rothesay pavilion rothesay, isle of bute · 2015-01-10 · simpson & brown architects november...

ROTHESAY PAVILION Rothesay, Isle of Bute

Conservation Plan

Simpson & Brown Architects November 2010

Front cover: The upper part of the east elevation, with the non-original but distinctive lettering. (S&B)

Rothesay Pavilion, Isle of Bute – Conservation Management Plan 1

Contents Page

1.0 Executive Summary 3

2.0 Introduction 5

2.1 Objectives of the Conservation Management Plan 5 2.2 Study Area 5 2.3 Heritage Designations 7 2.4 Structure of the Report 8 2.5 Adoption & Review 9 2.6 Other Studies 9 2.7 Limitations 9 2.8 Orientation 9 2.9 Project Team 9 2.10 Acknowledgements 9 2.11 Abbreviations 10

3.0 Understanding Rothesay Pavilion: Historical Development 12

3.1 Introduction 12 3.2 Overview 12 3.3 Historical Context 13 3.4 Architectural Context 19 3.5 The Building of the Pavilion 26 3.6 Drawn Evidence 29 3.7 Historical Views and Photographs 37 3.8 The Caretaker’s House 43 3.9 Summary Chronology 44 3.10 Summary of Condition 45 3.11 Construction Materials 45 3.12 Paint Analysis 46 3.13 Summary of Documentary and Physical Evidence 46 4.0 Understanding Rothesay Pavilion: The Pavilion in 2010 51

4.1 Building Description 51 4.2 Current Management of the Site 81 5.0 Assessment of Significance 83

5.1 Introduction 83 5.2 Historical Significance 86 5.3 Architectural, Aesthetic and Artistic Significance 87 5.4 Social Significance 87 5.5 Archaeological Significance 88 6.0 Summary Statement of Significance 89

2 Rothesay Pavilion, Isle of Bute – Conservation Management Plan

7.0 Grading of Significance 90

7.1 Introduction 90 7.2 Graded Elements 91 8.0 Risks & Opportunities 92

8.1 Introduction 92 8.2 Conservation and the Existing Fabric 92 8.3 Maintenance 93 8.4 Use 93 8.5 Statutory & Non-Statutory Constraints 93 8.6 Public & Disabled Access 94 8.7 Management 94 8.8 New Work & Alterations 95 8.9 Setting & Boundaries 95 8.10 Effects on the Environment & Climate Change 96 8.11 Interpretation & Understanding 96 8.12 Management of Information 97 9.0 Conservation Issues & Policies (Aims & Objectives) 98

9.1 Introduction 98 9.2 Base Policies – Conservation 98 9.3 Conservation and the Existing Fabric 99 9.4 Maintenance 109 9.5 Use 110 9.6 Statutory & Non-Statutory Constraints 110 9.7 Safety, Vandalism & Security 110 9.8 Public & Disabled Access 112 9.9 Management 113 9.10 Workmanship & Advice 113 9.11 New Work & Alterations 114 9.12 Setting & Boundaries 116 9.13 Effects on the Environment & Climate Change 117 9.14 Interpretation & Understanding 117 9.15 Management of Information 118 10.0 Appendices

Appendix I Listed Building Report Appendix II 2002Paint Analysis Appendix III A3 Drawings (figures 41-46)


1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Rothesay Pavilion is a category A listed building located at the junction of Argyle Street and Mackinlay Street.

The structures that comprise the pavilion were built in one long phase of construction with the building completed and opened to the public in July 1938.

The building is important for its historical, architectural and social associations. Historically, it represents an important inter-War reaction to the decline of the seaside resort, an idea which had seen its invention, and heyday, in the 19th century. With the increasing availability of choice in travel, these seaside resorts needed to compete, and the pavilion was a key component in the considered effort of Rothesay to continuing attract visitors in large numbers. Architecturally, the building stands as an intriguing and distinctly Scottish response to the International Style, with the combination of cast stone and Streamline Moderne. Again, socially, the pavilion has remained a key social space in Rothesay for over seventy years, and has seen continued change in its purpose: primarily it has seen a shift of focus from tourism and in 2010 functions primarily as a social space for the local community, as a Council-owned and managed community centre.

The overall level of significance for the building is considerable, but with a number of features being of negative significance. Elements of considerable significance should be retained and respected as part of any future redevelopment of the building. Elements of moderate significance should be retained wherever possible. It would be beneficial for the overall significance of the building if negative elements were removed (see section 5.0).

This conservation management plan provides an overview of the historical development of the site, followed by an assessment of the significance of the overall site and its components. From this understanding of the place, a discussion of the key issues relating to the site and a set of policies have been produced to guide future use, development and management of the building and its various parts. A draft version of this document was prepared by Simpson & Brown in 2003, and this has been used to inform the initial design approach proposed architectural interventions. This 2010 document addresses those proposals.


Figure 1 Front elevation of the Rothesay Pavilion. S&B

Figure 2 Location Plan. bing.com/maps


2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Objectives of the Conservation Management Plan

This conservation management plan has been commissioned by Argyll and Bute Council and the Prince’s Regeneration Trust to inform the conservation, repair, use, management and alteration of Rothesay Pavilion, Argyle Street, Rothesay, Isle of Bute.

This report includes an appraisal of the heritage value of the pavilion, an examination of main conservation-related issues and guidelines for the site.

The conservation management plan assesses and sets out in summary what is important about Rothesay Pavilion (its significance), based upon readily available information. The information gathered is then considered in an assessment of cultural significance, for the site as a whole and for its various parts, to be summarised in this report with a statement of significance.

The purpose of establishing the significance of the site is to identify and assess the attributes which make a place of value to our society. Once the heritage significance of the building is understood, informed policy decisions can be made which will enable that significance to be retained, revealed, enhanced or, at least, impaired as little as possible in any future decisions for the site. A clear understanding of the nature and degree of the significance of the building will not simply suggest constraints on future action. It will introduce flexibility by identifying the areas which can be adapted or developed with greater freedom.

Based on all of this information and opinion, a set of policies, or guidelines, have been established that will inform the conservation, repair, management and use of the building according to best conservation practice.

2.2 Study Area

The study area comprises the Rothesay Pavilion building, the surrounding site, and the former caretaker’s house. The study area is located on Arygle Street, at the junction with Mackinlay Street. The pavilion sits on the west side of the Argyle Street facing eastwards across Rothesay Bay. The main front of the building complex is set back from the road, and thus the pavilion is not readily visible when approached from the north or the south. The former caretaker’s house is immediately to the south-west corner of the main pavilion building. The study area backs onto adjacent properties to the south and west. The study assumes that the grassed area to the rear of the building is not part of the site, although the ownership of this and the potential for use by the pavilion should be investigated. as this may be the original site for extension noted in the original competition entry (see below).

The study area is shown on Figure 3.


Figure 3 Study area of the conservation management plan outlined in red. Promap. Crown copyright 2009. Licence no. 100020449. Modified by S&B.

Figure 4 Rothesay Pavilion in context. Google Street View.


2.3 Heritage Designations & Policies

2.3.1 Listed Buildings

Rothesay Pavilion is a category A listed building complex comprising three parts – pavilion, former caretaker’s house and boundary walls (HB Number: 40452). The listed building report is included in Appendix I.

As a category A listed building complex, it is therefore recognised by Historic Scotland as a building of national or international importance, either architectural or historic, or as a fine little-altered examples of some particular period, style or building type.

2.3.2 Scheduled Ancient Monuments

The site is not recognised as a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM), nor is it located in the immediate vicinity of a SAM.

2.3.3 Conservation Area

Rothesay Pavilion is located within a designated Conservation Area. Rothesay Conservation Area (see figure 5) is one of Scotland's most extensive, stretching along the east coast of the Isle of Bute for some five miles from Port Bannatyne to Ascog. It encompasses Rothesay town centre and esplanade, its early industrial area, extensive seafront residential suburbs and two villages. It was designated in 1971, extended in 1980 and 1984 and given outstanding status in 1985.

Figure 5 Map showing extent of the Rothesay Conservation Area, with the location of the Pavilion circled. Argyll and Bute Council


2.3.4 Sites and Monuments Record

The site is not located within an area identified as being of archaeological interest by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service on their Sites and Monuments Record.

2.3.5 CHORD Programme

Argyll and Bute Council has embarked upon a programme to assist regeneration and economic development in five of its waterfront towns - Campbeltown, Helensburgh, Oban, Rothesay and Dunoon. In November 2008, the Council unanimously agreed to allocate more than £30 million to the programme, since named ‘CHORD’1.

The proposed heritage projects in Rothesay seek to halt the process of decay within the town centre’s outstanding conservation area. These projects include the identification of a sustainable re-use to enable the restoration of the Category A listed Rothesay Pavilion, and the implementation of a Townscape Heritage Initiative (THI) to restore the fabric of a prominent part of the town centre primarily focused around Guildford Square. By capitalising on the unique heritage assets of Rothesay, the aim is to revitalise the historic town centre and draw attention to the town as being an attractive, successful and highly liveable town for all those who live, work and visit.2

Figure 6 Rothesay Pavilion in context. S&B

2.4 Structure of the Report

This conservation management plan follows the guidelines set out in the Heritage Lottery Fund’s Conservation Management Planning (April 2008) document, (which supersedes the Heritage Lottery Fund Conservation Management Plans Checklist, Conservation Management Plans Model Brief and Conservation Management Plans: Helping your application (2004)); Historic Scotland’s document Conservation Plans: A Guide to the Preparation of Conservation Plans; The Conservation Plan 5th Ed. (The National Trust of Australia, 2000) by James Semple Kerr; and The Illustrated Burra Charter: good practice for heritage places (Australia ICOMOS, 2004) by M Walker and P Marquis-Kyle. Reference is also made to the British Standard BS 7913 – Guide to the principles of the conservation of historic buildings (1998).

