Better Yard/land or Better Home?

[lokiju]

I've been house hunting for the last few months now and was wondering what others think.

It seems in most situations, for the price range and area I'm looking in, a home will either be smaller and older but have a larger front and back yard or be new/newer but have little to no back yard and a small front yard.

I think about having kids and them having a large back yard to play in and how nice that'd be.

But on the flip side, I think the reality of it is that my wife and I and any kids we might have will all end up spending a lot more time inside than outside the home.

We're now faced with the option of.

House 1:
Built in 1995. 3 bedroom 2.5 bath, 2 car garage.

Wood siding, signs of wear and tear, would probably need a new AC in a few years if not already.

Has a large fenced in back yard and a decent front yard.

House 2:
Built in 2005

Home is like new, ready to move it, needs nothing done to it with the exception of getting a fridge for it.

All the materials are low maintenance and meant to last.

Has a small front yard and pretty much no back yard at all but does have a decent patio out back that'd be good to grill on.

Has 4 bedrooms and 2 baths.

 

[ravana]

If you the $$ difference between the smaller yard house and the one that needs repairs is big enough & you are willing to put the effort into fixing it all up asap...buy the one with the yard.

If you are like me, buy the one that needs only the fridge.



(PS: reading that again, it sounds like I am talking about 4 houses )

 

[djheater]

Since I already had kids when I bought, having a big yard was a selling point.
Glad I got it
(from 3 years ago)
Text

I've added a playset, trampoline, vegetable garden, and am working on a waterfall\pond

And there's still room to set up a volleyball net

:thumbsup:

The cool neighbors have young girls and a pool, we put a gate inbetween our yards so the kids nad dogs can play whenever they want.

 

[slsmnaz]

Can always improve the house but it's hard to expand your property. I bought a house that needed some work but had a great yard over some move-in-ready w/ smaller yards. I liked having the space and the fact that my improvements are making the house worth more $$. Plus, my dog is coming in a couple months and it really needs space to grow.

 

[PingSpike]

I guess I don't consider a home built in 1995 "old".

I would get the bigger yard in your example, hands down. Does the basement have room and is it finishable? It doesn't sound like you're making many compromises for the larger yard...a new AC unit isn't going to run you that much. You can always put an addition on a house, but convincing your neighbors to sell your their lawn so you can expand yours is pretty difficult to pull off!

We just bought our house, 3bed 2.5bath. The immediate yard is hilly, but its got 4 acres of mostly trees. I wanted that land, but the house is nice too!

 

[vi edit]

I would (and did take) an older/not as optioned with a wonderful yard and neighborhood over a bigger/better optioned home in cookie cutter development with no privacy/backyard.

I'm sitting on almost an acre of land that is about 50% private because a creekline of trees that blocks me from the neighbors. I've got room for a 24x24 poured basketball court in the back, two storage sheds, a full playground set and plenty of room for a pool or volley ball court if I want it. We bought the place for the purpose of raising kids there.

Hell I even have my own little fish pond at one end of the creek that has frogs and little minows that I feed cereal and bread to.

The house was about 30 years old and had it's quirks that a new one wouldn't, and we wish we had something newer a lot of times, but when you step outside and hear absolutely no city/traffic noise and have the neighbors that we do, it makes it all worth it.

We could have spent the same amount and bought in cookie cutter mcmansion neighborhood, but kids couldn't play baseball there. They wouldn't have the same playground equipment (without going to the park) and they wouldn't have the little bits of nature to look and play with.

 

[imported_Baloo]

If you got kids, house number 1. I would not even consider house number 2

 

[Dirigible]

In your example, I'd probably go with the house with the bigger yard, moreso if you definitely plan on kids soon. It's a case by case decision, though, and I don't have near enough info to really know the call I'd make.

I'd set minimum requirements for both house and yard - both must be met before making the tradeoff decision.

 

[spidey07]

I'd go with the first one. Lots aren't very big these days and having a fenced in back yard would be great for kids and parties.

 

[dullard]

A big nice yard is a good selling point to me. It helped lure me into buying my first home.
1) You get peace and quiet from your neighbors,
2) You can make more noise without bothering your neighbors,
3) It is peaceful and rejuvinating to be around nature,
4) The house just looks better, and asthetics are important,
5) It is good to get the kids out of the house if you have or want kids.
6) Fresh vegetables from a garden are wonderful tasting, cheap, and healthy.

However, a big yard has big drawbacks.
1) You'll spend a lot of time mowing, picking weeds, etc.
2) You'll spend a lot of money keeping it looking good.

I bought a house with too much landscaping, and now I regret it. I can't keep up (it didn't help that my wife left me for another man so I have less help on the yard). Now, I have crappy landscaping, a yard that needs lots of money to make it look good etc. This bad landscaping will harm the value of my home when I try to sell next year.

Conclusion: Get enough yard/landscaping to meet your needs, but NO MORE than that.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: dullard

Conclusion: Get enough yard/landscaping to meet your needs, but NO MORE than that.

The guy across the street from me has almost 8 acres of fully landscaped/maintained yard. It takes him over 8 hours a week to mow it - and that's with a $10,000 zero-turn commercial mower with a huge mowing deck on it.

When he had it appraised, the appraiser actually told him that he would have a harder time selling because of the landscaping and the time that it would take for upkeep than he would if most of it was just wild/brush.

Kinda crazy to think of it that way, but there's definitely some truth to it.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: dullard

Conclusion: Get enough yard/landscaping to meet your needs, but NO MORE than that.

The guy across the street from me has almost 8 acres of fully landscaped/maintained yard. It takes him over 8 hours a week to mow it - and that's with a $10,000 zero-turn commercial mower with a huge mowing deck on it.

