‘Dutch Billys’

Home Forums Ireland ‘Dutch Billys’

This topic contains 714 replies, has 63 voices, and was last updated by  admin 1 year, 4 months ago.

Viewing 20 posts - 41 through 60 (of 715 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #799205

    Anonymous

    This is an excellent thread gunter, keep it up 🙂

    Not sure if Id necessarily agree with you about poor ol Luke Gardiner, but I certainly do think you have made a very worthwhile case as to the need to document and debate the Billys.

    @gunter wrote:

    That big house on Manor Street is a gem, but I would be 95% certain it was never a ‘Dutch Billy’.

    I beg to differ – looking at that snap, it appears to me that the top two corners are of red brick, wheras the mass of the building is in brown brick, with a definate Billy outline as best seen by the gentle curves in the top left corner.

    @aj wrote:

    as much as it breaks my heart its clear we havent learnt from the mistakes made in the not too distant past. I have a real fear that the remianing areas of the cities with sizable concentrations of historic building are simply being left to rot.

    The state of thomas street and the Northern gerogian quarter is a disgrace . The intentional dereliction that developers are permitted to get away with is a joke. Its time we take stock of what we have left and protect it.

    Aj I 100% agree with you. The topic of Derelict Dublin may well merit a thread on its own. In the meantime, what are the primary reasons for dereliction in Dublin – is it the failure of the Derelict Sites Act to have worked, or the failure of the Living Over The Shop scheme, or the cuts/ under-resourcing of heritage protection?

    #799206

    Anonymous

    hutton:

    I want this to be a ‘Billy’, I just don’t think it is. I think that newer brickwork is just a repair.

    On the elevation, as I see it, there’s no real reason to see the top floor windows as anything but original. If it was a twin gabled house, I think the top floor would have reduced down to two windows and they would have moved them in to more closely line up with the apexes of the roofs. As well as that, in the gabled tradition, it was the practice for all windows to be of the same size no matter which floor they were on, the composition of the ‘Dutch Billy’ relied, very successfully, on the variety and rhythm of the gables. Once you leave the gabled tradition, the smaller top floor windows come in and, shortly after that, the full Georgian graded window heights according to the varied ceiling heights reflecting the importance of the rooms by floor which, I admit, was a nice little refinement if they hadn’t gone on for the next 100 years and flogged it to death.

    For me, the matching front and back hip profiles to the roofs and the parapet details on the Manor Street house are the clincher. If this was an early make-over, would they have gone to the bother of hipping the roofs at the back as well? and sticking in a full flat parapet at the back? This didn’t happen to any other ‘Dutch Billy’ that I know of.

    On your pal, Luke Gardiner, here’s a way you can get him off the hook:

    They give a date of 1728 for Henrietta Street, which is the same date thats been given for Molesworth Street for example. This is the stark contrast that I see and the reason that the glowing legacy of Luke Gardiner need a radical revision. Molesworth Street is fully gabled, socially mixed (includes tripple gabled Lisle House) and it responsibly in-fills obvious development land between Stephen’s Green (a City enterprise) and Trinity College. Henrietta Street (the Luke Gardiner venture) is an exclusive up-market cul-de-sac of London type houses off an arterial route, with no attempt to integrate into the existing street or development pattern.

    If it could be established, for example, that this Manor Street house was originally flat parapeted, and if it could be dated to before 1728, then I’d have lay off on Gardiner on that front anyway, and just concentrate on giving him a good kicking on the ‘shifting the city off it’s access’ point, and the ‘one house design fits all’ point.

    Best of luck with that.

    #799207

    Anonymous

    Great thread.

    Molesworth Street was such a criminal loss to the city. As Freddie O’Dwyer noted in Lost Dublin: “Of the twenty-three Georgian houses on the north side, only four survive, two on each side of Edward Holmes’ Masonic Hall of 1868. The pair to the west, Nos 15 and 16, built by Benjamin Rudd, carpenter, have idential plans and were originally brick-fronted and gabled. The gable of No. 15 which was added in late Victorian times and was dated 1755 belies the origins of the house which Rudd sold to one Edward Deane of Terenure in 1740.”

