# size of home for happy family



## jeteaa (Jan 23, 2007)

Our home is very comfortable for the stage our family is at now (2 kids 3 and 5 yrs old). its about 1300 sq ft. We have a large (700 sq ft) living room, kitchen is open to it, our 2 girls share a room/loft. We don't really have a master bedroom though, we made the office area into our room. cons are we only have one small bathroom, but it works for now. I wonder though if and when we might out grow this house. I would hope never since our mortgage is only about $400/mo..... and anything else in this area would be alot more. what is your experience with home size and raising kids?


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

For us it comes down to what we can tolerate and priorities. We live in an 1,100 square foot, one bedroom/one bathroom apartment in the city. While our mortgage is a bit higher than yours, it is relatively low for this particular market. We could afford a bigger apartment, but we'd have to forgo DD's private schooling which is a priority for us. The apartment is one of those pre-war jobs where grand entrances were important but yet impractical. We use said foyer for painting, projects and other things that require space. DD is still in the family bed but will move into the "dining room" when she needs her own space.

A lot of people here live with a lot less space and a lot more family. Living on top of each other is not so unusual, and most people don't give it a second thought. My brother lives in an 800 square foot apartment with four kids - so I count myself rich! Our hovel is our happy home.


----------



## Norasmomma (Feb 26, 2008)

Well our house is the one DH grew up in and there were 9 people here, and it's about 1700 sq ft. It's not big, even though it looks like it due to it being an old farmhouse, there's a bunch of wasted space. We also have one bathroom, but it's been remodeled and is wonderful. I guess like the PP it's all about priorities. We have a decent mortgage of $630 which is less than many of our friends rent, so I guess that is a biggie. Plus for us it is a family home, and has been in DH's family for 2 generations. It has everything we want and need. Acreage, garden area, a shop-the stuff we need living in the country.

I really don't know how they all lived here, but for awhile they all did, plus other friends and family. they are a big family and I guess it's just normal to be "cozy".


----------



## Miss Chris (May 7, 2007)

Wow, where do you live? That sounds like a pretty sweet deal.

For comparison I live with my husband, daughter, and soon to be new babe in a railroad apartment (for those that don't know that means most of the rooms are in a row and you have to pass through one to get to the next in a long line) and the total size is about 800 sq ft. We have some very creative storage solutions







and privacy can be a relative term, but we're happy here. I suppose it wouldn't be an easy spot for us when we have a couple of teenagers living with us but I'm sure hoping we can make it here for the next few years because we just moved in last spring and I hate moving.

I think its possible to live with a lot less than you might expect in terms of space and in many ways having these limits makes us happier I think. We have to put serious limits on how much stuff we have and that just means less to take care of. And we have to make an effort to get out of the house and explore the world around us which is great.

I say enjoy your good fortune (and excellent mortgage payment) for as long as you possibly can.

Miss Chris


----------



## 34me (Oct 2, 2006)

We don't live in a major city but it's a desireable city. We live in 967 sq ft with two teenagers a tween two adults and two large dogs. I wouln't mind more storage but I like our mortgage.


----------



## ollyoxenfree (Jun 11, 2009)

We're a family of 4, and at times have had a variety of pets - cat, dog, fish. We've lived in small homes (about 900 sq. ft.) and large. I've discovered there's never enough storage space. From a purely aesthetic viewpoint, empty rooms are as problematic as overstuffed spaces.

I like to have a little space of my own, it's helpful to restore my soul when I need it. So I think it's helpful if there's a bedroom for each child, or failing that, at least some unshared private place they can go for awhile. I'm sure others will tell you children will share bedrooms happily and I'm sure it's true. Personally, we like having separate bedrooms. Since we have a boy and a girl, and they are now teens, I wouldn't have them sharing anyway.

I've discovered that I can make any size space work for us. Properly furnishing and keeping up a large home on a daily basis (cleaning the floors!!) was almost as tiresome as constantly trying to manoeuvre around small rooms with too much stuff.

We are now considering our 5th move in less than 10 years. I'm not sure I have the energy for it, lol, but one thing I've been thinking about is what size home makes sense, since my eldest will be off to uni soon.


----------



## alfabetsoup (Jun 13, 2005)

We have 2 kids in 950 sq feet. They share a room, we only have 1 bathroom, but it works for us! We have no plans to move as we love the area (suburb of London), there are great schools and lots to do. I would much rather have a smaller house in an area I love than a big house somewhere boring.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

My dh's best friend and his wife lived for 20 years, raising 5 children, in a 85 sq. meter flat in Germany (they're still there, but have since moved). That's about 915 sq. ft. They were and are one of the happiest families I've ever known. The kids are amazing people, the oldest of whom are successful adults and the youngest, well-adjusted and joyous kids. I think it's a symptom of American greed to think that you have to have a huge home to be happy. It's so sad. Our flat was 55 sq. meters (about 550 sq. ft.) when we lived there and we loved it. Our house is 1500 sq. ft and my mom lives with us. We are very happy and I would never want anything bigger. A larger home means a larger carbon footprint. That matters to me, also.


----------



## Teenytoona (Jun 13, 2005)

I think it has less to do with house size than just the environment. I actually think shared space serves a family better than everyone having their own room. If everyone has their own space, you run the risk of people going into their own private space and effectively detaching from the rest of the family. With more shated space, you interact with each other more and learn to be more co-operative. Of course, I'm biased. I grew up in a 1200 SF house with my 7 brothers and sisters and parents (for most of my childhood). My mom grew up with her 7 brothers and sisters and parents in a 850 SF home.

I think the arrangement you have is nice, actually.


----------



## cappuccinosmom (Dec 28, 2003)

I would say the size isn't the most important thing. Happiness can transcend circumstance.

I can definitely understand starting to feel cluttered in a smaller house. Clutter makes me crazy. For us, that means we streamline our life and get rid of stuff that's just taking up space (moving often helps a lot!)







We have moved into progressively larger houses over the last couple of years, and found that our natural tendancy is simply to find more stuff to fill up the space, so we still quickly end up feeling lack of space even though the house is bigger..


----------



## Alyantavid (Sep 10, 2004)

We have 4 people in a 1800 square foot house. It works, for now, but at some point, we'll have to move. The house is ancient and not set up all that well.


----------



## Dahlea (May 15, 2008)

It all depends on what you think you need. We live in an rv with a 1 year old, baby on the way, 2 cats and 2 dogs.


----------



## rightkindofme (Apr 14, 2008)

I recently spent a week visiting a friend in her family's 3500sq ft house. It felt completely overwhelming and lonely. When we were in the 'guest room' we had to walk for literally about two minutes before we go my friend's room. (My toddler has short legs--I could have walked it in not quite a minute.) The amount of upkeep on a house that size is a *nightmare.* I was so happy to get back to my nice, modest little 950sq ft house.







I am not thrilled with the layout of my house and I think by the time I have teenagers I will long for slightly more room (not to mention another bathroom) but I will make due.

Our goal is to pay off this house and then my husband won't have to work full time anymore. That is way the heck more interesting to me than a bigger house.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

Well, we are very happy as a family of 6 living in about 3k sq ft. But, I think as long as we could keep the 3-car garage for storage, we could be comfortable in about 1800 sq ft. We really don't need all this space, at this point, but I won't lie and say it isn't nice. My kids are still fairly young, and much prefer to sleep together rather than in their own rooms, but I imagine as they get older, having their own space will be a good thing.

In the past, we have lived in much smaller homes (apartments). Before moving here, we were in about 1k sq ft, 3 bed/2 bath apartment on the 2nd floor. I wouldn't say we were unhappy, but it was far from ideal with four small children. If we had had a backyard, that would have made all the difference (I see that now, as we have 1/2 an acre for them to run around, dig, ride bikes, etc). I will say, that I was extremely unhappy living in about 700 sq. ft when we had 3 children (and I was pregnant). It probably had more to do with the condition/location of the apartment plus the rest of the things going on in our life, than the actual space - but still, I really, really, could not make the best of it at that point and I'm still bitter thinking about living there now. (not having two vehicles, I'll admit, was a HUGE source of my frustration, on top of other lifestyle struggles.)

