What would you class as a small, average and large house?(137 Posts)
Interested on others perspectives.
Our house is 108 square meters in total and I feel its small. I grew up in houses four times the size, so maybe Im spoilt?
DH thinks our house is fine but he grew up in houses of the same size.
Sometimes I have felt a bit embarrassed when relatives or dd friends have said comments along the lines of "oh its nice- but really small".
Then others have around and said it seemed quite big.
I suppose I class our house as small, an average house about 130-160 and larger anything over 160 square meters.
What do you think?
Don't know how big my house is in metres.
Average I would say, 3 proper bedrooms with kitchen & living area or 2.
What would you class as proper bedrooms do you think? All of them double?
We don't usually measure house sizes in metres in the UK, but number of bedrooms.
I'd say small was 2 bed with kitchen diner, 3/4 with seperate dining room was average and 5+ with a study was fairly large.
I would say modern or traditional 2 beds, kitchen/diner, one reception room small.
modern 3 beds, kitchen/ diner one reception room ( small/ medium)
4 bed, kitchen, dining room, lounge (med/large)
anything bigger (med, large, v.large, fuck off mansion)
depending on house style and size of rooms/ garden.
All house plans are in square meters/ square feet in the UK.
Trust me I have spent enough time looking at floor-plans on rightmove!
Yes, but that's not how traditionally we'd speak about houses. I'd have no clue how big any of my houses have been in terms of square metres, but I do know how many bedrooms they had.
All conversations I've had with British about houses has been on this basis, and every conversation I've had with other nationalities (French, Dutch, American, Finnish and India), has been based on actual size.
I didn't mean to offend, I only thought you'd get more response from bedrooms than area.
I've always thought of my house as average (no idea of the square metres) but seems it's small by the scales posted really.
I have 2 good size bedrooms, 1 tiny box room, large living room but no dining room, small kitchen.
Big to me is sniff anything with more than one bathroom, proper bathroom not just separate toilet.
WTF did that random 'sniff' come from?
Well and what they cost in different areas is completely different.
A small house in London is probably significantly more expensive that a large home in other areas of the UK
where I live
Im not offended
I just think going by bedrooms is not the best indicator as it depends how the space has been used.
For example fathers house has huge bedrooms- you could easily fit three king sized beds into each one. Yet he "only " has 5 bedrooms.
Where as it might appear his friends house sounds bigger as they have 8 bedrooms, yet in reality the house is much smaller as it's just more has been squeezed in to the space.
I liked the random sniff
Proper bed room can fit a bed/ wardrobe etc with room to walk round. We have 2 doubles & a single which are ok.
We looked at a house with my parents and couldn't work out how to get a double in the 'master' room or a single in the second room.
my house is tiny. i remember we had ours valued about 2 years ago and the estate agent told us our street were the smallest houses built in our town. They are mini and were built in the 60s.
extended kitchen (you could touch both sides of the room with arms outstretched before it was extended!)
teeny box room
2 other small bedrooms.
but its cosy, warm, renovated and in a nice spot.
in a shit town
heating bills are mini. its got a big garden and drive. we get a new bathroom soon and the garden/garage are being renovated in Feb....so it will be small but perfectly formed!
(apart from DS box room which needs sorting but we will get to that very shortly....note to anyone with a box room - do not get built in furniture!!)
It sounds like you are very happy in your home Vicar
Our home is similar to vicars except we have a kitchen/diner and our biggest bedrooms are a goof size.
Vicars please tell me more about built in furniture in a box room.
That sniff was awesome
It sounds like you may have a slightly squewed perspective if you grew up in a 5 very large bedroom house. That surely has to be a very very large house by anyone's standards?
Small would be 2 bed or some 3 beds (ie ours -one normal sized bedroom, one single and a box room).
I'd see average as 2 doubles and a single and then large as 4 bed plus.
Very large when you start having grounds . .
We have 4 bedrooms - 3 doubles and one single. Seperate dining room and a lounge. None of the rooms ae massive though. I would say our house is on the larger size of average I have always thought 5 bedrooms upwards OR 4 with big reception rooms is a BIG house
I think sq ft is more usual here. Ours is three-bed but 950ft and I consider it small, though we have a kitchen we can eat in plus a utility roomand downstairs loo so it's not too bad.
Medium I would consider to be 1500 sq ft to 2000 sq ft, ie, your usual 4-bed, two reception rooms, v typical Edwardian-1930s townhouse etc.
Anything above that is large.
People can be a bit snobby about terraced houses
and about the town where I live, but my home is a tardis
Huge living room, dining room, utility, kitchen, sun room, downstairs loo and good sized garden (with a huge shed at the bottom which needs its roof fixing), three double bedroom, small attic and family bathroom. oh, and a walk in airing cupboard. It' s huge. And costs loads to heat. And I need carpets throughout.
