cearbhaill you may have a new marketing tool...

"Houses without eating areas so you never have to entertain!"

ROTF

bethesdamadman: "Actually, that wasn't the writer's opinion; it came from a report from the National Association of Home Builders in which it conducted a survey of 500 architects, designers, manufacturers and marketing experts on home design trends of the future. The results, reported on the association's Web site in February, suggest that, nationally, the living room is well on its way out. In the poll, 55 percent of the professionals predicted that the living room will vanish in average homes by 2015."

LOL! These are the same people who gave us all of those design elements that they now say are or will shortly be pass Creating new trends helps insure job security for the above mentioned sectors, especially now...with home sales and new construction so slow....they need to entice folks with the new trendsÂso those who NEED to follow will have a reason to buy, due to the power of suggestion that their current layouts are no longer "current"...

IMO...although kitchen, L/R, D/R, F/R functions all rolled into one BIG GREAT ROOM may work really well for someÂ.I think that there will always be a huge market for those who are not necessarily enamored of spending every waking hour at home in the constant company of the other family members unless they are sequestered in their bedrooms.

Most people I know love the opportunity to watch something on TV other than what appeals to their kidsÂ.or, they like to read, net surf, chat on the phone, etc, without having to compete with the noise that children naturally generate. In addition, a formal D/R is great for the same reasonÂ.if the kitchen is open to the F/RÂwhich is the case with most newer homesÂ.the D/R provides a bit of a respite from the F/R activitiesÂespecially if with guestsÂas adults often linger around the table, sipping coffee, chatting etcÂsometimes about subjects that are not exactly child materialÂwhile the kids go off to the F/R and watch a movieÂplay, etcÂ

Last but not leastÂa D/R and /or a L/R need not be "formal"; they can be a casual as one prefersÂorÂ..can even be used for different purposesÂ..such as a library, study, office, etc.

Eliminating those rooms IMO provides for far less flexibilityÂnot more.

That said, while I am sure that the "group home" set up will always appeal to some, there will always be an extremely healthy market for more diversity in the lay outÂallowing more varied use and flexibilityÂas well as a modicum of privacy.

good logic,logic

We use our formal living and dining rooms every day. I wouldn't want to be without them. Growing up in Germany, we never had but one living room, so I didn't even know what one was. I thought it was the weirdest thing when I moved to the US!

Qdog beat me to it but still I have to say:

Logic, your logic is impeccable

I'm thinking of the house we just bought built in the 70s. It only has one large living space (you choose to call it a living room or a family room). It does have an informal eating area in the kitchen, but we plan to open it up to the current dinning room, put in a bar style places for people to eat facing the kitchen and will only have the dinning room table if you want to eat face to face.

We have a 1200sqft home, its not really big enough to have many different rooms that serve the same function. But I suposse if you had kids, a large home, etc it would be different.

I never did understand the 2-story stuff except as a builder's attempt to distract you from too little square footage. If you don't have closets, attics unencumbered by trusses, or basements, you'll need a 3 or 4 car garage that dwarfs the house to store your 'stuff'.

Build taller with a overall footprint that is half garage. Slap on some blind gables and shallow porches. Scrimp on windows. Brick only the front elevation. It looks impressive without delivering useful (more costly HVAC-ed and plumbed) living space.

So, what IS useful living space in America? Are we coming back to the log cabin's central living space with our combined kitchen/family room/dining area? How often do we use that grand front door or the 'front parlor' (company-only LR)? We don't have to sleep next to the kitchen hearth now; can have separate HVAC-ed BRs -- and bathrooms with toilets.

I'm plumping for the return of the 'back hall' -- a combination mud room, laundry and storage space, with a biffy and access to kitchen, garage, back yard. I'm also a fan of the big, screened porch.

In addition to our guest room and bath we have only one room that goes unused most of the time, a 12 X 15 DR divided from our LR by a 12-foot arch. (We can see it and get light from it; we just aren't using it as eating space very often.) We use our formal LR every day to read and talk; fireplace is there. It gets as much use as our so-called 'library' (per plans), where we watch TV. Most used is our kitchen/breakfast room/back hall area.

I agree with the article and am glad I'm not in the carpeting business. I feel it's time has passed (along with spreading rushes on the floor, LOL). Hardwoods and tile are cleaner and permanent. Unlike area rugs, tacked down caarpeting can't be thoroughly cleaned (washed).

It's not always what you call a space, it's how you use it. The company-only LR probably is a relic. The overly high ceilings that are useful in hotels and other public spaces may lose their attraction for people who want more cozy family spaces.

I'd like to see more about making off-grid alternatives affordable for SFH.

My home does not have a dining room or a living room. We designed it this way. I don't miss either of those rooms.

At the end of that article they talked about the clothes line making a resurgence. I suppose HOAs are really going to be having issues with this one. Then again, "green" subdivisions are starting to emerge and I suppose they will specifically allow clothes lines due to the energy savings aspect.

My home does not have a dining room or a living room. We designed it this way. I don't miss either of those rooms.

So, out of curiosity, what kind of spaces do you have?

I don't have anything against a living room or dining room if they're used. As Logic pointed out so eloquently, these rooms do not have to be formal and used only for entertaining guests.

