Mattla

History

Mattla was owned by Jaakko Mattla in 1756. The plot still included a part that was cabbage land. In 1800 the owner was the bourgeois Abraham Limnell. He had more than three barrels of arable land, a meadow, a food shed, a reef, a barn and a shed on the beach.

Fire insurance

The fire insurance was taken out in 1863 by the patron C. G. Palmroth. The main building on the plot was located on Kuninkaankatu, and the building had a second wing on the courtyard side, on the western boundary of the plot. The building was old, part of it was planked and painted in red paint. The roof was board and batten and the south side had a tiled roof with a clay roof underneath. The building had two entrance halls, two halls, four chambers and a baking room. There were five tiled ovens and a baking oven with a stove. Under the building was a vaulted brick cellar. The building also had a porch.

On the eastern side of the plot was a log shed. It was in fair condition and the building was unpainted and unplanked. The roof was made of boards. The other residential building on the eastern side of the plot was an old building in fair condition, unplanked and unpainted, with a pitched roof. The building contained a baker’s pantry and a pantry. The fireplaces were a baking oven, which also contained a sauna oven, and a tiled stove in the chamber.

The outbuilding at the back of the courtyard, on the riverbank, was made partly of logs and partly of boards. The building was in good condition, although it was old. It was unplanked and painted with red water based paint. The roof was made of boards. The building had a stable and a barn with haylofts, a shed, a larder with an attic and a woodshed. The double board fence on the plot, the unpainted board fence around the plot and the unpainted trellis around the garden were also insured.

In 1877 the house was owned by the tanner K. F. Sjöblom. The main building was then said to be partly old, partly built in the same year. Part of the building was planked and painted with yellow oil paint, part was painted with red paint, the roof was planked. The building had been raised with logs in the same year. There were ten rooms: two halls, three halls, four chambers and a baker’s room. There were seven tiled ovens and one baking oven. In the last year, six rooms and part of three chambers had been re-floored. Three rooms had new wallpaper, three new tiled ovens and the building had been painted inside and out. A vaulted cellar had been built under the house and the building also had an attached loft.

The second residential building on the eastern side of the plot was old and in good condition. It consisted of two earlier buildings that had been built together, boarded up and painted red. The building contained a pantry and a baking room, as well as a wall-less shelter for drying hides. Six wooden posts supported the roof of the shelter. The roof of the building was made of boards.

The residential building on the western side of the plot was a recent construction. The building was not lined, but it was painted red. The roof was boarded. The building contained a tannery and a chamber or so-called drying room. The building had two tiled ovens.

At the rear of the property was an old outbuilding, unplanked and painted red. The building had a tiled roof. There were stables and a barn with haylofts, a barn, a wooden shed and a food shed with an attic. The barn had a new floor and one wall had been shingled, while the stable and granary had been renovated and had new floors and ceilings. The gate and fence were also insured.

The manufacturer K. F. Sjöblom took out a new insurance policy in 1887. The buildings were again repaired. Both the walls and the interior of the main building had been given a new look. In the opinion of the assessor, the work had been done as well as could be expected: the façade was particularly decorative in an architectural sense, the interior was also quite splendid, the tiled stoves all in pristine white, all the rooms with fine wallpaper, the floors and ceilings tastefully painted. There was asphalt shingles and cardboard everywhere under the floor and under the wallpaper and lining, so there was no question of saving a little money anywhere. The basement floor also had stylish windows and doors. The beautiful eaves were of zinc and galvanised sheet metal. The residential building on the eastern boundary had been re-boarded and was oil-painted. The other buildings were also in good condition.

The building description shows that the main building now had a tin roof. There were five rooms in the building, plus a dormer, two tin-roofed porches with windows. There were three unvaulted rooms in the basement. The basement had brick walls, cement floors, a tiled roof, stone stairs and tiled exterior doors. The basement was furnished with a shop, a storeroom and a pantry. There was no fireplace.

In September 1894 there was a fire accident in which two of the outbuildings were damaged. The fire had started in the workshop room, which had been heated all day. It was assumed that the heating had been too high, causing the wall to overheat. The masonry building was badly damaged. After the fire, Sjöblom promised to donate funds to the fire brigade for the purchase of a water pump.

However, the land registry refused to restore the buildings to their original state, as they were already in a state of disrepair and the fire had only made matters worse. The Land Registry did not accept the modification drawings submitted by Sjöblom, which would have made the premises partly two-storey, with a fireplace on both floors. In addition, the building site was cramped. Sjöblom appealed the decision to the Governor. He argued that the building could be repaired for relatively little money. If the building was not allowed to be repaired, the business would be severely damaged: all leather processing would have to be stopped on a site where the valuable tanning ponds were located. The Land Registry considered that the complaint was unfounded and that the importance of the activities on the site had been exaggerated. In fact, there were only a few pools on the site compared with twenty elsewhere. It had been a mistake to grant permission for the erection of this type of building in 1870, when it was contrary to the town building regulations. It should not be renovated, even temporarily.

The workshop building was listed as a residential building on the 1877 policy, as was the 1887 policy, which listed 1870 as the year of construction. Workers lived in this workshop building, as elsewhere. Both policies show the building as a single storey with two rooms. There is no mention of an attic floor with a fireplace.

