How big of a house is "too big" (for a family of four)?
- > 1,500 sqft (4%, 8 Votes)
- > 2,500 sqft (35%, 69 Votes)
- > 5,000 sqft (52%, 103 Votes)
- > 7,500 sqft (6%, 12 Votes)
- > 10,000 sqft (0%, 0 Votes)
- something even larger (0%, 0 Votes)
- no such thing as "too big" (3%, 7 Votes)
Total Voters: 199
This poll will be active and displayed on the sidebar through 06.05.2010.
Rate this post:
00
That’s quite a jump from 2,500 to 5,000.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Anything you can’t afford is too big. Anything you can easily afford is fine.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
10,000 square foot home?
I suppose if you absolutely hate your spouse and kids, you might need to be 1/2 a mile away in the same house.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
my personal formula is the max sq ft a house should be is 1000 sq ft + 500 sq ft per person. So for a family of four it would be (500 x 4) + 1000 = 3000 sq ft.
2500 was the closest choice in the poll so I went with that.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Mrs. Meadows and I have raised a wild and crazy family of four in our 2200 sq ft 100 year old house. Plenty of room. I think 500 sq ft per person is a good rule of thumb. Small bathrooms (two is essential IMO) and small bedrooms can help maximize living/cooking areas… I’m a fan of a full basement (don’t have one, just a root cellar).
But the secret of marital happiness is a studio at least, for creative activities or a home office type room. I myself treasure my garage, an ugly 3 bay which has never stored an auto in it’s life… but is insulated, has 220, a woodworking shop, a pottery shop, glass flameworking setup, skylights and a funky stereo system as well as other attractions.
A man needs a decent garage/workshop as a “refugium.” (my word)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
What’s the “correct” size? The one you can afford that leaves enough extra money so that you can buy your own kid’s school lunch (instead of the government), save enough for your retirement (so you aren’t dependent on the government), and cover your own health care deductibles (so the government doesn’t have to) AND allows you something left over so that you can afford to travel and enjoy as many of the benefits of life’s adventure as possible. Given where we are headed, that probably means about 1500 square feet for TWO families of 4.
Seriously? Anything over about 5,000 is showing off. But even that’s OK if you can truly afford it.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
400sq per person. And if kid #3 arrives; bunk bed for a pair. Anything bigger is a waste of space (think SUV) and energy. And a dog to clean.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I feel the same way Cheap South.
There are consequences to an oversized house and the effects it has on a family. I want my kids to share rooms with each other, at least while they’re kids. I don’t want my kid to have an entire wing of a house to herself. Even if I could afford a 5000 sq ft house, I’d prefer something smaller.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Coloradoan @ 8 – There is also the cost of heating such a large house. Every extra sq. ft. costs that much more in utilities, which is all the more reason to try and live in a smaller area.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
There is actually a social movement that advocates living in smaller houses.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_house_movement
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Coloradoan @ 10 – I also seem to recall proposals to add tax burdens of some sort (I don’t remember) on houses over a certain square footage.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
You also need sufficent garage space to park the Ford F-150 and Chevy Tahoe.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Blurtman @ 12 – Garages are important. I don’t understand why some people fill them with junk and park outside.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 13:
People actually park cars in garages??
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Re: garage space – The late, great George Carlin covered this issue. It’s all about stuff.
For some it is easier to spend time accumulating stuff than to come up for air and see what is going on, I suppose. Remember, Bush the War Criminal President told Americans to go out and spend while he was killing thousands of women, children and elderly in Iraq.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I thought this was an odd enough topic to justify my first comment ever on this site.
Is it really in society’s best interest for other people to start dictating the rules of “correct living” when it comes to house size? Maybe we can also start setting rules on the “correct” size of a yard. While we’re at it, why not set limits on maximum amount of material that “should” go into people’s clothing, too. (I see there are already several comments hinting at what cars people should and shouldn’t buy/drive, so I don’t need to cover that hypothetical.)
If you can’t afford it, it’s too big for you. Let’s leave it at that and quit being the Other People’s Business Police.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Pfft sees nothing but blue skies in the future!
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Owners-Stop-Paying-Mortgage-nytimes-4276925797.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=7&asset=&ccode=
“The longer I’m in foreclosure, the better,” she said.
In Florida, the average property spends 518 days in foreclosure, second only to New York’s 561 days. Defense attorneys stress they can keep this number high.
Both generations of Pembertons have hired a local lawyer, Mark P. Stopa. He sends out letters — 1,700 in a recent week — to Floridians who have had a foreclosure suit filed against them by a lender.