Basically, I think having enough space is nice, but not necessarily the determining factor of happiness. It contributes/takes away from it, though, definitely. And again, where that living space is, probably plays a bigger role. My bro and soon-to-be SIL live in a tiny apt in the village of Manhattan. They are very happy - but look where they live, and they don't have children and all their belongings to contend with. Which reminds me (and others have mentioned this), having a ton of stuff in a smaller space (or a big one, actually) can be the difference between making it work, and being frustrated and feeling cramped. I know in the past we could have gotten rid of a lot of non-essentials, and I would have felt just a little bit better about our living space. Also, being able to put up shelving, etc (hard when renting an apt) and making the best use of your space, makes it easier to manage and keep organized.


----------



## pixiekisses (Oct 14, 2008)

We lived in a 2200sq ft. place just over a year ago. When our oldest lived at home too, so we had at least 5 kids all the time, it was crowded. And with an emergency care baby on top back then it was even more crowded. And then we sometimes had nurses at home 24/7 because of our severe SN child, and her personal assistant, that was too much.
So we moved, to 4300 sq ft. And for us, that was the only right thing. The nurses can have their own room when they have to be here, sometimes for months at a time.
And we have enough room to be comfortable with a teacher coming here to homeschool the 6 yos. when the girl with SN is to sick to go to school as well. And I'm home with a baby, and like these last weeks, the baby's new foster-adopt mom being here all the time too.
We have no problems when the physiotherapist comes, and she sometimes brings the ergo.
It's a lot of issues like that for us. So we needed more space. Both because we have many kids (and aren't done yet), and because we have a SN child who requires a lot of extra care. And, of course, I don't want to limit the other kids either, they need their space when their sister is very sick and needs peace.


----------



## Peony (Nov 27, 2003)

I will admit that I like space, but I hate the layout in our current house. It is 2800 sq feet which I could happily do and even bigger if it was say a 5B 3-4 BA, but we've got 3B2BA which for my family of 5 has been a logistics nightmare. DH and I can not sleep together, snoring and insomnia do not mix, DD1 has anxiety issues which keep her rooming around the house at night, DD2 has respiratory issues and also wakes up at a sneeze across the house. Her nebs, etc... at night keep up DD1 and DS so she has to be kept separate from them. One bathroom is through a bedroom and there always seems to be one sleeping child or another in there which renders it unusable. The other one is sandwiched between the other two bedrooms, even flushing means that we've woken up DD2.







I am happy with a smaller common area, our current living room is huge and such a waste of space and then more room to spread out in the rest of the house.


----------



## kcstar (Mar 20, 2009)

I agree, so much depends on your family, your needs, and your priorities. I also think, with kids, there can be a tradeoff between indoor space and outdoor space.

Our first house was 2100 sq ft, 4 bedroom, and the two of us rattled around in there until we packed it up with stuff







. I wanted a place where our families could visit comfortably, perhaps host a Thanksgiving or such. Unfortunately, we were too far away from the families to make that a feasible reality while we lived there.

What I grew up with was very cramped, six to eight people in a small space. So I've come to appreciate having room to breathe and move freely. I also like having space to practice yoga or martial arts indoors when the weather is bad.


----------



## redvlagrl (Dec 2, 2009)

We have a 1400 sq foot 2 storey house (3 bedroom, 1.5 bathrooms). It's ok for us with one kid and another on the way, though we are losing our spare room/sewing room for the new baby. We desperately want to convert our garage into a useable room (we have an old house and the garage is actually too small for our mazda3). By doing this, we would also be able to use the sunroom all year (located above the garage). We feel it's a bit small as is because our rooms are all very modest and narrow which is irritating for furniture. Also, the 3rd bedroom/nursery is a very tiny room and would be very cramped as a child's/teen's room.

Eventually, we will develop the attic and do an extention to the house. But we have no intention of moving anytime soon unless we move cities.


----------



## Holiztic (Oct 10, 2005)

We came from 900 sq ft 2 BR condo that felt very small, even though we are minimalists in terms of furniture and stuff. When DH did renovation work, there was nowhere for DS and I to go! When we had people over after DS' bedtime, well, we just didn't! It's not that DS requires silence to sleep, its just that DS would be able to hear company at full volume in that place--not dampened at all!

We looked at houses from 1700-2200. The only way to get a decent yard, at least 3 BR and a so so neighborhood around here was to stay above 1700, but even then to get our 1/2 acre, great neighborhood and 4 bedrooms (we hope to stay for 30 years!) was to go to the 2200. It feels HUGE right now with a 3 year old and little stuff, but when I imagine 3 preteen/teens, it seems just right!


----------



## claddaghmom (May 30, 2008)

I think it depends on what you need and if the house is providing it.

We moved and doubled our SQ. But I feel more cramped than before b/c the storage capabilities of this house are nil. (losing a walk in closet is depressing in itself lol).

Now my house feels cluttered all the time and I've been constantly downsizing and clearing out stuff just b/c we can't keep it anywhere.


----------



## nugget's mommy (May 13, 2006)

It sounds like you want to make it work (and I do envy your mortgage!). To me the bathroom would be the biggest issue - any way you could add one on? Even just an extra toilet would be huge for us if we only had one (we actually have 3, and there have been a few times where all 3 have been used at the same time, so if I were imagining us with only one, I would be doing anything to get another one - that's just me, though







).


----------



## mama1803 (Mar 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *claddaghmom* 
I think it depends on what you need and if the house is providing it.











Our current home has 4,200 sq. living area and our family of 4 is comfortable with that. The home we moved from was 2,500 sq. feet and we were cramped.


----------



## annekh23 (Nov 1, 2008)

layout is so much more important than actual area, we currently live in a 3br2ba condo, it's adequate right now, with 3 kids, but already we are having challenges of keeping everyone and their belongings safe as it's a bad layout for having any one area entirely baby safe, particularly whilst also attempting to keep certain toys belonging to our 6yr old safe from the middle child!

We lived in a house half the size but with 4br1ba, which would probably be easier for our current situation!

We're tied to this area and it's a high price area, I hope we can move in 2yrs, but I expect it will be longer.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

We lived in a house that was...think it was 800sq.ft., for a family of four, plus a dog when I was a kid. I never remember feeling cramped at all. My sister and I shared a room. We moved into a bigger house when I was 8. I got my own room, which I liked, but also...didn't like. I kind of missed my sister at first (was glad to have my own space as a teen, though).

I currently live in a 1250 sq.ft. townhouse (row house, maybe - I find the terminology is different in different places). We have no storage to speak of (a couple of hall closets, the under-the-stairs room where the hot water tank is, and a small - about the size of the hot water tank room - outdoor space). We have no yard.

Honestly, if it weren't for the wonky ages of my kids, and the stupid room sizes, it would be great. DD2 is with us in the master bedroom, which is too big. DD1 and ds2 share the smallest bedroom, which is too small (they play downstairs a _lot_, though). DS1 has the middle-sized room, which is just about perfect. If all three rooms were that size, it would be awesome. RIght now, that works. When dd2 moves out of our room, it's going to be complicated. She won't really fit in dd1 and ds2's room, unless we put their dresser in our room, which I'd rather not do. But, I don't want to ask my 17-18 year old to share with his 12 years younger brother!

Basically, I think our family of six could live quite happily in this amount of space, if it were broken up a bit differently. I'd also like a yard and a basement or attic or outdoor shed or...something...for storage.

I can't even imagine paying $400/month for a mortgage, though. Our rent is almost 4 times that.


----------



## Yippy! (Jan 2, 2007)

our house is the same size and same size family. I read somewhere about how back in the day homes were smaller and families were closer because of that, they weren't separated in different rooms watching different tv's, internet, etc. My house is real similar to the layout that my grandparents had in their old house and they had a few more children. The only thing I want to change is the our lot outside, it's real bare and cold, not really inviting.


