What sq ft is ideal for family of 5?

[ThisSharpNavyRaven]

We are London based so space is hugely expensive, but very lucky and have chosen an area in which we can buy quite a large property. DH and I are slightly at loggerheads as he is insisting on vetoeing anywhere with less than 2000sq ft, whereas I think layout can have a big impact on the 'liveability' of a house.

He'd rather buy somewhere massive where we'd have to do serious renovations (the only way we could afford a huge house in the area). I'd rather buy somewhere smaller if it was perfectly laid out and all done. We saw a 4 bed that's 1800sq ft that I love, with an incredible garden, but he's point blank saying it's too small.

Expecting third child, which is why we are upsizing, and would like to hear opinions about the optimal amount of space for 3 growing kids.
Thanks!

I suppose it depends on whether any of you WFH or not and want separate space for an office.
We are in a 3-bed with a useless conservatory pushing ever so slightly over 1500 sq.ft. and I still want more space - room in the loft so we can turn one of the bedrooms into an office. Would love to have a playroom but that is currently the living room and bound to be like that until they are old enough to play in their rooms independently. I only have 2 kids and could easily fill a 2000 sq ft property with our lifestyle (both WFH a few days per week), hobbies, need for storage etc.

Yes we are currently bursting at the seams of a terraced 1600 sq ft property. But, it's really not well laid out. All the space is vertical, whereas the 1800 we saw was so much wider so the living space just worked better. There was a playroom etc. But DH works from home 2 days a week so it's essentially a 3 bed, with one a small nursery. His point is that there's no point moving and spending a lot more for only a little bit more space, which I do understand.
Tricky!!

I think the layout /use of space matters. We are a family of 5 in 2,500 sqft and I feel like I rattle around, often the only person downstairs in the evenings when DH is working.

We have 2 very large bedrooms, 1 decent size one and 2 small bedrooms. It would be better if one of the small ones had some space off one of the bigger ones, so the kids rooms were more equal.

I don’t think square footage matters so much as number of rooms and layout.
Personally I like a huge amount of living space but I don’t mind if bedrooms are tiny. So a massive square footage because the bedrooms are huge is not a good use of my money.

I agree that layout matters as much if not more than square footage. We have just over 1600sq ft but it functions like a smaller house because the layout is poor.

Just as a side note, don't underestimate the cost of renovations! We're doing a little extension and rejigging our poor layout later this year and it's eye watering, I don't think buying a 'doer upper' is as efficient now as it was a few years ago sadly.

It’s the layout of a house that is so important. Also need to think ahead so the house is big enough for all your future needs.

I think anywhere between 1500-2000sqt is ample provided it's laid out to suit you as a family. Agree with a pp - renovation cost is massive at the moment. I think 1800sft done would be a good option.

Can you show us the floor plan?

The m2 you can afford?

Ideal I suppose is a bedroom for each child, a master bedroom, a kitchen with space for a dinner table/a living room/an utililty room/an office and 2 bathrooms. A garden and parking.

The layout is tbh more important than m2. And sometimes the price and location.

We have less m2 because we live in an expensive area of the city and like it here. We could buy bigger in another part of city but chose not to.

We are a family of 4 in an 1850sft house - we have two living rooms, medium/large kitchen, 5 bedrooms and an oversized bathroom, ensuite and downstairs loo. We could easily fit another child in and have an office/spare room. Our layout could be better but it feels like loads of space. We are quite ruthless about ‘stuff’ though - we have an undercroft but limited internal storage with a converted roof space. Do you have large stuff to store like bikes, body boards, skis?

I would absolutely buy the lovely 4 bed! Hope you find somewhere great OP.

We’re a family of 5 in a 1750sqft house and I feel like we’re bursting at the seams. Our 4th bedroom is tiny. We’re upsizing this year and looking for around 2000sqft.

Thanks all! You have given me more resolve to argue my case on the 1800sq ft! Going to show DH these responses. It would definitely improve our quality of life with the better layout and amazing garden. Has off street parking, and also could do a loft conversion if we did get to the stage where we want an extra bedroom/office space. I don't think I have a renovation project in me, especially with a baby on the way and two other small kids.

