Wood burners - and open fires

[french frank]

... I so agree. Many of the victorian terrace houses around here have been 'knocked through' to create larger rooms : I was never tempted to go down that path, for all the reasons you mention - and also - by knocking down a dividing wall you lose two 'walls' available for bookcases or pictures.

.

Also, if you have more rooms, you can go into a different room for doing different things; or if you've got tired of being in the same room you can pick up all your things and decamp somewhere else.

[Dave2002]

Also, if you have more rooms, you can go into a different room for doing different things; or if you've got tired of being in the same room you can pick up all your things and decamp somewhere else.

Depends how many rooms you have, and how big they are. In some Scottish towns and cities there are buildings which were once occupied by very many people. They didn't live in great conditions, but they survived. Probably many of them went out to work during the day, and they would have had minimal bathing facilities, little heating, and a very limited kitchen. Water might have been provided from a tap or pump in the street.
It's hard to convert those for modern living - or at least in what might be seen as an economic way by developers and others.

For example, put in a bathroom or a shower, put in a kitchen with space for a fridge and maybe a freezer. The options then become variants of - 1. Lose one or more rooms, or 2. have rooms with very narrow passing spaces - possibly contravening fire regulations, or perhaps 3. create an awkward layout - for example with bedrooms interlinked so one has to walk through one to get to another.

Another option for large scale development if there are rows of these houses in a street is to combine adjacent units to form one larger house, but that may not be attractive to developers because they figure - possibly rightly - that they can make more money by selling two houses with a pretty lousy configuration, rather than one house which has been rationalised do that it has most of the features we might expect in a modern house.

Even architectural marvels like Port Sunlight - which is a superb development - might not suit everybody. Each individual house is far too small for the way many of us live now - or perhaps too expensive for those who are living in very modest accommodation. Times have changed. Trying to keep history as well as provide good living accommodation for people today is hard.

Modern developers either want to build on green field sites (terrible idea, but they have ways of pushing this with recent governments) or on brown field sites, which either mean contaminated industrial sites, or demolishing earlier housing to make newer housing on the same space. They prefer green field sites - not because those are better, but because they don't have to pay out as much, and can make more profit.

[Dave2002]

I was trying to think who that might have been - having dismissed those on low incomes and people living in tied cottages. The wives and families of blokes who 'thrust' their own eccentric preferences on them perhaps?

Perhaps a family - kids grow up, and then the husband dies leaving a widow with a house larger than she needs, but not enough money to improve the house in a sensible way, and in any case perhaps prevented from so doing by planning and other rules. OK- you say - these people should move out - but it's a free society, and many people do not want to go and live in a rabbit hutch which some developers have "decided" that that's the way older people want to live. So they will hang on until things become impossible, or they get taken out in a box.

There are quite a number of widows who might be considered asset rich (i.e. they own a house which might be considered expensive - in a rich area) - but cash poor - they don't have much income and very few reserves to cover more than the basic costs.

[oddoneout]

Also, if you have more rooms, you can go into a different room for doing different things; or if you've got tired of being in the same room you can pick up all your things and decamp somewhere else.

In our Victorian hall entrance terrace family home the front room was the grown-ups room, for reading, listening to or practicing music and sometimes for a quiet cuppa with a friend in need. When the children were at high school having that separate room meant we were able to host the European students(oh happy glory days!) without them needing to share a room - which was only an option for boys anyway as my daughter's room was only a small single. We had a very comfortable futon type sofa bed in there which was also suitable for parents on their occasional forays to stay with us.
My current house is a 30s terrace which has had the two reception rooms knocked through, but as there isn't a hall it doesn't make so much odds as access to all rooms up and down has to be through what was the living room anyway. Although I would ideally rather it was done differently, with a separate front room, and the single storey kitchen knocked through to the dining room my circumstances are now very different, so the once in a blue moon visitors are accommodated by me moving out of the big double front bedroom into the back bedroom which only has a single bed. If my son and his lot ever came to stay they would all have to share that one room.
The different ways the houses in the street have been configured( the other decision is whether to lose the smallest bedroom to get the bathroom upstairs) shows the value of the basic old terrace house model of housebuilding.

[eighthobstruction]

In our Victorian hall entrance terrace family home the front room was the grown-ups room, for reading, listening to or practicing music and sometimes for a quiet cuppa with a friend in need. When the children were at high school having that separate room meant we were able to host the European students(oh happy glory days!) without them needing to share a room - which was only an option for boys anyway as my daughter's room was only a small single. We had a very comfortable futon type sofa bed in there which was also suitable for parents on their occasional forays to stay with us.
My current house is a 30s terrace which has had the two reception rooms knocked through, but as there isn't a hall it doesn't make so much odds as access to all rooms up and down has to be through what was the living room anyway. Although I would ideally rather it was done differently, with a separate front room, and the single storey kitchen knocked through to the dining room my circumstances are now very different, so the once in a blue moon visitors are accommodated by me moving out of the big double front bedroom into the back bedroom which only has a single bed. If my son and his lot ever came to stay they would all have to share that one room.
The different ways the houses in the street have been configured( the other decision is whether to lose the smallest bedroom to get the bathroom upstairs) shows the value of the basic old terrace house model of housebuilding.

