Compact and bijou

[Gob]

Hundreds of tiny studio flats, many smaller than a budget hotel room, are to be squeezed into an eleven-story block in north London as its developer takes advantage of the government’s relaxation of planning regulations.


Plans for Barnet House, used by the London borough of Barnet’s housing department, reveal that 96% of the 254 proposed flats will be smaller than the national minimum space standards of 37 sq metres (44 sq yards) for a single person.

The tiniest homes will be 16 sq metres – 40% smaller than the average Travelodge room. They are legal because of government deregulation designed to promote the conversion of underused office space to help meet housebuilding targets.

Local residents have labelled the Barnet scheme “ridiculous” and “immoral”, comparing the planned homes to dog kennels.

Once kitted out with basic furniture, such as a small kitchenette, bed and wardrobe, the smallest flats will have very little room to move around. There appears to be little space, for example, for a sofa or a washing machine, unless it is stacked on top of the fridge.


In the surrounding area, studio flats of a similar scale to most planned at Barnet House sell for around £180,000 and rent for around £800 per month.

Office buildings in Croydon have also been converted into studios with floor areas of as little as 15 sq metres under the Tory deregulation. Housing experts have attacked the relaxation of planning regulations as a “race to the bottom”, but ministers insist the measure is helping to deliver vital new housing, and point out that more than 10,000 new homes were created from office buildings last year.

Under the “permitted development” system, developers who convert offices into homes do not have to meet minimum floor area standards, considered by researchers to be important for health, educational attainment and family relationships. Neither do they have to include any affordable housing.

Housing campaigners, including Shelter and the Royal Institute of British Architects, have warned the schemes are producing overcrowded “rabbit hutch” and “shoebox” homes that will seriously damage residents’ quality of life.

Floor plan of these "des res" on page here...

[Jarlaxle]

Don't see the problem...looks like a city studio to me.

[rubato]

Space is expensive. If we want to have affordable housing we are going to have to adjust our expectations for how large a dwelling has to be. The "Tiny house" movement in the US and several other countries reflects a rational approach to what was becoming a critical problem.

SF NY and I would guess by now several other places are allowing this type of development.

yrs,
rubato

[Econoline]

Don't see the problem...looks like a city studio to me.

Same here. It's small, but there are many creative ways to use that space efficiently. Many "tiny houses"--including the suddenly trendy converted shipping containers--are smaller than the flats described in the OP.

[Crackpot]

No shipping containers are usually bigger and often use more than one. Small standard container are about 19 sq yards. (About the same size as the flats in question) Most use the longer ones which are twice that. The other thing is tiny houses usually offer outdoor space a block of flats doesn't.

[Econoline]

I was thinking of the standard 20-foot containers. (Actual internal dimensions: 19.3475 ft. x 7.7033 ft. = 149 sq.ft. and presumably the apartments have a ceiling height of more than the standard container's 7'10"...maybe even high enough for a loft bed.) There are lots and lots and lots of "tiny houses" that use those (unlike the 40-footers they don't require a semi to transport) and most are incredibly creative in their use of space. Of course, if they're sited out in the middle of nowhere they have a helluva lot more outdoor space.