Will bigger houses become cheaper

[Wantarest]

I've been wondering whether the high cost of energy and maintenance will mean people will want more moderate spaces rather than large houses.

One of my friend has said she regrets their renovation which massively increased the footprint of their house (from a 3 bedroom to a 6 bedroom plus a basement) but they do not use a lot of the space. One of their two children has already left home.

I believe back in the days (many decades ago), people did not want houses with many windows or large footprints because of the costs (tax for windows and keeping the spaces warm).

Just curious how lifestyle might change and adapt in the years to come because of the move to Net Zero, higher utility bills, and people having fewer kids. How will that affect the type of houses/space that we value the most.

That said, planning laws changed not too long ago to make it possible to build massive 6m box extensions both at the top and bottom and that has really change the look of many period properties, with some become bottom heavy and in some case top heavy.

Not the same thing, but I can def see cute little cottages with low beams falling off in value because they're going to be uninhabitable in a couple of generations. A friend of mine's husband is 6 foot and doesn't really suit living in a cottage, but you can easily see the next gen of boys being a couple of inches taller, then another couple of inches and then the house is basically unusable.

Yeah, this is why I'm not sure I'd factor in adult kids to my own housing plans - I might wait a bit longer to downsize if they're still around, but I wouldn't make any big "move" decisions when they're in their mid to late teens based on an assumption of them still being at home. Unless you live in a major city where you can work in most sectors at a high level, or they're targeting a geographically ubiquitous job (e.g. nurse, teacher), chances are they will go somewhere else for optimal work opportunities, potentially also abroad (they were both born overseas). I can't see either of them being happy WFH on a laptop for their entire lives so fully remote working unlikely.

Interestingly I looked at this yesterday on the back of another thread. It looks as though mens' height in the UK peaked around 2010 and started coming down slightly- it's around 5'10''. Not to say that there aren't more tall people but if that's true then there are also more short people.

If the C.O.L and all the reasons for causing it don’t show any improvement at all in the few years, people might start to look at larger houses will less acquisitive eyes on a more permanent basis.
If life doesn’t improve, ( 🙏 God help us) the definition of large has multi levels before it will affect the majority of buyers and sellers to the extent that no buyers will be left to ‘down-size’ to sellers size property.
It is possible I suppose that we have the odd nom-dom or trust fund babe /dude slumming it on mumsnet for sh*ts and giggles at the weekend, that have residences so vast that 💵 buyers become almost extinct, but for most of us, things will improve at some future date.

As PP says it's more likely that those open plan houses will become unpopular because of cost of heating, especially the small ones where all the walls have been knocked out to form one room, these aren't often bought by those with loads of spare cash.

We live near quite a fancy area with a lot of big houses (small plots are prob 4000 sq ft big one 8-10,000 sq ft) the gardens are 1/2 acre sized plots

A lot are run down / poorly maintained. I don’t mean it disparagingly - to simply stand still these houses prob need £40-50k a year invested (bills, and maintenance) maybe more… if you want to renovate it’s ££££

several are being bought and torn down by developers and turned into what look like a mega mansions (single property) but are actually flats (like 5 or 6)
they all have underground car parks private gyms, beautiful ground la sauna / spa and terraces.

they look AMAZING but 2/3 beds go for £1.5 / 2.5 m 😱😱😱

I don't think so.

People have far higher expectations now from those of previous home buyers.
2nd bathrooms (or more), downstairs toilets, utilities, a study or home office.
The expectation that each child has their own bedroom rather than sharing with siblings. I've seen more than one thread on here saying you can't count the box room in a standard 3 bed as a bedroom, when generations have grown up with that layout. All those have become 'the norm' rather than some fancy luxury that few people had. People's expectations don't tend to go backwards. Once 'most' people live with all those things then they become an expectation.