    This is them today, both with stunning panelled interiors. The rust colour has always been a delight.

    One building I’m not sure about being a Dutch Billy is No. 32 directly across the road, prior to its bizarre Victorian – and probably later again – remodelling.

    A picture of the building, possibly from the late 18th century, shows it as having a flat parapet and small window opes precisely matching those of the upper two floors.

    Yet this house apparently dates from c. 1725, and fascinatingly a single wall of panelling survives with cornice to part of the entrance hall, in spite of the wholescale 19th century alterations, let alone the modern office interventions. Also as you move up the staircase which is late 18th century, you suddenly encounter a startling remnant of early Georgian Dublin in the form of a single stretch of barley-sugared balustrading with Corinthian newel posts! Thankfully some good old-fashioned Georgian penny-pinching dictated its survival high up in the house.

    And as to the evidence of Dutch Billy, and a large one at that, surely such a fenestration pattern to the rear is suggesting something?

    (I thought the pink rather eye-catching).

    A house of this scale would not be out of place adjoining the tripartite gabled home of Speaker Foster that was once located right next door,

    #799208

    Anonymous

    @grahamh wrote:

    Great thread.

    One building I’m not sure about being a Dutch Billy is No. 32 directly across the road, prior to its bizarre Victorian – and probably later again – remodelling.

    A picture of the building, possibly from the late 18th century, shows it as having a flat parapet and small window opes precisely matching those of the upper two floors.

    Yet this house apparently dates from c. 1725,

    And as to the evidence of Dutch Billy, and a large one at that, surely such a fenestration pattern to the rear is suggesting something?

    A house of this scale would not be out of place adjoining the tripartite gabled home of Speaker Foster that was once located right next door,

    Graham:

    I think you’re spot on there on no. 32. I’m not familiar with the late 18th century print that you mentioned though, (unless it’s this one from ‘Lost Dublin’) and I hadn’t realized there were so many bits of the original structure left inside.

    Freddy O’Dwyer had speculated that Speker Foster’s house was ‘something of a hybrid, with gables on top of the parapet’ and that it was to the left of the building in your photograph, no 32 (where 29, 30 & 31 are now), having been knocked and ‘replaced before 1821’ But actually Speker Foster’s triple gabled house was ‘Lisle House’ at 33 Molesworth Street, and it’s still there, the big five bay house to the right of your no. 32. So the yellow rendered house that you’ve shown and the five bay brick ‘Georgian’ to the right are the two gabled houses shown in Penny Journal print reproduced in Freddy’s book.



    There are photographs from the early 1970s that show the original three perpendicular roofs to no. 33, that originally lined up with the three gables, peeping up behind the later Geoprgian parapet.

    The shameful gutting and removal of the roofs from no. 33 took place as recently as 1974, under the direction of a firm of architects who are still prominent in the city. The recent planning application (reg. no. 2775/07) by Benson & Forsyth to build a large office blook to the rear and further alter the two houses, totally underplayed the importance of the two houses.

    The planning application was refused by DCC following some withering comments by the conservation officer, the brilliant Clare Hogan again (she of the savage attack on the Clarance Hotel proposal, which unfortunately wasn’t listened to). I particularly liked her put down of the prestigeous Benson & Forsyth: ‘The National Gallery extension is not considered an acceptable precedent as it . . . is a major public institution’ and implied, this is an office block!

    If only someone had pointed this out to our ‘DARE TO BE THE BLOODY SAME’ friends out on the Merrion Road.

    Possibly the cruelist irony for the great ‘Dutch Billy’ that was no. 33 is that when it’s main staircase was ripped out in 1974, it was given a new home in 13 Henrietta Street!

    I don’t know if great staircases have souls, but this must be like taking a lifelong Everton fan and burying him in a Liverpool jersey.

