between two worlds

I don't know about the disrepair--though some are used by shops as storage--but i think the mortgage lenders fear restaurants, fires, other damage coming from the shop…you can search online, there's a lot about it.

Novocastrian

I'm sure I could, but I'm not really motivated to do so.

I just found the concept of solving Britain's housing problem by renovating flats over shops to be a bit mind-blowingly arcane.

Sorry for being rational.

Editha

I can hazard a few guesses. Commercial property is often not worth much, and unlikely to be well maintained, even if the flat above it is OK. So there are insurance and maintenance issues.

Novocastrian

Well possibly. It just seems to me that a flat above a shop is not really different to a flat above another flat in a typical house that's been converted to two flats.

As said earlier, the idea of renovating such flats, which, as you say, maybe OK, is hardly likely to make a major dent in the housing supply.

Giantaxe

Very common in San Francisco, both in new developments and older buildings. Not sure why you wouldn't want to encourage such mixed-use.

jasper123

I think also with living in a flat above a shop which is a cafe or restaurant for example would have its own set of problems like for example rats or mice coming up from unclean shops, not to mention the stink of the food from say an indian restaurant coming through the floor boards and walls not to mention the risk of fire starting in the kitchen and the whole building burning down, and what about the insurance policy on a flat above a restaurant, much higher I would think, each to his own I suppose, but me ---- well I wouldn't like to live above any shop, no matter what the business, ---- just saying!!!!

Editha

Novo is right that converting all the empty space above shops to flats would not solve Britain's housing problem.

But nobody in the UK is against mixed usage and virtually everybody agrees it is a good idea. There are just a large number of obstacles to overcome. It is not a simple solution to the housing crisis.

Giantaxe

Not a solution to the housing issue, but in a densely populated country such as England it makes sense to take advantage of existing buildings as efficiently as possible. Plus the added benefit of having more vibrant business areas should not be disregarded. One of the things I love about San Francisco is the number of vibrant neighbourhoods, and I'm sure the mixed use of buildings is a contributor to this.

I don't live directly above a shop, but I have a Sushi and Chinese restaurant within a minute, and many other shops/cafes within a few minutes. Being able to walk to stuff is a big advantage in an urban area, imo.

Editha

Nobody in the UK would disagree with you.

Giantaxe

A bit of a generalization methinks... if it were true, they wouldn't be so common in the US (and elsewhere), but relatively uncommon in the UK.

michali

We lived in a flat over a cafe seem years ago for six months and the owners of both the flat and the cafe were so lovely. I got lots of free full English breakfasts and we had no problems at all.

Editha

There are all sorts of reasons why that isn't true. Most of them are fairly obvious, like British town centres mostly having been built in the days of horse and cart, making access and parking an obstacle when converting commercial to residential, the fact that most American buildings have a lifespan of less than a hundred years meaning renewal takes place much more quickly, etc.

Giantaxe

Really these are just excuses rather than significant obstacles. Not everyone wants or needs a car in an urban area, for example. When I was over in the fall looking at apartments, I took a look at two places for sale that were directly over shops, both in older buildings. Both had been converted in the last 20 years or so. I suspect that a bigger part of the equation is resistance to something that isn't a "cultural norm" in the UK, and planning laws that don't cater for it.

Edit: I did find this about planning initiatives:

"In September 2012 Eric Pickles announced a relaxation of permitted development rights
(with effect from 1 October 2012) to allow two flats to be created in office or storage space
above shops. Previously only one flat could be developed above a shop without planning
permission."

Editha

I don't agree. It is quite normal for people to live over shops in the UK and always has been. I think you must have been out of the country for a very long time. Since I am descended from generations of shop-owners who lived above the shop, I can vouch for the fact it was regarded as quite normal as early as 1832.

It is true not everyone owns a car, or wants to, but planners must take account of the fact that if there is no parking provided with a property, it is very likely that the resident will get a car and park it on the street as close to their apartment as is legally possible.

I'm not sure what your point is about Eric Pickles' change to the planning laws. The fact you have to apply for planning permission for development does not mean you won't get it. The change from one flat to two without planning permission is a fairly minor change.

You really have gone off on a tangent here. Most shops in the UK are in mixed residential and commercial areas, and always have been. Since they were built in an age before most people had cars, they could not have been otherwise and survived. The American style cities built for the car with separate shopping and residential areas barely exists in the UK.

Giantaxe

Great, so Victorian shop owners lived over the shop. But there's a reason why so much empty space over shops currently exists: because it's not the norm any more, and hasn't been for some time. I suspect reasons are that so much shop space is leased rather than owned these days, so many shops are parts of "chains" rather than individually owned especially in urban areas, and much post-war redevelopment didn't take into consideration mixed use within the same building, perhaps because of flight to the "burbs" to live.

Or it will discourage people in urban areas from owning a car and using public transit/car sharing/bicycle etc instead.

The point is central government chose to allow more such development without (local) planning approval. That's a big clue as to the likely difficulty planning approval was to obtain for such conversions.

I see you moved the goalposts there.

The fact that there have been several government initiatives - for example, "Flats over shops" - over the last 15 years to convert space above shops into apartments suggests that there is indeed such space that could be converted.