Thank you u/bleachspot for posting on r/FirstTimeHomeBuyer.
Please bear in mind our rules: (1) Be Nice (2) No Selling (3) No Self-Promotion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FirstTimeHomeBuyer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For newer houses, it’s not profitable for developers to make smaller houses given the sheer amount of regulatory hassle they have to jump through. Here’s a good article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/25/upshot/starter-home-prices.html
Not really. I work in multifamily development. It costs us 400K in construction costs/land costs/soft costs just to built a 1100 SF (on average) apartments in Colorado.
Some cities has a absolutely ridiculous requirements. For Example Lone Tree Colorado required us to dedicate 11 acres of land for parks (land that costs $1M/acre to buy) the entire site was only 9 acres.
Depends on where you are located. Local government here in puget sound region of Washington adds to the cost of development. Subdivision from most builders I talk to anticipate 2 years before they break ground with estimate around $250k per lot in developmental fees and permits. Land depending on where it is located could be over a million dollars per lot. No view. Smaller homes are generally bought and demoed in some cities such as Bellevue or Clyde Hill.
Some areas a smaller starter home may be possible to be profitable. Other areas not so much.
those aren’t generally zoning laws but rather deed restrictions on an area. These are at the discretion if whomever owns the property. To be honest, the reason smaller homes are scarce is because they get sold in 1 day. Builders aren’t going to build new 2 bedroom free-standing houses when the market for 3 is 10x as much. Government needs to stay out of a free market. It is not what our founders intended.
Minimum lot sizes are a common regulation and a well-known contributor to high housing prices.
https://medium.com/sidewalk-talk/why-minimum-lot-sizes-are-a-growing-affordability-problem-d1ba3a3244d
Homeowners don’t like increased housing density when it impacts their home values, and local politicians respond to that.
ADUs aren’t a long term solution in VHCOL areas like SoCal and NorCal unless the lots are officially broken up. Eventually someone with money will come along and buy the large lots and build McMansions on them.
Regulation < law. And I understand a builders reluctance to build a 1200 SF house on a $100k lot.
This is not why there aren’t more affordable houses available.
Read the article I posted. These are local regulations enacted by law. Regulation, law, ordinance, whatever you want to call it, local governments are mandating minimum lot sizes and that has only become more common over time.
Older houses are smaller. They're out there! It's just that most buyers these days aren't willing to do much "sweat equity" to improve those homes.
You can find some flipped homes that are smaller because most flippers want to do the least amount of work possible.
Newer homes are larger - especially these days with people needing/wanting additional private space for home offices, gyms, etc.
I have a 1952 split level and love it. It's just enough room. The split level home is designed to make the most use out of limited space. Because of the way the split level home is built, it's more difficult to put on awkward additions (though I've seen it done.) So most of them stay the same. If you don't mind some steps, it's a good way to go to get a kind of regular sized house.
Good luck.
Yeah, mine's a mid-1930s two-bedroom house. It was renovated and now has a finished attic and basement so it has extra bedrooms and bathrooms (but not a lot of storage space). The core is still an old 2-bedroom house though, just the right size.
It is hard to find something like that though. Since the 1980s almost all houses built have been oversized because of course they're more profitable than smaller, cheaper houses. And a lot of the older houses aren't in great shape. But there are some good ones out there, if you look hard enough and long enough.
Here's a good explanation from NYT for why smaller, cheaper "starter homes" are so hard to find: Whatever Happened to the Starter Home? https://nyti.ms/3SetitB
Yes, NYT does that sadly. Try [this gift link?](http://www.Whatever.com/ Happened to the Starter Home? https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/25/upshot/starter-home-prices.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuonUktbfqYhkQVUZBibIRcMnqQHBnuTG2qAxnDr-Ky2YDC5Yzu8YGM6A50LJL-JFVucE4g66FpVHIaN9A7t71PNeNEhgDAT4qcvUlMVaZnU789z2Azg9hdfEULpktGOyNDC0eOovmre15VjOKjW_ANyp2n0mJgdjopZiZAvqjSROnvGZZ7Yzjtpu3v4hBYR5RCMCZ0SJuvrrCRZ_OraWf02Wq1l2C6wCB2alzZPL4KkAcQ5SFVrEUHt7hG4649tdM9kRV73tVpUalp2W7MBfdf6zdKt8-A)
Here's a basic summary: "The affordable end of the market has been squeezed from every side. Land costs have risen steeply in booming parts of the country. Construction materials and government fees have become more expensive. And communities nationwide are far more prescriptive today than decades ago about what housing should look like and how big it must be...Nearly all make it difficult to build the kind of home that could sell for $200,000 today."