Relatively speaking, ' twas cheep in comparison to houses five miles down the road.
Our first house I would count as small: 1 reception (only big enough for telly, 2 seater sofa & tiny dining table) The kitchen was a corridor which led to our bathroom on the ground floor.
Upstairs had 2 double bedrooms (biggest rooms we had).
The house I live in now, is terraced has two largish reception rooms (knocked through) good size kitchen (galley) and upstairs 2 double rooms, one single & bathroom. I count it as medium!
Ours is 600 sq feet, teeny detached. 3 very small bedrooms - largest rooms (bedroom and front room) is 11ft by 9ft.
An average sized house is like the one we live in. A small house is anything smaller than that and s large house is anything bigger than that.
I guess I would think of average for the UK as being 3 bedrooms, or 2 if you're including flats.
Do you mean small, or far away?
If you interested in the subject perhaps have a look at the Royal Institute of British Architects on the subject of space in new homes :www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/HomeWise/CaseforSpace.pdf
I thought it made interesting but that might just be me as an architect.
It has figure for m2 of houses and comparisons with averages in other countries it also looks at the perception of space and the need for it.
Small: 2 bed terrace and smaller, our old one, which was a good size for its type, was 900sq ft
Medium: 3 bed semi/one of those 4 bed new builds where at least one of the rooms is tiny.
Large: 4+ double bedrooms, current house has 4 doubles and a single and the equivalent of 3 reception rooms and is just under 2500 sq ft. Everyone I know thinks it's huge- but maybe not OP's dad
I would think small is one or two bed, with a openplan living kitchen, and a bathroom.
Med 3-4 bed with two good double bedrooms, seperate living kitchen/diner or dining room.
Large 5 bed two reception rooms, dining kitchen diner. Lots of space, the sort of house I would like
Our house is 1100 sq feet, which I've just online-converted to 102 sq metres.
It has 4 bedrooms, which fooled me into thinking it was big. Ha.
It is way too small for our family of 5 to live comfortably - the bedrooms are tiny, there is a single reception room and a tiny kitchen. Nowhere for any decent storage, no second loo or bathroom and no utility, dining room or study.
I think medium is about 2000 sq feet (185 sq metres), with space for children to do their homework or play in their bedrooms, a separate dining room and a kitchen with room for a table, and big anything more than that (e.g including study, guest room, extra bathrooms).
My house is about 150 m^2 and I think it is large.
I grew up in a house that was probably about 180 m^2, and I knew that was big, too.
My teen years best friend lived with 5 other people in a house about 70 m^2.
108 m^2 would be on the large side of average in UK.
Our is a 1300sq ft 3 bed (I don't think they counted the halls in the floorplan which are big - I think sometimes square footage is a big confusion). It hasn't got extension/loft conversion so that's the 'natural' size - so it does have good rooms
I grew up in a much bigger house in the countryside and I'd love to have a larder/playroom/utility room/study - but I live in north London, and I can tell you for free that compared to nearly everyone I know, I'm living the dream in this place
Just checked , mine is 103 sqm
What a brilliantly written and presented pdf wonkylegs.
I live in France in the suburbs. I'm sure we generally have more space per house than in the UK and the perspective on house sizes would be different.
I'm in a rented house, new build, 1500 sq ft and I think it would be classed a small to medium house over here.
It's all about the layout..
I currently live in a "large 2 bed" - there is a lot of space relative to other houses that have 2 bedrooms.
Someone else could live in a "small 4 bed" - 4 bedrooms but not a lot of space.
It sounds like you grew up in a "massive 5 bed", not just saying that having 5 bedrooms is massive but that it was massive compared to other houses with 5 bedrooms.
I really hate the houses where the garage is part of the house, so you have a larger number of bedrooms upstairs but not much downstairs space.
Agree with VBisme that people don't speak about square metres (or feet) in the UK, we talk about how many bedrooms and how many "extra" rooms and how many bathrooms and whether it has been extended.
I have a cousin who has settled in the Paris suburbs, married a Frenchman etc, we regularly visit, and I too have noticed the houses and their rooms are distinctly larger than the equivalents in the UK.
I think our house is quite big. Not enormous, but certainly not small. And probably bigger than average. It's certainly the biggest house I've ever lived in.
It's 4 bedrooms (3 proper doubles and a box room), with one bathroom, a dining kitchen and two reception rooms. There's also an integral garage with a utility area at the back. I think it's around 130m2 in all. Maybe a bit bigger if you include the garage.
Based on that, I don't think 108m2 is small. I can't believe that your daughter's friends comment that it is small. How rude!
We lived in a 2 bed Victorian cottage 50m2. Small
Now Edwardian semi 3 double beds 3 reception rooms 150m2. The bug end of medium. My parents 60s 3 bed semi with box room small end if medium.
Agree that we don't really talk about size in terms of metres/feet; it's on lots of plans but its never a subject if conversation, estate agents don't mention it! I've just had to do some calcs/conversions to work ours out.
