Who will buy these homes?

“Yes, we were discussing new builds, but David compares them favourably with older housing and suggests that new estates are found in more 'upmarket' parts of town, whereas other posters (including me) have not found that to be the case.”

You either misunderstand or misinterpret my comments.
Locally we have all sorts of new estates some on the edge of town greenfield sites, some in town on former industrial sites, some out of town on a former Army base. We have them all, the close to town use existing local services that have been expanded to cater for larger numbers. The large out of town site has provision for new school, doctors surgery, road improvements, community centre and shops. All of this alongside smaller infill developments within many villages.

The new builds are very popular with whether as rentals, affordable or purchase because they are very practical, they are what you need, cheap to heat and low maintenence. My wife’s son lives in one on the edge of town, we have dog sat for them, the environment of the estate is excellent. If I was working age I would live there, that’s what it is designed for, you can tell the mix of incomes on the estate by the cars parked, there is everything from a old Ford Escort to Aston Martins. As I’m retired a 3 bed bungalow with a decent garden is my and many others first choice, so new build estate maybe not the best for the retired

I think it is a crying shame when gorgeous chunks of garden are built on.

Chocolatelovinggran

I think that we live in different areas, David, so our experiences of housing are not similar.

My experience is very different from David's too, for what that's worth.

Yes, we were discussing new builds, but David compares them favourably with older housing and suggests that new estates are found in more 'upmarket' parts of town, whereas other posters (including me) have not found that to be the case.

Where new estates are on the outskirts of older towns, which many of them are, they lack facilities, or share them with the original town, for which the facilities were developed. It is rare for estates to have their own schools (particularly High Schools), medical centres or shops other than a Spar or local Co-op. Residents have to come into the town to access those things, and many are further than walking distance, so equivalent properties nearer the centre become more desirable and 'up-market' after the advantages of buying off-plan (eg incentives from builders) have worn off.

In my area 'close to town centre facilities' is very much a selling point, and adds £££ to the price of a house. Many of the new builds are family houses, hence the number of bathrooms and bedrooms, but when parents are driving children to different schools, the shops, the station and to the various clubs and sports in the centre they soon see the advantage of living somewhere more convenient.

I think that we live in different areas, David, so our experiences of housing are not similar.

Chocolatelovinggran

Well, David, I might disagree with you on housing areas. I have lived in a number of cities and towns and have found that most of the 'desirable ' areas, near to amenities, transport, and good schools, have been built on already, possibly by those ' jerry builders' you dismiss. Most new build estates around here are in places where, previously, there has been little demand, because of location.
The odd exception is where a small development replaced a torn down property, or has been constructed in land taken from a large garden.

The original thread was discussing New Estate housing, there are plenty of older houses built cheaply in all periods, call them Jerry built if you want.
In this area the worst were condemned and demolished in the 1960s as were many city slums, over the years the remainder got refurbished piecemeal . Now if a house which has not been updated is sold it’s likely to get demolished and rebuilt, if it’s a large plot two built.
Around the Towns and Villages there are many spaces, fields Farmyards, former shops, pubs and other small buildings all have a value for development. Even in the upmarket areas houses built in the 1930-50s are being rebuilt not extended.

Allira

David49

We need to compare apples with apples, if we are bringing into the thread older jerry built semis, they are probably not in an upmarket area and the probably need a lot of work to bring them up to modern standards.
Sites in upmarket areas are expensive it may cost £ 250k+ easily, whereas a new large estate it could be £100k or less just for the site. A developer is looking to make a % of the selling price as profit

It was me who mentioned jerry-built semi-detached houses as that was how ours was described in the 1930s. In fact, it was solidly brick-built, had a large, productive garden, my parents maintained it well. It was sold before house prices rose rapidly in the 1980s and has, I saw from the internet, been more modernised. The area is popular and houses well maintained.

They were better built than many more modern properties.

In that area it might now fetch £275,000+
A similar property in an area of London where DH and I lived would be around £850,000!

The house we had before this one was a 'jerry built' semi in a convenient part of town, which is much more 'up market' than the outlying areas being built up now. It had a good sized garden, decent room sizes and I suspect as many square yards as many of the detached boxy ones on the peripheral estates.

As with many older homes, people living there modernised them as they went along - I doubt there are any still as they were in 1935. They are still very much in demand, and have maintained their popular with families.

LovesBach

Shared ownership seems to be a minefield - a friend's daughter bought a flat under this scheme and, like many I have read of since, management and service charges spiral. This means she will never be able to afford any further shares, having extortionate charges, rent and a mortgage. Who has the income to buy new houses? We are told it is virtually impossible to buy now, unless a deposit is forthcoming from a relative.

I wrote about 1 year ago on here, that I considered shared ownership the worst of both worlds.

Your last sentence.
Yes I would say.
Unless a cheap[er] area.
Or two people on higher than average wages.
Or one on a very high wage.

My lovely market town is now surrounded by new developments with hardly any houses that could be considered affordable. We have no new hospitals, GP surgeries, schools or roads to cope with the huge influx of people. However we do have a new crematorium! Perhaps there’s a plan to bump us off and incinerate us to make way for the newcomers.

David49

We need to compare apples with apples, if we are bringing into the thread older jerry built semis, they are probably not in an upmarket area and the probably need a lot of work to bring them up to modern standards.
Sites in upmarket areas are expensive it may cost £ 250k+ easily, whereas a new large estate it could be £100k or less just for the site. A developer is looking to make a % of the selling price as profit

It was me who mentioned jerry-built semi-detached houses as that was how ours was described in the 1930s. In fact, it was solidly brick-built, had a large, productive garden, my parents maintained it well. It was sold before house prices rose rapidly in the 1980s and has, I saw from the internet, been more modernised. The area is popular and houses well maintained.