----------



## hillymum (May 15, 2003)

I've lived in just about every size house there is, from renting a really small bedroom (shared kitchen), to a one bedroom flat shared with dh, to a a 1000sqft finished area house with dh and 3 children to 4500+ with dh, 3 kids, 3 cats and 2 dogs.
My conclusion is that it's the plan of the house which really matters. We are now looking for a smaller house with a good sized eat in kitchen, a good sized family shared space, 4 bedrooms which will allow the kids to have privacy when needed and peace to sleep and 2 bathrooms. So few houses seem to be that simple. I don't want a house thats under 1500sqft but I don't want a house over 3000sqft.


----------



## ProtoLawyer (Apr 16, 2007)

For me, it's not the size, it's how it's arranged.

My last apartment was 1,300 square feet, 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, small LR, big DR, big KIT, and it felt CRAMPED for three people. My SD's bedroom was only 8 X 8, the master was only 7 X 11. All on one level, no good way to get away from each other, loud people above us. Tiny, tiny yard.

My current house is only 1,500 square feet and it seems HUGE by comparison, because it's on two levels (and we have a large screened porch, which right now that it's 20 degrees and snowing isn't much help) and it's all ours. Four bedrooms (all bigger than 7 X 11, but still not enormous--the master is 11 X 14 and irregular), two baths. We're now at three people and a 70-pound dog, to be four people in July. We also have a large fenced yard, which also helps.


----------



## NYCVeg (Jan 31, 2005)

We tend to prefer smaller spaces. Our last home was the only large space we ever lived in. It was a small house by many people's standards (small rooms), but was three stories--two floors of living space and a finished basement where we had a playroom, plus a small yard. We hated it. It was just too big for us. We hated having a yard, even a small one, to maintain, when we always went to the park instead. (This was in a city, btw.)

Now we're in a much smaller space, all on one level and like it much better. But, honestly, I would be much happier trading my current little house for a two-bedroom apartment in NYC! (We're currently living elsewhere for work reasons.) For me, location is far more important than square footage. I prefer not to have a huge space to care for, I prefer not to have/need a car, I vastly prefer living in big cities to suburbs. We spent the first 1.5 years of dd's life living in a small, one-bedroom apartment, and had no problems with it at all.

FWIW, we're a family of three and planning to stay that way--we like everything small!


----------



## mami to 3 :) (Feb 7, 2010)

I don't know how big the house it honestly, we're renting it but the sixe is comfortable. Is not too big not too small, it's just perfect.
My 14 yo has her own big room that she adores in the basement. My 5yo and 4yo share a room (their choice) and we have a nice and comfortable room next to theirs with the baby sleeping with us and two extra rooms.

Our house in Canada was too big nad before we had the girls we lived in a tiny 2 bedroom apartment and it felt crowded.


----------



## physmom (Jun 15, 2009)

Yeah... we're a family of 3+ a cat in less than 400 sq feet! It's super tight but you know what we survive just fine. Granted, we don't plan on living her much longer and DD is still really young but it's doable. Your place sounds like a mansion in comparison!!!

DH and i have lived in even smaller places before this. We've always gotten along extremely well and are rarely in different rooms from each other even when we've had more space. I find that having a small space makes us get out more and looking for cool, fun things to do in our neighborhood. It also ensures that we interact a lot and are constantly chatting about our days.


----------



## SoxMama (Jul 7, 2009)

We live in the same amount of space (1300 sqft) with 3 + 1 on the way and two cats. We feel really cramped and hope to relocate in the next few years.

The main reason for us is that in our region of the country homes do not have basements and rarely attics so there is hardly any storage space. We don't have a single closet that is not in a bedroom (no pantry, no coat closet, etc.). It's difficult to find space to put things like vacuums, cleaning supplies, tools, etc. Most of our tools are kept in the garage and some have been ruined by the heat and humidity.

So, we don't need more living space but more storage space would be fantastic.


----------



## pauletoy (Aug 26, 2007)

To me house size has nothing to do with family happiness. This reminds me of a country song (although I am not a fan of country music). The song is Little houses by Doug Stone. http://www.stlyrics.com/songs/d/doug...ses513176.html. I have always thought of my living space like this song. While more space would be nice, just think of the closeness you would miss.


----------



## Joyster (Oct 26, 2007)

Depends on what you make it. We had a smaller bungalow and it never really felt like home. We have very little storage space and it was consistently a battle to make things look neat. We moved a couple years ago to something larger and love our home. We like to live in a home with a lot of storage space. I have a dry pantry and a cold one which I love because I can make preserves and store honeycrisp apples til the cows come home. The person who built this place had two preschool boys at the time, so it's like it was built for us. The kitchen is big and inviting (which I absolutely required) and the family room has enough space for our cuddle couch, cuddle chair, toys and TV. We also have a fireplace there which was a major draw.

I don't know if it's so much the space as it is the features of the home which make it work for some people and not for others.


----------



## philomom (Sep 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Alyantavid* 
We have 4 people in a 1800 square foot house. It works, for now, but at some point, we'll have to move. The house is ancient and not set up all that well.

This was me last year. I had no room to leave projects out and the kids had no place to spread out when they had sleepovers and such. We added on and we love it! Just having a couple of extra rooms makes all the difference to us.

I'll have a small house once the kids are grown.


----------



## Jenifer76 (Apr 20, 2005)

We have a large home and don't utilize half of the rooms. If we could it again, we'd buy smaller. For the time being, we are stuck because the market tanked. Though I appreciate all the storage we have in our basement.


----------



## kcstar (Mar 20, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jenifer76* 
We have a large home and don't utilize half of the rooms. If we could it again, we'd buy smaller. For the time being, we are stuck because the market tanked. Though I appreciate all the storage we have in our basement.

Floor plan makes a huge difference. Our current house is about 100 sq ft smaller than our first house, but it has an open floor plan and so it FEELS bigger. Except, of course, when we go to store things (it doesn't have the big closets).


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

I like a house that's about 2,500 sq ft with a good floor plan. There are 4 people in our family plus a bunch of pets.

For a while we lived in a 4,000 sq ft home. It was just TOO BIG! One of the kids would loose a shoe and and it would take me ages and ages to find it! After dinner, the kids would go up stairs to their playroom and my DH would go to the basement and I would clean the kitchen completely alone -- unable to even hear them. It was seriously weird.

We can (and sometimes do) live someplace much smaller, but about 2,500 sq ft is the point where we can leave projects out, easily host sleep overs, etc. It might sound silly, but I love having a house that's big enough for the kids to spread their homework out on one table and leave it there while we eat dinner at a different table. It's just easy. We don't *need* it, but we enjoy it.

We move a lot for DH's job so we've got to try lots of different things. In addition to sq. ft. and floor plan, I like:

a park/playground within walking distance
a community pool
fenced yard
quiet street for riding bikes
private patio area with a fire pit
After the kids grow up, Dh and I want an urban condo with lots of funky resturants within walking distance.


----------



## AmyKT (Aug 20, 2009)

I think the 4 of us will be very happy in our 1700 sq ft house. I used to think we'd need more room, but really, once the kiddos are old enough not to be into everything, we can have more stuff out in the open, and it will be fine. We're not totally happy with our neighborhood, though, and I'd like a bigger yard with room and zoning for chickens, so we'll probably be moving in a few years. I think the size is fine, though. I like not losing track of where anyone is. And everything on the 1st floor has a sight line to everywhere else, which is good for babies.


----------



## Landover (Oct 12, 2007)

We live in about 3K and have another 2K in the basement that we rarely use. We are expecting #3, and we are very happy with that. The kids will all ship down tot the basement when they are older, but for now they share two rooms and one bathroom upstairs. We saved a bonus room upstairs for guests.

Honestly, it is more about how you live life versus the size of your home. You can have a close knit family in a larger home and you can have a disjointed family in a tiny home.

If YOU are happy then go for it!


