Small families with big houses

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m in the exurbs and many of my neighbors are empty nesters in 5k sq ft houses because there are no affordable smaller options. You either get McMansions or high density townhouse communities.

Yes, this is why we have a sfh. There are no in-between options here built after about 1960.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We moved from a 5,300 square foot house to a 9,000 square foot house for more room. It depends on what your hobbies and proclivities are when considering the amount of space needed for one's pleasure.

Very similar here - 4K to 9.5K sq. ft for a couple. We wanted a less crowded garage, separate rooms for individual offices, a large guest suite for visitors, and dedicated rooms for a a gym, golf simulator, music, and other interests.

This is shockingly wasteful. I hope your dreams are haunted by people who can't afford any place to live, much less a massive house for just two people.

DP. We are three people in 6,000+ sq ft. home. My dreams are not haunted by the fact that I bought a large house. We donate over $100,000 a year to one food insecurity charity as well as volunteer our time. What are you doing to help those less fortunate?

If that poster had the brains to snag someone who made serious money, she would be the first in line to have a similar house. As it is, she now must rely on the largesse of those like you to fund her non-profit non-anything job until she completes barista training.

Yikes! Are you OK? You sound unhinged.

What an odd comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:America is crazy, people think they need a separate room for everything. Gym, office, TV room, playroom, sitting room, etc. God forbid you have a guest stay in your office room! Or a desk in your playroom! I prefer smaller, older houses but I know I'm in the minority.

We have a 900 square foot house. The office due to work/school at home is completely filled with desks/computers. Where would we put a guest? There is no space in our bedroom for an air mattress for our kid either as it only holds a bed, nightstands and a dresser with a tiny bit of space in-between.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I originally came to this thread with the attitude of "hey, different strokes for different folks" -- I have never really though that hard about what other families do, as I like our family size and house size.

Reading the thread has made me a convert though: y'all are horrifying. These people talking about 5k, 6k, even 10k houses for 2-3 people? It's gross. The PP who said that at that point, it doesn't matter how environmentally conscious your house is, it's environmental impact is horrific? Is correct.

I don't care if you have a couple spare bedrooms or not, if you have a living room and den, whatever. But when the overall size of your home is this big, you are doing something really selfish. I don't know, I live in an apartment in the city. I get that other people want more space and I don't begrudge that. But there has to be something between the way I live (3 people in 1000 sq ft) and the way some of you all are living. It's just so obviously unsustainable! Good lord.

Why is it gross? If they can afford it, what's wrong with it. We have 1000 square feet too and its a struggle at times especially with work at home and kids in virtual learning. Not to mention, all the kid stuff.

The planet cannot afford it.

Sometimes those big houses are more energy efficient to heat/cool than a smaller house. Our utility bills are way higher with a tiny house than friends with larger houses due to insulation.

[Anonymous]

I’m curious how many of you that live like this give AF about anyone else or the planet. I find this kind of conspicuous consumption disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my searches in Arlington, there is often not that much of a price difference between well maintained, older 3-4 bedroom houses with 2500 sq ft (often around $1.5-$1.7 million) and relatively new McMansions with 5-6 bedrooms with 4000-5000 sq ft (often around $1.8-$2.0 million). So it can make lots of sense to just go for the bigger house, even if you don't really need the extra space.

In my N.Arl neighborhood every new build is 6-7 bedrooms and bathrooms, and many look like apartment buildings.

The builders make them this large because the lots are so expensive ($1 million+) that they have to build a huge house to reap a profit.

I know many downsizers and people with no kids or only 1-2 that are having trouble finding a home that is not a giant McMansion.

The smaller homes have huge bidding wars and go very, very fast.

Why can't the developer build a multi-family unit instead of one McMansion?

With upzoning coming to Arlington they will soon be able to do that. It will be like that house on Sycamore St. that is finally going to be a group home after years of people buying it, tinkering with it and trying to make it right. Many McMansions are built on the 10,000 square foot lots off Williamsburg Blvd which was once part of the Crossman dairy farm. Rather than having one McMansion per lot, a builder can build an eight plex or a small apartment building on the lot. The only glitch with all of this is that Arlington County has never measured the demand for parents with two kids to live on the top floor of quadraplex so that their kids could go to Tuckahoe, Nottingham, or Discovery. Nor did they measure the impact on infrastructure, parks, schools, parking, or rec centers. The people advocating for Missing Middle housing have a "if they build it they will come" philosophy.

I work for builders and it will be a boon to them because they obviously can make more money putting eight housing units on a lot rather than one. They can then rent the units and have great passive income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m curious how many of you that live like this give AF about anyone else or the planet. I find this kind of conspicuous consumption disgusting.

I live in a 2000 sq ft house and don't give AF about anyone else on the planet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is crazy, people think they need a separate room for everything. Gym, office, TV room, playroom, sitting room, etc. God forbid you have a guest stay in your office room! Or a desk in your playroom! I prefer smaller, older houses but I know I'm in the minority.

We have a 900 square foot house. The office due to work/school at home is completely filled with desks/computers. Where would we put a guest? There is no space in our bedroom for an air mattress for our kid either as it only holds a bed, nightstands and a dresser with a tiny bit of space in-between.

