Posted by: Timothy Ellis (The Tim)

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market.

9 responses to “Poll: The ideal lot size I would like to live on is…”

  1. toad37

    Ideally it would be a nice yard but not so big that you’d need to hire out help. I picked option #2.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  2. David B.

    The smaller the lot, the less yard work to worry about, and the more things that can be an easy walk or bike ride away, so I picked No. 1.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  3. Blurtman

    I’ve lived on 10 acres. It ain’t too bad. You can walk around nekked in the house with no worries.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  4. wreckingbull

    The larger the lot, the larger the attack surface you have for the taxman. Best case scenario? If you want space, find small acreage which is surrounded by larger farms or open spaces.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  5. Peter Witting

    I’m on 5 acres surrounding by 5 to 20 acres parcels. It’s in the country, so it isn’t like there is “yardwork” to do, although I have a tractor to mow the horse pastures as needed. The biggest drawback is the high cost of good fencing.

    Now if I lived in town, a half-acre would be about right.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  6. Swintony

    The voting categories seem rather skewed towards country living. If you’re in the city, there is a huge difference between 3,000 sq ft and 5,000 sq ft, and between 5,000 and 9,000 sq ft. Arguably, much more difference than between an acre and half and acre. A level 9,000 sq ft lot in most of Seattle’s close-in neighborhoods would be positively obscene!

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  7. Ira Sacharoff

    I live on slightly larger than half an acre. When we bought the place 14 years ago, moving from our house on a 5k sq ft lot, I was thrilled to be getting a lot more space to garden. But as I was in the garden today with my pick, doing back breaking work removing grass, it dawned on me that a smaller yard would be a good thing. Not so small that one couldn’t have a big veggie garden, but 23,000 sq ft is a little too large for a fat, out of shape old guy. I voted number 3. Closer to a 1/4 acre would be great.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  8. Chuck C

    Although the majority of my current 1/2 acre lot is “forest” and requires no maintenance, I do have some lawn. Sometimes I wish I had even less lawn. OK, I usually wish I had NO lawn, since by this time of year it’s usually just moss anyway. But tree roots and septic systems don’t mix well so I’m stuck with grass in a few areas.

    Still, I voted for 5+ acres. Of course I wouldn’t want to pay tax on that property without an exemption, but I elected to ignore that part of the equation for our hypothetical question. I suppose the best way to go (IMO), would be to own an acre or so (low maintenance of course) which backs up to a few thousand acres of state/federal land. From personal experience (childhood, in another much less populated area of the country), there’s nothing like being able to jump on your ATV or snowmobile and head out from the garage into the wilderness. Maybe someday again when I reach retirement!

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  9. redmondjp

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 7 – Ira – they make a better tool for getting rid of the grass – it’s called a roto-tiller! Rent one for four hours every spring and save your back.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

Leave a Reply

Do you want a nifty avatar picture next to your name, instead of a photograph of Tim's dog? Just sign up with Gravatar, and make sure to use the same email address in the form below. It's that easy!

Please read the rules before posting a comment.

You have 5 comments remaining on this post.

Archives

Find us on Google+