New Builds Vs Old Builds

RelievedSheff

Davesnave said:

I'm not sure what this 'modern living' might be. Is it code for something radical, like having a kitchen/diner and a loo off the hallway? Or what?

It's not having a useless lounge diner and a tiny little kitchen that is no use to man nor beast.

NaughtiusMaximus

RelievedSheff said:

Davesnave said:

I'm not sure what this 'modern living' might be. Is it code for something radical, like having a kitchen/diner and a loo off the hallway? Or what?

It's not having a useless lounge diner and a tiny little kitchen that is no use to man nor beast.

I would prefer, and currently have, a decent sized kitchen AND a lounge/diner. Far more useful and practical than the alternative of a smaller lounge and larger kitchen/diner.

NaughtiusMaximus

RelievedSheff said:

NaughtiusMaximus said:

MidnightWolf said:

Mickey666 said:

I've got nothing against new builds as such and there's no intrinsic reason why they need to be poorly built.  I'm sure some will be, others won't be.
No, my issue with them is size.  Developer's want to maximise their profits so they build new houses as small as they can get away with and then cram as many to the acre as possible, so even a 'detached' house might only be three feet from its neighbour.  Bedrooms that can't accommodate a super-king bed and still be able to walk around it, en-suites with shower cubicles so small you can't wash your hair without banging elbows on the sides, gardens smaller than the house footprint.
Sign of the times I guess.

Surely the size depends on the size of the house you buy? It’s a complete myth that all new builds are small with tiny rooms. Just look around some show houses and you’ll see plenty of decent sized houses, some of which even have room for a super-king bed 

It's a myth that ALL new builds are small but a fact that the AVERAGE new build home is smaller than average mid 20th century home. 

They may be smaller in terms of square footage but new builds waste very little of the square footage that they have and have layouts that are better suited to modern living.

In what sense do older houses waste square footage? 

gagahouse

Have lived in both older and new build properties. Am currently living in a new build and definitely prefer this new build even though I was previously biased towards older properties mainly for their bigger sizes. I have 1150 sq ft in a 3 bed over 3 floors. I prefer the modern layout, having a gigabit FTTP connection, downstairs cloakroom, master with en-suite over the entire 3rd floor and garage with driveway long enough for 3 cars. Am not overlooked, nearest neighbour is 6m away and have a decent sized garden as well. House is very well insulated, with no heating on and in the recent cold temperature never goes below 16 degrees so save a lot on gas and electric. I was also able to spec finish to my liking at the outset (flooring, carpet, tiling) and developer has been very good in rectifying snags efficiently and promptly.
Am also fortunate that there are about 8 different types of house types so estate doesn't look like a lego land theme park either.
I visited many new build developments whilst looking for this house and it very much varies depending on developer and location. Some developers build to a much better quality than others and some have better layouts / designs and price per sq m than others so you have to do your research if looking at a new build.
I was lucky in that I was allowed to go and see a few of the finished houses rather than just the show homes and I could see immediately that at least with this developer they did a good job with the actual finished article.

So my advice is don't dismiss new builds out of hand, spend the necessary time looking at as many developer's offerings as you can and their customer ratings in particular.

RelievedSheff

NaughtiusMaximus said:

RelievedSheff said:

NaughtiusMaximus said:

MidnightWolf said:

Mickey666 said:

I've got nothing against new builds as such and there's no intrinsic reason why they need to be poorly built.  I'm sure some will be, others won't be.
No, my issue with them is size.  Developer's want to maximise their profits so they build new houses as small as they can get away with and then cram as many to the acre as possible, so even a 'detached' house might only be three feet from its neighbour.  Bedrooms that can't accommodate a super-king bed and still be able to walk around it, en-suites with shower cubicles so small you can't wash your hair without banging elbows on the sides, gardens smaller than the house footprint.
Sign of the times I guess.

Surely the size depends on the size of the house you buy? It’s a complete myth that all new builds are small with tiny rooms. Just look around some show houses and you’ll see plenty of decent sized houses, some of which even have room for a super-king bed 

It's a myth that ALL new builds are small but a fact that the AVERAGE new build home is smaller than average mid 20th century home. 

They may be smaller in terms of square footage but new builds waste very little of the square footage that they have and have layouts that are better suited to modern living.

In what sense do older houses waste square footage? 

Room layouts in general. Our previous house was a 1930's 2 bed semi and it was just all out of proportion. There was a huge hallway, the main bedroom was massively over sized and then the second bedroom was tiny.

Modern houses tend to have rooms which are better proportioned to the size of the house.

RelievedSheff

NaughtiusMaximus said:

RelievedSheff said:

Davesnave said:

I'm not sure what this 'modern living' might be. Is it code for something radical, like having a kitchen/diner and a loo off the hallway? Or what?

It's not having a useless lounge diner and a tiny little kitchen that is no use to man nor beast.

I would prefer, and currently have, a decent sized kitchen AND a lounge/diner. Far more useful and practical than the alternative of a smaller lounge and larger kitchen/diner.

Not all houses have that though. In general the generic 3 bed 1950/60's semis have a tiny kitchen for the size of the house and a useless lounge diner. They also tend to have two decent sized bedrooms but then the third bedroom really is a box room.

We have a good sized kitchen diner and a good sized lounge that are both the same size but on opposite sides of the hallway. And our third bedroom is a good sized single bedroom that has room for a single bed and wardrobes.

bery_451

Okay with all the flood news coming on TV, shall we assume all new homes are not built in a flood risk area?

Slithery

bery_451 said:

Okay with all the flood news coming on TV, shall we assume all new homes are not built in a flood risk area?

Hahahaha.

Davesnave

bery_451 said:

Okay with all the flood news coming on TV, shall we assume all new homes are not built in a flood risk area?

 People should never assume anything in relation to buying property.

 There are flood risk maps available on the Environment Agency web site which will provide a starting point for personal research.

Doozergirl

bery_451 said:

Okay with all the flood news coming on TV, shall we assume all new homes are not built in a flood risk area?

Designed for living, not 'modern living'.