Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hello all! First timer here, as well as a real-estate newbie.
I've been looking at some homes (Los Angeles county) because I got tired of renting, and I learned tons in those few weeks. But so many things I don't understand...
For example, what's with this "starter home" idea? I never knew you were supposed to start with a starter home and upgrade every so often! I've been renting all my life and moved around a lot, so I admit I don't know any better. I always thought of home-buying as something I'd do when I am ready to settle in a place and pick a house that I can envision living forever... with just two of us, with a few children, maybe our elderly mothers, whatever circumstances may bring.
Now, I don't mind living in a cramped space (as long as I don't have to live with my mother in a single room ), and can't imagine buying something that's larger than 2,000 sq ft. So I suppose I could very well buy a "starter" home as my permanent home.
However, I simply do not understand the typical layout of a home. There are too many rooms! Living room, family room, dining room, breakfast room... I don't need all that! I would like just one living room, you know, a place for a couch and to hang around, and then a kitchen with a space for a 4-person dining table. I wouldn't need a formal dining room that will just sit empty and collect dust, as we're not into entertaining guests.
I've seen some houses that has just right amount of rooms for my liking... that are run-down REOs. I'm not handy, nor my husband. We can't handle fixers. As we go up in price-range in a nice, quiet, upper-middle class neighborhood, I like them less and less.
Is it even possible to find my ideal house that's small and without all those redundant rooms in a upper-middle class neighborhood, or must I resign to the big houses that I can't even clean (I'm extremely lazy) if I wanted to live in those neighborhoods?
What do you all think? This is just a light-hearted, newbie's observation/question, conversation thread, not a serious question. Just throw your opinions please!
To me, the idea of a "dream home" is a home that has ALL of your wants no matter the cost. It could be mountain views, a pool, acreage of land, 4,000 Sq Ft, 4 car garage...etc. everybody's dream home is out there. It is all a matter of whether you can afford it or not.
A starter home would be a home that could help you obtain your dream home years down the road. Your starter home, might have 2000 sq ft, small lot, no pool, 2 car garage, etc, but you could easily live in it. Depending on the housing market, you could eventually sell this home and use it to buy a home closer to what you want in a dream home.
Another way to look at it is family size. For a lot of people, it might just be spouse / spouse / kid. In this case a 2 bedroom house could work. Of course if they decided to have another child, where would this new child sleep? So, now you need a bigger home. The 2 bedroom house would have been a starter home for a new family just starting out.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,576 posts, read 81,186,228 times
Reputation: 57813
Homes have always been built to appeal to the greatest number of people. The design/layout has changed with people's taste over many years. For example, the "great room", family room, dual sinks in the master, and the huge walk-in closet have all been fairly recent additions to new homes. people with 100 year homes are including these things when they renovate because they want them or to get more money when they eventually sell. You have rather unusual taste, and should look for a small 1-2 bedroom cottage, and if it has rooms you don't want/need hire a contractor to remove them and just expand the spaces you do need. Does it have to be a house? You can surely find many studio or one bedroom condos for sale as small as 450 sf that wouldn't take long to clean.
I haven't looked at too many houses but from my limited experience, it seems my ideal houses are those that are less desired by other buyers in general. The general trend of buying a smaller, starter home, and then moving to larger homes as family grows, is not what we envision for ourselves. Maybe it's because both my husband and I grew up in cultures different from middle class American. I would like to buy a small house (2000 sq ft or less) but I would like to live in an affluent neighborhood. But affluent neighborhood seems to equate to big houses. Therefore, here I am, scratching my head...
Maybe I'll change my mind once we have children, but at this point, I honestly think even 2 bedrooms will be enough for having 2 kids. Well, 3 bedrooms max. Is my thinking too bizarre?
Homes have always been built to appeal to the greatest number of people. The design/layout has changed with people's taste over many years. For example, the "great room", family room, dual sinks in the master, and the huge walk-in closet have all been fairly recent additions to new homes. people with 100 year homes are including these things when they renovate because they want them or to get more money when they eventually sell. You have rather unusual taste, and should look for a small 1-2 bedroom cottage, and if it has rooms you don't want/need hire a contractor to remove them and just expand the spaces you do need. Does it have to be a house? You can surely find many studio or one bedroom condos for sale as small as 450 sf that wouldn't take long to clean.
Yes, a condo would fit us better as far as interiors. Problem is, we crave our own yard!
We're actually starting to think about townhomes with small private yard space.
Also, our long-term dream is to move out of state to a rural or semi rural area. Maybe we'll have better luck finding those small houses in a nice neighborhood if we look at rural towns?
Maybe I'll change my mind once we have children, but at this point, I honestly think even 2 bedrooms will be enough for having 2 kids. Well, 3 bedrooms max. Is my thinking too bizarre?
No it's not bizarre. I'm surprised you're having trouble finding a beach bungalow or something like that that fits your desires in the LA area.
I'd caution you on the 2 bedrooms with 2 kids thing though. I have 2 kids; a boy, who has tons of energy and requires little sleep and a girl, who needs 10 hours and likes her privacy...a lot. I think sometimes before you have kids or even when you have little kids, it's easy to forget that in just a few years these are adult sized people that will live in your home. My 10yr old is the same height as me, when she has her friends over our 2600 sq ft house feels small. I can't imagine how it will be when our 7yr old is man sized
None of that is to say that a smaller house wouldn't work just fine, I'd just recommend 3 beds if you're planning on 2 kids.
If you lived in Asheville, NC I would say absolutely yes, you can find this kind of house here. Los Angeles County? I have no idea! Maybe you just need to look further out in the suburbs?
If you can find what you like in a fixer upper, negotiate a low price and then you can afford to pay professional construction workers to fix it up for you.
Starter houses are not necessarily small. They are a house that a person can afford for their first home purchase. It's about price, not size.
The other option is to purchase a build-able lot in the area you want to be located in and have a house custom built for you, just as you want it. I suggest that if you want to build small, that you have your architect design a house that can be added onto, so that when you sell it, a buyer can see where they could buy it cheap for the neighborhood and add on. It's easy to do that in the planning stages.
Yes, davebarnes, obviously. I intend to do just that. We're just starting out in this real estate journey.
About custom building: wouldn't it be awfully expensive to build a house? Our financial situation is, I currently make about $100k/yr, and my husband will be able to add $50-80k in a few years after graduation. If he can get a job elsewhere, we're moving out of over-priced California. We've talked about Idaho, Utah, even Alaska lol! We can't wait to get out of city life! It would be wonderful if we could buy an acre or so, and build a small, cozy custom home. But isn't custom building an inevitably expensive route?
Anyway, thanks for the various tips!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
), and can't imagine buying something that's larger than 2,000 sq ft. So I suppose I could very well buy a "starter" home as my permanent home.
