Prater's stairs

[Elamarna]

THERE is NO opening on the plan Pierre. is there, yes or no?

Therefore it is a "gut feeling" you have about it isn't it.

Now what was it you said earlier about such things...........?

[Pierre]

THERE is NO opening on the plan Pierre. is there, yes or no?

Therefore it is a "gut feeling" you have about it isn't it.

Now what was it you said earlier about such things...........?

Regards Pierre

[Elamarna]

that is an opening on the ground floor.
the key makes that very clear

[richardh]

Yep, Only ONE opening on ONE floor. And according to Goad that floor is the 1st floor (street level). So unless McCarthy or a previous owner knocked a doorway through the upper floors then there are no more doorways/openings on any other floors above the passageway.

that is an opening on the ground floor.
the key makes that very clear

[MysterySinger]

Once more, that is a brilliant piece of work. Thanks richardh.

[Pierre]

that is an opening on the ground floor.
the key makes that very clear

Yes. And this is the only opening in the passage. And there are no signs of any stairs, walls or doors in number 26. Therefore we must use the space that is on the map. And this space is the upper passage. It is real. It is on the map. And there must obviously be stairs to it placed as near it as possible. And they lead from this door.

[Elamarna]

Yep, Only ONE opening on ONE floor. And according to Goad that floor is the 1st floor (street level). So unless McCarthy or a previous owner knocked a doorway through the upper floors then there are no more doorways/openings on any other floors above the passageway.

Richard,

remember its 1890 for the map, so one would expect it to show if it was there in November 88.

great work by the way, like your new project too

[Elamarna]

Yes. And this is the only opening in the passage. And there are no signs of any stairs, walls or doors in number 26. Therefore we must use the space that is on the map. And this space is the upper passage. It is real. It is on the map. And there must obviously be stairs to it placed as near it as possible. And they lead from this door.

But Pierre, there is no opening into that area. you keep saying the map is valid and reliable, why does it not show then, the opening is on the ground floor

[Wickerman]

Yep, Only ONE opening on ONE floor. And according to Goad that floor is the 1st floor (street level). So unless McCarthy or a previous owner knocked a doorway through the upper floors then there are no more doorways/openings on any other floors above the passageway.

Quite so Richard (and Steve), the Goad Plans were created by a company who came from Canada and therefore used North American terminology, their "1st" floor is the British "Ground" floor.

[Elamarna]

we must use the space that is on the map. And this space is the upper passage. It is real. It is on the map. And there must obviously be stairs to it placed as near it as possible. And they lead from this door.

Why must there obviously be stairs to it from 26?
To insert an opening which is not shown, nor backed by any other source is not scientific, it is an act of invention.
From a scientific point of view it is boarding on fraudulent.

[richardh]

I don't understand Pierre. What are you saying? Goad says opening on street level within the passageway that opening (where ever it was placed along that passage) was the opening used to access the stairs to the next floor. That's it! The stairs go to the next floor, then the next. At no point on your travels up those stairs will you ever come across another opening that will take you across and into #27 OR any of its floors. You would never come across another opening because Goad says 1st (which is street level) only.

stairs and internal doors are not shown on goads ANYWHERE.

Yes. And this is the only opening in the passage. And there are no signs of any stairs, walls or doors in number 26. Therefore we must use the space that is on the map. And this space is the upper passage. It is real. It is on the map. And there must obviously be stairs to it placed as near it as possible. And they lead from this door.

[richardh]

Getting back to the original point of this thread !

I've noticed on that panoramic demolition photo of Dorset St (see other tread) that the bit that is #13 and #19 Miller's court is deeper (from windows wall to back wall of #26). It might be a stretched or distorted photo, it might be a disagreement between Goad's scale and the focal length of that photo but my model, which is based directly off Goad is more square.

This has got me thinking about Stephen's (Thomas) plan and the fact that he has a partition behind the main wall (back wall of #26) and a stairway between. Looking at that panoramic I can see how that might be the case. If the door to prater's was original but it was originally the door into #13 (or the salon with #13 added later) then this might explain a few things.

[richardh]

This is what I mean:

The orange wireframe in this image is the model based exactly on goad. The other wireframe is the a close match from the panoramic photo. See on the top down image that the orange (original) model is exactly as per Goad. While the black wireframe actually goes beyond the brick back wall (back of #26) and neatly creates a 'passage' for a partition and a stair well.



thoughts please.

[Elamarna]

To be fair Richard that could be due to the lens or optical illusions.

However, if it really is a view of Miller's Court, and you can do some more work on it, which I think may be very hard, you may have a point.

I think time will tell on this one..

keep up the good work, and have a great xmas.

Steve

[Wickerman]

Getting back to the original point of this thread !

I've noticed on that panoramic demolition photo of Dorset St (see other tread) that the bit that is #13 and #19 Miller's court is deeper (from windows wall to back wall of #26). It might be a stretched or distorted photo, it might be a disagreement between Goad's scale and the focal length of that photo but my model, which is based directly off Goad is more square.

Richard.
Even if you added another 3ft to the depth of Kelly's rear structure, thereby feeling more satisfied that room for an extra set of stairs is physically possible, you are still left with finding a logical reason why two sets of stairs would be built within feet of each other to service the same landing.

Lack of room is not the concern, it is lack of a logical reason to include it.