[cpu121]

Marchmont's quite nice, but it wouldn't be student central if it was a particularly expensive place to stay.

The students actually make it a fairly expensive place if you're a couple/family. You're competing against 4/5 people each paying £350/month (or their HMO landlord).

Worse still some landlords have mutilated the generous proportions of the flats to subdivide into additional bedrooms. Kitchens that were a sizeable room in their own right are divided into a bedroom and small windowless kitchen. Box rooms are advertised as bedrooms despite being barely bigger than a bed. A lot of these flats were built with two reception rooms, which are turned into long narrow bedrooms.A particularly ghastly example is this.

 

[Moschops]

The students actually make it a fairly expensive place if you're a couple/family. You're competing against 4/5 people each paying £350/month (or their HMO landlord).

Worse still some landlords have mutilated the generous proportions of the flats to subdivide into additional bedrooms. Kitchens that were a sizeable room in their own right are divided into a bedroom and small windowless kitchen. Box rooms are advertised as bedrooms despite being barely bigger than a bed. A lot of these flats were built with two reception rooms, which are turned into long narrow bedrooms.A particularly ghastly example is this.

Well quite. But I suspect that property may be being sold because bedrooms 3 and 4 don't meet the minimum room sizes to get an HMO Licence. Bedroom 5 meets the minimum, but only exceeds the minimum width by 11cm. Any new buyer with any sense would remove at least some of the internal partitions.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR PHYSICAL STANDARDS
(see also SECTION 4.3)
SPACE AND LAYOUT
The space standard and occupancy of each room within the house shall
be based on the use made of the room.
Floor space should only be counted where there is a ceiling height of at
least 1.5m.
The minimum width of a bedroom should be 2.25m.
Standards for Bedrooms where there is a commonliving room and kitchen
available. The common living room and kitchen comply fully with the HMO
Standards
Single room (1 adult)
6.5 sq. metres
Double room (2 adults) 10.5 sq. metres
Triple room ( 3 adults) 16.5 sq. metres
Over 3 adults 16.5 sq. metres
+ 4.5 sq. metres per person over 3

From page 57 of the HMO statutory guidance.

 

[Jon10]

The students actually make it a fairly expensive place if you're a couple/family. You're competing against 4/5 people each paying £350/month (or their HMO landlord).

Worse still some landlords have mutilated the generous proportions of the flats to subdivide into additional bedrooms. Kitchens that were a sizeable room in their own right are divided into a bedroom and small windowless kitchen. Box rooms are advertised as bedrooms despite being barely bigger than a bed. A lot of these flats were built with two reception rooms, which are turned into long narrow bedrooms.A particularly ghastly example is this.

And are there building control officers still working for the council, who can intervene? But presumably they are happy.

 

[cpu121]

And are there building control officers still working for the council, who can intervene? But presumably they are happy.

Building control gave it a certificate of completion. They never did get round to ruling on the HMO application as the development company went bust after the application went in. (The for sale leaflet I linked to dates back a couple of years).

There a few chancers out there that subdivide flats and sell them on with "potential" to unsuspecting parents who think they're getting what will be a great investment as well as a flat for their daughter/son only for their HMO application to be turned down. Prices/rents then go up as they try to recover the costs of remediation or reduced tenants.

The purpose built student accommodation going up around the city may reduce demand somewhat - although that itself is beginning to look like a mini-bubble.

 

[Jon10]

The purpose built student accommodation going up around the city may reduce demand somewhat - although that itself is beginning to look like a mini-bubble.

That is going on all over the country. There is some stupendously-ugly giant buildings just gone up in Birmingham, on this site:

http://binged.it/1m03oqc

 

[Octoman]

The people claiming that back gardens are rarely used and end up as storage place clearly live in flats with no back garden. I use mine all the time, all year round. That is despite working long hours and a long commute meaning I don't get home until quite late most days. In the summer I often sit out in the evening and if it is raining we have a large patio brolley. In the winter I have a wood burner that we fire up and use. I grow fruit and veg, play badminton, knock a football around with my son, set up bird feeding stations, have barbeques etc etc. I would really struggle to live in a flat, even with a balcony. It would be a huge element of my life that gives me a lot of pleasure gone.

I buy the case for superdense flats for the people who want to live in zone 1. Let them play top dollar for their little boxes if they want them! Been there and done that. For the outer zones, build houses with gardens for the people who enjoy a bit of space, privacy and the outdoors.

 

[ill tonkso]

My parents both look after their gardens, and most of the gardens where I grew up were immaculate. We don't have gardens where I live now, I would like one though.

 

[potto]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29082338

A massive collection of images from British urban developments of the 1960s and 1970s now provides a treasure trove for those who want to reassess a vilified era of town planning.

The concrete architecture that dominated Britain's post-war landscape has always provoked visceral emotions. The concrete monoliths that have survived popular culls still divide opinion, with some likening them to Orwellian dystopias.

They were part of a massive wave of development orchestrated by a generation of architects and planners who wanted to improve the way people lived.

JR James
JR "Jimmy" James, chief planner from 1961-1967
One of those heavily involved with this regeneration was JR "Jimmy" James - a "titan of post-war planning", as one former colleague put it. He helped launch the new towns of Newton Aycliffe and Peterlee in the late 1940s, eventually becoming chief planner at the Ministry of Housing and Local Government from 1961-1967.

When James died in 1980, he left behind a collection of nearly 4,000 slides amassed over several decades of interest in the work of planners around the UK. Many offer a glimpse into the evolution of town planning at a time when anything seemed possible.

 

[The Champ]

So came across Chafford Hundred for the first time in my life, a development of 5,000 new homes in 90s and 00s. Judging from the pictures this looks one of the most souless places I've ever seen - 90s planning at its worst surely:

It makes me want to cry.

Is this the best we can do? Does anyone know anything else about this location or other examples of poor modern town planning I can get upset by.

:lol: I used to live here