Which house?

[Medoit]

just looking for some advice from the mumsnet hive. Relocating to a new city for work. 1 primary aged child and toddler.

first house is in a less ideal location but slightly bigger and no renovation needed.

2nd house is 100k less in an ideal location but would need renovations including reorganising downstairs (knocking down wall for new kitchen/diner as well as converting garage to reception room. We could buy it without selling our home (just with mortgage in principal, and then sell our home) but means we wouldn’t have any cash to renovate. Ideally would renovate before we move in. Once we spend the difference, the house would be lovely.

which house would you go for?

and secondly does have any advice about that kind of renovation and ideally could we live there whilst the work goes on? We don’t have the option to move

sorry if it’s a scrambled explanation but some third party advice would be great!

does it have to be either? would the extra £100k get you the ideal house in the ideal location with no renovations required? But it's a gamble if you wait for something to come on the market and it doesn't.

Unfortunately the ‘ideal’ location either has properties that are needing renovation and those that are renovated are just way out of our budget!

I'd go with worst house, best location. But I love a challenge. If you don't want to spend your spare time and money on your house, go for the done one.

I'd also go for the better location. As once you've spent the money you've got a great house in a great location.
I've always lived in the houses I've renovated as I've not been able to afford to live elsewhere. It's hard, stressful and takes longer, but I'm on site making sure everything is done right or doing it myself to save money. Renovations will go faster if you live of site, but you need to make sure you are visiting daily and talking to the tradesmen all the time as there will be constant decisions to be made and if you hold them up if unavailable then it won't go quickly at all.
If it's just the 2 things you've mentioned, ie knocking down a wall for new kitchen diner and a garage conversion, then that isn't particularly disruptive and I'd definitely live on site.

Personally I'd always go for the worst house in the best street. i.e. go for location.

As for renovations - as you have two young children I would do whatever possible to do as much of the messy work as you can BEFORE you move in. The work will then be quicker and maybe even cheaper. But obviously thats easier said than done but see if you can figure out a way to do at least the knocking down walls and kitchen so at least you can cook a meal as normal while going the rest of the works.

Good Luck whichever you decide.

If no other option then the renovation project

Thankyou for all your replies.

i definitely think the second house would be better overall. The thought of living through the renovations is just what scares me. We couldn’t move out for the entirety (due to costs).

I know it’s what the length of a length of string. What are rough timescales?
how messy realistically would the downstairs be? I’m guessing we would be limited to upstairs only

Definitely the 2nd house location is everything. You will have the money to do the renovations and it will be worth it when it's done

Worst house, best location