The House of Elyot: No. 73, High Street

The medieval townhouse of Thomas Elyot must've been one of the finest private houses of its period in Exeter, and although it was demolished in 1845 its most notable feature can still be seen today.

The history of the site itself can be traced back in documents to 1284. According to Lega-Weekes, in the late 13th century the location of the Elyot House was a large tenement called Bokerel, one of three such tenements which ran from St Petrock's church to the corner of the High Street with South Street. (Until 1942 this section of land was occupied by Nos. 70 & 71, No. 72 and Nos. 73 & 74 on the High Street.) Prior to its demolition Thomas Elyot's House was at No. 73, High Street. Thomas Elyot was the collector of the customs at the ports of Exeter and Dartmouth during the reign of Henry VII. He was also a notary public and a registrar of the archdeaconry of Exeter in 1495. It is not known if he built the house himself or merely made some additions to a pre-existing property. It's possible that it once belonged to the Dean and Chapter and was purchased by Elyot at the end of the 15th century.

The house was built of stone between c1450 and c1500 and sat on a long, narrow plot of land, its main entrance accessed via the High Street with a 'back front' in Cathedral Yard. Inserted into this back front, overlooking the Cathedral itself, was a three-storey bay window which extended across almost the entire width of the building. The drawing from 1839 top shows the window within the context of the Elyot House. The property to the left of the window was No. 1, South Street. The property just visible to the right was the half-timbered back front of No. 72 which survived until it was demolished in the 1950s.

Both the scale and the quality of Elyot's window were remarkable. It was built from limestone in the Gothic style. Each floor contained a seven-light window separated by stone panels richly decorated with shields, quatrefoils and other Gothic motifs. Jenkins described the window in his 1806 history of the city: "At a small distance West of the Church [i.e. St Petrock's], is a stone front of very ancient architecture and excellent masonry, beautifully disposed in panels of Gothic fretwork, surmounted with stone battlements". George Oliver called it "the most elegant specimen of the florid style of architecture, for a dwelling house, within the city of Exeter". Either the house already existed when the window was inserted into its south wall c1500 or the window and house were both constructed at the same time.

The image right shows a 1905 street plan of the area overlaid onto a modern aerial photograph. The tenement plot of Elyot's House is highlighted in red. The Globe inn is highlighted in purple. The High Street runs roughly from east to west along the top before reaching the junction with North Street, South Street and Fore Street.

A licence dated 20 July 1500 and issued by the Dean and Chapter granted Thomas Elyot the right to place two stone corbels into the wall of his tenement which would project 2ft into the Cathedral Yard (then the cemetery of St Peter's cathedral). According to the licence these corbels were to be used specifically for the upholding and building of a window ("edificandum fenestram"). Lega-Weekes believed that this licence accurately dates the elaborate bay window to 1500 although there is no sign of the corbels in the drawing from 1839. Perhaps the licence referred to a second, oriel-type window. Either way, on 05 August 1504 Thomas Elyot gave the house to the parish of St Petrock in return for obituary services to be performed for his soul in the event of his death.

One other interesting feature of the 1839 drawing is that it doesn't show any doors leading into the Elyot House from Cathedral Yard although it must've once been possible to access the property from the rear. Jenkins recorded that "this fine specimen of ancient architecture, is now so obscured by buildings, that it cannot be seen to any advantage, except from the narrow back court of the Globe Tavern; though it is evident, it was originally open to the Churchyard." This is almost certainly true. Between 1573 and 1603 the cemetery which lay behind the Elyot House was converted into gardens and by the end of the 17th century part of these gardens was occupied by the Globe inn. In the 18th century the sprawling old Globe had totally obscured the view out of Elyot's medieval window. A narrow passageway once ran around the north side of the Globe inn from Cathedral Yard into South Street. Although partially blocked, the passageway remained until the destruction of the Globe in 1942. The passage, which Lega-Weekes called "a traditional right of way", might've been the entrance into the back court of the Elyot House which is mentioned in various deeds as the "introitus from South Street".

Few other details about the house survive. There are no floor plans or accurate measurements or a description of the interior. Thomas Elyot's house at No. 73, High Street was completely demolished in 1845 but even the Victorians couldn't bring themselves to destroy the Gothic bay window. It was purchased by the Bishop of Exeter, Henry Phillpotts, and reinstalled in what was once the medieval great hall of the Bishop's Palace left.

Unfortunately it was also greatly modified. Elyot's window was three storeys high, the former great hall at the palace only two. The pieces of the window that survive intact today are the decorated panels which separated each floor, now rearranged to fit a two-storey building. Transoms were added to the window openings and the mullions were extended in height, but even in its mangled condition it evokes something of the prestige of both its original form and its original owner.

The property to the west of Elyot's house, No. 74 High Street, was demolished at the same time and a new building with neo-Classical details took their place as Nos. 73 & 74. The facade of No. 73 was rebuilt when the High Street was widened in 1905. Despite surviving the Blitz of 1942, this mid-19th century building with its facade from 1905 was demolished during post-war redevelopment in the 1950s. What was once the site of the medieval house is now taken up by a poor flat-roofed, brown-brick building from the 1960s. Thomas Elyot's elaborate window, now over five hundred years old, is still situated in the wall of the old great hall at the Bishop's Palace below (Courtesy of Cornell University Library).

Sources

Nos. 73 & 74, High Street

Nos. 73 & 74 is worth writing about for two reasons. Firstly, it was a handsome building in its own right. It was rarely photographed but is worth remembering here for its aesthetic qualities alone. Secondly, and not unrelated, the building which replaced it after World War Two provides an object lesson in how poor planning and inferior design can impact negatively on an important urban location.

The image above is a composite photograph showing a postcard from c1910 merged with a photograph of the same area from September 2010. Nos. 73 & 74 are highlighted in red and shows No. 73 after the alteration to its facade in 1905. The 17th century Chevalier Inn in Fore Street on the far right. The entrance into South Street is between No. 74 and the Eastmans building, the street being much narrower than it is today.

The site is one of the most historically significant in the city: the ancient Carfoix. It has been the junction of Exeter's four most important streets i.e. the High Street, North Street, South Street and Fore Street since at least the Middle Ages. This was the location of the huge late-medieval water conduit, known as the Great Conduit, which stood near the centre of the junction until its removal in 1770.

Dating to c1845 Nos. 73 & 74 were two properties constructed as one building. It stood on the corner of the High Street with South Street and had elevations on both, its corner built as an elegant curve, similar to the almost contemporary building on the corner of the High Street with Queen Street above right which was demolished in 1971. A sketch in the Westcountry Studies Library dated c1827 shows the two buildings which had previously stood on the site and which were demolished c1845. They were both four-storeys high and timber-framed with steep gabled roofs, not dissimilar to the still-standing No. 72. One of these old properties, No. 73 in fact, was known as Elyot's House. It was named after Thomas Elyot, the customs collector at Exeter and Dartmouth during the reign of Henry VII and who lived in the house during the closing years of the 15th century.

The mid-19th century rebuild of Nos. 73 & 74 consisted of four-storeys. The ground floor contained shop fronts and the first floor had rusticated blocks with arched windows. All of the second floor windows had attractive pointed pediments and above the plainer third floor windows was a modillion cornice, the roof hidden from street view. The elevation on the High Street was originally three bays wide, as shown left c1900.

When the road-widening project around St Petrock's church occurred between 1903 and 1905 the High Street facade was reduced from three bays to just one bay and a new street frontage was built on the site of No. 73. (The newly-built facade of No. 73 is visible in the photograph at the top of this post, four-storeys high with a gabled end and with two big stone bay windows on the first and second floors. Although the facade was rebuilt the building work from c1845 remained at the rear, stretching back to the Globe in the Cathedral Yard.) Probably constructed of brick and dressed stone with a stucco exterior, No. 74 was destroyed during the air-raid of 04 May 1942, although No. 73 survived unscathed and continued in use throughout the 1950s as a branch of the Fifty Shilling Tailors (more recently known as the retail chain 'Burtons').