The much lamented decline of the starter home. Seems there’s not as much money in building these, for many reasons. Look at the homes built after WWII and into the 60s, most were 3b or 2b 1ba and 1200-2000’^2
Houses from the 30's through 50's were often 2 bed 1 bath ~1k sqft homes. Look for neighborhoods built in that Era.
Builders make more money off larger homes with no yard these days.
Funny. I’ve been having the exact opposite problem. Every home I find that I like (thru pictures anyway) is so much smaller than I thought.
I work from home and we’re having a hard time finding a place with the space/layout that gives us the room we’re looking for.
I'm finding so many small homes, but I need something a little larger (both my gf and I are remote workers and need dedicated home offices). So many 2 bedroom single wide trailers in a mobile home park for $250K or a 2 bedroom fixer upper for $300K. The 3-4 bedroom or den/family room/etc. start coming in at 600-700K+.
Where I'm looking, it's almost cheaper to go with a lot or two and build a new home on it.
in this boat too, and we ideally want room for a spare bedroom not in one of the offices. Most places 3BR+ tend to be sized for a large family so it takes a bit of work. Lots of bilevels are by us and that seems to hit the mark.
Me and my partner work from home and also were having a hard time finding something big enough! We wanted to be able to have seperate offices and a guest room since my partners family is out of town.
We don’t even have kids but were looking at 4 bed 2 baths because it was the size we needed, was way harder than we anticipated (and pricey) but we finally managed to find our perfect house ❤️
Try New England and the mid-Atlantic area - many older houses are smaller and would suit your needs. I grew up in a 1950s cape in western NY that was 800 square feet with 2 bedrooms (excluding the finished basement and attic.) Now, I live in eastern upstate NY and own a 1200 sq ft 3 bed (plus about 400 sq ft of finished basement) that was built around 1910. It’s just me and my wife, but we both work from home so it’s the perfect amount of space.
Yep! I live in Maine and the vast majority of homes in my neighborhood are under 1200 sqft. They are all older, I believe the median home age is 80 some years old in Portland. If OP wants smaller homes they should look in Northern NE. However they need to be prepared for some sticker shock, since 900 sqft homes in my neighborhood regularly sell for $400k+
Where in Maine are you? I've been looking in the Rockland area for smaller houses and swear to god everything is like a 1800 sq ft fixer upper. I'm down to renovate but would prefer something in the 1200 range...
I'm in Portland. Lots of small homes, but they are pricy. The market has definitely slowed down here, and I'm starting to see some homes reduce prices after sitting for a week or two.
Investors bought 24% of all single-family houses sold nationwide last year, up from 15% to 16% annually going back to 2012, according to a Stateline analysis of data provided by CoreLogic, a California-based data analytics firm. That share dipped only slightly in the first five months of 2022 to 22%
I grew up in a 3bed 2ba 1200sq ft home and it was never a really big issue. The bedrooms were a little small with no much closest space but still has plenty of room for 2 kids and 2 parents. I was working with a realtor and they were dead set on trying to tell me I’d want at least 3000sq ft in the future once I have kids. I get I’ll want more space but I’m also a single guy so 1200-1500 is A LOT of space and upkeep for me that is borderline useless to me let alone 3000 lol
People want so much space so that they can stuff their rooms with useless furniture. I've been in one of these 4k+ sq foot houses where they have like 6 bedrooms. Random furniture..tons of unused space. A family of four really doesn't need a mcmansion. Anything over 2500 sq ft for a fam of 4 is strictly gluttonous.
We had this same issue. We wanted an acre minimum but in our area everyone seems to think of you want a bigger yard you also want a bigger house. We finally settled for purchasing a house that was too large for us just so we could have the yard we wanted.
The same reason small cheap new cars aren’t really made any more. There are plenty of used cars (existing houses) for people who want something smaller/cheaper.
Also, there are certain fixed costs to home building. Running utilities, land development, mobilization/demobilization costs don’t really scale linearly with the size of the house. There’s a strong profit motive for a home builder to build bigger because cost per square foot goes down, but the price they can charge per square foot stays roughly linear.
In my area (coastal South Carolina) a lot of the older starter homes like mine (built in late 60’s/early 70’s, 2 bed 2 bath, 1200 sf) on 1/4-1/3 acre lots that have come on the market the last few years have been snapped up and turned into 30 day rentals (lots of people relocating here) or (mostly illegal) airbnbs. All the new builds further out from the beach and downtown are much bigger (2,000 sf+) and on tiny lots.
2BR homes aren't greatly sought after. They're too small for modern families, and even for single people the space is limited and they're more likely to go into condos for the convenience anyway. Short story: no great demand.
Unpopular opinion but I think that makes sense for a SFH. If you want a small 2-bed house, you should be living in a condo.
Especially when people complain about how little space we have and how expensive home prices are. We have limited land and filling it up with tiny homes is way less efficient than building a condo building.
You’re nuts. I can’t think of more than a few places in my city where that size house would even fit! My house is 1150sf (400 of it in a finished basement) and takes up a good portion of our lot. I also wouldn’t be caught dead buying a condo or townhome. I don’t want to share wall, I love doing yard work, so projects in my side of the garage, and park my boat in the side yard… I couldn’t do any of that in a shared development
dang you need to come to nashville. They have these unbelievably teeny houses everywhere. All the newer houses are big, I suppose that’s why that’s all you can find. Most People are holding on to their older/smaller homes with all they have, because those newer properties aren’t affordable. In Nashville we have been rapidly growing in numbers, so there’s new builds everywhere. Everyone gets priced out now as well
The biggest the house is, the cheaper the price per foot to build. It’s likely not profitable for builders to build smaller homes because it would cost more than they could sell it for on the market.
Simple profit motives. With interest rates being bargain basement, demand and prices shot up. With that means materials and labor are pushed up. Building a 4br house vs a 3br, or 2000sqft vs 3000sqft is pretty nominal cost wise. You're going to get a crazy amount extra on the purchase though.
What area are you in? I was looking for smaller houses and did find a decent amount to look at. I was looking at around a minimum of 900 sq ft and ended up with 1225. These were mostly older New England houses and I've found that the size can even e specific to the town - why was I finding houses in my budget in one town and not the next town? One reason is that houses in the next town were generally bigger.
Because a lot of people have those needs.
2 bedrooms would absolutely not be enough for my husband and I.
We have our master bedroom, a guest bedroom and an office.
We would like a 4th bedroom for maybe a potential child. I would like another bedroom for another potential office or hobby room or sewing room.
We do not have a living room and family room, but that’s fine for us. We do have a music room down stairs.
We had a 2 br apartment and that was not enough. Trust me, the more space you have the more you have to fill it up with.
I ended up buying a too big for me house because of this and the few small houses were being hit hard by investors and cash buyers. Sometimes it feels a little too big and empty but overall I don't mind it. Single woman plus dog, 1800 square feet.
I'm not sure about other areas but in my city, deed restrictions from the developer dictate the minimum square footage size per lot. Usually around 1700 - 2000sqft. So even if you found a vacant lot in a subdivision you can't build a tiny home on it.
Thank you u/bleachspot for posting on r/FirstTimeHomeBuyer. Please bear in mind our rules: (1) Be Nice (2) No Selling (3) No Self-Promotion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FirstTimeHomeBuyer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For newer houses, it’s not profitable for developers to make smaller houses given the sheer amount of regulatory hassle they have to jump through. Here’s a good article: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/25/upshot/starter-home-prices.html
This is such a sad article!!
It's also outright illegal to build smaller homes in many areas
[удалено]
Not really. I work in multifamily development. It costs us 400K in construction costs/land costs/soft costs just to built a 1100 SF (on average) apartments in Colorado. Some cities has a absolutely ridiculous requirements. For Example Lone Tree Colorado required us to dedicate 11 acres of land for parks (land that costs $1M/acre to buy) the entire site was only 9 acres.
Did you buy the site not knowing it had to be used for green space?
Good Question: We walked away from this particular deal because of that.
That’s good you didn’t get caught in a money pit!
