Have you ever wondered why so few families live in flats?  I was pondering this question earlier today, as I thought about the shortage of housing in this country and what could be done to help. Of course, Mira Bar-Hillel has eloquently advocated one solution: build-to-let.  You can read all about it in News on the Block by clicking here. It’s a novel idea, which deserves support.   However, when you look at the market for leasehold flats - especially the new build developments which have sprung up in the last 10 years - most are studio, 1 or 2 bedroom leasehold flats.  Yes, larger leasehold units are built.  Yet, these are usually the minority in a development and are often the “penthouse” (and consequently priced).  So, here’s a thought:  the reason why so few families live in leasehold flats is because few leasehold flats have the living space to accommodate families.  Even a modest family would ideally like a 3-bedroom property.  But because 3-bedroom leasehold flats are less prevalent that studios, 1- or 2-bedrooms they cost more.  Also, by their very nature, leasehold flats are urban-centric where land is more expensive.  So, apart from being few and far between, those 3-bedroom+ leasehold flats that do exist are situated on the most expensive parcels of land a city has to offer.  This means that many families are priced out of living in leasehold flats, and are forced into the suburbs.  In return, flats become the preferred choice for young professionals, singles, sharers, widows, and retirees.  I wonder if  it would be appropriate for more flats to be built with 3-bedrooms plus and thereby cater better for families?