advertisement


Housing market

gustav_errata said:
We're nearly at the opposite end of the spectrum, buying a late Victorian mid-terrace.
Click to expand...
Funny how we're all different in our desires for homes. I wouldn't touch a new build; others wouldn't buy anything over, say, 20 years old. I've gone from 30s semi with cavities on ground floor only; (strange and not picked up at the time) to a massive 1870 detached with 23 rooms incl. loos and cellars with oodles of wide cavities (bit of a one-off), to a 1964 detached to a 30s terrace to my current 1962 detached

What is it with old and new designs of houses which attract? I guess new-builds have purchasing benefits (gov't or whatever). Other people prefer little or no garden (as in new-builds); others need masses of garden space.

What is your favourite building period? I think mine is the fifties, where lofts were still huge and cavity walls guaranteed. Very similar to thirties stuff which is prob. my second choice. The lovely stained glass, fireplaces and ornamental interiors of the late Victorian and Edwardian period are very tempting but prob. as a terraced house (no cavity). I have reservations about Georgian properties, aesthetically alluring as they are.
 
Mike Reed said:
I cannot understand why and how property is now increasing after hardly falling. Is it simply the paucity of bricks and mortar? Mortgages higher than for almost 2 decades, cost of living/energy etc. reducing savings and potential deposits.; doesn't add up to me, as I thought the limit had well and truly been reached in these straitened times.
Click to expand...
It's simple supply and demand, Mike. The population has grown more than the number of dwellings in recent years.
 
^^ the main problem with new builds IMO is that ceilings are too low. I really really like high ceilings.
Strange that as people got taller ceilings got lower...
 
Mike Reed said:
Funny how we're all different in our desires for homes. I wouldn't touch a new build; others wouldn't buy anything over, say, 20 years old. I've gone from 30s semi with cavities on ground floor only; (strange and not picked up at the time) to a massive 1870 detached with 23 rooms incl. loos and cellars with oodles of wide cavities (bit of a one-off), to a 1964 detached to a 30s terrace to my current 1962 detached

What is it with old and new designs of houses which attract? I guess new-builds have purchasing benefits (gov't or whatever). Other people prefer little or no garden (as in new-builds); others need masses of garden space.

What is your favourite building period? I think mine is the fifties, where lofts were still huge and cavity walls guaranteed. Very similar to thirties stuff which is prob. my second choice. The lovely stained glass, fireplaces and ornamental interiors of the late Victorian and Edwardian period are very tempting but prob. as a terraced house (no cavity). I have reservations about Georgian properties, aesthetically alluring as they are.
Click to expand...
My favourite is the Georgian era, 1714-1830.
I cant possibly afford one of course.
 
Jubal said:
There are alternative arguments:
Click to expand...
By a very politically biased author who uses silly comparisons to enhance his baseless arguments. '4 times as many landlords as teachers'. Why teachers; why not train drivers et al? Irrelevant rubbish i.m.o. Think he scoured the stat's until he found some which fitted his modus operandi.
 
Last edited:
There's a noticeable increase in 'period' properties for sale on this side of the sheugh , I'm guessing this is due to increased heating costs. The vast majority of houses in NI have oil-fired central heating and the oil has soared in price.
My house was built in 1680 using locally sourced (off the beach) basalt stone, some of the older timbers used were salvaged from a ship wreck.
Thankfully it's not listed in anyway which meant it could be dry lined and insulated, both the ground floor and all exterior walls, double glazed sash windows could be used and solar panels put on the roof, all making for a very easy to heat comfortable home with 'free' electricity.
 
Jubal said:
There are alternative arguments:

www.theguardian.com

The end of landlords: the surprisingly simple solution to the UK housing crisis

Mass-scale housebuilding isn’t necessary – there is already enough housing stock. But we need to learn the wisdom of the last century when it comes to landlordism
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
It's true that there are more homes than households.

If I buy a home and let it to a family, the ratio of homes and households has not changed. If I buy a home and let it to several families, the ratio of homes to households has improved -- one home has become a dwelling for more than one household. If there are fewer landlords, that ratio will worsen, and the people who will suffer are those people who are least well off, the people who live in bedsits.

On the other hand I agree with Nick Bano that "municipalisation" is a good idea, because councils can break up one dwelling into several, assuring a more efficient use of the housing stock. In fact, in my opinion, the entire residential housing stock should be nationalised and redistributed according to need.

I'll tell you an anecdote. In the 1960s, there was a shortage of rented accommodation, as that article points out. My mother saw that single parents in Manchester could not find anywhere to live. There just wasn't enough for rent on the market and, to make matters worse, they were the brunt of prejudice, and maybe risky tenants because of low income.

So she bought two enormous three storey Victorian houses on Broughton Lane in Salford, split them into bedsits and let them for a very modest rent to single parents mostly. She saw it as a good investment, and as a gesture of solidarity -- she was a feminist.

This is an example of how the private rented sector helps the least well off. Without my mother's intervention, those houses would have gone to two households, not ten. And those women would have been even more insecure, even less well off.
 