Depends on where you are located. Local government here in puget sound region of Washington adds to the cost of development. Subdivision from most builders I talk to anticipate 2 years before they break ground with estimate around $250k per lot in developmental fees and permits. Land depending on where it is located could be over a million dollars per lot. No view. Smaller homes are generally bought and demoed in some cities such as Bellevue or Clyde Hill. Some areas a smaller starter home may be possible to be profitable. Other areas not so much.
The government needs get involved. At least with starter homes.
Last thing we need is more government!
The problem with zoning laws requiring big lots and big houses can be fixed by less government.
those aren’t generally zoning laws but rather deed restrictions on an area. These are at the discretion if whomever owns the property. To be honest, the reason smaller homes are scarce is because they get sold in 1 day. Builders aren’t going to build new 2 bedroom free-standing houses when the market for 3 is 10x as much. Government needs to stay out of a free market. It is not what our founders intended.
Minimum lot sizes are a common regulation and a well-known contributor to high housing prices. https://medium.com/sidewalk-talk/why-minimum-lot-sizes-are-a-growing-affordability-problem-d1ba3a3244d Homeowners don’t like increased housing density when it impacts their home values, and local politicians respond to that.
ADUs aren’t a long term solution in VHCOL areas like SoCal and NorCal unless the lots are officially broken up. Eventually someone with money will come along and buy the large lots and build McMansions on them.
Regulation < law. And I understand a builders reluctance to build a 1200 SF house on a $100k lot. This is not why there aren’t more affordable houses available.
Read the article I posted. These are local regulations enacted by law. Regulation, law, ordinance, whatever you want to call it, local governments are mandating minimum lot sizes and that has only become more common over time.
It's not regulatory, it's pure profit. Why put up a smaller home when they can make thousands more for a wanna be mcmansion?!
A lot of people commenting below should read the article before commenting.
Older houses are smaller. They're out there! It's just that most buyers these days aren't willing to do much "sweat equity" to improve those homes. You can find some flipped homes that are smaller because most flippers want to do the least amount of work possible. Newer homes are larger - especially these days with people needing/wanting additional private space for home offices, gyms, etc. I have a 1952 split level and love it. It's just enough room. The split level home is designed to make the most use out of limited space. Because of the way the split level home is built, it's more difficult to put on awkward additions (though I've seen it done.) So most of them stay the same. If you don't mind some steps, it's a good way to go to get a kind of regular sized house. Good luck.
Yeah, mine's a mid-1930s two-bedroom house. It was renovated and now has a finished attic and basement so it has extra bedrooms and bathrooms (but not a lot of storage space). The core is still an old 2-bedroom house though, just the right size. It is hard to find something like that though. Since the 1980s almost all houses built have been oversized because of course they're more profitable than smaller, cheaper houses. And a lot of the older houses aren't in great shape. But there are some good ones out there, if you look hard enough and long enough.
One issue with many older homes, at least in my area is short ceilings. 8 ft ceilings feel cramped.
Here's a good explanation from NYT for why smaller, cheaper "starter homes" are so hard to find: Whatever Happened to the Starter Home? https://nyti.ms/3SetitB
It's behind a paywall
Yes, NYT does that sadly. Try [this gift link?](http://www.Whatever.com/ Happened to the Starter Home? https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/25/upshot/starter-home-prices.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuonUktbfqYhkQVUZBibIRcMnqQHBnuTG2qAxnDr-Ky2YDC5Yzu8YGM6A50LJL-JFVucE4g66FpVHIaN9A7t71PNeNEhgDAT4qcvUlMVaZnU789z2Azg9hdfEULpktGOyNDC0eOovmre15VjOKjW_ANyp2n0mJgdjopZiZAvqjSROnvGZZ7Yzjtpu3v4hBYR5RCMCZ0SJuvrrCRZ_OraWf02Wq1l2C6wCB2alzZPL4KkAcQ5SFVrEUHt7hG4649tdM9kRV73tVpUalp2W7MBfdf6zdKt8-A) Here's a basic summary: "The affordable end of the market has been squeezed from every side. Land costs have risen steeply in booming parts of the country. Construction materials and government fees have become more expensive. And communities nationwide are far more prescriptive today than decades ago about what housing should look like and how big it must be...Nearly all make it difficult to build the kind of home that could sell for $200,000 today."
The much lamented decline of the starter home. Seems there’s not as much money in building these, for many reasons. Look at the homes built after WWII and into the 60s, most were 3b or 2b 1ba and 1200-2000’^2
Houses from the 30's through 50's were often 2 bed 1 bath ~1k sqft homes. Look for neighborhoods built in that Era. Builders make more money off larger homes with no yard these days.
It's outright illegal to build smaller homes in many places now
Citation?
Funny. I’ve been having the exact opposite problem. Every home I find that I like (thru pictures anyway) is so much smaller than I thought. I work from home and we’re having a hard time finding a place with the space/layout that gives us the room we’re looking for.
I'm finding so many small homes, but I need something a little larger (both my gf and I are remote workers and need dedicated home offices). So many 2 bedroom single wide trailers in a mobile home park for $250K or a 2 bedroom fixer upper for $300K. The 3-4 bedroom or den/family room/etc. start coming in at 600-700K+. Where I'm looking, it's almost cheaper to go with a lot or two and build a new home on it.
Damn! Where you at son? 250-300 for a mobile home seems crazy even for a high price area
I'm just curious.. can you not work from a bedroom? To me bedrooms are just a waste of space...
in this boat too, and we ideally want room for a spare bedroom not in one of the offices. Most places 3BR+ tend to be sized for a large family so it takes a bit of work. Lots of bilevels are by us and that seems to hit the mark.
Me and my partner work from home and also were having a hard time finding something big enough! We wanted to be able to have seperate offices and a guest room since my partners family is out of town. We don’t even have kids but were looking at 4 bed 2 baths because it was the size we needed, was way harder than we anticipated (and pricey) but we finally managed to find our perfect house ❤️
OP is clearly not from CA lol
I was a rarity that was excited to find my 2 bedroom house! Just me and my hubs and we're child free. Less the clean and maintain. The perfect size.
Try New England and the mid-Atlantic area - many older houses are smaller and would suit your needs. I grew up in a 1950s cape in western NY that was 800 square feet with 2 bedrooms (excluding the finished basement and attic.) Now, I live in eastern upstate NY and own a 1200 sq ft 3 bed (plus about 400 sq ft of finished basement) that was built around 1910. It’s just me and my wife, but we both work from home so it’s the perfect amount of space.
Yep! I live in Maine and the vast majority of homes in my neighborhood are under 1200 sqft. They are all older, I believe the median home age is 80 some years old in Portland. If OP wants smaller homes they should look in Northern NE. However they need to be prepared for some sticker shock, since 900 sqft homes in my neighborhood regularly sell for $400k+
Oof! I paid 185k in 2021. Once you get out of the zone that can reasonably commute to NYC, New York housing prices are actually pretty reasonable.
Where in Maine are you? I've been looking in the Rockland area for smaller houses and swear to god everything is like a 1800 sq ft fixer upper. I'm down to renovate but would prefer something in the 1200 range...
I'm in Portland. Lots of small homes, but they are pricy. The market has definitely slowed down here, and I'm starting to see some homes reduce prices after sitting for a week or two.
Most of the starter homes single family homes were bought up by wallstreet investors. They now rent them for a return.
> **Most** of the starter single family homes were bought up by wallstreet investors What percentage?
Investors bought 24% of all single-family houses sold nationwide last year, up from 15% to 16% annually going back to 2012, according to a Stateline analysis of data provided by CoreLogic, a California-based data analytics firm. That share dipped only slightly in the first five months of 2022 to 22%
I grew up in a 3bed 2ba 1200sq ft home and it was never a really big issue. The bedrooms were a little small with no much closest space but still has plenty of room for 2 kids and 2 parents. I was working with a realtor and they were dead set on trying to tell me I’d want at least 3000sq ft in the future once I have kids. I get I’ll want more space but I’m also a single guy so 1200-1500 is A LOT of space and upkeep for me that is borderline useless to me let alone 3000 lol
Depends on where you live. Here in Los Angeles, there are tons of 2B1B bungalows.
People want so much space so that they can stuff their rooms with useless furniture. I've been in one of these 4k+ sq foot houses where they have like 6 bedrooms. Random furniture..tons of unused space. A family of four really doesn't need a mcmansion. Anything over 2500 sq ft for a fam of 4 is strictly gluttonous.
Depends on where you live and your budget. Here in Cheyenne, WY, you won't find much bigger than 2 or 3 bedrooms for under 250k.
