Downsizing the Place Called Home

Downsizing according to Barbara Corcoran, Real Estate commentator for the Today Show, is the latest trend in home ownership. For a family of four (4), 2000 sq ft has become the new standard - a reduction of nearly 300 sq ft from just a year ago.

It has taken a while for this idea to catch on. Sarah Susanka, author and architect, has written about the virtues of the smaller home for nearly 10 years. Her book “The Not So Big House” is filled with highly personalized interior spaces, often decorative and multipurpose as well.  These homes, which reject the idea that “Bigger is Better”, tend to be more vibrant and tasteful than their typical MacMansion counter parts. With smaller mortgages, taxes and utility bills, these homeowners can devote more time and resources to family relationships and perhaps spend fewer hours on the job. Although other concerns such as the recession and climate change may be influencing this trend, for many it is the quality of life that matters most.

Below are some major factors affecting the movment toward the “Not So Big House”.

1. Open Floor Plan: The Kitchen, Dining and Living area should all be open to one another. The idea of connectivity among people is an important aspect of community.
2. More Windows: A room with a view and connection to the outside world is essential for a pleasantinterior environment.
3. Higher Ceilings: Nine (9) feet is becoming the norm. The extra headroom reduces the feeling of being enclosed.
4. More Exterior Space: Patios, Terraces and Covered Porches create a greater sense of spaciousness.
5. Flexible Rooms: Every room should have three (3) purposes. The Great Room is a good example of a multipurpose area -  a space for family,  for gathering of friends or entertainment.
6. Stuff – What to Do with It: Provide clever storage in every nook, cranny and closet. For the other 50% that won’t fit, get rid of it.

For the entire MSNBC Segment, Downsizing Your Home, on the “Today Show”,
Click Here

 

10 Things We Can Do: Rebuilding Civil Society

Originally written and Posted by David Roberts at 11:37 PM on 13 Sep 2007

 

It’s not that individuals can’t do anything about climate — they just can’t do it by themselves. I’ve been thinking about this debate over voluntary individual action and its place in the larger fight for sustainability. It’s missing something. 

 

A huge gulf has developed in America between public and private life. This has put green activism — all of progressivism, actually — on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, private life has become all but coextensive with consumerism – what we choose to buy. Shifting consumer dollars around isn’t a sufficient solution to any substantial problem. On the other hand, the levers that control the state are out of reach of the average citizen, even in a democracy. Most people are no longer accustomed to being actively involved in self-government. 

 

To tackle environmental problems, we know we need governments to make big changes, but it’s difficult to tell individuals what they should do about that. (Call their representatives? Vote? Then what?) We know individual changes will never add up to the societal shift we need, yet individual changes tend to be the ones that motivate, you know, individuals. We’re reduced to hoping that small, ultimately ineffectual personal changes will open hearts and minds, leading to … something.

  

Neither position is satisfying. What’s missing is the middle ground, the space that used to mediate between private individuals and states. I’m talking about civil society: church groups, NGOs, professional associations, unions, affinity groups, etc.

  

It is in civil society that action can be personal but not private. It can leverage large numbers of people but still be individually meaningful.

  

Civil society has declined in America. Historically it’s two pillars were unionsand churches. Unions have been under sustained attack since Reagan, and American churches from evangelical to liberal have turned their focus to individual fulfillment. Americans have been isolated from one another by ubiquitous, overbearing commercial culture, atomized into their individual strip malls, cars, and suburban houses. Where there was once a vibrant and enduring network of voluntary associations, there is now mostly TV.

  

Psychologically speaking, it is important to offer people ways of engaging and taking action that are tangible. But telling people to buy better lightbulbs, cars, and clothes is a wan response to the magnitude of our peril.

  

What we need is for people to become active citizens. We need them to return to churches and union halls, but also to create new civil institutions that can leverage collective action into real change. We need to rebuild civil society in America.

  

Getting involved in civil society is something “you can do.” Hell, I’d put it right there at the top of my “10 things you can do.” It may mean exercising muscles many Americans have allowed to atrophy, but rebuilding civil  society will not only move the needle on climate change, it will make our culture more resilient against coming stresses. Time we all rediscovered our neighbors.  

Ten things we can do. Got a better ring to it, no? 

 

 

July 4th – Independence Day 2008

As firecrackers go off with a staccato burst of sound, and aerial fireworks explode with a cascading shower of color, it is not hard to imagine the early celebrations which marked the successful conclusion to our War of Independence. These celebrations also marked the end of a King’s devastating colonial rule and his ruinous taxation policies. In its place, a promising future was at hand. Everywhere were great expanses of land, timber and minerals, just waiting to be claimed.

 

Today, some 200 years later, we find ourselves in the midst of another conflict. The issues are multiple. Overseas our military is engaged in a war against ideals contrary to our own. At home we are faced with economic uncertainty brought on by an adverse combination of financial and market forces. And our future is challenged by diminishing sources of affordable energy. Again the conflict has multiple fronts – oil, coal, natural gas, and nuclear (representing fossil and traditional fuels) and wind, solar, biomass, tidal and geothermal (representing renewable sources).  The wild card is Climate Change and its impact on everything around us. What should we do???

 

In a changing world, each of these conflicts is another challenge to our independence. Our military can only assure our independence when the nations we are supporting can establish a respectful independence of their own. Our “Free Markets” (financial and economic) must respect the values of the society they serve, and function independently of irresponsible monetary gain. And our future energy sources must have a benign impact on our environment, and remain independent of vested interests with their significant financial influence. Again we are at a turning point. A promising future may very well be at hand. The choices we make today are the very cornerstone of that future.

 

In the weeks and months ahead we will explore the claims, issues, promises and problems with all our energy options. Regardless of the source, the real question is: “How well do these energy sources play out against Climate Change?”

 

In the midst of all this is the significance of Green Building – why do it, what can it accomplish, where is it headed??? For that matter, how will these scenarios play out against our traditional Real Estate market??? Will this market need to adapt to a changing field as well. Stay tuned. It is an evolving and exciting story.