No Wonder They Don't Like People Building Houses Any More

[Wurzel Of Highbridge]

A one, yes ONE BEDROOM HOUSE a bargain for one hundred and twenty thousand pounds:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-16209438.html

WHY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :angry:

No wonder the NIMBYS say don't build around here! If all the current building monopoly is capable of building is that.

Why can't we build more estates like they could one generation ago.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=dumpton+park+broadstairs+kent&hl=en&ll=51.347178,1.433413&spn=0.010186,0.033023&num=100&client=firefox-a&hq=dumpton+park+broadstairs+kent&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=51.347178,1.433413&panoid=VRfT1WbOjS1ptqFUX8F3tg&cbp=12,25.79,,0,5.38

In my opinion a pleasant and sustainable development with driveways, a place to put your bins and gardens for the wildlife to flourish.

AND YES, THIS WAS FARM LAND BEFORE IT WAS A HOUSING ESTATE.

WHY ???????????????????? :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

[Ulfar]

Its because of nimbys that we don't get buildings like that any more.

Farmland no chance of building on it.

[Wurzel Of Highbridge]

People don't like diluting the money housing supply ?

Take a look at this hideous development:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=whitfield+dover&hl=en&ll=51.150207,1.293837&spn=0.005142,0.016512&hnear=Whitfield,+Kent,+United+Kingdom&gl=uk&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.150207,1.293837&panoid=Pj4tksksLZyJUD6yLT8H4g&cbp=12,140.98,,0,6.2

Not even I want that built!

Building lower density developments would use around double the amount of land. At the current rate of development we would another 0.00001% of the available land in the UK each year.

[OnionTerror]

Ah, Shit & Smellit...popular for commuters who work in Brizzle & Bath, but cant afford those prices...

[OnlyMe]

Agenda 21

[Wurzel Of Highbridge]

I now absolutely believe that the housing supply is that tight that another 1 million well distributed houses appearing overnight would not harm property values in this country.

People only 'allow' these crappy developments because 'it is worse than where we live' type attitude.

I really start to question how this attitude came about? It must have started after around 1995, there was a sudden change of thinking by the general public.

[thecrashingisles]

I like the description...

"Attached modern house"....like that makes it different from semi detached.

I've seen one bedroom houses like that where the building actually divided in four so you get a corner each.

[Wurzel Of Highbridge]

[edit]Started new post.

Edited April 5, 2012 by khards

[MrPin]

I now absolutely believe that the housing supply is that tight that another 1 million well distributed houses appearing overnight would not harm property values in this country.

People only 'allow' these crappy developments because 'it is worse than where we live' type attitude.

I really start to question how this attitude came about? It must have started after around 1995, there was a sudden change of thinking by the general public.

I think it started in the 1980s, when a few "minimum size" planning restrictions were lifted!

Therefore you won't get decent houses built! Just cardboard flats! :angry:

[The Preacherman]

I now absolutely believe that the housing supply is that tight that another 1 million well distributed houses appearing overnight would not harm property values in this country.

People only 'allow' these crappy developments because 'it is worse than where we live' type attitude.

I really start to question how this attitude came about? It must have started after around 1995, there was a sudden change of thinking by the general public.

How many more threads will we get claiming that there is a housing under-supply problem. There isn't its a myth created by the big builders to justify there land banking and get planning permission for slave boxes.

All we have is an over-demand problem created by lack credit conditions and the property route to riches culture.

[thecrashingisles]

How many more threads will we get claiming that there is a housing under-supply problem. There isn't its a myth created by the big builders to justify there land banking and get planning permission for slave boxes.

There is an under supply of large houses. If anyone had predicted 15 years ago that normal people would be spending so much money on houses, you'd have imagined that all that capital invested would have led to a massive increase in standard of living and quality of dwellings. Instead supply was artificially distorted and we just bid up the prices of the same old rubbish.

[jammo]

NW2 6QL, two bed terrace (nicely furnished IMHO) asking price .... £399,950. Not many railway workers will be living there now.