We have a big house, I think; around 3000ish square ft, 5 beds, 3 receps, diner kitchen, study, playroom. British houses, by and large, aren't on the same scale as many US ones because of the price of buildable land here compared to many places in the US ( not everywhere, clearly; friends have just moved to New York and their upper east side 2 bed apartment costs more than their 5 bed Fulham house)
So...it's all relative!
I just had a very quick skim read of your report.
Im shocked that 88sqm is the average for a 3 bedroom. I thought ours was below average.
Good report, thank you for the link. I find how we live fascinating.
I don't like the measurement by bedrooms. We have just purchased a 5 bed house, which makes it sound palatial but it isn't. The kitchen is typical 60s, an afterthought in size, and I'm going to have the wall between the kitchen and dining room removed just to get more of a feeling of space. There is one proper bathroom, and one toilet.. outside.
This isn't woe as me and my 5 bed house, but a 5 bed house built in the 60s is one size, a 5 bed Victorian would be different, and another 5 bedroom built recently would again be different (probably would be chock full of en suites and a kitchen diner as well as another reception/dining area.
I think talking about number of bedrooms or even rooms means very little as space can be sliced up very differently.
I'd see ours as large average rather than large.
4 double bedrooms. 2 bathrooms. 2 large receptions. Kitchen diner. Cellar utility and loo. Edwardian, so rooms pretty well proportioned. But feels a bit full with 5 of us. Garden not massive and not oodles of storage as have converted loft and cellar (did loft to get extra double bed, so was 3 double 1 single and is now 4 double and 2 bath).
Large for me would be BIL's 7 bed victorian heap of gorgeousness.
I think it's really strange that we don't sell houses in the UK based on living area. At least you can find out the size on the EPC. We are moving from a 3 bed with about 73m2 to a 3 bed with 90m2 plus large conservatory and I feel we are moving from a large small house to a small medium house. Would still love more space though.
A friend is looking to buy a flat in Edinburgh at the moment with 3 bedrooms.
Sounds pokey?? Er no - 163 sq m!!! That is not far off the size of our 4 bedroom house. Numbers of rooms are meaningless.
We found looking at sq m rates by far the most useful thing when comparing houses in a way that counting rooms does not.
It is all relative but I would say small is less than 100 sqm and large would be greater than 200 sqm. Above 300 sq m for a typical family must just mean that there is a lot of unecessary cleaning and maintenance costs imo.
Yes Tricot exactly!
I was looking at some floor-plans thinking "oh look they have a playroom and a study, maybe its worth viewing".
Then I realised by looking at the sqm, that although there were more squares drawn on the plan (which psychologically made it seem bigger) the house was actually just the size of ours so would have been pointless.
I don't think in terms of total square footage. I think in terms of small, medium and large rooms and then numbers of rooms.
Most new builds seem to me to have small rooms - even 4 bed+ houses. A medium sized room to me is 12' by 11'.
I don't have any idea about the sq ft of our house, but I do know our 2 bedroom victorian flat was way bigger than our 3 bed detached house. The sq footage must have been enormous as I had a hallway you could live in!
However, the house has a garden and I never knew what to do in a bedroom as big as the one I did have!
And what's the obsession with multiple en suites in new builds at the expense of space to move around the bloody bed? They seem to make a room that's just big enough to hold a standard double, stick in a small built in wardrobe to suggest that's covered even though it would only hold the clothes of one 7 year old, and put in an en suite where you could be standing in the shower and reach to wash your hands in the sink! Downstairs loo, great. Master ensuite and family bathroom, great. More than that is pointless if you're left with no space to shake the duvet. And that isn't a euphemism.
We are shortly moving from a 68 sq m 2-bed property to a 125 sq m 3-bedder and it's going to be palatial in comparison! This is in London too so it does seem big compared to the standard 3-bed terraces around here which are about 90 sq m.
Ours is tiny. Three bed modern house with 2 real bedrooms and a box room. One open plan living area downstairs. But, angelfootprints it's really just what you are used to when growing up isn't it? I don't think it will ever give you a good idea how big a house is just by saying number of bedrooms.
The home I grow up in. It's 4 bedrooms with 4 reception rooms and 3 bathrooms/ensuite. But the bedrooms are huge in UK standard. My bedroom has a full sized double bed in one corner. I have one wall for a desk and a dressing table. Another wall with a piano. Another wall with a console/bookcase. And then on top of it I have a built in wardroble. And the left over floor space, I think I can lay a double mattress on the floor. The lounge is so massive that we have a 3+2+2 sofa in one half of the lounge surrounding the fire place. The other half can accomodate a grand piano (and many neighbours have one). We have a playroom downstairs that is larger than our living room now. I know our plot size is around 1300 sqm because that's how we talk about house sizes.