----------



## Holiztic (Oct 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Landover* 
Honestly, it is more about how you live life versus the size of your home. You can have a close knit family in a larger home and you can have a disjointed family in a tiny home.


----------



## dogretro (Jun 17, 2008)

ITA that it depends on the layout of the house. I have no idea what our sq ftg is, so I have no frame of reference here. I do not think of our house as huge, but the rooms do not feel cramped when we have a lot of people over & we do have 4 bedrooms (2 large, 1 normal, 1 tiny) & one v small bathroom. We have lots of storage including a giant basement & nice attic. Our house is older, too, not new. The layout of our house is great, though, & feels v spacious. I'll have to ask dh about sq ft tomorrow. We are planning on having more than 2 kids & knew this before we bought the house. When we looked at it, we felt that it would meet our needs just fine.

Dh's aunt and uncle's house is not that big & they have five kids. It never feels cramped, just full. They also only have one bathroom & have made it work all these years. I used to babysit for a friend before her family moved & there was no way at all that it felt comfortable w/ 4 little kids (one of whom was a baby). The layout left no room in the rooms for a fourth child w/ a bouncy seat or anything. It was def a 2 kid house & that's it (she had 2 & 2 were mine)!


----------



## ChristyMarie (May 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Landover* 
.............

Honestly, it is more about how you live life versus the size of your home. You can have a close knit family in a larger home and you can have a disjointed family in a tiny home.

If YOU are happy then go for it!


Very well said!!!

I think layout matters more than size. We were in 2500 sq ft with an ok layout but NO storage and no place for play. And the family room area was so completely separate from the rest of the house that DS never wanted to play there, not that there was much room to do so. And it was too noisy in the bedrooms if people were up late.

But at my mom's house, which is maybe 1500 - the layout is different and it works so much better for him. He'll play in the family room alone which is somewhat separate but still connected.

We're in about 6000 now and the layout makes it work - and the storage! Oh the storage in this house is fabulous. Having a place to put everything takes away a LOT of stress and disorganization.


----------



## MJB (Nov 28, 2009)

We have 2 kids (7 and 4) in about 800 sq. ft. The boys share the bigger room, with bunk beds and enough room to play. We have a very small bedroom (it fits our king sized bed but our dresser is in the living room). My husband has a small office, we have an eat-in kitchen, a decent-sized living room, and a tiny bathroom with no tub. I think our house is a fine size for us, and will be until our third (due this summer) is 2-3 and moves out of our bed.


----------



## major_mama11 (Apr 13, 2008)

We are a family of 4 in a 1700 sq ft, 3 bed 2 bath house. It feels just right, and I think a lot of it is due to the open layout. We are in the kitchen, playroom, or living room 90% of our waking hours, and this area of the house is about half our square footage, so it never feels cramped. Also, we have a big yard and a nice big porch to play on, so that all helps too.

Our previous house was 1700 sq ft also, and it felt cramped with just DH and I, but this was due to the poor layout, wasted space, lack of storage issue.


----------



## limette (Feb 25, 2008)

We are currently four, (5 in August) in a house that is 900 sq ft on the main floor and the same in the basement (bedroom, craft room, workshop, laundry, rec room, eventually a 2nd bathroom). It's likely that we'll have 4 kids. I'd hate to live in anything bigger.

With the 2 we have now we spend 95% of our time on the main floor. I imagine when they are older, the extra space downstairs will be nice to have, especially in the long winters we have here.

If I could afford to have a house built with a better floor plan we could scale it down to 1200-1400 sq ft easily (for 6 people).

Our house was a fixer upper and we've reno'd each room to fit our needs and to utilize the space better.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

We've been house hunting recently, and I've been blown away by how much layout makes a difference. The place we bid on is about 1700 feet and feels nice and roomy, but we saw some places that size that felt positively claustrophobic, and some 1500 square foot places that felt spacious. I think it just really depends.

We're in an 1100 square foot place now, which felt fine when we only had one kid, but feels a little squashed now that we have two (hence the house hunting!)


----------



## aussiemum (Dec 20, 2001)

Our house is about 150 sq. m (1600 sq. ft.) on a 900 sq m (9600 sq. ft) block. It's a bit bigger than average for our neighbourhood. For a while there we wanted to move to a bigger place as the kids got older, but now I think we are happy to stay in a house this size. I certainly don't want to clean a bigger house, and we already have a second toilet, plus the kids already each have their own bedroom.... really, they are not going to be living at home that much longer so we might as well stay where we are.

And i do love the area, it is so close to everything & it's on a busline. I would like to install a pool, an outdoor shower, & a carport that will hold a climbing wall- then our place would be perfect for me. Also our house is over 100 years old so it really does need a roof re-seal (the roof is not that old!), & the outside needs to be painted... then it really will be perfect.... I promise!


----------



## Chicky2 (May 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Teenytoona* 
I think it has less to do with house size than just the environment. I actually think shared space serves a family better than everyone having their own room. If everyone has their own space, you run the risk of people going into their own private space and effectively detaching from the rest of the family. With more shated space, you interact with each other more and learn to be more co-operative.

I don't think this is necessarily true. I think that largely depends on the family dynamics. We have a 2700 sq ft home on almost 5 acres, and love it. It currently has 4 bedrooms, 2 full baths and 2 half baths. We are about to build a wall and make our art/computer area into a bedroom for our youngest. We all have our own space, but honestly, we spend more time together than anything. No one is off in their own rooms watching tvs or on the internet, except my 21 yo dd, or occasionally my 2nd oldest dd if she needs quiet to do her classes online. And when the oldest is on the internet in her room she's just listening to music while she knits, or researching plants. Sometimes the 3 yo tries to undo her knitting, lol. It is nice for the kids to have their own rooms for when their friends come over. They are at the ages where they are starting to really want to hang out w/friends of their own sex.

We have ultra hot and long summers here. (we get cabin fever from it, just like people who live where there are long winters) The kids can run and play all the way thru the house and have plenty of room to do so. When they aren't doing that, we're usually in the kitchen or den (really like one huge room), doing school stuff, or cooking, or playing games together, or doing art projects at the table.


----------



## FreeRangeMama (Nov 22, 2001)

We are a family of 6 in a house that is under 1000sqft. I really don't feel the need for MORE space, just LESS stuff. My kids are 2, 4, 6, and 8. We have 3 bdrms and 1 bathroom. It works well for us and we are a tight knit family because of our small space









I find our small home does colour the way we live. We are careful with what we bring into the house, we need to be creative with how we arrange our stuff, and we need to find solutions to the problems that come up (like siblings in each others stuff or whatever). These things are definitely PLUSES for small home living, we have great incentive to live simply and work together!

I also refuse to sacrifice our small mortgage as it gives us the freedom to do things we wouldn't otherwise be able to do. We can put the money we would have spent on a higher mortgage for a bigger home on things for the family to enjoy or on travel. We don't have a high debt load and I can stay home with the kids and homeschool without financial hardship. AND, our mortgage will be paid off in it's entirety early leaving that much more for retirement and travel when the kids are still in their teens.

Each family will have different needs and priorities, only you can decide which path will bring the most happiness to your family. That space sounds perfectly workable for a family your size if you choose to stay long term!


----------



## kcstar (Mar 20, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama* 
We are a family of 6 in a house that is under 1000sqft. I really don't feel the need for MORE space, just LESS stuff. My kids are 2, 4, 6, and 8. We have 3 bdrms and 1 bathroom. It works well for us and we are a tight knit family because of our small space









I find our small home does colour the way we live. We are careful with what we bring into the house, we need to be creative with how we arrange our stuff, and we need to find solutions to the problems that come up (like siblings in each others stuff or whatever). These things are definitely PLUSES for small home living, we have great incentive to live simply and work together!









I think like the PP said, this depends a great deal on family dynamics. I think where gentle discipline is practiced, anger management and problem resolution skills are modeled, and boundaries are respected, that a small space truly can work out.

My family of origin was not at all like that, and the six-eight of us really could have used more space.


