Ooh. Smoke and mirrors ...Indeed. It got me thinking about drifting smoke as well - perhaps they'd deflect that too?
Ooh. Smoke and mirrors ...Indeed. It got me thinking about drifting smoke as well - perhaps they'd deflect that too?
I think you’re probably right. I’m a bit tired and posted without thinking about it properly.Unfortunately (from my work) it's not plausible at all. Sound deflects / diffracts around barriers, light doesn't bend significantly in public health or nuisance terms. I reckon the light screens are definitely the most likely answer.
Actually a sheet of black paper or cardboard would keep the light out, but it wouldn't survive the first shower of rain! I think they are robustly boarded to withstand the wind and so that they don't rot away in a couple of years. As I said earlier, I think the railway created the nuisance and was persuaded to deal with the problem by structures on its own land, which would have been the easiest way out for them.They still seem very substantial just for keeping light out though when something could easily be attached to the windows themselves.
Except that it's a bit of a coincidence that the screens mounted on the posts (and their shadows) map quite precisely onto some of the windows (and none are not associated with a window.) Also the positions of the shadows relative to the house wall and the windows show the spacing from the wall - all too far away to be anything structural I think.an afterthought to this, the photos date from 1931. According to http://www.toffeetown.org.uk/tales/title/Rileys-Toffees/post/4696 the Riley Toffee factory was damaged in a major fire in 1918. I wonder if these were emergency wall supports after a section of roof had gone? Post-war, repairs may have taken a long time and when they finally did happen the timbers were taken by the locals for use as firewood?
Pure conjecture, but seems possible
an afterthought to this, the photos date from 1931. According to http://www.toffeetown.org.uk/tales/title/Rileys-Toffees/post/4696 the Riley Toffee factory was damaged in a major fire in 1918. I wonder if these were emergency wall supports after a section of roof had gone? Post-war, repairs may have taken a long time and when they finally did happen the timbers were taken by the locals for use as firewood?
Pure conjecture, but seems possible
Except that it's a bit of a coincidence that the screens mounted on the posts (and their shadows) map quite precisely onto some of the windows (and none are not associated with a window.) Also the positions of the shadows relative to the house wall and the windows show the spacing from the wall - all too far away to be anything structural I think.
p.s.and re some of the structures being in the lane - sorry, I missed this at first reading - I think you are seeing the shadows of the supports on the side of the house.
I have found another picture of the goods yard from a different angle, stated circa 1927.
The picture is from the Pennine Heritage website and the rights holder is quoted as 'PHDA - Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway Society'.
The basic edifices can just be seen in the background.
I cannot spot any obvious illumination sources in the goods yard.
So four years earlier, the buildings have windows. No structures, so they're not an attempt to restrict light access
I reckon 2 poles are visible, the right-hand one having the hint of a diagonal brace (plus what maybe a gutter downpipe between them) The blinding boards don't show up though, so perhaps they have rotted or dropped off by now?Pretty sure I can make out at least one pole in that photo. Less sure about boards though.
I too think they are supports... but for the poles themselves, which were erected to hold the window shields up.Looking at the maps again, I misidentified the toffee factory, but I still am certain they are some kind of support structures.
Surely either shutters or curtains would have been both less expensive and more straightforward to install? They would also be in the total control of the occupiers.The 1927 picture shows the houses at a higher level than those on the opposite side of the yard - given that it's an east facing wall, my guess would be that the screens are there to block out the sunlight at dawn in summer. If you're a factory worker who starts their shift between 7 and 8, you don't really want to be woken by daylight at 5am when it's difficult to get back to sleep.
It would be a bit more reassuring if he had got the station name right (unless it is an admission that it is only loosely based on the station) A nice model, all the same...It seems someone has built a layout roughly based on St Paul's station, and has even included the row of houses in question!
https://www.scalefour.org/scalefournorth/2016/halifaxkingcross/Halifax-King-Cross-4.html
If we could track down this chap perhaps he might have come across an answer in planning the layout?
It would be a bit more reassuring if he had got the station name right (unless it is an admission that it is only loosely based on the station) A nice model, all the same...
Indeed an awesome lot of work!I believe it's only loosely based on St Paul's rather than a slavishly accurate rendition. He's clearly put a lot of work into it though, so I assume he did a lot of research into the area.
Presented by Steve Hall
Halifax King Cross is a first attempt at P4, and took ten years to build.
Based on the Halifax High Level Railway, it represents the terminus the line intended to have, rather than the one the line's cost of construction permitted in reality.
This post has made me change my mind!I once interviewed an old retired station porter who told me that one day, some time in the 1920's he was told to call at a particular house (an end terrace whose gable end faced the line) that backed on to the station junction.
His job was to collect the 'light of day money' from the occupiers. He had never heard of such a thing and thought it was some sort of prank. However an official railway form/receipt was produced and the householder was not surprised by his visit, 'oh they have sent you have they'.
It was 1 shilling for the 12 months so the railway company was not exactly exploiting the arrangement.
I assume that although everyone has a right to light they don't necessarily have a right to some sort of view that could be blocked by later development although how this legal arrangement was achieved I do not know. The property did post date the railway. Perhaps that, or a variation of it is whats going on in the picture in question?
This seems the most plausible explanation. Landowner sees windows being opened on neighbouring property and anticipates future problems. Goes to property owner(s) and says: "Either sign this paper permitting future development on my land or I'm putting up screening which will block your light". Or something similar.