We use the dining room (with formal dining furniture) everyday. For 'formal' we set out the fancy plates and nicer tablecloth. There is no way our living room can be described as formal. It is a place for people to gather and talk, read, or lounge. No TV - that's in the TV room but we have toys, lots of toy bins and play space.

I've started browsing the "Not so Big House" books in which the author introduced a new type of room - the "Away Room". I think the concept of this room is to be away from noise and distractions from TV, stereos, computers, video games, etc. (I would call this type of room a den.) So while some rooms are being eliminated, new rooms are being invented!

My brother had close to 30 folks at his house for Thanksgiving. He only has one open dining space/living space that's right off the (also open) kitchen. He moved back the sofa and loveseat, brought in some folding tables and chairs, and accommodated everyone quite nicely.

There really are very few "musts." Lots of "wants", though. Most folks do seem to find a way to make do just fine with whatever they've got. In fact, some of the fondest memories throughout my life were made in places where accommodations were makeshift, but still lovingly provided.

To each his/her own!

Count me in with the dinosaurs! Of course, at least some of it is because we don't have the fat wallet that it seems like most of these builders/designers/architects think people have and aren't interested in the monster houses that they think everyone wants. We bought a ~1350sf Folk Victorian (talk about dated! LOL) with no family room, no 3 car garage (HA!), "only" 1.5 baths ("Even a house with one full bath and a toilet/sink powder room is going to turn buyers off" is a load of crap), all sorts of "obsolete" stuff... Our living room is just that, the room we live in - we spend most of our waking hours there. We have a dining room, sort of, because PO took down the wall between kitchen and DR to expand the kitchen footprint by a few feet; since we wouldn't use the usual big table, we've got a couch and we're planning to put in some nice comfy chairs and a tea table/extra-high coffee table. I suppose you could call that a family room or a keeping room or something like that, I just consider it part of the kitchen. When we entertain it's always buffet style, usually with "one-bowl food" like chili or beef stew, because we are extremely informal people (okay, rednecks LOL) and so are all of our friends and family. We'd all feel super weird sitting at a table arrayed with fine china, crystal and silver. :-)

When we redo the kitchen I plan to put in a trash compactor, out of style or not. I've always thought they were extremely practical. We had pay-as-you-throw program in our last town and there are indications that we're going to have it in this one in the next few years, and at two bucks a bag it really adds up after a while. Not to mention just plain taking up less cubic space in the landfill - we recycle as much as the town will accept, but there's still stuff left after that.

Very small houses - under 1000sf - actually move quite well in my area in a normal market. Mostly it's retirees who aren't interested in keeping up a big house for the ten days out of 365 when the kids/grandkids come to visit, or singles/couples who aren't interested in condos, or starter homes for young couples planning to start a family because they're generally the houses that are just plain affordable. (I spent my teen years sharing an 800sf bungalow with my parents, so IMO it's a crock that a family with offspring must have a large house. You just have to be less acquisitive and stuff-obsessed than the typical family these days.)

I also think his assertion that it requires "a couple million dollars" to update an old house to decent condition is utterly absurd.

This is such an interesting thread. I come from the Uk where i still have a very small very old house( Tudor).In the Uk most people have one living room/sitting room for the family and the bedrooms become heavily used by the children to escape often having TVs etc. This reflects the expense of land there as it is a small heavily populated island.Similar story in France, or at least Paris, which is where I lived before moving to the US. When I moved to my current home in the US I was in shock to have so much space.My "formal' LR is really just the room with no TV and what a pleasure that is! I can sit there in the evening and listen to great plays etc on the BBC internet feed. Although my US house is big it doesn't have the charm and cosiness of that 500 year old doll house in the UK! I am so interested to read about all your different life styles. Vive la difference.

Well, I floored in the 2-story foyer of my hopefully-soon-to-be-former home and built a large master closet in the space. Which let me annex the former master closet space and have something larger than a 5'x8' bathroom. Never regretted that for a moment.

Used the dining room every day because my "eat in" kitchen was a joke, so I quit bothering to try to cram a table in there after 6 months. Figured I payed the mortgage on the whole house; might as well use the whole house...

New house has better usable space but I was sulking yesterday because I don't know where to put all my crystal, etc. because the dining room is smaller and I don't have a hutch.

Love the back stairway in our house,it is used practically all the time , and more convinient then the front stairway in the foyer..Hate our hardwood floor in Kitchen..Love the wood burning fireplace.. hate having all day full sun exposure at rear of home..Love seperate his and her master closets..Hate having a bedroom above garage(always either too hot or cold)...LOVE the guest suite, makes visitors have their own space(we have lots of visitors)...

I don't think that older homes will be unusable in the future. I just think rooms will be re-purposed. My house is about 20 years old. It has a formal living room, dining room and main floor family room. All the rooms are fairly small. We have adapted things to suit us. We took the small eat-in kitchen and turned it into a decent sized kitchen only. We eat every day in the dining room. We do our living in the living room. It made sense because it is the biggest room in the house so we spend most of our time in it. The tiny family room we turned into a computer room. I appreciate not having high, hard to heat cathedral ceilings. I like that my house has rooms and isn't open concept. It makes for more private spaces. Everyone is different and what appeals to one person might not appeal to another. The fact that people's tastes are different will prevent certain styles of homes from becoming "relics".