Plus, any larger house that comes up for sale in our City tends to get snapped up for landlords to turn into HMOs. No shortage of buyers at all. There is a major housing crisis with hundreds of thousands of people homeless (without necessarily sleeping on the streets - people who are being housed in hostels or hotels or B&Bs) who are waiting to be housed in HMOs

Me too. I don't think people think ahead very far when they see open plan on the house programmes on telly and think how useful it is to be able to see children while you're cooking etc. As soon as you factor in things like someone needing to work from home, teenagers wanting friends round, a dog that needs shutting in to one room now and again, etc etc, then open plan becomes a bit annoying. Harder to make cosy, too, and can be extra annoying if there's a tv in there you're trying to watch while someone is clattering around with pots and pans and sizzling things.

We had an extension done all across the back of our semi and instead of having a huge kitchen/diner/living room in the back we kept it as 2 separate spaces - kitchen/diner and separate back living room. We have another small living room in the front so effectively there are 3 living spaces downstairs. V handy with DH working from home in one of the living room, me off each school holidays and not wanting to be confined to the kitchen/diner, one young adult home during uni holidays and another teen needing space to revise for A-levels.

Yes, it's happening round here. Lovely big old period houses with large gardens being sold by elderly people who can no longer manage them (or their family sell them when they die). Unfortunately there is not much call for them now that houses prices have become so unaffordable. They seem to linger on the market for ages and the pool of people who can afford them seems to get smaller and smaller. With the result that developers buy them and in Liverpool, at least, the council seems to approve the most ridiculous developments. Loads of really really small flats on the footprint of what was one household before, with not enough parking, or parking entrances coming out onto fast traffic at traffic lights etc. They try to sell the top floor flats as "penthouses" for a very high price, conjuring up all sorts of luxury but they're laughable as they're tiny, the windows are tiny. They then end up on the rental market, not owner-occupiers. It just changes the whole feel of a neighbourhood as no-one stays longterm. Probably because they realise that they're tiny and they can't park anywhere so why should they be paying mega high rental costs..

Same with old bungalows with large gardens. No-one buys them to live in because they are overpriced as developers buy them and knock them down to build flats.

In the meantime, families in smaller houses who need more space are stuck, or have to extend. And older people who need to downsize to a smaller house find the pool of small houses dwindling, and the "luxury penthouse" rip off flats built on the plots of the big old houses are out of their price range and not suitable for their needs anyway.

It's all crazy. And it's all about money. And hitting local council targets without thinking about what is actually needed or wanted or what will work practically.

Thanks for asking. My annual LVT would replace council tax as well.

I'm not familiar with how other countries do this so I'll make it up on the fly here. Every home can be added to Land Registry. I don't think they are all there at present. The LR database can be enhanced to add property land acres and type - developed, arable, pasture, forest, wild, etc. Part of the LVT will be based on land size and type. Part of the LVT would be based on developed property size in square metres. This info is on EPC's so could be added to the LR too. Then a third element would be added based on number of adult occupants. This was previously known as the Poll Tax - but here it would be fairer as only part of the council tax charge it replaced would be based on the number of people using the council services, e.g. pavements, roads, lighting, waste, libraries, etc.

Elimination of stamp duty would make it cheaper for people to rightsize and relocate when their circumstances change.

Landlords would be responsible for the LVT (of course they'd try to factor it into the rent) and tenants would be responsible for the Poll Tax element.

I doubt that any prospective government has the will to do this. Shame.

I've seen more than one thread on here saying you can't count the box room in a standard 3 bed as a bedroom, when generations have grown up with that layout. All those have become 'the norm' rather than some fancy luxury that few people had

Yeah but people tended to marry very young, age 20/21, to move out into their own marital home. Sometimes, if they'd had a miserable or controlling family life at home they married the first person who'd have them even if they were unsuitable.

I'm another who isn't convinced that those big Instagram-worthy kitchen/dining/living spaces are all they're cracked up to be. We stayed in a house with this set-up recently and found it slightly claustrophobic and depressing that you essentially did everything apart from sleep in one room.

I like the flow of moving out of the dining space after dinner into a separate room. Easier to keep warm too and I can listen to something different on the radio while I'm cooking when others are watching TV Also more privacy to have a minor squabble with DH while cooking Christmas dinner

We have a 5 bed (so not huge but decent ) but can't envisage downsizing any soon as I would like the children to be able to stay with us as needed until they are fully independent. Plus I can't wait to make at least one bedroom free for a proper study. Ideally DH and I would each have our own study.

