house versus location

[Amber76]

We'd like to buy a house.

I have an area i love but it is expensive - we might be able to afford a small three bed semi there. Its a coastal town, somewhere tourists love.

We've seen an amazing house - much bigger, period style, great garden and its under budget. But the area isn't as great. Its an okay town - not really somewhere you'd go to unless you had to.

Dh thinks we're mad to not jump at the period house. Aibu to really want to live in the lovely coastal town in a much smaller house?

We have three young kids - schools are good in both places. Dh works about 25 mins from both places. I'm at home with kids.

Two places are about 30 mins apart. Such an important decision as it will be the town where the kids grow up.

Which is more important - house or location?

If the 3 bed is big enough for you I would go for location every time. We live in a lovely town and do use a lot of the amenities- cafes, restaurants, shops, parks, walks, things for DC and the nearest city isn't far which is just as important as the town for older teens.

Location, as long as the house isn't too small.

Location always.
We have a small house in a great area with brilliant schools and lots to do. We looked at a lovely big house on the outskirts but would have been isolated and the nearest schools are rubbish. I have no doubt that we're much happier in our little house.

It would always be location for me.

I'd go for the house. It's more likely to have lots of families in a similar position to you, so likely to improve. Touristy town sounds like the kind of place which will have lots of more affluent older people so might not be as nice to actually live in.
Or go neither and keep looking for a compromise

Location, location, location.

Moved from an expensive place less than 2 years ago to move to a big and beautiful period house. Moving out tomorrow to a small and very expensive house back where we used to live.

Location is important, but you usually have to compromise and settling for the OK location rather than the dream location is not too big a deal.

3 kids in a small 3 bed house. Not so bad when small, but as they get older you're going to need space. Not just for them but when they have friends dropping over - and its never just one and its never just one child's friends. At last house I used to end up at bottom of garden with a cup of tea as multiple offsprings multiple friends invaded the entire house.

If the schools are comparable then I'd go for the bigger house.

And what t4nut said in her last paragraph is exactly why. Small kids in a small house is fine, big kids not so much. We're moving for that very reason.

Is it likely that you will be able to move to a more expensive house later? If so, then definitely the smaller house in the great location. If not, then tricky...

You need to visualise your day to day life there. The weekdays, the weekends. With small children, and with teenagers. Talk to as many local people as you can. Make sure you don't have a romantic view of either the coastal town or the big period house. I was very set on a pretty, character property when we bought ours, but actually it is the nature of the village that makes it such a great place to live. But to be honest, I didn't know how good it was when we bought it.

It sounds like you know which you prefer and so does your husband. You may both be right from your own perspectives and it is hard to see how to resolve it. But if you are going to spend more time there than him then that is important.

I think it depends so much on the two locations and on what your family is like that I can't really give proper advice.

I love where I live, and am in a smaller house than I could have because I love the area so much. For me, it's important to have good schools, a nice local community, good shops/activities within walking distance, nice places to go for a walk and easy access to cultural activities. I don't drive. So my small house with a 15 minute attractive riverside walk to the city centre, a nature reserve practically on my doorstep and a range of community activities going on is perfect.

But many of my local friends moved away to villages where they have more space, good schools, big gardens but have to get in a car to buy a bar of luxury chocolate or go the cinema or any of the many city-based festivals and cultural stuff that is around. They love where they live.

Try imagining a week in each house at different times of the year. What do you do? Where do you go? How do you get there? Who do you spend time with? Where do you spend time with them?

We had outgrown our three bedroomed semi by the time the oldest (of three) child was 9. The older they get, the more stuff they have. Our house was full of surfboards, wetsuits, bikes, assorted sports stuff and all the additional paraphernalia that teenage lives seem to need.

Tricky one, I see your dilemma. I live in Cornwall, and although the lovely coastal towns aren't completely dead in winter (I prefer them in winter, tbh), the eight weeks of murder in summer would certainly give me pause for thought!

I lived in a small house in the Cotswolds in a lovely little town ... but the size of the house got to me in the end and we moved to a bigger place in much less affluent town nearby. I probably wouldn't have moved if we'd had the house of our dreams in the Cotswolds but I would rather have this house than that one any day (if that makes sense?!).

So essentially it's house over location for me - and like you I'm only about 20 mins away so can pop up to the extremely nice shops whenever I fancy!

My advice would be, that if you do go for the coastal home, make sure that you get a sea view. Otherwise, you may as well be in land, imo.

What are the nearby facilities like, for the children? I moved house to a brand new location, when my kids were 3 and 5 (a work transfer). We had a choice of a coastal location, with not much going on, or a location 30 minutes in-land, with loads for the kids (swimming/bowling/cinema/shops/restaurants). We chose the in-land location, for that reason, and also because the commute to work was far more reasonable from the in-land location. But like a PP said, whenever we had a day at the coast, I always had a bit of a sinking feeling as we travelled home, away from the sea.

Fast forward 6 years and my marriage dissolved, but the kids were still needing amenities, so I moved about 2 miles away (so still in-land).

Fast forward another few years and I re-married, and my DH was from a coastal town and also working there, so he was doing the commute from my home in-land, to the coastal location. Kids were almost at Uni. I had changed jobs and worked from home. So, all of a sudden, living in the coastal location was viable. So we decided to keep an eye on the property market, and only move for a house with a view.

We eventually found one and moved to the sea-side a few years ago. Our house is right on the seafront, there is literally no other property in front of us. I love it! We sit outside with morning coffee. In the evening, we can sit out with a glass of wine, and watch the boats go by, or people kayaking. Sometimes a big cruise ship will go by, or an oil tanker. But there's no doubt, that if the kids were still at home, they would be a bit bored here. There's a small town centre, and about 4 restaurants. But that said, you can get to enormous retail parks within 10 minutes and a gigantic shopping centre in 30 minutes, so that's all fine, imo.

It's not a tourist town tho. About 10 mins away there is a very touristy town, and our home there would be worth double. We pop over for lunch sometimes and have to say, not sure I could put up with all the hussle and bustle, every single day. It's just sooo busy.

Location x3 refers to making money speculating on houses.
Not everyone regards a house as a money making venture.

I would love a sea view and to live somewhere that people aspire to, however, compromising on a too small home with three growing children may just be a deal breaker. I'd also need to do a lot of research on how tourism might impact on quality of life.

How have property prices performed historically? Would it be feasible to downsize to the coast in years to come?

The bigger house is the more practical choice at this stage.

You can always try to move after a while if you feel you made the wrong decision - it isn't irrevocable.

As long as the area isn't actually terrible, but as pp have said, you can't guarantee nice neighbours, no matter which area you live in.

Do you plan to go out to work when the kids are older? How do the opportunities compare between the two places, if you do?

I lived in a touristy seaside town for a few years and the tourists were a pain in the butt. My 5-minute walk to work took half an hour when the narrow pavements were rammed with meandering holidaymakers.

All that aside, what is your heart telling you?

I'd always go for location too. Unless it were the same town just a slightly scuzzier part of it. But not a completely different town I didn't like much.

I've lived in towns that I didn't like (for work reasons, not to get a nicer house) and it's crap. A lovely big house does not make up for where you live being shit. 2 years in Milton Keynes wouldn't have been ok if I'd had a glorious mansion to live in. If still have been stuck in Milton Keynes.

Is the coastal house right near the coast and how far away from the coast is the bigger house?

I live in a coastal town and couldn't really imagine not being near the sea. Yes it's busy in summer but there's nothing like walking along the prom in the middle of winter! Love it and the children will too!