    For the record, I very muched liked the Benson & Forsyth plan, except for the further alterations to the two houses, and I would be far more in favour of stuff like this, densifying up under-used sites in the city centre, than the random depositing of ‘urban’ centres on distant suburban and green field sites.

    #799209

    Anonymous

    I am in number 33 every fews days and there is very little orginal features left. the entrance hall retains some panelling and plaster work thats it

    #799210

    Anonymous

    Do any of the internal walls survive, or is it all open plan offices? What about the basement?

    #799211

    Anonymous

    They appealed that Molesworth St refusal, but then withdrew. Revised proposal is awaited.

    Feel free to return to Molesworth Street after this post!!

    @gunter wrote:

    completely forgot about those three houses on Haymarket. Weren’t they knocked for some appalling extension to Tully’s Tiles?

    I don’t remember them myself]
    Existing view looking west on Newmarket towards Chamber Street. The stone warehouses on the right form the west corner of Brabazon Place, opposite Gray’s on the east corner. The warehouses are derelict and look to be prep’d for re-development. They are 19th century replacements of the original gabled houses, but they are part of the story of the space and should be retained and worked into the redevelopment rather than bulldozed and forgotten.[/QUOTE]Yeah, the stone warehouse on the corner (‘the potato market’) is a protected structure and is being incorporated within approved Ref. 5410/04 (the other semi-demolished one beyond it is not protected & is not being kept), for a big scheme also including repair of the fine Georgian Brewer’s house round the corner, 10 Ardee Street – Image: http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/8113/sheehanimages8fe.png Although this scheme was approved 3 years ago, there’s no sign of anyting starting.

    If McCullough Mulvin have their way Newmarket will look quite different in the future (go to ‘view all projects’ and ‘masterplanning’): http://www.mcculloughmulvin.com/pages/moviepg.html

    The early-18th century gabled house on Montpelier Hill deserves an appearance in the thread.

    #799212

    Anonymous

    Reluctant as an alien (!) to intrude on this debate, but doesn’t the side of M’worth St opposite the Freemasons’ Hall (what an Aladdin’s Cave that is!) provide somrthing of a template for when the 80s (?) bland monstrosity at no. 14 is eventually knocked?
    The newbuild B+S scheme looks very good and looks as though it would provide an internal court/garden to the rear of nos. 32 and 33, which they should leave well alone or, shock-horror, restore as part of a pro bono gesture. (What’s that? says the company accountant.)

    #799213

    Anonymous

    What is up with all of the images not working (apart from the old Blackpitts)?

    #799214

    Anonymous

    Is the black and white building to the left of the Newmarket image Art Deco? Also, what is the interesting-looking tower peaking up above the awful utilitarian lamppost?

    #799215

    Anonymous

    It’s Art Deco-ish, but I don’t know the date. I suspect gunter might?

    Interestingly, although it appears to be used as a warehouse, one Sunday a few months ago while I was giving a friend a guided bike tour of parts of the city we noticed that it seems to be some sort of church for Africans- families were coming out of a ‘goods entrance’ in the most fantastic outfits, and the kids were running around the square. One of the few signs of real life in that part of town (I don’t count tyre skid marks).

    #799216

    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster

    @devin wrote:

    The early-18th century gabled house on Montpelier Hill deserves an appearance in the thread.

    Someone made a huge effort restoring that a few years ago – my business partner’s house is also in the picture so am very familiar with that street – some lovely period houses on it

    #799217

    Anonymous

    Yes absolutely. The render around the opes has clearly been touched up following the insertion of what are perfect reproduction windows. What a gem of a house.

    Though, eh, how do you get into it? Is it amalgamated with an adjoining house? Is it that little far door that’s actually in the other house?!

    #799218

    Anonymous

    The houses on Montpelier would be immensely improved if either the cement render was removed or they were painted in almost any colour other than grey (and the trailing wires were removed, but I’ve given up commenting on that).

