Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it depends .... Many cities outside of the US are built up with all sorts of things that entice people to stay away from the home until they are ready to sleep. I don't think someone living in that 86 sq ft flat spends much non-sleeping time in there.
Americans want everything IN their home. Many have a gourmet kitchen, home theatre, home gym, swimming pool, tennis court, etc.etc. This culture has the expectation that homes need to be big and we correspondingly spend a lot of time at home.
A lot of people wouldn't mind that stuff, but it's mostly reserved for the wealthy. If most people are like me, they probably spend 90% of their time in small areas of their home (the favorite chair in the living room, the bed, the spot where they stand in the shower, near the potty, their favorite seat at the kitchen table, etc) which could be condensed to a tiny home.
And this (I personally think) is part of the problem; we're led to believe that "stuff" = happiness and success, and instead we become trapped by it (we need larger and larger homes to store it, and need to make more and more money to both buy, upgrade and replace it).
But that is just my opinion. :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmyk72
Americans want everything IN their home. Many have a gourmet kitchen, home theatre, home gym, swimming pool, tennis court, etc.etc. This culture has the expectation that homes need to be big and we correspondingly spend a lot of time at home.
That is not that bad. I would never close that door to sleep though. Also wonder what the rent is. I would live there as a single person in paris, assuming it was quite affordable and allowed you to do fun things like go out to restaurants often.
I could and would totally live in a room that nice! I've seen similar setups in Tokyo and sort of similar setups here in Hawai'i. (although not that tiny)
I would make a few changes though. I would get rid of the bed and sleep on the floor. I would also get rid of all the storage, place my clothes in stackable containers, and dedicate more of the extra space to a more open area where I could cook easier. I would use a sturdy folding table as well.
A lot depends on what's available around you. Here in Hawai'i, you could probably actually get away with eliminating the shower and toilet and just have a single bigger multi-use sink. For showers, you could shower at the gym (24-hour fitness). That would give you motivation to exercise daily or every time you visit. You could use a biotoilet to substitute for the traditional loo.
The more I think about this, the more I want to do it! But I would want to be in a place that is very very outdoorsy, has an excellent climate, and has a well-supported educational institutions and libraries. I've yet to find a place that fits the bill unfortunately. If only O'ahu had an outstanding library system like UW Madison, it would be almost perfect.
In Tokyo, I lived in an apartment about this size. It did not have any fancy cabinetry, either. It could only fit a twin bed. It had a balcony, though. It was ok, although I wouldn't want to live there forever. Tokyo has a lot of apartments like this because single people seem to not live together with roommates like they do in NYC or London.
It's pretty well-thought out but anyone with a real wardrobe would have issues - you'd have to greatly "simplify". I wouldn't mind the "bedroom" since it had it's own light and you could leave the slider door open - it'd be cool if it had a few nooks inside for books, etc. The kitchen was pathetic but if it was in an urban center where you only have toast and coffee for yourself and eat out for everything else it would suffice. I actually thought that while the bathroom was tiny it was the most luxurious part of the apartment.
After looking at that...wouldn't it make 200 square feet seem like a mansion? That's the best lesson of this...
I think the trend in America (by necessity) is for multiple generations to live together in one structure. So while some singles can live comfortably in REALLY tiny spaces, families would have a hard time. We had 3 generations living in 3000+ sq feet and it was just about right and sometimes not enough.
I've seen multigenerational families in cracker box apartments in Japan where enough real estate is really a premium and I'm surprised they don't all strangle each other after awhile.
I am actually into the small house movement, but that apartment is about half the footprint I would be minimally comfortable in for the long term. It would be better if there was a Murphy bed or the shelf bed was wider and had more headroom.
However, for a short term, say a year or less, I could make do in there. Say my work day plus commute was 8 hours, 4-6 hours of socializing in restaurants, pubs, cafes, winebars, shopping, museums, performances, etc. Then 2-4 hours reading, watching tv, or otherwise relaxing in that apartment. It could be quite doable.
American's (and others) often lives revolve around huge amounts of time spent in the home. 8-10 hours at work and 8-10 hours around the house (and 8 hours sleeping). In that case I could see where a small house would get very claustrophobic.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