Predictably, the post-war treatment of the site hasn't been successful. Having survived the Blitz, No. 73 was subsequently demolished in the late 1950s as part of the project to widen South Street and to create a new entrance into the Cathedral Yard at the point where the old Globe inn once stood. The building which took the place of both No. 73 and the blitzed No. 74 is remarkable only for its insignificance as architecture. The city council's 2002 conservation report for the centre of Exeter describes the replacement building as "a rather bland, 1950s three-storey building". The report continues: "The siting, scale, fenestration and horizontal emphasis of this corner building, and its poor relationship with No. 72 High Street is arguably one of the least successful examples of urban design in the city". The replacement structure is shown below, adjacent to the white-fronted gable end of No. 72. It forms a dismal entrance into what was, historically, the most important street in Exeter.

Sources

Blog Alterations

I've made a few changes to the blog. The layout has been widened and posts re-edited some with new information, although this is an on-going process! There is now a 'Recent Comments' box in the right-hand menu along with a box linking to random posts which generates new results every time the page is refreshed. The 'Popular Posts' section has been reduced to just the title of the post and no longer shows a thumbnail or post summary. The search engine at the bottom of the page still displays results against a dark background, which is almost unreadable, but I'm not sure how to fix it at the moment. The Twitter and FB buttons have been altered and I've also added a new banner which shows the north crescent of Bedford Circus. I think it looks quite good and is an improvement on what was there before!

Nos. 65 & 67, High Street

As it stands today Nos. 65 & 67 is one of the most impressive examples of neo-Classical architecture in the city. Like Nos. 70 & 71 on the High Street, Nos. 65 & 67 partly owes its current appearance to the major redevelopment which took place between 1903 and 1905 in the vicinity of St Petrock's church.

The history of the adjacent church is both long and interesting but by at least the beginning of the 19th century it was almost totally enveloped by houses. Jenkins, in 1806, wrote that "scarce any part of it can be seen except the tower" and the Rev. George Oliver recorded in 1828 that the church was "buried in the midst of houses". The church was only accessible from the High Street via a passageway which led underneath one of the houses. At the beginning of the 20th century it was decided to sweep all of the surrounding buildings away, both widening the High Street and revealing the north face of the church for the first time in centuries. (Hooker's map of Exeter suggests that the church was already surrounded with houses by the late-1500s.)

Nos. 65 & 67 is the result of a merger in 1901 between two of Exeter's oldest banks: the Exeter Bank, founded in 1768 and the City Bank, founded in 1786. These two banks then merged in 1902 with a London bank, Prescott, Dimsdale & Co, followed by yet another merger in 1903 with the Union of London & Smiths bank. (This bank was later to become part of National Provincial whose name partly lives on as the National Westminster bank.) The mergers from 1901 to 1903 were commemorated in a large plaque which still exists on the High Street facade of Nos. 65 & 67, right. The City Bank already owned premises in Cathedral Yard but it was decided to erect another building adjacent to it for the Exeter Bank, and this is the building which now sits on the corner of the High Street with Broadgate.

The construction of the new building in 1905 coincided with the plans to demolish the properties surrounding St Petrock's church. Instead of building on the exact footprint of the property which previously occupied the site, the line of the High Street frontage was moved back towards the Cathedral Yard. A photograph in the Westcountry Studies Library dated 1905 shows the bank under construction at the same time as Nos. 70 & 71, on the other side of the church, were being demolished. Clearly there was some synchronisation between the clearance of old properties around the church and the construction of the new bank.

Unfortunately little is known about the buildings that the Exeter Bank replaced. I've never seen a photograph of them. One small but fascinating piece of information has survived though concerning what was No. 65. It seems that this building had groin vaulted undercrofts, the only such example that has ever been recorded in one of Exeter's domestic houses. Jenkins mentions the undercrofts in his 1806 history of the city: "Near the Church, under the house now occupied by Mr George Cox, is a cellar; which, from its arched stone groins, has occasioned conjectures, that it was originally the crypt of an ancient chapel." These undercrofts were destroyed during the construction of the bank and the reason behind their existence will forever remain a mystery.

