We Are Building Too Many Poorly Designed Homes

Lately I’ve been reflecting on how housing design impacts everyday life, not from an aesthetic point of view, but from livability, adaptability, and long-term well-being.

Many U.S. cities are experiencing a housing oversupply, particularly in newly built apartments and condominiums, where rapid, profit-driven development has outpaced actual demand. In markets like Denver, this imbalance is already showing up as falling rents, stalled sales, and increased pressure on developers to negotiate. The issue isn’t just quantity, but quality: too many homes are being built with generic, poorly considered design that fails to respond to community needs. As a result, saturation is dampening price growth across both rental and single-family markets, exposing how short-term building strategies ultimately undermine long-term value.

For a long time, demand outpaced supply. In that climate, almost anything sold, even generic, poorly planned layouts. But that moment has passed. Today, buyers are more cautious, and housing that lacks thoughtful design is no longer competitive.

What we’re left with is a large volume of “bulk” housing, spaces that technically meet square footage requirements but fail in daily life.

I see this repeatedly:

homes built in the last decade with dark entryways, excessive circulation space, limited storage, small and inflexible bedrooms, awkward living rooms, and no clearly defined place for something as basic as a dining table. Even waste sorting, work-from-home needs, and real storage are often afterthoughts.

In practice, this shows up in very specific and avoidable ways:

GOOD EXAMPLE

Clear Zoning, Clear Living

• Public and private areas are clearly separated

• Coat closet near entry for guests

• Mudroom access from garage for daily family use

• No circulation paths cutting through seating or dining zones

• Rooms function as rooms, not hallways

POOR EXAMPLE

When Circulation Becomes the Design

• Maze-like circulation with no clear hierarchy

• Oversized foyer with awkward angles and wasted space

• Primary walking path cuts directly through the living room

• Furniture placement becomes compromised

• Square footage is present, functionality is not

Circulation paths cutting through functional zones.

When the natural walking route runs directly through a seating area, dining space, or workspace, the room is forced to function like a hallway. Furniture placement becomes compromised, and usable living space quietly disappears.

Angled walls and peculiarly shaped rooms.

While they might seem visually interesting, angled walls create awkward, tight corners that are often unusable for furniture placement or storage, resulting in wasted space.

Oversized foyers and underused entryways.

A grand entry may look impressive in plan view, but when it rivals a bedroom in size and serves only as a pass-through, that space could have meaningfully improved adjacent rooms, expanded living areas, added storage, or created a true mudroom.

Window placement that dictates interiors rather than supports them.

I often see bedrooms where window placement leaves no viable wall for a bed, or closets interrupted by glazing that reduces functional storage. Natural light matters — but not at the expense of livability.

At the core of many of these issues is a familiar pattern: homes designed from the outside in, where form, façade, and elevation lead and daily life follows later.

I believe better homes start from the inside out. From how people live, move, store, gather, work, rest and only then take architectural form. When interior function leads, the result is not only more livable homes, but better architecture.

Square footage alone doesn’t determine quality. How those square feet are used does. And when homes truly work for daily life, they don’t just look better — they live better.

Why Floor Plans Matter More Than Finishes

Most people find it difficult to assess whether a home will truly support their daily life at the moment of purchase.

Empty rooms are hard to scale mentally. Staged homes are optimized for sale, not for living. Attention is drawn to finishes, cabinetry, colors, tile, appliances, elements that photograph well but are not the primary drivers of long-term livability.

Yet for most people, a home is the largest financial investment of their life. The return on that investment should be more than surface-level beauty.

Square footage alone does not indicate quality. What matters is how those square feet are used.

Even in larger homes, a significant amount of space is often lost to corridors and circulation, areas you pass through but cannot truly live in. These movement zones quietly erode functionality.

Homes Should Adapt to Life, Not Force Moves

Housing design affects all of us because home is the stage for everyday life.

Residents are often in a subordinate position relative to developers. Once a home is built, the ability to adapt it as life changes is limited. If a home cannot flex to accommodate remote work, family growth, aging, or shifting routines, people are forced to move.

And moving is not just a financial burden. It disrupts emotional ties: friendships, schools, routines, and a sense of belonging.

I often wonder whether we move so frequently, not because we want to but because our homes stop working for us.

We Need a Shift in How Housing Is Designed

Much of today’s housing is shaped by production efficiency and scale, which can leave everyday life underexplored. That model no longer serves the people who live in these spaces.

Better design can dramatically improve livability, creating homes that are functional, adaptable, and meaningful to inhabit. And importantly: well-designed homes sell.

We need more multi-functional thinking. More flexibility. More foresight.

A simple example: in family housing, a primary bed should fit comfortably in more than one bedroom. That single decision allows rooms to change function over time, without renovation.

Homes should be more universal able to serve different types of residents at different stages of life. People no longer live according to a single norm, and our housing should reflect that reality.

Designing for Real Life

If you are considering buying a home, it’s worth thinking beyond how it looks today and asking whether it will support your near-future life.

Will it accommodate remote work?

A growing family?

Changing routines?

Furniture can help solve some limitations, modular shelving, narrow storage units, stackable seating but these are compensations, not solutions.

If compromises must be made, it’s important to identify which daily functions matter most to you and protect those first.

Ultimately, I wish people could shape their homes around their lives, not shape their lives around poorly planned spaces.

When a home works well, people form emotional bonds with it. It becomes meaningful. It supports well-being.

And that, to me, should be the true goal of housing design.

This isn’t about blame, it’s about re-centering design decisions around how people actually live, change, and stay rooted over time.