Showing posts with label Royal Victoria Pavilion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Royal Victoria Pavilion. Show all posts

Thursday, April 14, 2011

David Chipperfield, The Turner Contemporary, architecture at Sea in Thanet a bit of a ramble.

I was born in the same year as David Chipperfield and so I suppose there must be some common ground, I once worked for a different Chipperfield, who ran a fun fair. My main connection with Margate is that I was employed as an engineer working on the various sites owned by Associated Leisure sometime in the early 1970s. This was the firm that owned Dreamland, the Lido and most of the amusement arcades along what used to be known as Margate’s Golden Mile. I have always been fascinated by electromechanical and electronic control of machines and for a while it was amusement machines that interested me.

With this new building opening to the public at the weekend I feel I have some affinity with Margate, the architect and the building, I also have an interest in art and our local architecture, so here goes some sort of post.

Major public architectural structures on the foreshore in Thanet nearly all have an unusual history and The Turner Contemporary has already one of its own, most people will remember Snohetta and Spence's design and the prototype that failed its test when the sea washed it away. After this a much more practical approach to constructing a building on the foreshore was adopted, a proper professional flood risk assessment has been carried out for David Chipperfield’s Turner Contemporary so I is unlikely to be washed away, as Margate Pier was. Like it or not here in Thanet we have probably got it for a long time.

I know people have likened it to a shed, a gun emplacement and various other things, when I first saw the design drawings, the first thing that occurred to me was that it looks like a series of heads of K9 without ears. You can’t help what your mind does and perhaps it is best not to mention this sort of thing, but I don’t think it matters here as I don’t think the finished building looks like K9.

In a sense this weekends opening is the third opening of the Turner Contemporary in Margate, as it has previously opened in the old M&S building and The Droit House, lets hope it is a case of third time lucky. The two previous incarnations have seemed to me to be a bit underwhelming, attracting almost no interest at all. I have visited almost all of the exhibitions in both buildings and apart from the people working there I have usually been the only person looking at the exhibition.

With the Droit House I got the feeling that much of what was happening there was fake, the silly walks, the attempts to encompass local history into art which seemed to missing the vital ingredient, a local historian. Perhaps it was the ambience of the building, which is of course a fake itself, the original having been dispatched by Hitler.

Contemporary art and architecture is elitist, and there is a sense that the new building has been designed for the benefit of the elite inside it, from the outside it looks utilitarian, there is I agree some elegance to it when viewed from some angles, but there is no doubt the prime utility is for those inside.

There is also the sense that both contemporary art and architecture generates an emperor’s no clothes situation, this was particularly evident in the Droit House at some times, where there was a very real sense that the staff were being careful not to leave anything about that wasn’t supposed to be art that could be mistaken for art.

There is also a sense in seaside architecture that is intending to be something that it isn’t, the only other famous architect that I know of to design something that was actually built down on the Thanet foreshore was Stanley Davenport Adshead who designed Ramsgate’s Royal Victoria Pavilion, built in 1904. This was supposed to look like Little Theatre at Versailles, like the Droit House we can call this a fake, it was intended to be one from its first inception.

Well Ramsgate’s Royal Victoria Pavilion hasn’t succumbed to Hitler, hasn’t been washed away like the mock up of Turner 1, or the adjacent Margate Pier, but is has become a victim of circumstance, see http://thanetonline.blogspot.com/2010/11/pictures-of-inside-of-royal-victoria.html

My understanding was that the new gallery was going to be coated in glass and glow in the sun, either this hasn’t worked, I haven’t seen it or the idea was dropped for some reason. Has anyone seen it glowing, or isn’t it supposed to?

I think all of the main Thanet blogs have been unkind about the whole idea of building this gallery, this is a quote from Thanet Life, probably Thanet’s oldest blog:

“Why the fiscally challenged planners at Kent County Council in conjunction with Thanet Council, believe that opening a gallery in a famous artist’s name, with none of his paintings on display, will suddenly transform Margate into a cultural Mecca and attract hordes of cultural day-trippers is anyone’s guess.”

Well they have managed one Turner and admittedly it is one of the few Turners not painted from life but based on a sketch by another artist, so once again it is a bit of self confessed fake.

