Prater's stairs

[richardh]

Here's a very rough and dirty fly-thru so people can decide if this is the layout we should settle on.
Please take note of the partition and also decide if 'Prater's stairs' 'Prater's door' position and the walls/partition to the shed are viable.

YouTube:

There's no shadow or texture contrasts so details are sometimes hard to see.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfW6atSWbzg

[Wickerman]

That's what I said

My apologies Richard, I only noticed your comment after I posted that piece.

[Wickerman]

Wickerman,,

yes that makes more sense if the rooms from 27 extend into the passageway, then the possible problem of lack of light, as no window at front of the building goes away.
Think you are right with the interpretation,
With regards to the entry point while of course it is possible that this was from 26; I still see no support or need for such entry point.

what do you think?

steve

Hi Steve.

I must confess to not being too clear about the arguments over that upstairs window above the passage near room 13.

In the Goads Plan we see a room at the back of No.27, parallel with Kelly's room. The dashed line also passes under this 2-storey construction, but the solid line is not broken so it suggests the same, that this rear window above Millers court passage belongs to No.27 totally, meaning it is not an access passage to No.26 at all.

[Elamarna]

Wickerman,

good I think we agree.

This thread was meant to be about the position of the stair way; so not sure why the idea of access to 27 from 26 was ever raised by Pierre?

[Wickerman]

Here's a very rough and dirty fly-thru so people can decide if this is the layout we should settle on.
Please take note of the partition and also decide if 'Prater's stairs' 'Prater's door' position and the walls/partition to the shed are viable.

YouTube:

There's no shadow or texture contrasts so details are sometimes hard to see.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfW6atSWbzg

That, is eerie!

Well done Richard.

[Pierre]

Like this Pierre:

Hi Richardh,

yes, it is looking good. But why do you think that was the plan?

Regards Pierre

[Pierre]

Richardh - an important question

If 27 went over the archway - how did the tenants in 27 get into their rooms?

Did McCarthy have a lot of people running out an in of his front door in 27?


The question is important since that wasn´t the case for the shop in number 26 (maybe a "shed" in 88 but according to Goad´s actually a shop). There was a door in that side of the passage. So the tenants did not have access to the front door.

So WHY is there no door in McCarthy´s side of the passage?

Did all the tenants really go through the front door, that is, through McCarthy´s shop?

Regards Pierre

[richardh]

Sorry Pierre, I don't know what you mean? Why do I think what was the plan?

If you mean why do I think #27 has the space while #26 doesn't then I can only say that, to me, it was a given that that the window belonged to #27.

Hi Richardh,

yes, it is looking good. But why do you think that was the plan?

Regards Pierre

[richardh]

If there WAS a doorway knocked through from #26 to #27 how has this any bearing on things?

If 27 went over the archway - how did the tenants in 27 get into their rooms?

Did McCarthy have a lot of people running out an in of his front door in 27?


The question is important since that wasn´t the case for the shop in number 26 (maybe a "shed" in 88 but according to Goad´s actually a shop). There was a door in that side of the passage. So the tenants did not have access to the front door.

So WHY is there no door in McCarthy´s side of the passage?

Did all the tenants really go through the front door, that is, through McCarthy´s shop?

Regards Pierre

[Pierre]

Sorry Pierre, I don't know what you mean? Why do I think what was the plan?

If you mean why do I think #27 has the space while #26 doesn't then I can only say that, to me, it was a given that that the window belonged to #27.

Richardh,

I am trying to understand how you think since it is your thinking we will see when we look at the model.

So why is it obvious to you that the window belongs to 27 and is not only a port of an archway with a corridor between the houses?

Regards Pierre

[Joshua Rogan]

[B]So WHY is there no door in McCarthy´s side of the passage?

Did all the tenants really go through the front door, that is, through McCarthy´s shop?

Do we know if there were any tenants in no.27? Maybe just the McCarthy family lived there.

[Elamarna]

Pierre.

Seriously why do you think there are no doors other than the front door.?
You have seen that the goad map rarely shows doors.

[Elamarna]

Richardh,

I am trying to understand how you think since it is your thinking we will see when we look at the model.

So why is it obvious to you that the window belongs to 27 and is not only a port of an archway with a corridor between the houses?

Regards Pierre

Am not going to answer for Richard. But maybe he believes that the plan shows the 2 building have no link.

There is NO link on the plan is there? Yes or no will do

[MBDecre]

Do we know if there were any tenants in no.27? Maybe just the McCarthy family lived there.

That's a good point... do we know?

Maybe their mention can be found in the list of witnesses in newspapers or at the inquest re MJK's last hours.

It would resolve pierre's query.

[Wickerman]

Do we know if there were any tenants in no.27? Maybe just the McCarthy family lived there.

In 1891, the Census shows three McCarthy families, plus two female domestics and one unrelated married couple, occupying No.27 Dorset St.