96

What in the dystopian hell?! 350-square-foot tiny homes...

"You can rent the homes out, cover your mortgage, and get income each month," he notes. "Those homes can be leased out for a minimum of $1,300 a month."

Mata says investors rushed in from all over the country, especially from California.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] tal@lemmy.today 16 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

The homes run as small as 350 square feet.

Mata, who says all the 12 tiny homes he repped sold in less than a year, tells Realtor.com that the typical buyer was a single individual, often a college student or downsizing older person.

That's small relative to US houses today, but even the smallest size they have there is 60% larger on a per capita basis, if there's an individual resident, than houses were in 1900 in the US.

https://www.windermere.com/blog/how-the-american-home-has-evolved

Owning a home has been an American tradition from the start. But the home itself has changed dramatically over the years.

For example, you may be surprised to learn how much the size of the average American home has increased since the turn of the 20th century—especially when you compare it to the size of the average family during the same time period.

In the year 1900, the average American family was relatively large with 4.6 members, but the average home featured just 1,000 square feet of usable floor space. By 1979, family size had shrunk to 3.11 members, but the floor space they shared had expanded to 1,660 square feet. And by 2007, the average family size was even smaller still—just 2.6 members—while the average home size had increased by the largest amount yet—this time to 2,521 square feet.

In 1900, 217 square feet per capita.

[-] GraveyardOrbit@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 hours ago

Per capita doesn’t make sense for living spaces. Too many shared/unshared spaces

[-] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 9 points 23 hours ago

It's small relative to houses back then too. I don't think there were many 217 sqft houses, we just had more people per household back then.

[-] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 10 points 23 hours ago

Per capita is a bit odd for measuring the space in a house too. 5 people don't need 5 kitchens and bathrooms

[-] HobbitFoot 5 points 23 hours ago

If these were ADU's or something similar, I'd respect them more. This just looks like typical suburbia but with tiny homes.

I question why this couldn't be a set of apartments.

[-] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 4 points 19 hours ago

I question why this couldn’t be a set of apartments.

Yeah, apartment/condo buildings should be the goto rather than tiny homes. The "shared walls" issue is really a "stop cheaping out on sound insulation" issue.

[-] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 19 hours ago

I question why this couldn't be a set of apartments

Zoning laws, these could still qualify as free standing single family housing, which in Texas is probably required for most suburbs.

this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
96 points (97.1% liked)

Not The Onion

20442 readers
573 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS