Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-11-2017, 09:39 AM
aceplace57 aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 22,049
Anyone want a 60 ft wide by 3ft deep house?

LOL why was this even built? It's a long hallway.

I've seen other tiny houses for sale. They are usually seven or eight feet wide. More usable then this thing.

Even a twin bed wouldn't fit. I guess a built-in bed with custom foam mattress would work. Perhaps a long built-in padded bench for seating. It's a very claustrophobic space. Even for just one person.

The "house" is obviously a tacked on bump out from the main building. Someone went to a lot of trouble adding this on. It seems like a decorative false front to the building and not intended as living space.

Anyone actually willing to buy something like this? It's got obvious water damage and needs a roof. All new interior and an innovative living space design.

The photo of the previous owner indicates a small woman. That's probably a requirement for any potential buyers. 5 ft tall at the most.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...l-800-000.html

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/for...00k-in-london/

Last edited by aceplace57; 03-11-2017 at 09:43 AM.
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 03-11-2017, 10:00 AM
Amateur Barbarian Amateur Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: F.O.S.O.N.E.
Posts: 19,905
There was one of these somewhere - SF? - that was about six feet wide by three stories by forty or fifty feet deep. It made the weird news sections regularly.

I suspect such things don't meet any modern codes. Things like door clearance and stair access (for fire safety) alone would be red X's.
  #3  
Old 03-11-2017, 10:08 AM
aceplace57 aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 22,049
Glad you mentioned doors.

The photos show the front door swings in. That eliminates significant living space. I'd install a door that swings out. Unless building codes prevent it.

Doors that swing out are used in Florida. They resist strong winds from tropical storms.

Last edited by aceplace57; 03-11-2017 at 10:12 AM.
  #4  
Old 03-11-2017, 10:35 AM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 17,880
800,000 pounds for a water damaged hallway?

It wouldn't be terrible if you could fit a bed in there. Plus a bathroom. Plus a place to put a recliner and TV. On second thought, it wouldn't work.
  #5  
Old 03-11-2017, 10:36 AM
Sahirrnee Sahirrnee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 7,957
Where would you put the fridge, and the stove, and a shower?
  #6  
Old 03-11-2017, 10:53 AM
aceplace57 aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 22,049
I think we figured out why this space has remained unsold. A stove is at least 24 in deep. So is a fridge. Good luck fitting that in there.

I can't imagine how that lady lived in this hallway for 60 years. Yet she obviously enjoyed living there and had lots of plants outside.

Last edited by aceplace57; 03-11-2017 at 10:56 AM.
  #7  
Old 03-11-2017, 10:59 AM
Filbert Filbert is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sahirrnee View Post
Where would you put the fridge, and the stove, and a shower?
The buyer will be a rich crazy person. They need none of those things.


The 3 foot wide is the narrow end, other photos show some sections are almost usable width. I mean, I could still think of much better things to do with 800,000, but then I'd never want to live in London anyway.
  #8  
Old 03-11-2017, 11:08 AM
Lasciel Lasciel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,567
Well, it's not insurmountable. You can buy a shower head and put plumbing down on one end of the hallway beside a boat or airplane-style 'head' and then have your bed as a fold-up against the wall style on the far wall.

Hang hammocks from the ceiling for stuff, and have a table that folds up against the wall... it's tight, but I think doable.

Last edited by Lasciel; 03-11-2017 at 11:08 AM.
  #9  
Old 03-11-2017, 11:24 AM
aceplace57 aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 22,049
Just noticed the lady had the exterior painted grey. Looked very nice with the plants.

Some idiot painted it a depressing turd brown. What were they thinking?

I bet she'd be heartbroken seeing that place in such terrible condition after only 7 years.

