Shop and Residence

Statement of Significance

View spatial data in

Description

Assessed significance: State

Item type: Built

Current use: Shop

Former use: Shop and residence

Group: Residential buildings (private)

Category: Terrace

Designer/Maker:

Builder/Maker: Built for William Reynolds (blacksmith)

Construction Years: 0 - 1834

Physical Description: No 32 is a two storey brick shop with residence above built by 1834 by Reynolds. The rear of the building is of stone. Style: Georgian; Storeys: Two; Roof Cladding: Corrugated Iron; Floor Frame: Timber

Property Description

Address

Historic Notes and Themes

Historical notes: To the Gadigal people of Sydney the western shoreline of Sydney Cove (known to them as Warrane) was called Tallawolladah. The Gadigal traditional lands ranged from Darling Harbour in the west to the Heads in the east and included Manly. No evidence of Indigenous occupation is evident in the immediate vicinity due to the extensive nature of subsequent building activity. The block bounded by George, Argyle, Harrington and Suez Canal (formerly Harrington Lane) was part of the hospital precinct from 1788. The structure on this block was a house for the Assistant Surgeons'. It was run up in a hurry almost as soon as the First Fleet had disembarked, probably built with logs and plastered. The footprint of the building was large and it was sometimes referred to a barrack. By June 1796 Collins recorded that many of the earliest buildings were already falling into decay, and that extra work gangs were being organised to remedy the shortfall. He included the observation that houses were to be built for the assistant surgeons, 'those which had been erected soon after our arrival being now no longer tenable'. At least three Assistant Surgeons lived here, William Balmain, D'Arcy Wentworth and William Redfern, but there may have been others, and this requires further research.The Assistant Surgeons' house stood on a generous piece of land and the future 32 Harrington St was behind the house and part of the gardens. When a new hospital was completed in Macquarie Street in 1816, the Assistant Surgeon, William Redfern, vacated the house on the corner of George and Argyle Streets, and it was made available to the Colonial Architect, Francis Greenway as part of his stipend. By the 1820s attempts were made to get hold of the rear portion of the block fronting what had now become Harrington Street and to dislodge Greenway from his George Street property. Francis Howard Greenway, the convict colonial architect seems never to have had any formal grant for the land and house, however he did claim that Macquarie had granted it to him, beginning years of legal wrangling over the block.While all around the land was being covered with buildings associated with the burgeoning trade and shipbuilding of the colony, and while hopeful property owners were making claims and counter claims for land that had allegedly been granted or promised though insufficiently recorded for anyone to make much sense of who had a claim to what, the large piece of land where the old Assistant Surgeons' house had stood since the beginning of the colony remained unsold until 1835. By then Greenway was possibly mad and certainly an unstable, irascible old man with many enemies, but the fact that he was allowed to remain so long on the block suggests that there must also have been a residue of respect for this man who had designed and overseen the construction of many of the best buildings in the colony.In 1832, probably in a near destitute state, Greenway 'sold' a portion of the land to Frederick Wright Unwin. Unwin was a lawyer, a major landholder in the area, and a canny operator. He must have known that Greenway's claim to the land was tenuous, and that the ?150 he paid for the land bore no relation to its market value. The rest of the Greenway family had moved to the Hunter, and Francis Greenway probably followed soon after. Here he contracted typhoid fever and died in 1837 in a hut built of slab walls roofed in bark.Why did Unwin 'buy' the property in 1832 when he knew Greenway did not own it? A charitable interpretation of this is that it was just a way of supporting the now impoverished Greenway, but then Unwin was not noted for his charity. A more likely explanation is that this so called sale put Unwin in a stronger position to get hold of the land officially after Greenway had finally left the premises. In 1835 Unwin paid the Crown ? 