On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 06:37:15 -0700, sm_jamieson wrote:
I don't think they're nearly as common as they were. I don't think I've
seen a place built prior to the 80's here that *doesn't* have a basement
- but I believe lots of new builds just have crawlspaces beneath the
ground floors now. I think in some areas (although not around here)
whether there's a basement or not can affect property taxes and insurance
prices quite a bit.
Back c.1980 a small development of back-to-back starter homes in New
Malden was done using volumetric units, basically container sized timber
framed boxes all finished internally, craned into place, services hooked
together, brick veneer facing and roof tiling. In Building Control our
initial reaction was negative, but our tame structural engineer said he'd
much rather see the majority of the work done in a warm dry factory with
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on' Melbourne, Australia
www.superbeam.co.uk www.eurobeam.co.uk www.greentram.com
It's not that expensive to build a house anyway, it's buying the land that
forms the bulk of the price. Around here, a typical (average quality)
rebuild cost would be 70-80K, while buying would be around 180K.
That is a bare shell rebuild cost. In reality when you buy a second hand
house, its got a lot of after market addons in it: mature gardens,
cupboards, more than a basic kitchen , cupboards etc etc.
You can easily double that cost to turn a house into a home.
On Sat, 01 May 2010 13:38:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
All that's just as true of a pre-fabricated house though. Okay some of the
interior fittings may be included, but you're still looking at cupboards,
wardrobes, floorcoverings, suites, etc. As to a second-hand house, the
first thing most people do is rip-out everything that's not to their taste
and start again!
Commercial buildings typically have a design life of about 30 years.
Traditionally built homes have a design life of 200 years.
There's no problem building homes with a design life of 30 years
(and it's commonly done in other countries), but such homes are
much cheaper, and UK developers are not interested in developing
homes which sell for any less. Developers already use cheaper
building techniques for many homes, but have so far managed to
still sell these for top prices, even though they will not last
as long as traditionally built homes. They largely see it as a
game of how cheaply can they get away with building, without the
sale price dropping.
Ultimately, house prices depend on supply and demand, and the
supply has been too low for a long time. Artificial measures
such as insisting on a proportion of "affordable housing" just
makes this worse. It's only solvable by building enough homes
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
No, the *demand* has been too high.
In my day, there were less people and I was 28 before I could even
afford a rented FLAT on my own, let alone buy a house, which I managed
to do when I was 43.
These days pepole leave college and expect to instantly own a house!
It's only solvable by building enough homes
No, its solvable by peoples expectations coming down to the point where
owning a house is a minority privilege, and something only very
successful people can afford to do, until such time as the population
drops well below housing stock, and there are more affordable homes.
There are in fact plenty of affordable homes, as long as you don't mind
living in a burned out post industrial town etc.
It is a problem made worse by the large scale demolition of existing
stock, more often than not property that was once more than adequate but
has been vandalised. The shirking classes then refuse to live in such
property and the whole sorry cycle will be repeated in ever decreasing
time scales as the aspirations of the shirking classes are ratcheted
Were they the three wonderful 22 floor white blocks? Of so these nice
looking block were demolished because of construction problems. They
looked good on the edge of a park. The sort of thing seen in the South of
That hits the TV and the national press frequently. The Welsh Streets as
they all have Welsh names and were built by the Welsh. Wales is only a few
miles aways so it figures. The right wing press are a making a big thing of
this, so as to discredit a successful government.
I read comments by one of the people camapiaging to get them demolished.
Most want them demolished and moved to the new proposed homes adjacent. He
"However as conflict sells news,I shouldn't be surprised we have not be
given fair & Unbiased media time. Even the Liverpool Echo are failing to
publish any of our correspondence, whilst constantly publishing that of the
anti- demolition groups, even now."
Not even the local papers or radio will give him any time, as he has been
blocked out. A political agenda at work. Googled and got this.....
I have lived in the same Welsh Street for over 60 years and having worked as
a volunteer street rep. for over 5 years on regeneration of the Princes Park
area, I can tell you that the residents can't wait to move into new homes.We
are fed up with all the hype about what lovely houses these are, put about
by the so-called Welsh Street Homes Group, many of whose original, very few,
supporters have now bought & moved into new properties on Clevedon Park,
aleaving only 3 residents objecting to the proposals, who all live in Kelvin
Grove nd DO NOT represent the Welsh Street residents
THE FACTS ARE : 11 streets are to be demolished from one side of Kelvin
Grove to Admiral Street and new housing being built on the site for local
residents, including local shops. The remaining Welsh Streets - Dovey,Teilo
& Elwy, houses will be refurbished, together with the streets off Windsor
Street down to Upper Warwick Street.
The Community will NOT be split up as suggested by WSHG opposition group,who
have only lived in the area for about 6 years and only became involved about
18 months ago when Nina Edge became aware that her Kelvin Grove house was
part of the demolition plan,who have never been involved with the community
and are not known to the community, most of whom have lived here all their
lives. Many residents had Improvement grants in the late 70's to have
bathrooms built on & general improvements to their properties, however in
spite of numerous damp proofing courses, these houses are in bad shape, now
beyond saving and residents want something better & have been prepared to
fight for that.
Originally three of the streets Treborth, Pengwern & South Streets were not
included in the demolition proposals,but residents of those streets fought
to be included in the demolition plans and over 200 Welsh Street residents
lobbyed the Town Hall meeting of the Executive Board demanding that these 3
streets be included in proposals and won their case. One of the main
problems in all this has been the credence & publicity given to the
opposition, whilst failing to give a truly balanced view on TV & in
newspapers to the views, needs & aspirations of the wider community. However
as conflict sells news, I shouldn't be surprised we have not be given fair &
unbiased media time. Even the Liverpool Echo are failing to publish any of
our crrespondence, whilst constantly publishing that of the anti-demolition
groups, even now. Despite all the hype we are now looking forward to
brighter future for the Princes Park Area and it's residents in better homes
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.