Summary
A complete reinforced-concrete warehouse of 1911 by T E Smith and Son of Bolton, with engineers L G Mouchel and partners.
Reasons for Designation
58 Richmond Street, Manchester, a complete reinforced-concrete manufactory of 1911, is listed at Grade II for the following principal reasons:
* Technological innovation: of the complete reinforced-concrete frame, of which this is still an early example and which varies in detail from other early Hennebique frames;
* Design interest: in the expression of the frame, use of reinforced concrete wall panels and the application of typical stone detailing to the new material, and for the raked and glazed rear elevation that maximises light without affecting adjacent properties;
* Age and rarity: as a rare example of a complete surviving pre-1914 reinforced-concrete frame both in this region and nationally;
* Group value: with the brick textile workshop opposite (NHLE 1270835) and for its contribution to the urban environment of the industrial city.
History
The building is dated 1911 and when built it was abutted to either side by residential properties, two of which it replaced. It was built for the executors of Joseph Nall and intended to be let by floor as textile workshops. Instead it was let entire; the first recorded tenant (in a 1913 street directory) is Anthony Bland, a manufacturer of boot-lining textiles who remained in occupation for many years. By 1948 (Epoch a5 First Edition National Grid map) the adjacent buildings had been demolished, leaving No. 58 with cleared land to either side; the site of No. 60 now forms a small car park to the building and the fire escape to the W is an addition. By 1962 the building was used as offices. The steel windows at first and second floor are probably original but the ground-floor window openings have been partially infilled and timber windows inserted. In the basement the front windows also appear to be replacements, while the rear windows have been bricked up. The current staircase to the upper floors appears to be a modern replacement but occupies the original position. The original staircase to the basement has been blocked and a new stair cut through the ground floor slab in the NE corner.
François Hennebique first patented shear reinforcement to concrete beams in the UK in 1892 and had built an estimated 100 reinforced-concrete framed buildings in England by 1908. 1908 saw the start of construction of the first major English building using the Kahn system from America, which was also Manchester’s first important reinforced-concrete building, the YMCA (qv). Considere’s system was first used in 1909 and a dozen or so buildings had by then used the Coignet system. This building appears on the list of Hennebique-Mouchel licences for 1910, although the location is given as Trafford Park. Only around 25 per cent of early concrete-framed buildings in England are thought also to have had concrete walling in preference to infill or an external skin of other materials.
Details
Warehouse of 1911, by T E Smith and Son of Bolton with engineers L G Mouchel and partners.
MATERIALS: reinforced-concrete frame with ferro-concrete wall panels and roof, with rendered brick infill to the side returns.
PLAN: basement with piano-nobile and two storeys above, becoming less deep at the rear of the upper floors, and four bays wide.
EXTERIOR: situated on the N side of Richmond Street and standing prominently in the street scene with no adjacent buildings.
The S front is painted light grey and comprises a regular grid of five concrete columns treated as pilasters with plinth, first-floor band, second-floor beam, cornice and parapet. The outer columns are wider, with plaques that are hollow-angled at the corners running from first to second floor. Above ground floor all the columns are hollow-chamfered with tapering stops to each floor, and at street level each column has a very slightly larger square base. The first-floor band and cornice are both continuous cavetto mouldings, punctuated by tapering capitals to each column and (at cornice only), integrated ‘keystones’ to each window opening. The parapet is recessed slightly in (from left) bays 1 and 4 with a central segmental arch spanning bays 2 and 3 with the date 1911. The entrance is in bay 1, a wide, fielded door with glazed panels to the right (now boarded), a slight horizontal canopy over and semi-circular arched window opening above, now blocked with two inserted square timber windows. The other ground-floor windows are all inserted timber horizontal centre-pivot windows with infilled arches above. Steel windows at first and second floor are all 16-paned, with segmental-arched heads at second floor. Ferro-concrete wall panels sit below the windows. Basement windows are flat-headed timber casements.
The left and right returns (both painted) display the structural frame with rendered brick infill. From the top of the ground floor the tops of the side elevations slope upwards from the rear wall towards the front; on the left elevation, this slope meets the vertical rear wall of the second floor about 3m from the front elevation, while on the right it continues through the second floor, reaching roof level 1m from the front elevation. At the rear the basement windows are blocked and the ground floor has full-height 20-pane steel windows. The rear wall of the first floor is a sloping roof with bitumen applied, the upper half glazed between the concrete beams. At the left this continues to roof level but in the three bays to the right the second-floor rear wall is vertical with unpainted concrete frame and wall panels above and below the 8-pane windows.
INTERIOR: an exposed grid of concrete beams and ceilings showing shuttering marks, and exposed brick infill to side walls. The ground floor has a slope below the rear windows allowing the basement to borrow light. The basement has a cross-corridor but otherwise the floor-plan is open, with the exception of the stair in the SW corner.
EXCLUSIONS: Pursuant to s.1 (5A) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (‘the Act’) it is declared that the 20th century external fire escape is not of special architectural or historic interest.
