Box rooms

[Beansonapost]

Why is it that houses in the U.K. are still being built with box rooms?

... and still being built with no laundry/utility room?

I grew up having all massive bedrooms... kitchen diner... lounge/living room... utility... garden... garage etc. This is in the Caribbean. My childhood bedroom could fit two uk sized box rooms.

I've lived in other countries almost all of them had utility rooms... except China where the washing was housed in the bathroom; which to me makes sense. Why would you want to do laundry in the kitchen?

Husband is British so is used to this way of life... but I am confused as it's 2018 and I am certain the way people use their homes has changed. Why are people still being forced to have a box room and do the washing in the kitchen? That slot could be used for extra storage.

We went to look at some new builds... while the house was nice for almost £500,000 it just didn't provide what I would want in a family home (based purely on my experience). I think when people buy a home they don't really intend to move anytime soon unless they have to... so why put a room that is useless beyond the age of 10? Then force people to either sell of "create additional space" why not just build a house people can live in for as long as they need or want?

Also where utility rooms are concerned... in a country where it rains so much, wouldn't a dedicated space for laundry be standard? Wash, dry, iron... leave clothes to dry with windows open. Clothes out of sight.

Why is this the norm in the U.K.?

Also... why are homes still built with such poor storage options? You might get an under stair cupboard, an airing cupboard but that's it?! Why aren't built in wardrobes standard in all bedrooms? Gives you back your floor space and means less furniture to buy.

It seems developers are more concerned about how many people they can cram into these developments than how people will enjoy their homes/space.

Don't think I could do it in this country... no lifts and two small children!

Because flats in this country don't have lifts?

I think you're being very selective. You've taken one style of housing in England which is quite narrow. I've never lived in a house like you described in your OP and don't know any around here. Youre then judging it against random nicer places around the world. I've seen plenty of various unpleasant flats and houses in China for example. If you want a certain style then you have to pay for it wherever you are. If all you can afford is a place with no laundry and a box room in the UK don't try and compare that with something that someone on a similarly tight budget in another country couldn't afford.

Wow op so all new build have box rooms? All new builds have utilities? And now no flats have lifts?
Well you're the housing expert...

Preach, OP. My thoughts exactly and I grew up and live in the UK.

It's because in the UK houses are sold on the number of bedrooms (and increasingly, bathrooms) they have. So it makes senses to have a 5 bedroom luxury home with 4 en-suite bathrooms even if the rooms are all tiny. Having extra storage space doesn't look good on paper. In other countries they sell on floor area - so the house would be sold as 44 square metres or whatever, making it obvious how big it really is!

Land space is nothing to do with it. If you are short of land you could put a third storey on top for an extra bedroom. This does happen in the UK but not for big houses, only for cheapish 'town houses'.

Houses in the Netherlands are much better designed, althouhg they have less land than we do.

On our estate there are loads of 2 bed flats (not ours) with one family bathroom and one en suite. If you’re 2 flatmates sharing then you really don’t need a bathroom each, and while I think I’d appreciate 2 bathrooms between the 4 of us in the future, in a small flat there are much better things to do with that space. Lots of 3 bed houses I’ve seen have a downstairs shower room added because people find it adds value. Yet they have tiny kitchens. First chance I got I’d be getting rid to extend the kitchen to somewhere where 2 people can stand in there at the same time!

Well, for me (with two teens) numerous bathrooms is essential. And it is imperative to have a downstairs loo. And it must be in a private-ish location. I’ve seen ones that are directly off the kitchen (ugh) or directly off the sitting room . Just imagine being a guest and being shown to a loo two feet behind the sofa!!

Actually bring back the outside privy. Marvellous.

I agree that not all homes in the US/China/Caribbean are wonderfully spacious and well-appointed. Totally depends on location and budget... just like here.

People are acting like you'd get more usable space with fewer bathrooms, but that's rarely true. If you lost a bathroom it would be the en suite, not the main bathroom (no one wants their main bathroom to be through one of the other rooms), and usually that's space taken off the master bedroom and which couldn't easily be reallocated.

The houses you want are available, they just don’t exist at your budget.

The whole point of the OP's post is that these things should be standard in every home whatever the budget. A laundry should be as usual as a loo, and bedrooms should be big enough for beds.

I have to think that she has a point, but I doubt it will ever happen.

In the houses I’m talking about there is a master bedroom with an en suite, then bedroom 2 also has an en suite half the size of the room. Bedroom 3 is the same size as bedroom 2’s en suite. They could have 2 bedrooms the same size without the en suite, which makes a lot more sense for a family with 2/3 children, which is presumably who wants a 3 bedroom house. If you only have the one child you wouldn’t ever use the family bathroom if you each have an en suite.

The whole point of the OP's post is that these things should be standard in every home whatever the budget

It's a nice idea but not likely to happen in the UK or anywhere else. These things aren't standard in houses of every price in any country.

Agree myotherprofile

...but building/planning regulation could help.

imo labelling a box room as bedroom is misleading.

imo labelling a box room as bedroom is misleading.

Maybe if literally can't fit a single bed in. However, a bedroom is still a bedroom even if it's smaller than most people would like. I lived in a box room for a year when doing my PhD - it fitted a single bed (which touched the wall at both ends) and a desk the width of a chair and that was it. Was it great, or luxurious? No. Was it doable? Sure. We now have a house with a box room of a similar size that was my study but we're turning into a nursery. Just because a room isn't very big doesn't make it useless.