The Governor’s decision allowed the building to be temporarily repaired for a period of three to five years. However, no fireplace was allowed in the attic. In the end, the local representative of the insurance company told Sjöblom that the complaint was only a matter of principle between the Land Registry and him. The building was not going to be repaired. The insurance company had claimed the remains of the building and they would be sold at auction for removal.

However, this was not the case. In 1895, the miller Sjöblom renewed his land insurance. The insurance policy showed that the log workshop building, built in 1870, was in good condition and under an asphalt roof. The building was boarded up and painted red. There were two rooms, which were furnished as tanner’s workrooms. The building had one fireplace with a masonry hearth. The insurance value of the building was increased because it had been restored to good condition after the fire of 1894. The insurance company’s representative in Rauma had attached a note to the papers stating that, in accordance with the Governor’s decision, the building had been granted only a temporary renovation permit for a maximum period of five years.

Another building with minor damage had also been repaired.

Modification drafts

There is an alteration drawing from 1880 for the building on the eastern boundary of the plot. It contained a baker’s pantry and pantry and a canopy supported by columns at the south end. It was now intended to demolish the canopy and instead build a board shed at the north end of the building. Other buildings on the site included a residential building along Kuninkaankatu and on the western boundary of the site, and another residential building further north on the western boundary of the site. There was an outbuilding along the river.

An alteration drawing of the main building by August Helenius dates from 1888. The main feature is the magnificent neo-renaissance cladding on the façade, which is executed as it is and serves as a model for the cladding of many other buildings. As an exception, a basement is built underneath the building, along the entire length of the building’s roofline. It is clear from the sectional drawing that the interior of the building is also intended to have a neo-renaissance design as fine as that of the façade. The hall features handsome double doors, panelled walls and a large tiled stove. The floor plan shows the hall at the end of the building, with a deep hall, followed by a hallway and three small chambers, and a smaller room at the end of the building and a kitchen with a baking oven that partly extends to the side of the courtyard. There are two more large rooms on the courtyard side. In front of the main entrance, as well as in front of the kitchen door, is a porch. However, the courtyard wing was not exactly as planned.

All the buildings on the plot can be found on the 1895 map by John Fredr. Lindegren. There is a residential building along the street and a second residential row on the side of the courtyard, which was to be extended. At the same time, the outbuilding on the west side of the property was rebuilt. There were also outbuildings on the river bank and on the eastern side of the plot. The change concerned the courtyard wing of the residential building, where one small chamber was added. The chamber was not connected to the other living spaces, but was accessed via a small porch of its own. The baker’s pantry also had its own entrance and was not connected to the other rooms. The oven in the baking room also had a brick oven and a stove. The sauna was separated from the corner of the baking room by a light partition wall. The kitchen and two chambers in the wing were connected to the living rooms on the roof, although the kitchen had its own entrance. The façade drawing on the courtyard side shows that the slightly wider rear section, which is slightly wider than the rest of the building, appears to be older than the articulated section. It is horizontally boarded and has six-paned windows. The windows in the attic are double-paned. The new extension has been adapted to the building’s appearance and the porch has a gable roof. The windows in the articulated section are T-pane and there is no separate attic section.

The rebuilt outbuilding would be made of board. It was to be two storeys high, with a single room on each floor, accessible from both the long side and the end. The building would be vertically planked. In 1905, plans were made to replace the outbuilding on the western boundary of the site with a new residential building. The plan drawn up by M. Isakson was not carried out.

There is also another drawing by M. Isaksson from 1905. It concerns a building on the eastern boundary of the plot. It had partly storage, partly living quarters and an open roof. Now more living space was wanted. In addition to the old kitchen stove, three tiled ovens were added. There were two entrances. In the same year, a separate chamber on the west side of the building was to be converted into a stove room. In 1931, the adjoining room, which no longer had a baking oven, was also part of the same dwelling. The wing part of the building was being widened for the two chambers, so that the width of the frame was the same as in the former parlor. The roof of the building was raised. In 1935, a clapboard-lined garage was added to the riverfront outbuilding.

In 1951, the main building of Mattla housed a bank. One partition wall was demolished for the bank room. The bank also needed a vault. The old fireplaces in the building were demolished and the entrances were modified. The building still had some residential use. At this stage, the attic floor was also brought into use, and from the side of the courtyard, the street-side building began to look like a two-storey building. The second floor apartment even had a balcony. The building was converted to central heating.

In 1961, a new garage section was added to the building on the eastern boundary of the property. There were no other outbuildings on the site.

In 1965, the main building was converted into a printing house. The vault and some partitions were demolished, while new lightweight walls were built.

In 1983, changes were planned. They wanted to make Kuninkaankatu residential again. The wing on the western side of the plot would remain in shop use. New porches were to be built on the courtyard side, similar to those that had previously been in the building. A tall, neo-renaissance gateway was also planned for the roof side. After a couple of years, the plans had changed to include a restaurant on the site. The attic apartment was to be enlarged and modernised. However, the plans were delayed and it was not until 1994 that an apartment was finally built on the ground floor of the building. The west wing remained a shop and workshop.

Current situation

Street-side building
An elongated residential building, partly a commercial building. Courtyard wing built in 1877, street wing before that, street facade with neo-renaissance siding of 1887 (August Helenius), ribbed siding on courtyard facade, hipped roof, windows in stone basement.

Exterior
Longitudinal exterior building, ribbed horizontal siding.