The bank that arose on the site was constructed of beautiful Bath stone. It is three storeys high with a rusticated ground floor. The High Street facade is five bays wide, each bay separated at first and second floor level by pilasters topped with Corinthian capitals. The Broadgate facade is two bays wide, divided again with pilasters. A chamfered corner from the High Street into Broadgate contains the main entrance.

The corner facade is just one bay wide , the windows framed with more pilasters and Corinthian capitals. All of the first floor windows have pointed pediments and balustrading and a deep modillion cornice runs under the eaves. The ground floor windows have round arches inset into which are quarter Tuscan columns. Above the main entrance is a stone parapet supported by enormous corbels decorated with stylised acanthus leaves and within the arch over the entrance is a decorative panel inscribed with the words 'Exeter Bank'. Crowning the corner of the building is a large buttressed cupola with a copper roof.

When you actually stop to look at it Nos. 65 & 67 is a magnificent building, although I don't believe that the cupola is a particularly effective addition. To construct the same building today would cost a fortune. It was granted Grade II listed status in November 1971 and is currently used as retail space.

Sources

Nos. 211 & 212, High Street

Probably built as a pair c1650, Nos. 211 and 212 survived until the beginning of the 20th century. In appearance at least the property was similar to No. 241, High Street (destroyed in 1942) which I've also provisionally dated to c1660.

Between 1650 and 1700 there was a gradual development in Exeter towards a much lighter style of timber-framed construction. This new style tended to be characterised by the use of more slender pieces of wood, especially when compared to the massive framing used in such houses as the old Chevalier Inn on Fore Street (also destroyed in 1942) which dated to between c1610 and 1630.

As fashion changed, and after the city had been pounded during the English Civil War in the 1640s, there was less desire for the exuberant display of carved timber and multiple oriel windows once seen in such houses as Nos. 19 and 20 in North Street.

The lighter method of construction, both quicker and more economical, also probably had its origins in two other factors. One was the amount of devastation wrought on the city outside the East Gate and the South Gate. New housing was needed and much of the Eastgate and Southgate areas were completely rebuilt in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War (a large number of these rebuilt houses survived at Southgate until they were demolished in the 1960s). The other factor was a sharp increase in Exeter's population as, by 1700, Exeter was the fourth or fifth largest city in Britain.

The postcard view right shows Nos. 211 and 212 highlighted in red c1900. The portico of the Guildhall is to the left.

Another characteristic of post-Civil War timber-framed construction in Exeter was a drastic reduction in the oversailing jettied stories which are such a typical feature of the archetypal timber-framed house (and still represented at Exeter in such rare examples as the much-mauled No. 226 in the High Street or Nos. 41 and 42, also in the High Street). Between 1650 and 1700 these jettied floors were either reduced to a few inches or, more commonly, completely replaced with a totally flat facade.

Unfortunately, apart from my rambling supposition, I don't know much more about Nos. 211 and 212. It was located on the north side of the High Street, next to the medieval church of Allhallows. The very rare postcard above c1900 shows Nos. 211 and 212 to the right of the church. The entrance into Goldsmith Street is to the far left. Note the children balancing on the railings by the east window who provide the scene with a sense of scale. According to Peter Thomas in his book 'Aspects of Exeter', in the first two decades of the 19th century a hosier called Thomas Brown had his premises on the upper floor of the house next to the church and these premises were reached via a narrow passageway called Excise Passage.

Allhallows was demolished in 1906 to widen the entrance from the High Street into Goldsmith Street and, within a few years, Nos. 211 and 212 went the same way. They were replaced with another four-storey building. It was constructed of brick with dressed stone window surrounds, the third floor having timber-framed black and white decoration with an oriel window in the gable end overlooking the High Street. It is shown in the image left c1972. (The two buildings painted blue were Nos. 206 and 207, High Street. They were both demolished in 1979 and the original facades substituted with modified concrete replicas.)

