It’s also, like, houses even in the US were like that during the same era as the Khrushchevkas. Sorry that mid 20th century housing isn’t up to 21st century standards.
Only the lacking insolation and the thin walls are real downsides.
The size of the bathrooms and kitchens is completely fine, as is the size of the flats. Lacking elevators? No shit, these buildings are from the 50s!
In a state of disrepair? Could this be related to the dissolution of the USSR somehow? I wonder, I wonder…
Also, insulation can be retrofitted. A few cm of fibreglass or cellulose fiber does wonders for both heat and sound containment.
These things are stupidly ripe for redevelopment. An excellent brit example is Park Hill: https://www.shefnews.co.uk/2022/05/05/sheffield-architects-wins-award-for-design-at-park-hill/
Although it stings that the council handed the whole concrete shell over for £1
Insulation is not even a problem nowadays, there are external insulation basically everywhere on those building in Poland now, and afaik everywhere in Europe. And it is pretty cheap since even small one building housing associacions are able to afford it.
Elevators are a problem for old and disabled, getting to 3+ story can be harsh few times per day.
Size - it’s fine. I wonder about the 2,5 meters height. Are they giants or something to complain? 2,5 is plenty, average human can’t even reach it when stretching hand. It can only be a problem when you have really big ass chandelier and routinely bang your head on it.
I’m in a house built in “the west” in the 21st century with a floor-ceiling height of 2.4M. What are these moans? They seem entirely fake.
Also, who cares! Unless you’re 2.4 m tall, in which case your name is probably Goliath, why are ceilings that height considered “too low”? Am I the only one who doesn’t care about ceiling height as long as I don’t hit my head on anything?
… I basically live in one of these
What are your actual thoughts on it?
It’s not actually a Khrushchyovka (I don’t live in Russia), but the specifications seem more or less the same. It’s fine, for the most part, since I don’t need much space to move around. The heat insulation is probably better.
Noooooo, it’s impossible that temporary housing built in order to fulfill the most burning needs in a country utterly devastated by world war and only intended to last for few decades have disadvantages!
Actually, those houses are standing even today with often semi proper maintenance, while modern private developers burgie ghettos are breaking after few years, sometimes even during the building. There’s one khrushchyovka building in Germany that is repaired and still inhabited after military fighter crashed in middle of it.
Khruschyovka > murican skyscrappers
Just imagine when we will transform skyscrapers in social housing 😎
Would be cool, although I doubt the infrastructure is up to living standards
Can someone make a version of this, but for a tent? Because that’s how the US is dealing with homelessness.
Does running over slums with a police bulldozer help? They sure think so.
This is every apartment in nyc or sf bay but they charge $2000/mo minimum
Plop it in New York and call it a “Quaint efficiency unit with character” and then libs are okay with it, I’m sure.
But suuure, commieblocks are the worst.
deleted by creator
Because elevators at the time was a lot more expensive than now. The technology was less mature. Between choosing to spend a large portion of the budget to build elevators or using that money to build more units to accommodate everyone, they chose the latter. You could always get first floor units if you had accessibility requirements.
Evil Soviets making you get some exercise
Seriously though, Americans (and Canadians) will drive for an hour to an expensive gym and run on a treadmill instead of just taking a jog outside for free, or use a stair climbing machine while refusing to use any real stairs. Just, why?
Cause FREEDOM, baby!
But seriously, I don’t know. The ways of the Burger Tribe are truly incomprehensible.
Some people will always need elevators and that’s okay. So it’s more like: evil Soviets being incapable of making technology immediately affordable
I know that, I’m confused on why didn’t the creator of this thing didn’t think about that
Because it’s probably an armchair “architect” blindly hating Soviet apartments because /r/architecture told them to.
Living in a student dorm, I couldn’t give less of a shit about room sizes. Good community is worth more than any amount of space
What abt Brježnjevka?
Stalinkas are my personal favorite…
I lived in a Khrushchyovka for a few months and I never had any problems, especially the ones listed here.
Liberals say a lot of stupid things. Post incidences here.