How much square footage would you want for a family of five?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we agree that not many people who could comfortably afford a 10,000 sf house would happily prefer/choose to live in a modest <2,000 sf house?

No. The point is that in DC, you have to choose space or commute. The question needs to specify location. There are very, very, very few 10000 sf homes in DC or close in. Those few go for $8M+ in NW DC. You'd have to move to Potomac to buy a 10000sf home for $2M. OTOH, $2M in DC will buy you a 3000 sf home in a nice neighborhood in DC. There are significant number of people in DC who can afford a $2M home, but not $8M. (I'm the PP who was concerned about the driving. I do not want my boys to be driving River Road drunk or high when they are in high school, so if I had $2M to spend, I'd rather buy close in where they have easy access to Metro and cabs --while teaching them how to drive, of course.)

$2M can get you anywhere from 3,500 to 7,000 square feet in "nice" DC neighborhoods right now.

I don't think a typical person wants to have drunk or high high-schoolers who will either embarass themselves in front of other passengers on a Metro or feel entitled to hail cabs to ferry them around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we agree that not many people who could comfortably afford a 10,000 sf house would happily prefer/choose to live in a modest <2,000 sf house?

No. The point is that in DC, you have to choose space or commute. The question needs to specify location. There are very, very, very few 10000 sf homes in DC or close in. Those few go for $8M+ in NW DC. You'd have to move to Potomac to buy a 10000sf home for $2M. OTOH, $2M in DC will buy you a 3000 sf home in a nice neighborhood in DC. There are significant number of people in DC who can afford a $2M home, but not $8M. (I'm the PP who was concerned about the driving. I do not want my boys to be driving River Road drunk or high when they are in high school, so if I had $2M to spend, I'd rather buy close in where they have easy access to Metro and cabs --while teaching them how to drive, of course.)

$2M can get you anywhere from 3,500 to 7,000 square feet in "nice" DC neighborhoods right now.

I don't think a typical person wants to have drunk or high high-schoolers who will either embarass themselves in front of other passengers on a Metro or feel entitled to hail cabs to ferry them around.

I'd rather have an embarrassing and entitled teenager than a dead one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'd rather have an embarrassing and entitled teenager than a dead one.

Had not realized the choice was so stark and that Potomac was such a suburban death-trap.

Still, if the choice is between 10,000 SF in Potomac and 2,000 SF in NW, I'll take Door No. 1. It's worked out OK so far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'd rather have an embarrassing and entitled teenager than a dead one.

Had not realized the choice was so stark and that Potomac was such a suburban death-trap.

Still, if the choice is between 10,000 SF in Potomac and 2,000 SF in NW, I'll take Door No. 1. It's worked out OK so far.

Perhaps you haven't heard the drag racing that goes on weekend nights on River Road in Potomac. I'm surprised the police haven't done a better job of cracking down on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we agree that not many people who could comfortably afford a 10,000 sf house would happily prefer/choose to live in a modest <2,000 sf house?

Seems like a fair assumption.

Yes, recent posts support the assumption as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'd rather have an embarrassing and entitled teenager than a dead one.

Had not realized the choice was so stark and that Potomac was such a suburban death-trap.

Still, if the choice is between 10,000 SF in Potomac and 2,000 SF in NW, I'll take Door No. 1. It's worked out OK so far.

Perhaps you haven't heard the drag racing that goes on weekend nights on River Road in Potomac. I'm surprised the police haven't done a better job of cracking down on that.

Perhaps you haven't read about the drug dealing that goes on every night on Wisconsin Avenue and Georgia Avenue in DC. I'm not surprised the police haven't done a better job of cracking down on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we agree that not many people who could comfortably afford a 10,000 sf house would happily prefer/choose to live in a modest <2,000 sf house?

Count me in as someone who has absolutely no desire to live in a 10,000 sf house, even if I were a billionaire. I prefer cozy to cavernous. 2000-2500 sf feels like plenty of space for a family of 4 or 5 and even though we can afford a much bigger house than that, choose not to. I find wasted space and rarely used rooms depressing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we agree that not many people who could comfortably afford a 10,000 sf house would happily prefer/choose to live in a modest <2,000 sf house?

Count me in as someone who has absolutely no desire to live in a 10,000 sf house, even if I were a billionaire. I prefer cozy to cavernous. 2000-2500 sf feels like plenty of space for a family of 4 or 5 and even though we can afford a much bigger house than that, choose not to. I find wasted space and rarely used rooms depressing.

Me, too!

[Anonymous]

I agree that 10,000 sf is just too much. But I'd find 2000 sf too cramped. For our family of 5, 4500sf seems just right. And we could comfortably afford about $3.5M.

[Anonymous]

My mother is a residential architect. Those in her profession agree that most families could live very comfortably in 2000 sq ft, providing that it was well designed. When people actually calculate which rooms they use (and not just to store stuff) and how often vs the amount of sq footage dedicated to the room, they are usually surprised by the results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we agree that not many people who could comfortably afford a 10,000 sf house would happily prefer/choose to live in a modest <2,000 sf house?

Count me in as someone who has absolutely no desire to live in a 10,000 sf house, even if I were a billionaire. I prefer cozy to cavernous. 2000-2500 sf feels like plenty of space for a family of 4 or 5 and even though we can afford a much bigger house than that, choose not to. I find wasted space and rarely used rooms depressing.

Me too. I'd pick 2,000 sf over 10,000 sf (or even 5,000) every time. There is no chance that I would ever willingly live in a house that size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we agree that not many people who could comfortably afford a 10,000 sf house would happily prefer/choose to live in a modest <2,000 sf house?

Count me in as someone who has absolutely no desire to live in a 10,000 sf house, even if I were a billionaire. I prefer cozy to cavernous. 2000-2500 sf feels like plenty of space for a family of 4 or 5 and even though we can afford a much bigger house than that, choose not to. I find wasted space and rarely used rooms depressing.

Me too. I'd pick 2,000 sf over 10,000 sf (or even 5,000) every time. There is no chance that I would ever willingly live in a house that size.

I couldn't agree more.

[Anonymous]

There was an article today (Sat) in the WP real estate section about 2,000 SF and good design.

[Anonymous]

10,000 SF would be too much for us and I would not like only having 2,000 or 2,500 SF for our family of five, six with pet. For us, our close-in 5,200 SF house is ideal. I love having a spacious foyer and features such as a library/study, a real dining room, five spacious bedrooms, his and her closets in the master bedroom and, yes, a finished basement with a movie room. I used to live in a cramped rowhouse in DC and do not want to do that again. There was not nearly enough closet space and we felt like we were shortchanging DC #2 by giving him a tiny little bedroom. I know others prefer less space and make it work, but feel so fortunate that we have the extra amenities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we agree that not many people who could comfortably afford a 10,000 sf house would happily prefer/choose to live in a modest <2,000 sf house?

No, I would rather rent and save up for longer, then move once. Teenagers with their studies, sports, hobbies, etc. are hard to fit in in 2 k sf or less. You basically just have less hobbies. Like when we used to live in London, just keep a ball in the closet for a Toronto the park and pretend the whole world lives the same way - cramped.