The attractive Tudor Revival building lasted until 1979 when it too was demolished along with most of Goldsmith Street as part of the new Marks and Spencer redevelopment scheme. It was replaced with a very plain, shed-like structure with a single gable and drab, featureless walls interspersed with regimented rows of windows, below. People will have to decide for themselves if it is an improvement on the Edwardian building it replaced. According to the city council's conservation report for the High Street, Nos. 211 and 212 attempts "to complement the older buildings opposite". In truth there are many buildings in Exeter that are uglier than this but very few that are more insipid:

Sources

Nos. 70 & 71, High Street

One of the more unusual buildings that remain in Exeter's High Street, the elaborate facade of Nos. 70 and 71 is nowhere near as old as it might first appear.

Either side of the oculus window that sits high up on the third floor is the date 1905, the year in which the building was completed. Nos. 70 and 71 stand next to the tower of St Petrock's church. Prior to 1905 the north face of the church was completely obscured by several buildings which had been constructed against it. This had the effect of narrowing the width of the High Street and causing slight problems with the movement of traffic. In the early 20th century it was decided to demolish these buildings as well as the properties that stood within the immediate vicinity of the church. The single building known as Nos. 70 and 71 was a product of this Edwardian redevelopment.

I've never seen a good and clear image of the building which previously stood on the site of the present structure. Fortunately a description of it does survive in a 1931 article by Harbottle Reed which appeared in a volume of the Devonshire Association's journal. Entitled "The Demolition of Ancient Buildings of Exeter During the Last Half Century", the article provides interesting but frustratingly brief details of some of Exeter's lost historically interesting buildings from between 1880 to 1930.

According to Reed the property that occupied the site before its demolition in 1903 was "a very fine specimen of early 16th century timber work". It must've once been a prestigious house given its very central location on the High Street and next to the church of what was formerly one of Exeter's richest parishes. The interior "had been sumptuous with linen fold door panels and moulded framing". Apart from the mention of a solid oak staircase leading up to the attic and some oak doors this is, disappointingly, the full extent of Reed's comments. Presumably the oak panelling was ripped out and sold off when the building was demolished.

The property which replaced it in 1905 is notable primarily for the free Baroque style of its decorated facade, constructed entirely from brick with stone dressings. Most impressive of all are the two-storey canted bay windows surmounted by beautiful swan neck pediments under which run sections of egg and dart moulding.

Set within each of the four pediments are panels of highly-intricate carved foliage, including oak leaves and acorns, and a shield. Carved in relief on the second floor shields are the numbers 70 and 71. The shields on the first floor carry two separate monograms: CM and WM with the letters intertwined*. Pilasters with decorated capitals frame the facade on either side. Someone put an enormous amount of effort and money into creating this facade and in June 2000 Nos. 70 and 71 were awarded much-deserved Grade II listed status. (It should be added that the current property wasn't inspected internally prior to it receiving its Grade II status. It's possible that elements of the older building remain on the site. Its neighbour, No. 72, although much altered, still contains traces of its late-16th century origins.) Nos. 70 and 71 narrowly escaped destruction in 1942 when the corner of the High Street and South Street was bombed.

*I don't know the identities of either CM or WM. I would think that they're connected with the person who financed the rebuilding. I'll try and find out and re-edit this post accordingly.

Sources

Nos. 1 to 11, Sidwell Street

This is one of the ugliest, most inappropriate, most unpopular and abhorrent buildings in Exeter's city centre, although I can think of many others that could also vie for the title. Not only should it never have been built but it is in the process of being tarted up so it can be inflicted on a whole new generation under the guise of a new John Lewis store.

Since its opening in 1964 the seven-storey tower block has squatted on the historically important junction between Longbrook Street, the High Street and, before it was redeveloped out of existence, the High Street entrance into Southernhay. This junction formerly lay just beyond the city's ancient East Gate in the parish of St Sidwell, the three roads meeting close to what was known as London Inn Square. The square had one side open to the High Street. The other three sides were formed by the Royal Subscription Rooms, the New London Inn and a row of properties which curved round into Sidwell Street itself.