2820 for the same land and acquired the title deeds in 1837, which is probably when the house was pulled down. Then he was reissued with the title to the land in 1838 after the Commissioners of the Court of Claims decided that there was evidence that Macquarie had granted the land to Greenway after all. This has sometimes been interpreted to mean that Greenway was unfortunate to have missed out, but a more likely explanation was that Unwin extracted this view from the officials so that he could claim that his original purchase was legitimate and that he had thus twice paid for the land and therefore got his money back. In the story of land dealings on this site and on The Rocks, Unwin emerges as a ruthless player. In 1839 Governor George Gipps went over all this in correspondence to the Home Secretary, Lord Glenelg. He explained that Unwin had attempted to prove ownership by producing a sketch of some buildings which it appeared Macquarie had signed, giving approval to Greenway to construct some buildings on the site, and a letter from Gill, who had been the acting colonial engineer at the time stating that the land was to be Greenways, but again only if the buildings were constructed. As they were not, Gipps was of the opinion that the land was never his. Furthermore he queried the genuineness of the supposed Gill letter. His aside of 'if the letter be genuine' would be echoed over and over in the battles to establish who owned land on this site.During Greenway's occupation the land at the rear of his house fronting Harrington Street was being alienated and built on. Land in Sydney, including on The Rocks was occupied opportunistically in the decades before tenure was regularised in the 1830s, and until land titles were systematically recorded it is often impossible to be absolutely certain of who owned what, let alone establish the exact structures on the site. Many lived on land they claimed had been promised them, but without title or survey, and long before any of this was sorted out, land and houses were being traded, sold and rented out.As early as 1808 a stone dwelling was advertised for sale 'at the back of the General Hospital Garden'. The hospital gardens stretched well south of the study site this 'very substantial and well built dwelling' may not have been in Greenway's back garden. Another advertisement for a stone cottage in the Sydney Gazette on the 11th March 1820 sounds as if it was. It advertised for rent 'those extensive premises situate at the back of part of Mr Greenway's. They are well adapted for a private family residence, or a seminary; having spacious rooms with many other conveniences'. If these were indeed on the study site, this establishes building activity there before 1820. The physical evidence also indicates early building on the site. Today the two cottages known as Reynolds' Cottages, at 28 and 30 Harrington Street, are some of the oldest housing in Sydney. These were built sometime between 1826 and 1829, but archaeological investigations under these houses and in the yards behind indicate that there were older structures on this site, including a bakehouse. Next door, on the corner of Harrington and Argyle Streets stands an 1880s building known as the British Seaman's Hotel. An earlier building on this site, a shop with a bakehouse attached, also dated back to the early 1820s, with a sketch of it, submitted to a court case that was held in 1825 to clarify property ownership on this part of Harrington Street. The history of building on these Harrington Street sites is supported by partial and contradictory evidence. In so far as land ownership went, in 1825 the Supreme Court established that all of this land had been leased by Governor Brisbane to James Gleeson in 1823. The trouble was that at the time many people did not believe that this was a true finding of the actual facts, and more recent scholarship provides convincing reasons to reject this. In attempting to unscramble the story a good place to start is with some of the main players. James Rampling was English, born in Suffolk in about 1786. Rampling had been sentenced at the Old Bailey on 20th April 1814 for attempting to pass off forged banknotes and transported for 14 years. He arrived on the Indefatigable in April 1815, and after a few years of servitude at Toongabbie and Seven Hills he ended up in Sydney, where he married Mary Balfe at St Phillips church in 1821. One of the witnesses to the marriage was Catherine Hawkins. He gave his occupation as 'baker' and he was working at this trade in Harrington Street in the mid 1820s. Rampling's efforts to establish possession of land in Harrington Street generated many letters and testimonials, some probably bogus, some genuine, as well as the 1825 Supreme Court case which found against him. Rampling was up against a tough player in Thomas Ryan, and in his long quest for land Rampling possibly gained a reputation in official circles as a nuisance to be fobbed off. He was at a distinct disadvantage because he could not read and as he petitioned the government year after year he was at the mercy of scribes who took his story down from documents that Rampling carefully kept, but could not read, supplemented by information extracted from him through questioning what he remembered. Over time Rampling mixed up his dates, his age, even his year of arrival. Many of his letters to the government probably went straight to the in-tray of Thomas Ryan. Thomas Ryan, from Tipperary in Ireland, was transported in 1817 for forgery, a skill not irrelevant to this story. He must have possessed some education, as he was almost immediately taken on as a clerk in the Colonial Secretary's office. His work involved keeping convict records and by 1822 he was himself in receipt of assigned convicts. In this same year, following the removal of Governor Macquarie, Ryan was employed under the new Brisbane administration to assist in sorting out land claims. In her book Reynolds' Cottages: Living History, published