How big is your ideal house for 4?

[HouseCart]

In square feet, for family of 4. Both parents WFH. What would be your minimum and ideal? Im thinking 1500 & 2500? I know layout and garage, drive, garden adds to requirements.

Average in UK is 750ft, and 700ft in London...

@SD25

Average in UK is 750ft, and 700ft in London...

Quite.

@SD25

Average in UK is 750ft, and 700ft in London...

Average for 4 occupants, or average of all homes?

That average of 750ft must be across all dwellings though, not family homes - the 2 bed terrace we lived in before we were married was about that. It was a nice size for a 2 bed but is in no way representative of the average size of a house around here, where most of the housing stock is either 1930s semis of around 1100-1300sqft or large Victorian terraces of 4 beds plus (couldn't guess the sq footage of those, but certainly much larger than the 2 bed we lived in).

Ours is about 1700 sq ft, but it has 5 double bedrooms, two bathrooms and a separate living room and eat-in kitchen. (Victorian terrace over 3 floors).

Downstairs is not the ideal shape, being narrow and deep, but I wouldn’t say that more space overall is needed. The other houses mentioned upthread sound enormous!

I've just tried to find a 2000 sq ft house where I live. The ones I found were double our budget.

Ours is around 1250, and there are 4 adults. It is very well laid out with not much lost space. We manage fine.

@Whatiswrongwithmyknee

It's beyond bonkers to describe a 2000ft house as normal - what world are people living in?! Great and maybe ideal but definitely not normal.

Ours is about 1650 and feels massive. We'd like bigger rooms (some) but there is no way it can be considered anything other than spacious - 2 adults and 2 teens.

I agree. Ok so our bedrooms aren't huge (average of 3 x 3.5m) but not tiny either. However our kitchen is 4.5x8m, our lounge is 4x7m, we have 2 bathrooms and a utility room and a big hallway and it is 1600sq ft. 3 bedrooms only but it's for 4 of us so fine. We would consider our house pretty big in comparison to most.

Never quite sure where those averages come from, is it all housing stock, new builds, etc? The ONS had some figures here for the average size of houses sold by year, with it being about 90m2. But there might be a higher turnover of smaller houses which would skew the figures. Also, should really be median figures as otherwise really big houses would skew it as well. Purely from observation (and probably completely wrong), I would say the average family house is 3-4 bedroom, semi-detached, about 1000sqft.

@emsyj37

That average of 750ft must be across all dwellings though, not family homes - the 2 bed terrace we lived in before we were married was about that. It was a nice size for a 2 bed but is in no way representative of the average size of a house around here, where most of the housing stock is either 1930s semis of around 1100-1300sqft or large Victorian terraces of 4 beds plus (couldn't guess the sq footage of those, but certainly much larger than the 2 bed we lived in).

Most families don’t live in “family homes” though, not where I live. That would be a dream scenario. Families of four live in two-bed flats, commonly. Some are in one-bed flats. My family of five is in a two-bed terraced house. Obviously, some families must live in large Victorian houses, but most I know are in ex-local authority flats or one floor of a converted house. Talk on here of a utility room, a downstairs loo, a garage are ideal dream scenarios that most people don’t have. I would like these, too, but there’s no space.

Average size of a new build 3 bed house in the Uk is about 947 sq ft according to RIBA estimates.

Ours is 1050sq ft approx. It's ok for three but does feel crowded when DD1 is home from university and there are four of us. Also there's not much privacy, if either of our teens want to have friends back. A downstairs loo (& shower?) would make a huge difference I think.

Are you in London @daisypond? I have lived in London, although only for a few years and it was pre-DC. We lived in a largish 2 bed flat for a year, then moved to a 2 bed terrace. Only renting though, we didn't buy. The house we live in now is only worth slightly more than the terraced house we rented in London!

@emsyj37

Are you in London *@daisypond*? I have lived in London, although only for a few years and it was pre-DC. We lived in a largish 2 bed flat for a year, then moved to a 2 bed terrace. Only renting though, we didn't buy. The house we live in now is only worth slightly more than the terraced house we rented in London!

I am.

Ours is large but you get used to what you have and that then makes anything less seem small

The title of the thread was 'what is your ideal size of house for 4 people' though, not what do you or the people you know live in. Hence why people have talked about all the nice times haves as well as the actual space.

I appreciate people live in all kinds of size of house, but location is also hugely influential on that. I don't know any families in my rural location who live in a flat for example. I knew a couple of people who did in their twenties but we don't even have a city in my county so most people have moved from the (small) town centre to live in houses with gardens. Obviously that's not going to be possible for everybody in London!

*nice to haves!

Exactly. But size isn’t the important thing here, I’d say. Number of rooms are. My ideal house would have a utility room, downstairs loo and three bedrooms. I’d rather have smaller rooms but more of them.

I think people are perhaps taking exception at the OP saying things like “It does feel … the typical minimum for 4 is around 1500” when the majority of people will be living in much less.

@user512 :57user512

@surreygirl1987 I'd be careful opting for all open plan, works great with younger kids but as they get older you appreciate the lots of rooms for various reasons!

Thanks yes, you have a good point! I absolutely love open plan but if it doesn't work later on we can get pocket doors put in. There is an additional downstairs room separate as well so it's not entirely open plan, just kitchen/living room/dining room.

Depends so much on the layout, it's hard to say from sq ft/m

At least 2500 sq.ft. Each bedroom should decent wardrobe space. In the UK, too many houses have ‘double’ bedrooms crammed in which can barely hold a double bed. A double bed is not big enough for two adults anyway, needs to be king size at least. The you see bedroom that have the tiniest wardrobe or no wardrobe. Kitchens with a sofa crammed it. It’s either a proper kitchen dining living or just a kitchen. So many badly partitioned rooms to create extra tiny rooms and inflate prices of houses. Sq.ft matters, because it tells you how much house you are getting for your money. I am shocked at how many people fall for number of bedrooms rather than looking at sq.ft.

@daisypond

Exactly. But size isn’t the important thing here, I’d say. Number of rooms are. My ideal house would have a utility room, downstairs loo and three bedrooms. I’d rather have smaller rooms but more of them.

Yes but what good is that if it crammed into tiny sq.ft. You can get any number of rooms you want m, but without space, it’s just a series of claustrophobic boxes.

daisypond I disagree, I had a 4 bedroom 1280 square foot house new build house with lots of rooms and it was too cramped. Downstairs there was a kitchen you could fit a small table in, loo, dining room, utility room, lots living room, study, tiny hallway. Upstairs was 4 bedroom, 2 with en-suite and a bathroom. Upstairs was ok but downstairs there were too many doors and the main issue was a tiny hall. There wasn’t enough room for us all to put out shoes on at the same time before going out. I only lived there for three and a half years.

“I am shocked at how many people fall for number of bedrooms rather than looking at sq.ft.”

Perhaps their budget doesn’t afford the luxury of additional square footage?

My house is a two-bed, but the main bedroom is quite large - about 18 feet long, I think. The size of the room is actually too big, and it would be better and more useful if it was two bedrooms. As it is, our three teens shared that one room. I agree that adding en suites into bedrooms can wreck the usable space, though. I personally would rather have a smaller kitchen - not that it’s big in the first place, only a galley - and have a downstairs loo - because that would make living in a house for five people easier.