When he had it appraised, the appraiser actually told him that he would have a harder time selling because of the landscaping and the time that it would take for upkeep than he would if most of it was just wild/brush.

Kinda crazy to think of it that way, but there's definitely some truth to it.

I don't get it. All you need to do to make landscaped land into wild brush is nothing.

 

[Eos]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: dullard

Conclusion: Get enough yard/landscaping to meet your needs, but NO MORE than that.

The guy across the street from me has almost 8 acres of fully landscaped/maintained yard. It takes him over 8 hours a week to mow it - and that's with a $10,000 zero-turn commercial mower with a huge mowing deck on it.

When he had it appraised, the appraiser actually told him that he would have a harder time selling because of the landscaping and the time that it would take for upkeep than he would if most of it was just wild/brush.

Kinda crazy to think of it that way, but there's definitely some truth to it.

I'd enjoy seeing a picture of that, if you could.

 

[Capt Caveman]

I'd go with the house with the bigger yard. 1995 is not old for a house and you can update/renovate it over time to your liking.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: PingSpike

I don't get it. All you need to do to make landscaped land into wild brush is nothing.

It's a mentality. People don't typically buy a property with the intention of making it look worse. If you have something that is incredibly well maintained it looks great. But it takes a ton of work to keep it that way. Prospective buyers aren't going to walk onto the property and want to actually bring it down in looks. Having something that big & nice really whittles down the number of people that want to take on the effort.

It's not like buying a lot that is completely undeveloped short of a little bit around where the house is.

 

[Descartes]

I guess I'm in the minority here, because I'd likely go with the 2nd. Houses built in the 90s have a very dated look to them, imo. The interior quality was substantially less than that of modern houses and houses before it.

That said, it would also depend on what the yards look like. If it's just a bit, flat fenced yard with all of your neighbors looking down on it, then that's no better than a smaller yard to me. If I'm going to have a big yard then I want some privacy.

 

[DrPizza]

At this very moment, there are two high school seniors doing their senior portraits somewhere in my back "yard." My choice in your situation would, obviously, be more yard. It's only a recent phenomenon of huge homes for families; the number of square feet in a home per person has doubled (tripled?) since the late 70's. (Actual figures on the last page of this month's issue of Smithsonian. I don't know where my copy went though.)

However, if you want the kids growing up playing Halo 4 instead of kickball, t-ball, etc., get more rooms.

Re: the patio at the bigger house. If you have a huge yard, you can always add on a patio in the future. If you really want, once the kids hit 4 or 5 years old, you can add in a beautiful stamped concrete patio that extends out to the in ground swimming pool. Remodel the basement into a cool-looking bedroom and any boys you have will fight over who gets it. (See Brady Bunch episode where Greg gets the attic) Besides, what good is that 4th bedroom anyway? A. Have parties where guests are too drunk to go home and sleep and vomit in your spare bedroom. B. Mother in law gets to spend 2 extra months living with you!

 

[nakedfrog]

LOL@1995 being an "older" house (may be biased since mine was built in 1890 )

 

[RossMAN]

I would consider an "older" house anything pre-1979.

 

[NuclearNed]

A larger yard gives you more options in the long run. With a larger yard, you can build a bonus room a few years from now. With a smaller yard, you're pretty much stuck with what you have when you buy.

 

[drnickriviera]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

The guy across the street from me has almost 8 acres of fully landscaped/maintained yard. It takes him over 8 hours a week to mow it - and that's with a $10,000 zero-turn commercial mower with a huge mowing deck on it.

He must be one of those grandpa's that drive at 2mph. I have 6 acres of grass to mow with a 54" Z and it takes me 3.5 hrs.




Why does the 'older' house need a new A/C? I have 1 unit in a rental that is still original from 1977

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: drnickriviera

Originally posted by: vi_edit

The guy across the street from me has almost 8 acres of fully landscaped/maintained yard. It takes him over 8 hours a week to mow it - and that's with a $10,000 zero-turn commercial mower with a huge mowing deck on it.

He must be one of those grandpa's that drive at 2mph. I have 6 acres of grass to mow with a 54" Z and it takes me 3.5 hrs.




Why does the 'older' house need a new A/C? I have 1 unit in a rental that is still original from 1977

He has 27 *TYPES* of trees on the propery. Not 27 trees...27 various varieties. I'll snap a pic when I get home tonight of the "front 9".

 

[lokiju]

Originally posted by: ravana
If you the $$ difference between the smaller yard house and the one that needs repairs is big enough & you are willing to put the effort into fixing it all up asap...buy the one with the yard.

If you are like me, buy the one that needs only the fridge.



(PS: reading that again, it sounds like I am talking about 4 houses )

There is no money difference really.

Maybe $2k or $3k when all is said and done but for the most part, they're about the same cost.

Additional bonus of the home that's newer is that it will have $20k+ in instant equity since it is a foreclosure.

 

[Zolty]

Just get some spinning rims, they are a way better investment and the get the ladies.

 

[lokiju]

To all those that say 1995 isn't old.

I agree in general it's not old but a 1995 home has wood siding, which is not cheap to replace with vinyl siding.

An AC unit for this size house would need to be a 3.5 ton, which installed would run anywhere from $4,000 to $6,000 (my Dad sells AC's)

1995 Home needs all new carpet.

2005 Home needs nothing but a fridge.

2005 Home is walking distance to elementary school we'd send our kids to, so that'd cover us for a good 10 years and has a playground that can be used after hours/weekends.

I've always personally not like having homes right next to each other but after being in contract with another 1995 home and having the inspection done, it brings to light just how many things can go wrong with a home in 10-15 years and the countless thousands it would cost to fix, bring up to date and maintain.