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.
My dream is a house that is around 800-850 sq feet!
I bought a lot in town in SW Colorado and built a house that is 800 sq.ft. There was no way to buy such a small house, especially around here. I've had trouble getting comps in refinancing, too. There just aren't any.
One candidate answer to the OP's question is that the price of land rises faster than the price of labor, materials or components. Suppose that in 1970, land cost X, while building the house - from excavating for the foundation, to wheeling the refrigerator into the kitchen - cost Y. Today, maybe building the house costs 10Y, while the land costs 20X. To return the ratio of house-price to land-price to its former value, the house, crudely speaking, would have to be twice as large.
As others have noted, the trend of minimalism, to the extent that such a thing exists, is conceivably being subsumed by the trend towards compactness. Those who prefer smaller dwellings also want to be closer-in. They're OK with being close to neighbors, sharing walls. They don't want the chore and bother of tending to the land. Persons who want a small detached house with a proper yard, are few. Those who want the yard, want a larger house. Those who want the smaller dwelling, don't necessarily even want a house, and are OK with a condo.
Nevertheless, there's anecdotal evidence that even if not very many people want a small SFH, demand still exceeds supply. In Los Angeles we have many small detached houses from 100 years ago, when the inner-suburbs were being built out, and land was comparatively cheap. Today these houses are being sold very dearly, in terms of price per square foot. By way of example, a more modern 2000 sq ft house might go for $1.6M, whereas a 1000 sq ft house on the same block might go for $1.2M. The former is $800 per sq ft, while the latter is $1200 per sq ft. But to my earlier point, part of the price difference per square foot, is the price of land... those two houses are on similarly-sized lots.
The OP is in Texas, yes? I've seen properties on acreage in central Texas, where the dwelling is cabin or a modular house. It's very rural, which might not be what the OP wants... but it's definitely an option for a small house, or indeed, for building a brand-new small house, as presumably out in the boonies there are no size restrictions.
One candidate answer to the OP's question is that the price of land rises faster than the price of labor, materials or components. Suppose that in 1970, land cost X, while building the house - from excavating for the foundation, to wheeling the refrigerator into the kitchen - cost Y. Today, maybe building the house costs 10Y, while the land costs 20X. To return the ratio of house-price to land-price to its former value, the house, crudely speaking, would have to be twice as large.
As others have noted, the trend of minimalism, to the extent that such a thing exists, is conceivably being subsumed by the trend towards compactness. Those who prefer smaller dwellings also want to be closer-in. They're OK with being close to neighbors, sharing walls. They don't want the chore and bother of tending to the land. Persons who want a small detached house with a proper yard, are few. Those who want the yard, want a larger house. Those who want the smaller dwelling, don't necessarily even want a house, and are OK with a condo.
Nevertheless, there's anecdotal evidence that even if not very many people want a small SFH, demand still exceeds supply. In Los Angeles we have many small detached houses from 100 years ago, when the inner-suburbs were being built out, and land was comparatively cheap. Today these houses are being sold very dearly, in terms of price per square foot. By way of example, a more modern 2000 sq ft house might go for $1.6M, whereas a 1000 sq ft house on the same block might go for $1.2M. The former is $800 per sq ft, while the latter is $1200 per sq ft. But to my earlier point, part of the price difference per square foot, is the price of land... those two houses are on similarly-sized lots.
The OP is in Texas, yes? I've seen properties on acreage in central Texas, where the dwelling is cabin or a modular house. It's very rural, which might not be what the OP wants... but it's definitely an option for a small house, or indeed, for building a brand-new small house, as presumably out in the boonies there are no size restrictions.
Great answer!
I think this may be the best reply in this thread so far!
That's what I built, because I always want my gaggle of senior dogs. Right in town.
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.
