Georgian or not so (original) Georgian... help :)

[atlasfever]

The weird door/structure has no connection with the rest of the flat.

At the moment, the kitchen floor has a cheap laminate wood floor (think Ikea + 12 years use), and the rest of the kitchen, bathrooms are in terrible condition.

My goal is to do a conservation mode refurb of the whole flat (clean/repair/de-paint) the cornicing back to life, fix the wood, the shutters, replaster walls, etc. The only issue that I see is this structure, as I don't see the point of investing so much to end up with a huge item that is impractical. I am hoping that I can convince the CO that I'd like to put georgian doors (either reclaimed if possible or 'new to look original'), and bring back the georgian air with the rest of the flat. I can set up a pre-application visit for £200, by a CO. Just afraid he may not agree
A.

 

[Feltwell]

They charge for a pre-application visit? Is that something specific to your council?

LBC application was free the last time I did one, as was the pre-application advice.

 

[atlasfever]

That's London £150 for paper pre-application, or £200 with visit.

 

[Feltwell]

Not nice. Does anyone else on here have to pay for a CO's opinion prior to submitting for LBC?

 

[Nigel Watts]

I am not entirely clear if your main objection is aesthetic or practical, and if the latter what exactly you feel is impractical about it.

The semi-circular headed door appears to be of normal width and close to normal height, but I can see that the way it opens into the kitchen could be awkward. If your CO wants you to keep the structure intact how about rehanging the door so that it opens instead into the other room?

 

[atlasfever]

Nigel,

Fair enough: The structure itself is not that unattractive to me (the arch, details), but the opening is barely over 6ft (I'm 6'2), and from such large ceiling heights, it's well, just not logical to me. So, really, it's the mousehole door that is silly to me. Secondly, I really appreciate the Georgian period and this structure just isn't in keeping with it (again, the door). But, anyway, lots of good feedback here. Thanks to everyone.

I hope that I could make a good case to a potential CO: Refurbing the walls, bring back the cornice, removing a false ceiling to expose the original cornice in another room, improving the archi-shutters, etc, etc and installing either reclaimed or original wedding doors in its place, plus chandeliers. Maybe all the positives will win over the removal of this item. Wouldn't that be a great day!

A

 

[Flyfisher]

That's London £150 for paper pre-application, or £200 with visit.

:shock: :shock: :shock:

I think we should have this thread deleted as quickly as possible before other COs get the same idea.

I'd be broke if I had shelled out £200 every time our CO has visited - the tea and biscuits is bad enough. :wink:

Seriously though, I appreciate that councils have to pay COs and other listed building admin costs but I think that's only fair given the time and money that listed building owners expend on looking after the nation's heritage assets for them.

 

[Nigel Watts]

Buildings and how they are used change over time. It is very un Georgian to have a kitchen on the piano nobile, opening into the main reception room with large double doors whose original purpose would have been to allow the circulation of guests between the different reception rooms. Kitchens would of course have been in the basement and hidden from all but the servants. You could argue that the later door, apart from being an interesting memory of some previous use, does have a certain logic in the way it separates off the anachronistic kitchen and prevents it from intruding rudely into the living space.

 

[LadyArowana]

Buildings and how they are used change over time. It is very un Georgian to have a kitchen on the piano nobile, opening into the main reception room with large double doors whose original purpose would have been to allow the circulation of guests between the different reception rooms. Kitchens would of course have been in the basement and hidden from all but the servants. You could argue that the later door, apart from being an interesting memory of some previous use, does have a certain logic in the way it separates off the anachronistic kitchen and prevents it from intruding rudely into the living space.

Our kitchen was indeed originally in the basement ( now moved to ground floor ). All that remains is the surround where the fire would have been. I would like to remove the cupboard on the left side and restore the stonework, but that will depend on getting permission to move the boiler to the newer addition on the back of the house. I bet there is a basement flat in the OP's building that has some vestige of the kitchen and servants area.

 

[JoceAndChris]

That's pretty stonework LadyA.

Atlasfever clearly loves the Georgian period and in my rather harsh opinion ought to look for a flat that is purely Georgian, if such a thing exists, or a flat where it's all been ripped out and he can put it back just as he likes. To buy a flat where you don't like the dominant characteristic, where the building is listed, seems illogical to me. I know we all seek to change aspects of our properties, but in general the philosophy on here is to love them warts and all, and try to make sense of later additions, which can be extremely difficult. Thinking more about that feature I think it would look better wood grained and with the room around oak panelled, which doesn't fit the era but which would make sense of a very dominant and imposing wall and door. As for being too tall for the period door, no sympathy whatsoever, don't buy a period house then. One of our doors is just 5ft, which happens to be perfect for me, but my husband has learned to duck. The attitude " this doesn't suit me, and so I'll rip it out" is the reason why precious little of our heritage remains.

 

[Lime]

Hear! Hear!

 

[atlasfever]

Well, I was wondering when it might start getting personal joking.