1 http://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/content/planning/regenerationprojects/chordprogramme/, accessed 30-

Sep-2010 2 Ibid.


2.5 Adoption & Review

This conservation management plan is to be adopted by Argyll and Bute Council, stakeholders, consultants and by any future users of the site to aid in the sensitive and appropriate management and use of this historic building complex.

2.7 Limitations

It is possible that further information will become available after the completion of this report. Any new information should be acknowledged by the stakeholders and incorporated into future revisions of the conservation management plan.

2.8 Orientation

The front elevation of Rothesay Pavilion faces east-north-east. For the purposes of this report and convenience, the front elevation has been taken to be facing east.

2.9 Project Team

The study team from Simpson & Brown for the 2010 conservation management plan comprised John Sanders, a partner in the firm & Tom Parnell, an architectural historial. The 2003 conservation plan was written by Georgina Allison, architect at Simpson & Brown. Specialist input was provided by Morham & Brotchie (Quantity Surveying) and John Nevin (Paint Analysis).

2.10 Acknowledgements

Simpson & Brown gratefully acknowledges the assistance provided by the following persons, archives and organisations during the completion of this report (in alphabetical order):

• Argyll and Bute Archives

• Argyll and Bute Council

• Tom Connolly, Director, Elder & Cannon Architects

• Matt Loader, Elder & Cannon Architects

• Douglas McCoombe, Rothesay Pavilion

• Peter McLaughlan, Architect

• James McMillan and colleagues, Rothesay Pavilion

• Maria Perks, Prince’s Regeneration Trust


2.11 Abbreviations

A number of abbreviations have been used throughout this report and are identified as follows:

A&BC– Argyll and Bute Council

DSA – Dictionary of Scottish Architects

E&C – Elder & Cannon Architects

NAS – National Archives of Scotland

NLS – National Library of Scotland

OS – Ordnance Survey

RCAHMS – Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland

S&B – Simpson & Brown Architects

Figure 7 View of east (principal) elevation. S&B

Figure 8 View of east (principal) elevation. S&B


Figure 9 View of west (rear) elevation. S&B

Figure 10 View of north (Mackinlay Street) elevation. S&B


3.0 UNDERSTANDING ROTHESAY PAVILION, ISLE OF BUTE

3.1 Introduction

An understanding of how the building has reached its present form will help determine the importance of various elements of the site, which will then inform policies, or guidelines for management and alterations.

Primary and secondary sources were examined in the preparation of this section of the report. The majority of written information was gathered from the National Monuments Record and the archives of Argyll and Bute Council. The architectural drawings submitted for the competition and architect’s photographs are held with the RCAHMS, and further reference has been made to Dean of Guild drawings held by Argyll and Bute Council. A dissertation by Peter McLaughlan provided a useful source of secondary material of information from council minutes etc.

3.2 Overview

Figure 11 Satellite photograph showing Rothesay Pavilion in context. Google Maps

Rothesay Pavilion sits directly at the NW end of the esplanade, which wraps round the bay on which the town of Rothesay is situated. The main elevation faces onto the esplanade and shore (figure 11). The town, on the Island of Bute, is accessible only by ferry, and was an important seaside resort, particularly for the urban population of nearby Glasgow and Clydeside.

The pavilion is a cast stone clad concrete structure that exploits its sloping site well, with two main public levels, both accessible from the adjacent ground levels. It was completed in 1938 in a Modernist style, after an architectural competition won by J.A. Carrick of the firm of J and J.A. Carrick of Ayr. The building, with its curved projecting bay with cantilevered sun terrace over and deep balconies is very visible from the ferry route and makes a striking contribution to the esplanade townscape for those arriving to the town by this route.


The building consists of large main hall, with recessed dance floor and proscenium stage. This is set back from the front of the building to allow terraces and the drum shaped café area to take advantage of the sea views, and also allow a more dynamic and open principal elevation. It also contains ancillary meeting rooms, offices and backstage accommodation.

At the time that it was built, the pavilion was an attempt to improve and update facilities in the town, hosting dances and conferences as well as providing sports facilities for both the summer and winter populations. These uses continue today.

3.3 Historical Context

Figure 12 Aquatint showing general view of Rothesay, published 1824. RCAHMS


Figure 13 Oblique aerial view showing Rothesay town, harbour & castle, 1999. RCAHMS

3.3.1 Historical Development of Rothesay

Rothesay has been inhabited for centuries on account of its notably sheltered bay on a key route at the midpoint of the Firth of Clyde. Combined with the freshwater outflow from Loch Fad, this point would have been ideal both as a natural harbour, and habitable, fertile ground.

Figure 14 Oblique aerial view of Rothesay Castle. RCAHMS

Rothesay Castle presents the earliest evidence of habitation with parts dating back to the 13th century. It’s tumultuous history of ownership reflects both its critical position and its vulnerability –Scots, Norsemen and the English all owning the castle at various points in the 13th and 14th centuries.

After becoming a favoured residence of the Stewart monarchy in the latter half of the 14th century, Rothesay and Bute’s association with nobility was established – continuing today with the high-profile titles Duke (held by the reigning monarch’s eldest son) and Marquessrespectively. The town itself became a Royal Burgh as early as 1401.


Figure 15 Rothesay as depicted on the Blaeu Atlas, 1654. NLS

Rothesay was to see further unrest in the 16th and 17th centuries, with the town being seized by the Earl of Lennox in 1544 on behalf of the English – a century later, the castle became a key foothold for Cromwellian troops, who largely destroyed the castle when they left in 16593. The castle saw further damage during the Earl of Argyll’s rebellion against King James VII in 1685, and remained in a derelict state until the 19th century.

It is interesting to see depictions of the town around this time – Joan Blaeu’s Atlas of Scotland, 1654 (figure 15), depicts the castle and town as a small island. The moat was certainly connected to the sea, prior to later land reclamation pushing the shoreline northwards, but it is more likely to represent the outflows from Loch Fad spreading out around the town. It is also suggested that the area was regularly flooded, with an account of 1306 describing the castle being taken ‘by sea’4.

Figure 16 General Roy’s survey of 1747-55. NLS

3 F A Walker, The Buildings of Scotland: Argyll and Bute, p627 4 Referenced in the Rothesay Conservation Area Town Centre Character Appraisal, Argyll and Bute

Council


By the 18th century, industry had begun to develop to a notable extent in the town, with an consequent increase in population. The growth of the town can be seen in the 1747-55 survey map by General Roy (figure 16). The town had largely developed to the south and east of the castle, and the map depicts a mill lade, which continues to exist today and can be seen around Mill Street.

Figure 17 John Wood’s map of Rothesay, 1825. NLS

Figure 18 Detail of John Wood’s map of Rothesay, 1825. NLS

The first of the land reclamation projects, to create Montague Street, was a distinctly urban project – the two sided street turning its back on the harbour behind. The 1825 map by John Wood shows the bridge over the mill lade leading to the similarly enclosed Bridge Street: Rothesay had gained an impressive linear main street, largely replacing the older High Street. The Gallowgate, leading on to the shore-hugging Arygle Street, turned off Bridge Street – very much a road ‘out of town’, but nevertheless lined with modest terraced houses by this date (see figure 17).

John Wood’s map also shows the road layout around the study area roughly as it is today (figure 18). Argyle Street bends into Argyle Place, with a steep road turning left up the hill leading to Argyle Terrace – at this time referred to as Terrace Lane, but later renamed Mackinlay Street. The site of today’s pavilion is relatively clear, with the short lane behind the building shown to the south of Terrace Lane.


Figure 19 1863 Ordnance Survey 25-inch map. NLS

It was not until 1840 that Rothesay began to turn its attention towards its seafront by constructing Victoria Street. Guildford Square and Albert Place continuing eastwards thus connected Argyle Place/Gallowgate and Prince’s Street as one long sea-facing elevation for the first time.

3.3.2 ‘Doon the Watter’: The Development of ‘Glasgow on Sea’

Figure 20 Crowds coming ashore at Rothesay during the 1952 Glasgow fair. Scotsman/Scran


The concept of a seaside retreat began with the increasing industrialisation of urban centres, in the case of Rothesay, the second city of Empire, Glasgow. In the early to mid 19th century many upper middle-class families from the city, flush with wealth from industrial concerns, started to build residences in coastal positions around the Firth of Clyde – primarily locations served by a pier which could be reached by boat direct from the city. This started less out of leisure concerns, but for health reasons to escape the smoke and bad air of the city – the concept of ‘taking sea-air’ is something that continues to persist today. Villas built for these families appear all along the sea-fronts of Rothesay, Dunoon and round the Cowal Peninsula – many dating to the mid-19th century.

With the arrival of the railways to numerous seaside locations – Helensburgh, Gourock and Wemyss Bay, for example – and the increasing ability of the working classes to both afford time and money for holidays, the niche market of the seaside resorts like Rothesay rapidly became mass-market. In addition to boats arriving at piers and jetties all around the Firth of Clyde, large frequent ferry services were provided from railway stations on the mainland.

Residential developments in towns like Rothesay quickly became larger and more commercial in scale – large hotels, taking up many feu-plot widths and rising well above the historic roofline became more common. In the case of Rothesay, architects even imported the Glasgow style of tenements – clearly demonstrating the high demand for accommodation, and ultimately leading to the term ‘Glasgow on Sea’. A number of impressive examples of tenements remain in Rothesay today.

By the end of the 19th century, the population of Rothesay had soared – the 1811 census recorded a population 2,118 in the burgh, and 9,034 by 1891, a level it sustained until the 1930s (9,347 in 1931)5.

