a part of that.
As far as I am concerned though the willingness of people to build responsibly - perhaps especially for larger homes where the net difference is greatest - is to be applauded at any size.
WSJ Article on the Shrinking Size of the Vacation Home
Last week the Wall Street Journal ran an article on the shrinking size of the vacation home. Recently, throughout the blog world and various trade magazines, there has been a great deal of talk of how, after many years of expansion of the average size of US homes, things are starting to shrink. For the first time in over a decade the average size of a new home shrank last year. Many expect that trend to continue. There are a combination of reasons.
One, there is a bit of a backlash towards the McMansion expansion of the suburbs over the past 15 years. Two, the sustainable movement has people more aware of the ramifications on the environment and their checkbooks than ever before. At the same time there is a pretty nasty recession going on that you may have heard about … and the reality is that smaller houses tend to cost a bit less than huge ones to buy and then to operate. The recession will, eventually, pass. The sustainable movement, I suspect, will not (though it has come and gone in the past with energy prices, etc., I think it has staying power this time around).
Most people in the sustainable building industry have a knee-jerk reaction to big homes. There seems to be quick “this isn’t green” reaction to any home that is over 2,500 ft. or so on sites such as Jetson Green (take a look at the comments on this link, as an example) - even if the home is LEED certified, Net Zero Energy, and/or generally built responsibly. This attitude perplexes me, and it is one I don’t agree with or think is fair in many cases.
First, let me say that I fully embrace the smaller home movement. I think many large homes are wasteful in every way. They use more resources to build and to operate than is needed. More than anything, for many people they simply don’t make sense. As Steve Midouhas likes to say, “people build houses for the two weekends a year that everyone they know is around”.
The homes we have designed start at 1,250 sq. ft (very small for new construction in our market) and currently top out under 2,300 (also small for the market). We think they fit many people’s lifestyles perfectly, allow us to build sustainably, and make sense both financially and aesthetically with their scale. They also allow us to sell them for less and make good design more accessible, but that’s a post for another day.
While I am fully in support of smaller and more sensible homes, I refuse to be one of the people that, upon seeing a larger home (say 4,000 ft), instantly turns my nose at it. If it’s a 4,000 ft home with fake columns, vinyl siding, three more bedrooms than are ever used, an HVAC system that is poorly sized for the home, and a concrete yard — yeah, that really turns me off.
Yet, if the home is built with a nice scale, uses real and sustainable materials as much as possible, is right-sized for the family, and uses non-toxic and highly efficient finishes on a well landscaped lot - well then who am I to criticize? Some people need and want a larger home. That they should do so and also prioritize responsible design is a good thing, not a bad one. If the home is LEED certified, Net Zero Energy, or something else sustainably tangible, and is built with some style and care for the community it shares, I refuse to dismiss its’ owner’s responsibility just because of its’ size. Sure, all things being equal, a smaller home built with the same commitment to design would use less resources. That would be great, and it is when it is the choice. However, if that is not what people want, if they want a larger home, it would not be built in the first place. It’s responsible of architects and developers to encourage and promote smaller homes. Especially for vacation homes (but main residences too), most people think they need way more space than they do. The industry is moving to smaller and more efficient standards and we’d like to think that we are very much going to be a part of that.
As far as I am concerned though the willingness of people to build responsibly - perhaps especially for larger homes where the net difference is greatest - is to be applauded at any size.
Posted 1 year ago & Filed under design, size, jetson green,