Apart from the site of the New London Inn, which had already been demolished in 1936, the London Inn Square/Eastgate area was totally destroyed during the bombing raid of 04 May 1942. The map c1900 above right shows the Eastgate junction and London Inn Square. The blitzed area that was to become the footprint of the tower block is highlighted in red but surviving buildings were also demolished to encompass its enormous size. In fact none of the buildings represented by the numerous plots shown anywhere on the map now exist.

The photograph above shows the view towards the Eastgate Junction from the upper High Street c1900. The buildings highlighted in red occupy what was to become the site of the Debenhams tower block. The Eastgate Arcade and the city's Gothic Revival post office are on the right. All of the properties shown were completely destroyed in 1942, although a significant number survived just out of view in Sidwell Street. The photograph below right shows some of the buildings which stood on the Debenhams site prior to their destruction.

Clearly rebuilding was necessary. Exeter's post-war townplanner, Thomas Sharp, was commissioned by Exeter City Council to formulate some ideas for rebuilding the damaged city, ideas that were published in book form as 'Exeter Phoenix' in 1946.

Reading the book in the 21st century one is struck by Sharp's optimistic, tentative naivety. He wasn't overly-familiar with the city's buildings or its history and he had some obvious blind spots. He right lauded the remnants of Exeter's Georgian architecture, and proposed the restoration of the townhouses at Dix's Field, but he also advocated demolishing the city's Gothic Revival Royal Albert Memorial Museum in Queen Street, calling it an "architectural horror".

But his interest in Exeter's architecture never strayed beyond the merely visual. A medieval house behind a later facade was of no interest. For example, he proposed demolishing the 15th century White Hart Inn in South Street, hidden as it was, and still is, behind its plain stucco exterior. He also suggested the construction of an enormous ring road around almost the entire city, a road which would've run from the above-mentioned Eastgate junction, looping around the base of Rougemont Castle beyond the city walls, down through Northernhay Street (so destroying the early-19th century Iron Bridge near North Street) before it turned and took the course of the present-day inner bypass known as Western Way from the river to Southgate.

Apart from a few exceptions, such as the construction of the northern bypass and the demolition of the museum, the city authorities appeared to have rejected Sharp's best ideas and only implemented the worst. In his much-quoted statement, Sharp states: "The way to rebuild a city like this is in sympathetic, not ruthless, renewal". He goes on: "Sympathetic planning in such a case lies in the observance of scale and in the creation of intimate rather than monumental forms". Monumental forms, he suggests, are "empty and meaningless" when used in a medieval town.

And so at the Eastgate site, in 1962, work began on the seven-storey monster that was become the Debenhams building, over 120,000 m2 of retail space piled up 140ft (42m) into the air, a "monumental" building which has remained as one of the biggest blots on Exeter's fragmentary historical cityscape ever since.

It's tempting to speculate how such a thing ever received planning permission, but then one remembers that this was the same local authority that barely lifted a finger to reinstate any of the city centre's damaged pre-war buildings and which freely knocked down hundreds of the city's buildings in the three decades following World War Two. The aerial photograph above left © Express & Echo shows the completed tower block in 1965. The buildings highlighted in red, most of them fronting onto Sidwell Street, survived the Exeter Blitz intact but were all demolished in the mid-to-late 1960s for yet more redevelopment in Sidwell Street and the construction of the King William Street car park. A similar number of pre-war buildings lined Sidwell Street on the opposite side until they too were demolished for redevelopment in the 1950s.

The photograph above shows the view c1955 after the destroyed upper High Street was widened and rebuilt but prior to the construction of the tower block. Visible in the distance are the side walls of the properties that remained in Sidwell Street but which were demolished in the mid-1960s.

The sheer inappropriateness of such a building just beyond the city walls of Exeter is breathtaking. This is the place where William the Conqueror gathered his army and laid siege to the rebellious city in 1068, where Perkin Warbeck attacked the East Gate in 1497 and where Royalist and Parliamentarian forces pounded each other with artillery during the English Civil War. The tower block was 'designed' by George Baines and Syborn and constructed at a cost of over £800,000 before finally opening on 05 March 1964.