Last edited by aceplace57; 03-11-2017 at 11:27 AM.
  #10  
Old 03-11-2017, 12:20 PM
Renee Renee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,454
What were they thinking with that toilet? Mounting it on the adjacent wall would have made it usable. I'm astounded that they're asking so much for this hallway. It would be a fun design challenge, I suppose.
  #11  
Old 03-11-2017, 12:25 PM
Roderick Femm Roderick Femm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: On the cusp, also in SF
Posts: 5,577
I was assuming that the lot was bigger, so whoever bought it would just tear it down and build something bigger, but apparently this is not the case. I wonder if it could be converted to commercial space somehow?

Also, I love this photo caption from the Guardian. I'm glad to see our local rag is not the only one that makes egregious editing errors:

Quote:
For 60 years, it was lived in by Linda Wildoner (above, pictured with Sir Martyn Poliakoff), however she died seven years ago and is now being put up for auction by Savills
So they are auctioning off her corpse? I didn't know you could do that. I wonder what it will fetch after 7 years.
  #12  
Old 03-11-2017, 12:34 PM
jtur88 jtur88 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Cebu, Philippines
Posts: 12,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amateur Barbarian View Post
There was one of these somewhere - SF? - that was about six feet wide by three stories by forty or fifty feet deep. It made the weird news sections regularly.

I suspect such things don't meet any modern codes. Things like door clearance and stair access (for fire safety) alone would be red X's.
Sure glad we have codes,to make sure everyone lives in little boxes, all made out of ticky tacky.
  #13  
Old 03-11-2017, 05:37 PM
Melbourne Melbourne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,189
I'm not convinced. The /text/ of the articles claims "2.5 feet at one end" (not even mentioning 3 ft), and the pictures look wider, so I'm thinking it's a triangular lot, and /wider/ than 3 ft at the other end. Perhaps they've just divided the plot size by the length to get a number for width?

More interesting to me: note the filled-in doorway in the centre of the lot. I'm thinking that when they built the flats behind, they were required to keep the facade, and the facade was turned into the narrow triangular lot. What do you think the building was before the development?

Last edited by Melbourne; 03-11-2017 at 05:38 PM.
  #14  
Old 03-11-2017, 06:20 PM
Dr. Strangelove Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roderick Femm View Post
For 60 years, it was lived in by Linda Wildoner (above, pictured with Sir Martyn Poliakoff), however she died seven years ago and is now being put up for auction by Savills
Huh. Sir Martyn Poliakoff is the wild-haired guy featured on the excellent Periodic Videos channel.
  #15  
Old 03-11-2017, 06:27 PM
clairobscur clairobscur is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 16,837
I assume it has to be in a very desirable neighborhood in London, because I can't think of a reason why someone would want to pay such a high price for such a place, especially given it's very damaged.

800 000 ???? That unbelievable.

Last edited by clairobscur; 03-11-2017 at 06:28 PM.
  #16  
Old 03-11-2017, 06:55 PM
panache45 panache45 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: NE Ohio (the 'burbs)
Posts: 39,268
Back when I was apartment shopping in NYC, I looked at a place that was a converted hallway, very long and about 5-6 feet wide. You could sit on the living room sofa and rest your feet on the opposite wall. The kitchen and bathroom were like what you'd find in an airplane. I have mild claustrophobia, and couldn't wait to escape from the place. But it was in a prime location in Greenwich Village, and went for a couple grand a month. And that was 30 years ago.
  #17  
Old 03-11-2017, 07:47 PM
Gorsnak Gorsnak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskaboom
Posts: 8,757
At 280 sq ft, 65' long and 2.5' wide at the narrow end, it's about 6' wide at the wide end. That's actually enough width to work with, though obviously still a significant design challenge.
  #18  
Old 03-11-2017, 07:55 PM
Musicat Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 19,901
Can someone explain to a Yank what "freehold" means?
  #19  
Old 03-11-2017, 08:15 PM
aceplace57 aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 22,049
Freehold

In England and Wales a freehold is the ownership of real property, or land,[1] and all immovable structures attached to such land, as opposed to a leasehold in which the property reverts to the owner of the land after the lease period has expired.[2] Immovable property includes land and all that naturally goes with it, such as buildings, trees or underground resources, but not such things as vehicles or livestock.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freehold_(law)

Last edited by aceplace57; 03-11-2017 at 08:19 PM.
  #20  
Old 03-11-2017, 08:45 PM
Musicat Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 19,901
Wonderful. aceplace57 can use Google as well as I can. Color me impressed.