An important maritime connection to consider in Rothesay’s history is the presence of the Royal Navy in Rothesay bay from 1940, through the remaining war years and beyond to 1957. This meant that Rothesay became important for the social and recreational activities of Navy personnel, with significant patronage of events at the pavilion as well as use of the Winter Gardens and the cinemas in the town.

3.3.2 Decline and Regeneration

Although Rothesay’s tourism industry was somewhat revived after the Second World War, the revival did not last long. In common with almost every other seaside resort in the UK, competition from the package-holiday boom of the 1960s caused a rapid decline in visitor numbers. Foreign holidays were not the only reason for the decline however – increasing car ownership also meant that holidaymakers became less reliant on holiday destinations that lay on major public transport routes. Although Rothesay was served by a vehicular ferry, once on Bute, car drivers could use their freedom to explore the rest of the island – inevitably however, the freedom to explore other parts of the UK became the more notable trend. The closure of the Royal Navy base also had a considerable impact.

The impact on Rothesay was significant, and this decline remained apparent until recently in the built heritage of the town. Furthermore, the population of the island

5 http://www.histpop.org/ohpr, accessed 15-Oct-2010. Note that the population of 1921 was recorded

as being ‘heavily inflated’ and discussion is made in the census reports about the apparent difficulty in

ascertaining the difference between resident population and visitors.


entered a steady decline from the peak of 12,112 residents noted in the 1931 survey6 to around 7,000 today7. Although the depopulation of island communities is a common phenomenon, it is probable that such a rapid decline in Rothesay was related to the tourism-based economy.

Figure 21 The Regal Cinema, completed the same year as the pavilion, now demolished. Des Gorra/ScottishCinemas.org.uk

Figure 22 Interior of the Winter Gardens in 1978, several years after closure. John Hume/RCAHMS

A number of buildings from the inter-War peak of Rothesay’s tourism industry didn’t fare quite so well as the pavilion. The cinema at the Duncan Halls which was converted as such in 1935 closed in 1968 – after briefly reopening as a cinema in 1972, the halls were destroyed in a landslide the following year. The Regal Cinema which had opened in 1938, the same year as the pavilion, closed in 1976 and was later demolished. The Ritz Cinema, also from the late-1930s, became a bingo hall, and was later largely converted into flats. Most notably of all closures however was the Winter Gardens, which closed in 1976. The building remained empty for much of the following two decades – but was nevertheless listed at category A in 1978, which helped to ensure its survival and ultimate regeneration in 1990 as a tourism information centre, restaurant and small cinema facility. It is notable that of all these buildings, only the pavilion remained open, and along with the Winter Gardens is now a key survival from this period.

Although it could be argued that the crowds that descended upon Rothesay in its heyday are unlikely to return, it has been recognised that the most important attractions that Rothesay held in the 1930s are still very much apparent. With the renewed focus on holidaying within the UK, particularly with the increased market for short-breaks, coupled with a common desire to escape busy roads and return to public transport, seaside destinations easily reached by rail from city centres are returning to favour.

3.4 Architectural Context

3.4.1 The Practice of J And J A Carrick

Although the competition was won by J & J A Carrick, a father and son practice based in Ayr, it is generally understood that James A Carrick, the son, was the primary designer of the Rothesay Pavilion.

6 Referenced in the Rothesay Conservation Area Town Centre Character Appraisal, Argyll and Bute

Council 7 www.scrol.gov.uk, accessed 05-Oct-10


He joined his fathers’ practice after being a prize winning student, possibly in Rome. His father had been a distinguished architect, at one time working for James Miller (the architect for Wemyss Bay station) before setting up his own practice.

In common with much of his generation, the younger Carrick entered competitions. These were a way of testing and using the ‘new style’ of architecture coming from the continent in the early thirties, as well as opportunities to gain work in what was a poor economic climate.

Again like many of his contemporaries, which include Jack Coia and Basil Spence, there were greater opportunities for relatively younger (and therefore more innovative) architects to build, owing to the scale of loss in the First World War.

Figure 23 Front elevation and section of Coatbridge Municipal Baths. RCAHMS

The first recorded competition win for Carrick was the Coatbridge Municipal Baths completed in 1935, a sedate sub-classical two storey structure in stone which bears little resemblance to the pavilion (figure 23).


Figure 24 Presentation perspective by J & J A Carrick for the Cragburn Pavilion, Gourock, September 1935. RCAHMS

However, his style had become more radical by the time he won the competition in 1935 to build the Cragburn Pavilion in Gourock, which was completed by 1936 (figure 24). Although a simpler and less ambitious scheme compared with Rothesay, Cragburn does show similar characteristics. The composition of staged horizontal and vertical elements, designed to mask the bulk of the main hall block (albeit less successfully), were all developed in the design for Rothesay. There is still a late Arts and Crafts influence (Gilbert Scott power station and Norman Shaw planning) in elements, but the white rendering is a move away from typical Arts and Crafts materials of brick and stone.

From these three projects, all dated from the period 1935-1936, it is clear that the practice was committed to modernism as a style, but suitable for only some buildings not all. However, at Rothesay, they have managed to transcend this limiting view, and create a cohesive building which merges British ‘beaux arts’, and International style and give it a uniquely Scottish character “with little if anything of its period to equal it in Scotland”8.

8 F A Walker, RIAS Illustrated Guide: North Clyde Estuary


Figure 25 Proposals for a Dunoon Pavilion by ‘A Carrick’, c1939. RCAHMS

An interesting project that confirms the young Carrick’s ambition is his design for a pavilion at Dunoon. The drawing (figure 25) showing a building with many remarkable similarities to Rothesay’s pavilion – large interlocking cuboid forms; projecting semi-cylindrical drum off-set on the principal elevation, forming the principal entrance; large expanses of glazing to take advantage of the views; clever manipulation of the site gradient. The plan is also signed ‘A Carrick’, presumably the younger partner in the firm distinguishing himself from his father – further confirming Rothesay Pavilion as his work. Where it differed was that the Dunoon building was to be substantially larger with a concert hall in addition to the main hall, several additional municipal functions, and at least a whole storey higher. Of course, the date of the plans, c1939, belie the inevitable: the plans were abandoned with the onset of war, and the Queen’s Hall built on the site in 1958 to a different design.

Figure 26 Presentation perspective by J & J A Carrick for the Cragburn Pavilion, Gourock, September 1935. RCAHMS


Immediately after Rothesay, J A Carrick went on to design an Ice Rink for Ayr, but the onset of war inevitably meant that this young architect’s oeuvre was cut off at his prime – as with Coia and Spence, Carrick was to become a distinguished architect, being president of the RIAS 1969-1971, but was not to match the pavilion in quality in the post-War years. With the loss of both the Cragburn Pavilion and the Ayr Ice Rink, Rothesay Pavilion remains a key example of his early work. Although the father and son are now dead, the practice continues to work in Ayr.

The Architect, James A Carrick (1911-1989)

The following is an extract from the Dictionary of Scottish Architects (www.scottisharchitects.org.uk).

Figure 27 Portrait of James A Carrick DSA

James Andrew Carrick was born on 22 April 1911, the son of James Carrick, architect, of Ayr and his wife Susan Cunningham. He attended Ayr Academy. He commenced his studies at the Glasgow School of Architecture in 1928 and served his apprenticeship with James Miller. In 1930 he spent a month touring England to study ecclesiastical architecture, and in the following year he won the Alexander Thomson travelling studentship in 1931, which he used for a three-month study tour of Rome and Northern Italy two years later; and in 1932 he was runner-up for the Grissell Medal. He obtained his diploma and passed the professional practice exam in summer 1933, enabling him to be admitted ARIBA on 4 December that year, his proposers being Andrew Graham Henderson, John Keppie and James

Archibald Morris, an old friend of his father's. By that time he had been assisting in his father's office for over a year. In 1934 he was taken into partnership, the firm's name changing to J & J A Carrick, and in the same year he spent a month studying Greek buildings in Sicily and Southern Italy as Bourdon Memorial Student.The elder Carrick was an excellent Arts and Crafts architect, mainly in an English Tudor-Jacobean idiom close in style to Miller's work. In the younger Carrick's hands the direction of the practice quickly changed, although traditional Arts and Crafts could still be provided according to the tastes of the client. The son was a significant modernist, as can be seen at Gourock and Rothesay Pavilions and to a lesser degree at Ayr Ice Rink, but his career was curtailed by the Second World War.

The elder Carrick died in 1940. The younger Carrick served as an officer with the Royal Artillery during the Second World War and resumed practice after the war. He was elected FRIBA in 1953, at which time he was still practising from Wellington Chambers. He served as President of the Glasgow Institute of Architects from 1958-60 and as President of the RIAS from 1969-71.

He retired in 1981 enabling him to spend more time on his leisure pursuits, fishing, golf and gardening. He had a position with the River Doon Fisheries Board, was a keen Rotarian and served for a spell as President of the Ayr Rotary Club as well as being Captain of the Turnberry Golf Club in 1985 and 1986.


The practice continued operating in central and southern Scotland until 1982 when it merged with Cowie Torry and Partners and became Carrick Cowie and Torry. The new partnership took over the practice of T K Irving and Partners of Stranraer in 1985 and in 1999 changed its name to Carricks, James Andrew Carrick having died on 23 November 1989 in Ayr County Hospital. He was survived by his wife, Christiana Margaret Waddell, and his son and daughter. He was described by his obituarist as a 'kind man and a good practitioner'.

3.4.2 ‘Modern Movement’ Buildings: Scotland and Beyond

In the Thirties in Britain, there was much interest in the new ’international style’ architecture coming from the continent. Put simplistically, this architecture was based on beliefs that a new way of building would be created from the new materials and the new ‘machine’ age of mass production. There was in many cases a revolutionary social aspect from the war ravaged Germany, Russia and France, demanding architectural attention to new or previously ignored building types such as social housing and industrial building.

The typical elements of the ‘style’ were an expression of internal function on the exterior appearance of a building; use, often innovative, of materials such as steel and glass; and reduction or complete absence of applied decoration, particularly symbolic or pictorial; the more abstract use of planes and solid /void compositions giving aesthetic satisfaction. The arch typical building of this pure architecture could be seen to be the Bauhaus school in Dessau.

Figure 28 The Bauhaus school in Dessau. Andrew James/Scran

Modernism in England was given a boost in the middle of the decade by the political refugees arriving from central Europe, and those who began working with them. These architects, including the architect of the Bauhaus, Walter Gropius, built the most radical, published, and copied, works in the thirties. The most obvious influence on the Rothesay Pavilion from this source must be the De La Warr Pavilion built in 1935 to designs by two émigré architects Eric Mendelsohn and Serge Chermayeff. (figure 29). This uses a dramatic circular glazed drum, containing the main staircase. It has a much more sophisticated and radical design than that of the Rothesay Pavilion: its construction and detailing show a greater understanding and embrace of the new, modern, not just aesthetic approach than at Rothesay. Most of the key buildings of this period in England are built by these continental architects in exile, or their pupils a little later.

The De La Warr Pavilion is particularly relevant to Rothesay, not least in the similar building type, position and use, but also in the fact that the building had deteriorated over the decades and was in need of restoration. The subsequent project, and the ongoing success of the rejuvenated building is a relevant template for Rothesay.


Figure 29 De La Warr Pavilion, Bexhill. Robert Gordon University/Scran

In Scotland, however, the avant garde did not arrive from the continent. But nevertheless modernism was explored by some architects, generally in the second half of the decade, and particularly for industrial buildings or ‘health’ related. Most of the famous Scottish buildings of the time, such the Luma Light factory or the India of Inchinnan Tyre works fall into this industrial class, where the improving working conditions demanded clean, bright facilities. For residential or public buildings, a more restrained style was usually employed, based on classical, or a dour art Deco. A ‘crafts’ approach also remained strong, bolstered by the growing politics of Nationalism.

Rothesay is one of the few public, and certainly the few remaining, which adopted the international style, and it was also one, if not the first, to be a fully fledged International Style Building, albeit one with a Scottish character. The pavilion’s importance has often been masked by the grander and more publicised Glasgow Empire Exhibition (figure 30) that opened at the same time, with its famous Tower, designed by Thomas Tait.

Figure 30 Oblique aerial view showing the Empire Exhibition in April 1938, a month before opening. RCAHMS


At the beginning of the decade, the main influence in Scotland, and particularly in the Glasgow area, did not come from the Continent, but from the United States, with its unashamed commercial art deco and grand Chicago buildings. In the height of the depression the American example of building out of recession with schemes such the Hoover dam and interstate system, had enormous political appeal with its optimistic faith in the future, as did the image of luxury created by the American style cinemas and giant steamers which sailed the Atlantic.

The Rothesay Pavilion echoes their luxurious interiors, often built just up the Clyde. It is as if the pavilion was the affordable version for the working population of Glasgow, a unique Clydeside version of the ‘machine’ age aesthetic.

3.5 The Building of the Pavilion

3.5.1 The Selected Site

Figure 31 Detail of Wood’s 1825 map. NLS Figure 32 Detail of 1863 OS 25-inch map.

NLS

Figure 33 1880s view from the south, showing the site to the bottom-right. The next line of buildings to the other side of Mackinlay Street, with the four windows on the end gable still exist. RCAHMS


The site chosen by the local authority for the new pavilion was at the northern end of Argyle Street at the junction with Mackinlay Street. The choice of site must have been carefully considered, and the criteria are easy to suppose: not too far from the heavily developed town centre; waterfront position; large plot of land with few significant buildings. The site here fitted all these criteria, with four early-19th century terraced houses with large gently-sloping grounds to the rear. The added benefit of a jetty at this position, and the fact that this is the point that the promenade ended no doubt confirmed its suitability.

3.5.2 The Competition

After buying the site at Argyle Street in the beginning of 1935, the local authority announced a competition for the design of a new pavilion. The primary function was to hold dancing and also to cater for functions and conferences, as well as sport and recreation of various kinds. There was some concern that the role of the new pavilion would clash with the then ten year old winter gardens which hosted the ‘variety’ shows of comedians and other performances. The competition brief was published at the end of the 1935, and attracted 24 entries. Included in the judging committee was Thomas Tait, a leading exponent of the new modern style in Scotland and Britain – he had also been a judge in the competition for the De La Warr Pavilion.

The competition was won by a local Ayr firm of J & JA Carrick, and the competition drawings survive in the RCAHMS (figures 36 - 40). In the judges’ report, it is clear that this scheme was the best interpretation of the brief:

“many of them failed through the competitors not fully realising… that the buildings would be used principally for dancing and indoor games, with the result that many designs which would be eminently suitable for concerts or cinematography purposes have had to be cast aside”

The report goes on to highlight the best parts of the Carrick scheme:

• the most satisfactory arrangement for dancing and games, without ruling out concert use.

• wide views across the bay

• well laid out entrance and car parking

• consideration to further development

• the aesthetic treatment of modern functional design with solid stone walls

• straightforward construction and understanding of service requirements.

However, they also note concern over the sun terrace looking onto adjacent property to the south.


3.5.3 The Construction Process

Figure 34 The pavilion under construction, c1938. RCAHMS

On the 15th June 1936, a set of amended drawings was approved by the council and preparation for construction started, with a budget set of £30,000.

Even as early as the first contract for preliminary works, the budget looked insufficient the lowest tender was £28,411. The architects embarked on a series of cost savings, reducing the stone thickness, deleting stone from some garden areas, and the specification for internal finishes was lowered. A revised budget of £38,744 was reluctantly approved by the council.

The building was further beset by cost increases. A major contributory factor must surely have that the pavilion was being built at the same time as the Empire Exhibition in Glasgow. This would have taken up huge amounts of labour and materials, and make costs for other work uncompetitive. Interestingly, the architects authorised “the substitution of split lath and 3-coat lime plaster for all the wall boarding and plaster work through out the job, as there was a dispute between plasterer and joiner over the fixings and to avoid delay”.

To add to the problems, in September 1937, the main contractor went into liquidation. Although the liquidators undertook to complete the building by subcontracting, the council were forced to pay the cost of this, the eventual cost of the building being in the region of £45-60,000. The consequential financial constraints can be seen in the finishing and furnishing of the building, for example of the buffet where the tables and chairs were extremely basic (figure 57) and rear areas.


Figure 35 Interior view showing the stage area under construction, c1938. RCAHMS

3.6 Drawn Evidence

A selection of competition drawings of Rothesay Pavilion can be found in the RCAHMS and in the Dean of Guild collection from Argyll and Bute Council.

3.6.1 RCAHMS Drawings

The drawings from the RCAHMS date from early 1936.

Figure 36 1936 drawing showing site plan. RCAHMS


Figure 37 Competition drawing from early in 1936 showing lower and upper ground floor plans. RCAHMS


Figure 38 Competition drawing from early in 1936 showing first and second floor plans and plans, section and elevations of the caretaker’s house. RCAHMS


Figure 39 Competition drawing from early in 1936 showing elevations. Note the open terrace at the entrance level of the drum. RCAHMS


Figure 40 Competition drawing from early in 1936 showing part elevation to Argyle Street. RCAHMS

3.6.2 Dean of Guild Drawings

The set of drawings from the Dean of Guild are all dated to July 1937 – this is after a previous set of drawings was approved by the local authority in May of that year, suggesting that the set of drawing presented to the Dean of Guild incorporate the amendments made to reduce costs after the initial tenders were received.

As the following drawings are the closest to the building as constructed, larger versions of the drawings are presented on A3 in the appendices (Appendix III).


Figure 41 Dean of Guild warrant drawing dated July 1936 showing lower ground floor plan (composite photograph copy). A&BC/E&C

Figure 42 Dean of Guild warrant drawing dated July 1936 showing upper ground floor plan (composite photograph copy). A&BC/E&C


Figure 43 Dean of Guild warrant drawing dated July 1936 showing first and second floor plans (composite photograph copy). A&BC/E&C

Figure 44 Dean of Guild warrant drawing dated July 1936 showing roof plan and elevations(composite photograph copy). A&BC/E&C


Figure 45 Dean of Guild warrant drawing dated July 1936 showing short sections (composite photograph copy). A&BC/E&C


Figure 46 Dean of Guild warrant drawing dated July 1936 showing long sections (composite photograph copy). A&BC/E&C

3.7 Historical Views and Photographs

RCAHMS holds a set of photographs of the building as built, from the Carrick papers. Argyll and Bute also hold several brochures of the pavilion which show contemporary views.

Figure 47 Pavilion under construction, viewed from Rothesay Bay. RCAHMS


Figure 48 (Top) Front elevation from Argyle Street. Note the absence of signage.RCAHMS

Figure 49 (Left) Front elevation from Argyle Street. A&BC

Figure 50 (Below) Entrance hall. A&BC


Figure 51 Ladies’ Cloakroom. A&BC

Figure 52 First floor lounge looking through to foyer. A&BC


Figure 53 Main stair from ground floor. A&BC

Figure 54 Main stair from half landing. RCAHMS


Figure 55 (Top) First floor foyer. A&BC

Figure 56 (Left) Buffet windows, during construction. RCAHMS

Figure 57 (Below) Buffet. RCAHMS


Figure 58 Main hall, looking towards the stage. RCAHMS

Figure 59 The rear of the main hall. RCAHMS


Figure 60 (Left) Main hall. A&BC

3.8 The Caretaker’s House

Figure 61 Extracts from Dean of Guild warrant drawing dated July 1936 showing north (left) and east (right) elevation of caretakers house. A&BC/E&C

The former caretaker’s house is a distinct, but key part of the pavilion site. It is a simple, compact plan two-storey detached house, roughly 20’ by 25’ in plan, situated just off the south-west corner of the pavilion. It nevertheless can be independently accessed from both Argyle Street and from the lane off Mackinlay Street.

