Shortage Of Larger Homes, And Too Many Flats

[Frenchie73]

According to most local estate agents I have spoken to in different areas of London are saying that there is a large stock of flats for sale, but there's a big shortage of larger homes for families. Many of them said that most of these flats stay on their books for a very long time, because there's just so many of them for sale.

In my area, in north east London, I have spotted many developments to build flats, and flats and yet more flats.

Building new housing is great, don't get me wrong, but I get the feeling from the estate agents, comments on the local newspapers website and the local people in general that they're not building the right type of housing to meet the needs of people.

it certainly becomes clear to me that flats in London are being built to target investors, to encourage more speculation generally on the housing market.

It's so depressing...

Edited September 23, 2010 by Frenchie73

[Sir Sidney Ruff-Diamond]

As with any property bubble, the developers have been targeting investors rather than people to live in these places and now the investors are all gone, or very few in number because returns are so slim, the developers are being left high and dry with unsold stock and depreciating assets.That's why they keep whingeing to the government for taxpayer money.

[tim123]

According to most local estate agents I have spoken to in different areas of London are saying that there is a large stock of flats for sale, but there's a big shortage of larger homes for families. Many of them said that most of these flats stay on their books for a very long time, because there's just so many of them for sale.

In my area, in north east London, I have spotted many developments to build flats, and flats and yet more flats.

Building new housing is great, don't get me wrong, but I get the feeling from the estate agents, comments on the local newspapers website and the local people in general that they're not building the right type of housing to meet the needs of people.

it certainly becomes clear to me that flats in London are being built to target investors, to encourage more speculation generally on the housing market.

I don't think it was to encourage speculation. They were just building for where the market was.

[mikthe20]

And nobody saw this coming. 

[gimble]

According to most local estate agents I have spoken to in different areas of London are saying that there is a large stock of flats for sale, but there's a big shortage of larger homes for families. Many of them said that most of these flats stay on their books for a very long time, because there's just so many of them for sale.

In my area, in north east London, I have spotted many developments to build flats, and flats and yet more flats.

Building new housing is great, don't get me wrong, but I get the feeling from the estate agents, comments on the local newspapers website and the local people in general that they're not building the right type of housing to meet the needs of people.

it certainly becomes clear to me that flats in London are being built to target investors, to encourage more speculation generally on the housing market.

It's so depressing...

Well obviously one problem is that there's not much land for building big houses, or even terraces, on. I've got no problem with living in a flat but I'd only rent, not buy, and the flat would have to be well proportioned. I stayed with a friend in Madrid a while ago - her (She said 1950s) flat was great, balcony onto the street, marble floored and wide hallway and stairway up to the flat. The flat was spacious, bright and nicely laid out - reasonably high ceilings. New flat I was looking at renting in Borough recently had narrow corridors leading to them, low ceilings, a tin-can elevator, narrow stairways, a really half-hearted attempt at a communal gym (common in London new builds) with 2 broken exercise bikes in it. The whole building felt like it was made of nothing more than plasterboard. It had a 24 hour concierge, some miserable looking young guy, that was completely unnecessary and must have added hundreds to each flat's service charge. The rent was astronomical for what it was - it had been empty for 4 months.

I agree, it's depressing. Why the hell are we putting up with this f**king cr*p!? Why are flats built in a Facist dictatorship in the 1950s so much superior to those being built in 2010 London, supposedly a great centre of the global economy? What was the point of all the incredible technological development of the last century when after all of that we've no choice but to live in cheap and nasty rabbit hutch dwellings?

Edited September 24, 2010 by gimble

[Frenchie73]

Well obviously one problem is that there's not much land for building big houses, or even terraces, on. I've got no problem with living in a flat but I'd only rent, not buy, and the flat would have to be well proportioned. I stayed with a friend in Madrid a while ago - her (She said 1950s) flat was great, balcony onto the street, marble floored and wide hallway and stairway up to the flat. The flat was spacious, bright and nicely laid out - reasonably high ceilings. New flat I was looking at renting in Borough recently had narrow corridors leading to them, low ceilings, a tin-can elevator, narrow stairways, a really half-hearted attempt at a communal gym (common in London new builds) with 2 broken exercise bikes in it. The whole building felt like it was made of nothing more than plasterboard. It had a 24 hour concierge, some miserable looking young guy, that was completely unnecessary and must have added hundreds to each flat's service charge. The rent was astronomical for what it was - it had been empty for 4 months.

I agree, it's depressing. Why the hell are we putting up with this f**king cr*p!? Why are flats built in a Facist dictatorship in the 1950s so much superior to those being built in 2010 London, supposedly a great centre of the global economy? What was the point of all the incredible technological development of the last century when after all of that we've no choice but to live in cheap and nasty rabbit hutch dwellings?

