Downsizing from 2K sq ft to 1K sq ft?

[TromboneAl]

There's a 1,000 sq ft house for sale near here (compared with out 2K sq ft house). I find small houses attractive, but I realize that the only big advantages are:

1. Much faster to clean.
2. Much cheaper and easier (if you split firewood) to heat.

So, it doesn't make must sense to think about moving there, right?

 

[rbmrtn]

In addition, cheaper to insure and less property tax.

 

[Dash man]

Less room for guests to overstay their welcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

 

[Moemg]

That is a little tight for when Jenny comes home and brings her SO and then later when she comes home with your grandchild . Stay put !

 

[bbbamI]

If the house appeals to you and the missus, go for it.

As for me, I wouldn't move to a smaller house because it was cheaper (unless I was struggling financially). I need my own space and so does my DH.

 

[heeyy_joe]

We went from 3000 to 1020. It was liberating!

 

[REWahoo]

As for me, I wouldn't move to a smaller house because it was cheaper (unless I was struggling financially). I need my own space and so does my DH.

+1

 

[W2R]

If you like it, why not? There's nothing inherently bad about either a small house or a large house.

Some of us find that the older we get, the more we like the idea of downsizing and a smaller house could be well suited to that sort of lifestyle. If the floorplan was right and the house had whatever amenities you prefer, you might like it a lot. Less to clean, less to maintain, less hassle, less money - - a small house can have a lot of advantages.

Others find they entertain more and need the space. Or maybe they don't want to downsize and need the extra storage of a larger house. Maybe they have the type of hobbies that require a lot of space. There are lots of reasons why some prefer larger homes.

I tend to prefer small, cozy homes, but if the right home was larger than I had in mind, I wouldn't let that get in my way, either (up to a point).

 

[Mulligan]

I have about 2000 square feet of livable space. About 1000 of it is used only when I am in it to clean it. Company visiting issues aside, I certainly could downsize. If GF and a I ever move out of state in retirement a 1100 square foot patio home would be perfect.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Bestwifeever]

I think our house was 1200 sf (and that's generously measured) when we bought it--we added on a big family room soon after when we had kids. It has three bedrooms, a dining room, a living room, and a kitchen, all about the same size. We find the number of rooms is almost as important as the total square footage--one of us is in the living room reading or knitting while the other is in the family room or the bedroom-turned-into-office. I am sure we could quickly get used to a bigger house, but we could also do fine in the original house.

 

[W2R]

I think our house was 1200 sf (and that's generously measured) when we bought it--we added on a big family room soon after when we had kids. It has three bedrooms, a dining room, a living room, and a kitchen, all about the same size. We find the number of rooms is almost as important as the total square footage--one of us is in the living room reading or knitting while the other is in the family room or the bedroom-turned-into-office. I am sure we could quickly get used to a bigger house, but we could also do fine in the original house.

I'm like you - - I'm pretty adaptable about house size I guess. I don't need a lot of rooms, though. Right now I live in a 1600 square foot house but only use about 800 square feet. Like Mulligan, I seldom go into various parts of my house.

I could manage with a larger house if it was otherwise just right for me, though, as long as I didn't get lost in it too often.

 

[FUEGO]

Easier to maintain, too. Less to paint or pressure wash on the outside. Fewer gutters to clean. When things need replacing like the siding, windows, or the roof, it's a smaller quantity. Same inside the house. Less bathrooms mean less plumbing leaks and if you ever renovate, less to do.

 

[FIREd]

We downsized from 2,500 sqft to 1,100 sqft. Is it possible? Yes, absolutely. Is it desirable? Maybe. We downsized by need. We moved to a much more expensive area and we could not afford a 2,500 sqft dwelling. We found that spending a lot less time on cleaning and maintenance increased our quality of life by a great deal more than anticipated. I can't imagine moving back to a 2,500 sqft house now - unless it comes fully staffed. Still, the extra room was nice...

 

[Bestwifeever]

I'm like you - - I'm pretty adaptable about house size I guess. I don't need a lot of rooms, though. Right now I live in a 1600 square foot house but only use about 800 square feet. Like Mulligan, I seldom go into various parts of my house.

I could manage with a larger house if it was otherwise just right for me, though, as long as I didn't get lost in it too often.

I started out in a studio apartment, one big room, and could easily live like that again if it were just me, but it is nice to have a few separate rooms when two or more people share the residence.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

I guess partly it depends on where you live and the price of real estate. In metro areas in states high cost of living states like New York or California 1K sq feet could free up a lot of cash.

 

[timo2]

I live in a 1332 sq ft house now, and it's plenty for two or three people. It depends upon the way the space and rooms are arranged.

 

[TromboneAl]

Good points, all.