How is that definition relevant to this situation?
  #21  
Old 03-11-2017, 08:56 PM
aceplace57 aceplace57 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: CentralArkansas
Posts: 22,049
I assume most properties in that exclusive area are leased. Probably because the property continues to increase in value over time. People keep them as investments.

This odd shaped property can actually be purchased.

Last edited by aceplace57; 03-11-2017 at 08:58 PM.
  #22  
Old 03-11-2017, 09:07 PM
Cub Mistress Cub Mistress is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 3,137
IIRC correctly, freehold means you own the land completely, forever and ever and can sell it as you please. as opposed to a leasehold which means you have use of the property and buildings for some specified term of years (like 20 or 40 or more years.) In the US I think this is only common in Hawaii.

an explanation as to how it works in Hawaii
  #23  
Old 03-11-2017, 10:32 PM
Sahirrnee Sahirrnee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 7,957
We have a similar set up in MD.

https://www.peoples-law.org/understa...-rent-maryland

From this site, it happens in the Baltimore area, parts of PA, and Hawaii.
  #24  
Old 03-13-2017, 01:00 AM
Bad News Baboon Bad News Baboon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: A house.
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melbourne View Post
I'm not convinced. The /text/ of the articles claims "2.5 feet at one end" (not even mentioning 3 ft), and the pictures look wider, so I'm thinking it's a triangular lot, and /wider/ than 3 ft at the other end. Perhaps they've just divided the plot size by the length to get a number for width?

More interesting to me: note the filled-in doorway in the centre of the lot. I'm thinking that when they built the flats behind, they were required to keep the facade, and the facade was turned into the narrow triangular lot. What do you think the building was before the development?
I agree that it's triangular. The second link- the far end of the building looks wider than it is at foreground. Look at the adjoining beige building.
I agree that they were probably required to keep the facade. Looking at that picture again, that whole row seems to be composed of narrow buildings. My guess for former use was housing or shops with housing above.

I would love to have this building, but the cost and taxes are astronomical.
  #25  
Old 03-13-2017, 02:42 AM
Mangetout Mangetout is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 56,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melbourne View Post
I'm not convinced. The /text/ of the articles claims "2.5 feet at one end" (not even mentioning 3 ft), and the pictures look wider, so I'm thinking it's a triangular lot, and /wider/ than 3 ft at the other end. Perhaps they've just divided the plot size by the length to get a number for width?

More interesting to me: note the filled-in doorway in the centre of the lot. I'm thinking that when they built the flats behind, they were required to keep the facade, and the facade was turned into the narrow triangular lot. What do you think the building was before the development?
I agree. In fact, it looks as though this is a remnant of a building where there was always a stone facade wall, concealing a rather less grand building behind - you can see it in the photo with Sir Martyn Poliakoff in it.

To me, the building has a look such that it might originally have been part of an office/light industrial premises - the part that remains being the corridor leading to offices and work spaces (doors bricked up when the remainder of the building was demolished).

If it was a 'light industrial' building, It's possible that the parts that were originally behind the surviving structure may have been timber framed sheds with a tin roof, which could be demolished without requiring much structural change to the front parts of the building.