Even if you have “no defenses,” the form letter says, “you may be able to keep living in your home for weeks, months or even years without paying your mortgage.”
About 10 new clients a week sign up, according to Mr. Stopa, who says he now has 350 clients in foreclosure, each of whom pays $1,500 a year for a maximum of six hours of attorney time. “I just do as much as needs to be done to force the bank to prove its case,” Mr. Stopa said.
Many mortgages were sold by the original lender, a circumstance that homeowners’ lawyers try to exploit by asking them to prove they own the loan. In Mrs. Pemberton’s case, Mr. Stopa filed a motion to dismiss on March 17, 2009, and the case has not moved since then. He filed a similar motion in her son’s case last December.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Still Anonymous @ 16 – Well we do have minimum lot sizes. Part of the problem has been that government has set those minimums too small, IMHO. But surprisingly that’s not just a recent problem. There are a lot of older properties that have lots smaller than 4,000 square feet.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Still Anonymous @ 16:
I don’t think it’s anybody’s intention here to dictate what home sizes should be. It’s filler. for amusement purposes only. Every so often there’s a poll here, and sometimes it’s more trivial than at other times. It would be difficult to think of something creative, meaningful, and interesting on a regular basis. Mostly the Tim does a pretty good job at it.
As far as lot sizes per Kary’s last post:
Sure, I see older homes in Seattle with tiny lots, but it’s only in the last ten or fifteen years where I’ve see huge new homes in the suburbs built on tiny lots. Doesn’t suit my needs at all, these ugly,crappily built huge houses on tiny lots,but who am I to judge?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
We are a family of 4 (2 small kids). After living in houses and apartments of various sizes, we concluded that the best fit for us is a 3BR plan with 1500-1800 sq.ft space.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I grew up in a family of 4 in a 1,500 sq ft ranch style house, and it never felt small.. thought that was in a part of CA where the weather was nice enough that you didn’t have to stay inside too much.
I hear that more sq ft makes more sense in places with long, snowy, winters… like Montana.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Everett_Tom @ 21:
Agree there. We had 5 in our family (I’ve got 2 younger brothers) and we had 3 bedrooms and 1,288 sqft. I’d certainly like a bigger house someday, but I don’t get the “need” some people seem to feel for a huge house, especially when they have just one or two kids or often even no kids at all.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: The Tim @ 22 – Agree. I think if I could I’d like something about that size, maybe a little bit larger, but need seems such a strong work.
I’ve got an uncle & aunt who’ve got something that’s in the 3,500 sq ft range for a family of 3. It feels very odd, as almost all the time we visit everyone is just in the living room / kitchen area. The bottom floor isn’t uses except when company is staying, as far as I can tell.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I had read somewhere at one time that only about 800 square feet get used no matter what size the house. I need to find that article. I’m thinking formal dining rooms are a waste and bathrooms the size of bedrooms.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Leigh @ 24 – We call our formal living room the cat room, because we never use it except on holidays when family is over. The formal dining room gets even less use, because the cats don’t use it.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 25 – RE: Leigh @ 24 –
I disagree that formal living rooms are a waste. It’s a great place for my wife to hang paintings I can’t stand and its the perfect place for the expensive and uncomfortable white furniture I hate and could ruin with food stains because the dogs and I aren’t allowed to go in there.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Still Anonymous @ 16 – I think the time has passed when what we each do is a purely individual decision. What size house and what kind of car someone drives has a very real effect on the community and the environment. If someone is consuming more than his/her fair share of the resources or negatively impact the lives of others, I think that the rest of us have a say in that. That said, if someone wants to build a 4000-sq ft house that has less impact on the environment and the neighborhood than a poorly built 1500 sq ft house, I don’t have a problem with it.
My family of 3 (1 young child) lives happily in an 1100 sq ft rental house. And there two rooms there that we barely use except when we have houseguests or friends over to play.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Elizabeth @ 27 –
“My family of 3 (1 young child) lives happily in an 1100 sq ft rental house. And there two rooms there that we barely use except when we have houseguests or friends over to play.”
What size home does your landlord live in and how many family members are in that house? If you want to go down this slippery slope, you need to also rationalize your decision to support his level of consumption by your choice to rent from him.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Elizabeth @ 27 –
And who will decide what the correct size is? Probably some bureaucrat that lives in a home of any size he desires. Or maybe a true environmental guru like Al Gore will be charged with making the decision while lounging in one of his 10-14,000 square foot homes.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: The Tim @ 22 –
Here we go again. 1100 s.f. and a family of 5. We didn’t even notice though because we spent so much time in the front and back yards (better weather in NorCal).
Rate this comment:
0 
0