----------



## mama1803 (Mar 4, 2008)

I'm rather surprised by all the responses that imply that a small house is more conducive to fostering a close knit family. I've always felt that when people truely enjoy being together and put a priority on spending time together doing things as a family, the size of the house is irrelevant.

We have what many people would consider to be a large house (4,200 sq. ft living area) and yet we chose to spend most of our time together because we enjoy the togetherness. Just because my kids each have their own rooms doesn't mean they spend all their time there by themselves.

A large house doesn't have to be isolating or cold. There are certainly ways to make it homey and inviting.


----------



## Chicky2 (May 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama1803* 
I'm rather surprised by all the responses that imply that a small house is more conducive to fostering a close knit family. I've always felt that when people truely enjoy being together and put a priority on spending time together doing things as a family, the size of the house is irrelevant.

We have what many people would consider to be a large house (4,200 sq. ft living area) and yet we chose to spend most of our time together because we enjoy the togetherness. Just because my kids each have their own rooms doesn't mean they spend all their time there by themselves.

A large house doesn't have to be isolating or cold. There are certainly ways to make it homey and inviting.

ITA w/this post. Just like we have almost 5 acres, and guess what? When we are outside, we are almost always together, taking care of livestock chores, petting our goats, swinging, swimming, gardening, or hanging out around the campfire. Heck, even on butcher days we are all together, doing our part as a family to put meat in our freezer.









I do see how having a smaller space would make you more mindful of what you are purchasing/bringing into the house. When we moved into this house (twice the size of our previous home) we thought we'd never fill it up and now I find myself purging and donating at least once yearly. Trying to get better about that.

I also see how having a smaller house helps to reduce the carbon footprint. Since we opted for a larger house, we just decided to work on our footprint in other ways.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

Yeah, see, there are times when I wish the kids would go play elsewhere in the house (mainly separate from one another), and it is super rare that they all sleep in their own bedrooms - they either want to be w/DH and I, or they sleep in each other's rooms. My DD will be 9 next month, and I thought maybe she'd be ready for more privacy/alone time, but nope, she is always asking one of her 3 younger bros to sleep in her room.

In contrast, when we were living in a small apartment there were times when we drove each other nutty and there simply wasn't any where to go to get a break.

I guess I don't personally see how a smaller home = closer knit, and a larger one = more isolation. Having lived in both extremes, I don't see myself ever choosing to go back to a small space with a large family. So, for me, the size of our home does impact happiness, though it is just one variable.


----------



## Chicky2 (May 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Drummer's Wife* 
My DD will be 9 next month, and I thought maybe she'd be ready for more privacy/alone time, but nope, she is always asking one of her 3 younger bros to sleep in her room.


FWIW, my 9 yo son still prefers to sleep either on the couch, in my floor, or in one of his older sister's rooms. It's not that he's scared of anything, just what he prefers still...


----------



## FreeRangeMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama1803* 
I'm rather surprised by all the responses that imply that a small house is more conducive to fostering a close knit family. I've always felt that when people truely enjoy being together and put a priority on spending time together doing things as a family, the size of the house is irrelevant.

We have what many people would consider to be a large house (4,200 sq. ft living area) and yet we chose to spend most of our time together because we enjoy the togetherness. Just because my kids each have their own rooms doesn't mean they spend all their time there by themselves.

A large house doesn't have to be isolating or cold. There are certainly ways to make it homey and inviting.

It isn't that a larger house is isolating or cold, but when you are in a small home you have NO CHOICE but to work it out







There are different dynamics at play, not better or worse. Just different









I am also surprised that people think house size *doesn't* make a difference. When you are forced to share a room (not just sleep in a sibling's room) there are constant compromises that need to be made. Who gets the bed on which side of the room, which shelf belongs to which child, what colour to paint the walls. So much practice for compromise









Not that those things aren't possible in larger homes, and of course not every small home living family will practice creative problem solving or gentle discipline. And of course the reasons a family will choose to stay in a small home will make a big difference in how they make the situation workable (if they do). I don't think you can really separate out the reasons why families are close knit and well functioning, WHY we live the way we do are interwoven into our every interaction.

BUT choosing to live small is a lifestyle choice that provides opportunities that are just not a factor in a larger house where everyone has a bunch of space for every family member and a place to put every item one could want (should one want to have it all). Doing stuff together isn't all that optional when the ONLY place you can choose to do stuff is......together


----------



## Altair (May 1, 2005)

We have a tiny 1BD in Brooklyn and we love it.







Our bedroom just barely fits a queen size bed with crib sidecarred, then a long dresser with a changing pad on top. Small closet. Very small hallway with a stackable W/D and a little (3x3) boiler room where the cats have their litterbox and a small bathroom. The main living space is completely open but very small, the kitchen is just a corner and an island, we have 2 comfy bar stools and a clip on high chair on the island to eat... then the LR is just a couch on one side and little corner waldorf inspired play area on the other wall, TV mounted on the wall and a cabinet mounted on the wall above the play area is our "office."







But the whole place is so modern and simplistic and minimalist we love it!


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

We have a 1200 sqaure foot house for 4 people, and I'm glad we have a small space. I grew up in larger house, and we tended to hang out in different rooms much of the time. But the four of us are basically together all evening every evening. Even if someone gets angry we have to stay together and work things out as there aren't a lot of other options. And we are a very close family.

Plus our mortgage is small and we have a lot of money for other things we want to do, again generally stuff to do as a family, but also healther food options (pasture raised local meat, free range local eggs, and raw milk and cheese from pastured cows, and free range chicken - are pretty darn expensive) which is a huge priority for us. We are not vegetarians, but will not eat factory farmed animals or eggs or dairy, so we don't eat out except to a couple of places which have the same standards we have or to the one vegan place in the area. Which saves money as we don't eat out often, but we spend a lot on groceries on the other side of that. And I stay at home, which means having to live on one income which is a money loss, but on the other hand I can cook from scratch, which is a money savings and another priority. Plus we plan to pay for our kids' college education and we're saving for that, and the small mortgage makes that possible. I guess the point is that every family has different ideals and priorities, but a small house fits our life very well.


----------



## pixiekisses (Oct 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama* 
When you are forced to share a room (not just sleep in a sibling's room) there are constant compromises that need to be made. Who gets the bed on which side of the room, which shelf belongs to which child, what colour to paint the walls. So much practice for compromise









House size doesn't matter here. Siblings can still share a room even if the house is bigger. Or even share a bed.
Lots of families co-sleep in here, perhaps even most? And lots of siblings do after they leave the family bed too.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama* 
I don't think you can really separate out the reasons why families are close knit and well functioning, WHY we live the way we do are interwoven into our every interaction.

No, and we have a very close knit family (also well functioning), and size of house doesn't matter in this for us. We used to live in a house half this size, but we needed more room (no seriously, I mean that we really needed it, not wanted it). But it hasn't changed our family or the family dynamic or close knit relationship. We actively choose to be together every day, we could spread out, but we want to be together.
(Also, we have no TV, now I do think that is a contributing factor though.)


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

we have a 3BR 1 bath home that is 12 sq ft. It's a bit small. I think one more room and one more bathroom would be perfect. We love the yard though. We actually looked at other houses and though we found some that were bigger (for over twice what ours cost) there was less usable space. We have a full basement and a garage. In order to get a house with those, we'd have to go to a price range we can't afford.

That said, there was a 5 bedroom house on the market, that made me sigh. But the location was awful and there is no yard, so we didn't seriously consider it.

Also we met some people who used to live here who had 8 kids in their family. The family who built it had 4 kids.


----------



## mama1803 (Mar 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama* 
It isn't that a larger house is isolating or cold, but when you are in a small home you have NO CHOICE but to work it out







There are different dynamics at play, not better or worse. Just different









I am also surprised that people think house size *doesn't* make a difference. When you are forced to share a room (not just sleep in a sibling's room) there are constant compromises that need to be made. Who gets the bed on which side of the room, which shelf belongs to which child, what colour to paint the walls. So much practice for compromise









Not that those things aren't possible in larger homes, and of course not every small home living family will practice creative problem solving or gentle discipline. And of course the reasons a family will choose to stay in a small home will make a big difference in how they make the situation workable (if they do). I don't think you can really separate out the reasons why families are close knit and well functioning, WHY we live the way we do are interwoven into our every interaction.

