People who design houses should have to live in them!

[SweetMoon]

Went to view a new build yesterday on a new development. Nice looking house but there was a major WTF moment with its design.

It was a town house over 3 floors and had 4 bedrooms. 3 Bedrooms were ensuite. Bedroom 4 was the smallest bedroom and then right next to it a massive family bathroom. But the other bedrooms all had decent size ensuites, including 2 with baths so basically the only bedroom using the massive bathroom would be the small bedroom 4.

Why not just make that en suite aswell? Or better yet, use bedroom 3's big ensuite as the family bathroom (it could be accessed from the landing if a door put in) and have the massive bathroom as another bedroom or a study?

Or am I missing something? There was a seperate toilet on the ground floor for guests, so bathroom wouldn't even be used by a visitor.

Although quite a big house there was also nowhere to store your hoover or a broom or anything as no tall cupboard or even a space where they can stand. That was a little odd. The downstairs loo was huge, so again could easily have been half the size and then a lovely cupboard could have been next to it there.

AIBU to think people that design these new houses should be made to live in them for a month afterwards so they can realise all the little things that are just odd!

We live in a new build two bed semi, it's on a development that was designed quite well in that the houses are spaces out and most have good sized gardens and parking for two or more cars. Lots of green space as well. However, this is probably due more to the fact we are further out of the city, in a more rural location. We looked at new builds closer to the city, and they are all very cramped and squeezed in.

Saying that, we looked at both two and three bedroom houses where we are now and went with the two bed. The three bed was weirdly designed - it had a bigger kitchen diner but every other room was smaller and oddly shaped.

The bedrooms were a lot smaller, the third bedroom I would be surprised if it actually could fit a bed in. The garden was smaller, it has less parking - all very odd.

There are some new builds happening the other end of town from us and they are also badly designed - nearly all are open plan living room/kitchen and the front door opens straight into the living room, and the stairs are in the living room as well - so it's basically one large room downstairs - apart from the downstairs toilet - which is also off the living room.

Hum they have at least realised one problem with some of the new builds on our current estait. While house hunting recently we rejected two houses as they where 4 bedrooms with a single garage and one driveway space. You drive round that part of the estate are there are cars just everywhere. The roads aren't that wide either.

At least the newer ones they are currently building all have at least two driveway spaces. But they are more expensive then the slightly older one's we couldn't have afforded a new build. They are driving up the local prices round hear to.

I think there are some developers who get it right and some who don't.

In the early 80s I visited a friend and her dh who had just moved into a new build. A show house would have shown the biggest design flaw.

The front door opened into the living room. But because it was so tiny you had to climb over the 2 seater sofa to get in the house and climb again to get to the kitchen/diner.(small shelf on the wall with a couple of stools. Another friend lived with her 2 DC in a 1 bed flat that had more space.

Round here (rural Yorkshire) a lot of the old old houses have living rooms that open straight onto the street. So that's not a new design flaw.

When we were looking we were originally keen on a new build until we realised how craply designed so many of them were. I went to one where there was a massive window looking into next door’s wall a foot away. What on earth was the point? Also so many bathrooms, limited storage and postage stamp gardens. When I realised how many houses used 3/4 size furniture that put me off too. That said, while I think we got far better value with our older house but there are some weird quirks in our house that drive me bonkers. Our house was extended in the 80’s so it isn’t just new builds that are prone to odd layouts.

Most people buying houses want one bathroom per bedroom if possible

Most people buying houses want enough room for their family to live and sleep in within their limited budget. Most houses are under 1000sqft in this country.

My fb friend bought a new build and put up a huge number of photos of it.
The kitchen was so badly designed, there was a cupboard that would be impossible to open and some weird half units. It made no sense and annoyed me just looking at the photos!

Those who castigate older people for failing to downsize might bear in mind the lack of suitable new properties available to downsize to

When my kids left home (I was a widow by then) I downsized to a two bed bungalow, all modern and luffly, I hated it. I've just downsized again to a 1902 one bed bungalow and I am in my element, I love, love, love it.

Even when all the kids were home and hubby was alive I wouldn't have wanted loo's all over the place. We had a downstairs loo and shower room and upstairs bathroom.

I'm not keen on new builds simply because I've read to many horror stories of things going wrong and builders denying liability plus I think older houses have more character.

A 4 bed house should have 4 bedrooms big enough for king size bed, side tables, wardrobes, a desk

I don't think this has ever been the case, not in the UK. King size beds are not normal. The "last" bedroom is always smaller than the rest.

Agreed. But you shouldn't be able to market a room as a "bedroom" if it can't fit (1) a standard single bed and (2) a standard single wardrobe or chest of drawers in it (3) with the door to the room operating normally ie inwards and unhindered.

(2) can be waived if there's similar provision built in - which is actually reasonably efficient when you're doing stud walls and oddly-shaped rooms.

water pressure is a bastard too, especially if you have a combi boiler. If I went for another house at any stage I would ask to put on all the showers at the same time .... pointless having 3 ensuites and a bath if you can't use at least two of them at the same time.

Also interested if there's a builder or architect on here who can explain the lack of basements? I can understand it in flood prone areas - but it seems a missed opportunity for more space for storage if not an extra room. Quite a lot of old build terraces in London (19C) have tiny ones which people try to expland (and everyone then suffers subsidence) and then earlier (18C) which have hardly any footings let along basements.

yy to combi boilers

Basements always cause hideous issues and massive cost when they're put in on Grand Designs, so I assume it's a £££ decision.

basements are expensive.
the earth needs to be moved and disposed of, it needs to be tanked (unless you only want to access from outside and only use it to store bikes).
so yes, it would cut into the profit margin of the developer.

