Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Gerinako

An Affordable Entry Into Competitive Housing Markets - Live Small

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20150420-why-small-is-the-new-big-thing

While the tiny house movement has been well documented, a bigger idea for smaller living space is on the rise: that of the micro-condo or tiny apartment. Driven by housing shortages and an affordability crisis in cities across the globe, these pint-sized pads — also referred to as “apodments,” micro-digs, nano-suites and micro-lofts — are being planned and promoted by developers both as luxury rentals and as an affordable entry into competitive housing markets.

New York City, no stranger to cramped, high-density living, will open the doors of a pioneer project, called My Micro NY, at the end of 2015.

The 11-floor tower will have so-called nano-units ranging from 24sq metres (260sq foot) to 33.5sq metres (360sq foot), which will rent for $2,000 to $3,000 a month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not been here for long (months perhaps) but even in that time the sheer volume of bonkers, money-making, people-shafting, poor-bashing stuff I've seen even in that short period of time leaves me lost for any further appropriate descriptions.

:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that the 'Tiny House' movement was something which originated in the USA as a means of living under the radar of planning controls by building small houses (often moveable) which could be placed on existing properties in the back yard, driveway etc, and easily moved if complaints were made.

Seems like the property industry doesn't quite understand the concept, and thinks that it's a great way to make more money out of people!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The urban studies student at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada, has traded his 55.7sq metre (600sq foot) Edmonton apartment for a 23sq metre (248sq foot) micro-flat downtown.

and in the photograph at the start of the article they have the cheek to show a 4 person family (2 adults/2 children).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read this, so basically, we are just lowering everyone's living standard! What a victory....

Don't necessarily agree with that....not what we live in or the size of it but where we live, how safe and secure we feel and the community and opportunities that surrounds us.....It is a big responsibility taking on a big house, an old house, a labour and cost intensive house.....less can be more, less to worry about, more life. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read this, so basically, we are just lowering everyone's living standard! What a victory....

From this

Golders_Green_poster_1908.png

To this...

p02p5231.jpg

I like the kids trike...the 'garden' isnt actually actually big enough to use it, but it looks good at least, and thats what matters. Dads seat cum roof hip is also very aspirational.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not been here for long (months perhaps) but even in that time the sheer volume of bonkers, money-making, people-shafting, poor-bashing stuff I've seen even in that short period of time leaves me lost for any further appropriate descriptions.

:blink:

Well, people want to live in London. Why do you have to mandate what is acceptable to them? My solution is to build upward but then I see that is not an acceptable solution to many.

So what are the solutions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't necessarily agree with that....not what we live in or the size of it but where we live, how safe and secure we feel and the community and opportunities that surrounds us.....It is a big responsibility taking on a big house, an old house, a labour and cost intensive house.....less can be more, less to worry about, more life. ;)

Do people still pay more for square footage. Yes. Is a bigger house the first thing lottery winners buy (if theyre under the age of 80, at least). Yes.

Ergo, in economic terms, the nearest thing we have to an objective measure, living standards are falling. The same places (location, or community, as you call it) are desirable that have always been desirable. Only it costs more to get less of them now.

Wake up man! We're being sold down the river. The first generation in many to have a lower standard of living than our parents. If ever that happened before, they at least had the excuse of drought, war etc. Given the productivity gains since the 70s, its inexcusable. All because of banksters. and to a lesser extent a public sector that cares more about its staff and less about its users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't necessarily agree with that....not what we live in or the size of it but where we live, how safe and secure we feel and the community and opportunities that surrounds us.....It is a big responsibility taking on a big house, an old house, a labour and cost intensive house.....less can be more, less to worry about, more life. ;)

I agree with your sentiment! As someone that lives in a one bed flat in a nice area I certainly appreciate that size isn't everything (insert gf related joke).

Nice area, low maintenance and security are certainly all very important. What I am saying though is there is a limit when things just keep getting smaller and smaller and it just starts to get a bit unpleasant.... 'Micro' flat to me implies 'unusually small'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, people want to live in London. Why do you have to mandate what is acceptable to them? My solution is to build upward but then I see that is not an acceptable solution to many.

So what are the solutions?

Not sure people 'want' to live in London. Most the anecdotals on HPC suggest that they are there for work and would move out in a shot if they could get a decent wage outside London.

1) expand the green belt to the m25

2) Put an LVT inside the m25. Charge those with acre plus estates in weybridge and similar an arm and a leg for the land they monopolize.

3)build up in central areas. Much of Rotherhithe and the isle of dogs still looks like its a bit of milton keynes transplanted into central london. Ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, people want to live in London. Why do you have to mandate what is acceptable to them? My solution is to build upward but then I see that is not an acceptable solution to many.

