Friday, March 2, 2012

Rentals

We are deciding on 2 houses to rent.  I am torn about which one we should pick.  We're only planning to rent for a year and then get a place of our own, so I know it's not temporary and shouldn't matter so much, but it does!  There are pros and cons to each place.  Here are the deets on each one.   

House #1---
Built in 1967.  Completely remodeled, new hardwood flooring on lower level, new carpet throughout on upper level, new paint through out, large updated kitchen with maple cabinets and lots of cupboard space, large dining room leads to outdoor deck, living room with fireplace.   Upstairs features three bedrooms and full bath. Large fully fenced backyard surrounded by trees.  Pros:  Closer to Mike's office so less of a commute, allows pets, beautiful remodeling, large kitchen, large backyard for kids to play in and plenty of trees, 2 car garage, more square feet, slightly less for rent.  Cons:  Only 3 bedrooms which look very, very small, only one full bathroom, no washer and dryer (will have to buy our own). 

 
 





 
 


House #2---
Built in 2007, hardwood floors, stainless steel appliances, gas range, dishwasher & microwave, gas fireplace, large master suite, his & her sinks in master bath, washer/dryer, back patio, fenced backyard, and one car garage.  Pros: 4 bedrooms, 2 full bathrooms, washer and dryer included, a block away from Tualtin Nature Park which has lots of trails for hiking and walking, newer neighborhood with lots of young families.  Cons:  Small backyard, further away from Mike's office, no pets allowed, although there are more bedrooms than the other, the house is 200 square feet smaller, slightly more expensive to rent (about $55 more dollars a month, which isn't much), in a cookie cutter neighborhood, dining room and kitchen combined, only 1 car garage, less storage space overall.
 

  





4 comments:

Carmen said...

I would ask for measurements of the bedrooms, then you can get a feel for how big they are compared to your current rooms. Other than that, I would personally choose the first one. I think the cons for the first one outweigh the cons for the second one.

Anonymous said...

You didn't post bedroom pics of the second house. :) Since you have little ones I'd go with #2 IF it has forced air heating- those baseboard heaters in house #1 suck at heating the rooms and get super hot- not too fun for little fingers. :) I hated them when we had them.

J said...

I didn't post bedrooms of the 2nd one because there weren't any available on the rental website. There was a walk thru video though, so I was able to see the rooms.

Rebekah said...

I would say #1, but I would be wary of the baseboard heating. It looks awesome. Also, the $55 a month for a year you'd save would be enough to pay for at least a washer and maybe even part of a dryer. And won't you need one anyway when you buy a house? I think the biggest thing that would sell me on the first house is the back yard. And probably also the storage space.

But really, both places look really nice. Now that I'm reading the description for the second house again, it does have some good things going for it, like the extra bedroom, the nature park, and the proximity to other young families, especially if that demographic also shows up in your ward. It's hard to be in a ward with a lot of older people and not many other kids in your kids' age groups.

Nevermind, I'm no help.