The right-sized house for you
I asked you recently what sort of house sounds ideal to you, size-wise. I didn't ask what you could afford, mind you -- just what you'd like. Even so, most of you opted for something far short of palatial.
Forty-six percent of you said in last week's poll that 2,000 to 2,999 square feet sounds just right. (Here's an example of a house in that size range.)
And 38 percent say just right is smaller -- 1,000 to 1,999 square feet.
Eight percent chose 3,000 to 3,999 square feet. Four percent went for the biggest option -- 5,000 square feet or more. Two percent selected 4,000 to 4,999 square feet.
The very smallest option -- under 1,000 square feet -- got the smallest number of votes. But two of you did raise your hands for this sort of home.
One voter who goes by gardener commented that "as a single person I don't need much 'stuff' and would like to minimize maintenance time and effort. I'd rather spend the time outdoors."
Wonk reader Lisa also weighed in:
OK, so let's put it in terms of space use instead of square feet. My kids will be out of the house in a very few years... even then, I believe in 3-4 bedrooms -- i.e. our bedroom, a guest room, and a study, or even small his/hers studies -- (my husband gave his den up to our son a while back and has never really adapted to the loss of "personal" space). Then, I prefer a kitchen nook for breakfast, if possible, and separate living/dining rooms, but that can depend on the layout. The older Baltimore homes often haven't got a finished basement (as recroom), but guess what? Without one, Baltimoreans ACTUALLY USE their elegant living and dining rooms. All this can happen in approx 1800-2200 sq feet and be exceedingly comfortable.
How much space do you have, and does it work for your needs?
Comments
1800 ft, 4 bedroom, 2 full and 2 half baths. Me, wife, 2 kids and mother-in-law. Works fine for us
Posted by: Jeff | October 4, 2009 11:46 AM
Me, wife, 1 kid 2900 sq feet 5 br 3 & 1/2 baths. The space right now is a little big but my wife and I plan on having 2 (3 total.....maybe 4) more kids so it will be perfect then. We have an eat in kitchen so we don't use our formal LV & DR at all. One thing that I notice about baltimore is that there isn't much variations in homes. You can't find a builder that's building something other then a colonial
Posted by: JB | October 4, 2009 9:08 PM
Not sure what's the right answer to the square footage question, but I think the expectations for the number of bathrooms required for the average family unit has gone way, way up. I know couples who would not consider even an apartment with fewer than 1.5 baths.
Posted by: Liz Kay | October 5, 2009 8:51 AM
In another thread I offered up a criteria for sizing; 300-400sf for the core needs of a home regardless of the number of people living there and then an allowance of 200sf per person for private (bedrooms) and public spaces.
Here is an example based on the "Atomic" family of two parents with 2.5 children:
Common/Core Basics
A moderate (if minimalist) allowance for the core common area features:
galley style kitchen (7.5’ x 12’/90sf) with breakfast nook (7.5’ x 6’/45sf);
laundry/mechanical (7.5’ x 6’/45sf) ; a family bathroom (7.5’ x 5’/38sf);
and an allowance for walls & halls throughout (3’x 30’/90sf).
All told it comes to a rather modest 308sf.
You can certainly size the rooms larger or lay out the space differently, and of course have more common spaces in the category (walk in pantry anyone?), but those aren’t needed… are they? Even so, lets add 30% (92sf) to this and set this core “need” at 400sf.
Bedrooms
We can indulge Mom and Dad by giving them the private bathroom and walk-in closet and even some extra “walk around” room they want so desperately but the (2.5) kids will have to make do with two bedrooms and modest closets for the lot.
The allowance is based on a rate of 200sf per person and that 900sf can still go a long way (200x4.5). Don’t forget though that the public rooms (LR, DR, Den, etc) haven’t been allocated and that space must be drawn from the 900 and the 92sf left over from the core common area.
MBR Suite: 14’ x 20’ overall (280sf) w/ bath (6’x6’/36sf) and closet (6’x8’/48sf) .
BR#2 14’ x 12’ overall (168sf) with closet (2.5’ x 14’/35sf).
BR#3 14’ x 12’ overall (168sf) with closet (2.5’ x 14’/35sf).
Plus the allowance for walls & halls throughout (3’x 30’/90sf).
So, the actual bedrooms (and closets, second bath, and hall) don’t really need that much space after all… do they? Of that 992sf available we still have 286sf available for a “greatroom” (you didn’t think this would allow for formal defined spaces… did you?) Still, a 20’ x 14’ room should serve quite adequately for the public and entertaining needs of most young or modest means families.
And there you have it. You can actually shave a couple hundred square feet if inclined and still find it manageable. Or add to your hearts content; just please be clear on the distinction between NEED and WANT when you do so.
Posted by: MrRational | October 5, 2009 1:01 PM
Speaking of having a gazillion bathrooms, we happen to have "only" one and a half and were dreading the moment our two kids would reach adolescence. I even thought seriously about moving. But guess what! One kid preferred to breakfast first and the other preferred it the other way around. We all ended up with a.m. departures abt 10-15 minutes staggered and I stuck a large mirror in the bedroom for my daughter's make up routine. So we haven't had any issues at all. Would I have preferred 2 full baths... yes. But 3??? Who wants to clean yet another toilet?
Posted by: Lisa | October 5, 2009 3:42 PM
3 full baths is a lot - we only have 3 because the previous owner who built the house opted for the full bath in the basement. We really never use it
Posted by: JB | October 6, 2009 10:03 AM