To wonder what you think is a reasonable living space for a family

[BelleMarionette]

For a family house, with children, what would you say is a reasonable number of square metres. I know the perception varies wildly.

For example, for a family with four children, how many square meters do you think would allow for reasonable living standards? How many for a family with two children?

When people have seen my house, they have either thought it was decently sized, or very small.

Mine got measured by the bulldog surveyor when I was taking out a mortgage as they needed a valuation
It's a ground floor flat with a garden and he managed to begrudgingly say it was big after moaning the garden wasn't private. Like alright it's not private and overlooked but it's a garden that isn't shared!
Then he down values it by 20k

I have no idea of the sq m of my house, but my neighbours is for sale and is approximately 68sqm. They are all pretty much identical, so I'll assume mines round about the same.

There's me and 2 teens (18 and 16) here. It's small but works for us. Just as well really as we can't afford anything else

Just noticed a typo, it should have said "sort" of size, not "sorry" of size! Glad the overall message was still there though.

My house is about 115m2, and it feels fine for me and my teenage daughter- the bedrooms, other than the loft conversion, are not big but ok. If my teenage son was to move in though I'd need much more room as he seems to take up so much space - when we all lived together we actually did have a house twice the size.
However my neighbours live in the exact same house but without the loft conversion and they have a 2 year old and 4 year old and seem happy enough.
So point is, what's roomy for one family may be cramped for another! But as a guide I'd be looking for 180m2 with five beds for a family of 6.

Totally agree about the new builds and toilets. Developers around here seem to be obsessed with them. There's a development here where the bedrooms are 3.5m x 3.5m, 2.2m x 2.2m and 1.8mx 2m... But you get an en suite, a family bathroom and a downstairs loo. I'd much rather more square metres of living space or even cupboards. But I suppose en suites are seen as v desirable by a lot of people.

It’s most definitely about how the space is used!

We bought a house last year. We were looking at two identically sized houses, in terms of area. One was a four bed new build, the other a three bed Victorian home. The three bed was FAR more appropriately proportioned for our needs; and felt significantly larger than the four bed.

We moved from a two bed to a three bed so our kids could each have a room. Guess what? They chose to share a room and have a playroom 🙄

Still, that will probably change when the puberty monster arrives, and at least now we have the flexibility to let them choose.

The house we currently own is nearly double the size of our previous home, but doesn’t actually feel that much larger tbh - a lot of the extra space is taken up by things which don’t necessarily benefit us, like a big hallway and landing area. Still, it’s better appointed than the new build which has a dining kitchen, and then two postage stamp sized lounges, a huge downstairs toilet which you enter through a utility room, and a MASSIVE master bedroom with three other tiny rooms … Why?!?

This was my bug bear about new builds. We were sorted if every member of our household simultaneously had diarrhoea … but otherwise, no thanks! It’s all to do with building regulations.

It just got a bit ridiculous IMO, one has a downstairs loo which you entered through a utility room (so you had to go from the lounge, into a hallway, up a corridor, into the kitchen, through the kitchen, into the utility, then eventually into the downstairs loo - it was easier to go upstairs!)

Another had the toilet door inside the kitchen. Why?!

One toilet on each floor is more than adequate.

Your house is big OP. Houses don't need an en suite, downstairs loo and second reception ro be reasonable. Those are extras. Reasonable IMO is a bedroom for each child, even if small, space to fit a dining table big enough for all people who live there to sit round it somewhere in the house, and a double door wardrobe in the master. That said, it's not a catastrophe if children have to share.

It's good to hear things working well in your home. I wondered how you've managed with 2 growing teenagers and all their friends in a smallish house? Did they have special place to hang out? Like a garden room, their own rooms, or did they go round friends houses? I'm just thinking to the future for mine!

I like open plan. I just have separate rooms as well as the open plan. And no they aren't a small snug. DC have a decent size playroom with seating to play video games. They also have lots of room to play with toys there. Then we have separate living room too and this is 6m x 4m. Utility is a separate room too which I like.

125sq metres, had to look on rightmove. This is a 3 bed.

Just looked at a new build in my town it’s a further 20sq metres but is 4 bed and has 3 toilets and a utility room and a postage stamp size garden.