That is a little tight for when Jenny comes home and brings her SO and then later when she comes home with your grandchild . Stay put !

Excellent point. I always think of Jenny's visits in terms of one person. That will change.

 

[frank]

smaller house, less cleaning, less maintainance, more free time. espescially if you travel a lot.

 

[Senator]

There's a 1,000 sq ft house for sale near here (compared with out 2K sq ft house). I find small houses attractive, but I realize that the only big advantages are:

1. Much faster to clean.
2. Much cheaper and easier (if you split firewood) to heat.

So, it doesn't make must sense to think about moving there, right?

I never understood why people move just down the street/block. If you are going to sell a home, and buy another, why not pick a warmer state, or a state will lower taxes, or a state that has something legal that you can't legally do now.

A smaller house with less expenses makes sense to me, if it makes sense to you... But you will likely never recoup the selling and moving costs.

 

[scrinch]

I never understood why people move just down the street/block. If you are going to sell a home, and buy another, why not pick a warmer state, or a state will lower taxes, or a state that has something legal that you can't legally do now....

I see it the opposite way, but maybe that's because I live about 10,000 miles away from friends and family now. Why move to a different state just for a little more money or sunshine? Being around friends and family worth more than that to me.

 

[Huston55]

We went from 3000 to 1020. It was liberating!

+1
DW and I have lived (during our working lives) in everything from 875sf to 4,800sf, and we've upsized and downsized several times. We've found that "location" and what's just outside our front door is really more important than square footage.

I have about 2000 square feet of livable space. About 1000 of it is used only when I am in it to clean it. Company visiting issues aside, I certainly could downsize. If GF and a I ever move out of state in retirement a 1100 square foot patio home would be perfect.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yep. Same for us in almost every dwelling >1,000sf, we've had unused space. Of course, we have no children (if you don't count our fur child) so, that makes small spaces a bit easier for us. In fact, looking back on our dozen+ residences, we've almost always had unused space; kinda makes me feel wasteful now that I think about it.

We downsized from 2,500 sqft to 1,100 sqft. Is it possible? Yes, absolutely. Is it desirable? Maybe. We downsized by need. We moved to a much more expensive area and we could not afford a 2,500 sqft dwelling. We found that spending a lot less time on cleaning and maintenance increased our quality of life by a great deal more than anticipated. I can't imagine moving back to a 2,500 sqft house now - unless it comes fully staffed. Still, the extra room was nice...

We are in the process of doing exactly the same thing - moving to a more expensive area, where we will downsize because space is expensive and we've found we don't need much more than 1,000sf. Also, as described above, location and what's outside our front door is very important to us.

 

[jerome len]

If you would be happy with the 1000 sq ft, move, if not, don't. I grew up in a family of 4 in a 580 sq ft home....never knew it was small. Today, DW, DS, puppy and I would kill each other in a 1000 sq ft home......just the way it is. Good luck, be happy.

 

[Rushmore]

One thing I would add is whether it has good age in place potential. Things like a bedroom and bath on the main floor and fewer steps could help keep someone in their home longer.

I moved 2 years ago to a slightly smaller home that is zero clearance(no steps) and it has really helped my pain level. I didn't realize how much those steps were adding to pain.

As for family coming. My sister, 2 nieces and on fiancée stayed here(two bedrooms) for a week and it worked. My other house would have been a little nicer-more spread out and more privacy for all, but hey isn't family about being close? We, as always spent most of our time out and about anyway and we sure got lots closer the fincee, lol.

My former in laws used to rent hotel rooms when we all came. We rotated which family stayed there and which stayed at the house. Since the one closest to them allowed us all use of the pool it was a good way for the g kids to burn off steam particularly in the winter. I think doing that for a few days here and there was a lot less than the costs of a bigger house.

 

[BBQ-Nut]

I am looking out into FIRE and the possibility of downsizing, but I am also concerned about TCO (total cost of ownership) - a smaller abode may not mean actual lower cost in the long run which may mean higher property taxes, maybe it is older and will need an infusion of money for a remodel, or higher yearly 'maintenance'/repairs, maybe it has a yard that will need a gardener, what about water bills, we have our solar system paid off on our current home, maybe the new one will mean a big energy bill again every month.


It really is dependent on the specific areas and properties in question.

 

[Amethyst]

We would like to go from 4000 to 3000 sq feet. Unfortunately, in our area, the smaller the dwelling, the cheaper and less desirable is the development, until you finally get down to shared-wall environments which are generally quite undesirable.

Developers around here do not yet perceive any profit in building smaller, but higher-end houses. They will build the largest house possible on a very small lot. A few expensive condos have gone up lately, but the thought of sharing walls - let alone hallways - is quite unappealing to us.