What can be done with 1920s Crittall windows?

[Nigel Watts]

My mother's house was built in 1928 in a builders' Arts and Crafts style. It has un modernised single glazed Crittall windows, some with leaded lights and some with Steel glazing bars. The house is not listed and is one of the very few left in the road not to have been refenestrated. Those houses which have been look horrible. The houses were built in established parkland with large gardens and the effect is (and in spite of the recent horrors still is) quite picturesque.

The road has a reputation in the provincial town in which it is located for attracting the nouveaux riches - my grandfather was one when he bought it in 1934 - who have been progressively extending and coursening their houses, building swimming pools, replacing front gardens and gravel drives with concrete paving bricks on which to park their oversized cars etc.

What can be done? The house may eventually have to be sold in its current unmodernised state. If it is, it will suffer the same fate as its neighbours. It's not impossible however that I could buy it off the estate and try to do I up myself.

 

[plasticpigeon]

I will eventually sell my house. Anyone who buys it will wreck it. Sounds like that will be the fate of your mothers house eventually whatever you do.

 

[Roger H]

Assuming that the building is of insufficient interest to warrant statutory listing, you could ask the conservation officer to consider whether it warrants an article 4 direction being made on the property? - i.e. Removing 'permitted development' rights to change the windows without planning permission.

 

[Feltwell]

I suspect the only hope would be that whoever is in the house would be sensitive enough to put new Crittall windows in. They did have a terrible reputation for condensation, rust and (for galvanised versions) paint not sticking to them. I have heard that new Crittall windows are available that are close to the original style, are double glazed, have proper thermal breaks in the frame to stop the condensation and don't have the flaky paint problems.

It's only the expense that has stopped our neighbours - i.e. the other half of our semi-detached house - replacing their sashes with UPVC. I wouldn't care, but their sashes are in a far better state than ours at present at least - however the future for them is not so bright. A previous owner replaced the original sliding sashes with new softwood ones with "micro-thin" double glazed panels held in place with beading, about 15 years ago. These are now starting to deteriorate and need regular repair, it's clear the timber is nowhere near as good as our Victorian ones. I fear at some point they'll have the lot ripped out, they are not DIY people at all.

PP, I wouldn't be so pessimistic. Fashions will change. When was the last time you heard of anyone wanting to put hardboard over their stair spindles, over their panelled doors? Artex their ceiling? Everyone was doing that at one stage. Eventually there will be so few houses left with original doors and windows that, provided they are in good condition to begin with, people will value them as original features. The main risk is that all will be left is ones that are old & tatty, and unlike us lot not many people have the skills & patience to restore them and instead go for the easy "rip 'em out" option. Hopelessly optimistic? Possibly. Probably!

 

[plasticpigeon]

No I haven't seen people nailing hardwood sheets to panel doors, that would be positively sympathetic. I have seen people throw all of their Victorian or Edwardian panel doors in the skip. Fireplaces regularly get junked so that homeowners can install the usually utilitarian looking log burners. For some reason, the surrounds get junked at the same time. And worse, my pet hate, people see the builders arch as a mini inglenook, and strip the whole chimney breast of plaster for that Ye olde worlde pub chic look. I have seen sashes with painted glass panels thrown into skips from the upper storeys, and an entire geometric/encaustic floor thrown out, presumably because it wasn't quite level or looked a bit old.

Near me there is a skip outside a large house containing an entire floor of quarry tiles, and at least 2 original built in cupboards. The destruction these days is far more comprehensive than it was in Barry Bucknell's day. My neighbours have removed everything from their house, including the stud walls and door frames. The only saving grace is that I can salvage stuff like 2 under stairs cupboard doors that I rescued yesterday.

 

[kreyszig]

sounds like you're in an ideal spot to set up a salvage yard!

 

[88v8]

I doubt there is much you could do with them as the rebates are too small for dg units, and stepped-edge would look so clumsy.

We have Critalls here, installed I guess in the 1970s, although some could be earlier. The glass dates to 1972 so has no merit other than being waterproof and transparent.
Condensation.... especially in ye kitchen.
I was going to junk them in favour of oak. But yes, there are new Critalls, they look reassuringly expensive
http://www.crittall-windows.co.uk/range/9/homelight.html

For our small windows they will probably be the answer, given we have no wonkly glass to save, and I like the high glass ratio in our diddy small-windowed cottage.
Galvanise... just prime with calcium plumbate.