I totally take on board the previous poster's views -- fair enough. I suppose there are purists, idealists, maybe zealots, and finally, schmucks like me trying to figure it out. When I first saw Georgians, I didn't appreciate them, but now adore them for their simplicity. I suppose I've made compromises on many aspects and accepted that I shouldn't change or expect such a period flat to fit me, but in a way, vice versa. And, I suppose we all have our range and limitations. For me, radiators, single pane windows, odd walls, etc are all lovingly fun, but perhaps bending down before every snack visit happens to be unenjoyable. To each their own, in the end.

But, again, great feedback. Appreciate all of your time to respond. A.

 

[Feltwell]

That's pretty stonework LadyA.

Atlasfever clearly loves the Georgian period and in my rather harsh opinion ought to look for a flat that is purely Georgian, if such a thing exists, or a flat where it's all been ripped out and he can put it back just as he likes. To buy a flat where you don't like the dominant characteristic, where the building is listed, seems illogical to me. I know we all seek to change aspects of our properties, but in general the philosophy on here is to love them warts and all, and try to make sense of later additions, which can be extremely difficult. Thinking more about that feature I think it would look better wood grained and with the room around oak panelled, which doesn't fit the era but which would make sense of a very dominant and imposing wall and door. As for being too tall for the period door, no sympathy whatsoever, don't buy a period house then. One of our doors is just 5ft, which happens to be perfect for me, but my husband has learned to duck. The attitude " this doesn't suit me, and so I'll rip it out" is the reason why precious little of our heritage remains.

Whilst I broadly agree Joce, there has to be some leeway when it comes to removing later alterations - otherwise many on this forum would be preserving their 1970's aluminium double glazing & avocado bath suites, 1980's swirly artex and (heaven forbid) UPVC windows & doors. Aesthetically that doorway conversion of Altlasfever's - if it is such a thing - divides opinion. The door size is just a contributing factor, not a dominant one - I quite agree that if it was an original feature or even an old alteration then you just live with it.

As such if (and only if) it is a recent addition then I don't see any harm in taking it out, LBC permitting.

 

[JoceAndChris]

If I were atlas fever's CO, or working at EH, and that feature proves to be 1950 onwards, and he showed me plans for some really wonderful and befitting early 1800s double doors, then I'd back down and approve plans. But if there's doubt over its time and purpose then I'd feel reluctant to give LBC. The real CO may feel totally differently.

It isn't the age of something, it's the thing. It's whether it's historically interesting, whether it contributes to the story of the building, whether it harmonises with its surroundings, whether it's rare, what its condition is like, whether it would make people, in general, stop and say "Oh! How interesting!", and also, equally crucially, what is proposed to replace that thing. If well proportioned 1980s wood panelling is ripped out of a Georgian house and the walls Fred Flinstoned with the dreaded naked stone then I'm sorry but the inhabitants should be booted out and the property given to someone more deserving. Artex and UPVC and dilapidated plastic conservatories and avocado bathroom suites are neither unusual nor contributing significantly to the history of the building, or the aesthetic appeal of our environment - and nor are they likely to last as long as a well crafted piece of panelled wood. If you read through all the criteria of why a building gets listed on the EH website you won't find mention of those things, and frankly, I don't understand why they are brought into discussions on PPUKe time and again.

On top of that it should be borne in mind that alterations are less controversial when they seek to add to a building rather than take away. An additional kitchen added on in an extension is less problematic than smashing up the existing structure and historic features of the room.

 

[JoceAndChris]

When I first saw Georgians, I didn't appreciate them, but now adore them for their simplicity.

Sir John Soane
Robert Adam
Thomas Chippendale
Thomas Sheraton
Nicholas Hawksmoor
William Kent
John Wood the Elder and John Wood the Younger etc etc

Where's simplicity?

Here's a description by EH of my house, which is a servant's cottage


"PLAN: Rectangular with polygonal bay to the west, bowed porch to the east, canted bay to the
south added in the 1930s, and narrow lean-to projection to the north added in the early C20.
EXTERIOR: The cottage has one storey, a half-cellar and attic. It has regular fenestration
consisting of six over six pane horned sash windows with timber glazing bars, probably dating
to the second half of the C19. The east elevation has a central, bowed porch with stone
castellations. The C20 shallow-arched, half-glazed, double-leaf door has an overlight and
flanking windows with diamond-leaded glazing. The bays either side are lit by a sash window,
and there is a central, flat-roofed dormer window in the attic. The west elevation has a central
polygonal bay lit by three windows, under a conical roof. The bays either side have one sash
window, and the half-cellar is lit by a pair of casements in the central bay and a small window
on the left. The canted bay on the south elevation has a window on each side. There are two
rendered ridge stacks on the main block and one on the south extension.
INTERIOR: The interior has survived largely unaltered and retains almost all of its original
joinery, fireplaces and other fittings, including service bells. The stone-flagged entrance hall
leads through a shallow-ached doorway with the original double-leaf door, half-glazed with
diamond timber glazing bars, into the central hall. This is paved in Ancaster stone, scored to
form a diamond pattern, and provides access to the west-facing room and, through pairs of
semicircular arched openings with a simple roll moulding, to two rooms on the north and south
sides. The south-west room leads into the south extension added in the 1930s. The
reception rooms have delicate coving and skirting boards, wide timber floorboards, and
four-panelled doors. The windows have panelling underneath, panelled soffits and jambs, and
retain their shutters and central bars. The principal west-facing room that occupies the
polygonal bay has a wide arched recess in the south wall. This room and the south-west
room have reeded fireplaces with brass roundels, and surrounds and hearths of Derbyshire
fossiliferous marble. The two rooms on the north side have smaller fireplaces, one reeded
and the other with guilloche jambs, and both with diamond grates, moulded timber surrounds
and stone hearths. From the central hall, a half-spiral stone stair leads to the extensive, brick
vaulted cellar which provides access to the stone-lined well, and has alcoves for storage and
the remnants of a C19 range. There is a narrow timber stair leading to the attic in which the
original roof, with principal rafters and purlins, is exposed.
SUBSIDIARY FEATURES: The ha-ha on the west side of the cottage is laid in herringbone
red brick"

