tiny houseToday Inman News announced the results of its 10 U.S. hotspots for smallest house sizes. Included in its top ten list were six cities located in the Midwest, notably the great state of Wisconsin. The list was based on the median square footage of homes listed for sale on Realtor.com during the month of September 2011. Note: not all homes for sale are listed on Realtor.com.
Realtor.com reported that the median size of homes for sale in Wisconsin was the 10th smallest in the country for the month of September 2011, at 1,669 square feet. Like the other top ten finishers (with the exception of our nation's capitol which only has two), Wisconsin's homes have a median of three bedrooms.
In addition to Wisconsin, the other Midwestern states cited as having the smallest homes were Michigan, Iowa, Ohio, Illinois, and Missouri. Hawaii, California, Maine and Washington D.C. rounded out the list. 
The median price for a home in Wisconsin was $174,900 in September 2011. The highest median list prices for these small home contenders were Hawaii and D.C. at $432,500 and $575,000, respectively. Note that the median price data in these rankings included all for-sale property listings on Realtor.com, including land, single-family homes, and all types of condominium homes. 
Lot sizes varied widely in the rankings. Wisconsin had the second largest behind Maine's 44,431 at 30,000 square feet. Washington, D.C., had the smallest median lot size at 2,375 square feet and Hawaii's median lot size in September was 21,778 square feet. 
For a complete list of the top 50 smallest median house sizes for all 50 states visit the complete Inman article here.
Do you think a 3-bedroom home that's 1,669 square feet on a 30,000 square foot lot is small? How does that compare to where you live? We'd love for you to weigh in in the comments section below.
Posted by Jolenta Averill on
Email Send a link to post via Email

Interesting article! I'd like to see something like this to compare the averages from country to country! It amazes me as to what we consider small. Really, 1669 sqft is a lot of space. Many families with multiple children did just fine with a home of this size back in the day. Our great-grandparents would get lost in many of today's residences. I think we just have too much 'stuff'!

Posted by Kerri Demski on Friday, December 2nd, 2011 at 6:42pm

1,669 sq ft is pretty small by Scottsdale standards. That would definitely be a "starter" home in our market. But a 30,000 sq ft lot is HUGE in Scottsdale. Land is at a real premium and only the top of the market has lots that big. Very interesting to consider the size differences across the country.

Posted by Carmen Brodeur on Sunday, December 11th, 2011 at 3:24pm

Small is relative. Wisconsin homes may be small when compared to the median home in America size but I'm betting they're massive compared to the average European or Japanese single family home.

Posted by Alex Aguilar on Tuesday, December 13th, 2011 at 2:53am

I live in Westchester county in NY which is about 30 north of NYC. I'm not a real estate agent, so I don't know actual square footages. But, within our county there is great diversity of sizes. In lower Westchester (which is closer to NYC) and the cities such as White Plains, square footages tend to be lower (and property higher...at least per sf). As you move further up in the suburbs, houses become larger as does the property size. Some of the places here are huge mansions and worth several million dollars.

Posted by Debbie Gartner on Tuesday, December 13th, 2011 at 12:13pm

Times indeed are changing now. People are smitten by larger than life standards depicted in movies and on televisions. 1669 was pretty big earlier, but now people want bigger houses. But again, we need to adjust to the changing market conditions.

Posted by Divorce Lawyer on Thursday, December 15th, 2011 at 11:45am

This is interesting that people are still considering small homes, with all the hype and trends, you would think people only want large homes. There are still some small Seattle homes and I have some clients interested in them. Great article!

Posted by Seattle Homes on Monday, December 19th, 2011 at 11:43pm

The houses in the Tampa Bay area started out about 40 - 50 years ago as 2 bedroom 1 bath homes of roughly 1100 square feet. My first house was a 3/2/2 with 1500 square feet in Largo and it served us well. I have always bought new homes (go figure) and trying to find a new home now in the Tampa Bay area of average size is close to impossible. Since most of Pinellas County is built out if builders find any land at all they are going to over build on it. Most new homes (when you can find one) are roughly 4 bedrooms, 4 baths with over 3000 square feet.

Posted by Bob Lipply on Thursday, December 22nd, 2011 at 11:11am

Surprising that so many are in the Midwest. I'd have imagined smaller homes in areas with warmer winters!

Posted by Kelly Angles on Sunday, February 26th, 2012 at 6:59pm

Leave A Comment

e.g. yourwebsitename.com
Please note that your email address is kept private upon posting.