6 ms·

I used to live in one of these London art-deco apartment blocks and it was a beautiful building, nice grounds, quirky but well laid out apartment. So much nicer

by altacc 3y ago

I used to live in one of these London art-deco apartment blocks and it was a beautiful building, nice grounds, quirky but well laid out apartment. So much nicer than the generic "affordable" apartments built today. But it was also incredibly cold in the winter! No insulation, thin windows that couldn't be replaced as they were listed and the decades old central heating & hot water system kept breaking down. Cheaper to buy but a money pit to maintain.

tpm 3y ago
Pretty sure the windows could be replaced with actually insulating ones, but it would be expensive and the landlords prefer not to do that. However having single-glazed windows in the 21st century is simply inexcusable. Experienced the same when I was living in London years ago (not a listed building). The underinvestment into insulating old buildings was staggering when compared with Central Europe.
- dkdbejwi383 3y ago
  A lot of the housing stock here is very poor quality, run-down and filled with ancient plumbing and electrics, no insulation, single glazed, draughty windows. For some reason British people are extremely attached to old buildings and favour "character" over comfort, warmth, light, efficient storage space, etc.
  - jl6 3y ago
    It's not "character" that Britain is mainly attached to, it's greenbelts. Difficult to build -> undersupply -> high prices/rents -> low incentive to improve.
    - toyg 3y ago
      I call bull on that. As the first country to industrialize, and arguably the first to de-industrialize too, Britain has massive amounts of brownfield ready to be used. The problem is just that developers have to pay to clean up those sites. You can simply look at the Houchen affair: as soon as the local authority foots the bill, developers will jump on the dirtiest stretch of brownfield, no questions asked.
      - jl6 3y ago
        > developers have to pay to clean up those sites i.e. more cost, which gets passed onto buyers/renters. Different entry point, same result. Plenty of brownfield sites do get redeveloped, particularly in city centers, but they don’t become affordable housing, they become trendy apartments with industrial heritage museums next door (and not enough of them). The population of Britain has increased nearly +10M in the 21st century, but the housing supply has lagged far, far behind.
        toyg 3y ago
        I'm not denying there is a supply problem, what I don't agree with this that it'd be because of some silly obsession with protecting greenbelts. Protecting greenbelts is important, and there are alternative policies that can incentivize house-building without losing more green spaces. If there is one British obsession, is the expectation that every family should aspire to a semi-detached in the suburbs, with the result that (outside of London) developers only build small flats for singles and childless couples. The semi-detached model does not scale, while flats do. Developers should be forced to include larger flats in new builds, and councils should start thinking in terms of making town centres denser and more attractive to families.
        jl6 3y ago
        Medium density cities would be great but if you have to force developers to do it, that means it will cost more, which gets passed on, etc. etc..
  - tpm 3y ago
    I'm not sure it's about attachment, although the fact large residential areas of London are somehow 'protected' does not help. I'd guess it's mostly two things: * Landlords don't care their tennants pay too much for energy because there is no competitive pressure, the apartments will rent regardless. And many homes in London are rented. * The government does not care. The British society is very classist in my experience and the ruling class does not care the general public is freezing. So even while the UK was in the EU and the EU had various drives to improve energy efficiency of buildings, the UK mostly ignored them.
    - jl6 3y ago
      England has always been run for the benefit of the landowning and homeowning class, in whom the greatest portion of political power, wealth and status are concentrated. This has been the case for at least 1000 years. This is not a "1%" thing; about half of all UK adults live in a home they own. For homeowners, the current setup is pretty sweet. And for a while, the number of homeowners was increasing, hitting an all-time high in 2003 - making it not too undemocratic that the country should be run for their benefit. But now with that figure reducing, mainly at the expense of younger people, it's not surprising that discontent is on the rise (particularly online, where the youngest are the most visible).
    - cameronh90 3y ago
      Lots of people really do prefer the old awful buildings. There was a story just a couple of days ago [0] where residents are protesting having their windows upgraded, despite their existing windows being cold, draughty, rusty, and mouldy. One man felt so strongly about it that he said he'd electrocute anyone who tried to change his windows. They're concerned new slightly thicker window frames might destroy the character of their 60s water-stained concrete brutalist eyesore. [0] https://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet/news/yes-it-s-cold-but-you-can-t-replace-our-windows-at-iconi-303338/ https://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet/news/yes-it-s-cold-but-y...
      - maccard 3y ago
        There's nutters everywhere, to be fair.
- michaelt 3y ago
  For listed buildings, you've got to get permission from the council. For most buildings they'll let you put in double-glazed windows if you can get them in a style that matches the existing windows. One of the iconic features of many Art Deco buildings is curved windows [1], and the flat windows having very skinny frames. That means nonstandard "heritage" windows, which can be several times the price of normal, mass-produced windows. Blocks of flats have the additional problem that it's unlikely every owner will have the cash to replace their windows at the same time. So it's tough to save money by getting them all done at once. [1] https://maps.app.goo.gl/uWUr5YyvJvRDPkH27 https://maps.app.goo.gl/uWUr5YyvJvRDPkH27
  - gpderetta 3y ago
    Blocks are typically leaseholds, so if the freeholder decides to replace the windows, the leaseholders often have little ability to object. Of course often the freeholder has no interest in improving the building other than the minimal maintenance.
  - tpm 3y ago
    > For listed buildings, you've got to get permission Sure - it's the same in our country, with the additional trouble that there is a special institution that has to approve any changes in protected buildings and they are pretty harsh. And even then lots of them get updated. > Blocks of flats have the additional problem that it's unlikely every owner will have the cash to replace their windows at the same time. We have that too and what usually happens with changes that apply to the whole building (like the whole facade) is that the community of the owners finances changes like that with a credit on the whole building, there are special laws for that. Happens less often with just the windows because they are so cheap most people can afford them on their own.
- maccard 3y ago
  There's an entirely short term outlook that's caused by the "housing ladder" IMO. If you spend any time on reddit, you'll see people asking "Why would I want to spend £10,000 insulating my home if the payback period isn't 4-5 years?" Instead of thinking about comfort and maintaining a building, they're thinking about ensuring that they maximise the value of their current property so that they can sell and upgrade to a bigger one. I live in an old stone building in Scotland - the previous owners installed a kitchen in 2019, and at that time they replaced the flooring. They _could_ have insulated under the floor, and done internal wall insulation but that would have added a few hundred pounds onto their renovation job, and they didn't care, they were content with the asthetic upgrade of the room.
- laurencerowe 3y ago
  > The underinvestment into insulating old buildings was staggering when compared with Central Europe. Nominally, GDP per capita is ~2.6x higher in the UK than in Poland ($46.5k/$18k) while domestic gas prices are only about 20% higher [1]. Renovations are mostly labour costs so the expected return on investment is almost twice as good in Poland as the UK. Ultimately the issue is that energy prices in the UK are too low. [1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a749056e5274a410efd09a6/International_Energy_Price_Comparisons_September_2017.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a749056e5274...
Symbiote 3y ago
I lived in a 1930s art-deco apartment building in London, and it was the nicest place I lived in England. At some point all the windows had been replaced with UPVC double glazed ones. The heating system had some redundancy, so when they closed half of it off to replace it we just had a day or two where they asked us to limit hot water use. (I don't remember but I assume this was done during the summer.)

by altacc 3y ago

tpm 3y ago

Pretty sure the windows could be replaced with actually insulating ones, but it would be expensive and the landlords prefer not to do that. However having single-glazed windows in the 21st century is simply inexcusable. Experienced the same when I was living in London years ago (not a listed building). The underinvestment into insulating old buildings was staggering when compared with Central Europe.

dkdbejwi383 3y ago
A lot of the housing stock here is very poor quality, run-down and filled with ancient plumbing and electrics, no insulation, single glazed, draughty windows. For some reason British people are extremely attached to old buildings and favour "character" over comfort, warmth, light, efficient storage space, etc.
- jl6 3y ago
  It's not "character" that Britain is mainly attached to, it's greenbelts. Difficult to build -> undersupply -> high prices/rents -> low incentive to improve.
  - toyg 3y ago
    I call bull on that. As the first country to industrialize, and arguably the first to de-industrialize too, Britain has massive amounts of brownfield ready to be used. The problem is just that developers have to pay to clean up those sites. You can simply look at the Houchen affair: as soon as the local authority foots the bill, developers will jump on the dirtiest stretch of brownfield, no questions asked.
    - jl6 3y ago
      > developers have to pay to clean up those sites i.e. more cost, which gets passed onto buyers/renters. Different entry point, same result. Plenty of brownfield sites do get redeveloped, particularly in city centers, but they don’t become affordable housing, they become trendy apartments with industrial heritage museums next door (and not enough of them). The population of Britain has increased nearly +10M in the 21st century, but the housing supply has lagged far, far behind.
      - toyg 3y ago
        I'm not denying there is a supply problem, what I don't agree with this that it'd be because of some silly obsession with protecting greenbelts. Protecting greenbelts is important, and there are alternative policies that can incentivize house-building without losing more green spaces. If there is one British obsession, is the expectation that every family should aspire to a semi-detached in the suburbs, with the result that (outside of London) developers only build small flats for singles and childless couples. The semi-detached model does not scale, while flats do. Developers should be forced to include larger flats in new builds, and councils should start thinking in terms of making town centres denser and more attractive to families.
        jl6 3y ago
        Medium density cities would be great but if you have to force developers to do it, that means it will cost more, which gets passed on, etc. etc..
- tpm 3y ago
  I'm not sure it's about attachment, although the fact large residential areas of London are somehow 'protected' does not help. I'd guess it's mostly two things: * Landlords don't care their tennants pay too much for energy because there is no competitive pressure, the apartments will rent regardless. And many homes in London are rented. * The government does not care. The British society is very classist in my experience and the ruling class does not care the general public is freezing. So even while the UK was in the EU and the EU had various drives to improve energy efficiency of buildings, the UK mostly ignored them.
  - jl6 3y ago
    England has always been run for the benefit of the landowning and homeowning class, in whom the greatest portion of political power, wealth and status are concentrated. This has been the case for at least 1000 years. This is not a "1%" thing; about half of all UK adults live in a home they own. For homeowners, the current setup is pretty sweet. And for a while, the number of homeowners was increasing, hitting an all-time high in 2003 - making it not too undemocratic that the country should be run for their benefit. But now with that figure reducing, mainly at the expense of younger people, it's not surprising that discontent is on the rise (particularly online, where the youngest are the most visible).
  - cameronh90 3y ago
    Lots of people really do prefer the old awful buildings. There was a story just a couple of days ago [0] where residents are protesting having their windows upgraded, despite their existing windows being cold, draughty, rusty, and mouldy. One man felt so strongly about it that he said he'd electrocute anyone who tried to change his windows. They're concerned new slightly thicker window frames might destroy the character of their 60s water-stained concrete brutalist eyesore. [0] https://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet/news/yes-it-s-cold-but-you-can-t-replace-our-windows-at-iconi-303338/ https://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet/news/yes-it-s-cold-but-y...
    - maccard 3y ago
      There's nutters everywhere, to be fair.
michaelt 3y ago
For listed buildings, you've got to get permission from the council. For most buildings they'll let you put in double-glazed windows if you can get them in a style that matches the existing windows. One of the iconic features of many Art Deco buildings is curved windows [1], and the flat windows having very skinny frames. That means nonstandard "heritage" windows, which can be several times the price of normal, mass-produced windows. Blocks of flats have the additional problem that it's unlikely every owner will have the cash to replace their windows at the same time. So it's tough to save money by getting them all done at once. [1] https://maps.app.goo.gl/uWUr5YyvJvRDPkH27 https://maps.app.goo.gl/uWUr5YyvJvRDPkH27
- gpderetta 3y ago
  Blocks are typically leaseholds, so if the freeholder decides to replace the windows, the leaseholders often have little ability to object. Of course often the freeholder has no interest in improving the building other than the minimal maintenance.
- tpm 3y ago
  > For listed buildings, you've got to get permission Sure - it's the same in our country, with the additional trouble that there is a special institution that has to approve any changes in protected buildings and they are pretty harsh. And even then lots of them get updated. > Blocks of flats have the additional problem that it's unlikely every owner will have the cash to replace their windows at the same time. We have that too and what usually happens with changes that apply to the whole building (like the whole facade) is that the community of the owners finances changes like that with a credit on the whole building, there are special laws for that. Happens less often with just the windows because they are so cheap most people can afford them on their own.
maccard 3y ago
There's an entirely short term outlook that's caused by the "housing ladder" IMO. If you spend any time on reddit, you'll see people asking "Why would I want to spend £10,000 insulating my home if the payback period isn't 4-5 years?" Instead of thinking about comfort and maintaining a building, they're thinking about ensuring that they maximise the value of their current property so that they can sell and upgrade to a bigger one. I live in an old stone building in Scotland - the previous owners installed a kitchen in 2019, and at that time they replaced the flooring. They _could_ have insulated under the floor, and done internal wall insulation but that would have added a few hundred pounds onto their renovation job, and they didn't care, they were content with the asthetic upgrade of the room.
laurencerowe 3y ago
> The underinvestment into insulating old buildings was staggering when compared with Central Europe. Nominally, GDP per capita is ~2.6x higher in the UK than in Poland ($46.5k/$18k) while domestic gas prices are only about 20% higher [1]. Renovations are mostly labour costs so the expected return on investment is almost twice as good in Poland as the UK. Ultimately the issue is that energy prices in the UK are too low. [1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a749056e5274a410efd09a6/International_Energy_Price_Comparisons_September_2017.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a749056e5274...

Symbiote 3y ago

I lived in a 1930s art-deco apartment building in London, and it was the nicest place I lived in England. At some point all the windows had been replaced with UPVC double glazed ones. The heating system had some redundancy, so when they closed half of it off to replace it we just had a day or two where they asked us to limit hot water use. (I don't remember but I assume this was done during the summer.)