London Rabbit Hutches

Windofchange

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/27/dog-kennel-flats-barnet-house-smaller-than-travelodge-room

Just when you thought things couldn't get any more ludicrous this appears. Can't wait to read the estate agent blurb - quality fittings and luxurious open plan kitchen, oh and open plan bathroom too. This is the kind of insanity that can only appear in a bubble. I'd like to say surely nobody will buy into this, but I guess you could run a decent brothel there?

economic

this means nurses can afford to buy a place in a nice area (instead of croydon).

Windofchange

Yup, leafy Barnet. Of course they probably still won't be able to. What do you reckon, 200k a hutch?

Herzlos

I actually think we should be building thousands more micro-flats like this. Ideal starter properties, and great for commuters and as an alternative to hotel rooms.

That might then ease the pressure on the bigger houses that people need later on.

GreatApe

30sqm is plenty of space for a single person. It's equivalent to three double rooms. If they layout is good and there is no dead space due to a staircase then 30sqm is absolutely fine even for a couple.

Even 15sqm is fine for a studio. 15 sqm can be a 12sqm room plus 3sqm ensuit. 12sqm would be a large room by comparison a double bed is less than 2.7sqm.

Windofchange

Yup, why should first time buyers in London aspire to be able to walk around in-between their furniture? If 15sqm is just fine, why are the national minimum space standards 37sqm?

I guess if these units were to be sold for £20k or something then I wouldn't have too much of a problem - I agree, it would maybe suit some as a first step into housing etc, but I imagine that the smallest will be around the £200k mark. I then simply question the sanity of anyone chipping up that kind of money for something like this.

economic

Windofchange wrote: »

Yup, why should first time buyers in London aspire to be able to walk around in-between their furniture? If 15sqm is just fine, why are the national minimum space standards 37sqm?

I guess if these units were to be sold for £20k or something then I wouldn't have too much of a problem - I agree, it would maybe suit some as a first step into housing etc, but I imagine that the smallest will be around the £200k mark. I then simply question the sanity of anyone chipping up that kind of money for something like this.

if people buy these small flats then obviously these people dont have an issue.

you seem to be saying there should be affordable housing for everyone to buy and the housing has to be a decent size and in a decent area. you are seriously deluded.

Conrad

Windofchange wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/27/dog-kennel-flats-barnet-house-smaller-than-travelodge-room

This is the kind of insanity that can only appear in a bubble.

I've heard many argue this is just the kind of imaginative Japanese style solution we ought to have been implementing.


Not sure why one would deem this insanity if there are willing takers.

Conrad

Windofchange wrote: »

but I imagine that the smallest will be around the £200k mark. I then simply question the sanity of anyone chipping up that kind of money for something like this.

People will pay £20k for a piddly little watch, or thousands per year for their dogs needs.


Couple of mates of mine once chose to rent tiny single rooms.

sleepymans

Once the residents move a partner in....and the inevitable offspring come along, then these tiny places will turn into little more than slums....and the demand for bigger social housing will be even greater.....shudders

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

Yup, why should first time buyers in London aspire to be able to walk around in-between their furniture? If 15sqm is just fine, why are the national minimum space standards 37sqm?

I suspect you do not understand the minimum space standards

For a start the average house is about 70sqm and 2.4 people live in it so its about 29sqm per capita for the current owner stock so stop crying 37sqm is not enough

I recall when I were a lad I had to share a room in our university dorms. The options were to rent one room to yourself or to rent 2 per room or there were even some that were 3 per room and none of the options were cheap! I dont recall ever measuring it but if I had to guess it was 2.5m by 5m = 12.5 square meters and that was shared by 2 persons or 6.25sqm each. And iirc it was £325 per month each for that shared room! This was central London more than a decade ago when prices were a good deal less than half what they are now.

I guess if these units were to be sold for £20k or something then I wouldn't have too much of a problem - I agree, it would maybe suit some as a first step into housing etc, but I imagine that the smallest will be around the £200k mark. I then simply question the sanity of anyone chipping up that kind of money for something like this.

most likely they will be build to rent or possibly bought by a BTL investor

So long as people freely rent them whats the problem. Why must you dictate what is acceptable and not? If they want more space and higher quality they can go for that if they want less space and less cost they can go for that.