5 ms·

Personal story here. I have a 2-year old, and used to own a condo in what is now called Mission Bay. Here are some factors that we had to consider when plannin

by Naritai 10y ago

Personal story here. I have a 2-year old, and used to own a condo in what is now called Mission Bay. Here are some factors that we had to consider when planning on a child: -we are not sure how many children we want, and didn't want to lock ourselves into a lifestyle where that decision was driven by finances. -our 1-bdm 900-sqft condo is not a bad size but still woefully undersized for 1, much less 2, children. The couple on the floor above us had a baby in their unit, and they told us it was hellish. - there was a park nearby, which is nice, but the number of dogs we see reliving themselves on that patch of grass makes me think I'll never let my child play on that grass. -people drive aggressively through my street, and I'd be terrified to let my child play on my sidewalk. -it's really hard to find daycare in SF, and what you do find is expensive. A co-worker told me she got on a school's waiting list before she got pregnant. And when you do find a space, it'll be $2k+ per month per child. -the public education system in SF is opaque and confusing; there is no assurance that your child will be sent to the school geographically closest, and everybody has a horror story about a friend's cousin's brother who moved away from SF after getting their child assigned to a terrible school across town. I don't know that I'll be able to afford private school if needed (and, see aforementioned comment about finances). -when it comes right down to it, I want my child to have the sort of childhood I had, which is from a middle American suburb, with the parks, bike rides, and lemonade stands that that entails. Are any of these 100% accurate? probably not. Maybe I was horribly misinformed. As you note, most of my info came from conversations with other people who already had kids. But that's how most people learn, and I imagine it's how others learn the info they use to make their decisions too. So here I sit, commenting from my home in the East bay. I miss SF, sure, but you know what? It's pretty nice out here, too.

laurencerowe 10y ago
It's a shame most new build apartments ins SF are so horribly designed. 900-sqft is enough for a comfortable 3 bedroom apartment. In an SF new build it probably means a deep, dark open plan space with windows on only one small wall.
- kelnos 10y ago
  I'm not sure I'd say comfortable. Three 10'x10' bedrooms would leave you with 600 sqft remaining to play with, and that's not a lot of room for two bathrooms and a decent-sized living space and kitchen, not to mention closets and any kind of storage space (which the need for increases with the number of people who live there). My 1BR is around 900 sq ft, and I'm having trouble envisioning how you'd carve two more bedrooms out of it and still have a nice space. One more bedroom, sure, but two more feels like it would be a stretch.
  - lambdadmitry 10y ago
    It's an interesting exchange to read for Russian because here it is somewhat common to have two generations (e.g. my grandma, grandpa, aunt, uncle, two nephews and a small dog) living in a 2BR 500 sq ft flat. Gives me kinda different perspective on the poverty of everyday Soviet living, eh. It's slowly changing for the better, though.
  - adevine 10y ago
    Again, it's a matter of perspective. I've seen quite a few well designed 1 bath/1 bed places for 600 sq ft or less. Not hard for me to envision turning the bedroom into another bathroom, with some space left over, and you've then hit pretty much all of your criteria.
- shostack 10y ago
  Many would not consider 900sqft comfortable for a 1bd/1ba let alone 3/1 or 3/2.
  - manarth 10y ago
    It's interesting to see such a different perspective: my 2-bed apartment is 645sqft. It seems the average house in the USA is over twice the size of the average house in the UK [1], and is significantly larger than many countries. [1] http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/how-big-is-a-house http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/how-big-is-a-house
yardie 10y ago
Our son was born in a 230sqft studio. We moved to a 75sqmtr, 760sqft, 3BR apartment. This is in Paris where anything over 500sqft is considered luxurious. Somehow with kids, visitors, and our stuff we managed to make it work. I honestly believe most Americans are latent hoarders. Just buy whatever's on sale with no thought on where it fits into our lifestyle. BTW, everything else I agree with. Childcare is criminally expensive here.
- _delirium 10y ago
  I agree, but the European apartments also typically have much more practical use of space. The U.S. condo market in particular seems aimed at single people or couples who want to have cocktail parties all the time, followed by retreating to their luxurious master bedroom suite for a romantic evening. Or at least imagine that they would, so are looking for a place that looks impressive for that use. The focus is on big, airy open spaces (open-plan living/dining/kitchen areas), plus a large master bedroom suite with attached master bathroom, walk-in closets, etc. One reason Americans find it hard to imagine raising a family in an 900 sq ft (85 m^2) unit is that if you design it this way, it really isn't a lot of space for a family, or at least not space laid out in a useful way for a family. That much space would typically be only a 1-bd in SF or one of the newer NYC buildings (maybe even a studio). While in much of Europe it'd be a 2-bd, or 3-bd, and even compared to American 2-bds the space would be laid out more practically (e.g. less space devoted to those giant bathrooms and walk-in closets).
  - yardie 10y ago
    I'm about to move into a postwar apartment, 900sqft, in Miami. It is 250sqft smaller than my 90s built hi-rise apartment. What I noticed is the ceiling is higher and the windows are larger. It just feels like a much larger, brighter space. I guess at some point something changed. The layout of houses in the US just lost the ability to be functional and tasteful. I did lose the walk-in closet, dual vanity sinks, gift wrapping room, and letter writing room (joking on the last 2).
  - sarah2079 10y ago
    I was about to make the same comment. It's amazing how much the layout affects the usability of the space. I hate, hate, hate those huge master bathrooms and walk in closets because they eat space. Also common where I am: large hallways and entryways that could have been part of a room instead, and an open seating area at the top of the stairs. (What is that even for? Why not just make it an enclosed office. I don't want to hang out on a couch at the top of a stairway). Older 1300 sq ft houses often feel just as spacious as new construction that is 2000 sq ft because they have no wasted space.

