I did see it.

I loved the phrase "The McMansion goes on a diet." I saved the clip to show my husband tonight b/c they had us pegged. The criteria they used for classifying what's happening in new construction included:

1. 2000 sq ft
2. 9 ft ceilings
3. open floor plan (spec. kitchen/family/dining all one area)
4. more outdoor space & porches

I can't decide if it's cute or absurd that our new home meets all four criteria.

We're still in the design phase, but it looks like we'll meet criteria 2, 3, and 4. We'll come in at about 3200 square feet, I think, and that's after putting in a lot of effort to pare the floor plan down!

mdev, that's us too with some slight adjustments, i.e., 1900 sq. ft. and 10 ft. ceilings, and we didn't even know it was the trend. LOL

I came across someone's lovely home the other day online and this person had a sun room, that was fully furnished, a living room, fully furnished for sitting, a family room, fully furnished for sitting and entertaining and a bonus room, fully furnished with sofa etc. My thought was, how many rooms like this can you use at one time? I thought to myself it was a lot of wasted space. I can see having a sun room and a very large living/family room. I thought having 4 rooms, all fully furnished for sitting and/or entertaining, but cut off from one another, was a bit much and wasted space. I figure if you entertain and have a lot of people over you would want them all in the same area and not spread out into seperate rooms, wouldn't you? At least that's how I would like it.

i've never been one to follow trends. i suppose this might work for some but i'm not a "one size fits all" kind of girl. while i do believe bigger is not always better, i also know our family will simply not "fit" in a 2000 sq foot home. if it works for people i think that's great but as far as following what might be considered the trend, i'll stick to marching to my own drum.

Kate-

I think this has less to do with us fitting into a trend and more to do with the trend aligning with the path that we've chosen for ourselves. Maybe brutuses and I are the trendsetters- LOL!

That way, it's less about us being followers and you being your own person. But I don't think you meant it that way- it just came across that way from my perspective.

Brutuses-

The photos of your house are beautiful. I wish ours were almost complete as well.

mdev,
Yes, Dh and I also qualify for the main 4 except for #1, we are even smaller (1648 sq.ft.)!

brutuses, I agree with you about all the "separate" rooms; doesn't make sense to me.

kate, I don't think anyone would expect everyone to "follow" a trend; I just thought maybe the economy may have triggered a part of it. I think that everyone tries to build to their specific needs and some, I suppose, build just for the "trend"!

I guess we don't measure up- we were originally planning about 1300 sq ft, but even that is being pared back due to the economy. Our first house was 800 sq ft, and I could see us returning to that. We're being clobbered on the equity in our current home- it may only bring half of what it would have 2 years ago. That equity is what will build our next house. If things get much worse, we may just sell out land and chuck the whole idea....:(

It is kind of funny to me, things that I thought were "my original idea" after researching I am finding there are lots of people with the same idea. Like no formal living room, no formal dining room, etc. I thought these were all MY ideas haha.

I was trying to keep my sf down, but not working out so well. ha. might downsize yet before it's over.

The house-actually a condo in the city- we just sold was almost 4000 sq ft. Even though our family is still growing, there were rooms that we just never used. We had this huge gorgeous dining room and even during dinner parties everyone just wanted to hang out in the kitchen, bar and sitting area. So in the new house we ditched it. Same goes with the semi-formal (or whatever you want to call it) living room. I'm done designing rooms that look good but no one wants to sit in. We also increased the mud room area in this house since that seems to keep the rest of the house from being cluttered. The whole first floor is going to be open with the kitchen flowing into the dining area, which flows to a few sofas near the fireplace and across the room we have another seating area that seats 5-6. If we have a big party, 22 people will be able to sit down (on the first floor) once we include the bfast nook, bar stools, dining room table and sofas & chairs. 2000 sq ft works for us but I can appreciate how others would really feel they need more space.

A possible reason for the trend toward smaller housing might be to cut increasing energy costs. If implemented by the new president, the "smart energy" plan will monitor levels of home energy consumption and tax accordingly. Coupled with the cap and trade proposal, the cost to heat and cool homes will jump way up. There was even a rumor at one point that people who live in homes larger than 2700 sq.ft. will have to pay additional taxes because they use more energy. Maybe some people are afraid they won't be able to afford to heat very big homes. I certainly hope and pray that these plans do not come to pass.

"If implemented by the new president, the "smart energy" plan will monitor levels of home energy consumption and tax accordingly."

Uh. No. Simply not true.