in 2010, Melissa Holmes portrays Ryan as a hot headed and violent man and makes a strong case for him being both corrupt and personally vindictive towards James Rampling. In 1818 Rampling was granted a ticket of leave and was entitled to conditional pardon in 1821. He did not get it and the earlier ticket was cancelled in September 1822, around the time Ryan was starting to work on clearing up the mess of land claims against the Crown. Holmes take on this is that 'as chief clerk in the Principal Superintendent's office of convicts, he could affect tickets of leave, and conditional pardons. Although Rampling was entitled to his freedom, he was denied it and his convict status was used as a weapon by Ryan to obtain the land on which Rampling had built his bakehouse.' Holmes recounts how Ryan, testifying at an unrelated land grant dispute case in 1832, informed the magistrate that back at the time when Governor Brisbane replaced Macquarie, he was personally responsible for the destruction of 'four bushels of public papers.' The implication was that he may well have destroyed papers pertaining to land grant cases, and whether he did so maliciously or not, this event shows the power of this man to influence the success or failure of land claimants. Add to this the fact that he had forgery skills, and it becomes clear that it may be impossible to ever clearly establish the truth concerning his involvement in the land granted on Harrington Street. Gleeson was a mate of Ryan's. Like Ryan, he came from Tipperary, they arrived together on the Pilot in 1817 and they lived close to each other in Cumberland Street. He appears in the records from time to time for property theft and was twice dismissed from the lowly position of police constable for drunkenness. William Hawkins appears in the story of property wrangles on Harrington Street, and later in Rampling's claims over land that had been granted to Hawkins at Orphan School Creek. One of the witnesses to the Rampling's marriage was Catherine Hawkins. William Hawkins claimed that James Rampling was a relation of his and for this reason he may have been inclined to intercede on Rampling's behalf in ways that muddied the waters concerning which one of them owned certain pieces of property. Little is known about Hawkins except for his own self-assessment. He defended his right to land on the corner of Harrington and Argyle Streets by depicting the successful claimant, John Gleeson, as a mere 'labourer and inhabitant of the colony for eight years' , and as 'a person of indigent circumstances.' Hawkins portrayed himself as an independent and settled man who had lived in the colony for twenty-five years and had the wealth to build a substantial residence. He included with his petition to the court an elevation and plan of the house he had built on the corner of Harrington and Argyle. In the 1828 Census Hawkins was listed as a labourer, pardoned convict, living in Kent Street with his housekeeper, Catherine Riley who was probably the same Catherine Hawkins who signed the Rampling's marriage certificate.Convicts used land on The Rocks opportunistically, without grants. At some time around 1824 William Hawkins built a house/shop on the corner of Argyle and Harrington. In 1825 he claimed that Governor Macquarie had granted the land to him in 1821. He granted/leased/'sold' the land next door to his building in 1822 to Rampling, for £30 and Rampling built a house and bakehouse. So there were two houses, both with bakehouses on Harrington Street on the site between Argyle Street to Suez Canal prior to mid -1820s. In 1825 Hawkins petitioned to be allowed to retain 'his' land and house, and although he was no longer in residence by the time of the 1828 Census, the house remained standing and was being operated by Caleb Salter as a public house by 1830 and probably earlier, as by 1828 Hawkins was living in Kent Street. Salter possibly paid Hawkins for it, as it is his name that appears on this property in Russell's 1834 survey map and he submits a claim over it in that year. The Court of Claims awards the land to Rosetta Terry in 1844. [Further research is required to establish whether Caleb Salter was also contesting this property.]Ryan's cottages in Harrington Street were advertised in the Sydney Gazette in December, 1829 as Nos. 1 & 2 of 'those eligible and desirable cottages or tenements known as Rampling's Buildings being within one hundred yards of the new Customs House and also commanding an entire view of the Harbour "In October 1830 the two cottages at what is now 28 & 30 Harrington Street were sold to William Reynolds for £100. The property next door on the corner of Harrington and Argyle Streets, previously Hawkins two storey house and shop, was being operated as a public house under the sign of the Kings Head by Caleb Salter. It is possible that he paid Hawkins for it on the mistaken understanding that he owned it. Several sources claim that this was owned by Frederick Unwin, citing as evidence Robert Russell's 1834 plan of Section 84. However this plan clearly allocates this corner block to Salter. There is some notation on the plan concerning Unwin, but it appears to be a later addition and in any case does not relate to this