Action on Rabbit Hutches?

Graham_Devon

There is nothing particularly wrong with "rabbit hutches".

It really depends on what the property is designed for. So, as an example, a "rabbit hutch" may be just fine for a single person. It may be fine for those using these properties to "bunk down" while in their city job, going home at the weekend.

Trouble is, they are marketed as family homes, and there is little option now as an average family to buy any newbuild 2-3 bed that isn't of rabbit hutch proportions (at least in my area). A 3rd bedroom is often a simple box room with space for nothing but a single bed.

To get more, you have to go for the four / five bed homes, which often have a seperate dining room and storage etc.

My feeling is we need rabbit hutches, but said rabbit hutches should not take the place of the need for family homes which is what seems to have happened.

Looking at a development near me that I was interested in, they have communal bins for the row of houses. That's no way to live. You are buying a 160k individual property, not a flat. However, they had no room for bins so there was a communal bin store. People have bought them though.

chucky

No one is forced to buy these "rabbit hutches" however they're marketed.

If a 2/3 bed family 'rabbit hutch' home is too small, go an buy a larger 2/3 family home.

I'd like a bigger and better car but I don't want to spend that much on it. People need to learn to cut their cloth to what they can afford...

ukcarper

Plenty of old houses have small 3rd bedrooms and no where to put bins. There was a period when houses were bigger and it would be nice if they were now but that would only put more upward pressure on prices.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

Plenty of old houses have small 3rd bedrooms and no where to put bins. There was a period when houses were bigger and it would be nice if they were now but that would only put more upward pressure on prices.

Maybe so. But surely if we are going to build new stuff, we should be making some progress instead of walking backwards?

Unless falling backwards in standards is the new moving forward?

It's a bit like saying we had no seatbelts in the 50's, so why should we now.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Maybe so. But surely if we are going to build new stuff, we should be making some progress instead of walking backwards?

Unless falling backwards in standards is the new moving forward?

It's a bit like saying we had no seatbelts in the 50's, so why should we now.

With a shortage of housing and limited building plots how do you suggest we find the room for these properties.

chucky

ukcarper wrote: »

With a shortage of housing and limited building plots how do you suggest we find the room for these properties.

Amusingly they want the argument both ways, they complain about wanting more houses built but when they are built they complain they are too small.

It's similar to those who rely on benefits and expect everything to be done for them. They have exactly the same traits thinking that life and society owes them something.

Self proclaimed entitlement...

Graham_Devon

Well, plenty could be done to free up plots, so I don't believe that's a massive issue that cannot be sorted. Though at the moment, it's an issue.

The shortage of housing is, also, a man made problem. Not something that cannot be sorted. Though there is little will to sort this.

As for how you sort the individual houses, they don't need to be that much bigger. Were just talking a decent cupboard to store things in and outside space to store bins at least. I don't forsee massive numbers of potential houses being lost due to the house being made a fraction bigger.

This issue, afterall, is very much a recent issue. Wasn't happening pre 1990. So what changed so radically that means builders can no longer do anything?

I just don't see how looking backwards and aspiring to a bygone era and therefore stating it's OK is in any way productive. It just gives a reference point to say "hey, look, it was worse once" and that reference point can simply keep being put back further and further in history to prove things were once worse.

ukcarper

I thought I'd look at a new estate I saw a couple of weeks ago and this is the house they are marketing as a family home doesn't seem to bad to me.


http://www.persimmonhomes.com/barley-fields/3-bed-end-terrace-house-195984

chucky

ukcarper wrote: »

I thought I'd look at a new estate I saw a couple of weeks ago and this is the house they are marketing as a family home doesn't seem to bad to me.

Of course it's not bad for you but when you have the entitlement disease that some have they expect to buy a large 4 bedroom detached house on an average salary in their mid 20s.

It's the I want it now and deserve it syndrome. It's very sad that people are losing that hard work ethic.

Graham_Devon

OK. Well that's one house on one estate by one builder. Not sure we can conclude therefore there are no issues.

Anyway, said my bit and don't believe there is anything, bar man made issues, stopping houses having just slightly more space than a lot of current new builds do.

There obviously is an issue, as the government have had enough pressure to look into it.