Forget your favorite tiny home hunter show for a minute—this is real life. Despite what the media tells us, homeowners and homebuilders, have only very recently begun to shrink their standards in favor of more compact confines.

In the 1990s, if you can remember back that far, about 23.2 percent of homes built were 3,000 square feet or more according to a builderonline.com article based on data taken from the Census Bureau American Housing Survey (AHS). But after the recession, square footage dropped, right? Not so much. The study, which looked at the years between 1990 and 2015, saw the number of 3,000-plus square foot homes built actually increase to 28.6 percent from 2010 to 2015. In fact, the tiny trend didn't really start picking up steam until mid-2016, when millennials and other such first-time buyers became a big enough segment to affect census numbers.

What's interesting is that the minor dent young folks and first-timers are putting in the overall evolution of expanse isn't enough yet to pull builders off course. As labor and land costs expand with our house sizes, builders are less likely to put themselves at risk, opting to operate in the higher-end housing market boasting secure returns, as opposed to taking a less calculated dip into the lower-end income pool and the smaller—dare we say ‘tiny'—household segment.

Does that mean lower-end shoppers are out of luck?

Not necessarily. Townhouse construction is on the rise, accounting for 9 percent of single-family homes from 2010-2015 (up from 6 percent during the ‘90s), and, according to the Builder article, recent data reports show townhouse construction making upwards of 12 percent of total construction in current quarters.

Will townhomes and tiny houses continue to creep into the bigger picture? Time will tell, but it's safe to say as costs continue to rise and people continue coming to hotspots like Seattle and the Puget Sound region, both builders and buyers will continue to push traditional housing boundaries and seek out less expensive, more practical means of housing.

Should be an interesting evolutionary ride.

Craving more on less? Check out Seattle's tiny home revolution.

This week, Shannon discusses the benefits of the Built Green® program with Leah Missik, Built Green program manager.

More about Built Green

Number of the Day: 12.4

As in, Seattle metro area median home prices are up 12.4 percent from last year, topping Zillow's list of fastest appreciating U.S. markets.

In the everlasting battle between West Coast cities boasting the most eye-popping home prices, Seattle seems to have landed a surprise left uppercut to its sister (cousin?) to the south, the n-o-t-o-r-i-o-u-s San Francisco.

San Fran (they hate being called that) still holds the edge in median home values, with the average Bay Area home running just over $865,000, compared to $455,000 in the Seattle metro area, which includes Everett, Bellevue, and Tacoma.

Despite the still rather large gap in median prices, our region's $455,000 is up 12.4 percent from last year, which is good enough to top Zillow's list of fastest-appreciating markets. U.S. home values rose 6.9 percent during the same period, while San Francisco has thus far seen a 6 percent increase, or half of what Seattle is experiencing.

Still, don't expect the median price gap to close anytime soon. San Francisco had hit our current median home value way back in July 2002 and they haven't looked back since.

Is this a sign of where we're headed? MBAKS and friends recently addressed this issue at our annual Housing Summit, held October 17. At the Summit, the association announced our 2018 legislative agenda, including a 10-Point Plan for Housing Attainability.

Curious about the rental market? Seattle tops that list too, with a 5.5 percent increase year over year, which comes out to a median monthly rent of $2,189. U.S. rents are up 2.1 percent (at $1,430 a month), and San Francisco again limbos under the trend at a scant 0.4 percent increase, though don't start putting flowers in your hair just yet—their median rent is still a bloated $3,376 per month.

I guess that's one thing to be thankful for this Northwest Thanksgiving—at least we're not San Francisco… yet.