corner block. Later in 1841 Rosetta Terry, the widow of Samuel Terry was successful in making a claim to this corner block, and according to the Register of Claims she was legally represented in this matter by FW Unwin who could not have been the owner. The shop at No 32 Harrington Street may have been built in the 1850s, of stone with a brick frontage, probably on the same footprint of an earlier building constructed by William Reynolds c. 1835 next to the cottages he bought from Thomas Ryan in 1830. The original building at No 32 was reported as constructed of timber and shingle, and would have had more in common with the mean row of terraces that Reynolds built a few years later behind his Harrington Street cottages, and in Harrington Lane (Suez Canal) on land leased from F W Unwin for 21 years. The cottages that bare the Reynolds name today are simple but sound. Everything that he himself built only contributed negatively to the social status of this tawdry little slum area of late 19thC. Sydney. All of Reynolds handiwork was demolished in the 1880s, after which the area became a little less crowded. The specific trajectory of the building at No 32 Harrington Street is uncertain and a focussed attempt to clarify this using the Sands directories and the City Assessment books did not prove helpful. The Assessment books record it as being constructed of various materials. Other studies have suggested that the building may have been rebuilt of stone in the 1850s, but there are multiple entries for it remaining a wooden building until the late 1870s - with one entry for it being of brick in 1861, almost certainly a clerical mistake. It then appears to be wood and stone, which suggests there may have been some kind of partial reconstruction, although the assessment entry for 1882 goes back to describing it as 'wood.' Perhaps the assessors confusion arose for having to describe a make -do place, constructed and patched with whatever materials came to hand at various times. By the 1850s at least, the building on No 32 Harrington Street was being used as a grocers shop and this became its long term use. From 1855 onwards, No. 32 is described as a shop and dwelling, occupied and run by grocer Charles Price. In 1882 Patrick Fahey became the grocer on the corner of the lane and two years later he had purchased it and Reynolds Cottages. He remained the grocer until 1907, by which time the government had resumed the property and the Sydney Harbour Trust was his landlord. The building was used as a shop and residence until the 1920s, but then reverted to residential use. Ownership of the area behind the shop was in contention with the Trust requiring the City Council to pave the yard, while in 1935 a new tenant, William Tekaat was only agreeable to signing a lease if he could erect double gates to the laneway. These were installed, and were still there in 1966 when there was a request for them to be renewed. When Tekaat left in 1939 the lease was taken by N Griffith Norton, and later by Mrs D Norton. She wrote to the Board in 1947 asking why they were going to evict her son and she may have been the only breadwinner as in 1950 her records noted that she was recovering at the Sydney Eye Hospital, was not getting any money and would pay later. She was always in arrears with the rent and whenever she did manage to pay anything she made a habit of always asking for repairs and even applied for a larger residence. The requests, on the other hand were not extravagant - a window pane mended now and then, and in 1962 a request or permission to install an electric bath heater. These records provide a small window into a population that was both poor and insecure and at the same time believed in a sense of entitlement to this kind of housing. Oral testimony often records the de facto hereditary nature of housing under the control of the MSB. With bigger things to worry about, the authorities were often content to allow leases to be passed on to relatives and children provided the rents were paid.The Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority, formed in 1970, planned to demolish many buildings in The Rocks in the early 1970s, but by then the mood of the community had shifted and the Green Bans placed over The Rocks with the support of local resident groups spelt the end of plans for a major high rise redevelopment of the area. Currently there is something of a mood to return the area to private hands, if not through outright sale then through 99-year leases. Residential properties in Millers Point once administered by the MSB as low rental properties for the maritime community and now by Housing NSW have also been leased for 99 years to private buyers. Commercial leases are for shorter periods of time, often 10 years with limited renewal rights but these leases have not been without their problems.The story of the ownership of land on The Rocks where once convicts simply hewed out an existence without security of tenure, to the land grabs of the early developers in the 1820s and 1830s to the reversion of ownership to the state in the twentieth century to the present unsettled situation. Thomas Ryan and F W Unwin would have been very much at home in this 21st Century action.