DH is from the country and the house sizes are even more ridiculous. His was also a 4 bed, but the landing area upstairs is so large they have 3+2 sofas surrounding a coffee table layed out. Their guest room has two single beds, like hotels, in the middle of the room. Their family bathroom is so large there's a wall to separate the bath from the toilet.
This is in NZ btw. Everything I've seen is ridiculously small here. Except those on escape to the country obviously.
Escape to the country!
I love how they walk into a kitchen about the size of our entire house and shake their head sadly. "Its just not what I was imagining. Its just so small. I can only fit 3 Agas and 6 tables into it. Sigh".
Yes I know angel. Ours is so ridiculously small that
1) We can't fit 2 normal bedside tables next to our bed in the master bedroom. But the bed is sandwiched between the radiator and the built in wardrobe. So you can't push it to one side either.
2) I measured the box room the other day and it's slightly less than 2m in length. You can't even fit a full sized single bed in there.
Somehow I don't think they are real sized bedrooms. They are just slightly too small for their purposes. (I've been told this is normal for newer houses)
Oh and I'd love to live in those houses where they complain are too small. Like you say, we can fit our whole downstairs in those kitchens!
Bedrooms is a poor indicator. My house is a shoebox, but has 3 bedrooms. No storage and the third bedroom has to have a small bed in it.
I'm scouring Right Move but there aren't any houses in this estate for sale so I can't check sq ft.
onelittletoddlingterror if you look at the report I linked to earlier in the thread it talks about modern houses shrinking in floorspace in the uk. Often they are to small for requirements and are shown with 3/4 size furniture to make you think you can live in it!
Yes definitely needs 3/4 sized furniture. I see it says 4sqm will fit a bed, bedside table, dressing table and a stool. I wish they'd make the box room 2x2. Currently it's just under 2x2 which makes it so annoying. We have the cot in it at the moment. We'd like to put a guest bed in there. But because of the size, we couldn't.
Ok, have got the tape measure out. My 3 bed house is 62 sq metres.
It is (and I find it) miserably small, to the point it makes me really ratty as
there is clutter everywhere just owning the basics is a squeeze. It's not a new build either, new builds have things like en suites .
Yes, I am house hunting.
Meglet ours not a new built either. It's from the 80s. But I see it as new compared to the Victorian and Edwardian houses. They have much more generous sized rooms. Oh and what's with the really really low ceiling? Taller visitors keep banging their heads on the light in our lounge, until we changed to something that's more flushed to the ceiling.
Ours is 1800 square feet with three bed-three bath. It is an old farmhouse and cosy, without bring cramped.
To add, I think less than 1000 sq feet is small. Upto 2000 sq ft is medium and above that is large
Oh, you can find out on the EPC. Apparently our floor space is 111m2 (so quite a bit smaller than I'd calculated). We deconverted the garage conversion, so we might have made it smaller. Although, our surveyor refused to count it as a room (it was so badly done) so it might not have been included in the EPC either. On that basis I really don't think 108m2 is small.
I hate the en suite fetish aspect of new builds today. All teeny tiny rooms with specially made tiny (but shiny) furniture to make the show homes look less cramped and stupidly small ensuites (where you'd get claustrophobic in the shower). It's all so pointless.
111m2 is 1195 square feet apparently. I don't do this imperial nonsense though; it's utterly meaningless to me.
Arbitrary I love ensuites. But then only in proper houses with large master bedrooms. (As in those in Escape to the Country). But yes, in these tiny houses, they make them even tinier!
1 bed flat/house -small
2 bed flat/ house - medium
3 bed+ - big
I have just worked mine out its 83 square metres.
Narked I completely agree about new builds and the en suite obsession. Tis lovely to have one, but I've seen some with multiples en suites, minimal space in the bedrooms, and no storage space at all. ridiculous.
I am sorry to keep posting but have found this really interesting.Im shocked my flst is 20 square mtres bigger than some peoples 3 bed houses.Inalways thought my place was quite small.
Yes I know. How many bedrooms means nothing. The rooms should be proper sized! Mine are basically unfit for purpose. By the way, ours originally had an ensuite. The previous owners removed it. I'm glad they did. We put a row of dressers in the space where originally was the ensuite. With the ensuite. The space between the end of the bed to the ensuite wall would be about one door wide. And like I said upthread the space on the sides of our standard double bed is less than any bedside table we can find. Basically a room which can only fit a bed!
It's all relative I think. My house seems huge to me (modern 4-bed detached) but that's because I have only ever lived in flats or tiny terraces before. I'm sure to some people it wouldn't seem that big!
Ours is 90sqm. I always thought that was small but based on what others have, it isn't as small as I thought.
We live in outer London and our house is similar to what I grew up in.
I class two bed terrace as small, 3 bed semi as average and 4 bed detached as large. I have small unfortunately.