Thats why asking metres is quite valid, new builds may have more rooms but they almost always feel a bit claustrophobic. Hate low ceilings.

@CornishGem1975 have a look on rightmove sold prices, if the estate agents details are still there it should have the square metres on the floorplan. If you have lived there for a long time they may not.

We hope to move when DH and I have retired. Not rural but something with an enormous garden all the way round the house, edge of town or village

Tbh, (I guess fortunately) they don't have friends round all that often. They're more likely to meet them in the park than hang at someone's house.

DS2 has a habit of sitting in the front garden with his friends, although he did have 1 that used to come in and watch TV in the lounge with him.

If they did want a group of friends over then we'd just squeeze in so to speak.

We moved house when 3 of the kids were little.
They had been sharing a room but new house had enough bedrooms for a room each. After two nights they all asked to go back to sharing as they missed chatting (Aged around 6, 8& 9). This quickly changed when they hit puberty mind!

We had 180sm in London with 2DSC every other weekend and 1DC. When DC2 was born it felt too small and just not the right layout. We left London and ended up in a 400sm house. We don't need all the space but it's nice for each kid to have their own bedroom. The separate playroom from the main living area is fabulous. We sacrificed location for size and I have no regrets!

RIBAs ‘The case for space’ went through this in 2011, highlighting that the majority of modern housing is below the ‘minimum’ recommended space for each type of property, and also the key fact that there is no right size - everyone’s needs differ and change with lifestyle

https://www.architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/space-standards-for-homes/additional-documents/ribacaseforspace2011pdf.pdf

For square meters you can look at listings, including sold ones, in your area. At least if yours is similar to mine and the houses are all similar (Victorian terraces)

The minimums quoted in the riba article are surprisingly low, which is interesting

I think a bedroom for every child is definitely "ideal".

Although not a single family in my extended family has a bedroom for every child. Not one. One family has 2 boys share, another has 2 girls share, another one 2 boys sharing etc.

I knew someone as a child with a lovely home. There were 2 adults and 2 children.... Huge front room, a downstairs shower room, a downstairs snug/office space, open-plan kitchen with dining area and attached sun-room/extension, huuuuge garden and patio, 4 bedrooms (one with an en-suit) and an upstairs bathroom.

Whereas I grew up in a 2-bed council flat, it was tiny compared to hers. Honestly thought her family were abnormally rich as a child, I couldn't fathom having a house like that.

Sqm tells you a lot in terms of space, I agree. On paper the new builds on my town have everything, but it's all absolutely crammed in. The 4 beds are 120sqm, with 3 bathrooms & a utility room. But I'd rather have fewer rooms and not feel crammed in. I guess if you really want a bedroom per child in a larger family though you might prioritise the number of individual rooms over not feeling squeezed.

We found it much, much, cheaper per sqm to go for a boxy 1970s house.

400sqm! I don't think I've ever been in a house that size. How many bedrooms do you have? I'd love to see the floor plan 😁

Thanks @Fadedstripes It says mine is 160sqm. It's a 4 bed but feels quite small.

What an excellent post. Well said!

We are 6 of us in a 3 bed. We outgrew it a while ago but ho hum!

Neighbours have exact same house and say they feel cramped and there's 4 of them.

Really? My 4 bed of the same size feels generous. Do you have a lot of reception rooms / en suites eating up space?

there is a difference between the bare minimum, room for a bed per person, a chair per person in living room/ area enough room to cook and store food, a functioning bathroom, room for a fridge freezer and washing machine; a place for each person to store clothes and personal possessions, enough space for a child to play or do homework or an adult to have a desk to work from home or a dining table
nice to haves above that include a dining table and chairs as well as a comfy sofa type seat, a second toilet, a laundry area a separate bedroom for each child not just a bed, outdoor space, car parking space, second living area

a lot depends on design you can see some incredibly well designed spaces under 50sq metres for 2 people because of how well the spaces integrate and how storage is designed, where the windows and radiators are etc
sometimes you have a decent size kitchen but because it has a door to outside a door to hall a door to living room and a window on the fourth wall it is difficult to design anything

Yeah @Sweetandsourdough two ensuites, a family bathroom, downstairs loo and then separate living room, kitchen, dining room, utility etc.