Sick of crap house layouts

[Naptrappedmummy]

A moan thread but probably deserves to be on AIBU…

Looking to buy, 2 kids (boy/girl) so need 3 bedrooms. Every single house without fail either has 2 bedrooms plus a room so tiny you can’t fit a bed and wardrobe comfortably in it, or they’re 4 beds and slightly out of our price range.

Add to that rubbish uphill tiered gardens where you’ll trip and nearly break your neck every 5 minutes, a lack of storage in almost every house (no utility rooms, cupboards, pantries or porches), and just absurd layouts in general which make no use of the space they have and are completely counterintuitive.

All I want is an actual 3 bed with some storage, an ordinary downstairs layout and a flat garden capable of holding a swing and some chairs. Why can’t I have it????

Yes, look at older properties. Your Victorian house is tiny and crap, my Edwardian one has large rooms and storage.

Therefore it is worth looking at older ( than 1930s, which I never mentioned) properties.

I'll leave it there.

There are also modern houses which are good though. You can’t generalise about a specific period, because there are good and crap layouts in homes from all periods. So yes, do also look at older and newer homes, no need to write off specific periods, but equally looking for older homes in particular won’t help the search.

Would you go for a bungalow? Often bedrooms are good proportions and space is easier to re-purpose e.g. a dining room could be bedroom 3, the tiny bedroom is usually avoided as no need to accomodate a staircase.

Interestingly, it must depend on where you are. My 1930s end terrace is great: 2 large reception rooms; decent bathroom upstairs; downstairs shower room; garage; large back garden; small front garden but space for 3 cars in drive; 2 very large bedrooms; 3rd is much smaller but fits bed, wardrobe, drawers & space to play; converted loft of 2 rooms (eldest DC up there - one sleeping, other sitting/ studying/ music room) but still loads of storage in the eaves.

The only downside is small kitchen, but we're extending soon and the dining room/ 2nd reception is right off the kitchen.

Option for you might be a loft conversion?

Not sure where your DNiece is, but where I am it works out much cheaper to do SO than to rent (around half the cost in my case, including service charge). I bought a SO flat coming up to 10 years ago and will make a nice little bit of equity too. Unfortunately I'm unlikely to be in a position to buy on the open market in the foreseeable future as I'm a single person on a public sector salary living in a county with high house prices, so I have to make do.

If a downstairs loo is to accommodate a disabled person, then they should factor it in and made the house bigger for the kitchen, rather than sacrificing kitchen space?

Baffling.

Totally agree! Can’t stand the obsession with an en-suite, especially when bedrooms are tiny.

Sorry living 20 years with my en suite - never had steam come into my bedroom( its a well ventilated room) nor an issue with takin a dump, its our bathroom no one esle uses it, even my parents had one when was growing up. Building a new house at mo and have a fab lovely big en suite in the plans.

Big downstairs loos are for wheelchair accessible now which is a legal requirement

@Naptrappedmummy what you’re describing is ex-local authority 1950s homes. I live in one and even the third bedroom is a good size (a single but not a box), plus I have a pantry, airing cupboard, utility, old coal store, downstairs loo (not under the stairs so that is still free for coats etc.). If it weren’t for us wanting detached, a garage and 4 beds we’d be staying in this terrace as it’s fantastic and I am not snobby about it being ex-LA.

Years ago we bought an Edwardian terrace with what had originally been 3 double bedrooms. However, the previous owners had split the back bedroom to create an upstairs bathroom, then knocked the downstairs bathroom and kitchen together to make a larger kitchen.

It was fine whilst the dc were small. Babies don't need a large bedroom. They played downstairs all the time. The plan was to save up and do a loft conversion to create main bedroom + en suite for us, then the kids could have had a double bedroom each and the tiny bedroom would have become a study.

In the event, we ended up moving for other reasons, so never went through with it.

I used to watch Move to the Country, or whatever it was called around 25 years ago was was amazed that people with £1m budgets (a lot of money then when the average house price wasn't even £200k), couldn't find anything they liked.

So many houses are badly designed, even the expensive ones.

We are just selling a house we’ve been in for thirty years. We’ve extended and added loads of storage. Each bedroom has huge built in wardrobes, our utility room has floor to ceiling cupboards and as much as I am keen to downsize the lack of storage in every house I have looked it is a real sticking point for me. I really struggle to understand architects. The popular layout currently consists of a large open plan sitting/kitchen and every other room comparatively is small and no cupboards anywhere. No one seems to consider how it is to actually live in a house.

This is so true. We viewed four beds smaller than our last three bed SD, and ended up buying a 3 bed SD that had been overlooked by buyers like us simply because it has only 3 bedrooms. In fact, it is enormous with a big footprint, three double bedrooms and plenty of scope to extend etc. I fully believe it sat on the market due to not having a fourth bedroom, whereas it is easily more spacious than any new build 4 bed detached I’ve been in.

