Is 2000sq ft a big house??

[unikorn]

We've just had an offer accepted on a 2000sq ft house and now oh is saying he's worried it's not big enough. We're a family of 4. It has 4 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms plus downstairs loo, 3 reception rooms, separate utility room, driveway, decent garden.

Despite being more sq ft than ours, because of the bedroom layout I would rule it out as too small (unless gardeniz huge and potential to extend?)

Have they included the storage room in the dimensions? Is that just the front half of a garage that has been converted at the back? Also in the 2nd floor bedroom have they included all the floor space because most of that looks to be below eaves and therefore not very useable. Still a decent enough house for 4 people though.

I don't think it's big but as PP have said, it's about room sizes.

This is like one of those threads where everyone clamours to say that £80k a year is really quite average and nothing to be proud of.

2000sq feet is not the sort of house that you're going to walk into and think 'this is massive', or that people are going to say in hushed tones 'ooh, she lives in a huge house'. But in the UK there is no way you could class it as small. I live in an area where houses tend to be quite big and even here that's classed as a decent sized house.

It's not massive but it's not small. Apart from one bedroom, the rooms are decent sized. You could fit 2.5 of my 2 bed terrace into it and 3.5 of the 2 bed house someone was selling in a thread on here, earlier this week.

The thing is this is how houses are being built now , what originally was the footprint for a 3 bed or 4 bed with 2 tiny box rooms they now build into the attic , so the upstairs is big enough but the downstairs is still the downstairs for what in effect should be a 3 bed IYSWIM .

Am assuming you both viewed it? Did it feel spacious?

It looks like it has been extended to death. The garage has turned into the family room and storage space, the conservatory has been tacked on the back and they extended up into the loft for the master bedroom. Which probably means that it doesn't have quite the right "feel" as the rooms flow into each other - because it wasn't designed that way but has sort of evolved.

With 2 kids and 2 adults?? No.

We live in a 3200-ish sq ft home and only 2 of us plus a dog plus bump. It's too big. But I imagine with 2 kids it would feel ok.

What I would be concerned about is that the conservatory doesn't look like it had got doors into the house. Pretty common to do but doesn't meet building regulations, and more importantly is likely to be lacking insulation so hot in summer and cold in winter.

it's more about the layout than the square footage.
dh and I are in a 1650 sq ft house and it is fine for 2 and can handle guests for a weekend but more than that and it is too small as no room for privacy.
open concept, one level.

we are in the process of going from 1250 ft larger new build three story townhouse to a detached 2000 ft house with 3 reception room, 4 double beds, 3 en suites.

For me, Id like about 350 sq ft more comprising of a small 5th bed/ office and a small conservatory but im very happy to have the house as it is.

Yes, i appreciate we could be very lucky... IF everything goes ok valuation and mortgage wise, it will be great at 2000 sq ft. never in my widlest dreams did i think we could be in such a fortunate position.

We are a family of 3 in 1000 sq ft and it's fine. We don't have a spare room but put our friends and family up in the hotel over the road when they come to stay.

Although it's ugly from the outside, the interior of our house is well designed, and flows well, and that's what makes it so 'livable'. That is just as important to me as the size.

I think it's absolutely fine for 4. You don't need the 4th bedroom on a permanent basis so you won't even notice that it's small. The flow looks pretty good to me, you have separate spaces downstairs which is good as children grow.

Ours isn't much bigger for 5 but it flows well.

What @whatsthecomingoverthehill said

A typical 3 bed semi (which pretty standard housing stock) is generally around 1000 square foot.

2000 square foot is a nice size house for 4 people.

You have three MASSIVE bedrooms and the 'little' room is big enough to put a double bed in it for your spare room if you wanted the two kids to have the two bigger beds.

It's obviously a smaller house that has been greatly extended. If you think you can get a house as original for the same money, I would prefer it.

Another point is that stairs and landings take up a lot of space, even though they might be included in the floor area. A bungalow is much roomier than a 3-storey house of the same footage.

Look for evidence of Building Control certification, especially for the loft conversion, as well as PP..

Remember that conservatories are not built to the same standards as houses, so it will cost more to heat and will be relatively badly insulated.

I mean seriously OP, so you struggle with day to day life? Because quite honestly , that's one of the more stupid questions I've seen on mumsnet.

This is like one of those threads where everyone clamours to say that £80k a year is really quite average and nothing to be proud of.

I'm sure I don't know what you mean. My preference is to have several wings on my house so everyone has a bit of room and we are not constantly tripping over the maid.

Our house is almost exactly the same square footage and it is a bigger than average semi, but by no means a mansion. However we have not extended into the loft or garage, so the OP's house is likely to have proportionally smaller rooms which will make it feel smaller but still a comfortable size for the average family.

Layout really does impact; with young children I find that horizontal living space is much more useful than vertical, we went from a 5 bed house over 2000sqft to a 3 bed approx 1200sqft house (rented) and the 3 bed is so much more useful to us as we never really used the top floor before and the halls,stairs etc took away really valuable
Living space. I think useable space is more important than overall sqft

We brought house 2300 sq 6 bedrooms down stairs WC with separate wetroom , upstairs family bathroom ,and shower room it's a big house and it's a huge plot

It’s not small. It’s tight because of the layout. Inefficient use of space, and not money well spent. Imagine 2000sqft in a flat, open plan or semi-open plan. It would feel enormous, airy, possibly too big.

I'm bemused. In what way is this large house not big enough? I've been racking my brains trying to think of what you and your family might do which would require more space? It's massively larger than most people have and has lots of rooms (which to my mind is much better than lots of open plan spaces in which you can annoy each other with your noise). If you want an even larger house and have the money to buy that, then sure, go ahead. But please don't call such a large house small

The thing is, it really doesn't matter if someone considers it big or small. What matters is whether it is big enough for you and your family to live in and to enjoy. When you looked at the house you must have thought so or you wouldn't have chosen it!

My entire house could fit on your second floor