As the Small House Society points out, compact homes are efficient in many ways: they require less power, they require less maintenance, they require less materials to build, and they have smaller environmental footprint. Another advantage is that you can invest in land, rather than spend money building a huge home.
In the book 25 Houses Under 3000 Square Feet, author James Grayson Trulove presents a range of modern homes that offer comfortable living in less than three thousand square feet.
The 25 houses are featured with photos, architectural drawings and site plans. It’s a nice cross-section of modern homes: the houses are varied to fit the sites and to match the personalities of the owners.
The book is available from Amazon
Read more! Related stories:
- The Hague To Warm 4,000 Houses With Geothermal
- Why Prefab Homes Can Be Compelling
- Earth Sheltered Houses
- Book Review: The Beauty of Straw Bale Homes
- Book Review: Portable Houses
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
Wow! 3000 sq ft is pretty huge. Aren’t most standard middle class under 3000 sq ft anyway? Shouldn’t the title of the book be luxury homes under 3000 sq ft?
3000 square feet?! I’m sorry, but a 2999 square foot home is a large house, not a small house.
Holy crap.
My house is only 100 square meters – (Little more than 1000 square feet) – and it`s incredibly spacious in my opinion. Why on earth ANYONE would need 3 times this much space for an “efficient” home is a complete and total mystery.
I would be FAR more impressed if it were under 300 square feet… Or 25 homes that fit into one 3000 square foot area. Even 2000 square feet sounds incredibly inefficient to me.
I guess a “small house” depends on the size of your family. There is a similar book that outlines houses under 1500 square feet.
Justin
Allow me to help solve your mystery, Tamyu.
Before you detract from the size of the house, please consider not only the size of the family, as Justin points out, but also whether or not someone works out of their home. As a photographer, sound designer, composer/musician, I can fill up 3k s.f. in short order…and we don’t have kids, yet.
So, yeah, finding an energy-efficient, environmentally responsible option to leasing office/studio space–and all the construction costs that result from it, not to mention travel expense to and from–is a high priority.
Our current dwelling is just under 2k s.f.; it’s a townhouse, built in the early 70’s, and is inefficient as hell. It’s also a rental. Properly designed, 3k s.f. can get me the workspace I need, plus room for children in the future…this book holds great interest for me.
Perhaps this helps clear up your mystery of why someone would need 3x the space you have.
Sorry- 3000 square feet is massive! Only in America would this be considered ‘compact’. Talk about a consumer/me driven society if this is ‘compact’. Size of family? Give me a break- a $1000 square foot house was an average size for a family of 4-5 not so long ago. It’s all in the expectations. The book says nothing about living/business spaces combined- in which case- how big is your living space only in such a set-up? This is a joke surely!
Is this a joke? Only in America right? Talk about a wasteful/consumer driven/me society if a 3000 square foot house is considered anything but huge. Family?- give me a break- for 10 to 15 kids maybe. Business?- I don’t think so- this is talking about a home – if you combine your business then subtract that amount to find your ‘home’ living space .
I had my 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom 1530 square foot home built back in 1998 and I think the space is just right for a bachelor like myself. Any bigger is just unused space and any smaller I feel clausterphobic. Whenever Im at my friends 900 square foot home I feel cramped. So I think 1500 square feet of space per person is good. Donna, 10-15 kids in a 3000 square foot house would be EXTREMELY cramped. A house for 10 kids should be at least 15,000 square feet.