If you have a 900sf house I don't think you are an example of what PP is talking about...?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We moved from a 5,300 square foot house to a 9,000 square foot house for more room. It depends on what your hobbies and proclivities are when considering the amount of space needed for one's pleasure.

Very similar here - 4K to 9.5K sq. ft for a couple. We wanted a less crowded garage, separate rooms for individual offices, a large guest suite for visitors, and dedicated rooms for a a gym, golf simulator, music, and other interests.

This is shockingly wasteful. I hope your dreams are haunted by people who can't afford any place to live, much less a massive house for just two people.

If you'd like to house homeless people, feel free to invite them to live with you, but why criticize those who are able to live as they choose? Jealousy?

NP here: Overconsumption like that leaves one open to criticism. Even if that house is a LEED-certified energy-efficient marvel, the amount of materials and space used for a house of that size is indefensible. I’m not jealous of people in houses like that. I’m depressed that they think it’s fine, and that there are thousands (millions?) of people who feel the same.

Indefensible, I’m not jealous, I’m not depressed? A lot to unpack here. Ugh this is what is wrong with our country in 2022. I’m a left coaster who doesn’t like the McCraftsman sprawl of NoVA but cmon this is just one out of a million lifestyle choices with carbon footprint implications. Define overconsumption. Should I lecture you to never fly on a jet airplane, drive, have children, or use air conditioning? Let them live in their big houses, this is America for crying out loud. Should we aspire for govt that tells people how to live their lives, maybe like Saudi Arabia which decides what women are and aren’t allowed to do. Oops soon that’ll be us too?

Of course people can have these houses. Where in that post does it say otherwise? But people judge others for their decisions all the time. I think people who build too-large houses are selfish. That doesn’t mean I’m advocating for them to be banned.

There is nothing, let me repeat, nothing, more damaging to the future of the planet than overpopulation. So, regardless of how many bedrooms your house has - three, four? gasp, and you have THREE living spaces!!! a formal dining room is a WASTE! - if you are having kids at all, you have already done your damage. It's fun to watch y'all argue though. Carry on.

How many trees were felled to make that McMansion? How much oil was used to transport the lumber? Should we talk about the amount of metal used and the environmental cost of said extraction so you can have a mini castle? What's killing the environment is not the amount of people, it's the rabid over consumption. The US is leading the charge big plates, big bellies, big cars x2/3, big houses, bed beds (California King?!)

Maybe the United States is not a good fit for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My husband and i moved into a 7800 sqft home with 7 bedrooms and we love it. We have a yoga room, 2 offices, and lots of room for family and guests. Highly recommend it!

This seems tone-deaf to "highly recommend" something that many can't afford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m curious how many of you that live like this give AF about anyone else or the planet. I find this kind of conspicuous consumption disgusting.

I live in a 2000 sq ft house and don't give AF about anyone else on the planet.

dp If people feel the same way that you do about other people I can see why the world is the way it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I originally came to this thread with the attitude of "hey, different strokes for different folks" -- I have never really though that hard about what other families do, as I like our family size and house size.

Reading the thread has made me a convert though: y'all are horrifying. These people talking about 5k, 6k, even 10k houses for 2-3 people? It's gross. The PP who said that at that point, it doesn't matter how environmentally conscious your house is, it's environmental impact is horrific? Is correct.

I don't care if you have a couple spare bedrooms or not, if you have a living room and den, whatever. But when the overall size of your home is this big, you are doing something really selfish. I don't know, I live in an apartment in the city. I get that other people want more space and I don't begrudge that. But there has to be something between the way I live (3 people in 1000 sq ft) and the way some of you all are living. It's just so obviously unsustainable! Good lord.

Why is it gross? If they can afford it, what's wrong with it. We have 1000 square feet too and its a struggle at times especially with work at home and kids in virtual learning. Not to mention, all the kid stuff.

The planet cannot afford it.

+1. People on this board are so shocked when people are critical of their gas-guzzling, energy-sucking, suburban sprawl lifestyle. How dare you comment on the choices I make that directly impact others and the future of the planet!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is crazy, people think they need a separate room for everything. Gym, office, TV room, playroom, sitting room, etc. God forbid you have a guest stay in your office room! Or a desk in your playroom! I prefer smaller, older houses but I know I'm in the minority.

We have a 900 square foot house. The office due to work/school at home is completely filled with desks/computers. Where would we put a guest? There is no space in our bedroom for an air mattress for our kid either as it only holds a bed, nightstands and a dresser with a tiny bit of space in-between.

It's wasteful to have a room solely dedicated to people who don't live with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lucky them. We're a family of 4 in a 2500 square foot house and it is not enough room. My teenage daughter won't have her friends over and my college-age kids wants his girlfriend to visit but there's nowhere for her to stay. I wuold love to have 5 or more bedrooms, especially as kids age and have different needs.

Why is this not enough space? We are moving into a home that has 4 bedrooms + formal dining/game room and is roughly 2500 sq feet. We have 2 el aged kids, why do you feel this is not enough space?

Seems perfect!

[Anonymous]

Well, I didn’t build a 3800 sq ft house, we bought it from someone else. What do you want me to do? Tear it down and build a small one?

Gross are people who are building new McMansions.