So what are the solutions?

The question to ask is WHY people want to live in London.......then you will find the answer you are searching for. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do people still pay more for square footage. Yes. Is a bigger house the first thing lottery winners buy (if theyre under the age of 80, at least). Yes.

Ergo, in economic terms, the nearest thing we have to an objective measure, living standards are falling. The same places (location, or community, as you call it) are desirable that have always been desirable. Only it costs more to get less of them now.

Wake up man! We're being sold down the river. The first generation in many to have a lower standard of living than our parents. If ever that happened before, they at least had the excuse of drought, war etc. Given the productivity gains since the 70s, its inexcusable. All because of banksters. and to a lesser extent a public sector that cares more about its staff and less about its users.

I agree although the next generation will have it even worse. However I would put the blame on planning regulations - the banks do not control them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question to ask is WHY people want to live in London.......then you will find the answer you are searching for. ;)

Sorry, too obscure to me. I live here and I really like London. I want them to build up, closer to the centre, so I could live more cheaply and cycle to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure people 'want' to live in London. Most the anecdotals on HPC suggest that they are there for work and would move out in a shot if they could get a decent wage outside London.

1) expand the green belt to the m25

2) Put an LVT inside the m25. Charge those with acre plus estates in weybridge and similar an arm and a leg for the land they monopolize.

3)build up in central areas. Much of Rotherhithe and the isle of dogs still looks like its a bit of milton keynes transplanted into central london. Ugly.

I want to live in London because I am from here. BTW there is plenty of housing here for everyone who works here - sadly the Government makes us gives loads to people who don't work here - making it expensive for the rest of us who have to put twice once for us and once for someone else.

As this causes a shortage it means we are paying more than twice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, people want to live in London. Why do you have to mandate what is acceptable to them? My solution is to build upward but then I see that is not an acceptable solution to many.

So what are the solutions?

People's idea of what's acceptable is heavily massaged by marketing and environment. People deciding that what's available is acceptable is different to driving your own idea of what's acceptable. Money-fuelled encouragement is not the healthy type of encouragement.

A thimble flat at current prices is still a royal shafting, regardless of the benefits sold by the pushers. Would many think it was a great idea to buy one of these things if a conventional house 30 minutes away was a decent price and it wasn't so expensive to get to work? Nope.

Free-roaming space is important for any animal's well-being. To provide a can to sleep in so you can work harder, get drunkerer and feed the services industry is not a solution to anything. It also shrinks a humans world to a couple of square miles or less. Get in your cage, human battery.

Personally, I'd get cheesed off after 2 weeks of listening to 8 couples in shoe boxes around mine humping, watching TV late at night, hitting every wall when they swing their cat etc.

I'm not at the stage where I can provide you with a solution or two. I'm not clever enough to be able to factor in all the poison that has lead us to where we are. All I can currently do is recognise when feeding the problem with more poison gets us further into trouble. To be honest, it's getting easier to recognise each additional drop of posion as time goes by. But each added drop puts antidotes further out of reach. Perhaps man is not able to provide 'the answer'. I'm reminded of Agent Smith - "Humans are a disease, a cancer of this planet. And we are the cure".

I'm inclined to hold the power of the universe in far higher regard than I do the insignificant power of man. Mother Nature will sort it out somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, people want to live in London. Why do you have to mandate what is acceptable to them? My solution is to build upward but then I see that is not an acceptable solution to many.

So what are the solutions?

It's simple, we kill the green belt.

Or just a Percentage of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To a large extent, it's the real gap between rich and poor shrinking. That is, the ordinarily rich, not the super-rich! The headlines that say the opposite are those that ignore the redistributive effect of tax and benefits.

Historically a privileged few had lots of space (to accommodate the servants as well as the family), while a working family might be three generations in a 50 sq m cottage, and many would be glad to get a bed of any kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do like a smaller house it forces you to accumulate less shite and the heating bills are tiny. These are perfect if they are dirt cheap because I would do one of these and a campervan. Unfortunately a whole bunch of leaches and tumors will get involved and charge a half a million for them and we are ******ed again but only this time in even smaller houses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, too obscure to me. I live here and I really like London. I want them to build up, closer to the centre, so I could live more cheaply and cycle to work.

Fair enough, but if you choose to live in a small selective place so many others want to live in be prepared to expect to live in less space for more money....the only other way is as you say build upwards.....an acquired choice......thousands more would prefer to live outside a city, nearer to the ground, closer to nature with a bit of outside space.... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   86 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.