We certainly haven't got what we first expected which was a gallery that looked like a huge pebble on the beach, perhaps the question here is not so much does it look like an art gallery? But will it look like an art gallery? If it becomes famous enough people will look at this shape and think, art gallery, if it fails to then I suppose they will continue to look at this shape and depending on who they are they will think, shed, gun emplacement, K9, this is all something to do with what art is about, that it is something that has changed people from seeing a particular representation of a can of soup and experiencing artistic appreciation instead of. What? Seeing a can of soup.

Just as a further note if you are getting a warning saying that this site has a virus on it today, you need to update your virus checker.  

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Ramsgate, Rank the council and how the Royal Victoria Pavillion got trashed

Assuming that you are a normal law abiding citizen then you know that if you fall fowl – sorry must have been thinking of chickens – foul of the council, don’t pay your council tax, abide by the conditions of your lease (if you rent a council owned property – even a beach hut) then the council will take you to court and you will have to pay up.
When it comes to large companies that fall foul of the council then things are a bit different – I am not saying that this always the council’s fault, just what happens – the trouble is that as time goes on a council can get a bit of a name as a soft touch.
Sometime back in 1969 the council leased the Pav to Fortes, at this time the Pav was the main music venue in the town, from memory the Golden Goose Showbar – correct me if I’m wrong I was 16 at the time and had other things on my mind – live music most evenings.
Over time with company takeovers, mergers and so on this lease became the responsibility of the Rank Organisation and Rank and the companies they took over, trashed the Pav.

If they obtained planning permission for the things they did to the building then I can’t find any record of it, if they took any notice of the listed building consent then I can’t find any record of that either.
I suppose much of the fault here lies with the council who just didn’t keep an eye on this important building that had been entrusted to them. As you know eventually the Rank Organisation decided that they didn’t need the building anymore and walked away from it leaving it derelict.

Eventually in April 2008 the council wrote them a letter with a list of things that Rank needed to do to be compliant with the lease, here it is http://thanetonline.com/rvpds other letters followed, much the same and the Rank Organisation painted the outside of the building.
I think that the council saw this as some sort of victory (perhaps it was) and issued a press release, here it is http://www.thanet.gov.uk/news/latest_press_releases/pavilion_work_finishes.aspx saying that work had been completed down the Pav.

I didn’t like the look of the work on the outside, in many places they have just painted over where the building has been boarded up and frankly didn’t believe the press release.
Fortunately there was still some work going on down there so I thought I had better go and have a look, at what the building was really like inside, this I did, see http://thanetonline.blogspot.com/2010/11/pictures-of-inside-of-royal-victoria.html

The dreadful condition of the inside of the pavillion or pavilion – don’t know which is right – The Pav, was beyond anything I could describe so I took some pictures, see
http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/pav2010/index.htm

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/pav2010/id3.htm
http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/pav2010/id4.htm
after this nothing seemed to be happening with the building at all, so yesterday I asked the council what is going on with it .

This is what I asked:

“Do the council have any intention of getting Rank repair the inside of the building that is now derelict?

Is there anything on the cards apart from it standing for many more years as an empty and derelict white elephant?

Of course if you have anything else to say that I may not have thought about, say it and I will change the post accordingly.”

And this is their reply:

"The council is legally limited by what it can do in statute and in case law.

"As this was an interim schedule of dilapidations, the internal works that can be required by the landlord are very limited. Works within those parameters have now been concluded.


"Rank has a lease and they have now fulfilled their obligations within that lease."

The problem for us here in Ramsgate, is one of where do we go from here? a wealthy and major company has trashed one of main heritage and tourist assets.

The council while happy to engage in expensive legal wrangles with residents, won’t take on the Rank Organisation, probably wisely I should add.

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Pictures of the inside of The Royal Victoria Pavilion Ramsgate

Originally built as a Concert Hall and Assembly Rooms in 1903. Designed by Stanley Davenport. Adshead and built by F.G. Minter of Putney.
Ostensibly in the style of a Robert Adam orangery and based on the Little Theatre at Versailles; the whole was aimed as an exercise in the Adam style. Designed in 1 week, to be built in 6 weeks in time for the 1903 season.
Sounds fantastic doesn’t it and the council have issued a press release saying:

“Repair work has been completed on one of Ramsgate’s most familiar seafront buildings.

Work has been carried out over the last four months to the Royal Victoria Pavilion on Harbour Parade by the Rank Organisation. It follows lengthy discussions with the council, which owns the building. It is Rank’s responsibility, as the tenants, to ensure that the building is kept in good repair.