Some people want the formal DR/LR and others don't. I think it's great that the diversity is there to provide options for different people's lifestyles. It seems like styles are becoming less rigid and therefore are more accommodating.

"I don't think that older homes will be unusable in the future. I just think rooms will be re-purposed. "

I have never found a home that couldn't be re-configured with the aid of a sledge hammer.

We don't have a formal living room, but have a library instead. It's exactly the same thing, we just named it something different and added a door (divided light), books and a desk. We do have a formal dining room and a two story family room, but not a two story foyer. When we built this house the old folks in the family were concerned that we didn't have a "parlor" (New England Irish term for formal living room).

I believe the writer was discussing what builders and architects believe the trend for AVERAGE homes will be. It makes sense to eliminate some formal spaces in an average house, which I believe is only a little over 2000 sf. With that much square footage it doesn't really make sense to use up a lot of square footage in little used rooms. But honestly, I don't rememeber the last time I was in a newer house that size with a formal living room or two story foyer. Dining room, yes.

While ten years ago, I'd have agreed with everything on the list, now I'd have to say that my dining room and living room are two of my very favorite rooms!

In fact, for my next (hopefully small!) house, I definitely want a 'formal' dining room that will be furnished informally. Nix the bitty breakfast nook with it's cheapo dinette set and dine nicely every day. Wooden floors, semi-rustic table, nice but not-fragile china -- live well.

And what makes the living room so nice? No TV. We moved the TV to a small room with pocket doors off of the living room, and use the living room for family conversations and visiting with friends. Isn't that what it was designed for so long ago?

I guess I'm always ahead of the RE trends-lol.
We just built a house with a GREAT ROOM & a Dining Area/Room next to it. It's all open. Looks like a "T".

We re-designed the rooms in this house because our last house (Center Hall Colonial) was not very conducive to having dinner guests over. Many of the colonials have the Dining Rooms in front of the kitchen. Standard size is 13 x 14.
A room like that seats 8 people comfortably with all the walls around the table. What if you have a large family, 20 plus people? It was a problem.

Now, with the dining area open to the Great Room, I can open up the dining table & seat many, many people. Otherwise the table is pushed to the side leaving us a lot of extra space to move around. Then again, I'm not a formal person. I gave away my formal Dining Set & my china. It's all about comfort & utility now ;)

We did away with the Living room because we never used it. I had extra dusting & vacuuming to do.

I believe that you will always have different opinions on the layout of the homes. You may have majority of people go with the trends. A builder once told me:"Geez, you can go crazy with trends. First people want closed kitchens, then open kitchens, then semi-open kitchens. Get what YOU like. You cannot please everyone."

About spaces and holiday parties: My grandmother lives in a 600sf condo (back when her children lived there, 8 people inhabited that condo!). The main room for entertainment is the kitchen. About 15sf x 10sf. The Christmas party is always lots of fun - that room is packed with about 29 people and three cats. Back in the 80s, half of them smoked in that little room LOL! Now they are all more health conscious and non-smokers.

I have a formal living room that is never used. Only my dog goes in there because it's so quiet? As long as there is a roomy dining area, large enough for a good sized rectangular dinner table, then that's fine as well. I like a large living area with a vaulted ceiling, as opposed to a two story ceiling.

dabunch, we have a side hall farm house style Colonial; as one enters, the L/R is to the left...the D/R behind the L/R, the Kitchen to the right of the D/R, behind the foyer, staircase etc....the F/R is off the kitchen, to the right...and can't be seen from the front foyer.

When we have a large number of guests, we just add tables to the existing D/R table, into the L/R, in a contiguous row...which enables us to entertain 25 for a sit down meal very comfortably...30 if some don't mind a little bit of a squeeze...

IMO, many of the lay outs of the center hall Colonial is not as conducive to such...as the D/R is generally on the opposite side of the foyer from the L/R...and running a table across the foyer is hardly conducive to easy front door access...

IMO..a lot has to do with proper space uitlization in home design...and not just the amount of space.

A relative recently bought a center hall, that is about 5,000 SF....however, the kitchen is behind the D/R, so although their D/R is larger than our D/R (our home is about 2500 SF) we have far more flexibility for a sit down dinner..

There is a study behind their L/R...and if that was the D/R, they would have far more flexibility to accomdate more sit down guests...however..that room has a HUGE firplace, and is visually far more conducive to using as a L/R...

BTW...the only thing our house is missing that I would love to have is an additonal rear staircase like qdognj...:-)

>>I still see people buying super outdated homes built in the 50s (and still stuck in the 50s). People will still want my soon to be outdated 2007 home in 2057.LOL, but out here in the San Francisco Bay Area they call those properties 'teardowns'. The home is worth nothing; the land is everything.

I agree with logic and the others that people have differing needs at different times in their lives. When I was in my thirties, we gave elegant, sit-down, classic dinner parties for 8-10 people two or three times a month. For years, in fact - working out of a 'black hole' of a tiny kitchen, with a modest DR that just fit a table made of a 4x8' sheet of plywood covered by a nice tablecloth.

If it weren't for the classic 1930's sliding doors separating the LR and DR that could disappear into the walls, everybody wouldn't have been able to fit!

At that point in my life I would have killed for a not only a bigger kitchen, but a larger DR and LR.

Times change: now I'm in my fifties, I seldom have more than 2-4 folks over, and every family event is a potluck - my nephew and niece grew up, and turned into dynamite cooks. They also have bigger houses, with larger LR and DR than I currently have. And that half of the family all lives in the same area, so rather than making 10 people schlepp everything to our house, my DH and I go to one of theirs instead.

Our current house is small, less than 1500 sq. ft. I'd love an extra room or even two. It won't happen because getting permit approvals are a nightmare here, and costs are astronomical due to ever-tightening earthquake requirements. My DH will have to keep using the garage as his hobby room!

But I know that housing fashions DO change. We remodeled this house completely in 1989/90, and at that time big kitchens, master suites, and open plans didn't exist in our starter home, inner-city neighborhood. We were even refused a refinance in 1991 because the appraiser thought what we had done to our house was completely out of proportion and inappropriate for our cottage.

Fast-forward to 2003, when gentrification was in full swing here and property values soaring. A different appraiser loved everything we had done to the house, saying "everybody's looking for master suites and views and big kitchens like you have."

Since we know this isn't our forever house, we always balance what we want to have with what affects resale. This house will be bought by a single person or a small family; it's got a limited appeal and we know we have to make the most of it. I like to have my younger Gen X and Y friends come over, because if THEY like the house, then I know it will have good potential resale.

You have to know your local market and your competition, and decide accordingly what's worth having/changing/budgeting.

Just remembered, i hate hot air heat!!! Hot water baseboard was MUCH better...No dust,better heat balance thru each zone...

Needs change, but some remnants of old styles remain. 'Real Estate' has an interesting part in the study of group psychology.

Talk of back stairs makes me wonder (again) why the term 'bridal staircase' is still in use to sell houses. How many weddings can one family expect to host? How many are even held at home? In earlier houses the back stairs were not intended for family use; they were for the live-in help, who were expected to move invisibly behind the scenes. "Upstairs, Downstairs" lived on, slightly altered.

I grew up in a house in a neighborhood where most homes were built shortly before WWII. The post by jrldh about everyone crowding into a kitchen reminded me of how small the kitchens were. These houses were designed for help to do the cooking. The 'eat in' portion of those kitchens was for the cook/housekeeper to sit down and possibly to feed a child or two. Adults were served in the DR. During and after the war these kitchens were deemed 'too small'. Kitchens expanded and included eating space for families.

The LR and DR were kept, but there must have been some carry-over. They were still considered formal spaces -- signifying what? Status? Why did Americans think they needed these largely unused spaces? Because 'House Beautiful' displayed them? Looking back, it seems odd that people didn't adjust to Living Rooms for living in, instead of adding Family Rooms for the same purpose.

What was going on there, and how has it changed to where we now can want just one, true *living* room? (Peoople stopped entertaining formally at home? Working women don't have time or energy for doing it and 'help' is hard to find? There's plenty of opportunity to socialize with others outside the home -- even too much?)

I see the formal LR/DR issue differently: What has gone by the wayside for most folks is having either the hired help or the family cook/bottle washer preparing the meals in a kitchen (sometimes eat-in, sometimes not) that is closed off to guests and then serving these meals to the rest of the family and/or and their guests in a formal dining room.

This set-up has (in many cases) been supplanted by an open kitchen/family room -- with or without a formal dining room and formal living room space.

Personally, I prefer the latter (i.e., having two living and dining areas, one formal and one more casual). I like having a media-free area for adults to gather and talk, as well as a less formal kitchen/family room for smaller groups of friends and family to hang out in.

When we have a large group of parents and school-age children over (my dd's 9), the kids often eat together at their own table in the kitchen/family room while the adults eat in the dining room (these rooms are within earshot of one another). Much more enjoyable for everyone. For larger holiday/family gatherings, we have a place for everyone to sit together. For informal (i.e., small) gatherings of friends and family, we mostly hang out in the kitchen/family room. Often my husband and I will just sit in the formal living room and read or chat, so I wouldn't say that we only use it when company comes.

I'm sure that as my daughter gets older and has her friends over, we will appreciate not having to sit with her and her friends as she entertains as much as she will appreciate us not not being there.

That said, when space is at a premium, something has gotta give, and more often than not, it's gonna be the formal spaces. Just not in my house ;-).

The article didnt say what was going to take the place of the dining and living room. Open concept doesnt work for everyone. I like rooms; I like quiet spaces that arent open to the rest of the house (no offense to those that do like that, just doesnt work for us). I dont particularly care what you call them. I will use them for whatever I need. In my current house, I have a living room, which I use as an office. Its great and it gets used everyday. It isnt open to anything and it is quiet. My dining room table is used for crafts and homework. Its used several times a week.

Can't imagine not having a formal dining room. We eat in ours every week. We "dress it up" for fancier occasions like Thanksgiving, but we casually use it about every other day. It feels special to sit in a room completely dedicated to eating and talking. I don't feel the need to get up from the table to do dishes. Conversation doesn't have to compete with the lure of a TV, etc. It's very relaxing, and dinner is a time we look forward to and enjoy.

We don't have a formal living room, and I wish we did. I'd put the piano and a few reading chairs in there. I too like rooms, and grew to hate our open plan (that we remodeled!!!) because of the noise and chaos.

The formal Living Room used to be called the parlor. Here is how the Living Room name came along....