Georgian architecture is many things but it isn't simple - it's the late 20th C we have to thank for things being as plain as a pikestaff.

 

[Feltwell]

If I were atlas fever's CO, or working at EH, and that feature proves to be 1950 onwards, and he showed me plans for some really wonderful and befitting early 1800s double doors, then I'd back down and approve plans. But if there's doubt over its time and purpose then I'd feel reluctant to give LBC. The real CO may feel totally differently.

It isn't the age of something, it's the thing. It's whether it's historically interesting, whether it contributes to the story of the building, whether it harmonises with its surroundings, whether it's rare, what its condition is like, whether it would make people, in general, stop and say "Oh! How interesting!", and also, equally crucially, what is proposed to replace that thing. If well proportioned 1980s wood panelling is ripped out of a Georgian house and the walls Fred Flinstoned with the dreaded naked stone then I'm sorry but the inhabitants should be booted out and the property given to someone more deserving. Artex and UPVC and dilapidated plastic conservatories and avocado bathroom suites are neither unusual nor contributing significantly to the history of the building, or the aesthetic appeal of our environment - and nor are they likely to last as long as a well crafted piece of panelled wood. If you read through all the criteria of why a building gets listed on the EH website you won't find mention of those things, and frankly, I don't understand why they are brought into discussions on PPUKe time and again.

On top of that it should be borne in mind that alterations are less controversial when they seek to add to a building rather than take away. An additional kitchen added on in an extension is less problematic than smashing up the existing structure and historic features of the room.

Good points. It's "shades of grey" again in so many cases though - where an addition of whatever age is a positive or negative contribution is in many cases hard to define, and is where the CO's opinion comes in. Doesn't mean they always get it right though, if there is any such thing as right!

 

[Lime]

Hear! Hear!

You tell it as it is JoceAndChris.

The modern version of "Victorian" or "Georgian" bears almost no resemblance of what I saw as a young man.
(I was always interested in old houses and fortunate to be able to explore them in their entirety top to bottom and in intricate detail after they had been bombed out or pulled down.)

Old houses were filled with diverse colour and fabric as well as a huge variety of furniture.
Almost no interior resembled another.

 

[Zebra]

This is such a great and intersting thread! I'm a beginner in this area, so hardly feel qualifed to comment, but I love this:

It isn't the age of something, it's the thing. It's whether it's historically interesting, whether it contributes to the story of the building, whether it harmonises with its surroundings, whether it's rare, what its condition is like, whether it would make people, in general, stop and say "Oh! How interesting!", and also, equally crucially, what is proposed to replace that thing.

Just to put the opposite point of view, I myself have sought opinion on here as to whether I am doing wrong in not reinstating things exactly as they originally were in my house, and have been advised "It's your house" and "a home should live with its inhabitants just as much as its inhabitants should live with it." However, those views were with the proviso that any changes made should be reversible, whereas in this case we're talking about destroying something.
Might I put forward the much-quoted view that you just live with something for a while before deciding to destroy it? Many find that when they first buy their period home they want to rip something out, whereas after living with it for a while it becomes loved as part of the place's character. Mistakes can be made in the first few months of owning a property, before a new owner learns to appreciate all its quirks!

 

[AMc]

For me, radiators, single pane windows, odd walls, etc are all lovingly fun, but perhaps bending down before every snack visit happens to be unenjoyable. To each their own, in the end.
.

It isn't necessarily what you want to hear but you will get used to it very quickly. Most of my doors are 6' high (with high ceilings) and I'm 6'2". You bang your head a few times for a few days and then you learn to duck instinctively. The only time I bang my head now is when ducking my head into one room from another then straightening up - something I do less than I used to.

I was told by the previous owner that most of the doors have full height lintels but I've never investigated - rebuilding the door frames, replastering & redecorating every room and finding several "Georgian appropriate" doors is low on my list. I suspect she knew full well that the frames had been adjusted to suit a job lot of stripped doors they acquired when they did the first renovation but I have no proof of that .

 

[biffvernon]

But, anyway, lots of good feedback here. Thanks to everyone.

Ok, so no more posts (or contacting a CO) till after you have scratched off some paint, counted the paint layers, got down to the wood and discovered whether it is mdf, or a close-grained old growth pine.