Since work started in the summer, the roof of the pavilion has been repaired, partly recovered and redecorated. The external rendering was fractured and in poor condition in a large number of places, which was allowing weather penetration to occur in some of these areas. To avoid deterioration of the structure, these areas have been repaired, re-rendered and redecorated.

Cllr. Roger Latchford, Cabinet Member for Regeneration, said: “Most people in Ramsgate know the pavilion building and have wanted to see something happening with it, as has the council. We’re delighted that finally work has been completed on the exterior of the building to bring it back into good repair. Hopefully, now that this work has been undertaken, we can look forward to it being re-occupied.””
Anyway I thought I had better go and take a look, sorry the pictures didn’t come out as well as I had hoped, it was darker than I expected inside.
Here are the links to the rest of the pictures

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/pav2010/index.htm

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/pav2010/id3.htm

http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/pav2010/id4.htm
I am a bit lost for words at the moment, but I will add to this post later on today.

Saturday, October 16, 2010

Why has the Royal Victoria Pavilion in Ramsgate gone grey?

Anyone got any idea why the roof of the pavilion has been painted battleship grey?
Its bad enough that so many bits have been chopped off since it was built in 1903.
Some things about it remain a bit of a mystery, like the picture above (click on it to make it bigger) perhaps sandbags for the war effort, does anyone know?
As you see from the picture above it could really do with a flood defence like Margate is getting.
The pavilion was designed by Stanley Davenport Adshead, more about this later on when I get a bit more time.
Here are a few more pictures before I get going on this one http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/laptop1010/id8.htm some of what was there before the pavilion and some showing bits that were added on but mostly taken off since it was built in 1903.
Some of the official opening, I think it was opened by Princess Louise in 1904, but will have to check that.
What is happening at the moment is one of those only in Thanet stories, it could probably be resolved by spending several days formulating information requests and formal complaints.

Ridiculous as it is the council don’t just tell us what is going on, what if any the plans are for this iconic Ramsgate building.

What happened with the building is that it was leased to a firm who were running it as an entertainment venue, live music, concession seaside shops, café etc. it’s all rather a long time ago and I was a teenager at the time with other things on my mind.

A series of takeovers and possibly unwise control by the council meant that the building’s use changed to an amusement arcade and casino and then to a nightclub and casino.

The operators gutted the building and built separate buildings inside to house their various ventures.

They then closed the nightclub that became derelict, followed by the casino, leaving this listed building an asbestos contaminated wreck.

Eventually the council got around to trying to enforce the terms of the lease, I assume that these were at the very least to keep the building in a reasonable state of repair.

Some deal has been struck between the casino firm and the council, although what it is, well that is of course some sort of secret. From what I understand the casino operator have agreed to decorate the outside of the building but leave the inside a wreck.

I don’t think they intend to replace the features that they removed, most importantly the domed porch.

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Work starts on the Pleasurama site and other reflections on building work

There is much activity in Ramsgate from the men in overalls with their Transit vans, I seemed to confront this wherever I went today.
Pugin looks out under a much scaffolded Granville, it would seem that the roof on the new bit has never been quite right.

There was early morning activity on the Pleasurama site, they appear to be clearing the ground prior to constructing the Royal Sands Development there.
The only place in Ramsgate that residential development has occurred in front of a cliff face in the past is Kent Terrace.
At the moment there is some sort of dialogue going on between the council and the residents there about who is responsible for repairing the cliff wall there.
This design of cliff wall in Ramsgate has given problems in the past, so it is an important dialogue, particularly if you live in front of one.
There were a – what is the collective noun for Transit vans – a taggle or perhaps an encumbrance, lot of them about as you can see.

The trouble in this case is that I don’t think any amount of rodding will stop the buildings there filling up with sewage when it rains hard.

There is a strange anachronism relating to environmental regulation here, it isn’t possible to put an emergency drain into the harbour although the sewage pours into there too, when it rains hard that is.

There was also much work going on the slipway that apparently we don’t need.
Where this work will take place when the slipway is built on is unclear, of course while a slipway isn’t economically viable while some sort of pub eatery would be, there is the question. Is the harbour viable if there isn’t anywhere for the windfarm vessels to be mended.
The pavilion is having much attention from the taggle, it is strange doing all this work on the outside of the building, without giving it a sea defence to protect it or resolving the problems inside.
Much activity around the new development in Kent Terrace too, it is very obviously about a metre shorter that it should be, just suppose you had to explain to your partner why the garden shed’s height was out by a metre.

Sorry I digress, some of the Pleasurama site clearance seems to be revelling some unusual aspects of the cliff façade, but I won’t say anything about that as I have done so enough before I think.
I think it’s time to look at the historical aspect here combined with today’s pictures.
The guys in the picture above are looking for people buried in the rubble when part of the cliff near the Pleasurama site collapsed in 1957.
The Brick pillar in the picture above is part of the structure that collapsed then.
The picture above is another one of this series of collapses, I say series as it collapsed again halfway through the rebuilding process, taking the new concrete support with it, a few hundred tons of chalk tends to get its own way.

Now most of these collapses are caused by water leaking in through the top surface, blocked drains, cracked surface, that sort of thing.
The clump of weeds growing by the fence in the picture above is all you can see of the drain that is completely blocked, next to the top of the brick pillar.

And the brick pillar is seventy feet high and twelve feet away from the new development that will have people living inside.
I have mentioned this today to both the council and the contractor who is going to build the development there, just in case you were wondering.
Oh the rest of today’s pictures are at http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/910/id4.htm and http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/910/id5.htm I nearly forgot.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Work Starts on The Royal Victoria Pavilion in Ramsgate

As you can see from the picture taken yesterday the scaffolding is going up, my understanding is that the work is to be external only and is the result of an agreement reached between Thanet District Council the owner and The Rank Organisation the leaseholder.

I believe the lease was granted to the Pleasurama Organisation and that they moved their “Tiberius” casino there from where it was housed between The Marina Swimming Pool and Marian Esplanade into the western end of the pavilion and opened an amusement arcade “Stardust” in the western end.

At some point the lease was transferred to Rank Organisation who operated the casino until it closed and moved to Westwood Cross, I think this was late in 2007 or early in 2008.
If you look at the picture above of the pavilion in its former glory you can see some bits are missing most noticeably the domed porch and the windows in the arched roof.

Now I am not certain at what point the windows were removed but I am certain that the porch was removed after the building was listed and while the building was leased as a casino.

What I am completely uncertain of is if the work will reinstate the outside of this listed building to how it was and looked, or if this is just urgent weatherproofing to stop further deterioration.

The damage to the structure that has been caused by years of neglect that has lead to water getting into the iron framed structure, causing the iron to rust badly, which in tern lead to expansion inside the concrete that covered much of the iron frame, causing it to crack.

This process is called spalling, the cracks mean more water gets in causing more rust that enlarges the cracks, it is difficult to remediate effectively and it may be several years after the work is done, before it is certain that the problem has properly stabilised.

Speaking here with my engineer’s hat on instead of looking at it from a historical preservation point of view I think the pavilion is probably beyond economic preservation.
The picture above shows a very high tide, fortunately we don’t get these very often and mostly we get them on a calm day, like the day the picture was taken. I suppose pretty much anyone who has lived by the sea for a while can imagine what happens on the rare occasions when a very high tide is combined with a major storm.

Since the pavilion was built in 1903-4 it has been engulfed by the sea on several occasions, causing damage and flooding and I think that it is likely that at some time in the future a storm will cause all or part of it to collapse.

Monday, May 31, 2010

Bank Holiday Ramble

Another dull and dreary Bank Holiday on the type of weather front, we took the children to a boot fair this morning and I have just finished doing a few chores and reading the local blogs.

A few rather rambling thoughts here on this and that as I try to work out some sort of strategy to get a bit more for Ramsgate out of local government, in terms of the council owned assets in Ramsgate.

First the council leadership and cabinet reshuffle, I gather that the intention here is to reshuffle it again and that Simon Moores will probably not retain the Ramsgate Marina portfolio.

I think the intention here is to move this responsibility to the leader of the council Cllr. Bob Bayford, at the moment this presents me with something of a problem as so far he doesn’t appear to acknowledge or respond to emails.

To be fair this is just as likely to be due to some glitch in TDCIT as any intention to ignore local people. I do think however that there is some something wrong with the way that the leaders office is working when emails from local people about local issues to leader@thanet.gov.uk don’t get any response at all.

The harbour and most particularly the marina is the key to regeneration in Ramsgate and at the moment it is in a fairly rundown state, there are some fairly controversial plans for closing two of the slipways and building a leisure complex on them.

The problem here is that with competition from the ports on the coast of northern Europe it is becoming increasingly difficult to run the slipways at a profit, conversely the slipways are essential for profitable aspects of the harbour, like the expanding windfarm business.

There is also the council’s peculiar attitude to heritage, failure to grant security of tenure to the maritime museum and the reduction of the concessionary mooring fees for historic vessels, meaning that they have all left their dedicated pontoon.

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding in local government about the way the marina and royal harbour relate to the town, tourism and heritage.

The heritage aspect of the harbour, if properly managed should attract considerable grant funding, bring plenty of tourism and make the harbour more a more desirable place for people to keep their boats than other harbours without the strong heritage aspect. Driving the heritage part away, not only makes it less interesting for tourists but also is likely to mean less revenue for the council.

Partly I think the problem is that the council has got itself into a situation where it considers that the greatest return and therefore the best way out of the present financial problems, is to view every council asset as something where they are looking at the maximum return in terms of either disposal or rental return, that will produce the most overall short term return in terms of income for the council.

The Council legal bill for fighting the Montefiore Village Green Application see http://thanetpress.blogspot.com/2010/05/council-legal-bill-hits-80k-fighting.html is a case in point. Now I know this is an opposition press release and as such may have over stated the point, the problem is however one looks at it, when adding up the figures, it looks like there is an uncomfortable parity with the amount of money the council has spent so far in a legal wrangle over selling it and the amount they would ultimately realise if they sell it. I say this setting aside any thoughts about what local peoples wishes are and just looking cold and hard at the balance sheet.

I would imagine that the council’s legal and financial departments must have understood the cost that would be incurred before embarking in this procedure.

Management of council owned assets in Ramsgate seems to have gone a bit wrong, Westcliff Hall, The Café on the end of the east pier, the dry dock, slipways and winding houses, the marina, the maritime museum, Albion House, the pavilion, the Pleasurama site, well the list could go on. Perhaps one or two of these could be excused but all of them seem too much to be a coincidence.

I am hoping that the new cabinet will have a new direction when dealing with these things. Perhaps the first step should be much more openness about what they are doing and why.

To expand on this a bit more, the thing in terms of local council assets that I have the most in depth understanding of is the Pleasurama development. Information about this comes my way in dribs and drabs and frankly much more of it doesn’t make sense than does.

Now one aspect of this that is pretty much beyond me are the financial arrangements between the council and the developer, unlike the cliff façade and the flood risk problems that I understand, up until now I have had to take the councillors word that they are taking the best advise and acting in the public interest.

Now I have firm written confirmation that the council’s director of finance advised the cabinet not to proceed with the development and that the cabinet in a secret closed meeting decided to ignore that advice and allow the development to proceed.

It is now almost a year since that decision and still we have the situation that we have had for the last few years, when asked the council says the development will start within weeks.

No proper consultation, no accurate information for the people of Ramsgate, nothing approaching open government, but worse of all when things like this leak out and as open government becomes more widespread they surely will, no sensible explanation.

I have put this to two cabinet members, past and present, one who normally replies didn’t and the other replied with, no comment.

I should remind people that at this time the cabinet members were aware that the environment agency had strongly recommended not proceeding with the development without a flood risk assessment and emergency escapes to the cliff top.

I believed their position on this was that although they didn’t like the situation they had no alternative but to let the development go ahead even if the environment agency considered that it could be dangerous.

There is of course the issue of the cliff façade too but try as I have there doesn’t seem to be any government agency willing to comment on that one. I should point out that the various faulty bulging bits get this way because of cliff falls building up behind the concrete until there is a sufficient weight of chalk to shift and crack the concrete.

Let’s suppose that there is nothing much wrong with the cliff façade for a moment, if any of you have a few moments to spare go onto the TDC planning website http://www.ukplanning.com/thanet and look at the latest plans F/TH/03/1200 ground floor sheet 23 Jan 2009, take a kook at the lorry in the 70 foot deep 13 foot wide canyon and consider what would happen if it caught one of the protruding support pillars, for the cliff façade.

The picture is of the café on the end of the east pier, one of the long-term empty council owned assets.
 

blogger templates | Blogger