    #799219

    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster

    Graham – its the little door

    #799220

    Anonymous

    ooooh – I want it! 🙂

    #799221

    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster

    It’s a big house – great backyard on that side.. slope down to back of garage on Parkgate street

    #799222

    Anonymous

    What a weird, unexpected street Montpelier Hill is.

    #799223

    Anonymous

    Cool. It looks quite big alright. You can easily see how everything else grew up around it too.

    Thanks for that info gunter about Molesworth Street. Yes the print I referred to was that Penny Journal one you posted (I just couldn’t be bothered scanning it lol).

    It would certainly explain a fact from Lost Dublin I found hard to reconcile with the street: when it was suggested that three c. 1800 houses now occupy the site of Speaker Foster’s house. It seemed excessive. Yes poor old Lisle House, utterly gutted and with a flat roof now too. I’d no idea it was Foster’s house – in hindsight it matches perfectly.

    It was also a coincidence that the yellow building happens to roughly match that adjoining Foster’s in the picture, hence the confusion.

    Now that we know the yellow building is indeed that smaller gabled house pictured above, as far as I know the panelling inside survives to the side entrance hall in the building, which would match with the location of the doorcase seen above. I must check that out. Out of interest, how did you know Lisle House was Foster’s house, gunter?

    #799224

    Anonymous

    @grahamh wrote:

    Yes the print I referred to was that Penny Journal one you posted (I just couldn’t be bothered scanning it lol).
    Out of interest, how did you know Lisle House was Foster’s house, gunter?

    You just couldn’t be bothered scanning the single most important print of Dutch Billys in existence! You’d rather hold discussions on coffee emporia!

    We’ll move on.

    On the Speaker Foster’s house, when I saw the1970s photograph with the three roof ridges peeping up over the parapet, the penny dropped.

    For a bit of confirmation, the disposition of the windows on the back elevation of no. 32 is strikingly similar to the arrangement on the front elevation as shown in the Penny Journal print, which is the point that you were making at the start, surely no. 32 is a gabled house.

    My render skills are primitive, but one of these days I want to have a go at creating a decent render of this stretch of Molesworth Street as it would have been originally using the the surviving fabric as a template.

    missarchi could probably knock this up in a couple of hours.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #799205

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    This is an excellent thread gunter, keep it up 🙂

    Not sure if Id necessarily agree with you about poor ol Luke Gardiner, but I certainly do think you have made a very worthwhile case as to the need to document and debate the Billys.

    @gunter wrote:

    That big house on Manor Street is a gem, but I would be 95% certain it was never a ‘Dutch Billy’.

    I beg to differ – looking at that snap, it appears to me that the top two corners are of red brick, wheras the mass of the building is in brown brick, with a definate Billy outline as best seen by the gentle curves in the top left corner.

    @aj wrote:

    as much as it breaks my heart its clear we havent learnt from the mistakes made in the not too distant past. I have a real fear that the remianing areas of the cities with sizable concentrations of historic building are simply being left to rot.

    The state of thomas street and the Northern gerogian quarter is a disgrace . The intentional dereliction that developers are permitted to get away with is a joke. Its time we take stock of what we have left and protect it.

    Aj I 100% agree with you. The topic of Derelict Dublin may well merit a thread on its own. In the meantime, what are the primary reasons for dereliction in Dublin – is it the failure of the Derelict Sites Act to have worked, or the failure of the Living Over The Shop scheme, or the cuts/ under-resourcing of heritage protection?

    #799206

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    hutton:

    I want this to be a ‘Billy’, I just don’t think it is. I think that newer brickwork is just a repair.

    On the elevation, as I see it, there’s no real reason to see the top floor windows as anything but original. If it was a twin gabled house, I think the top floor would have reduced down to two windows and they would have moved them in to more closely line up with the apexes of the roofs. As well as that, in the gabled tradition, it was the practice for all windows to be of the same size no matter which floor they were on, the composition of the ‘Dutch Billy’ relied, very successfully, on the variety and rhythm of the gables. Once you leave the gabled tradition, the smaller top floor windows come in and, shortly after that, the full Georgian graded window heights according to the varied ceiling heights reflecting the importance of the rooms by floor which, I admit, was a nice little refinement if they hadn’t gone on for the next 100 years and flogged it to death.