BUT choosing to live small is a lifestyle choice that provides opportunities that are just not a factor in a larger house where everyone has a bunch of space for every family member and a place to put every item one could want (should one want to have it all). Doing stuff together isn't all that optional when the ONLY place you can choose to do stuff is......together









As with everything in life, there is more than one "right" way of doing things. You said that in a small home, family doesn't have a choice but to work it out. I don't agree. People always have a choice in how they relate, interact, and behave. If the parents foster an atmosphere where respecting other's space and possessions is important, then the children will learn that. If the parents model skills like conflict resolution, having patience, compromise, sharing, etc. then the children will learn because that is what they live. What I am inferring from many posts is that having a small home is the "right" way to instill things like compromise, patience, and functioning together well. I heard alot of this same crapola when dh and I were considering not having a second child. We heard from practically everybody that only children can't learn to share or to compromise without a sibling. Now what I am reading is that unless siblings are forced to share a bedroom or living on top of one another then they will not learn skills like compromise or creative problem solving.

IRL I know many families in homes of all sizes who have, whether by conscience choice or not, fostered a life of isolation. The kids may share a bedroom, but if they are always on their computers or texting their friends, or watching TV they aren't communicating. I also know many families who are so overscheduled that they are literally never home. The kids are growing up in the backseat of the family car as they are being driven to and from various extra curricular activities. The size of the home is completely irrelevent in their cases.

For me it's much more about the family's priorities and the emphasis they put on being together, even when they aren't forced to be together.


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama1803* 
For me it's much more about the family's priorities and the emphasis they put on being together, even when they aren't forced to be together.

yeah, and I also think it's OK for all members of a family to enjoy doing things without the others. Sure when your child is very small they want to be with you all the time, but as they get older, wanting time and space to themselves is healthy. It's normal for teens and tweens to want privacy. Denying them that on principle seems controlling.

I don't agree that living in a small space means that people have to work things out. Sometimes it just means that the person with the strongest personality always gets their way.

I don't think sharing bedrooms would be good for my kids. One has mild special needs. It really wouldn't be fair to either of them. I'm grateful that we can easily afford for them to have their own spaces. They get along very well and consider each their best friend. Being able to get away from each other HELPS them stay close!


----------



## pixiekisses (Oct 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama1803* 
As with everything in life, there is more than one "right" way of doing things. You said that in a small home, family doesn't have a choice but to work it out. I don't agree. People always have a choice in how they relate, interact, and behave. If the parents foster an atmosphere where respecting other's space and possessions is important, then the children will learn that. If the parents model skills like conflict resolution, having patience, compromise, sharing, etc. then the children will learn because that is what they live. What I am inferring from many posts is that having a small home is the "right" way to instill things like compromise, patience, and functioning together well. I heard alot of this same crapola when dh and I were considering not having a second child. We heard from practically everybody that only children can't learn to share or to compromise without a sibling. Now what I am reading is that unless siblings are forced to share a bedroom or living on top of one another then they will not learn skills like compromise or creative problem solving.

IRL I know many families in homes of all sizes who have, whether by conscience choice or not, fostered a life of isolation. The kids may share a bedroom, but if they are always on their computers or texting their friends, or watching TV they aren't communicating. I also know many families who are so overscheduled that they are literally never home. The kids are growing up in the backseat of the family car as they are being driven to and from various extra curricular activities. The size of the home is completely irrelevent in their cases.

For me it's much more about the family's priorities and the emphasis they put on being together, even when they aren't forced to be together.

Well written!


----------



## FreeRangeMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama1803* 
As with everything in life, there is more than one "right" way of doing things. You said that in a small home, family doesn't have a choice but to work it out. I don't agree. People always have a choice in how they relate, interact, and behave. If the parents foster an atmosphere where respecting other's space and possessions is important, then the children will learn that. If the parents model skills like conflict resolution, having patience, compromise, sharing, etc. then the children will learn because that is what they live. What I am inferring from many posts is that having a small home is the "right" way to instill things like compromise, patience, and functioning together well. I heard alot of this same crapola when dh and I were considering not having a second child. We heard from practically everybody that only children can't learn to share or to compromise without a sibling. Now what I am reading is that unless siblings are forced to share a bedroom or living on top of one another then they will not learn skills like compromise or creative problem solving.

IRL I know many families in homes of all sizes who have, whether by conscience choice or not, fostered a life of isolation. The kids may share a bedroom, but if they are always on their computers or texting their friends, or watching TV they aren't communicating. I also know many families who are so overscheduled that they are literally never home. The kids are growing up in the backseat of the family car as they are being driven to and from various extra curricular activities. The size of the home is completely irrelevent in their cases.

For me it's much more about the family's priorities and the emphasis they put on being together, even when they aren't forced to be together.

I think you are reading WAY to much into this. There are more ways to raise our children than there are children I am sure. House size is a contributing factor. EVERYTHING we do is a contributing factor. Each choice we make contributes to the way we live. And WHERE we live changes how we live.

Living on an acreage would make a huge impact on the kind of life one leads. There are experiences that cannot be replicated in an urban setting even if you grow a big garden or keep a couple of chickens. Living in an apartment will be different than living in a house with a yard. Living in a giant house is different than living in a tiny house. Living in a tiny house with lots of kids is different than living in a tiny house with one kid.

Our life is so much different than the lives of our friends and relatives with bigger homes. That doesn't mean they aren't amazing people with amazing kids. But it is an obvious difference in lifestyle. Just as the kids growing up on acreage. Many of those kids do more work in one morning than mine need to do in a week. They have a great work ethic and the families are amazing in their teamwork. That doesn't mean I think they are judging me for living in the middle of the city







Different lifestyle choices based on different values and desires of the people involved.

It seems so obvious to me that growing up with 4000sqft will lead to a different experience than growing up with 800sqft. Just like growing up in a family that moves every year will be different than growing up with one that lives in the same house forever. Or growing up with no siblings will be different than growing up with 6 siblings. A different set of circumstances means a different outcome based on different day to day experiences.

That doesn't mean it is better or worse. Life is so much more interesting with variety. If you choose to make that a judgment against your choices I guess that is up to you. I just don't see how it can be claimed that where we spend the majority of our time will have NO impact on our families.


----------



## Village Mama (Jul 22, 2004)

We are in a house that is just under 800 square feet and a family of four. It is perfect for now, but ideally I would add one basement rumpus room or something... because as the kids are older they don't have any privacy at all. If they have a friend over they are right in the middle of all of the action! I would like the kids to feel comfy bringing friends over, and to have a space to safely hang out.
That said, we manage really well in this space, homeschooling, spinning, knitting, weaving, writing, cooking, canning, gardening and all of the regular family goings on! It is a struggle to keep it from being cluttered or messy, and requires constant rearranging to keep it so that it works well for our needs. We definitely need to have a place for everything! Thrift stores are our best friends... both to get things out and to bring things in to fit our current needs. Nothing is designer or current, but it helps to not be attatched to one layout that looks good and stays the same for years!


----------



## orangefoot (Oct 8, 2004)

We live in a very small space which is smaller in total than the OP's living room.

I am frustrated by our situation and I don't really like it but I am not unhappy as a person, neither is my dh nor is any of our children.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Linda on the move* 
It's normal for teens and tweens to want privacy. Denying them that on principle seems controlling.

We could put our youngest two in school and daycare and I could go to work full time which could mean that we could get an enormous mortgage to buy a bigger house. That I refuse to take this option could be construed as denying my children privacy on principle. Am I controlling? I don't believe so.

Attaching personal happiness to material things has never really been my thing; I was very, very unhappy in a destructive relationship in a much larger house.


