Nearly a quarter of our nation’s annual energy use (approx. $700 billion dollars) is spent on our homes each year. Utility and material costs continue to rise due to competing demands for our dwindling natural resources.
In an effort to reduce costs and consumption, the race is on to develop high performance homes (green) and to make sweeping changes to our public policy. But there is another story emerging, one that shakes the very foundation (no pun intended) of American culture. Many homeowners, architects and builders are rethinking the obvious: HOME SIZE. A smaller footprint literally means, well…. a smaller footprint.
The beauty of this concept is that it doesn’t take a building scientist to understand that less square footage can substantially reduce energy and resource use, not to mention maintenance long term. That a cultural shift of this magnitude could match or exceed the benefits of science and policy makes it even more appealing from a financial perspective. Downsizing may well be the wave of the future.
It has been widely accepted in the U.S. that bigger is better. Case in point: home prices are typically based on square footage calcs and the number of bathrooms and bedrooms a property contains. Exceptional design, the quality of a home, how well it functions or the energy it saves seldom factor into real estate value. The McMansion era saw oversized “white boxes,” tricked out with strategically placed chandeliers, big roof lines, high ceilings and a maximum number of rooms that “counted” hit the market in unprecedented numbers.
Unlike countries where available space is scarce relative to population density, we have always had the luxury of living LARGE. As energy prices rise and home values fluctuate however, more and more buyers are rethinking the value of “more is better.” A burgeoning cultural shift is underway to “reduce, reuse, and recycle” to conserve resources and cost throughout the life of a residence. The choice to remodel dovetails nicely with this approach, as does re-purposing the materials and resources of an existing home and site. Emphasizing skillful design is critical to making renovations with smaller footprints work to provide the luxury that sheer size affords us.
Good design principles certainly apply to any size residence. In terms of “not so big” homes however the stakes are higher for the homeowner since there is less wiggle room. In a larger footprint for example, a poorly designed kitchen may be less noticeable because spillover space can compensate for weak planning. On the other hand, distilling a home to its simplest form with proficient planning methods not only avoids waste but it can offer more freedom and flexibility than size alone, as well as clues to maximize use.
To live large in a “not so big” house we can employ time honored design precepts to outwit spatial circumstances. Utilizing borrowed views, efficient circulation, the integration of shelter and activity, organizing principles that optimize locations for each function, removal of obstructions and treating the interior and exterior as one continuous element….these are just some of the ways we can “expand” how a home lives. Our experience of a space is really not so much determined by its physical dimensions as by how it feels and flows when we are in it.