Nash's Fish Restaurant and the street with no name

LS1 · Post by **LS1** » Thu 07 Jun, 2012 1:08 am

Leodian wrote: LS1 wrote: Jogon wrote: GeordxHere's a (hopefully) interesting scan, taken from the 1847 OS with dotted line amendments by C A Lupton.This shows the propose (and subsequently adopted) adoption of a "New Briggate" taking a continuation of Briggate across the Headrow with a gradual right sweep to join North St/Vicar Ln.The plan shows a reservoir at the top of Harrison St & one on Merrion St serving (I assume) the Lupton Cloth Works, now Grand Arcade next to the (then) Grammar School.I can't make out what your street is, was. My book says of the Luptons that they:.. "redeemed the firm's fortunes by laying out Merrion St in 1830 as a residential development adjacent to the cloth works".. Jogon, Where it says Stone Yard, above it are 4 clear squares. Between the top left corner of Stone Yard and the bottom left square of the four is the entrance to the modern yard of New Briggate. Perhaps one of the more ofay people here can do an overlay to google earth? Hi LS1With respect, my interpretation is that the street in question will be where the narrow 'roadlike' strip with trees lining it is, as that seems to fit very well with the modern layout of roads there.The map shows steps at St John's. I wonder if the steps that are currently there on New Briggate are the original steps? I think its just a little further south than those trees if the map is in fact to scale. The older buildings that front onto Merrion street were narrower it would seem in those days. In fact if you look at the buildings that front onto merrion street to the left and below is another long (east to west) building which are the ones in question.If it was where you refer to it would be roughly where relics records is now and I'm pretty sure that they chap who owns it wouldn't be too happy about that.As I say, an overlay would be good, and there is an assumption that the map is to scale.

somme1916 · Post by **somme1916** » Fri 15 Jun, 2012 3:24 pm

I have just returned from a visit to the city centre.I ventured up the street with no name.The official street sign says No's 51,53,55 New Briggate.I entered Nash's by the rear door and was delighted to be able to have takeaway fish 'n chips for £4.30....very nice they were too.In fact,you can actually eat your takeaway portion inside,as opposite the counter and range was a small room with buffets and seats for you to take advantage.A smaller portion of same could be obtained for £3.25 if required.All this,I thought,was extremely reasonable,bearing in mind the quality,that you are in the centre,can eat sat down etc etcExcellent-I will be going again.Of that,there is no doubt !Access to the main dining room can also be afforded via this entrance.

Jogon · Post by **Jogon** » Fri 15 Jun, 2012 6:52 pm

uncle mick wrote: [Geordie-exThere's an even better photo on some Leeds Bus/flickr web site but I've forgotten where. Soz. Is this it ?http://www.flickr.com/photos/thanoz/506 ... /UncMSorry just found this - no that's not the one. It is on a Leeds Bus Flickr group. Philld kindly sent me the link, but I keep losing them. It was photo'd from jnctn North St/Vic Ln looking up New Briggte. [Edit] Oooh somme that sounds lovely and way nicer than my fish past sarnie lunch

Leodian · Post by **Leodian** » Fri 15 Jun, 2012 7:08 pm

Jogon wrote: uncle mick wrote: [Geordie-exThere's an even better photo on some Leeds Bus/flickr web site but I've forgotten where. Soz. Is this it ?http://www.flickr.com/photos/thanoz/5067485854/ UncMSorry just found this - no that's not the one. It is on a Leeds Bus Flickr group. Philld kindly sent me the link, but I keep losing them. It was photo'd from jnctn North St/Vic Ln looking up New Briggte. [Edit] Oooh somme that sounds lovely and way nicer than my fish past sarnie lunchPictures such as that brought up through the link are very evocative. Though the area was demolished in the 1960's (to make room for the Inner Ring Road) I cannot sadly however recall any of the scene, though I should! As I often pass by that area it seems to be Crispin House in the backgound and most buildings around there are now for sale or to let (including many shops on North Street).