The principal entrance is on the north elevation – facing Mackinlay Street, with an additional entrance on the west elevation to the kitchen. The principal elevations to the north and east are symmetrically, and classically, composed – coupled with the flat roof, the impression of the house is of a very neat, near-cubic box. The one exception to the symmetry is the off-centre chimney stack (to both principal elevations) – although the elevations are classically composed, this functional aspect of the building is allowed to feature prominently. Although this could be argued to be a result of economy, it neatly fits in with Corbusian ideas of a machine for living in, with the function of the building overriding the form.


Figure 62 Dean of Guild warrant drawing dated July 1936 showing ground (right) and first (left) floor plans of caretakers house (composite photograph copy). A&BC/E&C

The interior of the house is compact and, at least when constructed, highly rational. The principal entrance leading to a corridor off which are doors to the bathroom, living room and kitchen. The living room, 20’ by 10’, takes the whole width of the east elevation, with large windows enjoying the eastward view over the bay, and an additional side window to the north entrance elevation. The kitchen, accessed both from the hall and directly from the living room provided adequate space for the expected feature of the time, with larder and fuel stores accessed off. A further door to the enclosed yard is located on the west elevation.

A centrally-placed stair rises to the first floor, with a window at landing level which is centred on the west elevation. Three bedrooms were provided for on the first floor, bedroom one with fireplace to the east, above the living room, and two additional smaller bedrooms, one of which was provided with a curious large walk-in cupboard with large sink.

Although of simple design and construction, when seen in conjunction with the pavilion, its 1930s character is fully appreciated. Its placing at the most private corner of the site affords it both seclusion, and, being slightly raised, superb views. Its survival, despite being under used for many years, is remarkable.

3.9 Summary Chronology

1934 James A Carrick taken into partnership, forming the practice J & J A Carrick

Early 1935 Site purchased by the Rothesay Town Council

October 1935

Competition launched. 26 entries submitted.

February 1936

Winning design by J & J A Carrick selected.

1936 Cragburn Pavilion, Gourock, by J & J A Carrick completed.

June 1936 Amended drawing approved by council and budget set of £30,000


July 1936 Plans submitted to the Dean of Guild Court.

October 1936

Cost rises to £38,744 after construction tenders received.

September 1937

Main contractor goes into liquidation, council forced to pay the cost of completing the building.

July 1938 Pavilion opened by the Earl of Dumfries.

1940 Royal Navy base opens in Rothesay Bay

1957 Naval base closes

1971 Rothesay Conservation Area designated

February 1988

Building listed at category B.

2003 Simpson & Brown complete draft conservation plan for the pavilion

February 2005

Listing category changed from B to A.

End 2009 Prince’s Regeneration Trust appointed as project managers for regeneration of the pavilion.

June 2010 Elder & Cannon Architects appointed to carry forward feasibility study and options appraisal as part of the CHORD programme.

October 2010

Conservation management plan updated by Simpson & Brown.

3.10 Summary of Condition

A full condition survey has been included in the feasibility study carried out by E&C (October 2010) – this is a summary of the condition of the building for the purposes of this report only.

Externally, the pavilion is in need of a comprehensive repair scheme. The flat felted roofs are reaching the end of their life and in some places have failed. The metal windows have rusted and distorted and will in many cases require replacement. The cast stone cladding requires repair, principally where water ingress has caused rust to affect the internal steel reinforcement. the method and condition of the fixings of the cast stone cladding must be understood. Areas of render will require repair.

Internally, the interiors are in adequate physical condition, except for localised areas of water penetration (workshop, gents WC, chair store).

3.11 Construction Materials

One of the key issues of modernism is the attempt to find an aesthetic for the ‘modern’ material such as glass, concrete and steel. It is interesting therefore to look at the materials and construction techniques used at Rothesay.

The main structural frame is concrete, which would have been the standard technology for building large span areas such as cinemas etc. which were being built in Scotland at the time. Welded steel frame technology was only beginning to be used in Britain (the De La Warr Pavilion being its first use in 1935). The structure


itself is interesting as it appears not to be a simple beam over but rather a series of box/ring beams. Further work to analyse this should be carried out.

The external materials are Crittal type metal frame windows, almost the badge of modernism, as they allow more glass/frame than traditional timber. The cladding is cast stone. The surface treatment of this is interesting as it has a tooled surface (manual or cast?) that would be the traditional way of finishing real stone.

Internally, there are some interesting use of decorative terrazzo, a once common material but now rarely found with such decorative patterns, and the ceiling plaster to the main hall shows an early use of steel framing and ‘spanning’ steel lath. It may be that this was requirement for fire prevention by avoiding timber lath and framing, or a weight issue.

3.12 Paint Analysis

Paint analysis has been carried out to selective areas, the buffet and Entrance foyers, to identify the original decorative scheme. The full results are in Appendix II. A total of 10 samples were taken from various parts in the buffet on the first floor, including the wall, dado, skirting, columns and window frames. Six samples were taken from the entrance hall and a further two samples from the vestibule.

In 2010 further paint analysis was carried out on external areas such as windows/screens, metalwork and lower ground floor concrete soffits. The results of this analysis is included in the Elder & Cannon Feasibility Study.

3.13 Summary of Documentary and Physical Evidence

This analysis draws upon the findings of the documentary and physical evidence in sections 3.1 - 3.12.

3.13.1 Development of the Site and Fabric

The arrangement of the building is significantly unaltered from completion in 1938, although some of the interior, an important part of the original building, have been covered over or lost.

The caretaker's house was altered internally to form a nursery, but this is no longer in use.

3.13.2 Changes from Competition Drawings

In the original competition scheme, the ground floor of the drum was not closed-in, as built, but was intended to have been an open terrace accessed by pedestrians via small set of curved stairs. Access for cars was via the straight flight to the right of the main entrance. The entrance would have been through the main bank of doors (now on the line of the inner entrance doors). At some point probably during the construction, a curved screen was added below the drum to create an entrance lobby, which explains the slightly odd position of the door in the screen. Today it is only the north facing, ’car’ doors that are used.

There are also minor changes to the organisation of the back of house areas.


3.13.3 Subsequent Alterations

There have been no substantial schemes of alteration to the building, but there has been a gradual erosion of the original fabric, primarily to the interiors, with refurbishments throughout its life. The only complete areas to be lost were the cloakrooms which were converted to more multi purposes spaces, with a new set of external doors formed from these to the main entrance.

Many individual original features have been lost, or hidden, such as the timber panelling to the public areas and thirties light fittings. Doors have been replaced and features such as the stage have been altered. There have also been some inventive uses of ‘dead’ space, for example the shooting range in the voids under the hall and the bowling alley in the former chair store under the stage.

In terms of fittings, it is remarkable that some of the original tables are still used within the building. The organ was removed from the building at some point but is still on the island and may be available to be returned.

The only main alteration which has added to the character of the building is the installation of the large letters to the front of the building.

A list of specific alterations is below.

Room Alterations

External • ‘PAVILION’ and ‘CAFE’ signs added – ‘CAFÉ’ since removed

• Handrail to lower terrace raised • Glass replacement to windows • Door added to east elevation

Entrance Vestibule

• Light fittings have been removed and infill panel inserted over recess.

• Dado has been painted but retains triple-beaded moulding

Entrance Hall • Light fittings have been removed and infill panel inserted over recess

• Picture rail beaded mouldings have been removed • Dado has been painted and 2/3 moulding removed. • Carpet installed over original linoleum floor covering • Plaster cast to ceiling been removed. Also decorative

plaques to walls removed: these may have been plaster • Ticket booth grill installed • Fire exit signs replaced • Air curtains installed • Sofa seating missing

Ladies’ Cloakroom

• Space has been subdivided and new external doors installed

• Curved Light fitting and counter have been removed • Original floor finish has been covered by vinyl sheeting • WCs area relatively intact with some original fittings

Gentlemen’s Cloakroom

• It is likely that this was similarly fitted out to ladies, as indicated on floor plan, and indicated by markings on ceiling. Fittings have been removed

• Vinyl flooring may cover original floor covering, as


indicated by skirting • High level windows lighting gents’ cloak room have been

altered • General alteration to services

Stair • Design of stub walls and balcony amended, but moulding re used

• Original dado may survive in situ behind later decorative schemes

• Handrails added to walls and in middle of flights • Light fittings removed and replaced. • Decorative panels, possibly plaster, have been removed

from walls and ceiling • Lining out/ moulding missing from upper section of walls

Upper Foyer • Light fittings have been removed and infill panel inserted over recess. Main light fitting removed

• Doors have been changed, but are in original screens • Vinyl floor finish installed, replacing or covering original

linoleum • Missing moulding to upper section of wall • Dado has been painted and 2/3 moulding removed

Main Hall • Stage pit filled in • Bar and changing installed • Wall plaques missing • Column cladding altered as foyer dados. • Vinyl floor finish to surround

Buffet • Light fittings have been removed and infill panel inserted over recess.

• Upper mouldings removed • Floor finish altered from original (likely linoleum). • New fire doors have been installed • Decorative birds were painted or applied: unlikely to have

been plaster

Chair Store • Opening to hall removed, and formed into bowling alley

Front of House Staff Areas

• Desk and opening to foyer has been removed

Basement • Undercroft to hall converted to form shooting gallery, later closed

Antechamber • Ceiling recently repaired • Vinyl floor tiles installed, possibly over terrazzo • Screen to rear entrance has been altered • Doors to former stair original, including ironmongery

Roof Terrace • Original Lavacrete finish replaced or covered by asphalt.