""After a person died, he or she would remain in the home for a few days so that family members and friends could pay their last respects by viewing the body. This time was referred to as the viewing or wake and was often held in the most formal room of the house, which was typically the 'parlor.' ... By the early 20th century, funeral preparation and wakes began to be held outside of the home in modern day funeral homes [that's why we used to call them 'funeral parlors.'] However, the association between death and the parlor continued to linger. To change this perception, inventive furniture makers and home designers invented the name 'living room' to describe the parlor. This would associate the room with life not death."

The above is from this link:
http://underthenews.blogspot.com/2006/09/room-of-ones-own-to-cook-sleep-or-die.html

What a fun thread!

I actually think the way to keep a house from being obsolete is to have flexible-use living space.

What used to be the formal living room is now the "man's room" in our house. The "family room" with a fireplace is now the office/kid's playroom (we don't use fireplaces). The garage is now a media room, and it's where we all hang out for the majority of the time. It's big, comfortable, with huge squishy couches.

I think in the future as more homes are built on factory lines that you'll see modular living coming into play more, like, need a huge closet but not that fourth bedroom? Click, snap, done. Oops, third kid on the way, click, snap, put the fourth bedroom back.

I'm betting in 50 years our houses will resemble giant lego blocks as they're being built.

As for predictings tastes, well, they are as different and varied today as they were 50 years ago and 50 years hence, so what's the point, except to get people to buy the magazine...

Until very recently, most houses were built for families with children living at home. US demographics have changed a lot and will change even more over the next 20 years, as the average age of the population becomes older. Also, fewer couples have children, and more single people buy homes. Twenty-five years ago, comparatively few single people bought homes.

Housing specifically for empty-nesters and housing built to visitability standards are big growing markets (visitability means a stepless entrance, wider doors, and accessible bathrooms to accommodate not only people in chairs, but people at any stage of life who have temporary or permanent mobility problems.

I think that we may see a trend toward building more homes for specific populations rather than assuming that one size/style fits all.

A housing trend I'd like to see is garages big enough for people to park their trucks and SUVs in. That, or a vehicular trend involving a return to smaller cars...

You know, I should really read the link a thread is about before posting - my suggestion about bigger garages was in there. Also, there are quite a few other gems in that article:

"Basements with only an outside entrance."

One of the strangest houses I ever saw had this, but (get this) it was *new construction*. After a year or two of having to go outside to get downstairs, the owner had an elevator built in the house (maybe that was the plan all along) so that he could get into his own (finished) basement.

"and dark beams cutting across the ceiling."

Ack. Guilty as charged. Although I have been planning on painting them white.

"the humble clothesline is making a comeback among the environmentally conscious. You still can't beat it for making your bed sheets crisp and fresh-smelling."

Yeah, and its pretty swell for getting bird poop all over your clean laundry too.

Siobhanny5, I easily had Thanksgiving Dinner for 18 in my 1000 sq ft post-war ranch without a dining room. Living room chairs and occasional tables went into the bedrooms, the couch was pushed against a wall, two 8 ft banquet tables were brought out and cheerfully set with colorful Fiesta ware and nephews' construction-paper decorations from years past. We pulled up every chair in the house, used the kitchen counters and the dining table for banquet-style serving, and we all sat and enjoyed the company. My mother (RIP) always enjoyed the TV being right near the table so she could watch the end of the football game. When we had 12 or so for a meal, we pushed the banquet tables together side-by-side and sat around one wide, square table with the serving dishes in the middle.

Now we live in a 1675sq ft house with a formal living room space in the front, then a big kitchen/informal dining area adjoining the family room. We had 25 for a banquet here for my DF-in-L's 90th birthday. The LR is used as our Library/office/music room, and we could seat 8 there using desks, occasional tables, and easy chairs. Four sat at a card table in the foyer, there was a "real" dining space in the kitchen, along with banquet serving space. Then the family room could seat 6 to 8, as well. People wandered between spaces and all still say how they enjoyed it. We did not use the china (or even the Fiesta), but we could have, just as easily.

We do need the living room space and it has to be fairly large to fit all the books, the computer, synthesizer, music stands, trombones, storage, comfortable chairs (that the dogs sit in most, like at Westranch's home). Our family room being at the far end of the house from the music room means that one can actually watch and hear TV when DH is practicing or composing. It is nice to have him on the same level as me, in our old house he was in a room above the garage.

The 'musts" that this house has for us also include a first-floor laundry (not in basement) and a second toilet. We have a bath and a half. Now that we share the only full bath with an invalid, I do wish we had a master bath, but it is no way a "must" for me. A second toilet in any form is good! I would love a real laundry room with space to hang and fold clothes. but it is not a "must" either. I can use the foyer and the floorspace in the library for hanging my clothes as they dry. Clotheslines only work if you are actually home during the day to do the laundry, watch the weather, and bring it in! I can imagine how I would often end up needing to hang them to dry again because the dew fell and got them all wet!

I have never understood two-storey rooms or foyers, having frozen in high school in the 1970s energy crisis. We wore our coats and mittens in class to help save on heating costs for the school. Did people in other parts of the country put in dropped ceilings in fine old houses in order to heat less space? They did that around here. Too much head space makes my mind try to calculate heat costs! We have a raised ceiling in our family room, which faces west. The afternoon sun just fries that room in the summer. When we do go to insulate, we may need to consider lowering that ceiling to be able to put insulation up there.