by Naritai 10y ago

laurencerowe 10y ago

It's a shame most new build apartments ins SF are so horribly designed. 900-sqft is enough for a comfortable 3 bedroom apartment. In an SF new build it probably means a deep, dark open plan space with windows on only one small wall.

kelnos 10y ago
I'm not sure I'd say comfortable. Three 10'x10' bedrooms would leave you with 600 sqft remaining to play with, and that's not a lot of room for two bathrooms and a decent-sized living space and kitchen, not to mention closets and any kind of storage space (which the need for increases with the number of people who live there). My 1BR is around 900 sq ft, and I'm having trouble envisioning how you'd carve two more bedrooms out of it and still have a nice space. One more bedroom, sure, but two more feels like it would be a stretch.
- lambdadmitry 10y ago
  It's an interesting exchange to read for Russian because here it is somewhat common to have two generations (e.g. my grandma, grandpa, aunt, uncle, two nephews and a small dog) living in a 2BR 500 sq ft flat. Gives me kinda different perspective on the poverty of everyday Soviet living, eh. It's slowly changing for the better, though.
- adevine 10y ago
  Again, it's a matter of perspective. I've seen quite a few well designed 1 bath/1 bed places for 600 sq ft or less. Not hard for me to envision turning the bedroom into another bathroom, with some space left over, and you've then hit pretty much all of your criteria.
shostack 10y ago
Many would not consider 900sqft comfortable for a 1bd/1ba let alone 3/1 or 3/2.
- manarth 10y ago
  It's interesting to see such a different perspective: my 2-bed apartment is 645sqft. It seems the average house in the USA is over twice the size of the average house in the UK [1], and is significantly larger than many countries. [1] http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/how-big-is-a-house http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/how-big-is-a-house

yardie 10y ago

Our son was born in a 230sqft studio. We moved to a 75sqmtr, 760sqft, 3BR apartment. This is in Paris where anything over 500sqft is considered luxurious. Somehow with kids, visitors, and our stuff we managed to make it work. I honestly believe most Americans are latent hoarders. Just buy whatever's on sale with no thought on where it fits into our lifestyle. BTW, everything else I agree with. Childcare is criminally expensive here.

_delirium 10y ago
I agree, but the European apartments also typically have much more practical use of space. The U.S. condo market in particular seems aimed at single people or couples who want to have cocktail parties all the time, followed by retreating to their luxurious master bedroom suite for a romantic evening. Or at least imagine that they would, so are looking for a place that looks impressive for that use. The focus is on big, airy open spaces (open-plan living/dining/kitchen areas), plus a large master bedroom suite with attached master bathroom, walk-in closets, etc. One reason Americans find it hard to imagine raising a family in an 900 sq ft (85 m^2) unit is that if you design it this way, it really isn't a lot of space for a family, or at least not space laid out in a useful way for a family. That much space would typically be only a 1-bd in SF or one of the newer NYC buildings (maybe even a studio). While in much of Europe it'd be a 2-bd, or 3-bd, and even compared to American 2-bds the space would be laid out more practically (e.g. less space devoted to those giant bathrooms and walk-in closets).
- yardie 10y ago
  I'm about to move into a postwar apartment, 900sqft, in Miami. It is 250sqft smaller than my 90s built hi-rise apartment. What I noticed is the ceiling is higher and the windows are larger. It just feels like a much larger, brighter space. I guess at some point something changed. The layout of houses in the US just lost the ability to be functional and tasteful. I did lose the walk-in closet, dual vanity sinks, gift wrapping room, and letter writing room (joking on the last 2).
- sarah2079 10y ago
  I was about to make the same comment. It's amazing how much the layout affects the usability of the space. I hate, hate, hate those huge master bathrooms and walk in closets because they eat space. Also common where I am: large hallways and entryways that could have been part of a room instead, and an open seating area at the top of the stairs. (What is that even for? Why not just make it an enclosed office. I don't want to hang out on a couch at the top of a stairway). Older 1300 sq ft houses often feel just as spacious as new construction that is 2000 sq ft because they have no wasted space.