3.13.4 Original Decorative Schemes

The architects’ photographs, although in black and white, give us substantial information on the original decorative treatment of the interiors. The public areas (entrance, foyers, main hall, cloakrooms) have terrazzo floors decorated with linear abstract patterns reminiscent of Bauhaus textiles or Mondrian paintings. The walls have a strong horizontal and linear style, with attached mouldings and timber dados, which call to mind contemporary steam ship interiors or cinemas. There are also, throughout the building, decorative plaques. These are used to enhance the structural rhythm of the building externally where they appear in the cast stone, but internally are decorative plaster, possibly ventilation grilles. Most of these have been removed but some survive in the former lounge on the upper floor. The patterns are variable and seem to reflect local coats of arms, but also include Scottish symbols such as thistles.

When these photographs are overlaid by the results from the paint analysis, an approximation of the original appearance can be seen (figures 63 – 64).

Figure 63 Conjectural view of the ladies’ cloakroom. A&BC, modified by S&B


Figure 64 Conjectural view of the main stair. RCAHMS, modified by S&B


4.0 UNDERSTANDING ROTHESAY PAVILION: PAVILION IN 2010

4.1 Building Description

4.1.1 Roofs And Balconies

Figure 65 View of the main roof from south-east, showing felt roof, copper covered ventilators and roof hatch, and rooflight to main hall. S&B

Fly Tower Roof

Felt roof laid in strips. The roofs were probably felted during the 1970s. It is not clear if the original 'lavacrete' finish survives beneath. There is a minor upstand of about 75mm around the roof but, unlike the other roofs, there is no parapet.

Rooflight.

The rooflight runs east-west with eight full bays and two further bays either side at the hipped end. There are four bays across the ends. The rooflight is made of iron T-shaped glazing bars which have been covered in lead. The ridge and hips are made of iron bars with hollow section iron rolls. Five panes of original glass survive in the extreme corners. The glass has been covered with black paint, presumably as a black-out but most of this has now peeled away.

Main Roof

Large flat roof with roofing felt in strips running east-west from a high point to the north and south of the central rooflight. The roof is surrounded by a parapet about 300mm high. The roof has the following interruptions:

• A large 30 bay gabled rooflight at the centre.

• 3 no. 3-bay hipped rooflights along the southern edge.

• 4 no. large copper covered ventilators,

• 4 no. steel ventilators with cowls

• A smaller ventilator near to the central north rooflight

• A cast iron soil vent pipe outlet near to the north eastern corner

• A copper covered roof hatch at south eastern corner

• felt-covered area possibly indicating another roof hatch to the west of the south west rooflight.


There are two small copper-covered ventilators near to the south parapet. Oddly, both have timber finials with a classical detail which do not match the style of the building. This implies that they were standard fittings.

The main rooflight is divided into three main structural bays. The bays correspond to the principal concrete beams running east-west comprising the main roof structure. From the upper faces of these beams are three concrete posts on each beam which support the central ridge and ‘I’-section purlins to either side. At the three central lines of each bay is a ‘U’-framed metal truss which also supports the purlin and ridge. Built on the purlin and ridge beams are 30 bays of Georgian wired glass between metal glazing bars similar in construction to the other rooflights. The purlin marks the break between an upper and lower run of glazing. The two gables of the rooflight are mass concrete on iron reinforcement bars, the principal elements of which appear to be vertical. The thin render outer face has been lined to appear as ashlar. There have been some minor repairs on the south face.

Flat roof over gents toilet

This is a rectangular roof surrounded by lead flashings and with a parapet to the south. The roof has felt running north-south but clearly older than the felt on the other roofs and probably from an earlier felting campaign.

Canopy roof

The canopy roof has a different detail around its edge, presumably to keep the apparent depth of the roof to a minimum. Above the cornice is a small upstand which has the felt turned over it.

Terraces

Figure 66 The east terrace. S&B

The East terrace has a parapet about 700mm high. The roof is flat because it was intended for use as a terrace, but it does have some grading towards the north west corner where there is an outlet and an overflow.

South-east terrace. The copes around this balcony are bedded onto copper, unlike the eastern terrace.


Figure 67 The lower east balcony. S&B

Central North Roof

At the central north side is an enclosed roof associated with the central northern projection. In the four bay mono pitched rooflight one pane of glass is original. The construction of this rooflight is the same as for the fly tower rooflight.

Lower East Balcony

Possibly because this is the only balcony to remain in public use, this balcony has retained an asphalt finish although it not the 'lavacrete' noted in the original specification.

Light fittings have been installed on the inner face of the parapet around the flagpole area, and the handrail has not raised.

Figure 68 Covered terrace showing framed view across Rothesay Bay. S&B

Figure 69 The south east terrace. S&B


4.1.2 External Walls

Fly Tower, South Wall

Contains two rainwater heads and short lengths of cast-iron downpipe. At the centre, is a run of five windows, two of which have been replaced with vents. At the western end is a timber door covered in plywood which gives access to the head of the fly tower. It is not clear if any of the original glass survives. Most of the glass has been painted out black but this has largely has gone. The upper pane of the east-most window contains a reused piece of art deco glass. The most recent colour on the window frames is white. The windows have previously been painted black, possibly as part of the blackout. There is also evidence of a red lead primer and an early coat of bright mid-green.

The main wall surface is cement render on a brick backing with two rows of cast stone.

East Wall, Upper Part

Figure 70 Upper part of east wall. S&B

The wall made of cast stone blocks laid as ashlar with a cornice and frieze. Letters spelling out P-A-V-I-L-I-O-N have been fixed to this wall. They are made of light metal, possibly copper and project out from the wall by about 100mm. The letters are not original but were placed on the building fairly early in the life of the building and are significant secondary fabric. They are currently painted dark blue. Their original colour should be investigated.

North-East Stair Tower, East Wall

Figure 71 Date added to panel on NE stair tower, showing fixings of original element. S&B


The window has a panel bearing the date ‘1938’ but this does not look original and there are fixings of elements which are missing. The cast stone has diagonal ‘tooling’. The fixing positions for a possible original light fitting should be investigated.

The fire escape doors and ironmongery are not original.

North-East Stair Tower, South Wall

The door to the upper terrace is not original.

Upper Terrace Balustrade

The masonry comprises vertical panels of cast stone of differing widths. The panels have an integrated lower margin.

Between the two terraces there is a run of 20 bays of horizontal metal framed glazing. The fire escape door towards the northern end is an alteration.

Lower Terrace Balustrade

Similar in design condition and recommendations to upper balcony. The front contains six heraldic panels. The original cast stone surface has strong diagonal tooling on the main face but not on the cornice or margins. There is a drip mould below. The overflows are lead lined with odd Late Gothic flashings around the outlet.

East Elevation, Ground Floor Wall

Figure 72 Fire escape inserted into ground floor of east elevation. S&B

The door is a modern insertion.

Upper Terrace and Canopy

On the under side of the canopy carefully there is some evidence of a previous decorative paint line on the line of the column heads.


Projecting Bow

Figure 73 Projecting bow, where much of the original glazing has been replaced with clear plastic. S&B

At the ground floor level, most of the original glass appears to have been reglazed with clear plastic apart from the top panes.

South Elevation, Rendered Bay

Figure 74 The south elevation. S&B

This wall appears to have been re-rendered at some stage. Only the top panel appears to retain the original render finish. There is some evidence of original paint finish colour here, a cream colour which could be sampled and used elsewhere.

A gap at the centre of the sill course indicates the position of a former pipe.


South Wall, Upper Section

This wall is faced with render but with a cast stone cornice. The frieze has the same square motif in render as on the east side. The original wall render colour is preserved under the canopy. It has been carefully tinted to match the colour of the cast stone.

Main Stair Block and South Wall

This wall has a large window, 4 bays wide and 11 bays high of lying panes facing on to a terrace. There was no access between the stair landing and the terrace, and access to the landscape on the south side of the building is restricted to a path along the north side of the pavilion. It appears that the terrace was intended to be seen from the main stair. The window is exactly as wide as the central lower staircase below the main landing. Decoration on the outside face of the wall is fairly minimal where it could not be seen from the stairway but there are three vertical bands to either side of the main stair and these are interrupted by a projecting rectangular block built of brick with render facing. These blocks contained or supported light fittings slightly above eye level to

Figure 75 Composite image showing main stair window. S&B

illuminate the terrace at night. The high perimeter wall here was probably intended to form the backdrop to the terrace garden, and provide privacy for neighbours.

The wall has cast stone copes projecting out over the heads of the vertical bands and capitals. The remainder of the wall is render on brickwork but there is no articulation across the top of the window. There is a concrete step at the foot of the window. Under the projecting box for the light fitting there are some remains of the original cream coloured paint finish.

The lower parts of the windows seem to have always been intended as metal clad risers since they have a different shape than the lying panes above. This should be investigated in case the original intention was to take glazing down to the step.

South-West Tower, East Wall

This is a blank elevation covered in render with numerous previous repairs. The colour on these return faces is a darker colour, closer in colour to sandstone and it seems probable that there have been two periods of repair to the render. Alternatively, it is possible that the walls facing south have a whiter, possibly more expensive render than the other walls. In addition, a darker wall such as the face of the south west tower projects above the roofline and so from a distance should have the same quality in colour as the stair towers faced with cast stone facing the promenade.


South West Tower, South Wall

Although the south east tower was the main public access to the roof, the external detail is simpler south east tower which was a service stair. Its is constructed in brick and render but with two bands outside the window rising to a cast stone cornice but without the built up blocking course of the two stair towers closer to the main front.

At the base of the wall a bitumen damp proof course is exposed. This bitumen damp proof course is not particularly intact and the step bridges it. The height of this damp proof course might have contributed to the failure of render along the base of the wall owing to an excessively damp support.