They were better built than many more modern properties.

In that area it might now fetch £275,000+
A similar property in an area of London where DH and I lived would be around £850,000!

Shared ownership seems to be a minefield - a friend's daughter bought a flat under this scheme and, like many I have read of since, management and service charges spiral. This means she will never be able to afford any further shares, having extortionate charges, rent and a mortgage. Who has the income to buy new houses? We are told it is virtually impossible to buy now, unless a deposit is forthcoming from a relative.

Well, David, I might disagree with you on housing areas. I have lived in a number of cities and towns and have found that most of the 'desirable ' areas, near to amenities, transport, and good schools, have been built on already, possibly by those ' jerry builders' you dismiss. Most new build estates around here are in places where, previously, there has been little demand, because of location.
The odd exception is where a small development replaced a torn down property, or has been constructed in land taken from a large garden.

We need to compare apples with apples, if we are bringing into the thread older jerry built semis, they are probably not in an upmarket area and the probably need a lot of work to bring them up to modern standards.
Sites in upmarket areas are expensive it may cost £ 250k+ easily, whereas a new large estate it could be £100k or less just for the site. A developer is looking to make a % of the selling price as profit

Also, a further potential problem with these constructions are large shared drives. Will all of the houses reached by these be happy to pay their share when they need repairs, or replacing?
The sums involved will be not insignificant, and what if one house owner refuses- will the others be happy to pay the extra, or..?

Our local water authority has warned that their infrastructure isn’t good enough to cope with any more large developments in the area. I wonder if that will stop any more building in and around our nearest city?

That's the chap, Doodledog: he'd have had a few thoughts on the new build dolls houses, I would imagine.

😁

I'n guessing that the mark-up on one large house is significantly higher than that on two small ones? The new houses near me tend to have lots of rooms, so sound good on paper. 5 bedrooms and 3 bathrooms sounds like a large house, but when you see the number of square feet that is far from the case, and often the older 'jerry built' semis have more space around them than the detached ones on peripheral estates.

I remember the EE who was 'frank' about the properties he was selling . Roy Brooks. I used to love reading his descriptions:
DARKEST PIMLICO. A large Victorian family house, entrance flanked by pillars, pathetically waits for purchaser. The bath shrouded by thickening dust. Torn up by its roots the missing geyser leaves a gaping hole…. Groping in the basement (3 rooms), our intrepid representative stumbled against an ancient brick copper: presumably the kitchen. Long 80 yrs. lse. G.R. £60 p.a. A gift at £6,990. If you are too late to secure this gem we have a twin (a much lighter house, equally repulsive) next door in Sutherland Street coming on the market this week at the same price.

FASHIONABLE CHELSEA. Untouched by the swinging world of fashion, an early Vic lower-middle class family dwelling, which has sunk to a working class tenement (2 lousy kits & 3 sinks). The decaying décor lit by, “high speed gas.” 6 main rms & revolting appurtenances which could be turned into a bathrm. & kit….A few doors away, houses sell for over £18,000 & tarted up twin houses to make this one almost double the modest £8,500 asked for this dump. Lse 51yrs.

😂

Josie55

Any body got any experience of buying a house where the environmental search failed because of contaminated land?

Not directly. It would depend what the problem was, it would be up to the seller to rectify the problem, it may be minor that can be sorted quickly, or a major issue that makes the house worthless.
Whatever the issue you are not likely to get a mortgage until it’s rectified.

Christian1x

It does seem baffling, doesn’t it? A lot of these big estates are marketed to commuters with decent salaries, investors (including overseas buyers), and people moving out of cities for more space. But with interest rates, mortgage criteria, and the general cost of living, it feels like developers are building for a market that’s shrinking rather than growing. Meanwhile the demand for genuinely affordable or social housing is huge, yet those are the homes not being built in enough numbers. It may explain why so many new builds sit empty or sales are slow.

Larger houses may well be slower selling but developers are only going to build if they can sell them at a profit. It all depends on the area in up market villages larger houses sell well so that’s where developers build if they can get planning.
Less popular estates build more 3 bed or smaller to a lower specification, developers who build houses that don’t sell go out of business very quickly.

Josie55

Any body got any experience of buying a house where the environmental search failed because of contaminated land?

No.

Not that I know as much as some may on that subject.
Start another thread about it?
Not everyone reads every thread on here[I certainly dont].

It does seem baffling, doesn’t it? A lot of these big estates are marketed to commuters with decent salaries, investors (including overseas buyers), and people moving out of cities for more space. But with interest rates, mortgage criteria, and the general cost of living, it feels like developers are building for a market that’s shrinking rather than growing. Meanwhile the demand for genuinely affordable or social housing is huge, yet those are the homes not being built in enough numbers. It may explain why so many new builds sit empty or sales are slow.

There's a lot of new builds in my area, too, and some are taking longer than the developers expected to sell ( spoiler alert, they're over priced) .
I am amused to see that these builds are invariably described as " stunning/ amazing/ luxurious etc", because a more truthful account would be " small houses of average quality on tiny plots".
Wasn't there an estate agent many years ago - Roy ? - who was famous for being extremely frank about the properties he sold?

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Any body got any experience of buying a house where the environmental search failed because of contaminated land?

Under the new proposals that would change though, unless the heirs stayed in the inherited house.