Too many new homes are Shameful Shoeboxes

[Bulgarian]

New houses are smaller, so what, you can still buy a big old house if you must.

 

I don't see the problem.

 

And certainly don't understand why someone would move into a house thats too small for their stuff then moan it's too small for their stuff ?

[chem1st]

Yeah I have read the link and think its a load of tosh. One man's opinion I feel. There is no indication that they have adjusted the figures to suit modern times of increase in population, migration and immigration, family size and the increase in demand and popularity of ownership v rental.

Property ownership has been in decline since 2002, the private rental market has been increasing since 1980!

 

I also find it strange that there is little mention of houses outside europe and USA where there is clearly more land. Take for example Asia. Land prices are through the roof. Nobody has a big house - they simply cant. Thousands of people live in apartments because they cannot afford a house but that's a way of life to them.

I'm concerned with UK housing. You can look at Europe and see how housing is cheaper and built to better standards, the Netherlands for example, where population density is 50% higher than it is in the UK.

 

We are an island. Land is not infinite. Not every piece of land can be built on and nor would we want to be. Therefore as land gets rarer it gets more expensive.

Granted, but that does not explain the massive rise in prices over the past decade.

 

In answer to your questions..... NO I dont think we have a housing crisis. We have facilities in place to provide a roof over the heads of those in genuine need. The recent homeless figures can easily be distorted as plenty of people who claim to be homeless could and do live somewhere but choose to define themselves as street homeless. I used to work in social care and had several clients who refused to live in hostel or shared houses, refused several properties and never put in a bid simply because they preferred to go around on the street begging and sleeping rough. It was worse than being a traveller. This is what council housing SHOULD be used for. People in need. Not subsidising someone working and earning. Why can't they pay market rate? The rest of us do.

The market has been distorted in favour of landlords for too long, things will change.

 

On the flip side we also have a clear housing envy problem. People are not prepared to live with what they can afford. There is plenty of affordable rental out there. Good quality, well looked after - mainly thanks to the buy to let and private investment because they are the ones who have to compete on an open market. However, there is a lot of snobbery with living in apartments or rental houses. They want a big house, a garden, a garage.... more and more, bigger and bigger without thinking or caring about whether or not they can afford it. That was a major contributor to the personal debt figures which have been thrown about in the press. However they never dared to point any fingers to idiots living beyond their means did they???

I don't think there is that much housing envy, simply put, basic dwellings are unaffordable. People got into debt by paying over the odds. and I agree they were stupid for doing so.

 

Despite what some people think. There is no way on earth that if we had a 2011 state built, state maintained, state controlled housing programme they would be built to a large size and good quality. I simply do not beleive.

All we need to do is bring back the Parker Morris standards which were abandoned in 1980, it was then that things began going downhill, as developers were allowed to build smaller housing, whilst the council stock was sold off on the cheap.

 

Chem1st you have got to admit. To maintain standards. We need private investment private ownership and private rental. Without it. There genuinely would be a housing crisis.

I don't believe we do. We do need investment, but we don't need private investment, ownership and rental. To the contrary, ever since 1980 when we had private investment, ownership and rental, things got worse. We need the state to step in.

[ECCOnoob]

Some interesting points there. Can't say I agree with it all. You touched on some of the points in here:

 

http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/ResearchAndDevelopment/Symposium/2008/MikeRoys.pdf

 

Worth a read

 

Thanks for that. It was actually quite interesting. Reading between the lines on the whole report. Not just the headlines and selective parts that the BBC seems to have focused on it appears that NOT every room is smaller. In fact some are larger. Although I see there is nothing about house sizes outside Europe.

 

Also Chem1st will be very pleased. It seems we are building more state houses now then we ever did in the 80s / 90s. Now that is an interesting fact. Perhaps the 'crisis' is even less.

[I1L2T3]

Thanks for that. It was actually quite interesting. Reading between the lines on the whole report. Not just the headlines and selective parts that the BBC seems to have focused on it appears that NOT every room is smaller. In fact some are larger. Although I see there is nothing about house sizes outside Europe.

 

Also Chem1st will be very pleased. It seems we are building more state houses now then we ever did in the 80s / 90s. Now that is an interesting fact. Perhaps the 'crisis' is even less.

 

The bit about shrinking average family size is significant. We actually need more smaller houses. But......we also need a certain quantity of properly sized family units too.

 

It seems that developers are being pretty cynical and lazy by designing units that fall somewhere between the two markets. The sort of units that at a push would be acceptable to the majority of buyers in either market. The proprly designed family homes seem to attract a massive premium.

[tinfoilhat]

I think ecconoob has a point. There are houses out there, I've found them, again, on right move. Some of the sub 50k houses are rough most unsurprisingly arent in atelier areas but some of them, judging by the photos are perfectly serviceable.

 

Buy one.

[LDeville]

Hi

 

one of our sisters is a building reg officer for a LB.

 

She told us a while bacl the ceilings are lower, the doors more narrow, w/c pans lower, smaller basins - all this saves thousands on the build price, fact

[chem1st]

I think ecconoob has a point. There are houses out there, I've found them, again, on right move. Some of the sub 50k houses are rough most unsurprisingly arent in atelier areas but some of them, judging by the photos are perfectly serviceable.

 

Buy one.

 

Who would buy in a falling market?

 

Better to wait, rather than saddle yourself with unnecessary debt.

 

Those homes are overpriced!

[foxy lady]

So a three bedroomed house is smaller than it 'should' be, by a whole 2 double bedrooms? Must be tiny!

 

There is a very simple answer

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oRKvpZ7PjE

 

Job done.

[Mister M]

They're not shameful shoeboxes, they're bijou appartments for young professionals who aspire to luxury living.

[tinfoilhat]

I don't know what you want then. It looks like you want millions of home owners to loose millions so you can buy a house somewhere nice. House prices might dip a bit but there aren't enough houses and not enough money, certainly public money to invest in new housing. We tried private money only to find out people couldn't pay if back hence we are all up to our necks in it. You can't turn the clock back only either put up or shut up.