Each bedroom should have room for a king size bed? Nonsense. But a single bedroom should have room for a single bed, double bedroom ditto for a double bed, + space for appropriate furniture.
I think a lot of people commenting on here must have a) massive budgets and b) no empathy for those struggling to get on/move up the property ladder.

My personal favourite was the new build 4-bed I looked at in 2000 which had a lovely large kitchen, about 16ft wide with the oven on one side and the hob on the other and three doors opening into the obvious space for a table. It had only one living room too and the estate agent has inadvertantly told me what they'd valued the properties at, which was, surprise surprise, significantly less than what it was being marketed at. Having just had my second child I couldn't see how the kitchen would be safe with small children. I went and looked at older properties in the same price range and we bought a 4 bed, 4 reception room house with a lovely garden instead. It didn't have much character but we made it work for us. Interestingly both the new build had significant extensions within a few years.

That said, I think late 80s new builds have to win the prize. Looking to buy round Guildford in mid 1990s, I felt completely exasperated by the number of 3- and 4-bed houses with a bathroom you had to back out of. Literally the door width with loo in front and sink between. I didn't have children at that point but even I could see that wasn't going to work with babies!

It's a good thing that new estates have to include a certain amount of affordable housing. But it's a fucking scandal how the developers do that by building houses too small to live in.

As an aside, when we were house-hunting and wanted a three-bedroom house, we had to set our searches for four-bed generally and five-bed in new build to get that actual size of house.

We're in a "period property" now, by which I mean 1970s. 1950s-1970s are IMHO the peak of sensible house building and I'm sure a social historian could tell us why.

1950s-1970s are IMHO the peak of sensible house building

Not really. This is the era of brutalist architecture and high-rise and high-density tower blocks. Perhaps you feel this way because the only housing left standing in your area are the ones that did not fit the norm.

@Elderpond mines an Ikea bed so we built in in situ. We have single wardrobes either side.

That's tiny room to be fair. We have an Ikea superki g, 3 wardrobes, two long chests of drawer, ottoman and dressing table and bedside cabinets. Our smallest room is bigger than that . People are far too used to tiny houses .

I guess I'm lucky that I have two huge double built in wardrobes. I also have a double bed and loads of other bedroom furniture that had to go into one bedroom. Of course all of this was a huge consideration when I was looking at houses but I wanted a smaller home and that's what I now have. I had to get rid of loads of furniture and by the time I'm done I will need a mid sized skip for all I can't squeeze in.

Buying a home that fits your needs and pocket is an incredibly difficult project. I call it a project as that's how I saw it. Also, you need to think about work that needs to be done. In many ways that's where a new build can be a bonus. I've spent and will continue to spend a fortune on this house due to it's age and also the last owner was like me, a single lady although she was older than me so the house was neglected a little bit. a lot

Swings and roundabouts I suppose...

Perhaps you feel this way because the only housing left standing in your area are the ones that did not fit the norm.

I said HOUSE building. Agree that tower blocks were a predictable disaster.

Unfortunately this was all we could afford and would rather live in a tiny house that's mine than live in a rented big one whilst paying someone else's mortgage!

It's loveable and cosy

I used to live in a new build. We viewed loads of developments before buying - and went for our old place simply because it had reasonable storage. Even then we had to pay to move some bits to create a cupboard big enough to get the ironing board into.

The worst new build I saw had a master bedroom with en-suite that only had a standard double bed in it. There was only just enough room to walk round the outside of the bed - sideways. The room was so narrow it was literally a 'bed' room and that was it; you couldn't even fit a bedside cabinet in it. When asking the EA where we were supposed to keep our clothes, she brightly suggested turning the second bedroom into a dressing room. OK, so why am I paying a premium for a two-bedroom apartment to turn it into a one bed yet still have an en-suite and a 'family' bathroom?! Bonkers.

The next thing we did was walk into the kitchen and saw the upright hoover leaning against the wall, because there was nowhere to keep it - and that was in the show flat. Every unit in that building absolutely tanked in value and still hasn't recovered its pre-2006 price even now.

Our house now was a bespoke build for the previous owner so it's one of a kind. I love it as it's been really well planned. Loads of power sockets, nice high ceilings but not so ridiculous that it will cost a fortune to heat, good size rooms and bathrooms, decent driveway and a lovely big garden. We had to wait and save for a long, long time to get here but it's been worth it.

I'm still angry with the idiot who designed our second bedroom. The TV socket and majority of sockets are in the nook that any sane person slots their wardrobe into. Wtf???????

Each bedroom should have room for a king size bed? Nonsense.

why nonsense? That's the norm in other countries. Again, if houses were priced per square footage instead of the number of bedrooms, developers would stop cramming as many "bedrooms" as possible. Other countries do not consider a "box room" as a bedroom.

No-one is being rude about people buying new built, posters are just stating that new built are designed without common sense and any of us having to live in them are struggling with the impracticalities.

Garages too small for a medium size car, drives too small for a car let alone 2, create a lot of aggravations for most families with 2 cars and the list goes on. No one is saying they shouldn't have bought that, we get that people buy what they can afford, but that's why it's unfair to design and sell houses not suitable for people living in them.

I'm forrin, but the fact that a room where you can't even fit a double bed can be called a 'bedroom' still baffles me. No, that's a cupboard.