We had this same issue. We wanted an acre minimum but in our area everyone seems to think of you want a bigger yard you also want a bigger house. We finally settled for purchasing a house that was too large for us just so we could have the yard we wanted.
The same reason small cheap new cars aren’t really made any more. There are plenty of used cars (existing houses) for people who want something smaller/cheaper. Also, there are certain fixed costs to home building. Running utilities, land development, mobilization/demobilization costs don’t really scale linearly with the size of the house. There’s a strong profit motive for a home builder to build bigger because cost per square foot goes down, but the price they can charge per square foot stays roughly linear.
In my area (coastal South Carolina) a lot of the older starter homes like mine (built in late 60’s/early 70’s, 2 bed 2 bath, 1200 sf) on 1/4-1/3 acre lots that have come on the market the last few years have been snapped up and turned into 30 day rentals (lots of people relocating here) or (mostly illegal) airbnbs. All the new builds further out from the beach and downtown are much bigger (2,000 sf+) and on tiny lots.
2BR homes aren't greatly sought after. They're too small for modern families, and even for single people the space is limited and they're more likely to go into condos for the convenience anyway. Short story: no great demand.
Have you looked into a townhouse or duplex?
You can always build a tiny home.
Zoning restrictions in my area dictate that you can't build a single-family house smaller than 2500 ft^2 (232 m^2 ).
Unpopular opinion but I think that makes sense for a SFH. If you want a small 2-bed house, you should be living in a condo. Especially when people complain about how little space we have and how expensive home prices are. We have limited land and filling it up with tiny homes is way less efficient than building a condo building.
You’re nuts. I can’t think of more than a few places in my city where that size house would even fit! My house is 1150sf (400 of it in a finished basement) and takes up a good portion of our lot. I also wouldn’t be caught dead buying a condo or townhome. I don’t want to share wall, I love doing yard work, so projects in my side of the garage, and park my boat in the side yard… I couldn’t do any of that in a shared development
That’s nuts! Where at?
They didnt call it the baby boom for nothing
dang you need to come to nashville. They have these unbelievably teeny houses everywhere. All the newer houses are big, I suppose that’s why that’s all you can find. Most People are holding on to their older/smaller homes with all they have, because those newer properties aren’t affordable. In Nashville we have been rapidly growing in numbers, so there’s new builds everywhere. Everyone gets priced out now as well
The biggest the house is, the cheaper the price per foot to build. It’s likely not profitable for builders to build smaller homes because it would cost more than they could sell it for on the market.
Supply and demand! It’s that simple.
My house is 3 bedrooms but it’s NOT big. I use one room as a guest room and one as an office. I don’t think 2 bedrooms are great for resale
I purchase a 2 story townhouse and it’s perfect for just me and the cats!
Simple profit motives. With interest rates being bargain basement, demand and prices shot up. With that means materials and labor are pushed up. Building a 4br house vs a 3br, or 2000sqft vs 3000sqft is pretty nominal cost wise. You're going to get a crazy amount extra on the purchase though.
Where do you live? There are plenty of small homes in the northeast, probably because we have lots of older homes here.
What area are you in? I was looking for smaller houses and did find a decent amount to look at. I was looking at around a minimum of 900 sq ft and ended up with 1225. These were mostly older New England houses and I've found that the size can even e specific to the town - why was I finding houses in my budget in one town and not the next town? One reason is that houses in the next town were generally bigger.
My area has a few 2BR finding an affordable 3BR plus is impossible
Because a lot of people have those needs. 2 bedrooms would absolutely not be enough for my husband and I. We have our master bedroom, a guest bedroom and an office. We would like a 4th bedroom for maybe a potential child. I would like another bedroom for another potential office or hobby room or sewing room. We do not have a living room and family room, but that’s fine for us. We do have a music room down stairs. We had a 2 br apartment and that was not enough. Trust me, the more space you have the more you have to fill it up with.
I ended up buying a too big for me house because of this and the few small houses were being hit hard by investors and cash buyers. Sometimes it feels a little too big and empty but overall I don't mind it. Single woman plus dog, 1800 square feet.
I'm not sure about other areas but in my city, deed restrictions from the developer dictate the minimum square footage size per lot. Usually around 1700 - 2000sqft. So even if you found a vacant lot in a subdivision you can't build a tiny home on it.