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *orangefoot* 
We could put our youngest two in school and daycare and I could go to work full time which could mean that we could get an enormous mortgage to buy a bigger house. That I refuse to take this option could be construed as denying my children privacy on principle.

I don't think that living in a space that your family can afford is denying privacy on principle.


----------



## pixiekisses (Oct 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama* 
(..) I just don't see how it can be claimed that where we spend the majority of our time will have NO impact on our families.

I don't think anyone said that. I don't think you understood the point from mama1803's post, or my post, that were actually commenting on your other one.


----------



## FreeRangeMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:

I don't think anyone said that. I don't think you understood the point from mama1803's post, or my post, that were actually commenting on your other one.
I understood perfectly, but thanks for the concern


----------



## pixiekisses (Oct 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama* 
I understood perfectly, but thanks for the concern









Then I don't get your second reply, that's just weird if you got our points. Particulary since I qouted you on something that wasn't the point at all, that nobody said or meant.


----------



## Landover (Oct 12, 2007)

I think the overall point isn't that where we live might impact our family... I think the main point is that it doesn't have to be a deciding factor in how close knit your family is.

Overall, I hear it being said that families in larger homes have a tendency to retreat and do not have to work things out. That is a very broad generalization and really quite inaccurate. My children are still learning to live harmoniously in our large home just as much as kids who live in a small home are learning to do so. For example, it would be rather silly to think that a kiddo living in a small home doesn't learn how to be comfortable on their own, have a private moment, or how to seek solace in themselves simply because there are other people around much of the time. Clearly, these kids learn to value their privacy, and my kids learn to live with one another.

Again... the size of the home DOES NOT matter in how close knit your family is. That has a lot more to do with how you live your life, the values you teach your children, and how much you make an effort to show your love for each other through time and touch. Trust me... you can live in a small space and make very little effort to show love and to genuinely work things out .


----------



## Chicky2 (May 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Landover* 
I think the overall point isn't that where we live might impact our family... I think the main point is that it doesn't have to be a deciding factor in how close knit your family is.

Overall, I hear it being said that families in larger homes have a tendency to retreat and do not have to work things out. That is a very broad generalization and really quite inaccurate. My children are still learning to live harmoniously in our large home just as much as kids who live in a small home are learning to do so. For example, it would be rather silly to think that a kiddo living in a small home doesn't learn how to be comfortable on their own, have a private moment, or how to seek solace in themselves simply because there are other people around much of the time. Clearly, these kids learn to value their privacy, and my kids learn to live with one another.

Again... the size of the home DOES NOT matter in how close knit your family is. That has a lot more to do with how you live your life, the values you teach your children, and how much you make an effort to show your love for each other through time and touch. Trust me... you can live in a small space and make very little effort to show love and to genuinely work things out .

Very well put.


----------



## Proxi (Mar 14, 2009)

This has been a fascinating conversation for me to read through! The only time I jump on the environmental bandwagon so to speak is when urban sprawl comes into play. I live in a city that is huge on the sprawl, and I totally don't agree with it. I think a smartly designed small house is a great way to use our resources versus a huge house. I don't think it necessarily HAS to do anything with a family.... after all, I was extremely close to my parents and we were just three people living in over 3000 sq ft growing up.

Now I am married and live in a 540 sq ft apartment (that is NOT designed well, can't wait to move!) with a dog. I hope that no matter how many kids we have that we never go over 1500 sq ft, and preferably stay under 1200. The key is build a space the way you would use it... for example, I need my person space. However, I can totally get that as long as I get a bath every other night, and when we have the money we will totally be renovating a condo so that I can have a decent bathroom. On the other hand, we don't need big bedrooms. We are rarely in there. I also hate cooking so the kitchen doesn't need to be huge either.

I understand that people have different desires. I have one relative who lived in an apartment that was probably 900-1200 sq ft (it was 3 tiny bedrooms, 2 baths) with seven people and another that lived in a 4000+ sq ft home with 5 people.

I am a huge fan of small-space living IF it is designed well. I don't think it makes or breaks a healthy family, but I think it is something that is good for the community. Smart-small-space homes are often in communities that are built to be pedestrian friendly. Walking around, chatting with the neighbors, etc... all great things in my books!


----------



## FreeRangeMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pixiekisses* 
Then I don't get your second reply, that's just weird if you got our points. Particulary since I qouted you on something that wasn't the point at all, that nobody said or meant.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama1803* 
I'm rather surprised by all the responses that imply that a small house is more conducive to fostering a close knit family. I've always felt that when people truely enjoy being together and put a priority on spending time together doing things as a family, the size of the house is irrelevant.


Quote:

House size doesn't matter here. Siblings can still share a room even if the house is bigger.

Quote:

No, and we have a very close knit family (also well functioning), and size of house doesn't matter in this for us.

Quote:

I don't agree that living in a small space means that people have to work things out.

These are a few examples of where it sounds like *to me* that people are saying that house size doesn't impact families. I am just saying that of course it does. But I am not "inferring" that it is a superior choice, just that different living arrangements contribute to the way our families operate (either by choice or by necessity).

I am not actually arguing with you though, just commenting on the subject at hand. Perhaps you are reading a tone or sensing an attack on your post that isn't really there? Because I was mostly agreeing that there isn't ONE right way. Just that whatever way we choose will have an impact, so whatever the OP chooses should be what will make her happy and be in line with her values and goals in life.

Does that make more sense to you, because I am not sure why you are confused?


----------



## pixiekisses (Oct 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama* 
These are a few examples of where it sounds like *to me* that people are saying that house size doesn't impact families. I am just saying that of course it does. But I am not "inferring" that it is a superior choice, just that different living arrangements contribute to the way our families operate (either by choice or by necessity).

Well, since you qouted me, for one, I can say that no, I didn't say that.
What I said was exactly what is put into this post under here, but maybe this is better put:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Landover* 
I think the overall point isn't that where we live might impact our family... I think the main point is that it doesn't have to be a deciding factor in how close knit your family is.

Overall, I hear it being said that families in larger homes have a tendency to retreat and do not have to work things out. That is a very broad generalization and really quite inaccurate. My children are still learning to live harmoniously in our large home just as much as kids who live in a small home are learning to do so. For example, it would be rather silly to think that a kiddo living in a small home doesn't learn how to be comfortable on their own, have a private moment, or how to seek solace in themselves simply because there are other people around much of the time. Clearly, these kids learn to value their privacy, and my kids learn to live with one another.

Again... the size of the home DOES NOT matter in how close knit your family is. That has a lot more to do with how you live your life, the values you teach your children, and how much you make an effort to show your love for each other through time and touch. Trust me... you can live in a small space and make very little effort to show love and to genuinely work things out .


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

I thought the OP was asking what size house made the easiest for family members to be happy and to enjoy each other.

Obviously, there are other factors that are for more important than the size of the house in our happiness. Some families would be miserable in any size home, and some would be very happy in an size home.

None the less, it's easier to be happy in a home with a good floor plan that is the right size for one's family. For us, it's a medium home, where we all feel sort of close together and yet we all have some space to ourselves. For us, it's about balance.

I think that kids do need privacy as they get older, and in a smaller home where that is harder to come by, parents who are sensetive to that will find ways to make it a reality for their kids. On the other hand, parent's can ignore their children's need for privacy in any size home. The attitude of the parents is really the deciding factor.


----------



## FreeRangeMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pixiekisses* 
Well, since you qouted me, for one, I can say that no, I didn't say that.
What I said was exactly what is put into this post under here, but maybe this is better put:

Actually the posts I quoted were from mama1803 not you, but I wasn't arguing, just commenting on the thread with no intention of derailing it









The OP asked

Quote:

what is your experience with home size and raising kids?
We are all sharing experiences. MY experience is that because we are close knit and "well functioning" (since that was so popular







) it works well even though we have more kids and less space than the OP. I feel it works well BECAUSE we are close and have good (respectful) dynamics. We have not necessarily become close knit because of the small home, but I am sure it has shaped our family in many ways because this is where we live.