I can afford a house without a box room... And we aren't going to buy, we just stopped on a whim passing the development. It's not a matter of my budget; If I wanted to spend less money I should have IMO the same thing the bigger property offers,just scaled.

Most flats in the U.K. do not have lifts! And it's hard to find in most new builds!

And I did live in a flat in glasgow, it was a pain literally in my ass lugging pram and children up and down the stairs!

There are shitty places everywhere, that's not the point I am trying to make.

I think some people on this thread think I'm criticising uk housing standards...

I'm asking why people aren't demanding better designed homes that meet their needs and that aren't just four walls and windows with rooms.

Why don't they just build a two bedroom house with well thought out designs and allow people to have that as their foot on the ladder and if and when required they can extend or move to a house with three or more proper bedrooms without worrying about the
potential of encountering a box room?

I agree homes should to be sold on actual size and not the number of rooms they've managed to fit in them.

Also it is possible when we lived in Australia every house we rented had a laundry room. When we bought our flat there off the plan it had a dedicated laundry space... with a sink with storage, dryer and space for washing machine. So it is possible to have these things as standard. Ours didn't eat into our living space and it was off the bathroom with an accordion door.

I completely agree OP! I'm from the USA and live in a Victorian terrace. One of the things I was looking for in a house was separate laundry space. Luckily we've managed that in our generous cellar. I really don't understand the washing machine in the kitchen unless it's a really small flat. Even then, a hall cupboard is preferable.

It's all about money. Plus, most houses are built to conform to Parker Morris standards which have a minimum space regulation for each room/house. E.g. a two-storey semi for four people needs to have at least 71.5 SqM of space.

Actually, that should say should be built to Parker Morris standards. They were up until 1980, I believe.

I live in a new build it has a separate utility room with washing machine space, tumble dryer space, a double cupboard and a single cupboard as well as a sink- pretty spacious. We also have build in wardrobes to 3 of the 4 bedrooms. The final (4th bedroom) is not a box room. Would be tight with a double bed but you could probably squeeze one in.

But you can't scale down anymore...if you look at a new build house in construction the rooms look tiny.

I had to buy a four bed, even though I didn't need to because I wanted space fir a fridge, freezer, washing machine and tumble dryer...you couldn't fit all of them in any of the 3 bed new builds I looked at.

Where would you put a utility room in a small new build house? The gardens are already tiny. They mostly have dining kitchens and not massive living rooms. There just isn't the land. You have to pay more to get a utility room, and guess what if I paid even more I could have an even larger house with a bigger utility. It is about his much you pay. I don't get studies, though. Who wants a study? just remembered DH often works from home & actually it would be very useful

Just to ask...

Who decided there isn't the land?

Also you don't need green field land to build. How many derelict buildings are there in this country?

I watched that programme £1 house and I couldn't believe they were going to just knock down valuable brown fields instead of regenerating the areas. Not new builds, but someone moving in would be able to make it what they want. A few did loft conversions and extensions.

I think this "no more land" thing probably has some historical bearings. Rich people always had massive homes with sprawling lands surrounding... poor people were always "huddled" together in much smaller dwellings until or unless you moved up the social ladder... these things are still perpetuated in British society.

I just find it strange that people accept basically the same style/type of home their grandparents lived in because "it's all you can afford" so should be so grateful. Developers and builders should be held to a higher standard it's 2018 and you're the consumer.

Beansontoast if our housing is so inadequate and Australia and the Caribbean have it so much better, what attracts you to the UK?

You've lived in Glasgow where houses prices are still within reach and OK they might not include deemed necessities like utility room and the 3rd bedroom is often a small single room. But houses are still affordable to average earners.
It might surprise you to know there were houses in Glasgow still sharing toilets during the 1990's. There may still be some around but really I think people on the whole do ok in UK houses. Maybe it's a case of people need to buy less stuff. I'm totally convinced the more space people have the more stuff they have.

There is not a lot of Brownfield land in the UK - most of it is already owned by devlopers but they sit on it until they can make massive profits. It also costs more to develop as you have to ensure the ground is decontaminated.
Hampshire is still the SE and very expensive.
The kind of house you want does exist - even in the SE, but costs at least 1M as a new build, and is probably on 3 or more stories with a pocket handkerchief garden. You need to look at more up market developments.
The UK needs at least 300,000 new homes a year. Builders are building are at the most building 184,000 a year (and have built a lot less than that in some recent years. The number of new homes built each year has been declining since the 1960s, and this decade has been the lowest since the 1920s.
And that ignores the properties which are built just for rich overseas buyers to invest in.

So basically there are not enough homes so the developers can build what they like and know someone will buy it.

If the prices or demand drops, then the developers just don't develop the land.

I just find it strange that people accept basically the same style/type of home their grandparents lived in because "it's all you can afford" so should be so grateful. Developers and builders should be held to a higher standard it's 2018 and you're the consumer.

You have officially jumped the shark now.

One set of my grandparents lived in a "room and kitchen" Glasgow tenement with 5 kids and a shared toilet with 8 other families.

The other set lived in a "single end" with 4 kids, water running down the walls and the same toilet set up. They all had to go to the baths once a week to get washed.

This was not unusual for the post-war era and I know of no-one who lives in anything like the same level of cramped and squalid conditions these days.