I agree with you gimble.

The modern built stuff looks lovely when it's brand new, but the quality is usually sub standard. Before too long, the new place has a long list of defects, because it's usually a rushed job done on the cheap.

[Si1]

chances of bad new builds becooming the new slum housing, and soem (actually quite well made) existing social housing developments, small family houses etc, after having sold off the stock, ending up as popular middle class residential?

[kingsgate]

The last government also actively encouraged "higher density living" (read: blocks of small apartments) which meant that developers had to build stuff that would increase the number of people / given area.

I don't know if this was just their misguided "green" idea, or if (as is so often the case) there was some Euro-directive behind it all......

[Si1]

The last government also actively encouraged "higher density living" (read: blocks of small apartments) which meant that developers had to build stuff that would increase the number of people / given area.

I don't know if this was just their misguided "green" idea, or if (as is so often the case) there was some Euro-directive behind it all......

AFAIK the new labour government, as greenies, were heavily into reclaimed brown field land, and these often being inner city, suggested apartments, also possibly prmoted by 'affordable housing' requirements. but the BTL boom also disctated the market to a great degree.

[efdemin]

chances of bad new builds becooming the new slum housing, and soem (actually quite well made) existing social housing developments, small family houses etc, after having sold off the stock, ending up as popular middle class residential?

+1

At least when a housing association builds a block of flats, it has to meet higher standards, things like doors wide enough for wheelchairs, proper sized rooms, built with an eye on future maintenance costs instead of cheapest rubbish available etc.

[Tonkers]

+1

At least when a housing association builds a block of flats, it has to meet higher standards, things like doors wide enough for wheelchairs, proper sized rooms, built with an eye on future maintenance costs instead of cheapest rubbish available etc.

We are renovating HA flats now, and all the regulations are there to make it last for 50 years plus, including the internal fittings (kitchen and bathroom). The heat and sound insulation is awesome.

[HPC001]

I live in part of a 4 bedroom home in W. London which was recently valued at £275k... it's down about 10% from the 2007 peak. Will be on the market soon so I'm looking for accomodation myself...

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

The Councils have a lot to be blamed for here in their pandering ti NIMBYs.

The last Government did set housing targets for numbers of dwellings and most Councils and NIMBYs were outraged claiming the targets were too high. So every opportunity was taken to avoid having to release Green belt or extending the curtilage of towns and villages. In addition to this there was a whole load of blather about needing more single person units, ie flats.

The result of this was a lack of family homes being built, and loads of high density flats.  These flats meant the figures for new homes constructed could be raised, whilst developing at the highest density thereby reducing pressure on the edge of towns/villages and Greenbelts.

Its the same problem as hospital waiting lists - achieving the target without any care about how you achieve the target. Again I blame a lot of this on MBA style management bo110cks and things like balanced scorecard.  Council Chief asked have you hit the target of 1500 homes, answers yes and tick box goes green, but in fact you just have block of flats with 1500 rooms the size of a capsule hotel.

[Pearshape]

We are renovating HA flats now, and all the regulations are there to make it last for 50 years plus, including the internal fittings (kitchen and bathroom). The heat and sound insulation is awesome.

Ive heard that part of the HA funding from the GOV has been pulled - results are that a lot of the HA schemes we were looking at have stopped or been pulled?

[MattW]

Well obviously one problem is that there's not much land for building big houses, or even terraces, on. I've got no problem with living in a flat but I'd only rent, not buy, and the flat would have to be well proportioned. I stayed with a friend in Madrid a while ago - her (She said 1950s) flat was great, balcony onto the street, marble floored and wide hallway and stairway up to the flat. The flat was spacious, bright and nicely laid out - reasonably high ceilings. New flat I was looking at renting in Borough recently had narrow corridors leading to them, low ceilings, a tin-can elevator, narrow stairways, a really half-hearted attempt at a communal gym (common in London new builds) with 2 broken exercise bikes in it. The whole building felt like it was made of nothing more than plasterboard. It had a 24 hour concierge, some miserable looking young guy, that was completely unnecessary and must have added hundreds to each flat's service charge. The rent was astronomical for what it was - it had been empty for 4 months.

I agree, it's depressing. Why the hell are we putting up with this f**king cr*p!? Why are flats built in a Facist dictatorship in the 1950s so much superior to those being built in 2010 London, supposedly a great centre of the global economy? What was the point of all the incredible technological development of the last century when after all of that we've no choice but to live in cheap and nasty rabbit hutch dwellings?

Agreed. I say bring back the Parker Morris Standards for determining property room sizes for all newly built homes.

And let's built them properly so they have a lifetime of at least one century! Well insulated and soundproofed.