Why do the majoirty of new houses look so ****e

C

ChaserXV

Joined
19 Jul 2014
Messages
80
Reaction score
41
Location
Cumberland
Country
United Kingdom
Why do the majoirty of new-builds look so ****e...why is most are so hideous, tacky, generic and characterless. Why is they all look the same with their ****ty fake chimneys, red-brick or rendered skins, fibre-glass door canopies and awful cast-concrete cills and lintels?

Old builds, on the other hand, seem to exude a certain character and charm. They actually look like they were designed by an architect, and built by skilled craftsmen who took a lot of pride in their work.



http://sucs.swan.ac.uk/~cmckenna/ttff/ib/blists_hill/victorian_house.jpg
 
Sponsored Links
ChaserXV said:
Why do the majoirty of new-builds look so s***te...why is most are so hideous, tacky, generic and characterless. Why is they all look the same with their s fake chimneys, red-brick or rendered skins, fibre-glass door canopies and awful cast-concrete cills and lintels?

Old builds, on the other hand, seem to exude a certain character and charm. They actually look like they designed by an architect, and built by skilled craftsmen who took a lot of pride in their work.



http://sucs.swan.ac.uk/~cmckenna/ttff/ib/blists_hill/victorian_house.jpg[/QUOTE]

The last paragraph answered your question.

I'd just add 'cost' to that.
Click to expand...
 
In the past buildings were made from locally sourced materials so the vernacular styles were readily apparent and regional variations made the architecture intersting to look at.

Now with new builds they are all the same, unfortunately.
 
New houses seem to have depression built into them. Depressing design, room size and low ceilings. Depression because gardens are so small and everyone's on top of each other. There are some really soul destroying estates that have gone up in the Bristol area in recent years.

Personally, I never touch anything built after the 1970s. I realise some 60s and 70s designs could be uninspiring, but at least they feel like they have had some proper tradesmen involved in their construction.
 
Sponsored Links
Don't forget that all the crappy, badly built, poorly designed Victorian houses have either been pulled down or fallen down - we're just left with the better ones now
 
I've found most 70's built estates(Wimpey for eg)were generally very poor as far as tradesmen are concerned.

On many of the builds you can see where different brickies(loose term) had worked on the same house and the quality of lay was varied and mostly poor, same goes for the roofing and joinery.

Pay peanuts get monkeys springs to mind.
 
ChaserXV said:
They actually look like they designed by an architect, and built by skilled craftsmen who took a lot of pride in their work.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of old houses were not designed by architects at all.
In contrast, the majority of modern houses are architect-designed.

Perhaps there's something in that as well as other factors?
 
Land prices.

Higher land prices = less money spent on the actual house, as people still only have so much money.

Green belt policy = When you have a such a policy, combine it with an expanding population (which today is only due to EU immigration) = Land prices skyrocket.
 
tony1851 said:
ChaserXV said:
They actually look like they designed by an architect, and built by skilled craftsmen who took a lot of pride in their work.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of old houses were not designed by architects at all.
In contrast, the majority of modern houses are architect-designed.

Perhaps there's something in that as well as other factors?
Click to expand...

I know, I said they looked like they were designed by an architect. Most old houses were designed by the very men who built them...maybe that's why the houses look better; they're a refection of all the different characters who built them?

the majority of modern houses are architect-designed
Click to expand...

Really? They look more like CADs...well like the computer done all the work.
 
The way things are going, with the recent sudden 'population explosion', I should imagine houses will have to be thrown up quickly and cheaply. God knows what they'll come out like.
 
When I read some of the posts on DIY, things like 'How do I fix a radiator to a plasterboard wall?' or 'what fixings do I need to hang something on a dot & dab wall?' or 'How do I remove the tiles in my shower without removing the entire wall?', I can only conclude that the majority of new houses are s**t.
 
There are two types of architect.

The better type design a house for the client and their style of living.

The lesser type design a set of houses that have maximum return for the developer. They have no consideration or respect for the people who have to live in them.

33 years ago my wife and I self built a house designed by an architect to our requirements.

I now live in a 500 year old cottage, was an architect involved, I doubt it but it is designed to be lived in. A "modern" extension ( single story kitchen was added in the 1940's
 
bernardgreen said:
There are two types of architect.

The better type design a house for the client and their style of living.

The lesser type design a set of houses that have maximum return for the developer. They have no consideration or respect for the people who have to live in them.
Click to expand...

Not everyone can live in a bespoke, individual, architect-designed house. The vast majority of houses have to be mass-produced.

An architect has to make a living just like everyone else. and he essentially does what the developer asks. In turn, the developer is saddled with all manner of costs and restrictions imposed by local- and central government.
It is fashionable to criticise the developer, but in doing so we are aiming at the wrong target.
 
There are two types of architect.

The better type design a house for the client and their style of living.

The lesser type design a set of houses that have maximum return for the developer. They have no consideration or respect for the people who have to live in them.
Click to expand...

Architects generally do a good job.

Less and less money is being spent on the house as the land sucks up so much of the cost (and now we have the community infrastructure levy on top of that), the houses also have to meet more stringent standards, yet generally the architects are designing houses that are perfectly robust and durable.

Its not the architects fault that cost cutting happens, and its not their fault cheap materials (like plastic cladding) have to be used, the architects don't decide the budget.

The vast majority of cock ups I see are caused by the builders, poor design isn't that common.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top