Only the guy that comes in the night and takes all the copper

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

There is an under supply of large houses. If anyone had predicted 15 years ago that normal people would be spending so much money on houses, you'd have imagined that all that capital invested would have led to a massive increase in standard of living and quality of dwellings. Instead supply was artificially distorted and we just bid up the prices of the same old rubbish.

it did lead to a massive increase in living standard whilst prices increased as that debt and tax take off it was spent back into the wider economy, granted it was mostly on sh@t but you dont go making quality programs about what makes Britain Rich and the like unless living standards are going through the roof

Edited April 6, 2012 by Georgia O'Keeffe

[sleepwello'nights]

But there are older houses.

Lots of "back to back" terraces still perfectly habitable. Mill workers, Railway workers cottages and the like. I believe they sometimes shared a back yard. Go back even further and it was common for farm animals to be kept in downstairs rooms of houses whilst the farm owners and labourers slept in the upstairs rooms.

Not saying we should go back to those days, (even though some commentators on here may think we are) we live in comparative luxury now.

I must step up my search for a single building plot round here.

[GBdamo]

People don't like diluting the money housing supply ?

Take a look at this hideous development:

http://maps.google.c...2,140.98,,0,6.2

Not even I want that built!

Building lower density developments would use around double the amount of land. At the current rate of development we would another 0.00001% of the available land in the UK each year.

Khards, I live in what can only be described as the poster child town for such developments. I have lived here for ten years and seen itro 3000 'houses' built in four 'developments' on top of an existing four or five.

What was a town of c.2000 people 15 years ago has now a population of over 12000, and what has come with that in the way of facilities........nothing. The leisure centre is now a public/private enterprise, the once vibrant town centre is estate agents, charity shops and supermarkets.

The only boom industry is piss farms, sorry old peoples homes of which there are itro half a dozen. Which means the high street resembles a scene from Shaun of the Dead during the day.

The cluster fvck house you posted in Shepton is about 10-15 miles north of me and that town also suffers from piss poor development syndrome. Both Gillingham and Shepton are on/close to the main roads and completely isolated in a sea of green, which means there is plenty of room and demand for much better quality housing.

There are expansion plans for 2016 and 2026 for Gillingham and there is hundreds of acres set aside for future development, most of it not yet purchased from the farmers that own the land. I know a few of them, and there waiting for the day that that land goes from being worth £5k/acre to £100k/acre.

This is all about controlling stock and maintaining high prices that's why I feel so sickened every time I hear the words affordable housing. It is and always has been lip service; they have absolutely no desire to see housing affordable.

And who are they? They are our councillors that are all of a certain generation (can't use the B word) who see their home and value of their home as some kind of achievement that they have worked for and a nest egg for a cushy retirement. Garage and gardens for them, sh1tboxes for the rest of us.

Unfortunately only the market with the help of the banks parasitic ways can help us now as our elected officials have no desire to serve anyone/thing other than their own self interest, even if it is subconsciously.

[tim123]

People don't like diluting the money housing supply ?

Take a look at this hideous development:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=whitfield+dover&hl=en&ll=51.150207,1.293837&spn=0.005142,0.016512&hnear=Whitfield,+Kent,+United+Kingdom&gl=uk&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.150207,1.293837&panoid=Pj4tksksLZyJUD6yLT8H4g&cbp=12,140.98,,0,6.2

Not even I want that built!

Building lower density developments would use around double the amount of land. At the current rate of development we would another 0.00001% of the available land in the UK each year.

don't see anything wrong with it myself.

Whether it's appropriate for the location is a different issue, but in principle it's OK

tim

[thecrashingisles]

don't see anything wrong with it myself.

Whether it's appropriate for the location is a different issue, but in principle it's OK

tim

-1

It uses the space incredible inefficiently in order to create a pastiche of the kind of suburban estate linked to further up.