We're getting ready to enter a depression; people aren't spending what they did five years ago, and it's really that simple.

brutuses: We feel the same way about wasted space. We were invited a couple years back to a housewarming party at some friends' 'move up' house. I noticed on my initial walk thru that they had a formal dining room, a breakfast area off the kitchen, and seating for 6 at a huge kitchen island. There was also a bar in the bonus-room that seats 6, and a table on the deck outside the kitchen. Each bedroom had its own full bath, there was another 3/4 bath on the first floor, a half-bath off the bonus/rec room, and another 3/4 bath in the partially finished basement. I remember thinking afterward that with 5 dining areas and 6 bathrooms, all those people must do is eat and cr@p!

What I find funny about the downsizing story is that 2000 sq ft is now considered a small house. I grew up with a family of 6 in a ~900 sq ft house. My current house is 1800sq and seems big in comparison. (Well honestly, seemed big before 3 kids were bouncing off the walls. Back in the day, we only came in to eat & sleep and otherwise hung out around the neighborhood. Let your kids wander today and you'll have them taken away!)

Oicu812, when I grew up it was the same. I grew up in a family of 5 children with only one full and one half bath. I can't even guess the square footage of that small house but we didn't seem restricted because, as you say, we all ran outside all day. Our new build is so much bigger than that great old house but we have tried to retain the basic principles of having the family eat and live together by having areas we really use everyday rather than spaces set aside for special occasions. We still have shared bathrooms for the children but have them zoned for multiple use. We have 4 porches and intend to use them all depending on the time of day and season of the year and I hope we will be outside more than inside. I don't know if this is trendy or not but I just loved my childhood and wanted to give my grandchildren a bit of that flavor when they come to visit and that's why we have built this way.

Yes, the smart grid system does monitor the amount of energy used by individual households. And, yes, the more energy used during peak times, the more it costs. Since the average person is out of their home from 8--5, they will naturally be home cooking, cleaning, using electricity during peak hours. It follows that the larger a person's house, the more energy they will use and the greater their costs will be. Please read the following excerpt from www.wikipedia.com:

"Many smart grid features readily apparent to consumers such as smart meters serve the energy efficiency goal. The approach is to make it possible for energy suppliers to charge variable electric rates so that charges would reflect the large differences in cost of generating electricity during peak or off peak periods. Such capabilities allow load control switches to control large energy consuming devices such as hot water heaters so that they consume electricity when it is cheaper to produce. To reduce demand during the high cost peak usage periods, communications and metering technologies inform smart devices in the home and business when energy demand is high and track how much electricity is used and when it is used. Prices of electricity are increased during high demand periods, and decreased during low demand periods. It is thought that consumers and businesses will tend to consume less during high demand periods if it is possible for consumers and consumer devices to be aware of the high price premium for using electricity at peak periods. When businesses and consumers see a direct economic benefit to become more energy efficient, the theory is that they will including energy cost of operation into their consumer device and building construction decisions."

So, perhaps people are building smaller houses because they are concerned about future energy bills.

Thanks for the compliments, I shall pass them on to DH who is responsible for building our house. Poor guy likes to hear is work is appreciated. LOL

When we designed our house we didn't know we were following a trend. We just knew what would serve us best. Our first design was inpired by a Jim Walters home that had a front porch. We didn't want anything over the top, just a house with a porch. We were actually going to build it 1600 sq. ft originally but the HOO said it had to be at least 1800, and thus we ended up with 1900. We have tons of storage, something this is lacking in our 1100 sq. home we presently live in.

I feel like if you need more footage because of a large family by all means build a house you are comfortable in.

I have always so admired huge mansions especially those down here in the South. As a young girl I dreamed of living in Tara. LOL That staircase, those magnificent rooms. All lovely, but so impractical today. So I guess I can see someone who can afford it, building their "Tara".

Guess I'm going against the trend. Our house will have a living room, sun room, study, and game room. And 10' ceilings. (Is there really much of a cost difference between 9' and 10'?)

- The sun room and dining area share the same room - a long narrow room. When we entertain, we will be able to shift furniture in the sunroom to allow the dining area to expand. The sunroom has the best view of the bayou, and is meant to be able sit in and enjoy the view when the weather doesn't allow for sitting on the porch.

- The study will have the computer and files and stuff, and maybe a sitting area. It may start out as a nursery - we haven't decided yet.

- The game room will be for our small children, ultimately we hope to add a pool table, pinball machine, etc. sometime in the future.

- We have a kitchenette upstairs - wasn't in the original plans, but when the framers messed up the bathroom framing, it seemed like a good idea.

- I've been looking at patio furniture - I would love to be able to serve dinner outside when the weather is nice.

- Bigger houses do not necessarily mean more energy consumption since it completely ignores construction methods. I fully expect our almost 3000 sq ft ICF house to use less energy than our 650 sq ft mobile home. You could argue that larger homes mean more toys (gigantic plasma tvs, etc.), but by that argument, you could say that smaller houses are less likely to be able to afford energy efficient appliances.

