The Elephant in the Room: House Size
There’s something we need to talk about, and it’s going to make some of us feel a little bit uncomfortable. We need to talk about house size in Australia.
Let’s start with the big picture on climate change:
The Earth is now about 1.1°C warmer than it was in the 1800s. We are not on track to meet the Paris Agreement target to keep global temperature from exceeding 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. That is considered the upper limit to avoid the worst fallout from climate change. (United Nations)
On the current path of carbon dioxide emissions, temperatures could increase by as much as 4.4°C by the end of the century. (United Nations)
The world would have to curb its carbon emissions by at least 49% of 2017 levels by 2030 and then achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 to meet this target. (IPCC, 2018)
And now let’s relate that to the context of our housing industry:
Along with the USA, Australians build the biggest new houses in the world at 235.8m². (CommSec Home Size Report).
The Global Footprint Network calculates that we use 74% more resources than the planet can make.
The Global Status Report 2017 stated that building and construction are responsible for 39% of energy-related C02 emissions.
I’m not writing this to shame anyone or create some kind of design dictatorship. I’m also not trying to sit on a high horse; I’ve worked on a couple of larger homes in my time as an architect. I passionately believe that sustainability needs to be achieved in whatever way an individual can manage, and this will look different for all of us.
But boy, look at those statistics. Don’t they take the wind out of your lungs? Just like a kid who’s taken more than their fair share of the Easter egg hunt, we need to front up to this. We need to own it, even if it makes us feel a bit uncomfortable.
What are some of the weaker narratives we tell ourselves to justify taking more than our fair share?
Commonly, I think it’s as simple as comparing ourselves to our neighbours, which seems to simply be human nature. We feel like we deserve just as good as those around us. We’re taught culturally to be proud of something a little bit bigger. We fear that building something smaller will be a poor investment.
Well, let’s look at our neighbours more globally. If we deserve to be on par with the UK then do we only need an impressive 76m2 home?
Should we refocus our pride on quality, comfort, and responsibility, instead of floor area?
The argument that does my head in the most is the one about return on investment. Firstly, what are you investing in? Wouldn’t you rather invest in a future planet for your kids, a great backyard to run around in, increased comfort, lower power bills, less cleaning, a more socially skilled family, and a smaller mortgage?
I’d also like to debunk the idea that the market wants a big house. This is false. The market is screaming out for smaller, sustainable, homes and a bit of much-needed housing diversity, and from what I’ve seen, swapping ‘big’ builds for ‘better’ builds pays dividends when it comes to resale value.
Another common narrative is ‘we’re only doing this once so we need to do it right’ (i.e. ‘play it safe’ and ‘include everything we could ever want’ to avoid regret.) Again, let’s take a breath and rethink this attitude. Yes, you are only doing this once… so it’s worthwhile keeping your build as efficient as possible to allow your family the best financial freedom you can to enjoy your best life possible. Yes, you are only doing this once so this is your one shot to take responsibility for your footprint on this planet. Yes, you are only doing this once but that doesn’t mean you can’t plan for an extension if another family move back to the farm, or build a really clever transportable to be used for a decade and sold on to fund a great retirement caravan.
Let me share some provocative statistics of my own.
Is a dedicated spare bedroom worth it if it adds $30k to your loan (and therefore even more to your spend, when interest is accounted for)? How many times a year could you put visiting rellies up in a really nice hotel for that amount? Could you instead design a study or second living space to easily transform into a comfortable guest room a few times a year?
Is a walk-in-robe necessary if a robe of a similar size can be achieved along the side of your bedroom? This probably saves 4m2 of floor area, perhaps amounting to $10k savings. If your fashion is important to you, wouldn’t you enjoy spending that $10k on some great items, rather than a hallway to access them in a room of their own?
Does your car need to be parked in a room of its own? This is how mainstream garages are built, and not only is it more expensive, but it usually means the cars end up cramped in a dysfunctional storage space. What if you could save $15k by building a beautiful carport, and dedicated storage shed, meaning the carport stays clean and easy to walk around, and you can spend another $15k on your camping gear or bikes.
Do you need a butler’s pantry? (Do you have a butler?) I loathe the idea of needing to do a workout worth of walking just to pull together a soup. Butler’s pantries are usually a reaction to having lived in a poorly designed kitchen with a lack of storage. Again, save your 6m of (the most expensive) floor space, and spend a fraction of the saved $15k on great kitchen joinery to make your kitchen a functional convenience dream.
Do you need a lounge room that has a magazine-style runway around the outside of all the lounges? With the exact same amount of seating, spaced the same distance apart, could you design a lovely room without this requirement and save an easy $30k. How many lounging hours by an ocean in a tropical destination could you gain instead with that saving?
Note: In a recent excellent episode of the Undercover Architect Podcast, Jeremy Spencer from Positive Footprints explains that as a rule of thumb, each square metre of the home is responsible for roughly a tonne of CO2. So, the savings above pay dividends not just in build cost, but also in future running cost, and in carbon footprint cost.
I’m not writing this to guilt people about that which has already been done. I’m writing it to inspire choices which are yet to be made.
We’ve all benefited from our environmentally costly past as a society, and we’ve all done really unsustainable things in our personal lives. BUT this does not justify continuing in this matter. We cannot continue in this matter. Every day is a new opportunity for us to realise this and to push the needle towards a better world.
The great news is, I don’t think you need to sacrifice your quality of life or hip pocket to do this. In fact, I passionately believe that clever design (which is informed by science) can help you spend the same size investment, on a smaller and more sustainable footprint, which will deliver an overall higher quality of life.
Humans are emotional and socially motivated animals. We can’t sustain our planet and environment by expecting Australians to sacrifice the perceived comfort, convenience, social pride and return on investment of a bigger home. We CAN trade a bigger home for a clever high-quality smaller home that delivers a different and more powerful kind of comfort, convenience, social pride and return on investment.