Cheap house in London

[Amanda_931]

60,000 pounds, You could't buy it for that, but....

Two bedroom, very green, SIPS, needs minimal heating, etc.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/05/15/cnhouse15.xml&menuId=242&sSheet=/money/2006/05/15/ixcitytop.html

this, and a couple of more pictures here:

http://mocoloco.com/archives/002634.php




And from the Telegraph story:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/05/15/cnhouse15.xml&menuId=242&sSheet=/money/2006/05/15/ixcitytop.html

Mr Prescott's challenge, to build two-bedroom houses of a certain size for under £60,000, was originally aimed at creating cheaper housing across the country, and it was widely reported that English Partnerships would continue to own the land, meaning that the ultimate price of the houses would be lower than if the developers had to buy it.

And here's the architect's (flash heavy) site:

http://www.sheppardrobson.com/#

[Jimmy_Cason]

That design feels like when we had one part of a double wide trailer on our lot waiting for the second half to be delivered.

[Olga]

It seems to me for 60,000 to buy a quite good apartment is better.

[Amanda_931]

You could be right.  There's no yard associated with this, so there's not that much difference.  

And I've no idea what prices in "good areas" of London are for condos/apartments.  They might even be more.  After all the house is reputedly selling for more--maybe a lot more.