Housing estate design of the last 20yrs - why so bad?
Discussion
I thought I'd start this thread as a tangent from the one about specific housebuilders. I've been house hunting, and found myself thoroughly uninspired by pretty much every estate of new/recent builds. They seem to be full of details which may look good on plans but invariably age badly.
I'm thinking of stuff like:
I'm thinking of stuff like:
- Houses pushed right up to the road/path meaning you have cars/people going right past your front windows
- Car parking behind the houses, often in shared car park areas. Shared responsibility for the areas mean often no-one looks after them - someone dumps an old appliance and it remains there for ages as it's out of sight and no-one else knows who put it there.
- Winding roads and insufficient on plot parking, leading to minimal visibility and often only being able to get one car through large chunks of the road.
- Increased use of block paving on road areas (often raised), which seems to deteriorate at a lot faster that traditional tarmac roads.
- Winding pathways running through the estates (and often looping roads) which introduce passing foot traffic to all corners of the development where on a traditional "branch" layout there would be areas you expect this but also quieter corners where only residents would need access
- Small green spaces periodically on the aforementioned winding pathways, which never seem to be maintained sufficiently and end up suffering from the same ambiguous responsibility issues as the car parks mentioned before
egomeister said:
They seem to be full of details which may look good on plans but invariably age badly.
Absolutely everything on that list is a direct result of the 'PPG3' approach...Blame Prince Charles.
I can explain the reasoning behind each one, if you really want me to, though it would make for a very long and tedious thread... suffice it to say that the Developers had those features forced upon them by Planning, not the other way around.
Equus said:
egomeister said:
They seem to be full of details which may look good on plans but invariably age badly.
Absolutely everything on that list is a direct result of the 'PPG3' approach...Blame Prince Charles.
I can explain the reasoning behind each one, if you really want me to, though it would make for a very long and tedious thread... suffice it to say that the Developers had those features forced upon them by Planning, not the other way around.
It's utterly depressing the outcome is so different and there seems to be so little done to address the realities of these spaces - the same crap uninspired generic housing on compromised generic estates has been built for pretty much all my adult life.
Equus said:
Absolutely everything on that list is a direct result of the 'PPG3' approach...
Blame Prince Charles.
A development near my parents was objected to by local residents using PPG3 as the basis for the objection. The developer had applied for ~70 houses on the site. The Local Authority upheld the objection and refused permission. The developer then reapplied for ~120 houses on the same site so that it fulfilled PPG3 guidance and it got passed no problem. Much to the objectors annoyance.... Blame Prince Charles.
What would have been a nicely laid out development was turned into everything the OP listed in why new developments are generally awful. Not the fault of the developers at all. the original plans looked really sympathetic and well laid out.
Planning regs.
Living in a 1930s "garden suburb" with tree-lined roads, grass verges, multiple parks, front and rear gardens, garages and parking for at least 2 cars is far more pleasant, but as I often tell people who complain about possible local greenbelt development, 90 years ago this was a very large green and agricultural area....
I would really dislike living in one of those cramped developments of the past 20 years, though. 2 cars per household makes for a lot of difficulty. Imagine being a bin truck driver or a fire engine driver responding to a 999!?
Living in a 1930s "garden suburb" with tree-lined roads, grass verges, multiple parks, front and rear gardens, garages and parking for at least 2 cars is far more pleasant, but as I often tell people who complain about possible local greenbelt development, 90 years ago this was a very large green and agricultural area....
I would really dislike living in one of those cramped developments of the past 20 years, though. 2 cars per household makes for a lot of difficulty. Imagine being a bin truck driver or a fire engine driver responding to a 999!?
Everyone of your complaints sums up where I live. I can't remember the source but I'm sure it was mentioned there are an average of 1.4 parking spaces per house, and the garages are only suitable for old minis at a push. There is a lot of on street parking, in dodgy places on winding roads.
Parents bought a new build about '93 and all the kids used to happily play on the street, every house had at least 2 spaces and a front garden. No way could they so that round here!
The really new stuff is starting to address it, but the prices are eye watering.
Parents bought a new build about '93 and all the kids used to happily play on the street, every house had at least 2 spaces and a front garden. No way could they so that round here!
The really new stuff is starting to address it, but the prices are eye watering.