If the 1800sq ft place is a true 4 bed and still has the loft to convert, then that is a no brainer for me - you’ll have storage space now and potential for more space later, especially if the living space is a good layout. Also, if it has a decent size garden you can put a garden office in as well. I would also not underestimate the value of off road parking in London - we’ve moved from having a drive to not having one as it was one of the compromises we had to make to size
up and I’m worried about needing to get an electric car now!

I live in a well laid out 1350sq ft terrace. Just me and teen DD. My 20 year old son occasionally visits and it's too crowded. Plus my room and guest room are not big (my DD has the loft with en suite). I can see a family here (many family of fours around), but not when kids are pretty much grown!
I'd say 2000sq ft is a good size, but you are right the layout has to work too. I have had a house 2750 and the guest room was huge and we had a dining room too we barely used. And a sun room for daytime and living room for evening - quite liked that! My son also had a separate games room (but two kids not three).

We are a family of 5 in an 1800sq ft house. We have 4 bedrooms, 2.5 bathrooms, a double reception room, kitchen diner, playroom, utility room. It is OK for us right now as our youngest is 2. I wfh occasionally and both DH and I have desk space to do admin even when we don't wfh. Our house had been renovated when we moved in - already had a loft conversion and back extension. I wouldn't have the stomach to renovate with under 5s - too stressful and dusty, and I'd resent it eating into our free time as a family. Very expensive now in London too.

Personally I think it will be a squeeze for teens (and older - I think there's a good chance that the dcs might live here through uni and early career as that's so common in London now). Unlike pp, I don't like small bedrooms, I think older dcs like to spend time in their rooms and should have space for a desk, wardrobe plus floor space for things like Lego projects and art projects etc.

Our layout isn't optimal and I think our master bedroom is too big and one of our other bedrooms is too small. And I don't like the open plan layout as I'd like to have more privacy when at my desk. We definitely aren't ruthless declutterers and we are at the "big toy" stage. I'm sure things will look different when the dc's entertainment narrows to a tablet and smartphone.

Personally if I was plucking a figure out of the air, 2000sq ft seems about right. But for us that would have meant not living in such a central/convenient location. I love closing my front door and being on the tube within 5 mins, or walking to my office in 25 mins so the compromise has been worth it.

We moved out of a house which was about 1700 sq foot. It was great when the kids (x 3) were little but when the youngest reached about 3 it was just too small. There was no cellar and only a tiny shed and although the layout was pretty standard for London (through lounge and big kitchen diner downstairs, good bedrooms and 2 baths upstairs plus good loft room upstairs) it just wouldn’t have worked longer term and was starting to affect how we lived. Main issues were-

• very small utility downstairs so no room to dry clothes (meaning they were always having to dry on an airer in someone’s bedroom);
• the downstairs was basically a massive interconnected room so if 2 people wanted to watch different things on TV, or one person wanted to do something in peace or cook it wasn’t possible (there was a glass door but it obviously allowed sound through);
• nowhere to keep bikes, camping equipment etc apart from eaves storage (for tent) which meant it was really difficult to find stuff and made me stressed;
• no dedicated office space (2 adults working from home 2/3 days a week);
• playroom was the walk through bit at the end of the lounge so I was always treading on Lego and couldn’t “shut it off”;
• storage for coats, shoes, pram, scooters all very tight.

I had thought about rejigging the downstairs to have a bigger utility and then separate off the front lounge, and then using the front upstairs bedroom as a separate study/ spare room but we still wouldn’t have solved most of our issues and would have been expensive so we decided to move out. We now have a bit of a money pit but the separate study, cellar, garage and massive storage cupboards have made my life so much easier!

So broadly I agree that layout makes a difference but if I were you, subject to other things being equal, I would go for a bigger place needing work to be sure it will last you for a decent period (unless you want to move again anyway). Try to imagine living there with 3 teens, one practising a musical instrument, one doing some shouty gaming and the other needing to do homework, whilst someone else works from home, plus all the other accoutrements of modern life with 5 grown people (clothes, sports stuff, hobby stuff, work stuff) and stress test the house to see if it would work in that situation.