....+ the joy of having extra room (esp if you do not not have garage) to put junk and stuff you do not want to look at....in my case spare bedroom - sometimes studio, recently mostly a mess of all sorts....

[oddoneout]

Perhaps a family - kids grow up, and then the husband dies leaving a widow with a house larger than she needs, but not enough money to improve the house in a sensible way, and in any case perhaps prevented from so doing by planning and other rules. OK- you say - these people should move out - but it's a free society, and many people do not want to go and live in a rabbit hutch which some developers have "decided" that that's the way older people want to live. So they will hang on until things become impossible, or they get taken out in a box.

There are quite a number of widows who might be considered asset rich (i.e. they own a house which might be considered expensive - in a rich area) - but cash poor - they don't have much income and very few reserves to cover more than the basic costs.

And even if they are willing to move the options may be limited to say the least, as I touched on in an earlier post. In my home town there are bungalows, some of them intended for older residents, but they are more expensive to begin with, as bungalows are, rarely come on the market, and are less and less enough to meet demand. Of the many new(within last decade) and proposed housing developments virtually all are right on the edge of town so not within easy, or even reasonable in some cases, walking distance of facilities and not all are served by buses. The one that will be built at the back of here is years away yet and would only provide the standard cardboard rabbit hutches, open plan, thrown together, and likely costing the same or more than I could sell this house for and half the size.There are some small infill flat blocks but none of the ones I know of has lift access - househunting 6 years ago involved me considering all options, so that may have changed. There are no retirement developments(McCarthy & Stone et al) here, but in any case even if the leasehold element isn't a problem the service charges rule them out for many people who don't have the necessary level of income. There is a very nice integrated "later life" development built around the GP surgery and a care home in a nearby village, enabling the transition from fully independent to supported living, staying in the same home if wished. Finances again rule them out for most ordinary folk in this low wage/state pension rural part of the world.
These are matters I am also having to address, sooner than I had envisaged, due to health issues. This house could be altered to ground floor living with minimal non-structural work as the bathroom is downstairs, and I would then be able to stay in familiar surroundings and with familiar people around. The town has limited(and reducing) facilities so access to anything cultural other than library, or basic GP services, or train station, involves travel to the city. And of course I would be underoccupying a family sized home. If I relocate to the city, a place I love, there is a choice of suitable or adaptable homes, aside from the retirement ghettos, and access to concerts, art exhibitions, music groups, hospitals, clinics etc, train station to see the wider world including family - but I would have to start over again with friends and building the practical and emotional support network - doable but somewhat daunting, and harder work now than 10 or even 5 years ago. By emptying all piggy banks and assets I could possibly afford some minimal sort of single person flat type place( with no lift at that price point) within reach of my son, but would then have only a less than full state pension to live off, not a prospect I would choose unless no alternative.
Given the ageing population this is something that needs addressing but not I feel by direct government edict(not that they would ever tell developers what to do anyway) but by small scale local solutions aided where appropriate by targeted funding, and flexibility and imagination with things like planning restrictions over the way houses are adapted and used. There is something unbalanced about an individual being unable to create an annexe for someone such as a relative to live in, but permission being granted to build a block of flats in a garden plot nearby.

[vinteuil]

Also, if you have more rooms, you can go into a different room for doing different things; or if you've got tired of being in the same room you can pick up all your things and decamp somewhere else.

... indeed so - and we have chosen to have our rooms in very different colours (red, yellow, pale blue, eau de nil), so there is a very different 'mood' in each

.

[french frank]

... indeed so - and we have chosen to have our rooms in very different colours (red, yellow, pale blue, eau de nil), so there is a very different 'mood' in each

.

The one where my main bookshelves are ("the library" were that not pretentious for a small 19th.c. terraced artisan's house) is dove grey. My large table in the back parlour sometimes gets so cluttered there's nothing for it but to gather up the books and papers I need immediately and make for the library.

[Dave2002]

There are no retirement developments(McCarthy & Stone et al) here, but in any case even if the leasehold element isn't a problem the service charges rule them out for many people who don't have the necessary level of income.

In the UK develpments such as the McCarthy & Stone ones seem to me to be designed to fleece the aged, and put cash in the pockets of the developers. Sometimes they're built in quite noisy areas, but I think the developers assume that anyone over 65 is likely to be deaf anyway!

I am not totally against community developments, having lived in one (a condominium) in the USA and also an apartment in Sweden which had some communal facilities - such as a sauna and a washing and drying room and a shared garage. Community developments could be really good if they provided good accommodation - either in apartments of reasonable size, or even houses (as in our Californian experience) but with other facilities such as swimming pools, meeting rooms, games areas etc.

However I feel that would be far too innovative in the UK, and I don't suppose we are going to get to the stage of a shared development with a golf course and an aircraft landing strip attached. Just having some communal music practice rooms might be good, though. It shouldn't be assumed that only students at school or university might want to use such facilities.

[oddoneout]

In the UK develpments such as the McCarthy & Stone ones seem to me to be designed to fleece the aged, and put cash in the pockets of the developers. Sometimes they're built in quite noisy areas, but I think the developers assume that anyone over 65 is likely to be deaf anyway!

I am not totally against community developments, having lived in one (a condominium) in the USA and also an apartment in Sweden which had some communal facilities - such as a sauna and a washing and drying room and a shared garage. Community developments could be really good if they provided good accommodation - either in apartments of reasonable size, or even houses (as in our Californian experience) but with other facilities such as swimming pools, meeting rooms, games areas etc.

However I feel that would be far too innovative in the UK, and I don't suppose we are going to get to the stage of a shared development with a golf course and an aircraft landing strip attached. Just having some communal music practice rooms might be good, though. It shouldn't be assumed that only students at school or university might want to use such facilities.

They can be an absolute nightmare to deal with when it comes to things like having to sort out a relative's need to move, or settle the estate on death. My mother's move from such an apartment to a care home proved very costly in terms of share of sinking fund, approval to sell from the leaseholder and management company etc. Doubly annoying as both the solicitor and estate agent had handled dozens of such sales in that building and didn't think to inform us in advance what the issues were, which would have reduced some of the costs, although possibly delayed things somewhat. All sorts of costs and limitations come into play and can result in relatives having to pay ongoing costs for lengthy periods. In some cases they are effectively unsellable. That will get worse I think as fewer people either want or can afford to take them on. There are such flats in popular seaside towns in this neck of the woods that have been on the books for 12 months plus, sometimes more if they've been to more than one agent.

[Dave2002]

A quick follow up to my comment about living in a condominium. Clearly the people in the Californian management thought I was mad (not too far wrong .... ) when going through the details. We were told the rentals were on a 30 day basis. So - being English - I asked "So when do we give notice and move out?" to which the answer was - "Decide when you want to move, and tell us thirty days before."

What - not on a Monday, in any month which doesn't contain an R, or if the Moon didn't shine last night?

I really liked that - simple - but I don't think anything that simple could happen in the UK.

Brilliant! US 1: UK 0.

[french frank]

What - not on a Monday, in any month which doesn't contain an R, or if the Moon didn't shine last night?

I really liked that - simple - but I don't think anything that simple could happen in the UK.

Brilliant! US 1: UK 0.

And presumably there's no process by which you can be given notice?

[Dave2002]

And presumably there's no process by which you can be given notice?

I don't know - the issue didn't arise.

I think there are procedures in the US, as in the UK, and in some cases they're just as dodgy as some in the UK.

I feel, as an outsider, that landlord/tenant relationships are often very biased. On the one hand there are dodgy landlords, trying to screw as much money out of tenants as possible, yet not maintaining the properties so that the properties deteriorate and the tenants live in relative squalor, but then there are nightmare tenants who may pay their rent late - I'm afraid I've been there - done that - but not only don't pay [I always paid in the end - but just didn't always have it, and I hope that I was on friendly terms with the owners at the time], but actually trash the properties in which they live. Over the last decade we have considered letting out properties, rather than selling them (we were trying to sell ...) but we never did as we weren't at all sure that that would work for us - and there is a risk that a good property will be damaged by a poor tenant. As far as we could tell around 95% of tenants are perfectly fine, but that means that approximately 1 in 20 is not, and trying to sort out issues with someone who is not playing fair could be very difficult.

Sadly it works both ways - some landlords don't play fair, while some tenants don't either. OTOH I know people who do rent out properties and they say they have a very good relationship with their tenants. It is a relationship which should benefit both sides if done well, but that's not always the case.

I suspect that in the US some rental arrangements are done with much larger companies, and the good ones reallly are providing a very worthwhile service, whereas in the UK many properties are let by small scale private landlords.

[Anastasius]

In the UK develpments such as the McCarthy & Stone ones seem to me to be designed to fleece the aged, .

Care to give any evidence to support this ?

and put cash in the pockets of the developers.

Or this ?

Sometimes they're built in quite noisy areas,...
.....

Ever thought that location close to shops (ergo allegedly 'noisy' but double-glazing sorts that out)....was easy to walk to ?

[teamsaint]

Care to give any evidence to support this ?



Or this ?


Ever thought that location close to shops (ergo allegedly 'noisy' but double-glazing sorts that out)....was easy to walk to ?

This was a well publicised case “ Ground rent” of £6k PA.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/nov/16/flat-retirement-builder-value-mccarthy-stone

I’d definitely want a communal swedish sauna like Dave had for that kind of money.....