Historical significance: The site of 32 Harrington Street has an important association with the historical development of Sydney, and the metropolitan area, since European settlement in 1788, and earlier with the Gadigal people of Sydney Harbour. To the Gadigal the site formed part of a strip of land along the western shore of Warrane (Sydney Cove) which they called "Tallawolladah". The fact that this area was named denotes it as a special or particular place for the indigenous peoples of Sydney Harbour before the coming of the Europeans.This land is thought to have been part of the site of the assistant surgeons' house and associated garden within the first hospital compound established in 1788, which would make it therefore important as part of the earliest European settled part of Australia, with specific importance in the establishment of medical practice. Early residential patterns suggest however that the land was not securely part of the hospital site. To the immediate east of the site, facing George Street, the Assistant Surgeons' barracks stood until the mid-1830s, resulting in the majority of the block which is bounded by Harrington Street on the west remaining undeveloped. When the long term incumbent of the Assistant Surgeons' house, the architect Francis Greenway, attempted to claim this property for himself, he usually did not include in his claims the back portion of the block fronting Harrington Street. The land on the western side of Harrington Street and up onto the high levels of The Rocks was liberally dotted with cottages of convicts and a few free settlers from the earliest years of settlement, and as early as the 1800s the eastern side of Harrington Street, which includes the site of 32 Harrington Street, was possibly built on. In 1826 this site formed part of the land formally granted to William Gleeson in 1826 (grant made retrospective to 1823). Gleeson passed the property to Thomas Ryan who built the houses now known as Reynolds' Cottages at 28-30 Harrington Street, between 1826 and 1829. He then sold the property, including the site of 32 Harrington Street to William Reynolds in 1830. By 1834 Reynolds had built a house /shop at No 32 and by c.1840 he had built a number of other dwellings behind his cottages and in the laneway immediately to the south. At the first City Assessment in 1845 the building was described as a two storey, four roomed timber construction with a shingled roof. The assessments books during the 1850s are very confusing and although some sources claim that the building was demolished and rebuilt of stone in that decade, later assessments clearly list it as still being wooden. It is possible that the current building was more or less constructed in the 1850s, or, given the frequent assessment book entries for it as a wooden building in later decades, it is possible that the original building was demolished along with Reynolds other jerry built tenements in the early 1880s. However, based on physical analysis, the building was constructed initially in timber circa 1834-41 and largely rebuilt in stone and brick in about 1850.From the 1850s until the 1920s the place was run as a grocers shop in all but a few years. Charles Price was an early grocer. Mrs Brennan ran the store in the 1870s. In 1882 Patrick Fahey became the grocer on the corner of the lane at No.32 Harrington Street and two years later he had purchased the building and Reynolds Cottages. He remained the grocer until 1907, by which time the government had resumed the property and the Sydney Harbour Trust was his landlord. By the 1920s it became a residence until the increasing commercialisation of The Rocks area restored it to a shopfront presence under the administration of the Sydney Cove Authority. The trade of the shop would have been to serve the local community. During the later decades of the 19th century the hotel on the corner of Harrington and Argyle Streets often utilised one or both of Reynolds cottages as overflow boarding accommodation, probably for single men, while across the street from the store were densely packed residences. So with a growing number of people living in close proximity, the grocer's trade was probably very local - a corner shop. The Ragged School and the presence of children in the street would have provided many small spending customers running family errands.The status of No 32 would have been lowered by its location on the corner of Harrington Lane (Suez Canal) which became a notorious hang out for criminals and larrikins in the second half of the 19th Century. The item meets this criterion at a STATE level.The historical significance of 32 Harrington Street is demonstrated by:·It forms part of a coherent group of early colonial buildings on the site bounded by Harrington, Argyle, George Streets and Suez Canal. ·Its ability to assist in understanding early retailing in the local setting. ·The building is a rare example of a small residential building that incorporated a shop which operated commercially between the 1840s and 1920s.

Historical association: As part of a group of buildings occupying the land between George, Argyle, and Harrington Streets and Suez Canal, the site of 32 Harrington Street is associated with the site of the 1788 Assistant Surgeon's residence, later occupied by the first colonial architect, Francis Greenway. Together with 28-30 Harrington Street, the place is associated with the convict builder William Reynolds who is an interesting example of the early 19th century group of pardoned convicts who remained in NSW and practised trades or professions.Over time, the place has been associated with a number of former owners and occupants, however these associations are intangible and the individuals of no particular note.32 Harrington Street does not meet this criterion.

Aesthetic significance: 32 Harrington Street contributes a sense of age and an evocative historic character to the Harrington Street and Suez Canal streetscapes. Its gabled form is an unusual element in the streetscape and its shop window is distinctive. The diminutive scale of 28-30 and 32 Harrington Street when compared to the later Victorian buildings in the vicinity serves to highlight them in the streetscape as a group.32 Harrington Street presents a blank wall to the Suez Canal, one of the Rocks area's most notorious laneways which is historically rich in tales of crime, poverty, graft and confidence schemes. The bagged stone south wall is highly evocative to the present-day visitor and lends to the imagination a ready picture of the characterful narrow laneways once connecting rudimentary slum dwellings with the major streets of the Rocks. 32 Harrington Street meets this criterion at a STATE level.The aesthetic significance of 32 Harrington Street is demonstrated by:?West (front) elevation, bagged stone south wall ?Gabled roof form and scale?Together with 28-30 Harrington Street, the item contributes to the Harrington Street streetscape?32 Harrington Street is technically significant for demonstrating urban planning techniques of the Colonial period in Sydney. The retains evidence of former properties its rear yard which once formed part of a contained urban space, together with the remainder of the block bound by George, Argyle and Harrington Street and Suez Canal. The buildings' relationship with Suez Canal remains unaltered since its initial construction (1834-1841) demonstrating Colonial town planning solutions through its architecture, design and construction.The item meets this criterion at a STATE level.The technical significance of 32 Harrington Street is demonstrated by:?A contributory element within a larger city block which demonstrates evidence of urban planning principles of the Colonial period?Archaeological evidence of former properties within the rear yard?The buildings' retention of its original design and fabric

Social significance: 32 Harrington Street as an integral part of the precinct of The Rocks which is valued for its overall heritage significance and for its links to the 1970s Green Bans movement. As part of the local community of The Rocks, 32 Harrington Street has maintained a longevity that gives it and its neighbours at Reynolds' Cottages a firm place in the heritage of The Rocks.32 Harrington Street makes a substantial contribution to the historic character of The Rocks area, Australia's premier heritage precinct, as evidenced by its inclusion on a number of lists of buildings of heritage significance formulated by community groups such as the National Trust of Australia (NSW) and representative bodies such as the City of Sydney Council and the Heritage Council of NSW.32 Harrington Street meets this criterion at a LOCAL level.The social significance of 32 Harrington Street is demonstrated by:?It is part of The Rocks precinct where the Green Bans resulted in altering the way that the NSW government, the people of Sydney and the wider Australian community understood and valued the history and heritage values of Sydney's first settlement.?The building's association with the internal courtyard area of the block bounded by Harrington, Argyle, George and Suez Canal which is an important meeting place for residents and visitors to The Rocks from the 1980s to the present.

