What a pity they didn’t offer some flexibility in this proposed policy, when cooking it up around the cauldron.
Surely, given the choice between what will, inevitably, be a ‘deceivingly spacious’ rabbit hutch (because we’ve seen not a sniff of a minimum room size spec from government have we?) with a garden and a house with decent sized rooms and good internal and external storage, what do you think most people would choose?
These decent homes, without gardens, would then have easy access to a nearby area of green space, that would be shared with their near neighbours. A much better way of promoting some feeling of community, than having everybody sat in their postage stamp size gardens, surrounded by a 1.8m fence.
The influence of the Astroturf Group Create Streets and Roger Scruton led Design Panel at work
“We’ve shown what we expect Starter Homes to look like not rabbit hutches or shoe boxes, but decent, well-built, homes with gardens – places to start and raise a family.
‘With Gardens’ these are starter homes not palladian villas, how many developments of brownfield sites in low affordability areas and targeted at first time buyers these days are houses with gardens, none, zero, and this if a requirement will make them unaffordable.
Consider the advice Peter Holland of Pins gave St Albans last week.
Mr Holland was told that “one problem for St Albans is that many in-migrants from London are able to pay considerable sums for housing.
“Consequently with much of the development … involving the redevelopment of sites containing older traditional family homes, even modest new family homes in St Albans…
View original post 171 more words
Roger Gambba-Jones 