Why are new builds all so ugly?

There's a firm in the uk called Border Oak that do thatched cottages but they're ferociously expensive so I'm guessing that the contemporary builds are much cheaper to erect.

Front gardens are generally a waste in most houses. When do you ever see anyone using their front garden? Makes more sense to take it away & give a bigger back garden to a house but they probably just take it away to cram more houses in the same area.

Most new houses I've noticed don't have the path at the sitting room window. They usually have a paved drive for cars with a small flower bed as the divide between houses. I have seen some that don't though, don't think I would ever buy a house like that though.

Op check out theranch_newbuild on insta.

Sounds like the kinda thing you'd be interested in.

Out if interest can you post something that's not ugly?

Also are you referring to estate builds or one off houses around the country or both?

Housing is so needed that builders and developers know that planning permission is a formality now and aesthetically there isn’t the same desire for the perfect or well thought out design… people just need functional homes asap…to service the seriously huge surge in population thanks to immigration in the main…and the pressure that’s adding to housing stock. Egg boxes as above is how I’d describe two developments I can think of…look like they were designed by some lad after leaving the pub and with a load of leftover materials…

Also two new builds very near me and 10 years ago not a cat in hells chance permission would have been granted… one is on a corner and the high wall around it so if you are pulling out in a car you can’t see any traffic from the left on the main road until the very last second… pure dangerous …. Especially if the vehicle is speeding …

So whoever in the planning department just looked, went.. “.. yes, it won’t fall down, we need houses,so, approved !

Cheap looking design, materials and just ugly.

Stone cottages with thatched roofs weren't invented because they looked nice, they were the most sensible use of materials and technology available at the time, used in such a way to maximize performance, e.g. small windows to reduce heat loss, field stone gathered in the process of clearing fields for agriculture. They were also dark inside and unhealthy to live in due to the burning of solid fuels (there are still a lot of people in denial about the lung cancer and other respiratory disease risks from this).

Attempting to keep the traditional aesthetic elements (e.g. small windows) in a modern build doesn't make any sense. Why would you want to live in the dark when modern glazing makes it unnecessary?

Best start with a blank sheet of paper, include design elements enabled by modern technology which serve the needs and expectations of the occupants, and try not to botch it with poor proportions.

Anyway, these look OK to me.

Rural, in the UK

Urban, and closer to home

Good question. The metal roof in the bungalow is counterbattened and ventilated, so presumably a little noisy from the outside, but if you have well fitted triple glazing, there's presumably little flanking sound.

Except in summer 😄

I dunno, there's something quite nice about the idea of summer rain hitting a metal roof. Quite nice, or bloody annoying, depending on one's mood.

Small windows weren't so much to do with heat loss, they were just the simplest and cheapest method of construction. Arching or hewing a large piece of stone for the lintel wasn't an option for most, and glass was expensive.

Personally i think that the planning requirement for small windows for new builds in rural areas just so they look 'traditional' is a joke. It makes a mockery of whatever 'heritage' is supposed to be. Times have changed and modern architecture should reflect the current

Yuck

not award winning but those are quite decent.

'100 percent. Its mental and a blight on the landscaoe in the country. Long line the bungalow or cottage' - long live the bungalow, are you being serious?

They get way uglier though years down the line when occupants start putting there own stamp on the property by changing the windows and doors or some other aspect of the property. Often people get this very wrong.

Oh by god. This.

Those dolls house white PVC doors are a pet hate of mine. These do not look good on anything.

If you told me the house i was buying was going to look like that then id tell yuou not to bother even starting to build it :)

Tiny back garden - cheaper

No front garden - cheaper

Box type shape - cheaper

Standard grey windows - cheaper

Grey cladding instead of brick - cheaper

Tiny box rooms - cheaper

Plastic ESB meter boxes at front door - cheaper

Cheap plastic electrical sockets and light switches instead of designer metal - cheaper

No trees or very limited landscaping - cheaper

Plain interior rooms with no covings, white walls - cheaper

Plain timber internal doors painted white - cheaper

Plain MDF skirtings and architraves - cheaper

Standard chrome door handles - cheaper

No fireplace - cheaper (but also easier to meet regulations)

Steep narrow stairs - cheaper

Three stories instead of two floors to fit more buildings - cheaper

Anyone starting to notice a pattern? House prices are expensive as they are without adding another 150 - 200k to improve the look and quality. 

You’d be amazed at the pressure to reduce prices and waste building houses. For example the size of a window is influenced by the size of a concrete block to avoid having to cut a block. That saves a blocklayer about 10 minutes per window, half a bucket of cement and about 3 blocks. So if you’re looking at a window and thinking it should be 4 inches wider keep that in mind.

The lack of a facia is the least worst thing about this abortion. A jumble awkwardly clumped together.

All periods in time have their own style. Nowadays its a more minimalist style possibly passed off as Kirving mentioned above with the subtext of cost saving. And it makes sense to build nowadays with all the advantages that we have in terms of larger windows, better insulation, better quality products.

I'm not sure if minimalist designs age well. At least they need a lot of maintenance and like all styles their time will eventually pass. There are a lot of things about the design of houses and I don't really know who is to blame (probably a mixture of planners/builders/owners). E.g north facing gardens/patios/conservatories, some modern houses completely dark despite an overwhelming abundance of windows, houses finished with the Dermot Bannon style box with huge windows staring out on a pile of sand two years after the house being built.

I also really don't understand the size of houses out in the countryside. Some are absolutely massive and with only 3-4 people living in them. In years to come they will be impossible to heat to a reasonable standard. Had I built one of them myself I'd possibly have reduced the size and spent ~30k of that build on landscaping. You'd end up in a house with a nicer setting and easier to clean/heat.

Designs obviously far ahead of the typical 80s bungalow.

People are running away with themselves though. Room sizes are getting out of hand and adding in typical features as required today, build cost is just through the roof.

That doesn't look like a corner window to me, it looks like there's a steel pillar in it.

I have a couple of proper corner windows in my 80s house and there's nothing in the corner except wooden window frame.

The 2 new designs you linked here are just as bad as the older houses you linked. I cant see how they sit into the landscape better - they are bland and boring. They will age really badly. Natural Stone should have been incorporated if they wanted it to sit into the landscape.

Building houses is something the victorians and georgians got right. These houses were designed and built by true craftspeople. They are still as beautiful now as they were when they were built. Modern architecture is trully awful.

I have a soft spot for our tiny number of art deco buildings and mid-century housing. The latter were solid houses, ok they need to be brought up to spec insulation-wise, nice lines but spoiled with modern stuck-on 'improvements'.