Its interesting though because in our first house in had really high ceilings and a big hallway.
I was convinced we were downsizing by a slight amount to move here.
Then I realised the old was actually smaller once I looked at both floorplans. Our house now has quite low ceilings.
I think there are many psychological aspects to how we perceive space. High ceilings definitely give a sense of more space.
In terms of square footage ours is roughly 525 sq ft.
We live in what feels like a big house to me.
It's a Council House. 3 bedrooms - 2 large, 1 small.
A wetroom upstairs, with space for shower, sink, toilet and a small square of free space to walk about.
A decent lounge - space for sofas, telly, computer, a storage cupboard and floor space.
A dining room, about the same size as the lounge, but with two alcoves which we can put storage units in.
A big entrance hall.
Tiny kitchen, but with a pantry.
Downstairs loo (but an after thought with no sink).
Downstairs walk-in store cupboard
An out house.
Good size front garden - bigger than my old back garden, with driveway.
Very big back garden, with tarmac path alongside the house and in between the house and garden.
Narked your post made me smile. I wanted to laugh but standing at station with a crowd of people!
I agree that too many bathrooms are built in new builds. I know someone who has three!!
My previous flat (pre kids) was 1050sq ft as a 2 bed, 2 bath fairly large open-plan flat. Our current rented place (3 bed, 2 bath) is probably about 1200sq ft and feels cramped (2 adults, 2 kids). We are shopping for a house and want something min 4 beds (ideally 5) and >1600sq ft.
To explain slightly, we both frequently work from home so studies are a big deal and no family are local so a spare room (or ideally two) makes it better for visits.
It sounds very big lougle.Its the same here the council houses are the size of mansions compared to normal properties.
Yes, I'm only house hunting for an ex-council house. Obviously mainly because I'm poor, but also because you get good design / more sq ft for your money. I'll have cupboards and a hallway! <clasps hands with joy>.
Now, if only someone on the estate want would put their house on the bleedin' market.
I have no idea the actual size. It's just a traditional 3 bed semi but it has been extended so living space is rather generous but one of the bedrooms is severely lacking. Doesnt matter so mu h because it turns out my two prefer to share a room! My flat was bloody massive though and that was only two bedrooms.
All of the places described here as tiny and miniscule are bigger than my house! Which is small but not hobbit sized. I have 1 large bedroom with ensuite and one fairly small, small living room, small kitchen diner. family bathroom. no garden, no drive, no garage. We are 5 here.
We have no drive or garage you have to be loaded to afford that.Also I only know professionals that have en suites that is very posh to me!
Thanks sunset for the EPC tip. Apparently my 3 bed semi is 75 sqm. It's smaller than many quote here. But larger than meglet's. (I think you are winning the award for britain's smallest 3-beds currently ) Mine is smaller than the average 3-bed size of 88sqm according to the report linked. And that 88sqm is still 8sqm smaller than recommended. So I'm right that my house feels cramped!
Well, I'd say a 3 bed semi is average, but full understand 3 beds mean different things in houses of different ages!
Although in the UK we quote room sizes, rarely is the total floor space quoted - and its more than just adding up the room sizes.
I think we have an above average size house (in a very cheap area), but not particularly large.
4 bed, just over 100m^2
It's really interesting!
My house is 3 bed (semi), as described above. It has a floor area, according to the EPC, of 103sqm.
A relative's house is a 4 bed (detached) with a converted garage to make a large kitchen-diner. It has a floor area of 105sqm.
My Parents' house is a 4 bed detached with garage and has a floor area of 107sqm.
The house I used to live in, 1 mile away, is a 3 bed mid-terrace and has a floor area of just 65sqm!
One question, though. If there is research that shows that the important thing is floor area, not the number of bedrooms, and a 4 bed house can have the same area as a 3 bed house....why are the Coalition Government instigating a bedroom tax?
A good point, lougle. What has always amused me about the bedroom tax is the assumption that couples share the same bedroom. Why should they? I know most do, but for it to be assumed is a bit cheeky.
The research has been commissioned by people who are concerned about the quality of housing in this country - this is not to be confused with the government who are concerned about the quantity of housing in thus country.
If you are only interested in quantity and what that does to your figures then getting a four bed house onto the space of a three bed house is great (sod how actually liveable that is for real people) because on paper you've provided more housing. Also the government are interested in supporting big housebuilders; Barrett, Persimmon, Wimpey etc and big housebuilders want to make a profit - they can make more profit if they can sell the same sized house as a four bedroom than if they market it as a three for very little difference in cost to build (an additional plaster stud wall, internal door & window).
It's all about profit - and our current government likes companies who think like this.
Our place 'only' has two bedrooms. But it is 1230 sq ft (about 117 sq metres). It has a kitchen, dining room, huge lounge (fits three seater, two seater, dining table plus chairs for six and massive coffee table), the bedrooms are both large doubles, two ensuites, a cloakroom and a very big inner hallway (enough to serve as dh's study)
Oh an on top of the above, we have a huge loft.
and this is all in a two bedroom flat.
