RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Wiltshire => Topic started by: toby webb on Friday 26 February 16 11:50 GMT (UK)
-
Leaving Highworth, this Terrace is to be seen on the left of the road to Lechlade. According to the summary book of the 1911 census there were 6 dwellings there. The 25 inch O.S. of 1922 shows clearly how it was divided and all are different. The sizes seem to tie up well with the number of rooms each house had.
However, if this Terrace is observed today, house numbers go from 15 - 19 inc. Google photos that are available to me don't appear to show where stone work might have been altered to say fill in a doorway. Highworth is too far off for me to have a closer look but one of our readers may know the Terrace well and be able to comment. I should be most grateful. Thanks, Toby.
-
Looking at it on Googlemaps Street View, I would say the terrace goes to number 20, and has 6 dwellings there.
20 is a slightly different design, but is still attached to number 19, so still part of the terrace?
-
Thanks lizdb for your help. Cannot agree with you however as the house numbered 20 has completely different roof line and widow jambs. The O.S. map also shows that building next to the block of 6 dwellings. I feel there is some other explanation. T
-
I haven't got the 1922 map.
Can you put a scan of the small relevant bit on here?
Does that show 7 dwellings joined to each other then? 6 in a straight terrace and one of a different design but still joined on?
-
This should be a link to the map http://maps.nls.uk/view/106026118#zoom=5&lat=10061&lon=5370&layers=BT
-
This should be a link to the map http://maps.nls.uk/view/106026118#zoom=5&lat=10061&lon=5370&layers=BT
Doesn't seem to work.
THanks for trying though!
-
This should be a link to the map http://maps.nls.uk/view/106026118#zoom=5&lat=10061&lon=5370&layers=BT
Doesn't seem to work.
THanks for trying though!
Sorry - the link works for me
-
That's strange - working now!!
So, there is a BIG building (presumably now demolished and made way for the garage) and then 7 dwellings in the terrace on the map.
And looking at the terrace now, there is 15,16,17,18,19,20 ie 6 dwellings joined together.
And (from map) from left to right, they are medium size, slightly narrower, slightly wider, slightly wider with porch, wider, very narrow, very wide.
Off to look at googlemaps again!
-
I think the properties to the north of the passageway between 16 and 17 are the same on the 1922 map and Google street view so any changes are to the south of the passageway.
I do wonder if the southern end property was demolished to make way for the development to the south. This end of gable end of the terrace is painted or rendered
-
Looking at Street view, from left to right, they are Medium, wide, narrower, narrower with porch, wider, narrow, very wide
The big contrast is the one second from the left. The map shows it to be fairly narrow, similar to the one to its left. But on street view it is a double fronted place, much wider than the one to the left.
-
Map has 3 to the right of passageway - so does street view (18,19,20)
Map has 4 to the left of passageway - street view has 15, 16, 17
I still think number 17 (now double fronted) was possibly originally 2 narrower dwellings?
-
The big contrast is the one second from the left. The map shows it to be fairly narrow, similar to the one to its left. But on street view it is a double fronted place, much wider than the one to the left.
But if you remove the southern property the proportions of the remaining ones seem to fit
Also rear garden boundary of the southern one is smaller than the gardens of the terrace to north and this is not reflected in the present google aerial map
-
OK Kay, I get it now
Yes, certainly a strong possibility that the first one was demolished with the other building next to it.
-
I agree that the 2 properties to the right of the passageway are unchanged and feel this is probably true about the first property at the other end of the block. Changes seem to have been somewhere
between the second house and the passageway.
I don't feel that any part of the block was demolished as all the jambs & lintels are the same. The rendering on the gable end probably became necesary to maintain weather proofing when the large building ( now garage) was pulled down.
Thank you all for your useful contributions. T
-
I think I had missed your point Kay99 and now am very much convinced you have got it right. Everthing else fits. All we need now is a resident of Highworth saying he saw it being done. T.
-
Hmm I'm now wavering!
Currently we have 6 properties - 15,16,17,18,19,20.
But - google earth shows 7 chimneys!. One on the larger property (No 20), then working in from both ends there is one at each end on the two narrower properties (15 and 19) , which leaves 4 chimneys (evenly spread) for the properties 16, 17 and 18. So I am still considering the idea that current 16 was originally 2 narrower properties as being a possibility!
-
One of the terrace was sold in 1904
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/rd/d4e7a3c7-16c7-4fd4-968d-ffa84076c14c
Don't know if the record has any more details or plans of the terrace.
-
Maybe it's worth contacting a local society http://www.highworthhistoricalsociety.co.uk/photographs.html Or you could print out the old map and modern map at the same scale and overlay them :)
-
Some good ideas here. I think a trip to Chippenham will have to be undertaken. The 1904 sale also seems to be of interest.
-
Acknowledging that there are bound to be distorsions in measurements taken from aerial views, I have however taken dimensions from the 1922 map and from modern Google.
If the first house is ignored, then the gap to Station Road as a ratio of remaining Terrace length in 1922 is close to modern measurements. If that house is not ignored the ratio is very different. Distorsions would not account for that.
I think this fully supports Kay99 's suggestion that the first property was demolished.
Thank you all for your help. Toby.
-
Great - Glad my former existence as a planner has some use ;D
Kay
-
A set back.
I have just noticed that the Terrace ends of the block are identical. If the first dwelling had been demolished, would anyone have gone to the trouble & expense of transferring the brick ornamentaion?
Back to square 1? T.
-
It is possible the terrace had two additions after it was first built - The house now attached to the north and a house which was subsequently attached to the southern end of the terrace.
The addition of a property on the southern end would have made it much easier for it to be subsequently demolished.
-
You may have a point there kay99. Ceertainly the bricks at the edge of No.19 look very different from the other end of the Terrrace and perhaps not so old. I am planning to go to Chippenham and shall see what I can find there. T
-
I went to Highworth last week to see if I could finally put this matter to bed.
I was told in the garage next to the Terrace that there had indeed been another house on the south end and that it had been demolished to make some extra space for the garage. They also had an aerial photograph prior to demolition. This house was of similar proportions to the block and was likely to have been considered as no.1, Westrop Terrace. The block itself only ever consisted of 5 houses and the stone & brick ends confirm this.
RIP. Toby.
-
Brilliant ;D
Kay