Research significance: The site has the potential to yield archaeological evidence relating to successive periods of occupation and development. The site has association with the hospital precinct and its garden, established soon after settlement in 1788 which extended north to Argyle Street and west to Harrington Street. While the site has been disturbed through later construction phases, it is likely the remains from this period, including deeper features such as wells and cesspits, may be present in the archaeological record. 32 Harrington Street also has the potential to yield information relating to the adjacent tenancy at 28-30 Harrington Street. Archaeological evidence suggests that a bake house, relating to 39-43 Argyle Street, was constructed in the rear yard area of 28-30 Harrington Street. Further remains relating to this period of occupation may be present. In addition, remains of former tenancies built to rear by William Reynolds between 1839 and 1841 are likely to be present. Their existence has the potential to provide further research on living conditions and building standards of the mid nineteenth century.Sub-floor and inter-floor deposits still have the potential to yield further archaeological evidence about the site's use and occupants from c.1830s onwards. While partly disturbed, the site area of 32 Harrington Street has the potential to yield evidence of indigenous and contact archaeology. The item meets this criterion at a STATE level.The research and archaeological significance of 32 Harrington Street is demonstrated by:?The archaeological potential relating to the hospital garden?Physical evidence of the site's occupants, notably William Reynolds ?Potential to yield further evidence of earlier construction phases including the rear properties built to the east of the building between 1839 and 1841 and of a bake house associated with 39-43 Argyle Street. ?The archaeological potential for sub-floor, inter-floor and wall cavity deposits

Rare assessment: While frequently seen in documentary records of Sydney's colonial streetscapes, gable roof forms are now rare in Sydney. Although 32 Harrington Street appears to have been constructed initially as a dwelling and later altered for use as a shop, retail buildings from the 1850s and earlier are rare in Sydney. Although an earlier timber building was constructed on the site in the mid to late 1830s, whether fabric from this period survives in the current building (dating from the 1950s) is not certain. Should any fabric from the initial construction period survive - this should be considered rare in the Australian context32 Harrington Street meets this criterion at a STATE level. The rarity of 32 Harrington Street is demonstrated by:?Original features of the building, in particular its external fabric.?Fabric relating to the 1850s alteration to a shop, in particular the shop window.

Representative assessment: An item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of NSW's or the local area's cultural or natural places, or cultural or natural environments.32 Harrington Street has lost much of its integrity through alterations to the internal fabric over time. However, this type of building is now sufficiently rare (gable form shop house) to consider each example of the type as a representative of the small class of these buildings in Sydney. 32 Harrington Street meets this criterion at a STATE level. The representativeness of 32 Harrington Street is demonstrated by:?Original features of the building, in particular its external fabric and gable form.?Fabric relating to the 1850s alteration to a shop, in particular the shop window.

Intact assessment: Archaeology partly disturbed, however significant archaeological resources remain on site and in the rear yard

Physical condition:

Listings

References

Type	Author	Year	Title
Written	SCRA	1978	Building Data Sheet HP/28
Written	Jim Stephany & Neridah Wyatt-Spratt,	1986	Conservation Plan for No.30 Harrington Street, The Rocks .
Management Plan	Phermual Murphy A;esso	2009	CMP shop & residence 32 Harrington St, The Rocks

IMAGES

Click to Enlarge

Click to Enlarge

Click to Enlarge

Click to Enlarge

Click to Enlarge

Click to Enlarge

Click to Enlarge