Main West Door

Figure 76 Main west door. S&B

The door is set within a bay which projects slightly forwards. It has a similar motif to the south terrace stair window but with two vertical bands rather than three on either side of the opening. The door is now a fire door with non original doors and framing around some of the Georgian wired glass. Although this door surround is at the back of the building and has less significance than the east elevation, it still contains quite a lot of architectural detail and flair in its composition. The relationship between this face of the building and the bank to the west is significant but could be altered.

West Elevation, Central Part

Figure 77 West elevation, with glazing to main hall. S&B


This elevation is a particularly audacious part of the architecture of the building, it forms the west side of the hall and presents an entirely glazed face under a projecting parapet. 21 bays long and corresponds exactly with the glazing on the east side. The glazing system contains panels of 6 panes above a blank riser, set between circular section columns. As with the metalwork of the windows at roof level, earlier colours appear to have been red oxide and various green colours. This should be tested by a full paint analysis. There are many different panes of replacement glass to the extent where it is difficult to tell which glass is original, although the presence of the original beads (both sides, with the same profile as internal dado) can help to identify original panes. Within the range of windows there are four opening lights comprising the top two panes of the bay. There are no doors.

West Elevation, Fire Escape Door

Figure 78 Fire escape door on west elevation, also the principal accessible entrance. S&B

A raised, rendered bay with a projecting lintel over the door. This detail may have been used over other doors, such as over the main west door, further south on this elevation. In addition, the light fitting above the door appears to be original. Within the opening the timber surrounds and fanlight appear to be original although the doors are more recent replacements.

West Fly Tower Wall

This elevation is built of cast stone, probably because it is visible from the road to the north of the pavilion and it must have seemed logical that the whole, visible face of the fly tower would have a ‘stone’ appearance. The top courses, extending down to two courses below the sill course of the windows is built of a different quality of cast stone than the rest. Most of the cast stone is a light fawn colour with diagonal tooling running down from right to left. The upper courses are of a greyer colour with the tooling running in the opposite direction. This is also the case on the east face of the fly tower but not the south face. On the East side the difference in cast stone changes mid course and so is clearly not a design intention and something to do with supply, possibly in relation to the main contractor going out of business.

Stage Door Wall

This is a four bay wall which contains the stage door to the south and three windows. The wall is built of cast stone.


The three windows have horizontal divisions but the most southern of them also has vertical divisions because it is a side hung casement. This is an odd inconsistency because the two horizontal windows also have opening lights in their upper panel. There must have been a design reason for making an opening casement adjacent to the stage door.

The stage door is in five leaves which fold. Although there are many replacements and the glass has been lost, these doors are basically the original ones. The oldest colour visible appears to be a dark green, although a darker red than the most recent red has also been used.

At the north jamb of this opening, the gap between the cladding and the brick backing is exposed. This shows that the construction has cast stones of 115mm (4.5 inches) with a gap behind of 10 to 15mm although this may have enlarged in this circumstance due to a slight bulge in the outer face of the wall. The fixings are not visible. In some places there is a bituminous felt dpm between the brick inner skin and the cast stone cladding although this is not the case in the upper part of the jamb.

Fly Tower, North wall

This is an extensive and almost blank elevation made of cast stone cladding with a frieze and cornice at the head. The frieze is interrupted by five lying two pane windows. This is a change from the original competition design which had windows spanning the entire width of the elevation.

Main North wall

Figure 79 North elevation. S&B

This wall is built of cast stone cladding, it is interrupted by a vertical element like an entrance tower above the north door. The upper level of windows has a connecting sill and lintel course running across the width of the building but interrupted by the tower. The lower windows are an alteration from the original design and only the sill course is joined.

The windows have the same odd arrangement of top hung and side hung casements. At ground floor level the door appears to be the original one, with vertical boarding set in the lower panel. The ironmongery of the locks etc is modern.


The arrangement of this frame is probably consistent throughout the building where the stiles project slightly in front of the head. There have been various colours on the stiles including the very dark brown visible elsewhere, a red base coat, a mid tone royal blue and a present light blue coat. On the door itself, the colours appear to be different, with a darker maroon red below the present signal box red.

East Elevation, North Part

Figure 80 Cast ashlar stones with ventilators on north part of east elevation. S&B

This wall contains three windows, each with three bays, at the upper and lower level. Again there is a curious mixture of top hung and side hung casements. At the base of the wall there are two openings which are later insertions since they are the only openings on the entire building to interrupt the coursing lines of the cast ashlar stones. They have ventilators placed in the centre and appear to be from the same manufacturer as the original cast stones. This suggests that these alterations must have been carried out early in the life of the building. The vertical parts of the ventilators seem to correspond with reinforcement bars and this implies that they were not cut in situ but made by a cast stone manufacturer. Both are now in poor condition.

4.1.3 Interior: Lower Ground Floor

Entrance Vestibule

Figure 81 General view of entrance hall showing original terrazzo finish to the floor. S&B


Figure 82 General view of entrance hall showing mahogany screen. S&B

The ceiling to this spaces has an artex like finish over the whole ceiling including the infill over the lighting recess. There are also ‘shadow’ mark on ceiling radiating around semicircular bay: these may indicate earlier strip light fittings. Each wall looks to have retained most original fittings, and a small ticket hatch remains to the south wall. The mahogany screen to the foyer area is in good condition, but has some stainless steel ironmongery, which is not original. The solid walls have a painted dado, defined by three small mouldings. The floor retains its decorative terrazzo finish. A cast iron radiator provides heat.

Entrance Foyer

Figure 83 General view of the entrance hall, viewed from main stair. S&B

The entrance foyer has a plain plaster ceiling, again with artex finish and infill to lighting recess. The walls have a painted dado, slightly proud of wall plane with a single moulding, the same profile as those in the vestibule. At the upper section of


wall, three lines are visible in the artex. These lines are possibly indications of applied timber mouldings. Some doors have simple reeded architraves but all are modern fire doors. Various pinboards have been fitted to walls. The floor is carpeted. Cast iron radiators are set in slight recesses. Modern fire signage (6no.) and air curtains have been installed over Foyer doors.

Ticket Booth

The ticket booth is semi circular, with a mahogany veneered base, again with triple moulding. The counter appears to retain original ticketing machinery dispensing tickets via brass/steel counter. Steel mesh grilles provide security, and the booth is topped vertically by a boarded canopy, painted silver, with a coat of arms inserted on the central axis of the foyer.

Figure 84 ‘Automaticket’ machine. S&B Figure 85 The ticket booth. S&B

Main Staircase

Figure 86 The main staircase. S&B


The stair case leading to the upper foyer area is finished with decorative terrazzo with patterns similar to the vestibule. The central flight leads to a landing, dominated by a large screen window with views onto the south terrace. The stair then returns back in two flights to reach the upper floor level. There are stub walls separating each flight. These walls have a painted panel dado with a single moulding as lower foyer, but there is evidence of an earlier stepped profile in the plaster finish above. Red plastic covered handrails have been installed at one point around stub walls and free standing within each flight (two to the central flight). New lighting has been added to ceiling and upper foyer balustrade.

Staff Room Accommodation

Figure 87 Staff room. S&B Figure 88 Office. S&B

Generally plainly finished in plaster with concrete floor, but with picture rail. The door appears to have upgraded for fire. A small work cupboard in the SW corner may be original as it has a terrazzo finish to the upper surface. A small partition stopping short of the ceiling accesses the ticket hatch to the vestibule The door leading to kitchen and lavatory may be original, as it has chrome ironmongery, typical for the period.

Office

Again plainly finished, with two steel windows to side of building and simple tile sills. To the foyer side there is a recessed strip in the ceiling, with a small downstand and some evidence that something, a sign perhaps, hung from this position.

SW stair

This is a plainly finished stair, with painted concrete floor and plastered walls, a high dado has been moulded into the wall surface. This may indicated plain terrazzo, or a more durable plaster to the lower section of the wall.


Ladies cloakroom (now meeting area)

Figure 89 The former ladies cloak room (compare with figure 63). S&B

Plain ceiling shows evidence of semi circular fitting. Otherwise finishes are very plain, with an accumulation of conduits bulkheads etc. A terrazzo skirting is present at edge of vinyl floor. Windows between ladies and gents have been painted out, and reduces the borrowed light available for the innermost room.

Gents cloakroom (now meeting area/dance studio)

Figure 90 The former Gents’ cloakroom. S&B

Again the ceiling shows evidence of a curved fitting. Similar fitting as to the ladies cloakroom. An opening in the wall (with terrazzo skirting ) gives access to vestibule, meeting room and WCs and external door. The northern end is used as a store.

WCs


Figure 91 Ladies WC, showing original fittings and terrazzo flooring. S&B

Generally the fittings appear to be contemporary with the building, as do the doors and toilet cubicles.

Mackinlay Street Hall/Former Chair Store

Figure 92 (Above) General view of the former chair store, now bowling alley.

Figure 93 (Right) Former opening leading up to main hall. S&B

This space has been fitted out with bowling lanes.

Undercroft area

This was previously converted for use as a mixture of shooting range and storage areas, but is now used for storage purposes only. There is limited head room and access. The floor is compacted earth/ash with bare bricks walls.


Figure 94 General view of typical undercroft area. S&B

Boiler Room

The boiler room has water consistently running through it. Apparently this is due to a burn which ran along beneath Mackinlay Street to the north of the pavilion which habitually runs through the pavilion basement. Occasionally there is a flood which floods the boiler room to about half the depth of the boilers, including covering the electrics.