    For me, the matching front and back hip profiles to the roofs and the parapet details on the Manor Street house are the clincher. If this was an early make-over, would they have gone to the bother of hipping the roofs at the back as well? and sticking in a full flat parapet at the back? This didn’t happen to any other ‘Dutch Billy’ that I know of.

    On your pal, Luke Gardiner, here’s a way you can get him off the hook:

    They give a date of 1728 for Henrietta Street, which is the same date thats been given for Molesworth Street for example. This is the stark contrast that I see and the reason that the glowing legacy of Luke Gardiner need a radical revision. Molesworth Street is fully gabled, socially mixed (includes tripple gabled Lisle House) and it responsibly in-fills obvious development land between Stephen’s Green (a City enterprise) and Trinity College. Henrietta Street (the Luke Gardiner venture) is an exclusive up-market cul-de-sac of London type houses off an arterial route, with no attempt to integrate into the existing street or development pattern.

    If it could be established, for example, that this Manor Street house was originally flat parapeted, and if it could be dated to before 1728, then I’d have lay off on Gardiner on that front anyway, and just concentrate on giving him a good kicking on the ‘shifting the city off it’s access’ point, and the ‘one house design fits all’ point.

    Best of luck with that.

    #799207

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    Great thread.

    Molesworth Street was such a criminal loss to the city. As Freddie O’Dwyer noted in Lost Dublin: “Of the twenty-three Georgian houses on the north side, only four survive, two on each side of Edward Holmes’ Masonic Hall of 1868. The pair to the west, Nos 15 and 16, built by Benjamin Rudd, carpenter, have idential plans and were originally brick-fronted and gabled. The gable of No. 15 which was added in late Victorian times and was dated 1755 belies the origins of the house which Rudd sold to one Edward Deane of Terenure in 1740.”

    This is them today, both with stunning panelled interiors. The rust colour has always been a delight.

    One building I’m not sure about being a Dutch Billy is No. 32 directly across the road, prior to its bizarre Victorian – and probably later again – remodelling.

    A picture of the building, possibly from the late 18th century, shows it as having a flat parapet and small window opes precisely matching those of the upper two floors.

    Yet this house apparently dates from c. 1725, and fascinatingly a single wall of panelling survives with cornice to part of the entrance hall, in spite of the wholescale 19th century alterations, let alone the modern office interventions. Also as you move up the staircase which is late 18th century, you suddenly encounter a startling remnant of early Georgian Dublin in the form of a single stretch of barley-sugared balustrading with Corinthian newel posts! Thankfully some good old-fashioned Georgian penny-pinching dictated its survival high up in the house.

    And as to the evidence of Dutch Billy, and a large one at that, surely such a fenestration pattern to the rear is suggesting something?

    (I thought the pink rather eye-catching).

    A house of this scale would not be out of place adjoining the tripartite gabled home of Speaker Foster that was once located right next door,

    #799208

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    @grahamh wrote:

    Great thread.

    One building I’m not sure about being a Dutch Billy is No. 32 directly across the road, prior to its bizarre Victorian – and probably later again – remodelling.

    A picture of the building, possibly from the late 18th century, shows it as having a flat parapet and small window opes precisely matching those of the upper two floors.

    Yet this house apparently dates from c. 1725,

    And as to the evidence of Dutch Billy, and a large one at that, surely such a fenestration pattern to the rear is suggesting something?

    A house of this scale would not be out of place adjoining the tripartite gabled home of Speaker Foster that was once located right next door,

    Graham:

    I think you’re spot on there on no. 32. I’m not familiar with the late 18th century print that you mentioned though, (unless it’s this one from ‘Lost Dublin’) and I hadn’t realized there were so many bits of the original structure left inside.

