Diet-on living space, possessions

I just wanted to come back and mention that I finally had the chance to watch the video in the article that shootingstar originally posted.

Our goal is the same as the goal of the guys in the video. We want to downsize and cut back on all but the essentials. BUT, at the same time, my home is also my escape and when the only rural small sf options are 30 year old trailers or uninsulated shacks with sagging roofs, you have to draw the line somewhere.

Like I originally said, while our house is 1700 sf, I WANT to live in a much smaller space. We have now 'downsized' 3 times (each time we've moved as a couple) and expect to continue to do so. I will mention that while not having lots of extra 'stuff' is good...not having any space in which to store food is bad - particularly if you live in the country. My pantry is probably half the size of that guys whole house! :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GLC1968

Tulip - I totally understand your point and I agree that an urban setting can be less of an impact that a rural one. As we both know, that's not usually the case though, is it?

Anyway, my point was that many of us make the best choices we can with what is available to us in our respective living areas. Maybe I should not have have spoken up if 1700 sf is considered a big house. I guess I was wrong to even have participated in this thread.

---

You know, we should recognize that people should face the reality that we only have physical capacity, time, energy and financial resources at different stages of our lives to live AND maintain a certain amount of living space and its configuration --1 level vs. multiple-level dwellings.

I'm not even thinking of environmental footprint when I think of myself. I ask myself: What can I realistically maintain on a regular basis in living accommodation within my capacity?

If one is single and is not mechanically inclined, then one had better have friends/neighbours /money to pay /have someone else do certain things for a self-standing house.

But I'm not the other spectrum where I would want to go into a housing co-op. Heck, it'll be enough just to share housework responsibilities.

Yea, GLC and some folks need some big pantries or root cellars. :)

Crankin:

Quote:

---

It's true, 2 people don't need a house this big. But, since we have remodeled the place from top to bottom, including replacing every system and window, roof, etc. to make it energy efficient, I feel we actually live more economically than we did in the last place. I also live closer to shopping and do many more errands by bike. It's closer to the city by 10 miles, which has made a huge difference in time/gas when I go to my classes and we have 2 commuter rail stations, as well as being closer to the end point of the regular train line.

---

Being closer to everything makes a big difference to me personally. If you can believe this, I signed an apartment lease without having seen it in person in advance. I had little choice with several major things, happening at the same time in life. :eek:

But luckily it turned out I'm a short stroll from a long walk-in indoor elevated walkway ..that is a big help when it's very cold in winter to get to work. I plan to bike in warmer seasons which will be nice to ...stretch out the distance deliberately just so I can get abit of a fitness ride.

In this city, the idea of living in smaller homes or many condos, is slolwy coming. Probably being in the prairies here, give this illusion of endless space and development opportunities..which is wrong thinking for urban planning for a whole city. Whereas in Vancouver, BC, the natural nearby mountain barriers and ocean, people are more willing to consider the idea of residential densification.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shootingstar

Could you/have lived in small spaces where home was 500 sq. ft.?

---

This is an interesting question. I must confess to being one of those people that always needed large (and empty) spaces. Maybe because it's what I got used to for a long time. Grew up in Europe, in a 3 story 6000+sft home, and until I was 30+ years old, the smallest house I lived in was at least 4000.
Then a few years back I had to move to a smaller place, which was actually 'half' of a house. The usable indoor space was quite small, 900sft or so - but there was a nice patio and a big shared backyard, and I was in school at the time, so a small space turned out to be a good idea.
My current house is still on the small side, about 1500 or so of indoor space. That plus the outdoor space - backyard, front yard, garage etc - it's enough work to keep up with. I guess I'm still 'downsized' sort of, at least compared to my earlier years, but living alone and with not much in terms of of housekeeping help, I'm not sure I would want to take care of a 4000+ right now.
Maybe I am getting older ;) and my job does not really leave me that much free time - so I'm happy as it is. :)