Following up on this, the comments added by Neil on the Stone Ranch brings up a really interesting point. We posted our link in to that thread just below, here:
Lex Anteinternet: More of the Stone Ranch: This is posted over on our photo site, as Holscher's Hub: More of the Stone Ranch. It is an historic structure, but its the very astut...
The original post appears here.
Neil made this comment:
Thanks, I have long been fascinated by how little space was needed only a few generations ago. Stage travelers probably were in a corner cot behind a curtain. Today a 1,200 sq foot home is sold as small, or as a starter home. Would have been more than spacious in the 1880s.
To which I replied:
That's very true.
I know that the original occupants of the house had a family and raised several children there. At least one of their children went on to marry and raise another family there, after the stage days were over. As time went on the outbuildings and what not were put in, but they continued to live in the small house. I don't know when the house ceased to be occupied, but I think it was in the 1940s or 1950s.
This house is smaller then modern apartments today. But, on the other hand, it was stone, cut by an itinerant Italian stone mason, and it was probably really easy to heat in the winter with its small size. Likewise, the windows and stone construction probably would have made it tolerable during the summer.
It is a very interesting observation. And very true. Even a "large" house by pre 1960s standards isn't really that large today, at least to some degree. Young couples that have no children buy houses of a size that would have been regarded as very large by families that had several children just 50 years ago. This isn't universally true, but it's at least significantly true.
Also, of interest, the phenomenon of purchasing new houses over time is fairly new. This is not to say, as people sometimes claim, that people bought one house when they first married (although that's sometimes the case) and stuck with it the rest of their lives, assuming they didn't relocate from one town to another. But, rather, people tended to buy a new house much less often, and if they did, there was often a practical reason for it related to family size. Now, people buy new homes fairly frequently, at least in the middle class, to this has been a real change over time.
Having said all of that, my wife and I still live in the only house we've ever owned, and it's actually smaller than my parent's home. So obviously we aren't with the program are a statistical exception.
6 comments:
Houses in the past had almost no closets, no utility rooms (for washer/dryers and furnaces), small utilitarian kitchens, narrow doorways and hallways, and possibly one small bathroom.
It doesn't take very many closets, extra bathrooms, big master bathrooms, walk-in closets, utility rooms, slightly larger bedrooms, and wider hallways for a house to grow from 1200 sq.ft. to 2500 sq.ft.
Very true.
I wonder how all this is dealt with when older homes are remodeled, which seems to be a popular thing to do. Most folks like the larger kitchens, etc., and what you observe is quite correct.
Back when I used to pay more attention to remodeling, it seemed like people would sacrifice something like one of the bedrooms to get a bigger kitchen and/or another bathroom.
Or, they'd build an addition onto the house and move walls and doorways around to reconfigure the floor plan of the house.
Either method always seemed like a whole lot of work for a mediocre result.
Back then, I thought tearing out walls and moving them around seemed interesting, but now it just seems like a bunch of unnecessary work, and I think you'd be better off just leaving everything alone in an older house. Focusing on upgrading the windows, insulation, and flooring, along with a good paint job is a better way to go.
Thanks Rich.
I wonder what the change in a floorplan of an existing house says about us, vs the people who built them. I.e., why do we need a larger kitchen, etc. Why did they need only one bathroom?
My best guess is that it's a combination of a few things.
Kitchens grew bigger to accommodate extras like microwaves, dishwashers, larger refrigerators, etc. More counter space or storage was needed for appliances like food processors, coffee makers, etc.
The middle class has grown significantly, and people have more disposable income or available credit to spend on bigger houses.
The idea of housing being an "investment" instead of a living expense is more common, and larger kitchens and extra bathrooms supposedly make your investment worth more or more marketable.
Or, it's simply a matter of "keeping up with the Joneses".
Post a Comment