I am doing a little research. I am about to pay off my 1942 two-bedroom, one-bath 900 square foot home I purchased in 1999. I live in a first-ring suburb of Minneapolis, where many houses similar to mine were constructed from the 1930's through the 1950's. These little 2-bedroom houses are known as "minimal traditional" by architects, or unofficially, "midcentury modest" (credit:
www.retrorenovation.com). Turns out there are close to 30 million of them around the country. They were built as a result of the FHA legislation in 1934, in which the federal government began backing home mortgages (Before this time, if you wanted a house you pretty much had to pay for most of it up front). This enabled millions of people to own these homes with small down payments.
These "exuberant, optimistic" houses, while small, were very well constructed. They were designed by professional architects, hungry for employment during the Great Depression. In order to qualify for FHA-backed loans they were required to have a minimum of two bedrooms and be modern, meaning electricity indoor plumbing, central heating. And they couldn't cost more than $10,000. In order to meet these criteria most homes built were two-bedroom, one-bath homes, appliances included. The common 3-bedroom Ranch came later, during the 1950's.
These homes today have the following benefits, of particular interest to MMM types:
Great locations in walkable and bike-able parts of cities and inner-ring suburbs. Neighborhoods are filled with mature trees, and many of these areas are now undergoing major infrastructure investments including efficient LED lighting, bike and pedestrian paths, traffic-calming mechanisms such as roundabouts. Where I live many people bicycle to/from downtown jobs (< 10 miles). In addition, these areas are typically well-served by public transportation. This is important for senior citizens, as it allows them to remain in their homes and still have mobility around the city.
Very efficient use of space, and green, simply because the most green houses are pre-existing houses;
Affordable: these are not McMansions, and unlike new exurbs, the cities are fully developed: there are no surprise assessments coming. Smaller sizes translate into lower ongoing operating expenses such as heating bills, taxes and insurance. The smaller sizes of these homes (especially closets) force one to always be ruthless about not collecting too many material possessions. Another MMM benefit.
Classic designs that have stood the test of time, and will continue to do so.
Very well-constructed, with built-ins, hardwood floors, arched doorways, coved ceilings, double-hung windows made of real wood: I can place a level anywhere in my house and the bubble is dead center. This 75 years after construction.
There are a LOT of these houses still in existence around the country. I think the Millennials, in particular, will embrace them at some point, simply because they will not be able to afford bigger homes with lifestyles that require multiple cars and long commutes.
I have been criticized by others, including family, for choosing to purchase such an "under-sized" home, when, in their words, "I could afford so much more". But now I am on the verge of owning it free and clear!
I am curious to know how many MMM types have opted for these down-sized abodes, avoiding the siren call of larger, newer homes?
