Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
ScrewsNutsandBolts

Architects Say New Houses Are 'shameful Shoebox Homes'

Recommended Posts

Many new houses in the UK are "shameful shoebox homes" which are too small for family life, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) has said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14909066

You can't really say he's wrong... gathering plenty of comments too.

Where've they been over the past 65 years of shoebox construction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where've they been over the past 65 years of shoebox construction?

Are there historical records on average new build house size? interesting to see how they tally with the land speculation cycle in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"If you increase standards you're going to increase costs," said head of planning Andrew Whitaker.

"That's going to mean houses are going to become more expensive"

That'll make the Daily Express happy at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most important nugget of information I got from this mornings BBC piece was that the SQUARE METRE AREA of all properties sold can be found on the ENERGY CERTIFICATE. Well, I never knew this!!

This will make some interesting comparisons between 1 and 2 bedroom flats that have had their kitchens put into the living room to make an 'extra' bedroom. My personal bug bear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking finding, everytime I've been into a new home it's like being in a dolls house.

My mate had a 3 bed house which at best should have been 2 bed, the 3rd bedroom was a joke and you needed to be a very small person to live in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many new houses in the UK are "shameful shoebox homes" which are too small for family life, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) has said.

Trouble is these shameful shoebox homes are some of the most expensive on the planet.

This country really does seem to offer the worst of all worlds. The weather sucks too :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair showboxes are being erectedd in other countries too. Somewhere like France, except in most cases you can pick which town to have it built, oh and the plot, oh, and the spec, oh and the size, could even have some garden parking space.

Bugger, they are only scratching the surface.

RICS income stream must be an issue - the unreal estate agents income and architect income hangs in the balance of this bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking finding, everytime I've been into a new home it's like being in a dolls house.

My mate had a 3 bed house which at best should have been 2 bed, the 3rd bedroom was a joke and you needed to be a very small person to live in it.

The third 'bedroom' in my rental is a joke and this isn't a new house either. TBH if a doorway was knocked through from the main bedroom it would probably only just make an en-suite bathroom. I use it to store my baked beans :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps these architects could supply some more land. The builders are just doing the best they can given the choices buyers make and what land costs.

Or the builders could have some legislation so they don't create the most god awful plots. The builders are just maximising profit. Would the prices go up - well no if we stopped immigration and stopped houses being pensions. </end rant>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps these architects could supply some more land. The builders are just doing the best they can given the choices buyers make and what land costs.

Er no. Builders are making bigger profits by packing houses in too tight. If they put fewer houses on the land they would be able to make them bigger houses. But then they'd make less money and we can't have that.

Legislation is the only answer; builders will never voluntarily make bigger houses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Er no. Builders are making bigger profits by packing houses in too tight. If they put fewer houses on the land they would be able to make them bigger houses. But then they'd make less money and we can't have that.

Legislation is the only answer; builders will never voluntarily make bigger houses.

Thats what I thought I said :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'The Home Builders Federation however, said that if new homes were built bigger, some people would be priced out the market.'

It would be good to see some figures for the margin these builders make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Er no. Builders are making bigger profits by packing houses in too tight. If they put fewer houses on the land they would be able to make them bigger houses. But then they'd make less money and we can't have that.

Legislation is the only answer; builders will never voluntarily make bigger houses.

Yep. There are some developments East of Edinburgh on the A1. Way out of town - basically a farmer selling a few fields by the look of it. Yet the builders have the houses about 3 ft apart ?! Clearly that is hte minimum but I would have thought the planing department had some common sense leverage when it comes to this ? Obviously not - or they didn't want to use it.

On a related note. I know this is a very general question - however does anyone have a very rough idea of the general build quality on those quite ugly grey squarish looking houses that were a favourite of the 70's ? They all seem to have much larger rooms than recent houses - and as they look rather unattractive seem to be generally priced far lower as well. If they are built to a decent quality then I reckon I may plump for one of them - if I decide to buy somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many new houses in the UK are "shameful shoebox homes" which are too small for family life, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) has said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14909066

You can't really say he's wrong... gathering plenty of comments too.

one of the comments

dove2011

2 Hours ago

I have worked as a builder all my life and could build a decent house £175K that is £75K for the plot and the rest for the house with services .This house would beat the pants of the big builders build and they would charge £275-325K ! So the moral is , split sites for self build so the home owner can get a decent home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps these architects could supply some more land. The builders are just doing the best they can given the choices buyers make and what land costs.

Would building decent-sized (we're not talking about large) houses actually use up that much more land? I doubt it. It simply wouldn't be as profitable. Unfortunately these days people don't seem to want quality.

Does anyone ever look at new-build houses before they've exhausted every possible alternative?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would anyone want to buy a second hand cramped 10 year old new build......unless the price is very right or it is a BTL investment :lol: .......in years to come the trend will be for larger multi generational living, so larger homes will be more in demand......single living and a couple with a kid or two living costs will be more expensive overall.....three or four workers in a larger more spacious home keeps the costs to a minimum..... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently went in a house of identical design to the one I grew up in.

I never appreciated at the time how massive it was. These were mass produced places, many for the council. 4 bedrooms, and you could comfortably get two double beds in the smallest with space to spare, plus fitted wardrobes in all. Plus 70s places all seemed to have massive windows, rather than the tiny ones you get now.

Compare that to you average 'executive' home now. Ugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone know what a good square meter house size is to live a comfortable life for 2 adults and 2 kids?

Bigger is obviously better :) but can anyone say if you have a minimum X m2 of space you shouldn't be getting under each others feet?

Not the health & safety or whatever minimum, but real world 'this is a good size'?

I'm in a 3 bed Victorian detached. It was great when there was just 2 of us but with kids it's feeling a bit small now and i'm wondering if this is just me being fussy or if it really is on the small side.

I guess it it feels small it is, but it would be nice to know what is considered a good living space for 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 333 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.