Why does the PM of the UK live in an apartment?

[GorillaMan]

I’m surprised Cecil makes such an obvious error as this:

(all of which adjoin–having even and odd numbers on opposite sides of the street is an American practice).

No it’s not. It’s just that Downing Street is a cul-de-sac, so the numbering went around in one sequence. Regular roads are numbered as you’d expect.

[RickJay]

@BrainGlutton

A townhouse is a house, not an apartment. I’ve lived in townhouses, suburban houses, and apartments. A townhouse, or row house, is a lot more like a suburban house than it is like an apartment; the only real difference is that a townhouse has no front yard and only a very small back yard. Another difference is that a neighborhood made of townhouses is a place where you can walk!

My townhouse has a front yard.

Aside from the front and back yards being small there just isn’t any difference in living in a townhouse as opposed to a detached house. I can’t hear my neighbours through the walls, even though I know from hearing them when I’m outside that the people on one side scream at each other a lot.

[lawoot]

@GorillaMan

@Ross

Another point which I don’t think anyone has made is that 10 Downing Street is actually two houses, as it’s been knocked into the house at its rear, to make one vast complex.

I did link to a couple of pages that explained just that.

From one of the links above:

The very ordinary address and the modest terraced façade are deceptive, giving little clue to the real size and grandeur within. Number 10 in fact consists of two houses. The house which faces Downing Street is a typical late 17th century town house. But it conceals a complicated building which was refronted in the 18th C and enlarged in the 20th C. A corridor joins this house to what was once a mansion in its own right, with a walled garden and a view across Horse Guards’ Parade. The two houses were joined in 1732 when the property became an official government residence

[Gary_Robson]

@doreen

I think I know what a “rowhouse” is - one house in a row of attached houses. Does a “townhouse” have to be attached, or can it be like mine- a front yard about 15 feet deep, with 3-4 foot wide alleys between the houses? Never heard either one called apartments- I’ve only heard apartment used when there is more than one unit in a single building.

My understanding, from when I lived in California, is that if they’re attached and have no yards (especially if they’re apartments converted to individual ownership), they’re condominiums. Add a yard, and it’s a townhouse. If they aren’t connected, they’re just houses.

[doreen]

@Misnomer

I’ve only ever seen/heard of attached townhouses, so I don’t know what I would call a house like yours. My townhouse is one in a row of five, but would definitely never be called a rowhouse (for reasons I’m not quite sure of). Is your house shaped like a townhouse/rowhouse (taller than it is wide), only not attached? The image coming to mind is something found in a city, like the Shambles in York; or something out of Dickensian London. As I said, I wouldn’t be surprised if such townhouse-vs-rowhouse naming conventions vary regionally.

Doesn’t look like the one in the Shambles. Looks a lot more like the second one on this page

[AncientHumanoid]

@Hermitian

2. It’s bigger than it looks.

TARDIS
.

[Misnomer]

@InvisibleWombat

My understanding, from when I lived in California, is that if they’re attached and have no yards (especially if they’re apartments converted to individual ownership), they’re condominiums. Add a yard, and it’s a townhouse. If they aren’t connected, they’re just houses.

Well, you can’t just “add a yard” to apartments or condominiums, at least not around here. Our definition of “condominium” is ONLY an apartment that is individually owned: all condominiums are apartments, but not all apartments are condos. The structure, space, landscaping, and quality of life of a townhouse have nothing in common with those of apartments or condos, except for the idea of shared walls (but townhouse walls are much thicker, you never have people living above or below you, etc.).

@doreen

Doesn’t look like the one in the Shambles. Looks a lot more like the second one on this page

Ah! That is what I would call “a house.” The one in that photo reminds me of the neighborhoods I would see when I used to visit my grandmother in New Jersey. In my book, a house is a house regardless of how much space is (or isn’t) between it and the house next door.

Ain’t semantics fun?

[tryout1]

Blair’s also just brought a house in a truly vile part of london for about £3.5m - it’s horrid. That is his private home from his own money.

Just curious–I have only seen the tourist parts of London, but what part could possibly be both “truly vile” AND have houses selling for 3.5m pounds? American cities have slums, and they have multi-million dollar houses, but you don’t usually find the two in the same neighborhood.

[owlstretchingtime]

@tryout1

Just curious–I have only seen the tourist parts of London, but what part could possibly be both “truly vile” AND have houses selling for 3.5m pounds? American cities have slums, and they have multi-million dollar houses, but you don’t usually find the two in the same neighborhood.

It’s in Connaught Square - which has pretensions to grandeur but is actually in Paddington.

Paddington is very vile. It is full of brasses and arab arm dealers and other euro-trash. In short it has no style or class.

£3.5m could have bought a house in any number of decent bits of London - but Blair has no style or class so I suppose it fits.

[Diceman]

Ouch.

Are housing prices in England really so high that a house in a slum sells for over 3 million pounds? Here in the American midwest, you could build a palatial mansion for that amount of money.

[GorillaMan]

Oh no, it’ll be a very nice building. It’s just a pretentious area that nobody with real style would touch with a bargepole.

[owlstretchingtime]

@Diceman

Ouch.

Are housing prices in England really so high that a house in a slum sells for over 3 million pounds? Here in the American midwest, you could build a palatial mansion for that amount of money.

Firstly the purchase price was £3.6m - ie $6,3000.000. Even in London this is plenty. It’s going to need some serious dosh spent on it too - unless Cherie wants to live in something that looks like the set from a 70s porno flick (always possible I suppose)

However the area is vile - not vile like an innercity slum (although there are a few lairy areas around there), but vile in the sense that the only people who live there are tarts; euro-trash; yank bankers and arab arm dealers and other wealthy ne’eer do wells. Johnathon Aitken used to live there - say no more.

Owl (who’s own house is on the market and is looking in wimbledon Park and Wimbledon Village as I am not as common as Blair, nor do I have £3.6m to spend)

[Walloon]

@Hermitian

Supposedly Tony Blair, or any other PM, lives at 10 or 11 Downing Street. It’s a townhouse…an apartment! I know, I know… it’s a very nice roomy one, but the fact is, it is still an apartment.

The defining features of an “apartment” are that it is one of several units in the same building, sharing the same entrance. Neither is true for 10 Downing Street.

[Diceman]

@owlstretchingtime

However the area is vile - not vile like an innercity slum (although there are a few lairy areas around there), but vile in the sense that the only people who live there are tarts; euro-trash; yank bankers and arab arm dealers and other wealthy ne’eer do wells. Johnathon Aitken used to live there - say no more.

I see. I took “vile” to mean “run-down and seedy”.

Some of Detroit’s northern suburbs sound similar. The northside is where all the lawyers, doctors, corporate officers, and other yuppie-types are moving to around here.

[notquitekarpov]

Take what OwlStrechingTime says with a pinch of salt, Connaught Square cannot sensibly be described as “vile” and is certainly not a slum - it is no more in Paddington than in Mayfair. Within strolling distance of Hyde Park, Park Land, Oxford Street… not exactly roughing it.

London does feature wealthy areas close by poorer ones but that is simply a legacy of it’s growth incorporating a series of earlier villages. Tony’s new pad is arrowed in the link below:

http://www.streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=527508&y=181076&z=1&sv=Connaught+Square&st=6&tl=Connaught+Square,+London,+W_2&searchp=newsearch.srf&mapp=newmap.srf

All that said GBP3.5 million is a lot of money for a place without a private garden (the residents share the small park that takes up the centre of the square) and it has been questioned whether it is a wise investment.

[owlstretchingtime]

W2 = Paddington. Paddington = Brasses; Euro trash; immigration scam english schools and yank bankers. End of.

In all seriousness are you telling me that if you had £3.6m to spend on a house for you and your family you’d live there? Especially if you had a young child?

That kind of money could have bought something nice, somewhere nice.