There was a period in the 1960's / 70's when houses (or rooms) had to be a minimum size didn't they.
Even saying a 3 bed detached is a good size house isn't accurate. There are massive 3 bed 1960's built detached, and dolls house size 2000's 3 bed detached.
350 sq m and yes, large. Too bloody large - 300 year old farmhouse , costs a fortune to -not remotely- heat and maintain. Adore it, though, will rattle here forever!
Wonky, I think your forgetting that these homebuilders are not a charity, they are there to make money.
Basically there should be some sort of building regs that state each double has to be at least ..... each single ... etc.
Meglet re:minimum sizes - yes there used to be a standard called the Parker Morris Standard but it only applied in certain circumstances although it was widely adopted en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Morris_Committee it was abolished in 1980
Minimum space and storage areas still applies to Housing Association properties which is why they are usually more generous than private new build housing.
I would say:
Small- 2 up, 2 down (or smaller)
Average- 2 double bedrooms and a single, with kitchen, living room and dining room.
Large- 4 or more bedrooms
Very large- mansion.
Thats odd cause I have part ownership housing association houses opposite and there titchy.
The same others of the same style on the development there like this
I am not forgetting that Housebuilders are there to make money, after all I work in the construction industry and construction firms making money is what pays my wages.
I am just explaining the reasoning behind it. I also think that the methods employed in this sector aren't always a very honest way to make money.
Other countries and smaller firms make profits without sacrificing quality to this extent. I know that major housebuilders tactics are partially in response to the high land prices in this country however most of them have forgotten their own role (like banks) in raising these prices in the first place through schemes like landbanking.
We recently moved from small 2 bed flat (55sqm) in a lovely part of London to a 5 bed detached in Somerset (c180sqm?). We only added about £100pcm onto the mortgage but have space to not kill each other and add DC to the mix quite comfortably. New house is large but 5 beds should really be 4 as 2 are too small really. One is my study and one is planned as nursery but DH will have to give up (or share) HUGE study extension over garage when DC needs a larger room as we need a double guest room for friends and family who live too far away and need to stay when they visit. I know I'm lucky and moving west has helped us hugely!!
I'm not sure if the HA standards apply to part ownership properties or just HA properties it's a while since I did a mixed tenure scheme.
The standards don't make houses large, more adequate - they state for each type what furniture should fit, average size of furniture and the space required for using that furniture/fittings properly, they also have sizes for storage space.
Yes wonky I'm sure a minimum standard will stop housebuilders calling a room too small to fit a single bed a bedroom. (Like my box room).
Unless ofc retailers start selling 190cm length beds for houses built after 1980s
Thats the thing furniture seems to be getting bigger and houses smaller.
Makes no sense
I would say average in the UK is a 3 bed terrace or semi with one bathroom, perhaps a downstairs toilet, 3rd room being a single. Perhaps a garage depending on age of house.
onelittletoddlingterror your box room must be tiny if it does not accommodate a single bed. Our box room is small but we have a single cabin bed. We considered taking out cabin bed and installing a child's bed for the extra space. The room would then eliminate adult guests and our dc will obviously grow so we decided against it.
We're househunting at the moment and looking for a 4 bed, 3 recep. Plenty of new builds around with 5 or 6 beds in our price range and area but haven't seem a decent one yet as the bedrooms are tiny. Even the master bedrooms aren't usually big enough for free-standing furniture and there are usually single and double bedrooms where you don't really have clearance to open and close the door properly once the bed is in. To my mind, if you have to open the door, sidle in, then close the door before you can move round the bed, then it is definitely not a double bedroom. I'd rather have fewer and larger bedrooms. Our shortlist is Victorian and Edwardian because of this.
When people calculate area, do they include hallways, loos, bathrooms?
The other thing I really love about the older houses is having a decent sized hall. I've looked at too many new builds where the hall is too small to get coats and boots off the 2 DC. We're renting a 4 bed new house while we house hunt and there's not even room for a row of coat hooks. Even if the landlord let us put one up, we'd have to limbo under it to get past.
Bumblequeen it's currently the nursery with a cotbed in it. We were thinking of moving DD into the larger bedroom and turning the box room into the guest room. I measured it, and it's only 194cm. It's a square room, the other wall has a radiator and the third/forth is the door. So there's only one way to fit the bed. It's ridiculous because 194cm is shorter than a standard single bed. They shouldn't be able to call it a bedroom if you can't even fit a single bed inside. It should be a study or a nursery only. (It'll fit a cot bed or a toddler bed, but they are only 150cm long).
Even the master bedrooms aren't usually big enough for free-standing furniture and there are usually single and double bedrooms where you don't really have clearance to open and close the door properly once the bed is in.