Having space feels like a real luxury and lockdown really made us appreciate it.

My parents have a 9 bed house and while they rattle round in it they aren't in any rush to move as they love having the whole family to stay /hosting big parties.

I think some people will need to sell but others will continue to enjoy to luxury of ample space

Bit of a leap there

I don't know, I remember one of my best friends moving in with her boyfriend because her parents moved her sister into her bedroom and said she could sleep on the sofa when she turned 18. Small houses probably do lead to people moving out sooner

I actually don't know anyone or been in a house who has their entire downstairs open plan, they always have a separate living room.

A lot of people's expectations have had to go backwards though. MN is v London/ SE centric and not exactly representative of most people. People were previously able to buy a home in their early 20s and often pay the mortgage on one income, have children early, etc. Now, young people need to live at home much longer, are often unable to afford homes, even on two incomes, have to postpone or not have children, etc.
This point is exemplified by your second paragraph, ie that large houses and not being bought by people who want to live in them as they are now but by landlords wanting more profitable HMOs. There is now more of a market for multiple, small properties than for large properties.

Land tax just isn’t workable in a system which hasn’t had it previously. It isn’t the case that all owners of larger homes or average sized homes with larger gardens have masses of excess money. So if you introduce a high tax based on a non liquid asset the result is the asset has to be sold which floods the market and brings down house prices in general pushing people on all rungs of the ladder into negative equity. Plus you have to find a way of dealing with the fact that larger houses will already have had tens of thousands of pounds of stamp duty charged on them at the point of purchase (which is realistically the only time in our land owning system when people have cash from their sale and can factor it in)

the only people who “benefit” are those who are cash rich and wanted to buy a big house more cheaply. Or those who see a perceived benefit in others they view as better off suffering (of whom there are plenty unfortunately).

it’s different in a society that has always operated this sort of system and doesn’t initially have high levels of home ownership like the Uk does.

Love our massive kitchen diner was great for little ones and still is fab for teens. Super warm as properly insulated we do all still hang out in it and it’s great for teen gatherings.

We have an upstairs sitting room Dh and I we can retreat and leave teens to party downstairs.

Thanks. It's good to think about these potential issues. I don't see them as being especially difficult to get around.

SDLT raised around £16Bn last year. Total England area in acres is around 40 Mn. So a very English centric vanilla calculation would put the tax at £400 per acre. That would increase the more the land was developed and reduce for farmland, etc. Most of us have nowhere near an acre. And £400 is nowhere near council tax levels yet.

But you're right about recent buyers and asset rich cash poor owners. Again, it's pretty easy to tailor for this. I'd phase in SDLT for these people over 5 years starting at 20% of charge increasing to 100%. To make it simple, I'd do this for everyone, so folks have 5 years to rightsize.

This. In my mums town every 3 bed victorian terrace is being bought to be turned into HMOs. Mums house had a bidding war between two developers and out bid the family massively. The entire street will become hmos soon. Its a cheap town close by train to London.

There will always been the outlier family's who need a bigger house, and wealthy couples and singles who have no money worries. I don't think there's much of set formula. With four kids I'd rather be cold and hungry than have kids 8-19 sharing. Different priorities I presume

A period of phasing/ tapering of SDLT sounds sensible.
Overall though this system would be much fairer. Increasing mobility and reducing house prices (over a period of time) is much to the benefit of society overall. The current system is clearly not working at all, the rental market is particularly shocking and also needs significant change.

As a person who is foreign born I also find it amusing at times what people in the UK regard as huge homes. In the US or South Africa a 250 square meter house for a family of 4 is considered average and normal. Here it is considered large.

Thanks. We are all aware of the funding crisis of public services, e.g. adult social care, etc. A step change is required. So rather than just, say, doubling council tax. Let's do something positive and introduce a truly progressive tax to cover the costs.