Amazing house - but who needs so much land?

[SequinBear]

Disclaimer - not my house, and also not a house I'm looking to buy. I'm looking in this kind of area, but my budget is significantly lower (less than a third of this house).

This house is obviously awesome, and I love all the luxury touches like the underground garage, the (freshwater?) pool, the alcohol pantry, etc.

But even if I could afford it and want it (it's also a bit too remote for me), who on earth needs 10 acres of land? That amount of land would actually put me off.

I appreciate it wouldn't be as easy as selling it, because then it might be built on and you wouldn't have the control of how it was used around you, but the maintenance of it would just be enormously costly and inconvenient, surely. And even if you could afford it, the mental load of having to be on top of it feels like way too much.

Do people wanting and affording these kinds of houses want that much land too? (Appreciate there are people who want horses and stables, but this doesn't look like the current set-up here - though appreciate you could maybe add all of that).

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/151929650?utm_medium=email&utm_source=emailupdates&utm_campaign=emailupdatesinstant&utm_term=buying&onetime_FromEmail=true&sc_id=48474300&utm_content=v2-ealertspropertyimage&cid=87dc833e-0e46-41ec-af8e-f618b4d86234&csg=5b9eb1dcedb5d4fa2f77cf9f5c4ef2b83ec1e48ecc3e0340308f070bad354694#/?channel=RES_BUY

Agreed, it's a very sympathetic restoration/ renovation.

In my own opinion, from spending far too much time on Rightmove, there are 3 main ways period properties appear to be renovated.

Keep the outer shell but make everything in the interior ultra modern

Completely renovate to original standard with often hidden sympathetic additions to make it comfortable like electricity, plumbing, central heating etc. Often done on Grade 1 and 2 listed buildings, many building restrictions on what can be done, endless meetings, inspections and unforseen costs.

Buy an old but unlisted property, do basically what you like to it inside and out to your own taste, within any planning and building regs approvals of course.

It's the latter category which attracts most comment, personal taste differs tremendously, as can be seen on this thread.

Some people think it's lovely, others don't.

Happily have 10 acres - daughter has horses, and we have the equipment to look after the land, but who needs THREE luxury en suites AND one with a separate bathroom as well as an extra bathroom and a downstairs loo. All those loos to clean and only a 5 bed house.
I wouldn't pay that much to have a footpath alongside my driveway and past the house though!

The biggest problem with it is it in Chesterfield which is a shit hole stuck in the 1980s (and not the good bit of the 80seither)
😂

I agree OP, it’s a good philosophical question. Not sure why people have to so be rude in the replies but hey, MN attracts them. Does a house and land that big bring you more happiness is really what we’re asking. For me it wouldn’t because the mental load would be too much. I’d want to actually bump into my children and I’d want close proximity in the living areas to maintain family intimacy.

The furniture is hideous.. with some less ostentatious/formal/reproduction crap the whole house would look different.

Never mind the land, who needs that much house?!
As beautiful as it is, the same disadvantages apply to the house itself as much as the land.

The whole house looks a bit "this room's too big - let's shove a random chair or sofa over there to make it look more lived in"!

Gutted there's no pictures of the underground garage. I bet there's an immense car collection in there!

Love the idea of woodlands. Any open areas I'd probably have some sheep to keep on top of the grass.

I'd get a pack of dogs and spend ages just walking around my own land, not having to worry about other idiotic dog owners with their out of control dogs!

If you have such a huge house I'd want land, and 10 acres is not that much at all - I was expecting it to be several hundred by your post.

Different strokes for different folks. I'd rather a less luxurious house but 10 acres would be awesome. I'd fill it with animals and crops

People do love the word hideous on here, especially in relation to someone else’s home when it’s better than theirs 😂

I see very little difference between the two except the first is sandstone and light wood and painted bright and the second one is tudor effect, dark stained and painted darker to feel more enclosed.

They are both historic character houses, in land with with wood beams that have been modernized with similar glass extension additions, modern bathrooms etc...

If anything the original one does it more uniformed than the latter.

What a weird response to assume someone was jealous? It's an ugly, pretentious house, that response is perfectly reasonable.

But it's not lovely, only you and a couple of others seem to think that

You're very invested in defending this house with all the over laughing emojis....

My house is on 1 acre. Its actually not as much as you think! 10 of my plot, would s tuskky be fab. More room for gardens, a lake, veg patch, a meadow. Always wanted to plant a woodland. My idea of bliss.

P.s. That house is hideous!

www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/146641607?utm_campaign=property-details&utm_content=buying&utm_medium=sharing&utm_source=copytoclipboard#/&channel=RES_BUY

58 acres..... Much nicer house too

People wandering off the path and all over your land. Picnics on your land. Dogs off leash, dog mess everywhere. Kids on trail bikes creating noise and destroying the surface of the footpath which you may be responsible to maintain. If you have pets or let the land for say horses or sheep, idiots feeding them very unsuitable things, dogs worrying sheep and other animals and you having enormous vet bills.

Then there's what happens when you try to explain to these lovely folks that they need to move, clear up their mess, keep their dogs on a leash, not do xyz on YOUR land then discover how belligerent, argumentative and scary they can be.
Have a look on the Rural Living board.

I also though this. There's a lot about this house that I find confusing!

They show the car collection and garage on the virtual tour. I was surprised given it shows actual number plates without blurring them out, actually.

Privacy! Land grants you privacy like nothing else. I’ve just finished renting a place with 3 acres and just being able to literally take my dc on a walk in my garden that looked like a park it was so beautiful without dogs running up me every 5 seconds with mud all over them is so wonderful. (since covid it seems this is definitely a thing that’s occurring more and more)
even able to have a picnic without anyone ruining it which used to happen all the time when I went to the woods for one. Dc were able to cycle all around it without me fearing much happening. It felt so free as we’d previously lived in a house with a tiny garden.

Also had the big house, was so so fun. I’d not enter rooms for a while then just go and chill out in a room that was completely clear of clutter and dc junk because I never go in it and had the space to leave it alone until I wanted it. Also when guests came I always always had a spare room they could go in without wondering if the dc had wrecked it in between the last clean…

Or how about this place in Norfolk? If 10 acres is a bit much, this has 44 acres

A 1960s house of 6,300 sq ft (585 sq metres) with 44 acres of land (including some forest and a walled garden - also part of the land is used by the local village cricket club!)

Asking price £1,550,000 although I do see that it went to best & final offers in July and is now under offer so it likely went for quite a bit more than that

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/148941848#/?channel=RES_BUY

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if the people who have bought this might not just knock it down and rebuild, although that would be a pity as I do like some 1960s houses.

There's a very subtle difference. The original house is all neat new wood, no character or warmth or any sort of historical feature that looks like it might be original. The one I posted (I didn't search too hard) has old beams with history and less harsh edges. It is softer,

The original has also committed an unforgivable sin by lowering the ceiling to cut across the brick arches of the windows on one of the pictures - this pretty much sums it up really.

The original house has nothing that makes it look like a "historical character property" as it has nothing that looks historical or characterful. It looks like a new build fake.

It's criminal they've painted over those beams! It's all very footballer's wife hun grey, isn't it. I can see the benefits of having nobody living near, mind.

Are you looking at a different house? It’s mainly beige tan and cream.