Last edited by Mangetout; 03-13-2017 at 02:43 AM.
  #26  
Old 03-13-2017, 02:52 AM
Mangetout Mangetout is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 56,559
Looking at it on Google Maps (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/...9!4d-0.1717549)

- in particular, the aerial views - you can see that it's a thin sliver of a building that exists at the end of a row of other thin houses, tapering down to this point. Also, there's a big strip of landscaped garden between the back of it, and the more modern buildings behind - but there is a straight line cutting off the back of all of these buildings - implying perhaps that whilst the surviving part is freehold, maybe the parts behind were not - and the entire plot behind was redeveloped.
  #27  
Old 03-13-2017, 04:05 AM
Melbourne Melbourne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangetout View Post
Also, there's a big strip of landscaped garden between the back of it, and the more modern buildings behind .
And doesn't the tree in the back look much nicer in the summer photograph from 10 years ago, than it does now with the leaves all off. And the street garden... If that facade is not protected by a planning regulaiton, the agents are expecting the building to be torn down and replaced. Or maybe even if it /is/ protected...
  #28  
Old 03-13-2017, 09:32 AM
Jophiel Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 16,628
Those photos don't do it any favors. Perhaps a picture of it cleaned up, painted, etc with some sort of shelves or a narrow bench would make it look livable. Plus a person inside for actual scale.

Still, maybe there's a rich ex-submarine captain somewhere looking for new digs.
  #29  
Old 03-13-2017, 10:10 AM
steronz steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,097
It's an AirBnB gold mine, is what it is. Nobody who can afford that is going to actually want to live there, but they'll be able to book it up solid at $250/night. It'll pay for itself in 10 years.
  #30  
Old 03-13-2017, 01:43 PM
cwthree cwthree is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: No, not there!
Posts: 2,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangetout View Post
I agree. In fact, it looks as though this is a remnant of a building where there was always a stone facade wall, concealing a rather less grand building behind - you can see it in the photo with Sir Martyn Poliakoff in it.

To me, the building has a look such that it might originally have been part of an office/light industrial premises - the part that remains being the corridor leading to offices and work spaces (doors bricked up when the remainder of the building was demolished).

If it was a 'light industrial' building, It's possible that the parts that were originally behind the surviving structure may have been timber framed sheds with a tin roof, which could be demolished without requiring much structural change to the front parts of the building.
In the comments on the second link in the OP, someone asserts that this structure is the rear facade and servants' corridor from a much larger house. Most of the original structure was demolished and the multistory structure behind it was built. I find this entirely believable, although I'd like to know why the rear facade/corridor wasn't demolished with the rest of the house. Perhaps only that strip of land was freehold, and the only way to maintain freehold status was to leave part of the original building. Does a freehold typically convert to leasehold if all of the original non-movable structures are demolished?
  #31  
Old 03-14-2017, 07:37 AM
Melbourne Melbourne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwthree View Post
In the comments on the second link in the OP, someone asserts that this structure is the rear facade and servants' corridor from a much larger house. Most of the original structure was demolished and the multistory structure behind it was built. I find this entirely believable, although I'd like to know why the rear facade/corridor wasn't demolished with the rest of the house. Perhaps only that strip of land was freehold, and the only way to maintain freehold status was to leave part of the original building. Does a freehold typically convert to leasehold if all of the original non-movable structures are demolished?
The 'corridor" thing doesn't make much sense to me. There are three doorways in that facade: two are bricked up. It's possible that the doors opened into corridors, but if so, there would have been a room on one or both sides of the corridor. But I'm not familar with the servents entrence to a much larger house: everywhere I know, the back enterence gate opens into outbuildings. When you go in the back door of the main house, it's just a little twist and your into the main corridor, or the stairs, or the scullary or whatever: you wouldn't waste space on a corridor duplicating the outside access.

---

In England, the Crown owned the land, by right of conquest, William the Conqueror conquered England, and took all the land. He gave other people the right to Hold some of his land and not pay rent: Free Hold. They could sell it or lease it out: the Crown only takes it back for Treason.

Some places don't have the custom of owning your own home, even if you plan to live their the rest of your life, you just get a long lease. The land itself doesn't have any special lease/free status.

I had a friend who holds a 99 year lease to a flat (a flat subdivision of a larger older building) in London. He paid cash for the lease, just like you would pay cash to own property. He has an ongoing payment as well, but it's a fixed payment, like paying out a mortgage, it's not tied to the present value of the flat.

Last edited by Melbourne; 03-14-2017 at 07:39 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017