It was intended to be a new flagship store for Bobby's (the firm's old premises, the historic New Inn in the High Street had been destroyed in 1942). The name Bobby's, only a subsidiary of Debenhams, was dropped in the 1970s and for as long as I can remember (35+ years) the tower block has been known as the Debenhams building. It wasn't even well-designed. The curve of the frontage at street level creates a tremendous wind tunnel effect, the downfall of many umbrellas which can often be seen flapping on the pavement like dying birds.

Debenhams vacated the building in 2007 and moved into new premises on the 13 acre, £225 million Land Securities redevelopment at Princesshay, and the hideous tower block stood empty for three years. The city council implied that the tower block's days were numbered prompting great excitement amongst many of Exeter's citizens. It was easy to imagine the cathedral bells ringing out in jubilation as the building was demolished! But it wasn't to be.

Land Securites were the new owners and the city council quickly approved the conversion of the entire building into 96 apartments. The council and their development partner were determined to keep the tower block intact. (According to Richard Short, the council's head of planning, the city council and Land Securities have already entered into an "exclusivity agreement" for redeveloping the bus station opposite the old Debenhams building.)

The leader of Exeter City Council, Peter Edwards, stated in 2010 that "the former Debenhams building is a well known landmark for the city of Exeter and it’s great that plans are being explored to give it a new lease of life." It is indeed well-known, for all of the wrong reasons, but to use the word "landmark" in anything like a positive sense would be laughable if it wasn't so risible. Nick Davis, Land Securities Retail Development Director repeated the mistake when he stated that "we remain committed to this landmark building located in Exeter’s city centre and plan to make a significant investment in refurbishing and refreshing the building in preparation for a suitable occupier".

Comments sent to the local paper suggested that many people felt otherwise. One resident wrote: "I've lived in Exeter all my life and even when the building was in use it was a blight on High Street. It's an ugly concrete block and the best thing to do with it is pull it down and build something (anything) more in keeping with the rest of High St. In fact a building site would look better."

Another local resident added: "I cannot help but think this massive eyesore in the centre of Exeter will always be a sow's ear with no hope of a silk purse emerging, regardless of the money that might be spent attempting to make the transformation. Surely demolition and tasteful rebuilding is a better option?" And another: "Flatten it and grass it over. Bloody eyesore it is". Someone else who had watched the original tower block's construction commented that: "The centre of Exeter has become such a mess compared to our expectation as we watched it being rebuilt". Perhaps it was the construction of the tower block that caused Exeter's renowned 20th century historian Professor W.G. Hoskins to state in the early 1960s that "the post-war rebuilding of Exeter has been a disaster".

It is deeply ironic that having demolished so many buildings over the last 50 years the city council has decided to keep the one building that was desperately in need of removal. In November 2010 it was announced that the city council's Holy Grail was arriving in Exeter. John Lewis, allegedly the UK's "most popular retailer", was finally opening in the city and had chosen to use the old Debenhams tower block for their new store.

The building is currently under scaffolding right as the exciting makeover takes place. The city council is to spend £250,000 on pimping up both the equally grim King William Street car park at the rear of the tower block and the footbridge that provides direct access from the car park into the back of the building. A report on the BBC in July 2011 reported that the total expenditure on improvements to the road system around the new John Lewis store, combined with the work on the car park, will cost a colossal £2 million. The structure will actually be larger than it is at present as two extra floors are being added to the front of the building. There are also frankly bizarre plans to have a "European-style piazza" overlooking the area on the opposite side of Sidwell Street.

I must admit that I don't actually care what happens to the building. Exeter's architectural ship sailed out of port a long time ago, and the tower block is after all just one appalling building amongst many others. Its removal wouldn't greatly enhance those which remained. The only advantage would be an improvement in the view of the city as you descend Pennsylvannia Road. The monumental tower block has recently spawned offspring nearby in the bulbous shape of the vast new Next building which now crouches on the opposite corner of the Eastgate junction and which dominates the eastern end of the High Street almost as much as the tower block, below.

Sources