We have 1650 for 4 of us, it’s a good layout so works.

downstairs is a good sized sitting room, open plan kitchen living and dining which gives us the second living area, downstairs loo and utility room.

upstairs is 4 double bedrooms although one is a small double and 2 bathrooms, one ensuite.

we moved from 2200 sweet with an amazing downstairs but not great upstairs layout.

i would like one more room downstairs, say an office but 2 of my 3 kids are uni aged so I bought this house for my future rather than as a family if that makes sense

There is so much food for thought here, I really appreciate it. @hopenaty and @Heronwatcher those are really interesting thoughts and exactly what I need - perspective from people a few years further along the kid timeline than us! We would definitely be hoping this house will last us until the kids leave home, so it's useful to know teens need more space.

The lovely 1800 sq ft house has huge front room, separate play room/snug and a huge open plan kitchen diner open on to the massive, beautiful garden. These are all the pros, along with off street parking and side return for bikes etc. and the fact that it's all done beautifully and in the perfect area.

However, the first floor I'm worried is just not adequate for us. There's a good size master with an ensuite shower room (no loo). A decent sized second bedroom which my oldest two could share for another 6 years or so. Another decent sized bedroom which is currently used as an office/spare room, and a teeny tiny nursery in which a proper single bed would be a squeeze.

In other words, fine whilst we're in the baby years but as soon as the youngest needed a proper room we'd have no office or spare room, and my mum stays a lot. And when the oldest two need their own room we'd have to do a loft conversion. Also, due to conservation area issues I think we'd only get one good sized room from the loft.

Sorry for the essay! I'm thinking aloud really but people have had such useful insights. There's another house which has just come up on the next road, pretty much identical but they've done the loft. I think it would be worth viewing to compare. It's £100,000 more which seems a lot for a loft conversion which would cost around £50,000, but of course without the hassle of having to do it!

Also there's no utility. That seems like such an unattainable luxury in our area of London that I'd hadn't really considered it as a possibility, and we've been living without one for so long. But maybe it would massively improve my quality of life to have one! Especially with a third kid on the way...

Ours is 1500 and fine for a family of 4 plus one office/spare room. Layout matters and we don't have dead space

Our house is large compared to what many families have I should add - personally I chose location though, my dc are leaving home (one gone prior to buying, one going this summer and one currently house hunting

We have about 1900sq ft for our family of 4. Classic victorian mid terrace with side return and loft conversion. So not massive but works well for us! Double reception room, eat in kitchen, downstairs loo. 3 double beds and a large bathroom on the middle floor. 2 more bedrooms, shower room and small roof terrace at the top. We 5 beds and use the smallest which I’d describe as a large single room, at a push might get a double bed in if it was pushed up against the wall, as an office. Have a lot of clever built in storage and are ruthless with chucking stuff out. No utility but have a stacked washer and dryer in a cupboard in the loft conversion which is fine. We won’t be having a 3rd I don’t think but it’s not due to lack of space! I think the issue with the house you’ve viewed is not so much the total area but that it’s bottom heavy and 4 beds where one is a box room isn’t going to work for a family of 5 also need a WFH office.

Also re prices, I think you’re a bit naive to think you could do a full loft conversion, including presumably fitting out a bathroom, for 50k in London.

I'd say 4 good sized beds and a garden office would be fine. Useful to have a good sized kitchen diner, storage, and a snug/playroom and living room if possible. I don't think there's much more you get from a huge house other than extra cleaning and repairs.

Also, just to say, in contrast the other house we have viewed is over 3000 sq ft, on an even better road in the same area and is the same price. However would need full renovation. It's not uninhabitable but would need major work before it would be adequate for our needs. And they've taken up a third of the not huge garden with a ridiculous self contained studio shed which is completely unnecessary for our needs considering it's a 6 bed with 4 reception rooms...

What must come before the "Sq feet" is the number of rooms required and the make-up of the family and family dynamics.
Then consider the number of bathrooms, separate w/c's required etc and also consider if OSP is required as well as transport links. The the "sq footage" Thanks.