Interesting thing about HA housing on Homes Under the Hammer.

[Pipbin]

It was on a couple of weeks ago but I've only just seen it.
A chap bought a plot of land and built ten houses on it. The other side of the road was already housing association new build housing and the HA contacted him and asked if they could buy all the houses he was building too.

Happy days for him, all houses sold. However they specified some changes. Namely that the bedrooms were two small in the 4 bedroom houses so he had to change the plans to make three bedrooms the right size. He also had to make sure that every house had a downstairs loo, a shed in the garden and that the shed had a ground anchor bike lock thing in it.

I find it very telling that he could get planning permission etc for the 4 bedroom houses that the HA deemed to have bedrooms that were too small.

Telling how?

I saw this one. I thought it was a shame, considering how desperate people are for bigger homes for their families. I'd rather have more, smaller, rooms.

Telling in the sense that people here and elsewhere have always said that new builds are getting smaller and are becoming too small. Then when an association who's job it is to provide lots of housing won't accept the rooms at the planned size it is clear that they are too small.

I see yes I agree new builds do have ridiculously small rooms as a rule.

It wasn't an anti social housing 'how dare those scroungers have bigger bedrooms than hardworking families' post!

I was struck by the Slum Landlords/Bad Tenants (not sure that's quite the right name) programme last night, where people were clearly prepared to live in very small spaces indeed (6 bunkbeds in one room, I think) if they are desperate enough.

So I guess it's a bit difficult to know exactly how big a room needs to be - but our council certainly has guidelines. I think the issue is that they are guidelines, rather than rules that must always be met?

For some reason I knew this - I think it was suggested in local town at the height of the big slump that the council looked into purchasing housing that was for sale (and generally not selling) to meet local housing needs but it didn't come up to spec (too small rooms for example).

I think it's interesting - in a sense that housing associations/councils have standards or criteria to meet for their prospective tenants but for private purchase or rental there isn't the same.

Bit social housing has often provided larger rooms, don't think it's anything new. I grew up in a 3 bed council house and the rooms, especially the bedrooms, were far bigger than friends houses who had privately owned homes.

In our council house all three bedrooms were doubles and two were really big doubles. They were a bit too big tbh especially in the days of no central heating.

It is interesting - generally ex-LA houses are generously proportioned. It's about the places being good to live in. Don't forget the first social housing was designed to provide good, sanitary conditions for people who been living in crowded, often disease ridden tenements.

Ive lived in 2 ex housing association houses.

The first was 1930s i think. Sturdy, huge, huge huge garden, reasonable sized rooms, loo upstairs and downstairs.

My current 1980s one has tiny kids rooms. One has just about room for a single bed and a wardrobe. I cant imagine its the same housing authority! Im so surprised by the op. Our road is mainly ha on the estate and the smallest houses. Its certainly less squsre foot than the "minimum" that gets put on threads like this!

I went to look at some 5 bed "executive" homes last year for a laugh (way out of my price league). I was surprised by how small the rooms were: the living rooms were much smaller than my Victorian mid-terrace's living room, and they only had kitchen diners, no separate dining rooms. Bedrooms were tiny, the doubles even had ensuites crammed in. Gardens, for a family of 5, about half the size of mine, which isn't large.
Was quite shocked, TBH.

Wow hula, just the opposite here. One double and 2 rather small singles!

Social housing is always big. If I remember righty you have to be able to fit a certain number of beds in the rooms so they are big enough for families

(Sorry that's to say- newly built houses have got smaller)

Ilove -not true here! Is there a difference between council built and ha built (ours is ex la and its tiny).

Didnt i remember rightly that they removed minimum requirements from house building regulations or something.

HA are working on the basis that 3 beds fulfils requirements of most family groups. They aren't interested in maximising resale value by adding bedrooms.

Id love a downstairs loo (isnt that a requirement for all new builds now to fit with disability regulations or something?)

Wed love a floor anchor point in the shed too after getting bikes knicked. Any idea how expensive it is to put in?

I'm really dumb. I've just remembered that our house is ex LA on a mainly private estate. Our 3rd bedroom is bigger than most others on the estate, and we have a downstairs loo which most others don't. All houses are standard 1930s 3 bed semis though and ours was first bought from the council in the 80s. I wonder if the same regulations applied then.

As for the bike anchor, I'm not sure but I know that BiL put one in his shed. The had to dig a hole and concrete it in. We've got one in our shed, but no bike .......

Yes, new build social housing has to conform to various accessibility, sustainability, energy and size standards. These things you've mentioned relate to these standards (different in Scotland and England, and can't remember the name of either).

the size relates to the legal definition of overcrowding see here. Basically if the rooms are too small, then the tenants are considered overcrowded and legally homeless, hence these properties are useless for HA or council.
Also the reason Shelter claim many people are homeless, when they are not in most people's definition.

Wed love a floor anchor point in the shed too after getting bikes knicked. Any idea how expensive it is to put in?

It depends. There are anchor points, and then there are anchor points.

A very simple anchor bracket is a good idea, and cheap. Drill two holes into the ground with a 10mm masonry bit, screw it into the floor and you're done. Literally ten minutes work, and you could easily do it yourself.

This sort of thing: www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Floor-Wall-Security-Bracket-Anchor-for-Caravan-Trailer-Motorbike-Bike-Cycle-/161770836568?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item25aa4b1258

I didn't have much money when I built my last bike shed, but I did have a long length of heavy chain. I buried it in the foundations of the shed, with the ends of the chain sticking up out of the ground.

If you want to secure something expensive like a motorbike, your insurance company might specify something more expensive. But for most applications an ordinary one gives most of the protection for about 1/10 of the cost.

Of course, the best thing is to make sure the shed doesn't get broken into in the first place. Make sure there's two padlocks on the door, and that the hinges are coach bolted through the doors and walls so they can't just be unscrewed. Really, all you need to do is make it look like the shed is too much hassle to break into, so they try next door.

Hmm our HA has smaller size limits than the council. I think it is individual to different HAs.

Someone told us a couple of years ago that HA houses were bigger than private but it wasn't until we bought a shared ownership new build last year that we noticed the difference. Ours is Shared Ownership but is built to the standard of a HA property. We have huge rooms, downstairs toilet, shed with bike anchor (didn't know what was a thing!). The house next to us is privately owned. We looked at the plans for their house and it's considerably smaller than ours but is the same size house (as in width and length) but they have an extra bedroom. Their garden is also half the size.

Find it a bit weird that there are different size guides if it's HA to private. Surely everyone wants more space?

redblu We measure houses by bedrooms, not space in this country (bonkers I know). That means your neighbour is pitying you and has a house which is worth more.

now I want a bike anchor in my shed.