I’m not sure where you are OP, but in my city, if you can stretch your budget, there are clusters of large 1930s semi detached & detached houses in certain areas. They are easily bigger than any of the new builds by us!

I don't understand all the fuss about box rooms not being bedrooms. Generations of families have all used them as a bedroom for a young adult offspring. John Lennon and Paul McCartney first started playing together in John's boxroom bedroom.

I agree that the third tiny bedroom in new builds often can only just fit a cot, chest of drawers and a chair in, and once past toddler stage they're too small really. However, in our 1930s semi, our box room fits in my son's single bed (extra long one for when he's fully grown - he's 17 now), drawers underneath it. A wardrobe. A narrow bedside cabinet. So it serves well as a bedroom. When the kids were younger we put bunk beds in and they slept in there and had the back bigger bedroom as their playroom. They had a massive Thomas train set permanently set up in there and had a whale of a time. Literally only used the box room to sleep in.

I suppose it's slightly problematic now that DS2 is wanting his own computer desk/gaming station - his bedroom isn't big enough unless you set up one of those high sleeper things with desk underneath (we decided against that as would only get a few years out of it). However we have an extension downstairs (so 2 living rooms really) so he has variously been in the front living room, and also in the back upstairs bedroom when DS1 is mostly away at university.

Plenty of people around here have had loft conversions too so the box room then becomes an office.

I just don't see a boxroom in a 1930s semi as being a major problem, so try looking for those.

The downstairs toilet being "accessible" is required for new builds even when the house itself isn't (on a "street" that is steps rather than a road...).

Probably the biggest reason not to buy a modern new build!

We had to compromise areas to get a 4 bed because a 3 bed with 3 decent bedrooms and a downstairs that wasn't fully open plan did not exist! Ended up with a dated 5 bed project in a less fashionable area.

I'd also much rather have 2 family bathrooms than an en suite unless you've space to burn - to be fair I'd rather have an en suite guest room while the kids are young and still needing reminded to flush!

My Edwardian house had 3 good-sized double bedrooms. One was big enough for 3 single beds. The reason it had these was that they’d put a kitchen extension on and, instead of putting the bathroom above it like they usually do, they’d put a third bedroom there and converted the original 3rd bedroom into a bathroom. This made all the difference.

So, look at older houses and be on the look-out for intelligent conversions. Ours was reasonably priced too compared with newer properties.

Was the same in our area unless it was edwardian/victorian semis in more affluent areas than we could afford! The only ones with 3 decent sized bedrooms were ones with attic conversions, so maybe worth looking at 2 beds that have potential to convert?

Good shout! I had a friend with a bingalow and the bedrooms doubled up as playrooms too. I think they are perfect for families.

I know people turn their noses up at them, but ex council houses were built to a great spec and have larger bedrooms.

I managed to find one that had 3 double bedroom (I had boy/girl teenagers) and couldn't believe others bypassed it, whilst bemoaning small third bedrooms in new builds.

@LindaDawn we have one and love it with two small children! Also gardens are often a decent size.

Yea I hate that tiny box room! My house is a 'four' bed, but was just as you describe three bed before the loft was done. But that third bedroom is less that 6ft wide! You could barely fit a cot in there. It's my office - I have a shallow L shaped desk and a chair and filing cabinet that fits under the desk.
But back to you! It will probably have to be a four bed, and you'll have to compromise elsewhere to be able to afford it.

How they do this in our neck of the woods is to put the plumbing for an accessible bathroom in the utility. So if you need it you can convert it. I don't want that I want a utility and a downstairs bathroom. Where are you putting the washing machine? As you get more expensive here (and it's madly expensive anyway) they just don't alter layouts they just make the rooms and the garage bigger. It's lazy planning. I'd love to downsize to a new build but want somewhere that will work in my 70s as well as my 50s and a new build isn't it.

The problem is that you want the best features from every era of housing stock.

If your house was old enough to have a pantry, it wouldn't have a utility room. Nor would it probably have a downstairs toilet.

The bedroom thing, I totally get. You need a 4 bed or an extended 3 bed to get three decent sized bedrooms.

If you truly want to get a 3-bed house that has everything you want, then you'll be looking at 4-bed money, but at least it'd be a 3-bed on the footprint of a 4-bed house.

I don’t understand new build flats houses with zero storage. Where does the hoover / ironing board / Christmas decorations / camping gear / bike pump / garden games etc go??? And I’d never consider a room to be a room unless it’s at least 10ft x 10ft.

The UK has notorious cramped new builds. It’s embarrassing.