Such nomenclature houses, most often located in the central districts of cities, still remain very prestigious housing, expensive and meeting all modern comfort requirements..
But there are also ordinary “stalinkas” who were built in workers’ districts. Usually these are two-story houses with one entrance, the layout in them is certainly better than in Khrushchev houses, and the ceilings are higher, but in general, in terms of comfort and prestige, they are significantly inferior to new business and premium class buildings, however, many consider them quite comparable with new houses belonging to the economy category.
At the end of the 1940s and at the beginning of the 1950s, such ordinary “stalinkas” were already built from cinder block, therefore they cannot compare in the degree of noise and thermal insulation with brick capital houses, losing one of the main advantages of “Stalinist houses”. Their external decor is much more modest, and the living area of the apartments is smaller..
It is not worth talking about the “stalinkas” that were used as working hostels as normal housing – a shared bathroom and only one room for a family do not fit into modern concepts of comfortable housing. And the quality of these houses leaves much to be desired. Most of them are being demolished and giving way to new buildings..
Ordinary “stalinkas” are likely to gradually fall in price, as new multi-storey buildings of the economy class category are already quite successfully competing with such houses..
New buildings, like “Stalin’s” buildings, cannot be attributed to standard houses, therefore it is impossible to unequivocally answer the question of which is better – “Stalin’s house” or a new building. Both “stalinkas” and new buildings are different – with a more or less successful layout, differing in location, quality of the materials and communications used and, of course, cost.
According to experts, in the near future, “stalinka” of the first category, that is, nomenclature houses, will continue to be in high demand from buyers, be distinguished by high prices and will not give up their positions to new buildings. But ordinary “stalinkas” are likely to gradually fall in price, since new multi-storey buildings of the economy class category are already quite successfully competing with such houses.
Experts also note that, on average, the new owners will have to spend almost the same amount for the arrangement of an apartment in a new building and the overhaul of the “stalinka”, so the choice depends only on the preferences of the new owners..
The purchase of an apartment is, of course, an individual matter, many home buyers prefer to live in new apartments, becoming the first residents of the house, choosing a modern interior and starting to create their own history. Others like houses with an already established atmosphere, solid and somewhat patriarchal. The main thing is that, upon entering the apartment, the future owner could confidently say – here, this living area is just for me!
Should we prioritize preserving historical symbols, like Stalin’s buildings, or should we prioritize progress and development by choosing new building designs? Which option do you believe would benefit society more in the long run?
Which option would you choose? Are you more inclined towards preserving historical significance and legacy with Stalin, or do you prefer progress and modernity with a new building? What factors would you consider in making this decision?
What are the key factors that need to be considered before making a decision between preserving historical landmarks like the Stalin building or opting for new developments?