    Freddy O’Dwyer had speculated that Speker Foster’s house was ‘something of a hybrid, with gables on top of the parapet’ and that it was to the left of the building in your photograph, no 32 (where 29, 30 & 31 are now), having been knocked and ‘replaced before 1821’ But actually Speker Foster’s triple gabled house was ‘Lisle House’ at 33 Molesworth Street, and it’s still there, the big five bay house to the right of your no. 32. So the yellow rendered house that you’ve shown and the five bay brick ‘Georgian’ to the right are the two gabled houses shown in Penny Journal print reproduced in Freddy’s book.



    There are photographs from the early 1970s that show the original three perpendicular roofs to no. 33, that originally lined up with the three gables, peeping up behind the later Geoprgian parapet.

    The shameful gutting and removal of the roofs from no. 33 took place as recently as 1974, under the direction of a firm of architects who are still prominent in the city. The recent planning application (reg. no. 2775/07) by Benson & Forsyth to build a large office blook to the rear and further alter the two houses, totally underplayed the importance of the two houses.

    The planning application was refused by DCC following some withering comments by the conservation officer, the brilliant Clare Hogan again (she of the savage attack on the Clarance Hotel proposal, which unfortunately wasn’t listened to). I particularly liked her put down of the prestigeous Benson & Forsyth: ‘The National Gallery extension is not considered an acceptable precedent as it . . . is a major public institution’ and implied, this is an office block!

    If only someone had pointed this out to our ‘DARE TO BE THE BLOODY SAME’ friends out on the Merrion Road.

    Possibly the cruelist irony for the great ‘Dutch Billy’ that was no. 33 is that when it’s main staircase was ripped out in 1974, it was given a new home in 13 Henrietta Street!

    I don’t know if great staircases have souls, but this must be like taking a lifelong Everton fan and burying him in a Liverpool jersey.

    For the record, I very muched liked the Benson & Forsyth plan, except for the further alterations to the two houses, and I would be far more in favour of stuff like this, densifying up under-used sites in the city centre, than the random depositing of ‘urban’ centres on distant suburban and green field sites.

    #799209

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    I am in number 33 every fews days and there is very little orginal features left. the entrance hall retains some panelling and plaster work thats it

    #799210

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    Do any of the internal walls survive, or is it all open plan offices? What about the basement?

    #799211

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    They appealed that Molesworth St refusal, but then withdrew. Revised proposal is awaited.

    Feel free to return to Molesworth Street after this post!!

    @gunter wrote:

    completely forgot about those three houses on Haymarket. Weren’t they knocked for some appalling extension to Tully’s Tiles?

    I don’t remember them myself]
    Existing view looking west on Newmarket towards Chamber Street. The stone warehouses on the right form the west corner of Brabazon Place, opposite Gray’s on the east corner. The warehouses are derelict and look to be prep’d for re-development. They are 19th century replacements of the original gabled houses, but they are part of the story of the space and should be retained and worked into the redevelopment rather than bulldozed and forgotten.[/QUOTE]Yeah, the stone warehouse on the corner (‘the potato market’) is a protected structure and is being incorporated within approved Ref. 5410/04 (the other semi-demolished one beyond it is not protected & is not being kept), for a big scheme also including repair of the fine Georgian Brewer’s house round the corner, 10 Ardee Street – Image: http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/8113/sheehanimages8fe.png Although this scheme was approved 3 years ago, there’s no sign of anyting starting.

    If McCullough Mulvin have their way Newmarket will look quite different in the future (go to ‘view all projects’ and ‘masterplanning’): http://www.mcculloughmulvin.com/pages/moviepg.html

    The early-18th century gabled house on Montpelier Hill deserves an appearance in the thread.

    #799212

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    Reluctant as an alien (!) to intrude on this debate, but doesn’t the side of M’worth St opposite the Freemasons’ Hall (what an Aladdin’s Cave that is!) provide somrthing of a template for when the 80s (?) bland monstrosity at no. 14 is eventually knocked?
    The newbuild B+S scheme looks very good and looks as though it would provide an internal court/garden to the rear of nos. 32 and 33, which they should leave well alone or, shock-horror, restore as part of a pro bono gesture. (What’s that? says the company accountant.)