Someone makes solid bronze Critallish, but I didn't like the external detailing which looked modern.

Ivor

 

[malcolm]

I've got a single crittall window dating from 1910 with leaded glass. My plan is to secondary glaze. Maybe doing something like that with yours would reduce the temptation for future owners to rip out and replace with double glazed.

 

[MatthewC]

Assuming that the building is of insufficient interest to warrant statutory listing, you could ask the conservation officer to consider whether it warrants an article 4 direction being made on the property? - i.e. Removing 'permitted development' rights to change the windows without planning permission.

But even then the new owner would just do it and get away with it. People round here in a conservation area next to a main road have done unspeakable things with uPVC (control yourself, Penners!) and have never been caught. The only people visited by "Enforcement" are those who DO apply and don't do exactly as the (often stupid) conditions that get attached.

 

[Nigel Watts]

You cannot control what happens to houses after you sell them. I would only take on my mother's house if I felt I would be prepared to live in it myself, at least for a while. If I do it up (assuming I could afford to) then there is a fair chance that the majority of the improvements would be kept, so long as they deliver what the new owner is looking for.

My challenge in doing up such a house would be to find a compromise between what I found functional and tasteful and what a prospective new owner, who is likely to be of a different demographic, finds functional and to their taste. Taste is less likely to align than function, so the focus would have to be on function.

The main things that the new owner is likely to want which the house does not currently have are a large open plan living space with a good outlook onto and connection with the garden, a spacious and swanky kitchen, possibly connecting with the living area (the current kitchen is rather small, dark and tucked away having been designed for use by servants), and more bedrooms and bathrooms which could be accommodated in the spacious, unconverted attic. They may also want a swimming pool (although the garden, unlike some of the neighbours' is a little too narrow). A concrete paved forecourt with or without some flashy gates to display their ostentatious cars will be de rigueur.

There are plenty of London architects who could design a stylish modern extension to and reconfiguration of the back of the house and the kitchen which would deliver the functionality required and be to my taste. I could fit a relatively cheap kitchen on the basis that the new owner would want to strip out and replace anything I put in. The loft conversion, which I would not need, could also be done stylishly if I could justify the value it might add to the house. If the windows were restored well then it's possible that they also may be retained. Pools and forecourts I would have no control over however.

 

[JanieB]

Assuming that the building is of insufficient interest to warrant statutory listing, you could ask the conservation officer to consider whether it warrants an article 4 direction being made on the property? - i.e. Removing 'permitted development' rights to change the windows without planning permission.

But even then the new owner would just do it and get away with it. People round here in a conservation area next to a main road have done unspeakable things with uPVC (control yourself, Penners!) and have never been caught. The only people visited by "Enforcement" are those who DO apply and don't do exactly as the (often stupid) conditions that get attached.

I have reported people who have put in uPVC windows in our conservation area without planning permission. I was thanked for the information but told that they didn't have the money to enforce the rules. A particular one that grates on me is the end house of what was once a terrace of almshouses with the pointy arched windows and doors. The originals have been replaced with squared off modern double glazing in wood effect uPVC and a new rectangular window installed in the end wall. It looks awful.

Another travesty was a 16th century window removed from a hotel roof. The owner was told to put it back as it was part of the listed building. The whole thing became a stand-off as the the owner had burnt the window so couldn't put it back and the listed buildings officer insisted on the original going back in and not a replacement. Of course a replacement was eventually installed as the integrity of the whole building was compromised by the absence of the window.

 

[Flyfisher]

I have reported people who have put in uPVC windows in our conservation area without planning permission. I was thanked for the information but told that they didn't have the money to enforce the rules.

Surely there wouldn't be any significant cost? Wouldn't the guilty party have to pay the costs incurred in enforcement?

 

[plasticpigeon]

Nothing is enforced where I live. I'm pretty sure that anyone can knock down a listed building with impunity in Birmingham. Failing that it can be burned down. One conservation officer and the crappest (award winning) planning dept in the country.