New Build Houses - Size and Density

LydiaJ

I don't think new build garages are supposed to have cars kept in them, despite the name "garage". They are for miscellaneous storage. The car is supposed to go on the drive.

MacMickster

BobQ wrote: »

I think the issue is that we should not be building small family houses at all. It seems to me that the architects and planners create these homes for other people even though they do not want to live in them personally.

These days many single people buy a newe three bedroom house just because the houses are so small.

I agree, but that means that we MUST build on greenfield as well as brownfield sites, and bu**er the NIMBYS.

Developers currently try to fit as many properties as possible on each development because of the high price of land suitable for development. Increase the amount of land available and the price comes down.

I can imagine many of the current shoebox newbuild's being demolished within 30 years as unfit to live in, as happened to many tower blocks of the 60s. We do have to make the choice however - decent family homes (and sacrifice some of our precious greenfield land) or condemn our children to living like sardines.

wymondham

MacMickster wrote: »

Developers currently try to fit as many properties as possible on each development because of the high price of land suitable for development. Increase the amount of land available and the price comes down.

The price would come down for the developer if more land is available, but I have a sneeky feeling the quality and quantity per area of housing will remain suspiciously the same.... developers like profit.

The only things that would change the quality of houses is set minimum legal standards, and if people just didn't buy overpriced rubbish then it would come down in price also....

ukcarper

Not a new thing

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-36192163.html

The house I lived in as a child was no bigger than most modern house second bedroom was larger but the toilet was outside house built late 19th century

grizzly1911

ukcarper wrote: »

Not a new thing

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-36192163.html

The house I lived in as a child was no bigger than most modern house second bedroom was larger but the toilet was outside house built late 19th century

Nice to see with have progressed.;) No doubt the toffs, with noses in troughs, will be safe in their gated palaces once more.

ukcarper

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Nice to see with have progressed.;) No doubt the toffs, with noses in troughs, will be safe in their gated palaces once more.

come on "we are all in it together"

michaels

We left the car out of the garage in the day yesterday, got in and it was freezing till it warmed up. Having an integrated garage doesn't half make you soft and the little superior wave you give to the neighbours scrapping their cars in the morning really is below one...

On the economics, if the choice for the builder is 2 4-beds at 260k or one 5 bed at 400 on the same plot (which may be hard to sell in the local market) you can see why they choose the former, especially if the former is more likely to get planning permission from the LA. And of course that means twice as many car drivers but again the LA rule out having enough spaces as that is bound to make sure more people use public transport sin't it....

Graham_Devon

They appear to be getting around the car parking issue here for all the 2-3 beds by having communal car parks.

I can't think of anything worse to be honest, especially considering these places cost 120k for a 2 bed and 160k for a 3 bed. Communal parking in a car park!? I've been down to one to have a look and the car park is at the back of the 3 bed terraces. However, there is no way into the back of the houses from the car park, so you all have to walk around the last house on the terrace and down to your house. With shopping and kids, it's not exactly ideal.

However.....they are all, apparently, reserved houses, and have been ever since I first looked on the website (the location would be spot on for me). So it seems they were resevered before the first brick was even laid.

Thing is, they have pulled out of phase 2 & 3, leaving the recreational and service plans in tatters for the existing houses, as apparently they cannot sell what they have. Theres apparently a large argument going on between the builders and the council about it, but plans for phase 2 & 3 have now been put back to 2019, which is a long time for existing residents to have more building inconvinience hanging over them. Certainly leaves the existing residents sold up the river, as there was supposed to be a library, recreation, school etc. This is a large building scheme, or was.

J_i_m

It's all very well saying that people should boycott small houses but unfortunately people do need a place to live.

So what then? Boycott the house and live in the wheelie bin outside?

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

They appear to be getting around the car parking issue here for all the 2-3 beds by having communal car parks.

I can't think of anything worse to be honest, especially considering these places cost 120k for a 2 bed and 160k for a 3 bed. Communal parking in a car park!? I've been down to one to have a look and the car park is at the back of the 3 bed terraces. However, there is no way into the back of the houses from the car park, so you all have to walk around the last house on the terrace and down to your house. With shopping and kids, it's not exactly ideal.

Same 'round my way. A whole estate has been built with insufficient parking - it's wonderful for creating neighbourly tension.

I thought it was because the builders wanted to squeeze in another couple of houses but they've assured me it's because they think it'll encourage people to use public transport.