    #799213

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    What is up with all of the images not working (apart from the old Blackpitts)?

    #799214

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    Is the black and white building to the left of the Newmarket image Art Deco? Also, what is the interesting-looking tower peaking up above the awful utilitarian lamppost?

    #799215

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    It’s Art Deco-ish, but I don’t know the date. I suspect gunter might?

    Interestingly, although it appears to be used as a warehouse, one Sunday a few months ago while I was giving a friend a guided bike tour of parts of the city we noticed that it seems to be some sort of church for Africans- families were coming out of a ‘goods entrance’ in the most fantastic outfits, and the kids were running around the square. One of the few signs of real life in that part of town (I don’t count tyre skid marks).

    #799216

    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster
    • Offline

    @devin wrote:

    The early-18th century gabled house on Montpelier Hill deserves an appearance in the thread.

    Someone made a huge effort restoring that a few years ago – my business partner’s house is also in the picture so am very familiar with that street – some lovely period houses on it

    #799217

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    Yes absolutely. The render around the opes has clearly been touched up following the insertion of what are perfect reproduction windows. What a gem of a house.

    Though, eh, how do you get into it? Is it amalgamated with an adjoining house? Is it that little far door that’s actually in the other house?!

    #799218

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    The houses on Montpelier would be immensely improved if either the cement render was removed or they were painted in almost any colour other than grey (and the trailing wires were removed, but I’ve given up commenting on that).

    #799219

    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster
    • Offline

    Graham – its the little door

    #799220

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    ooooh – I want it! 🙂

    #799221

    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster
    • Offline

    It’s a big house – great backyard on that side.. slope down to back of garage on Parkgate street

    #799222

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    What a weird, unexpected street Montpelier Hill is.

    #799223

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    Cool. It looks quite big alright. You can easily see how everything else grew up around it too.

    Thanks for that info gunter about Molesworth Street. Yes the print I referred to was that Penny Journal one you posted (I just couldn’t be bothered scanning it lol).

    It would certainly explain a fact from Lost Dublin I found hard to reconcile with the street: when it was suggested that three c. 1800 houses now occupy the site of Speaker Foster’s house. It seemed excessive. Yes poor old Lisle House, utterly gutted and with a flat roof now too. I’d no idea it was Foster’s house – in hindsight it matches perfectly.

    It was also a coincidence that the yellow building happens to roughly match that adjoining Foster’s in the picture, hence the confusion.

    Now that we know the yellow building is indeed that smaller gabled house pictured above, as far as I know the panelling inside survives to the side entrance hall in the building, which would match with the location of the doorcase seen above. I must check that out. Out of interest, how did you know Lisle House was Foster’s house, gunter?

    #799224

    Anonymous
    • Offline

    @grahamh wrote:

    Yes the print I referred to was that Penny Journal one you posted (I just couldn’t be bothered scanning it lol).
    Out of interest, how did you know Lisle House was Foster’s house, gunter?

    You just couldn’t be bothered scanning the single most important print of Dutch Billys in existence! You’d rather hold discussions on coffee emporia!

    We’ll move on.

    On the Speaker Foster’s house, when I saw the1970s photograph with the three roof ridges peeping up over the parapet, the penny dropped.

    For a bit of confirmation, the disposition of the windows on the back elevation of no. 32 is strikingly similar to the arrangement on the front elevation as shown in the Penny Journal print, which is the point that you were making at the start, surely no. 32 is a gabled house.

    My render skills are primitive, but one of these days I want to have a go at creating a decent render of this stretch of Molesworth Street as it would have been originally using the the surviving fabric as a template.

    missarchi could probably knock this up in a couple of hours.

Viewing 20 posts - 41 through 60 (of 715 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Latest News