It's not so much size as how it's laid out and how you'll use it. I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Susanka's Not So Big House book.

Thanks Paula; I'm very familiar with smart energy grids and the workings behind them. I was referring to the idea of Obama's 'smart energy plan' you referred to in your first post.

"Now, I'm married with four children and 6,000 finished sf isn't enough."

i'm married and only have two kids and 6000 sf definitely wouldn't be enough.

DH and I looked for years to find a 'small house with big rooms' -- on one floor, with nice finishes, on a quiet and private lot. We had to build it, and it turned out to have 2900 sq ft. (Moved in 2001.)

I've been interested to see the turnaround from just BIG (lotsa sq ft, but unremarkable) to smaller and nicer. Several people in our town have said they want to buy our house after they sell their big ones. I guess now we will have more competition!

I did not see the show but am curious as to what data supported their presentation. For years, there has been a clear pattern of larger homes. Maybe it is about to change but if it does, it will likely be due to boomer demographics.

Link is to NAHB page. To see SF trends, click on Single-Family Square Footage by Location. It will open in Excel.

Here is a link that might be useful: SF Trends

Funny how things evolve/change throughout various life stages. I think the size of the house depends greatly on what your life circumstances are, what stage of life you happen to be in at the moment (i.e. single, empty nester, family, etc), and of course, probably most importantly, the layout/design of the particular house you're in.

As big fans of Susanka's "Not So Big" houses, DH and I were perfectly happy living in 1800 sf for many years until we adopted two wonderful girls 4 years ago. Our daughters are now ages 10 and 15, and during the past 4 years since becoming a family, we've realized how important it is that we each have some "away" space.

We're now in the process of renovating a fixer-upper, and eventually it will have about 3400 sf, which, in my mind, is the "right" amount for our busy family of four. The space consists of 3.5 bathrooms, an office, a guest room, a family room/dining area off the kitchen (in somewhat of a "great room" concept, not at all formal or unused), 3 main bedrooms, and a small "hangout room" outside the girls' bedroom area so they can have sleepovers, watch their own TV/movies, have a spot for the computer, etc.

We have a large yard, and we'd love for the girls to be outside playing all the time, but the reality is that although they're both very active with sports teams and various activities, it's just not like it was when we were growing up, when we'd leave the house in the morning, roam the neighborhood, ride our bikes everywhere, go to the town park on our own, etc. Nowadays, let's face it, getting kids together with friends involves mostly organized events (called play dates).

Our hope is that our kids and their friends will want to congregate at our new house as they continue to grow up through middle and high school (some potentially scary and turning point type years). Unfortunately, in our former house, the girls' friends did not naturally congregate at our house because of several factors - 1) our girls' bedrooms were so tiny they could barely fit one extra friend in the room for a sleepover, 2) the communal great room/family room was the only hangout space in the house for all of us, and it just did not provide enough privacy or independence for everyone concerned, especially 'tweens and teens who will inevitably want to break away a bit (just when parents want to simultaneously keep an eye on their activities), and 3) all of our girls' friends had much larger houses, many with huge game rooms, pools, etc, where it would naturally be much more fun to congregate. Although such mega-houses are not our style and we would never design/construct one, we can certainly understand the appeal from a kid's point of view, like it or not.

Bottom line is, I guess my point is that there isn't a "one size fits all" solution. It's easy to say that we should all downsize, but I'm more of the "live and let live" mindset. What makes sense at one stage of life may not (and probably will not) make sense at another stage. Let it evolve. For example, it was easy for us to tout the virtues of living small when there were just two of us...now, we see that we need just a little more space - not to have a McMansion or to be showy, but just to ensure that our family hums along smoothly.

To each his or her own. Best of luck to all in creating your own peaceful and enriching homey space!

We just moved into our custom 6100 sq. ft. home. With 7 children still at home I would definitely call it cozy.
I am sure some would say it is much to much room but for me coming from 2200 sq. ft. all I can say is AHHHHH !!!

I also thought a great deal about lighting and such and I would venture to say we use far less energy than some families of 4. For the most part we do not need to turn any lights on during the day. We rely on natural light for the better part of the day. We also have Lutron which very energy efficient.
We have well water with a pressurized holding tank which
cuts down on electricity.

I absolutely did not design a McMansion & most who come to our home never realize how big it is from 1st sight.
I strived to create a close, comfortable feeling in my home, but yet make it big enough so that it worked for everyone.

I believe I met my goals, but they certainly don't fit into the coming trends. I plan on this as my forever home and it really won't matter what is trendy or not.