Our "new build" estate was built approx 10 years ago and has some of the points listed. A lot of houses are right on the path, but equally lots aren't (ours isn't). We could park at the front, but as it is a busy road, I would end up in the bad parking thread. There is a car park / garage are at the rear, but luckily we all keep it tidy. Winding roads and block paving seem a vague attempt at slowing cars, but just means that bin lorries etc end up driving on the grass. We do have quite a few green spaces and a couple of play areas that are maintained by the Parish Council, so are always well kept. As always though, the whole thing is very dependant on the residents and it would only take a few bad apples to start to make the place look untidy.
egomeister said:
I can well imagine most of the reasoning, and i'm sure the word "social" crops up in virtually every justification.
Actually, most of it is to do with principles of 'Urban Design' (a slightly different discipline from Architecture, administered by 'Urban Designers'), and mostly to do with trying to ensure that housing estates are not nominated by vehicle use and parking.The (half baked) idea was that if car ownership and use was made inconvenient, more people would use public transport.
Equus said:
egomeister said:
I can well imagine most of the reasoning, and i'm sure the word "social" crops up in virtually every justification.
Actually, most of it is to do with principles of 'Urban Design' (a slightly different discipline from Architecture, administered by 'Urban Designers'), and mostly to do with trying to ensure that housing estates are not nominated by vehicle use and parking.The (half baked) idea was that if car ownership and use was made inconvenient, more people would use public transport.
The parking thing is crazy, and obviously not just for residential. My last employer bought the building opposite to expand into. They set out the upstairs as 3/4 office, 1/4 meeting room and the lower had equipment in. The office had about 20 people in, (far more generously spaced than our building!) yet you could only park 13 or so cars. If you are trying to pull professional talent in, they are unlikely to relocate within walking or sensible public transport distance as their pool of potential employers tend to be geographically diverse over a number of surrounding towns or cities.
Ninja59 said:
The garages are decent sizes as well.
Garages are something that is actually improving.Historically, the size of 'standard' developer garages dates back to the days when we were all driving Morris Minors, and is wholly inadequate for the size of modern cars.
Both Planners and Developers are belatedly recognising this, and minimum 6m x 3m internal dimensions for garages are increasingly becoming the norm.
Of course, older properties (pre-1920's) tended to be built without either parking or garages, anyway.
I'm about to move out of a new build estate after 5 years to something more rural.
There is one particular house on the estate that has a challenging driveway................if you park on that drive you cannot open either car door more than 3 inches or so. The original buyers have been trying to sell the house for 12 months now without success.
And the whole estate has cars littered everywhere half up the kerb, with a tight twisting road network its a shambles at times.
There is one particular house on the estate that has a challenging driveway................if you park on that drive you cannot open either car door more than 3 inches or so. The original buyers have been trying to sell the house for 12 months now without success.
And the whole estate has cars littered everywhere half up the kerb, with a tight twisting road network its a shambles at times.
MOBB said:
I'm about to move out of a new build estate after 5 years to something more rural.
There is one particular house on the estate that has a challenging driveway................if you park on that drive you cannot open either car door more than 3 inches or so. The original buyers have been trying to sell the house for 12 months now without success.
And the whole estate has cars littered everywhere half up the kerb, with a tight twisting road network its a shambles at times.
We ruled out a house when we looking for that very reason. The house was on one side and a low brick wall on the other. You could just about drive down the drive (!) carefully, but you had no chance of opening a door.There is one particular house on the estate that has a challenging driveway................if you park on that drive you cannot open either car door more than 3 inches or so. The original buyers have been trying to sell the house for 12 months now without success.
And the whole estate has cars littered everywhere half up the kerb, with a tight twisting road network its a shambles at times.
The houses are almost on top of each other on new builds, they just feel so hemmed in don't they? Cramming as many houses as possible onto the land available.
I live on a 60's built estate of mainly semi detached, which are all generously spaced apart with a nice wide road & pavements. The difference & feeling of space to a new build estate is staggering, in fact I couldn't live on one for that reason.
I live on a 60's built estate of mainly semi detached, which are all generously spaced apart with a nice wide road & pavements. The difference & feeling of space to a new build estate is staggering, in fact I couldn't live on one for that reason.
Chris Jay said:
The houses are almost on top of each other on new builds, they just feel so hemmed in don't they? Cramming as many houses as possible onto the land available.