I would not like the many-roomed living area nearly as much as I like our house. It is more flexible (except there is no way to have a formal dining room unless you use the family room as one.)

One obsolete feature that some miss is the laundry chute. I'll never need one because I am in ranch homes for life, but people who viewed my old house when is was for sale always had fun with it. They would often tell me they were no longer allowed by code, due to the chimney effect they have in a house fire.

Do people really pass up an otherwise nice house becausse of it having a fusebox? I have replaced them in both of my houses before moving in, and it is not an expensive fix. Some people just have no imagination.

Waddyamean? No more laundry chutes? That's...awful! I can't beleive they are any worse than heating ducts for conducting flames. Ours had a door on each level and a flap on the basement end. Jeez, we are being legislated to death. (Don't get me started about 'age-appropriate' toys -- like the Baby doesn't grab everything in sight, including Big Brother's airplane glue and Big Sis's hairpins.)

It is what I was told, I don't know if it is true. Maybe a person in the trades can let us know.

Laundry chutes are illegal in my town unless it is lined with metal and has an airtight door/flapper on both ends. I guess you would throw the stuff down the chute and then open the door on the bottom when you are down there. My understanding is the rule bans any way fire can travel in walls. That is why you have to have blocking in balloon walls and why you have to seal where pipes comes through the bottom plate.

We decided against it because I couldn't find the airtight doors quickly.

My mother (as a small child) threw her infant brother down the laundry chute. She wanted him to "go away", obviously. He was fine. Knowing him as an adult I can see why she wanted to get rid of him.

Thanks, sue36. Ours was metal-lined, with doors. My father once rigged a telephone line through ours from the kitchen to the second floor and up to my bed when I had chickenpox. (Saved my mom some steps when I was just lonely for a word.)

Wonder if your uncle would have been different without the express trip to the basement! LOL

My grandmother's house had a laundry chute--metal, went from the 2d floor to the basement. There was a snug-fitting 'lid' made out of the hardwood floor that had been cut to install it. So cool. I loved dropping clothes down there and watching them land. I'm not sure a baby would have fit, unless it was really a newborn. There was always a basket under the opening, to catch the clothes.

I'm over clotheslines. I used to use them, and won't be going back.
--They take up the entirety of a small yard, or else they're too small for more than one load.
--The clothes have to be checked for poop.
--The clothes have to be fluffed in the dryer because otherwise they'll stand on their own. Maybe this isn't a problem in some areas, but water's very hard around here.
--Unless you're in the desert, you're going to wind up getting things rained on.
--Unless it's hot out, it takes all day for the clothes to dry.
--It's a heck of a lot more work.

I doubt carpeting will go out of style up north where there's winter. I for one hate cold floors.

"Did people in other parts of the country put in dropped ceilings in fine old houses in order to heat less space?"

Ohhhh yeah. (I'm in NH.) We looked at quite a few where rooms that clearly once had 10+ foot ceilings had their ceilings lowered to 7-7 1/2 feet - the ceilings were often butted right against the top trim of the windows, and in one case the top trim had been removed in order to lower the ceiling right to the level of the window itself. We saw both the conventional "dropped ceiling" with the metal grid and panels and drywalled conventional ceilings. I also immediately think "omg, what does that cost to HEAT?" when I see super-high ceilings! Yes, I know it's possible to build super-efficient houses that cost little to heat despite enormous rooms with soaring ceilings, but the "typical" subdivision special is unlikely to be so efficiently-designed and -built. My own experience with a two-story living room was very poor - we froze in the LR but the loft overlooking it was stifling. I put a ceiling fan in the loft but it did not really help. If I had one of those old houses with the very high ceilings I think I'd put in an old-fashioned-looking ceiling fan to help bring the heat down and use vent diverters or radiator boxes to direct the heat more toward human level instead of straight up. Our 1900 "Victorian Lite" has 9' ceilings downstairs and it's not too bad, a little chilly at floor level but I think when we get those floors insulated they will be better. (I read somewhere that one of the reasons for the high ceilings in northern climes during the Victorian era was because the smoke from coal fires, whale-oil lamps, and later gas lighting was more offensive than being chilly. They also wore a lot more clothes than we are accustomed to, which probably also kept them warmer - I put on from-the-skin-out Edwardian dress once and thought I was going to keel over from the sheer weight of it all, and I was sweltering in a ~65 degree room. And clothing in the Edwardian period was simpler and lighter than fifty years before, too!)

"I doubt carpeting will go out of style up north where there's winter. I for one hate cold floors."

I hate cold floors too, but after tearing up the carpet in a couple of previous houses/apartments and seeing what accumulated in and under the padding even though they had been professionally cleaned regularly, I'd rather have hard floors with area rugs that can be sent out to be cleaned and rolled up for cleaning underneath. Tough to send out something that's tacked to the floor. ;-) Radiant floor heating is also a thing of beauty - we used floor warming mats in the tiled master bathroom of our previous house, and we're going to put them in the kitchen and bath of this one when we redo those (although they'll be getting lino and vinyl instead of tile due to deflection issues).

Oh, and I happen to LIKE dark beams, although not so much against stark white ceilings - too contrasty. :-)

OK, so if your home does not have a living room, does the family room technically become the living room?