Last edited:
Just clearing a house now ( not mine ) word beginning to spread that its coming on sale .will be massive bunfight when it comes on.can be very very tricky choosing buyer .
 
Mike Reed said:
Funny how we're all different in our desires for homes. I wouldn't touch a new build; others wouldn't buy anything over, say, 20 years old. I've gone from 30s semi with cavities on ground floor only; (strange and not picked up at the time) to a massive 1870 detached with 23 rooms incl. loos and cellars with oodles of wide cavities (bit of a one-off), to a 1964 detached to a 30s terrace to my current 1962 detached

What is it with old and new designs of houses which attract? I guess new-builds have purchasing benefits (gov't or whatever). Other people prefer little or no garden (as in new-builds); others need masses of garden space.

What is your favourite building period? I think mine is the fifties, where lofts were still huge and cavity walls guaranteed. Very similar to thirties stuff which is prob. my second choice. The lovely stained glass, fireplaces and ornamental interiors of the late Victorian and Edwardian period are very tempting but prob. as a terraced house (no cavity). I have reservations about Georgian properties, aesthetically alluring as they are.
Click to expand...
Sorry I missed the notification when you originally posted this.

For us, the biggest factors in choosing the house we did (which, by the way, I've learned is technically Edwardian, not Victorian, with the covenant dating to 1902), were a) space, in which the high ceilings play a positive role, b) proximity to the city centre, wherein post-war builds are on the edge of the city and new builds are out in new developments outside the city, and c) scope for e.g. loft conversion. The history plays a minor role, however the above characteristics are primary and coincidentally derived from the era.

Our current rental is a 1970s build. It has low ceilings, it's cramped, it has a worse efficiency rating than our new one, it has a cheeky "3rd bedroom" to boost value but which would only qualify as a walk-in closet in any other culture, and, having been built on the green belt, the house is on the side of a hill which is more idyllic than practical. Furthermore, as a relatively recent development there is nothing here but houses and one (lovely) community shop. It gives off a strong "US suburb" vibe, something which I had hoped to escape when I left my parents' house at 18.
 
gustav_errata said:
Our current rental is a 1970s build.
Click to expand...
In the suburbs at least (C'bury and Thanet in my case), the late 60s and 70s were when the rot set in with matchstick build, cramped lofts, un-cavitied areas below windows and, worst of all (maybe late 70s/early 80s), no chimney !!!!

You don't mention nice touches to your early Edwardian house, like (half?) arches in halls and stained glass, fancy ceiling roses and coving.
 
Mike Reed said:
You don't mention nice touches to your early Edwardian house, like (half?) arches in halls and stained glass, fancy ceiling roses and coving.
Click to expand...
In Leeds the houses of that era generally come with leaky roofs, rotten guttering, no DPC or cavity walls, lead plumbing and dangerous wiring. My, how we love that period charm.
 
Mike Reed said:
In the suburbs at least (C'bury and Thanet in my case), the late 60s and 70s were when the rot set in with matchstick build, cramped lofts, un-cavitied areas below windows and, worst of all (maybe late 70s/early 80s), no chimney !!!!

You don't mention nice touches to your early Edwardian house, like (half?) arches in halls and stained glass, fancy ceiling roses and coving.
Click to expand...
Gosh, I'm embarrassed to admit I cannot remember if this one had stained glass on the inner entrance door. There is very nice coving in the sitting room and if I remember correctly there is a ceiling rose too.

We've been there twice, once back in January and once at the beginning of March. The second visit was mainly with a more critical eye. So the aesthetic details are escaping me now. Sadly they aren't covered in the agent's photos in the listing, nor in any of the photos in the survey report. I guess it will be a pleasant surprise or mild letdown when we get the keys in a couple of weeks.
 
stevec67 said:
In Leeds the houses of that era generally come with leaky roofs, rotten guttering, no DPC or cavity walls, lead plumbing and dangerous wiring. My, how we love that period charm.
Click to expand...
At least our roof is new and the gutters look fine! Everything else will be a series of surprises, although all of the safety certificates are fortunately in place.
 
stevec67 said:
In Leeds the houses of that era generally come with leaky roofs, rotten guttering, no DPC or cavity walls, lead plumbing and dangerous wiring. My, how we love that period charm.
Click to expand...
Well, I can't speak for Leeds, but in an approx. 120 year old house the state roof would've been repaired and guttering replaced. DPC would've been engineering bricks but as my 1870 house had them, I guess sth would've been sorted except that they wouldn't've been cavitied; doesn't matter if it's a mid terrace. Underground plumbing in lead? Maybe but surprised it would still be there. If the wiring hadn't been uprated/renewed at least twice it belongs in a museum extolling the virtues of futuristic domestic electricity supply. It may even have been gas lighting at that juncture. 😁

None of this detracts from the solid build, aesthetic attention to detail, capacious rooms and probably a decent loft and garden, prevalent in those times. However, Leeds may've been an architectural entity unto itself, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top