I live on a 60's built estate of mainly semi detached, which are all generously spaced apart with a nice wide road & pavements. The difference & feeling of space to a new build estate is staggering, in fact I couldn't live on one for that reason.
PPG3 house density rules means that if green belt land is being used you have to cram them in to get the most use out of that bit of green belt. They'd rather ruin 20 acres with high density than build something more sympathetic over 30 acres......I live on a 60's built estate of mainly semi detached, which are all generously spaced apart with a nice wide road & pavements. The difference & feeling of space to a new build estate is staggering, in fact I couldn't live on one for that reason.
We moved from a new build to an traditional Edwardian row of houses and whilst the floor space is similar, The Edwardian house is over 2 floors not 3 and has been designed to house people, something that new builds seem miss off the design brief.
Having had a quick look PPG3 seems to be moving away from minimum density, which is a good thing
Edited by RTB on Tuesday 9th July 15:52
RTB said:
PPG3 house density rules means that if green belt land is being used you have to cram them in to get the most use out of that bit of green belt....
Having had a quick look PPG3 seems to be moving away from minimum density, which is a good thing
PPG3 is now dead and gone - all the Planning Policy Guidance documents have now been replaced by the National Planning Policy Framework, but the density requirements applied to all sites, not just those in green belt (in fact greenbelt has always been pretty much sacrosanct under all Planning policy and is not normally developed).Having had a quick look PPG3 seems to be moving away from minimum density, which is a good thing
Equus said:
RTB said:
PPG3 house density rules means that if green belt land is being used you have to cram them in to get the most use out of that bit of green belt....
Having had a quick look PPG3 seems to be moving away from minimum density, which is a good thing
PPG3 is now dead and gone - all the Planning Policy Guidance documents have now been replaced by the National Planning Policy Framework, but the density requirements applied to all sites, not just those in green belt (in fact greenbelt has always been pretty much sacrosanct under all Planning policy and is not normally developed).Having had a quick look PPG3 seems to be moving away from minimum density, which is a good thing
Escort3500 said:
Equus said:
RTB said:
PPG3 house density rules means that if green belt land is being used you have to cram them in to get the most use out of that bit of green belt....
Having had a quick look PPG3 seems to be moving away from minimum density, which is a good thing
PPG3 is now dead and gone - all the Planning Policy Guidance documents have now been replaced by the National Planning Policy Framework, but the density requirements applied to all sites, not just those in green belt (in fact greenbelt has always been pretty much sacrosanct under all Planning policy and is not normally developed).Having had a quick look PPG3 seems to be moving away from minimum density, which is a good thing
egomeister said:
I thought I'd start this thread as a tangent from the one about specific housebuilders. I've been house hunting, and found myself thoroughly uninspired by pretty much every estate of new/recent builds. They seem to be full of details which may look good on plans but invariably age badly.
I'm thinking of stuff like:
I used to live on a development that had every single one of these ridiculous features.I'm thinking of stuff like:
- Houses pushed right up to the road/path meaning you have cars/people going right past your front windows
- Car parking behind the houses, often in shared car park areas. Shared responsibility for the areas mean often no-one looks after them - someone dumps an old appliance and it remains there for ages as it's out of sight and no-one else knows who put it there.
- Winding roads and insufficient on plot parking, leading to minimal visibility and often only being able to get one car through large chunks of the road.
- Increased use of block paving on road areas (often raised), which seems to deteriorate at a lot faster that traditional tarmac roads.
- Winding pathways running through the estates (and often looping roads) which introduce passing foot traffic to all corners of the development where on a traditional "branch" layout there would be areas you expect this but also quieter corners where only residents would need access
- Small green spaces periodically on the aforementioned winding pathways, which never seem to be maintained sufficiently and end up suffering from the same ambiguous responsibility issues as the car parks mentioned before
The one that stands out the most as causing problems is the rear parking. Nobody wants to use their back door as the main access, nor do they want to park their car and walk all the way around the house. In the slightly less than desirable area I lived in, nobody wanted their car out of sight of their windows.
The development I live on now was built in 1993, and even though I live in a flat, I have my own driveway, it's not abutted by other parking bays, and there's loads of visitor parking. The roadways are all full width, too.
Edited by cmvtec on Tuesday 9th July 23:06
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff