UK Housebuilding discussion

[zwk500]

The big issue I have with flats is the feudal scam that is leasehold (which needs to be fully abolished for residential purposes), but you do seem to have the ownership of flats sorted in Scotland so we should just copy that.

Or just build flats for rental only. If people can afford to rent flats then that will ease pressure on the HMO market, freeing up houses for freehold sale. But we'd need a lot of flats.

In the long term, I agree that leasehold needs to be abolished - I owned a flat that had a convoluted Leasehold + Freehold situation that could have seriously scuppered the sale. You are beholden to individuals who often have no interest in being helpful to you, and banks are overly cautious of short leases and it just slows the whole thing down. IIRC Labour tried to introduce a 'commonhold' status but it hasn't really taken off. The scottish system of just defining clear ownership and duties of owners of flats seems much better to me on first reading.

Not to mention the ridiculous amounts of service charges and other fees.

This is the real problem. The hidden costs of housing are crippling.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The big issue I have with flats is the feudal scam that is leasehold (which needs to be fully abolished for residential purposes), but you do seem to have the ownership of flats sorted in Scotland so we should just copy that.

Yeah, that is a fundamental problem. If it's a single building containing multiple residences, then someone needs to have responsibility for maintaining the building as a whole, and whoever has that responsibility has to have some way of charging the owners of the individual flats the costs of doing so. Plus you need some way to determine who makes any decisions needed for maintaining the building plus associated grounds. I'm not sure how you sensibly do that, as it's clear the current English system leasehold system often doesn't work properly and causes homeowners to get ripped off. How does it work in Scotland?

(To be clear, none of that is an argument for not building flats: Flats are important, often eco-friendly in terms of saving energy and using land more efficiently, and are exactly the kind of accommodation that many people want/need. But it is a legal problem that needs solving if we intend to build more flats and not see more people getting ripped off by unfair agreements).

 

[zwk500]

How does it work in Scotland?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenements_(Scotland)_Act_2004 is the relevant legislation

In short, the top-floor flat owns the roof, the ground floor flat owns the ground, but the Common areas are jointly liable. Owners of each individual flat are responsible for maintaining their parts of the structure, including those that support other flats. Owners are not allowed to make changes that would obstruct access or natural light to other flats.

There is also Commonhold, applicable only in England and Wales (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonhold), introduced by Labour in 2002, but very few properties have moved to this system of ownership (because it requires building management companies to give up a significant source of revenue).

 

[DC1989]

Housebuilding is the number one issue facing this country. Councillors with 100 votes are able to prevent 1,000 homes being built - the situation is unsustainable.

People often say there are loads of houses being built, they are going up all around me etc. It's still not enough - nowhere near enough. We need another 3-4 million homes for the population today let alone the millions of millions of immigrants we let in each year.

The opposition is not all about paving over green fields though. People object the same way to brownfield sites, people object to warehouses that have been empty for 20 years with broken windows and used for illegal raves being demolished for housing.

 

[Mojo]

The opposition is not all about paving over green fields though. People object the same way to brownfield sites, people object to warehouses that have been empty for 20 years with broken windows and used for illegal raves being demolished for housing.

People object to anything. Any time a coffee shop or restauraunt opens up on our High Street in a vacant shop you get the same people complaining and saying that there is too many coffee shops or some other such nonsense, and it’s always people from the same generation going by their Facebook profile pictures. Not quite sure why people prefer ugly vacant premises that attract graffiti and fly posting, rather than a business people will enjoy and use.

 

[Thirteen]

People object to anything. Any time a coffee shop or restauraunt opens up on our High Street in a vacant shop you get the same people complaining and saying that there is too many coffee shops or some other such nonsense, and it’s always people from the same generation going by their Facebook profile pictures. Not quite sure why people prefer ugly vacant premises that attract graffiti and fly posting, rather than a business people will enjoy and use.

It's NIMBY syndrome.

 

[Broucek]

Is it just planning?

I don't disagree that the planning situation is lamentable, but if we could suddenly build homes at double the rate would there be enough capable tradespeople to do the building? There are already massive skilled/semi-skilled labour shortages in the UK and accross most of the developed world and I know construction firms in the UK and other parts of Northern Europe are suffering with this

 

[zwk500]

Is it just planning?

I don't disagree that the planning situation is lamentable, but if we could suddenly build homes at double the rate would there be enough capable tradespeople to do the building? There are already massive skilled/semi-skilled labour shortages in the UK and accross most of the developed world and I know construction firms in the UK and other parts of Northern Europe are suffering with this

We could, of course, hire people in from overseas or train them up. There's plenty of demand for housing, you'd be able to offer an apprenticeship scheme that would see you well set for a long career.

 

[Thirteen]

TBF it's not just a UK problem, plenty of countries have issues building more housing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not to mention the ridiculous amounts of service charges and other fees.

It costs money to maintain a building properly, and you can't really DIY stuff on a block of flats bar within your own flat (and even then there are limits; for instance you may well want to prohibit DIY electrical or water works because of the risk it poses to the other flats if done badly). Of course people would trust that more if that were done by a non-profit than a commercial for-profit company of course.

 

[Broucek]

We could, of course, hire people in from overseas or train them up. There's plenty of demand for housing, you'd be able to offer an apprenticeship scheme that would see you well set for a long career.

It's a problem everywhere in the developed world. I agree that more apprenticeships (and fewer fluffy "degrees") would be good but but there's a significant lag effect as the entry-level people all need supervisers etc.

 

[DC1989]

There's opposition in *LADBROKE GROVE* - Inner London Zone 2, to redeveloping a completely disused brownfield site

https://www.change.org/p/keep-kensal-green-keepkensalgreen

 

[Broucek]

As others have observed, some people would object to anything. For example:

• A while back, the green lobby in North London objected to a proposal to reopen the Highgate-Ally Pally railway because it would take away the current walk/cycle path
• When my former church was building an adjacent hall on its own land for mid-week toddler groups, soup kitchens etc. there were HUGE protests about the two trees we need to fell. For clarity it was in a VERY leafy area and there were associated planting committments.

 

[DC1989]

As others have observed, some people would object to anything. For example:

• A while back, the green lobby in North London objected to a proposal to reopen the Highgate-Ally Pally railway because it would take away the current walk/cycle path
• When my former church was building an adjacent hall on its own land for mid-week toddler groups, soup kitchens etc. there were HUGE protests about the two trees we need to fell. For clarity it was in a VERY leafy area and there were associated planting committments.

By my old flat there was a new pelican crossing proposed at a busy area with lots of new developments where people needed to go back on themselves, and go down an extremely unsafe underpass. Aside from the safety reasons it would add 10 minutes on to a walk to the tube station (that was 5 minutes when the crossing came in)

One objection was 'I've had to use the underpass for 20 years and it's been fine, why should we get a crossing now there's lot's of newcomers'

 

[Broucek]

One objection was 'I've had to use the underpass for 20 years and it's been fine, why should we get a crossing now there's lot's of newcomers'

That's priceless! It's quite scary just how dozy some people are... and then to realise that they have the vote!

 

[zwk500]

As others have observed, some people would object to anything. For example:

• A while back, the green lobby in North London objected to a proposal to reopen the Highgate-Ally Pally railway because it would take away the current walk/cycle path

This is not an illogical objection. A barley used railway that snaffles paths on mainlines from better services that also requires lots of expensive and carbon-producing maintenance against a cycle path that can pretty much be left untouched for 20 years (odd pothole permitting) and allows people to cycle 2-3km quite happily.

 

[Broucek]

This is not an illogical objection. A bareley used railway that snaffles paths on mainlines from better services that also requires lots of expensive and carbon-producing maintenance against a cycle path that can pretty much be left untouched for 20 years (odd pothole permitting) and allows people to cycle 2-3km quite happily.

Well, your argument is rather more sophisticated than the ones that were being made at the time. But the disused line in question is in the London suburbs and would probably have been pretty heavily used (at least pre-COVID, when all this happened)

 

[zwk500]

Well, your argument is rather more sophisticated than the ones that were being made at the time. But the disused line in question is in the London suburbs and would probably have been pretty heavily used (at least pre-COVID, when all this happened)

Highgate to Ally Pally isn't the easiest cycle in the world (IIRC it's somewhat of a gorge between the two places) but the rail capacity is infinitely more beneficial to people coming in from outside London that people shuffling between the northern line and the ECML.
A railway is far more carbon intensive to build, operate and maintain than a cycle path. If it was a 10km cycle that'd be a different matter, but anything under >5km should be normalised as a 'bike first' option.

 

[Broucek]

Highgate to Ally Pally isn't the easiest cycle in the world (IIRC it's somewhat of a gorge between the two places) but the rail capacity is infinitely more beneficial to people coming in from outside London that people shuffling between the northern line and the ECML.
A railway is far more carbon intensive to build, operate and maintain than a cycle path. If it was a 10km cycle that'd be a different matter, but anything under >5km should be normalised as a 'bike first' option.

Your first paragraph muddles Finsbuy Park-Highgate (ECML-Northern Line) with Highgate-Ally Pally (Northern Line-Affluent Suburb) but I do take the point on short branch lines

 

[zwk500]

Your first paragraph muddles Finsbuy Park-Highgate (ECML-Northern Line) with Highgate-Ally Pally (Northern Line-Affluent Suburb) but I do take the point on short branch lines

A lot of abandoned urban trackbeds could be very effective at reducing transport if converted to cycle lanes. They're already largely segregated from roads, have reasonable gradients, and go between places where people live (ish).

It'd be interesting to know what the latest distance estimate is for how far 'normals' will considering cycling as a mode of transport. 5km is certainly an achievable distance, although the popular consensus may not be quite that far yet.

 

[Thirteen]

Wouldn't a lot of these branch lines be better served as light rail? Unlikely to happen with Ally Pally to Highgate but others could be converted.

 

[lachlan]

We need more taller, denser residential buildings in cities to allow more people to live walkable to their work and bring down the crazy monthly rents. I’m not sure what the answer is but at the moment folks in Bristol are opposing various developments on the basis of being too tall or too dense or not in character. Have they forgotten that they live in a constantly changing city?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 May 2023 ==

A lot of abandoned urban trackbeds could be very effective at reducing transport if converted to cycle lanes. They're already largely segregated from roads, have reasonable gradients, and go between places where people live (ish).

It'd be interesting to know what the latest distance estimate is for how far 'normals' will considering cycling as a mode of transport. 5km is certainly an achievable distance, although the popular consensus may not be quite that far yet.

I think the distance very much depends on if such a segregated route is available - I would feel much safer cycling at speed on a route such as a disused railway.

 

[Broucek]

It'd be interesting to know what the latest distance estimate is for how far 'normals' will considering cycling as a mode of transport. 5km is certainly an achievable distance, although the popular consensus may not be quite that far yet.

Propensity to cycle is MUCH lower in London than where you are.... Partly infrastructure, partly topography, partly driver behaviour!

 

[zwk500]

Propensity to cycle is MUCH lower in London than where you are.... Partly infrastructure, partly topography, partly driver behaviour!

I'm well aware - I'm only over here on a year out, I've lived in London, York and MK during the previous 27 years I spent in England

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Propensity to cycle is MUCH lower in London than where you are.... Partly infrastructure, partly topography, partly driver behaviour!

Haha! I did wonder about that remark given that London must have one of the highest rates of cycling of any place in the UK (maybe, apart from Cambridge ). But then I checked and saw @zwk500 's location

 

[zwk500]

Haha! I did wonder about that remark given that London must have one of the highest rates of cycling of any place in the UK (maybe, apart from Cambridge ). But then I checked and saw @zwk500 's location

Yes, all local councillors and highway engineers in the UK should come across and hire an OV-fiets for a long weekend. They'd get some pretty good ideas for making cycling attractive in the UK then!

 

[johncrossley]

The big issue I have with flats is the feudal scam that is leasehold (which needs to be fully abolished for residential purposes), but you do seem to have the ownership of flats sorted in Scotland so we should just copy that.

Leasehold is not a major issue if the leaseholders jointly own the freehold. That's how it works in our flats so we can't get screwed by the freeholder for excessive charges as we decide the charges. The monthly charge is £60 including insurance.

 

[zwk500]

Leasehold is not a major issue if the leaseholders jointly own the freehold. That's how it works in our flats so we can't get screwed by the freeholder for excessive charges as we decide the charges. The monthly charge is £60 including insurance.

This works as long as all leaseholders are involved and amenable. I owned a 900+ year lease on a flat with the freehold shared with the other owner but they never responded to any attempt to contact and I never met them in 4 years of living there (their flat was rented out, the tenant also very rarely had any contact with them). It meant both my purchase and sale was slightly delayed and I had to buy an indemnity policy against an absentee landlord.
Commonhold is a better option.

 

[johncrossley]

Flats seem to have a negative connotation in the UK which doesn't seem to exist elsewhere. If you look at a lot of American sitcoms and dramas, most of the characters live in apartments rather than houses.

The negative connotation probably arises because in most of the UK outside the south houses were cheap enough anyway for a working person, so flats weren't required. Flats were built primarily for council flats. It is different in London of course where celebrities and other rich people have lived in flats for at least a century.

American sitcoms are often set in big cities so living in a Manhattan apartment (for example) would be normal. But the vast majority of people in the US live in detached houses, even poor people.

 

[BrummieBobby]

Documented net migration to the UK in 2022 was 504,000 (Source https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63743259)

That's the equivalent of a city the size of Sheffield.

This level of immigration is simply too high for the current housebuilding or urban planning to sustain.