String o' beads · Post by **String o' beads** » Sat 16 Jun, 2012 12:52 am

Grateful for all the extra info on this thread.But no one has been able to answer my questions!Nash's state they moved into a mock Tudor building, and it is claimed on this thread that the lower building is mock Tudor, but how is it? What is about the former academy that indicates mock Tudor?Also, if Nash's didn't occupy the top building, the one that I regard as mock Tudor, then who did?

somme1916 · Post by **somme1916** » Sat 16 Jun, 2012 7:48 am

Geordie-exile wrote: Grateful for all the extra info on this thread.But no one has been able to answer my questions!Nash's state they moved into a mock Tudor building, and it is claimed on this thread that the lower building is mock Tudor, but how is it? What is about the former academy that indicates mock Tudor?Also, if Nash's didn't occupy the top building, the one that I regard as mock Tudor, then who did? Eee lad,tha's got me baffled.....dunno that but fish 'n chips were reyt good !

somme1916 · Post by **somme1916** » Sat 16 Jun, 2012 3:10 pm

somme1916 wrote: I have just returned from a visit to the city centre.I ventured up the street with no name.The official street sign says No's 51,53,55 New Briggate.I entered Nash's by the rear door and was delighted to be able to have takeaway fish 'n chips for £4.30....very nice they were too.In fact,you can actually eat your takeaway portion inside,as opposite the counter and range was a small room with buffets and seats for you to take advantage.A smaller portion of same could be obtained for £3.25 if required.All this,I thought,was extremely reasonable,bearing in mind the quality,that you are in the centre,can eat sat down etc etcExcellent-I will be going again.Of that,there is no doubt !Access to the main dining room can also be afforded via this entrance. My humblest apologies SL'ers......The street sign is numbered thus:51(small)a,B,C,D(capitals).......51aBCD New Briggate......think my little grey cells have been playing tricks on me !Doh !

Leodian · Post by **Leodian** » Sat 16 Jun, 2012 3:50 pm

This photo (which I took on January 7 2012) shows a view (with a street sign) on the opposite side to that which I posted on May 19 2012. I think it could perhaps be called 'Little New Briggate' or, to confuse future historians, 'Tudor Street'.

Post by **chameleon** » Sat 16 Jun, 2012 6:00 pm

somme1916 wrote: somme1916 wrote: I have just returned from a visit to the city centre.I ventured up the street with no name.The official street sign says No's 51,53,55 New Briggate.I entered Nash's by the rear door and was delighted to be able to have takeaway fish 'n chips for £4.30....very nice they were too.In fact,you can actually eat your takeaway portion inside,as opposite the counter and range was a small room with buffets and seats for you to take advantage.A smaller portion of same could be obtained for £3.25 if required.All this,I thought,was extremely reasonable,bearing in mind the quality,that you are in the centre,can eat sat down etc etcExcellent-I will be going again.Of that,there is no doubt !Access to the main dining room can also be afforded via this entrance. My humblest apologies SL'ers......The street sign is numbered thus:51(small)a,B,C,D(capitals).......51aBCD New Briggate......think my little grey cells have been playing tricks on me !Doh ! Not the easiest of signs to read, easier if you've seen it in the flesh, so to speak! They are the old cast iron signs suggesting a long existence prhaps, but the buildings being numbered 51 A,B,C,D leaves me wondering if they were built after everything else ( adding letters is a common practise where additional buildins appear later, say where a single property has been dmolished and replaced with more or perhaps, at some point it did have a different name only to become recognised as New Briggate at a later date. This latter hypothesis seems less likely though.

Leodian · Post by **Leodian** » Sat 16 Jun, 2012 6:57 pm

This photo (taken January 7 2012) is a close-up of the street sign that is seen in my post a couple of posts above. I thought at the time that was interesting enough to take a photo of.