I live in a small house now little 2 bed with kitchen diner and loving room- I want to move to a average house this year which I would class a semi-detached 3 bedroom with 2 reception rooms and garage.
A big house to me is detached 4 bed+
kindlemum When people calculate area, do they include hallways, loos, bathrooms? I don't know the answer because like many others, I got my house floor size from the EPC. But I think these extra areas make a difference. Like you say, a decent entrance hall is very good to have. Our tiny 80s house has a hall that is one door wide and two doors long. There is no where to hang coats or leave shoes. Once you enter the second door, it's an open plan living area. (So popular with newer builts because obviously a corridor is a waste of space).
kindlemum it is easy to underestimate how much space we need in our bedrooms. It would annoy me to have such tight spacing in my bedroom I.e not be able to walk around the bed with ease. I have seen houses advertised on Rightmove and double bedrooms do not allow for anything other than a wardrobe and bed.
Our hall is long but narrow. I keep this area minimal - only coats and shoes. Having cabinets, tables in small spaces looks too cramped.
onelittletoddling no it should not be called a bedroom if it does not accommodate a single bed. I remember looking at a much larger property when we were house hunting for the same price. There was a biggish hallway and smallest room accommodated two single beds. However, we did not like the location, was in a cul de sac, directly beside an alley way with a garage en bloc.
we have a small 3 bed.... one through lounge/diner and a kitchen downstairs (never again - there is no where to "escape" to when everything takes place in one room!) the bedrooms are 2
just double and a single, one loo and it is in the bathroom - typical 70s redbrick box house.
Wishfulmakeupping I think we would all like to hear more about your loving room :-)
Ha oh yes! I'm sure my OH would like to hear more about it too!
Its all relative surely? We have a big living room and kitchen, all open plan, but no dining room. Big table though, just not a separate room. The only 2 rooms downstairs that aren't open plan are the playroom and the loo. 4 double bedrooms upstairs. I'd say our house is average to big for the area. I'd say a 2 bed mid terrace in our village is small. And a 5 or 6 bed on the outskirts of the village is big.
We made our house seem much bigger by knocking through, extending a bit, reorganising and we have a massive hall which gives a feeling of space. The disadvantage of space is that you can lose the cosy.
Some houses have teeny upstairs with widgy bedrooms, others more evenly proportioned.
Tafetta I would class your house as big. A playroom and four double bedrooms- yes please!
I agree that knocking through two rooms can create more space. Our kitchen/diner was originally a tiny gallery kitchen and small dining room. The previous owner knocked it through. I imagine it was cramped in both rooms. The only thing I miss about having a separate kitchen is shutting out the mess behind you. With a kitchen/diner you have to clean as you go along.
Space is so important. Too many things and a house closes in on you. We cope in our 2.5 bed eot as I am a neat freak and a minimalist. Everything is packed away.
I think for me it's the other way round. I have what is a fairly small three bed terrace (London). It's about 1200 sq ft. It could always be bigger but what I like about it is that it's on four floors so you feel that you can spread across the house without tripping over each other. I like the fact that it's not open plan (apart from the kitchen/diner which is the absolute best thing in my life) because although the rooms are not at all big, they are not all together in one big area.
I remember the first Christmas we had the open plan kitchen. I couldn't believe how much people helped! Washing up everything I put down on the island etc.
It makes you keep it tidy though. I'm not an esp tidy person but it makes you so as its always on show.
It's more to do with sq ft than number of rooms.
Having a one huge, light, spacious room will feel better than lots of pokey dark small rooms.
small 2 bed flat, or terrace 2 bedrooms maybe boxroom,
1 reception room kitchen/diner and 1 bathroom,
average 3 double beds or 2 double and decent single 1 bathroom and downstairs toilet, kitchen diner big enough for table and 1 -2 reception may or may not have garage but will have garden unless a big flat
4 beds with 2 receptions and single garage probably still average
large 4+ bedrooms at least 2 reception rooms kitchen big enough to eat in too
garden with shed, (a garage unless in centre of city like a georgian townhouse) 2 proper bathrooms, utility room possibly study/playroom too feels spacious, useable attic or cellar plenty of storage
We partly based our house purchase on price per sqm. You can always change the layout but the space is set (unless you extend obvs)
3 bed very average size house, I grew up in an enormous house that was converted in to five two bedroom flats. It was a dump though.
We're in London in a terraced house and technically have 5 beds - but you'd have to re-hang the door to get a bed in the little room! We use it as a study. Other bedrooms are a good size. We have 2 bathrooms, sep loo, and a knock-through sitting room. Kitchen is a good size (side return done). It is about 2000 sq ft and we could (if we won the lottery) convert the loft (which would make it bedroom heavy). For my part of london, it is Big imo. I love it. Tiny garden and backs onto a railyway.
Thanks wonkylegs, what an interesting link. It's nice to have some figures to compare floorplan / EPC m2 values to.