My husband and I call formal L/R and D/R the museum rooms. They remind me of my mother in law who has these rooms to display her things that no one is supposed to actually use to keep them in garish, oops, I mean good condition. We just can't see paying for square footage to store a table and chairs seldom used.

Interesting article but it seems to me the professionals aren't paying any attention to energy issues if they think, for example, that garages of the future need to be designed with 8 ft by 10 ft garage doors to accommodate SUVs and other large vehicles! With gas prices going thru the ceiling, smaller cars and less driving are, I think, the wave of the future.

I also predict that a lot of folks (particularly those in the knowledge industries) will begin cyber-commuting to work 2 or 3 days per week or more if they possibly can. And, all of us will start finding ways to car-pool or use public transportation a lot more often than we currently do. If gas prices go up enough, we may even see a resurgence of the one-car or even zero-car family! So if I were picking the space most likely to become obsolete, it would be the behemoth garages we're currently building!

Conversely, I would expect to see a rise in the demand for space that can be dedicated to "home office" use while possibly serving as a guest room or "parlor" when the need arises. Murphy beds could make a big comeback. My guess is that formal living rooms and/or formal dining rooms will simply morph into home-offices ... which the kids will still be generally forbidden from entering! (Thus, besides Mom or Dad's desk and computer, it wouldn't surprise me for the home-office to hold some of the nicest furniture in the house. LOL)

IMHO, Architects also need to pay a lot more attention to whether they're designing homes for the sun-belt or for northern climes than they currently do.

Where it is hot 10 months out of the year, it is downright ridiculous to design a home with massive amounts of glass facing towards the west - no matter how gorgeous the view is. This is just begging for outrageous cooling bills! Instead, Southern homes need to be designed with porches or awnings or roof overhangs that shade as many windows as possible.

Where winter heating is the big energy user however, it makes sense to capture as much heat as possible by putting windows on the south and west facing sides of the home. North facing walls however should be well-insulated and have a few windows/doors as possible.

Likewise, soaring ceilings do create rooms that are a bear to heat if you live in a cold climate. Personally I've never been a fan of 20 foot soaring ceilings anyway because being in such a room generally strikes me as rather like being at the bottom of a well. Here in the South tho, 10 foot ceilings can be smart - if they are combined with ceiling fans and operable transoms over interior doorways plus well-shaded windows that are situated to capture the prevailing breezes so that one can take advantage of passive cooling.

Conversely, up North it makes sense to lower one's ceilings although I'd caution against lowering them below eight feet. While Abe Lincoln was considered a real giant of a man at 6'4", half the young men (age 20 - 30) I know today seem to be at least 6'2" and several top 6'5". I'm only 5'10" and I find a 7' ceiling downright claustrophobic. Can't imagine how a 6'5" fellow would feel about such a low ceiling. LOL.

As for two story homes becoming obsolete, I will grant that they can be problematic to the elderly and disabled. On the other hand, heating is generally more effective with a more "compact" 2-story house than equal square footage spread out over a single story. Fewer exterior walls and less roof area means less heat-loss. Two-story homes with smaller footprints also allow neighborhoods to be more compact resulting in less energy being expended on transportation. Square foot for square foot, they really are less expensive to build plus they result in less impermeable ground-cover. And, what with global warming, I'm all for leaving as much green space as possible!

For homes in warm climates, passive cooling techniques call for homes that are basically one-room deep so that every room can have windows on both the north and south sides (well-shaded, of course). Such a home tends to stretch out over an improbably long distance if it is only one story so stacking it just makes sense - especially given that this allows for more green space reducing the heat-island effect. Two-story homes in warm climates also have the advantage that, so long as there are open passageways between rooms (those transom windows over interior doors that I mentioned before), one can open ground floor windows on the windward side of the house to let in cooler air and 2nd story windows on the leeward side of the house to let out warmer air. VOILA - even when there isn't much breeze, convection currents will help keep air circulating thus making the home feel cooler.

So, assuming architects wake up to energy concerns, I don't expect to see two-story homes become obsolete. There are just too many advantages to building up rather than out.

Instead, I think home elevators may become popular in homes housing the elderly or disabled. While most people think of home elevators as luxuries to be included in only the most high-end 5000+ sq ft homes, they really quite affordable. In fact, a home elevator costs quite a bit less to install than a swimming pool and, combined with the savings one realizes from having a smaller foundation and less roofing, I would hazard that a modest (say 2000 sq ft) two-story home with an elevator may be less expensive to build than a comparably sized and appointed one-story home.

As energy becomes ever more expensive, another thing I would expect to see here in the South is a resurgence of homes designed with wrap-around porches, screened porches, and/or covered patios. Again, these are areas that stay relatively cool without AC.

Other things that the energy crunch and/or global warming may make more popular in new home: metal roofs to facilitate rain water collection and to reduce the amount of building materials going into landfills; rooftop solar panels; xeriscaping instead of turf grasses; roof and home-exterior colors chosen based on geography (light, highly reflective colors in warm climates; dark energy-absorbing colors in colder climates); solar units for heating - or at least, preheating - water; more use of renewable resources such as wood and/or ceramic tile flooring; and finally, less use of oil-derived synthetics such as nylon carpeting and vinyl flooring.

bevangel -- Good points, but I have two caveats.

