The Case for a Smaller, Smarter Home

America has a size problem when it comes to houses. The average new home built today is over 2,500 square feet — roughly double what it was in 1970 — and yet average household size has shrunk. We're building bigger homes for fewer people, and the results show up in three places: bigger mortgages, bigger energy bills, and less time with family because you're working to pay for both.

The NZEL solar farmhouse is 1,846 square feet. By today's standards that's modest, but nobody who tours it describes it as small. The reason is intentional design. The great room — kitchen, dining, and living combined — is 40% of the entire floor plan. The south-facing porch adds another 280 square feet of usable outdoor living space. The home feels generous because space is organized around how people actually live.

Smaller homes have a compounding financial advantage most people don't fully calculate. A smaller footprint means a smaller mortgage. Lower property taxes. Less to heat and cool, meaning a smaller solar array to achieve net zero. Less maintenance, fewer repairs, less stuff to fill the space. Every dollar you don't spend on square footage you didn't need stays in your household.

There's a social argument too. Large homes separate families. When every family member retreats to their own wing, common spaces become corridors. The solar farmhouse's great room design creates one large, magnetic space where the family gravitates. The kitchen, living area, and dining space flow together, and the front porch extends that gathering zone outdoors.

We're not suggesting everyone should live in 1,846 square feet — family sizes vary. But ask honestly: how much of this square footage will we actually use? How much are we paying for rooms that collect dust? The answers might point you toward a smaller, smarter home that costs less and lives better.