There isn't enough space for cars - no doubt if the Google car had visited in the evening you would see many of them parked on the road. The houses are too close together. Gardens are virtually non existant. Having your windows one foot from the pavement outside defeats the point of having a detached house. It would have been better to build spacious apartments in a parkland setting.

Edited April 6, 2012 by thecrashingisles

[Traktion]

Khards, I live in what can only be described as the poster child town for such developments. I have lived here for ten years and seen itro 3000 'houses' built in four 'developments' on top of an existing four or five.

What was a town of c.2000 people 15 years ago has now a population of over 12000, and what has come with that in the way of facilities........nothing. The leisure centre is now a public/private enterprise, the once vibrant town centre is estate agents, charity shops and supermarkets.

The only boom industry is piss farms, sorry old peoples homes of which there are itro half a dozen. Which means the high street resembles a scene from Shaun of the Dead during the day.

The cluster fvck house you posted in Shepton is about 10-15 miles north of me and that town also suffers from piss poor development syndrome. Both Gillingham and Shepton are on/close to the main roads and completely isolated in a sea of green, which means there is plenty of room and demand for much better quality housing.

There are expansion plans for 2016 and 2026 for Gillingham and there is hundreds of acres set aside for future development, most of it not yet purchased from the farmers that own the land. I know a few of them, and there waiting for the day that that land goes from being worth £5k/acre to £100k/acre.

This is all about controlling stock and maintaining high prices that's why I feel so sickened every time I hear the words affordable housing. It is and always has been lip service; they have absolutely no desire to see housing affordable.

And who are they? They are our councillors that are all of a certain generation (can't use the B word) who see their home and value of their home as some kind of achievement that they have worked for and a nest egg for a cushy retirement. Garage and gardens for them, sh1tboxes for the rest of us.

Unfortunately only the market with the help of the banks parasitic ways can help us now as our elected officials have no desire to serve anyone/thing other than their own self interest, even if it is subconsciously.

It's funny that this so called planning is supposed to make villages/towns/cities more organised, but it often seems to end up with very sterile results.

For instance, they frequently want to separate commercial from residential buildings. Instead of streets growing organically, with shops, pubs an such mixed in, we get estates with none of these features. You then have to drive to the shops/pubs to buy/work.

Similarly, it means that new villages can't spring up, where economic and social conditions desire it. Where there could be a cluster of related families and their business, their friends and other relatives may join them. Others may come along too, in time. You end up with a community knitting together, based around social bonds, with the shops/pubs/industry which they work in and need in the same area too.

This isn't an alien concept - it's how nearly all of our towns and villages formed. Planning is an entirely modern concept, only existing for about 100 years, growing more strict in the last 50 or so. Yet, people think it is immutable and the only way things can be run, just like the state police force (about 180 years old) and the state fire service (about 65 years old). Even parliamentary democracy itself is only a few centuries old... a blink of an eye in human development.

But no... apparently, the countryside will be 'concreted over' if we allow people to build where they are not strictly permitted to. Instead people are herded into state planned pens, like the tax cattle they are.

[Wayo]

People don't like diluting the money housing supply ?

Take a look at this hideous development:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=whitfield+dover&hl=en&ll=51.150207,1.293837&spn=0.005142,0.016512&hnear=Whitfield,+Kent,+United+Kingdom&gl=uk&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.150207,1.293837&panoid=Pj4tksksLZyJUD6yLT8H4g&cbp=12,140.98,,0,6.2

Not even I want that built!

Building lower density developments would use around double the amount of land. At the current rate of development we would another 0.00001% of the available land in the UK each year.

Yet they have still wasted most of their plot with silly voids and micro gardens. Why do some of them have random window box attic windows and some not? Three houses next to each other built completely different distances from the kerb. Even designing buildings of similar height next door to each other seems to have gone of fashion. Some houses have a double garage taking up almost the same footprint as the house, other great blocks seem to have no parking at all. Perhaps they are the social element?

Edited April 9, 2012 by Wayo