1) Green space is wonderful, but I also want some between me and the next-door neighbor. Our stay in a rental apartment before our house was completed convinced me that we are too old and cranky for 'communal living'.

2) Elevators don't work when you have no electric power. I don't know how much power they consume. It seems 'overkill' to have one to serve only two levels.

I have to wonder about the people who write such articles. Is the builders association trying to dictate our wants or needs, or has it been established by a public poll, and people who have built homes?

Sometimes you have to think outside the box:a formal LR can become a beautiful library, and a DR a den or office. I'm sure there are many people who have purchased a new home and do not use these rooms for they're intended purpose. We all live differently, according to our own personal needs, and if these spaces are already in a home, people will re-purpose these areas so they won't become wasted square footage.

Personally, I like a formal DR and LR. When the Grands come, they go to the FR, while the adults congregate to the LR for a little peace and quiet. In the home i'll be building there isn't a LR, so i'll be using the GR as one. The bonus room is upstairs and that's where the tv will go, along with a game table and other paraphanelia for the kids. A mess won't bother me if I can't see it! ;o)

bevangel elevators being retrofitted into homes in this area is already happening. We've considered it and would definitely do it if it was our "forever" home (we have two perfect spots). The housing in this area runs from new - 200 years old. The old Victorians seem to be getting the elevators more frequently than anything else. Because a one floor plan is not the norm here and especially difficult to find over 2000 sq ft, the expectations are that in-house elevators will continue to be installed for many years to come.

Our previous house had 7'6" ceilings which is very typical for your basic 1980s-type (although our house had been built in 1994, it was 1980s-style through and through, as if the builder had snapped up all the 1980s-style stuff on clearance and used it up there!) tract house in this area; we didn't really mind it that much. We had one friend who was 6'4" and our first realtor was something like 6'8", and both managed OK, they just had to remember to duck under the ceiling fans. ;-) I asked if they really minded it, because I am nosy! Actually out of all the houses we looked at, which ranged from about 1860 to 1995, that was the typical ceiling height of everything except the Victorian-period ones. I would guess it's a regional thing. Our best friends live in a tiny 50s ranch and their ceilings are 7', even though I'm only 5'2" I do find it a little stifling, especially since the rooms are extremely small. It's amazing how much difference a few inches can make (don't GO there... LOL). A lot of old-old houses here in New England have very low ceilings, as low as just over 6' in some pre-Civil War vernaculars!

Unfortunately, we're almost certainly going to end up moving at least one more time since in our price points, single-story houses of 1250-1500sf (which is what we actually wanted in the first place) in reasonably decent condition were few and far between, unless they were what is euphemistically referred to as "a manufactured home in a planned community" in the ads - that's fancy realtor-speak for "a doublewide in a trailer park". We put an offer in on one but lost out to a developer who bought it for the large lot, on which he could build at least eight houses. :-( While there's a spot in the little 1 1/2 story house we bought where an elevator could go, we learned that it would require a complete revamp of our electrical system (expensive) and would be completely over-the-top for the modest neighborhood. Better to move. (IIRC most home elevators have battery backups that can at least get you to the first floor if the power goes kaput - I think that may be required.)

One of the reasons why DH telecommutes (he works in the insurance industry as a computer geek) one day a week is because of the gas prices. A lot of people in his office are going that route. Luckily he is no longer commuting to Boston, because I am sure that the commuter-bus fares are up too. We don't have a designated home office but he can do everything he needs on a laptop from anywhere in the house or even (in warm weather) out on the porch. I wonder if we'll come full circle with the home office sharing space with the dining room again instead of having its own designated square footage? :-)

And yeah, DH and I are not cut out for "communal" living either. People kept trying to persuade us to look at condos (mostly since we both hate yardwork!) or townhouses but I just need more privacy. I'm not very old but I'm definitely very cranky, especially if you wake me up! LOL

I love having a separate LR and DR. The Family room is where DH watches TV every evening, the LR is where I read most evenings; the rest of the evenings I'm in here in the Study on the computer. Note: we do spend lots and lots of time together - he comes into whichever room I'm in to talk a lot, and I go in there too, plus we eat dinner and clean up the kitchen together every evening, plus spend all our weekends together all day. Utilizing separate rooms does not indicate people not wanting to spend time together.

We use the DR almost every time we have company for dinner which is several times a month. It's just our grown kids, but we still prefer a nice relaxing sit down at the table meal for dinners. If they're here for lunch it's 50-50 whether we sit in the DR or at the table in the kitchen.

As long as I can afford it I will not downsize. If financially I have to I will of course, and without too much whining, but I LIKE having separate rooms.

I agree about the carpeting - we have it in the whole upstairs - hallway and 4 bedrooms, and in the FR and I hate it. It was DH who really, really, really wanted it because his feet hurt (diabetes) and they feel better if he takes his shoes off and walks on carpeted floors.

I also agree with "Ceilings that look like they've been stuccoed" - I HATE that and I still have one room with it - we've replaced it in the other 4 rooms that had it, and also the basement which also had it.

I thought the original article in the hard copy of the newspaper said something about vessel sinks - but I didn't see it in the linked article. I never thought I cared too much for vessel sinks, but some of them have grown on me and I'm planning on putting two in my master bath when I remodel it soon. I've purchased kind of short vanities and they'll need moderate height vessel sinks to be comfortable.