New builds are "shamefull shoeboxes"

olly300

shar46y wrote: »

Oh, and 2 en suite shower rooms on the top floor, a family bathroom on the middle floor and a ground floor cloakroom. More bogs than bedrooms :eek: and at the expense of bigger room sizes or better storage??!!

However, people buy these properties despite the price premium, so why wouldn't the developers continue to build them?

Some people prefer extra bathrooms there as others like storage space and larger rooms to live in.

skylight

pinkteapot wrote: »

Assuming you take off the skirting board to get the bed right against the wall, a single bed (assuming divan) is 6'3 x 3'. So in theory you can get them in as shown.... There'd be about 6 inches between them....

Or two shorty single beds that are around 4" each shorter than normal sized single beds and narrower at 2'6".

Masses of space then!

puddy

however, having said that many of us are not in a position to have these huge rooms that most people on this site seem to boast about

we have a 30s semi, the living room is 10 x 14 if you dont count the bay, our bedroom is the same size, our third bedroom is 9 x 7 and the second bedroom is 10 x10 if you dont count the door recess

we would have got even smaller if we had gone for the traditional victorian terrace cottage style house

not everyone can afford houses with nice big rooms, thats just the way it is. i used to have huge rooms in my first flat which was purpose built from the 60s but the majority of bog standard houses have smallish rooms

puddy

pinkteapot wrote: »

Assuming you take off the skirting board to get the bed right against the wall, a single bed (assuming divan) is 6'3 x 3'. So in theory you can get them in as shown.... There'd be about 6 inches between them....

a recipe for mould growth then. and hermitically sealed inside their 'extra insulated' windowed rooms. urgh

puddy

LydiaJ wrote: »

I suppose in bedroom 2 you could put a chest of drawers under the window, if it was small and didn't obstruct access to the fitted wardrobe too much. But I cannot see anywhere in bedroom 1 where any drawers could go at all, apart from the tiny bedside thingies either side of the head of the bed. And yet there is an ensuite shower room as well as the "family" bathroom. Why? In what insane universe do the occupants of a small 2 bedroom house have a greater need for a second bathroom than they have for somewhere to keep their clothes?

I've lived in two new-build houses in recent years (rented). Both were supposed to be "executive" 4-bed detached homes, but in both cases the 3rd & 4th bedrooms were extremely small, downstairs wasn't big enough for everything I wanted to do with it, and the build quality left a lot to be desired, especially in the second one (Barratt). I am much happier in my 1969 house now I've finally bought it.

i cannot agree with this more. i love looking at rightmove even though we only moved here 2 years ago! but the numbers of houses with a plethora of bathrooms, cloakrooms and ensuites is just incredible and as you say, insane

god knows how we manage with ONE bathroom in this house.

michaels

Ooops - we are going to have 4 bathrooms once the extension is finished for a 5 bed house - however on is the downstairs cloakroom which is also going to have a shower so that it could form an annex with the utility and one reception should an elderly parent have to come and live with us.

For a family of 5 (3 kids) I think only one bathroom is to few although may be one bath and a separate cloakroom would do at a pinch.

I reckon 110 square feet is big enough for a double bedroom and 60 for a single, especially is their is other storage like an easily accessible loft and a garage. I suspect the real issue for developers in the land cost not the building cost. After all I suspect a 3 bed semi costs about 60-80k to build for materials and labour and would cost only probably 5% more to be the 10% larger suggested so a build cost of 63-84k or not much more if the selling price is 150-400k depending on location. Generally the planners insist on a high density of housing so the councils can get towards their local plan housing targets on the minimum of land, similarly the restrictions on parking are because we are supposed to be moving to a less car using society, the developers I am sure would provide more spaces if allowed. Recently we had some 1 and 2 bed flats built near the station and not far from the town and the developers were restricted to less than one space per flat because of that (and we are not in London with proper public transport) - luckily we have moved from nearby as parking by the flat owners displaced locals who already lived in the area.

mustrum_ridcully

puddy wrote: »

im very interested in the size of bedroom 3 in your first link there

it states that it is 10 x 7 (ish) and yet shows 2 single beds. we have a third bedroom which is 9 x7 (ish) and yet only holds one single bed and a wardrobe/chest of drawers, bed side table, there is no way with one extra foot of space we would be able to fit another bed in there?

I'm sure I remember hearing on a consumer TV show years ago about special "show home" furniture being used that was actually smaller than what you'd normally use (feature was about an unhappy couple who'd bought a furnished former showhome). It was 3/4 size IIRC.

pqrdef

The industrial terraces that the masses used to live in could also be quite poky, and the same goes for a lot of council flats.

But when the kids are out on the street corners, everybody says they ought to be at home. Like, watching New Tricks with their parents, all sat sitting around like the Royle family. Every night.

pinkteapot

puddy wrote: »

not everyone can afford houses with nice big rooms, thats just the way it is. i used to have huge rooms in my first flat which was purpose built from the 60s but the majority of bog standard houses have smallish rooms

Of course not, but as has been said on this thread, in many cases where people buy new-builds they could buy considerably larger older houses for the same money.

Some people just prefer brand-new. As someone has already commented, if these houses didn't sell they wouldn't get built. They're not my preference but there's obviously enough people who like them.

starsandmoon

I rented a new build 2 bed flat a couple of years ago. Ceilings were so low I could touch them when standing up, living room was a decent size but the second bedroom fitted a single bed and a clothes rail and that was it. The noise insulation was non existent, could hear everything. It was easy to heat though and cleaning took minutes. You got 1 parking space but visitors would park there quite often, it was a nightmare.

Ive since bought a Victorian terrace which has 2 double bedrooms, is more solid and has lots of storage. My under stairs cupboard houses a tumble dryer (condensing) and my DD's bike, coats etc.

The flat was built at the height of the boom and cost my landlord £130,000. They are now selling for between £60,000 and £70,000:eek: