StreetEasy Forums · Sales
Started by lobster
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 1147
Member since: May 2009
Discussion about
Since Streeteasy is read by a large group of individuals from all over the city, I thought I would ask what size apartment would you consider a sufficient size for an individual, a couple or a family of two or more? I'm guessing there will be a wide diversity of opinions.To get the conversation started, I would say that 600-850 square feet is sufficient for one person and 1000-1500 square feet would be fine for a couple.Thanks for all comments.
Response by ekartash
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 364
Member since: Jun 2007
Ours is 850 sq feet. Married couple with a newborn. Plenty of room for now. In about 18 months we will need a 2 bedroom. An extra 200 sq feet would do the trick. But I think we are going to look long term and get a 3 bedroom ( if we can afford it)
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by alanhart
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
I think home size (and "sufficient" home size) within a given market is dictated almost entirely by wealth, and not by family size.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by tdadlani
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 48
Member since: Apr 2008
Good conversation. Obviously it's all personal opinion. But would have to agree that 1000-1300 is more then enough for a couple.(2baths important) Family of 4 would need 2000+ to be comfortable. For singles 500-700 is ideal.
But if money is no object; add as desired.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by Mikev
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 431
Member since: Jun 2010
i would say affordability and desire is the driver. while 2000 sf is great, where are you getting that in the city? What are your other requirements that will drive price, doorman, other amenities. Are you willing to own a townhouse?
But size i agree is about right. 650sf was my apartment on my own, about 900sf with the wife and child for a bit longer hten would have like 4 years old. now in 1500 sf, 3br for the 3 of us.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by nyc10023
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 7614
Member since: Nov 2008
It's all about the $. Do you mean, the minimum size deemed comfortable, assuming no economic constraints? Or the minimum sized deemed comfortable by papa-bear-IB-associate, mama-bear-SAHM?
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by helenwaite
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 169
Member since: Jan 2009
Agree with nyc10003. About the money. And the configuration. 900sf can look wildly different.
Personally, I can't really consider anything under 900sf. Two adults, no kids however we have "special needs" because of art, books, records. So that means wall space. In addition, I am an artist so I really need a corner that I can keep my mess - otherwise I'll become a singleton.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by nyc10023
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 7614
Member since: Nov 2008
Lobster: as I was running outside (Riverside Park, gorgeous, even had some big waves over the fence), I was pondering your question. You can't think of size alone in isolation from $, from location.
For instance, my comfortable "minimum" would be different in a prime UWS location but you might get me to move to a bigger space in a less prime UWS location.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by nyc10023
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 7614
Member since: Nov 2008
As for couples, there are couples and there are couples.
What if my partner & I were retired, in good health, and had our grandchildren in or around NYC? Maybe we would still like a 3-bedroom to accommodate overnight guests or maybe we would have very large 1-bedroom to encourage visitors but discourage guests? It's all so individual.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by falcogold1
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 4159
Member since: Sep 2008
I could live (alone) in 200 sqft as long as I was not excited.
If I got excited, I'd also need is a window.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by alanhart
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
It's like the right size for a desk.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by buyerbuyer
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 707
Member since: Jan 2010
Layout is key, as noted. I have a friend who has a 450sf coop on uws, which actually seems nice and cozy, with a small kitchen alcove, small bathroom, 8x10 bedroom, and small but nice looking little living room , whch works partly because three is a nice big window in the room . It doesn't feel small. BUT I mention this as the absolute smallest I could handle, and even that would be pushing it a bit.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by nyc10023
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 7614
Member since: Nov 2008
Are we talking sleeping-cubicle-hotel Tokyo style? Nearby amenities matter. If I was single and lived in the Reebok building I could get away with no bath or shower.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by lobster
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 1147
Member since: May 2009
The tricky part to me is when you have children. I think that 2 adults who are not pack rats can live comfortably in 1000 square feet (and as a bonus, throw out all the unnecesary stuff you take from apartment to apartment). But kids need room to play and can not really share a bedroom if there is a boy and girl past a certain age.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by notadmin
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 3835
Member since: Jul 2008
it's so common for couples to work at least partially at home, that a home office is key for many. so i'd say 1 main bedroom, one bedroom/kid (this is know it's my preference) and a home office (more convenient than a dining-room). in our case then, as a couple with 1 kid, we ideally need at least a 3 bedroom at around 1,500 sf. the 2 bathrooms and 2 walking closets became necessities by the way, it'd be very tough to downsize that.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by jim_hones10
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 3413
Member since: Jan 2010
interesting commentary. i'd say a good 15% of real estate transactions are for studios that are 500 sq ft or less.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by BoerumHillScott
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 12
Member since: Oct 2010
Curently I live with my wife and our 9 year old son in a 950 sf apartment, and we feel like we have plenty of room. Partially that is becasue of a good layout, but it is also becasue we chose furniture that maximized storage.
I've lived in other states in places up to 2500 sf, but we really don't miss the extra space.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by freewilly
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 229
Member since: Sep 2008
I don't know about the choice of colors, but furniture can make a big difference in a 1400sf apt with 4 kids:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yjwvy691Kfc
If you're single, 330 sq ft you can still have a guest bed, a hammock and movie screening room and live clutter free
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lg9qnWg9kak
It's not the size folks, it's how you use it.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by NYCMatt
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 7523
Member since: May 2009
"If you're single, 330 sq ft you can still have a guest bed, a hammock and movie screening room and live clutter free
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lg9qnWg9kak
It's not the size folks, it's how you use it."
***
It's also how much CASH you have to pay an architect and engineer to custom-design and custom-build all those movable modular wall components.
I'm guessing to do that here in NYC would cost at least as much as the apartment itself.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by evnyc
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 1844
Member since: Aug 2008
Freewilly makes a good point. Average home size went up dramatically over 40 years: in 1970 it averaged 1400 sf and in 2004 it was 2330; meanwhile, family sizes decreased. People got used to having more space and more junk. If you're willing limit the Stuff you own and think creatively about space and storage, 950 square feet can work fine for a family of three or four. As the kids get older you might want to up that space a bit, but plenty of people have survived sharing a room with a sibling through high school.
I don't really understand the desirability of huge apartments. I'd *like* 1200 square feet and three bedrooms, but I'm happy with 950, too. Every time I visit family I always wonder, what's the point of maintaining this huge house when you use maybe three rooms regularly? All that vacuuming, running up and down stairs, cleaning all those bathrooms, etc. seems like such a waste of time and resources. To me the appeal of the city is that you don't need all that junk and thus get to spend more time doing things you enjoy.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by nyc10023
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 7614
Member since: Nov 2008
Sure, it's fine to theorize on what the minimum space is. Ev, on a cautionary note, I know many couples IRL who've said they don't understand why families with children need more space ("pshaw, 3 bedrooms is plenty") have convenient amnesia when they have 2 kids in 1000 sqft. You can't know it until you've lived it. There are many people who put up with living 4-to-1000-sqft-2bedroom who chose not to move to a bigger space (different location). There are many more others who SAY that with a 'lil ole Container Store magic here, they could shoehorn it, but it doesn't happen.
2 bathrooms, when you have a "toilet-trained" kid is great. Strange how my kids all of a sudden have a desire to pee RIGHT here and now when I tell them I need to go.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by nyc10023
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 7614
Member since: Nov 2008
p.s. We've gone in 4 generations from family-mansion to 6-in-one-room to 4br-suburban-model to *** but doesn't mean that we'd happily go 6-to-one-room again.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by ab_11218
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 2017
Member since: May 2009
i lived in a 1300 sq ft 3 br/2 bth with a fantastic layout. couple and 2 small kids. it was great. especially because we had 200 sq ft of outdoor space.
i see couples with 2 small kids in 950 sq ft and you can't walk around due to toys and "batchelor" furniture. if they would just get rid of the huge furniture and not buy toys every weekend, it would be manageable.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by broadwayron
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 271
Member since: Sep 2006
Minimum space needed in NYC...
250 sq ft for 1.
450 sq ft for a couple.
Obviously, more is better. And, the younger you are, the easier it is to get by with less space. But, I've done both, and it's possible. Funny thing is, I moved to NYC from NorCal, where at one point, I had a 2300 sq ft house (with a 3 car garage), so I haven't always lived like a college student.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by bgrfrank
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 183
Member since: Apr 2010
At some point you need your own space because people are conditioned for privacy. A door is a good thing. Ask all those men who call the toilet their throne.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by PMG
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 1322
Member since: Jan 2008
my requirements are 500 sf for 1, 850 sf for 2, 1200 sf for 3.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by alanhart
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
NYC gives the definitive answers:
"In a multiple dwelling erected after April 18, 1929 pursuant to plans filed and approved prior to December ninth, nineteen hundred and fifty-five, and classified and recorded in the department, at least one living room in an apartment shall have a minimum floor area of one hundred thirty -two square feet; if erected, constructed or altered pursuant to plans filed on or after December ninth, nineteen hundred and fifty-five one living room shall have a minimum floor area of one hundred fifty square feet."
Therefore one person can live in a studio apartment of 150sf.
The law goes on to specify that "Every other living room of an apartment in a multiple dwelling erected after April eighteenth, nineteen hundred twenty-nine shall contain eighty square feet and have a least minimum dimension of eight feet, except: yada yada yada"
... so if not a studio, each bedroom needs only be 80sf.
And more to the point of the original post:
"Every person occupying an apartment in a class A or class B multiple dwelling or in a tenant-occupied apartment in a one- or two-family dwelling shall have a livable area of not less than eighty square feet. The maximum number of persons who may occupy any such apartment shall be determined by dividing the total livable floor area of the apartment by eighty square feet. For every two persons who may lawfully occupy an apartment, one child under four may also reside therein, except that a child under four is permitted in an apartment lawfully occupied by one person."
... so a family of four can get by with 320sf.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by uwsmom
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 1945
Member since: Dec 2008
We're very comfortable now in a 2br+maid's/2.5 ba with a toddler and an infant. Actually, we're probably paying for more space than we need at this point, but we never feel cramped. We turned the maid's room into a guest room (w/ double bed) instead of a home office for family visits. If hubby works from home he's usually on the LR floor or DR table. I said this before in Rhino's "white flight" thread - since we plan to have at least one more child, we probably won't stay in the city if we can't upgrade to more space (7 or 8 room or townhouse). Only staying if we can do so comfortably. So, to answer the question - family of 5+ = at least 1800-2000 sq/ft.
Ignored comment. Unhide
Recommended for You
-
From our blog
NYC Open Houses for November 19 and 20
- More from our blog
Most popular
-
Your taxes are going up
21 Comments
-
Why rent control laws need to change
35 Comments
-
Hypothetical
31 Comments
-
Proposed ac law
21 Comments
-
Mortgage Rates Jump to Highest Level Since 2002
188 Comments
Recommended for You
-
From our blog
NYC Open Houses for November 19 and 20
- More from our blog