----------



## pixiekisses (Oct 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama* 
Actually the posts I quoted were from mama1803 not you, but I wasn't arguing, just commenting on the thread with no intention of derailing it










Sorry, I have to point out that in your last post, #73 to avoid confusion, you qouted three sentences from me, and two from mama1803, the first one with my nick, then the second one with hers. And the third and fourth with no nick were mine, and the fifth hers.


----------



## dmpmercury (Mar 31, 2008)

Quote:

This has been a fascinating conversation for me to read through! The only time I jump on the environmental bandwagon so to speak is when urban sprawl comes into play. I live in a city that is huge on the sprawl, and I totally don't agree with it. I think a smartly designed small house is a great way to use our resources versus a huge house. I don't think it necessarily HAS to do anything with a family.... after all, I was extremely close to my parents and we were just three people living in over 3000 sq ft growing up.

Now I am married and live in a 540 sq ft apartment (that is NOT designed well, can't wait to move!) with a dog. I hope that no matter how many kids we have that we never go over 1500 sq ft, and preferably stay under 1200. The key is build a space the way you would use it... for example, I need my person space. However, I can totally get that as long as I get a bath every other night, and when we have the money we will totally be renovating a condo so that I can have a decent bathroom. On the other hand, we don't need big bedrooms. We are rarely in there. I also hate cooking so the kitchen doesn't need to be huge either.

I understand that people have different desires. I have one relative who lived in an apartment that was probably 900-1200 sq ft (it was 3 tiny bedrooms, 2 baths) with seven people and another that lived in a 4000+ sq ft home with 5 people.

I am a huge fan of small-space living IF it is designed well. I don't think it makes or breaks a healthy family, but I think it is something that is good for the community. Smart-small-space homes are often in communities that are built to be pedestrian friendly. Walking around, chatting with the neighbors,
Well said this is exactly how I feel on the matter. I want to be a city planner in the future and design smart growth communities that are NOT suburban sprawl and are very walkable. Desity doesn't feel that way if it is well designed. It is so goood for communities to be walkable as well as the environmental benefits which are hughe. Sprawl is just not sustainable and neither is everyone having big houses. There just aren't enough resources for that. I want to live in a small but well designed house that doesn't feel small. We will hopefully have 3 kids and I hope to stay under 1200 sq ft. I would like a nice kitchen, small walk in closets, a mudroom with lockers and lots of storage. I'm in 1100 sq feet condo now with 2 and 1 on the way. It not designed the best but it it is ok. Some major decluttering made it better.


----------



## Hannah32 (Dec 23, 2009)

We are expecting our first and live in an apartment that is about 700 square feet, including indoor/outdoor storage space. I'm a major clutter crusader and LOVE to organize things, so I do a good job making the most of space.

I've got plans for how we'll adapt to baby. We'll probably ditch a chair that's in our bedroom now to make room for a crib. The baby will be an Arms Reach for awhile anyway. We've cleared a space in the hall for another bureau for clothes. We're ditching a futon (twin size) in the living room to make a play space and may store our coffee table at my parents house.

When the baby is older, hubby and I may move into the den and shift our desk into the hall, moving baby's bureau into baby's new room. Baby will have to deal with mom and dad needing to store our clothes in his room, but I think he'll survive.







At that point, I could move the play space into his room too, freeing up some living room for office space/books.

It's tight. Our space is decently adaptable, with the exception of the den, which is full of unsafe things that are 1) used often 2) there is no other place for. That's why hubby and I will probably have to transition into it some day. It will be blocked off from Day 1 by a gate.

I've got it figured out how we can stay here with up to 2 children, depending on financial circumstances. We may not be here that long. But this apartment helps keep our living expenses low, which is crucial as we live on my teacher's salary and a seasonal gig at the moment. Plus, with an infant on the way, the washer/dryer combo in the kitchen is extremely hard to give up. And for one more fantastic feature, my apartment is small enough that I don't need a baby monitor.


----------



## FreeRangeMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pixiekisses* 
Sorry, I have to point out that in your last post, #73 to avoid confusion, you qouted three sentences from me, and two from mama1803, the first one with my nick, then the second one with hers. And the third and fourth with no nick were mine, and the fifth hers.









I meant BEFORE that post, the other one you were referencing. Listen, I have no need to argue with you. I am not sure WHY this is still an issue as I wasn't disagreeing with you and all the things I said were directed at posts that weren't yours. I am not going to pick apart your every quote, you are reading something into my posts that wasn't there. You can choose to feel offended if you choose to, but I am not criticizing ANYONE in ANY HOUSE.









So if it makes you feel better you are totally right, I am totally wrong. The last word is yours (even though I wasn't really disagreeing with you). And have a wonderful day!


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Maybe this is slightly OT, but this thread got me thinking about the vast differences in how I live and in how my parents live. I posted earlier that we live in a one bedroom apartment in the city, and it works great for us so far. I grew up in a large house and everything that I have lived in since has gotten progressively smaller. My parents, on the other hand (both who are approaching 70 years old) just bought a house that's bigger than anything they ever lived in! I scratched my head on this one, mainly because my mother has more to clean (refuses to use any outside help) and we (as in my brother and I) only go to visit them maybe twice a year at most because it is nine hours drive for both of us. As far as I know, they rarely entertain.

My parents are forever reminding my brother (who lives in a two-bedroom apartment with 4 children) and I that we need to think about getting bigger apartments. It is the topic of almost every conversation! Their minds are literally boggled that we both can make it work. I think a major issue that they have and why they think they need a lot of space is that they are both pack rats. Getting rid of anything (whether it be sold, given away or tossed) sets off some sort of bizarre psychosis in them and they really have a hard time coming to terms with the idea that maybe they don't need all the stuff that they've acquired. I'm not talking about collections and fine furniture here, I'm talking about everything from furniture they find on the street to plastic grocery bags. My mom's most common line is: "It would be a shame to give it away, we may need it some day." While there is some truth to the concept that they may, remotely, need such item some day, what is the cost of keeping that item into perpetuity?

Don't get me wrong, I love my parents, but our life philosophies have diverged.


----------



## pixiekisses (Oct 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama* 
I meant BEFORE that post, the other one you were referencing. Listen, I have no need to argue with you. I am not sure WHY this is still an issue as I wasn't disagreeing with you and all the things I said were directed at posts that weren't yours. I am not going to pick apart your every quote, you are reading something into my posts that wasn't there. You can choose to feel offended if you choose to, but I am not criticizing ANYONE in ANY HOUSE.










No, no! I'm not disagreeing, or arguing, or reading anything into your post.









We must have misunderstood each other somewhere, but otherwise, I haven't been arguing with you at all really, just discussing some things. But I don't think we've disagreed that much at all.


----------



## childsplay (Sep 4, 2007)

For us it's about sanity. We lived on a 50 ft (not exactly sur the sq. footage) sailboat with four kids, it was great, lots of quality family time, travel and adventure, but after a while in that small a space? Forget it. I can only take hiding in a tiny bathtub at midnight for 'me time' for so long. Seriously, I love the children dearly but not being able to swing my arms without clocking somebody really gets old fast. The next (and present) house we built is 5000 sq.ft. of space, privacy, storage, and room to run.
It's funny though, in our house although all the kids have their own rooms the three younger ones always end up sleeping in one child's room.


----------



## MariposaMami (Jan 7, 2008)

We have a 1,500 sq. ft. home. There are 7 of us and we are expecting a baby in August. Childrens ages are: 7, 6, 5, 3, and 2. We have a big backyard, and we are just fine and happy in our home!


----------



## Jugs (Mar 18, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Landover* 
Overall, I hear it being said that families in larger homes have a tendency to retreat and do not have to work things out. That is a very broad generalization and really quite inaccurate.

I agree. Living in a 800 sq ft apartment with no yard, no local parks, very little storage space and two spirited children, in the dead f winter I tend to retreat more often than I should, simply because I feel so darn smothered at times!


----------

