Stuck in a house dilemma and going round in circles… help!

[getoutofmyhead]

We’re torn between two houses we genuinely love, and I cannot seem to land on a decision.
House A makes complete sense on paper. It’s near the countryside, close to school, with friends living literally across the road and a really strong community feel. The layout is practical and adaptable (ie could make it lovely and homely internally), and there’s potential to create an annexe that could generate additional income in future/ host visiting family. It’s also cheaper, which would give us far more financial breathing space. The city centre is a short bus ride or drive away. Thought it’s not pretty on the outside and never will be a beautiful period house. As someone who really cares about aesthetics, this niggles more than I’d like to admit.
House B is the opposite. It’s a lovely Victorian house with lots of character, walkable to the city centre and very much city living. However, it’s less practical day to day (lots of floors), and while still affordable, it would stretch us a bit more financially. Resale value is probably strongest on this one.
I keep swinging between the two. One feels sensible, supportive and future-proof. The other match better but comes with less flexibility.
Has anyone made such a choice? What I am missing to decide on the spot?
YABU – House A
YONBU – House B

House A or neither. If you really hate how it looks then don’t buy it, but minor aesthetic issues can generally be overcome/got used to. An impractical house will always be impractical.

A, unless it means you're going to be driving teenagers everywhere in which case B.

I've lived in pretty houses, in doer-uppers, have built my own, and am now in a boring sensible choice. The others are lovely when you have plenty of money and more living space than you need, but for practical child rearing there's nothing like an ugly sensible choice.

House B. I wouldn't even consider House A.

As PPs have said, a few floors can actually work better as kids get older.

I'd like the more practical house A, in house B's location. So maybe neither of these. But really the location is the biggest question - where and how do you want to live? I bought the house a short drive or bus ride away from the city, and am now planning to move more centrally as it's never felt right and has been annoying. But your situation may be entirely different.

I'm currently looking for a new home, hopefully being bought out by exH and there are new builds available that are affordable and in the village I want that would be fine, but I am worried they are soulless.

But it would be really easy and practical, so trying to figure out if I follow my head with the easy new build, or keep looking for a prettier, older house. Its hard!

If the two houses swapped locations, would you still be torn?

I ask because I’m trying to work out if the appeal of the Victorian one is more about the location or the period/kerb appeal.

A and ditch the annex idea and give it a facelift so you get your kerb appeal.

House A. Don't underestimate a house where you leave something on a higher floor and need to go back and forth especially over four floors.

Almost everyone in London is in a Victorian or Edwardian home, it’s fine. Don’t be put off by horror stories, most of the time they’re just houses. Saying that, your house A option does sound good.

House A

You willspend your life living in the house not outside looking at it!