In-Law Apartment vs Living room and Dining Room

**bennie0015** · 10-25-2009, 06:40 AM

I recently bought a house that has an in-law apartment and I have no need for it. In the main section of the house there is no dining room and a only has very small living room (10x12). Would I decrease the value of my house by removing the in-law and adding a large living room and a dining room? I would still have the same number of bedrooms and bathrooms.

**minnesota-mls** · 10-26-2009, 10:21 AM

Having an in law apartment can certainly make a home a bit tougher to resell. Here in Minnesota, I have seen a number of them for sale on the MLS and though they obviously do sell, the number of buyers look for that type of set up is lower.

I think adding more square footage will certainly help out a home seller and make it more "sellable" to really any type of home buyer.

Thanks!

**Greg** · 10-27-2009, 05:46 AM

I agree. Go with the bigger living and dinning areas instead of the in-law apartment. That is what most people are looking for.

**Moore** · 10-29-2009, 05:53 AM

I also agree with the prevous posts. It's better for you to have a dinning room and the living room. They are more necessary for people as they spend most of their time there.

**Chrisopher Moltisanti** · 11-01-2009, 10:05 AM

Aaaaaah, I only agree with the square footage rule. Square footage (in my opinion) is square footage. Much like acreage is acreage. In my area of North East Pa, mother-in-law suites don't discourage prospective buyers. In fact, if they have their own entrance and bathroom and an added fireplace or kitchenette, this only adds to the value because this lower level (usually) the seller or prospective buyer can rent out.

The family units in your respective areas of course are different. If this seller has no need for it, yeah, fix it up to be anything you want.

-CM