New York Times On Living in 435 Square Feet

Most people cite having kids as the reason why they can't live downtown. It was nice to see a baby in the photo. Let's hope they don't discover that "need" to move out to the 'burbs to provide a large lawn for their kids.

Too bad all the furniture in the apt pictured is ridiculously expensive!!

wow. that looks amazing. where do you think the baby sleeps tho?

I live in 1250 square feet, which to many of my coworkers is small, but we only ever seem to use our bedroom, bathroom, living room, kitchen and, lately, nursery. Our basement, office and attic room are basically storage areas, filled with stuff we don't use often.

If I were single, I'm sure I'd be able to live in in a lot less than 350 square feet.

I think in general people should reexamine the way they live. There is a new emerging trend of redefining our spaces, simplifying our life styles, reducing consumption and consumerism. Do we really need to surround ourselves with all that stuff? Simpler better designed spaces with a focus on low environmental impact and quality of life are the key.

It doesn't have to be, the fancy table is just a triangular table at the heart of things. So why too bad?

@Glenn - did you read the article? Most of their furnishings are cheap. The kitchen cabinets are from IKEA. Even the bathroom tile cost under $200. The most expensive items in that space are the appliances.

Well, they probably save so much money in water, electricity and buying less "junk" they can afford expensive things.

Living downtown is great now; you are close to everything! I live in 1000 sf. with my husband and our family thinks we are crazy. I think we could live with less. I know for a fact that our guest bedroom is just storage for stuff I will never need nor use.

Downsizing your life can extremely liberating, but the media and the social collective keep telling to shop, buy and collect. It's time to regain sanity and downsize.

Time to tackle that guest room!

It's true, they are creative and stretched their dollars in some areas, however the table and couch are hardly affordable...unless gotten second hand, and, besides, they did have a sizable budget to work with.

Living in smaller, necessary spaces is only the beginning. Like greenbuilder said, "...reducing consumption and consumerism..."is something that should follow, with many more steps in between. Just because it is minimalist in style does not mean that the purchaser is minimalist in nature.

This also does not address affordable housing in high density areas. This apartment is still way out of budget for most of the people living in the United States. Now that this trend of smaller is better is taking off, expect the prices to be driven even higher as the tight quarters become more desirable. Thus driving people, who can't afford the place, into suburban sprawl. There are still places where you could get a 2 bedroom home with a backyard for $150K....

@Glenn, Jay-

I have to say I was pleasantly surprised to see an affordable space in the Times Home section! It looks expensive, and the appliances definitely are, but when you only spend $295k on your home, and build your own shelving and so on, you can afford that kind of thing. And if you are going to splurge, splurging on appliances is probably a good plan. You'll keep them forever.

Nice digs and plan..but I'm just wondering what they'll do when baby is old enough that he/she needs their own space. There's nothing like having..er..grownup time interrupted by a little face at the edge of the bed!!

One reason this works is that they've only been married for two years. Give them a few more sharing that small bathroom and sharing their bedroom with their son, and I doubt they'll be quite as happy with their space.

The boy shares the bed with them or sleeps in a wood-framed sling, presumably also in their room. Either way, it makes it very difficult to deal with phases where the child doesn't want to go to sleep when he is supposed to. Odds are that they are either losing sleep themselves (do they both work?) or are appeasing him which can start a pattern that will come back to haunt them later.

The article says that they'll move if they have another child, but whether they do or not, I doubt they'll still be in this apartment two years from now.

I live in a 1500 s.f. house. My husband and I live in a three bedroom house with a 15 pound and a 95 pound dog. My family constantly tells me I need to move into a larger space. It's unreal that my house is considered too small because it's not 2000 s.f. or more.

It's great that the NY Times highlighted a small living space.

Uh, anyone notice the biggest flaw in this floorplan? Like, the bathroom being basically part of the bedroom, with but a door to separate? Unless each of them is keen on listening to their partner take a big farty dump while they're trying to sleep. But hey, after needing to pop out a kid, I'm sure their magic is long gone.

Small designs like this should always have the bathroom next to the kitchen, main reason being plumbing. You can then reduce the need for separate main drains and water lines. Saves a lot of copper. But hey, good for them in maximizing the utility and livability of a small space.

Irregardless of how spartan the adults chose to live their child is going to grow. Toys take up a lot of space when scattered across the floor, which the child will do because there is no outdoors to play in.

One window? Was the designer trying to make people depressed & use lots of electricity on lighting. I live in a home barely twice as large & I have 8 windows!

"There are still places where you could get a 2 bedroom home with a backyard for $150K"

LOL. You just described my house. Well, it's my mom's house. She just bought it. It's pretty large, larger than I would like.

I'm aiming for 1500-900 sq ft, because I'll have several children (most, if not all, adopted).

OK guys since this became so popular and full of assumptions. I want to clarify few things.
First I would expect a little more from tree huggers.
We don't plan to be here forever but if we have to we are capable. Look at other cultures where family structures are so tightly knitted into 300SF and they are perfectly happy families.
We ourselves subscribe to Green Energy and keep all lights off or dimmed when not in use. We also take our own bags to shop. We did not take wedding and baby gifts to reduce consumption. We only spent $ 1400.00 for furniture, the rest was hand made or hand down from friends, and family. All our kids stuff ( 90%) is also borrowed.
IN todays Global Warming crisis we do need to think small and consume less every possible way. This requires change of lifestyle. Ask yourself honestly do you Need or do you want? We need to struggle a little before nature really takes over and destroys humans.

1. This is in a NYC Apartment and therefore the bathroom, kitchen and window location are not up to me to change or relocate. Low budget renovation.
2. having bathroom next to kitchen is not very hygenic and probably the worst idea-(@ WIlly Bio)
3.Kids dont need a lot of toys. We grew up with lots of family time, no privacy, and lots of love and in addition lots of nature. Our son plays with dish brush, hair dryers, vacuum cleaner, goes to tons of park around us etc. all his toys in the chest are rarely used and we do put them away when he is done with it.Takes only 5 minutes
Kids need lots of toys is a projection made by parents.
4. Everyone's idea of privacy is different. We have been together for 9 years and traveled to India where bathrooms are in open fields. For us having privacy does not translate into a happy family.
5. Kids need separate room, is again a projection made by parents. Ask yourself do kids really want to be alone or would they rather cuddle and spend time with parents, grand parents and their siblings? Yes our son someday will have a separate room if requested.

Hope this helps. Suchitra Van

Excellent clarification Suchitra Van!

A little over a year ago, my wife and I moved into our first patch of property. We loved living in downtown Vancouver so much that we were willing to pay downtown prices - just not *able* to do so.

We made an interesting compromise though. Without gas, insurance, and car payments to make, we could afford an 890 square foot townhouse right on the Skytrain route through Burnaby (to say that Burnaby is a suburb of Vancouver is like saying Queens is a suburb of New York). Added bonuses were its very walkable neighbourhood and proximity to my workplace.

Our first son came along right after we moved in, and the amount of space we have is perfect for our family. Suchitra's very right about how kids would much rather play with practically everything else in the house. One of our son's favourite toys is one of the vaccum cleaner attachments. And while there's toys scattered everywhere throughout the place, any parent will tell you that's completely unavoidable anyway. No amount of square feet make *that* go away.

As for a yard? We have one. We just share it with all our neighbours is all. There's even a jungle gym, and all the neighbourhood kids love it too. We know far more of our neighbours as a result of living in such close proximity as well. There's a real sense of community here.

Awesome! I can't believe ppl think the layout is bad.. they should see the layout I have to work with in my 37.2sqm. I think that works out around 400 sq feet.