Agreed 1000 sq. ft. Is great for two. Living in SF I had a 750 sq. Ft. Apartment with three people and it felt fine.
Will probably have my kids help me plan, permit, and build an ADU in another year or two. Figure that’ll be a good summer project they’ll probably hate at the time, but appreciate down the road.
You are certainly a statistical outlier in multiple ways. Rural incomes rarely match their urban counterparts. Rural commute times are less than urban but hardly 5 minutes.
I have about the same deal. I'm in a low-density part of Florida, enjoying my 3-minute commute to a workplace across the road from the beach. I can afford my 12 kids. If I were willing to live in a 2-bedroom house on only 0.17 acres (for about $172,000), I could pole vault to work. I prefer my 0.39 acres of course. People wanting a dozen acres have to commute about 25 minutes.
Unless you live in a tiny studio apartment, income simply doesn't keep up with cost of living in the expensive areas. I don't know what income it would take to have acres of land in San Francisco, but it is something frightful that isn't generally being offered.
When I did have a full-time job, it was to a company in a business park. Nobody had a 3-minute commute there. I don't know if anyone who works in an office anywhere in Tampa Bay has a 3-minute commute. My mom lives in a genuinely rural part of Florida, and if I lived there, I'd either be working remotely -- giving me a zero minute commute, I guess -- or I'd be lucky if my commute was under an hour each way, because the chances of finding a tech job anywhere within a twenty-mile radius are pretty much zero.
To me, living somewhere is more than just the physical structure. My wife and I grew up in “tiny towns” and after we left, we swore we would never go back.
We love cities and are willing to live in a smaller home for a bigger city.
Heating it, cooling it, filling it with stuff. Why bother?
I can bike/walk anywhere I need to go in town, have a $20 electric bill, am 90 minutes from the pacific and 90 minutes from the mountains. 80 miles of running trails 3 miles from my door. I’ll take that over some giant house in the middle of nowhere.
When I was a kid, we didn't have anything like the monster SUVs of today. That's because an SUV in those days was basically the same as the now-mostly-discontinued mini-pickup trucks with a built in cap and two doors. There was nothing with seven seats and four doors and 300 hp and so on. So people weren't making conscious decisions not to buy that.
But thanks for the education on older homes and SUVs.
> Outside of a submarine, there really is little reason.
Because unless I missed it, I don’t see where you jumped to my defense.
My wife (then girlfriend) and I agreed never to live in one again. Just this morning, we were reminiscing about how we used to have to get our utensils, then eat on the utensil box I made to hold them because we didn't have counter space. We also recalled the brick wall had a brick sticking out just slightly too far that you couldn't open the oven. So we had to file down the brick.
Just... just no. Give me my 2600+ square feet house any day.
The real trick is not living somewhere where you need that kind of housing. Outside of a submarine, there really is little reason.
I live in rural Illinois, make close to an SF salary, enjoy my 5 min commute, and pay less than this guy for a five bedroom house.