This is an odd post, as others have pointed out, given how tight the market is right now. If you’re looking to buy, you find what best works from what’s available and undoubtably will have to compromise somewhere. Even a 1500-2000 sq ft target range could hav3 your housing search dragging on.

Buy an old home. Most are 1200-1800 sq ft.

The square footage isn’t what really matters to me. It’s the space. I think like you - I only want the amount of space I will use and I am really happy that we use every room of our house. But honestly, we could do with a few of the rooms being smaller than they are.

We have three kids and they each have/had their own bedrooms, albeit small ones. We have two and a half baths - one for kids, one for parents and the half for convenience and guests. We have an extra bedroom that I use for my art studio, which is a necessity for my personal satisfaction with life. And we have a family room where we have things like a pool table. That allowed our house to become the hangout house during those years when you want to know what your kids are doing (and, in all fairness, beyond because my college aged kid regularly entertains in that space. We have no guest room and I am just fine with that. We don’t have overnight guests often enough to have bought a bigger house. Someone just gives up a bedroom or we use air mattresses in the family room.

The rooms that are too big are our living room, dining room and kitchen, which is why I think it’s the space, not the square footage that matters. To get the rooms that we wanted, the house came with large shared space. And, I think our kids loved that they were large because they have had great parties using this space.

I have found through the years that some rooms didn’t get used very much. The family room is one of those rooms. Also, we have a section of the master bedroom that has a couch and chairs. When the kids were little we used it all the time for family reading - both the 20 required minutes per day and the family reading to each other. But once they hit their teens, it stopped getting used so much.

Agree that layout is important. We are 2000 ft.², family of three. All above grade, no basement, 3 bedrooms 3.5 baths. It’s perfect. It’s also a (newer) townhouse, not a SFH. Are you looking at town houses? If not, it might be a good fit for you.

1500 sq ft here and it feels awfully small. Layout matters.

I'd say somewhere in the 1800-2000 square foot range sounds perfect. We have 2 kids in a 4BR 2BA 1500 square foot house and it's a little tight (we don't have a basement.) Planning on a small 300-square-foot addition and I think that will be just about right (although honestly getting up to 2000 square feet would be nice too.) Anything above 2000 square feet feels like it would be too much (including finished basement space in the square foot count.)

Family of 3. 1700 Sf house includes the finished basement. It’s almost perfect - l wish the kitchen were bigger.

One kid and we are in a 2200 sqft house and it’s perfect

Anonymous wrote:I KNOW!

We raised two kids in a 1200 sq ft house. All I wanted during that time was an extra bath!

Why are houses so big? It's ridiculous and wasteful.

Me again. I live a stone's throw from downtown Bethesda, and believe me, I LOOKED for smaller houses. There are very few. They get bought up quickly by developers and ginormously ugly McMansions rise in their place. The new trend is "dark grey prison block". I was fine with craftsman; fine with modern cubic with fun wood panels; but pRiSoN?!? Who actually wants that esthetic?

I KNOW!

We raised two kids in a 1200 sq ft house. All I wanted during that time was an extra bath!

Why are houses so big? It's ridiculous and wasteful.

Well laid out and about 1250-1500 sq. is perfect to me for 3 people if there is also a finished basement hangout room or other "bonus" space on top of that. (what I have now)

But, seriously, buying a house is not like putting your specs into a 3D printer and spitting something out. There are so many variables, the real estate market isn't fine-tuned like that, and it's not shameful or wasteful if you buy the 2000 sq ft when you only "need" 1800 because the 2000 sq ft is on the lot/location you want and you can afford it.

If you end up with something in the 1800-2000 range, definitely take a look at the "The Not So Big House" book as it's not about tiny houses but building in smaller, cozier, more personal spaces.

The house I grew up in was 2500 for 3 people and maybe 400 sq feet of that was wasted with a formal living room and dining room that hardly ever got used because they were too open to everything else to be a good study space, hobby room, exercise space, etc. But the other 2100 sq feet and location was very functional for the family, so you do the best you can (one bedroom became the cozy den that the formal living room would never be, another was guest room/study, etc.)

Anonymous wrote:They’re not at all rare. There are plenty of older homes of that size in Bethesda, Chevy Chase, Potomac, Silver Spring especially in the under $1.5M range.

We're in Chevy Chase in a 1800 sq ft home. It's perfect size for us, and we use both our front and backyard all the time.

We're a family of 4, and we also think around 1800sf would be perfect, but depending on layout I can imagine us choosing something as small as 1500sf up to a bit over 2000sf.

Anonymous wrote:What a bizarre comment. 200 extra square feet is like an extra closet and slightly bigger bathrooms. There is not going to be any noticeable difference between an 1800 and a 2000sf home. This is like mental illness level of choosiness.

NP here. Your comment above seems fine. But was the last sentence really necessary?

What a bizarre comment. 200 extra square feet is like an extra closet and slightly bigger bathrooms. There is not going to be any noticeable difference between an 1800 and a 2000sf home. This is like mental illness level of choosiness.