Micro housing ?

zagubov

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82049869#Comment_82049869

I remember seeing and reading about them. They could be assembled in a day and the main gimmick that speeded it up was that all the plumbing pipes were a single unit. The Heart Unit supplied the sink in the kitchen which backed onto the bath and toilets as well as the water heater/airing cupboard.

This one is the ARCON V.

Exodi

Robert7578

Why has our planning system in the UK focused on massively expensive bricks and mortar homes [instead of] timber frame cabins, Sheperds huts, Yurts

I watched a documentary on this quite recently (well the inverse, it was about why the US still predominantly uses wood), but aside from all the lengthy points about density, material availability, risks, etc and those people have already made, 'common sense' would suggest that using wood in a country that rains constantly is no bueno.

Dustyevsky

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82054136#Comment_82054136

Where I live in Devon, the time to build is regularly cut by use of timber framed construction. When the house is complete, the final finish of stone or other material protects the frame from contact with the weather, of which we have plenty!

It's not inconceivable build time could be cut further with the use of external cladding materials other than stone, bricks or block & render. The thing most likely to work against that is British conservatism with regard to finishes, though that might be overcome.

About a week ago I explained to a well educated old guy the decking he was walking on was plastic and although it looked aged, completely rot proof. He listened politely, then bent down and touched it. As he walked away I heard him say to his wife, "Pft! You can see its wood!"

zagubov

Having lived in both England and the USA, Bill Bryson covered some of this in his books (I'd specially recommend the brilliant "At Home"). There is a differen attitude to housing. America is strongly commited to wooden housing because of many advantages. The longevity of their houses isn't one of them. There's legends of settlers burning their houses down to collect their nails before they moved on. In modern times, they largely don't know what blackcurrants taste like as they banned growing them for half a century because their parasites would attack the trees they build houses from.

And there's a tradition of knocking down and rebuilding their houses every forty years or so to keep them modern and they do construct them quickly and cheaply from factory-made parts. Many countries across the anglosphere think our houses are over-engineered as they could last more that a human lifetime.

Having said that many countries have so much more land available and build bigger low-level houses over more generous plots and the reasons for this are explored in many podcasts and youtube channels.

What I don't understand is how, in Europe, many more densely-populated countries manage to house their populations in much larger houses and homes without encroaching on their farmland and recreational land. When I was younger I travelled around the Netherlands and West Germany where they seemed to have big spacious cities, tons of industrial estates and farming, big wide roads, lots of railways tramlines and canals, and loads of parks (national and urban) and plenty of forests and other open scenery without seeming overcrowded.

ian1246

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82056992#Comment_82056992

In relation to your last part, I suspect for the UK its because something like only 9% of the land is actually lived in - cramming a population of approaching 70million into a small % of a small land mass. Large chunks of Northern England, Scotland & Wales are sparsely populated, with clusters of dense population.

QrizB

In relation to your last part, I suspect for the UK its because something like only 9% of the land is actually lived in

Also, France has less than half the population density (twice as much land per person) as the UK does. France has 107 people per square kilometre, UK has 285.

Within the UK, England has 450 per sq. km (similar to the Netherlands) while the other UK nations are far lower.

TroubledTarts

Population density when talking about it being clustered in areas must be down to transport, and the need for being near the bug hubs for work and living and what that offers.

Isolatik with no amenities or public transport is not ideal as you are and when you are younger most crave being where the noise and hustle and bustle is.

So unless new micro towns are constructed and with some of these very affordable say containers homes for first time buyers or retirees I can't see the system changing much or the density near major hubs especially has local councils don't have much money more than for social care public transport and services are not a priority.

Some bleak times ahead for our children and their children I forecast.

Robert7578

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82040523#Comment_82040523

I have lived totally offgrid for 25 years in various locations.

I live totally offgrid now with solar PV, a wood stove ,a composting toilet system, an outdoor shower and on 10 litres of water per day per person.

Robert7578

What i talked about in my original post is common in Sweden and surrounding countries, timber framed cabins with generous land , on and offgrid , £100,000 would be the top end of that market with a winterised cabin ready to move in , one needing renovation can be a fraction of that.

So what i talked about is already a thing. And it could be here.

( and yes I am fully aware of the winter climate and economics of living in those countries )

One example .

https://youtu.be/2XYiULw08BE?is=1BlMpDPkFen_EFf_