August 15, 2009 10:31 PM

Taking "Downsizing" to a Whole New Level

By
Jim Axelrod
(CBS)  At only 120 square feet, two is company - and three is really a crowd. The house is too small to meet building code minimum standards. It's a vehicle, reports CBS News correspondent Jim Axelrod.

But it's got all the comforts of home, and plenty of storage space.

Shafer is at the forefront of the "small house" movement - a school of thought that less is more, especially in a recession.

"This house, all decked out with plumbing and heating would be about $50,000 if we built it for you," Shafter said. "But if you built it yourself, it would be about $20,000."

According to the U.S. Census, the average single family house in America is a little more than 2,500 square feet, meaning you could fit 21 of these into one of those.

"I think they're amazing," said Elizabeth Randol, a possible buyer.

Right now, Randol lives in 1,500 square feet, but she finds tiny very tempting.

"You buy the house, no mortgage and no utility bills," Randol said. "So any money that you make goes right into your pocket."

And she's not alone. Shafer's been criss-crossing the country with his tiny house in tow, teaching workshops on the art of building small.

When he pulls over and posts where he is on his Web page, the small house draws large crowds.

Like the houses themselves, sales are still small. But interest is growing, and Shafer is finding a new use for an old sales pitch: good things come in small packages.

Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved.
Add a Comment See all 20 Comments
by lloydbest1 August 16, 2009 5:30 PM EDT
The idea is a good start. I agree, though, that $50000 is too much. I also don't believe you need go that small to be minimalist. 300 sq. ft. or the size of a standard master suite in today's glandular giant homes is more than twice as big of Jay Shafter's featured broom closet and is still plenty small enough.
The advantages of "living small" go beyond being easy on the budget; it is a possible way out of the Malthusian trap we've sprung on ourselves. If it does nothing else, Shafter's scheme will launch other ideas that may work better.
Reply to this comment
by mgkonyx August 16, 2009 4:57 PM EDT
$50,000 seems like a hellava lot of money for 120 sq.ft. Katrina cottages are about 300 - 500 sq. ft. and cost about $35,000 depending on the extras. They come pre-fab and take about a week to put up.

My husband and I lived in a 845 sq foot place for nearly 20 years. It was pretty crowded with 3 cats and 3 Shelties and an Irish Wolfhound. We learned, however, how to not keep stuff that had little or no use to us.
Reply to this comment
by April_B August 16, 2009 12:47 PM EDT
Our blog is http://agreatleapinthedark.blogspot.com for anyone who is interested in how this can be done. Specifically, http://***********/lbg5kq.
Reply to this comment
by April_B August 16, 2009 12:33 PM EDT
My husband and I are building our tiny house in rural Idaho and although I appreciate Jay Shafer's intent to help Americans see that we don't all need to live in oversized McMansions, the prices he suggests for these houses are unbelievable. We estimate we've spent only about $5,000 on construction so far, saving money by doing all of the work ourselves and using recycled/salvaged/bartered materials whenever we can. It can be done for MUCH less than $20,000. And $50,000 seems like a downright rip-off to me. How is that accessible to your average American?

To the people who think tiny house living is "a nightmare." Our house is 12'x20' (outside dimensions), making it a little less than 200 sq. ft. on the inside. With 2 adults and 2 pit bulls we get along just fine in this amount of space. We also don't have a mortgage, we don't have astronomical utility bills (wood stove heat and solar panel lights), we don't have to stress about what would happen if we lost our jobs (since we only work part-time anyway), and we have the satisfaction of knowing that we built our house ourselves (and didn't get divorced in the process)! Of course it's not all puppies and rainbows, but our goal in doing this is to spend more quality time together instead of commutes of 45 minutes and 10-hour work days (which is what we were doing in the city) just to pay the rent and keep our heads above water. Anyway, we're happy with our decision and encourage everyone who is interested to research the possibilities. It doesn't have to be as extreme as this; just taking a look at what you really "need" is a worthwhile exercise.
Reply to this comment
by Ace22257 August 16, 2009 10:08 AM EDT
If you're in the path of a tornado it isn't going to make one bit of difference what type of structure that you're in...the funnel cloud will wipe the slate clean. These homes aren't designed for families or people with children. For one or two people these are great. You'd save a bundle on heating and utility costs and you'd also be helping to save "land" space. Human's are killing off animal species because we're gobbling up their natural habitats. There's a lot of positives that come with a house of this size. I could live quite comfortably in one of them if it had a full basement. My current house is 926' with a full basement, more than enough space for one person. Great idea here...lets see some of you big home construction companies pick up on the idea and start making whole communities of these types of homes......
Reply to this comment
by Hosheen August 16, 2009 10:02 AM EDT
I've lived in a 32' sailboat, a 25' sailboat and a 28' motor home. All of these cost less than $50K and were a lot more practical.

Living small is good, but this is overpriced, undersized, and a silly idea. Look around and see what can be bought for even the $20K.

Most Americans are horribly spoiled when it comes to houses. They should travel a little and learn how other live without consuming an inordinate amount of the planet's resources. 2500 sq feet is larger than the biggest house I ever owned and I rattled around in there.
Reply to this comment
by specialty8 August 16, 2009 9:14 AM EDT
What happens when somebody takes a dump,everybody suffers.
Reply to this comment
by specialty8 August 16, 2009 9:11 AM EDT
Al Gore will be proud. The "make more for Gore" tour is working. He can plug up another five heated swimming pools if this works out.
Reply to this comment
by John_Merritt August 16, 2009 9:07 AM EDT
This would be a neat little house if there were no building codes that prohibited you from planting it on a piece of land. County codes might be a little less stringent, but no way a city is going to allow this except in very rural small towns, MAYBE.
Reply to this comment
by nojoy01 August 16, 2009 5:16 AM EDT
Is this the ultimate "starter home"?
Reply to this comment
See all 20 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook