Why do developers not build in historical styles?

westernpromise

BobQ wrote: »

Concrete on the outside ........

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricorn_Centre

Need I say more.....

God, that's hideous. It looks like something Daleks would build on slave planets.

ukcarper

We're they better?

Sapphire

ukcarper wrote: »

We're they better?

Yes, architecturally. If they were developed, they could be nice properties.

ukcarper

Sapphire wrote: »

Yes, architecturally. If they were developed, they could be nice properties.

Don't see it myself it's a little better than Victorian house I was bought up in which didn't have bay window.

Sapphire

ukcarper wrote: »

Don't see it myself it's a little better than Victorian house I was bought up in which didn't have bay window.

I don't consider bay windows to be a necessity in life (though I have them at the moment). I live in a Victorian property (have always done so, in fact, except for one short period of living in a box house with no features or character). I can say that brick-built buildings of the type that were made before the Edwardian period (say) were built much more to last, with very thick walls. Of course, there was no double glazing (though that is horrible unless done with wooden frames, especially on older properties), and little sound insulation on floors above (which must be legally installed now, even in conversions). I've seen many buildings in London that were hovels at one time, but have been beautifully restored and cleaned up, to make lovely characterful homes.

There was an interesting article in today's Evening Standard about all the (to me) ugly tall glass-and-steel buildings with 'luxury apartments' that are springing up all over the place in London. They are totally soulless (though the flats are advertised as 'must-have luxury' items for the gullible). In central London (and in other areas of London as well) many of them are empty most of the time (lights appear to be permanently off), having been bought by investors and speculators from abroad (apparently often with funny money). The areas around them are hardly full of life. To me, the huge structures that are being built in Battersea, for example, are prime candidates for the slums of the future. I thought that after what happened in the 1960s, when many such buildings were built and so much was destroyed, everyone said 'never again'. Yet here we are again, building them at far greater intensity now, and they are not being built to serve the needs of communities. There is this constant call to 'build more houses', yet when properties are built (or when historic buildings are internally gutted or pulled down altogether), it is not being done in the main to house Londoners, but to fuel the property acquisitions of the very rich.

I was in Mayfair the other day and it is horrendous. Lorries everywhere, clanging of metal, pollution, dust, heaving with people, like some sort of mass destruction or even another Blitz. The beautiful historic old buildings there look forlorn, and I simply don't see what the attraction is in living in such an area. The same thing is happening in places like Bloomsbury, Kensington and other areas that used to be a pleasure to visit and to work in. It wouldn't surprise me if affluent people who live in those 'desirable' places didn't get really fed up with it before long and start moving out.:cool:

zagubov

Sapphire wrote: »

There was an interesting article in today's Evening Standard about all the (to me) ugly tall glass-and-steel buildings with 'luxury apartments' that are springing up all over the place in London. They are totally soulless (though the flats are advertised as 'must-have luxury' items for the gullible). In central London (and in other areas of London as well) many of them are empty most of the time (lights appear to be permanently off), having been bought by investors and speculators from abroad (apparently often with funny money). The areas around them are hardly full of life. To me, the huge structures that are being built in Battersea, for example, are prime candidates for the slums of the future. I thought that after what happened in the 1960s, when many such buildings were built and so much was destroyed, everyone said 'never again'. Yet here we are again, building them at far greater intensity now, and they are not being built to serve the needs of communities. There is this constant call to 'build more houses', yet when properties are built (or when historic buildings are internally gutted or pulled down altogether), it is not being done in the main to house Londoners, but to fuel the property acquisitions of the very rich.

I was in Mayfair the other day and it is horrendous. Lorries everywhere, clanging of metal, pollution, dust, heaving with people, like some sort of mass destruction or even another Blitz. The beautiful historic old buildings there look forlorn, and I simply don't see what the attraction is in living in such an area. The same thing is happening in places like Bloomsbury, Kensington and other areas that used to be a pleasure to visit and to work in. It wouldn't surprise me if affluent people who live in those 'desirable' places didn't get really fed up with it before long and start moving out.:cool:

A year or so ago, a bunch of us celebrated a birthday by walking along the riverbank from Putney to Waterloo.

On the way we passed many of the construction projects you describe and it was every bit as bad as you say. Empty unoccupied vanity projects, presumably making a foreign investor happy but not providing accommodation for any occupants and competing for building land with any future housing for the people born in London who want to contribute to it by staying there to work.

I only know my own area (SW London) well but if the rest of the city is the same, we're all in big trouble.:(

ukcarper

The Victorian house I was bought up in is now demolished as have many similar houses. It like many others was a box with 4 boxy rooms and was not particularly well built. Yes some mondern properties are unattractive and not well built but so were many older houses.