Really interesting link. I am always taken aback by the titchiness of some new builds - DH's parents have a 3 bed detached new build, the footprint of which including (completely pointless imo) garage and three bathrooms would probably fit into our (Victorian) sitting room. Having said that it seems to cost pence to heat and maintain. We are in a typical London terrace with 4 double beds, fully extended up into the loft and to the side return. About 185 sqm/2000 sq ft. It feels absolutely enormous to me as I grew up in tiny 2 bed with three siblings, and it looks as if it genuinely is quite big according to that report. But the garden is tiny, as they all are in my part of London.
Wow that's huge Ogre. Ours is a tiny 3 bed new build and probably would fit into your sitting room from the looks of it... I'd love more space!
I think it's huge too giraffe. Although when I unguardedly said so to a friend recently (we have a massive mortgage to match and I have been wondering whether we should downsize in the next couple of years given job market uncertainty etc) she laughed out loud and proceeded to explain in great detail that it wasn't at all. So it's all relative...!
What an interesting thread (and report).
Having been brought up in a country where houses are much larger, in a 500sqm home, I consider small to be anything under 120sqm, medium (and ideal for me) 250sqm and large 350sqm+.
Dh was brought up in a much smaller house (about 150sqm I guess) and much prefers smaller houses, and thinks a 250sqm is quite large.
We are currently in a 400sqm house which is way, way too big for both of us. Probably partly an overreaction to the 70sqm flat we lived in in London!
small 1000 sq ft
medium 1500- 2000 sq ft
large 3000 sq ft+
Our selection criteria when house hunting was firstly, location, then plot size was followed by square footage of living space. Our 70's 'project' was originally 4 bed/2 bath house of 2400 sq ft (excluding double garage). We've added a 2 storey extension and it is now a 5 bed/3 bath house of 3200 sq ft/297sqm. We are planning to stay here until the DC fly the nest though so the next move would be in 20 yrs' time when we would be downsizing! Have much the same opinion re UK house sizes as the PP.
Small < 800 sq ft
Medium 1200 - 2000 sq ft
Large > 3000 sq ft
What an interesting thread. I live in a five bed house with two bathrooms and a utility room, which makes it sound like a mansion. But actually it's 1300 sq ft, so barely even scrapes into the medium category according to some posts.
Still, I'm in London, and it feels massive compared to the 740 sq ft flat we were squeezed into before.
Everything in my house is ona big scale though - huge inglenooks that are three feet wide and 8 ft long, living room is 30 ft long , even ensuite is 15 ft - so it's not so much number of rooms ( although there are quite a few ) it's the scale of them. Have three staircases too.
Absolute horror to heat and maintain, though.
Wow I cannot believe the sizes of some of your houses! I am selling my (what I consider) large 2 bed terraced house (approx. 72sq.m. + 8sq.m. conservatory) and hoping to buy 3 bed town house (approx. 76sq.m). I feel both are sufficient for our 2+2 family, if not lush although ideally I'd have a garage, a shed and a conservatory on top!
You can probably tell then I grew up in 1 bed flat, 4 of us, occasionally having 2 grandparents to stay with us...
this thread is fascinating!
I have just used this online calculator to get the size of my house in sq m because I have a toddler sleeping on me and CBA to go and find the EPC from when we bought the house...
It is now 89.6 sq m but was more like 77 when we bought it (we did a rear ground floor extension) and probably 72 when built (previous owners did front extension). At 72, with two beds, one bath, kitchen, lounge, council built in the 50s near Watford it probably met a decent/good standard, if one applied then. Only got half way through wonkylegs' link but finding it really interesting.
We have made it into a 3 bedroom layout upstairs, and I suppose the smallest could fall foul of a current RIBA standard for a single bedroom (2m*1.7 plus the long bit of L-shape) but it fits a full length single bed, has built in wardrobe, and because we've used a mid sleeper, all the floor space is available to play in. We definitely are influenced by that British idea of maximizing the number of bedrooms - but more to suit our own need to be able to stay here longer and not keep having to "climb the property ladder", incurring transactional costs every time.
I have no idea (but want to get the plans out and have a look!). Most people in the town that I know have three beds but ALL are different styles and layouts, some with conversions in the loft/ garage. Our's is open plan downstairs but not sure if that makes it seem bigger or smaller. However we have a big garden which was the selling point. On the other hand, I grew up in another three bed (in the box room) but the downstairs living area seems huge by comparison.
Three beds are average I would say, regardless of the rest.
I live in a 5 bed house,
My daughters friends come round and say wow its huge,
I just think it is the right size for my family 3 children and we fill the house
5 bed all double 2 en-suite
1 study downstairs
Dining room separate
Integral double garage
So i say 1+2 small
4 depends really if is a small 4 with all double bedrooms
Join the discussion
Please login first.