4.1.4 Interior: Upper Ground Floor

Upper foyer

Figure 95 The upper foyer. S&B

Again this has an artex ceiling, with infill sheet over the position of the lighting track in recess. There is no clear evidence of alteration over the stair area. The foyer gives access to WC accommodation and contains three glazed screens to other public spaces. The walls are treated as foyer below, but with refined classical pilasters at the side of each screen opening. Again, there is some evidence of removed mouldings at picture rail height. The screen to the east is obscured and consists of two side panels (with three horizontal beads at dado level as elsewhere) and a set of modern double fire doors The design indicates that the screens, if not the doors, are original. The screen to the north consist of banks of double doors and leads to main hall. Again, the doors are modern fire doors. The screen to the buffet space, is


identical to the screen opposite. The floor is covered in vinyl sheeting which is flush with adjacent terrazzo. The balustrade to the stair void is fitted with a higher red plastic handrail, matching those installed on stair. Cast iron radiators heat the space.

Workshop

This room is accessed off the half landing. Again it is simply finished, with a WC compartment at the end of the space. This space is in poor condition, owing to water ingress at ceiling level.

Lounge (now chair store)

Figure 96 General view of the former lounge. S&B

Figure 97 Detail of partition wall covering over part of former doorway to main hall. S&B

Figure 98 Example of original doors surviving in partitioned rear entrance vestibule. S&B


The ceiling has been patched with plasterboard sheets. A cast plaster panel survives in the remaining section of original plaster, as does the lighting strip recess. The floor finish (vinyl tiles) is missing in sections, and the screed on which it was laid shows some damage. Bare section of floor indicate that the west partition toward the external door is not in its original position.

Walls have a triple beaded dado and also a moulding at picture rail height.

Rear entrance vestibule:

This was partitioned off from the former lounge. Like the current chair store, this areas is in very poor condition. The doors to the stair match the panelling and are likely to be original. A chrome and bakelite (?) vertical pull handle is also fitted. This, and doors themselves, should be carefully preserved as it appears to be the only surviving original example of this type of door.

Stair

This is now used as bottle store. The stair has been removed, but the terrazzo floor finish is still existing, indicating that this was a more public stair than the plainer SW stair. The patterning gives an indication of the setting out of this stair.

Buffet/Café area

Figure 99 General view of the buffet/café area, set up for a presentation. S&B

The ceiling has had artex finish applied and, again, the lighting strip recess has been infilled. The walls have also had textured paint applied. Three beaded mouldings applied at dado level. The original serving hatch is still in-situ but boarded over. Alternate windows had opening lights but are no longer able to open. The recess above windows may have been for a curtain track. A timber door currently leads onto terrace but is modern insertion for the steel door adjacent. The floor has new vinyl floor covering. A modern design fin radiator has been installed below the bay in front of deep sill box, which may have contained the original heating.


Figure 101 Detail of curtain rail recess. S&B

Figure 100 Windows to front elevation. S&B Figure 102 Serving hatch to kitchen. S&B

Kitchen

Generally a modern fit out, with tiling to 1.5m height and vinyl floor. The abrupt stop in the dado to the adjacent stair suggests that the kitchen has been extended.

Main Hall

Figure 103 Composite image showing 360° panorama of the main hall. S&B

The main volume is defined by high walls corresponding with the dropped dance floor. These walls are held on oval columns on three sides at low level, and have three or four slight steps (10mm) outward as they rise up to ceiling: they are finished with a rough plaster, similar to pressed back harling. Beyond the line of the walls, the dance floor is surrounded by seating areas with a lowered soffit. To the east and west are banks of windows running along the outer walls. The main doors are to the south. The east screen windows give sea view, but because of the lowered soffit these do not detract attention from the stage area. Doors in the screen to the east give access on the terrace. The west windows have obscured glass.


Figure 104 General view of the main hall, set up for ball games in the lower dance area. S&B

The columns are clad with boarding with single bead profile moulding. Both this and the upper section have had hessian or similar material applied. There are also plaster grilles in each side of the column, which may have been for ventilation or heating.

Figure 105 Principal entrance doors from upper foyer. S&B


Figure 106 Detail of sample column. S&B Figure 107 Decorative screen to side of stage. S&B

The dance floor and stage have some evidence of alteration, with a change in material on the dance floor, and an extension to the stage. This is likely to have been the orchestra pit.

On each side of the stage, these are decorative screens with grille and the coats of arms. The west screen has small areas which have mahogany strips and brass grill behind: this is likely to be the original finish. The west edge of the stage, also retains the triple moulding to the dado seen elsewhere, but also two plaster(?) mouldings at picture rail height. This corresponds with the shadow lines seen elsewhere at this level, and therefore it can be assumed that this moulding was the same as that used elsewhere.

There are sets of doors in each corner, leading to exits: these are all modern fire doors.

On the north wall, the areas between columns has been partitioned off to form a bar, a plain plastered counter and solid screens and to the east temporary changing facilities have been installed with boards between columns.

The floor to the dance floor is timber, and may well be original, but the surrounds have modern vinyl sheet applied.

Surface mounted air conditioning has been installed to the surrounds, as have spot and box lights.

NW Stair

This is a plain finished stair, similar to SW.


Dressing room

Figure 108 View of sample dressing room. S&B

Generally the dressing rooms and corridors are plain, often painted bare brick. The dressing table areas are fitted in along walls, with mirrors being fitted between windows. These are likely to be original but have been redecorated. The floor has been fitted with brown/tan carpet tiles.

Corridors

Painted bare brick and plain grano screed to floor.

WCs

These rooms retain several original fittings.

4.1.5 Caretaker's House

Roof

The house has a flat roof covered in felt. The felt strips run north-south. The entire perimeter has a cast-iron profiled rhone with outlets to the north and east. The felt looks newer than the felt on the pavilion building.

Exterior

The east wall is a simple elevation with two windows to ground and first floor, each with four bays wide by five bays high. A sill course is brought across the width of the elevation to join up with the garden walls. There are two ventilators placed erratically, one of which appears to be a recent extraction point. It is clear that this face and the north face were the two sides of the building designed to be viewed architecturally.

The render on this building appears is in much better condition than on the pavilion. This implies a change in specification or a different period of repair.


Figure 109 Principal entrance door. S&B

Figure 110 Ease elevation from terrace of pavilion. S&B

Figure 111 North elevation from terrace of pavilion. S&B

The windows are original, but all are in poor condition.

To the south of the building is a small terrace, it appears that the boundary wall was intended to be high, unfortunately this restricts the daylight from the south side of the building.

The back door to the kitchen appears to be original, it is vertically boarded but without any V-joints. It is possible that the back door had a slab canopy – this is suggested by the alteration to the sill course which is continued across as the lintel of the back door.

The north wall is a symmetrical elevation with a window – 3 panes wide by 5 panes high - to the first floor. At the ground floor is an arrangement of door with a window to either side under a protecting slab canopy.

The front door and framing appears to be original. There are fixings in the front face of the canopy, possibly for a light.


Caretaker's House - Interior

Figure 112 Former living room. S&B

Figure 113 View of stair and window from landing. S&B

Figure 114 View from former bedroom on first floor. S&B

The internal planning has been altered to provide a separate flat on the first floor – probably dating from when the building was altered for use as a nursery, with access to the stair and landing being restricted. Some evidence of the original paint scheme is visible in the south west room. It is also clear that a door existed in the north east corner of this room. At the stair head it is evident that the original arrangement had three doors, one to the north as well as the south, besides the existing one to the east.


4.1.6 Landscaped Areas

Area to the East of the Pavilion

Figure 115 Granite rubble walling in front of the pavilion. S&B

There are a series of low walls built of granite rubble with cast stone copes which are intended to complement the architecture. The low walls are arranged to form planters with square finials at posts where there is a rectangular corner and with curved copes. The cope profile is similar to that on the pavilion building. At the southern end, the boundary wall to the next property appears to have been rebuilt as part of the pavilion construction project, at least as far back as the front face of the south west stair tower. Beyond this, the stepped profile of the wall may also be associated with the pavilion building.

There are further granite walls surround the planters to the southern end, possibly the architectural inspiration for these planters was Frank Lloyd Wright. The original intention may have been to have planting spilling over the cope, in the Frank Lloyd Wright manner. The present use of exotic species may be a tradition maintained from the first planting.

To the north of the planter in the south-east corner, there is an area of concrete paving which may well be the same date as the pavilion. It has concrete laid in areas and lined to appear like paving. The concrete itself contains medium sized aggregate of white and red pebbles and is attractive. The curved theme of the entrance bay is maintained by the curving approach road to the car park. This road has been covered in tarmac road finishing but the original concrete curbs appear to survive.

Between the car park and the street is a further group of retaining walls with curved ends enclosing areas containing concrete slabs. It is possible that these areas also originally contained planters. In the centre of the southern planter is a column of masonry with a blue painted pipe above it which may be the remains of a light fitting. At about mid length along the eastern boundary wall is a three point fixing, possibly for a standing light fitting.


Signs have been fixed or painted, directly on to these walls, such as "Pavilion Traffic Only" and "In". The paint should be removed and signs made to stand discreetly and detached from this wall, unless original.

Around the base of the flagpole there is a further concrete paved bed which may also have been a planter. The arrangement to the north-west of this is an alteration, set at an angle to gain access to the secondary door which has been added to the main east elevation.

Immediately to the east of the east wall is a retaining wall with cast stone slabs set on edge and coping stones. This is possibly also for planting along the base of the building.

At the north end of the walls against Argyll Street there is a further blue pole, rather larger in diameter than the one at the southern end. This has been a light fitting and looks to be at least 1950s and possibly contemporary with the pavilion building. The paint colour on this pole should be investigated.

Area to the North of the Pavilion

To the north of the building is an area of crazy paving that is not original. This may have intended to be a planted area originally.

Around the northern car park are taller walls and particularly to the west where these are retaining walls.

The sub-station is surrounded by walls on the east side of the parking area. The walls around the sub-station appear to be an afterthought since they cross over one of the windows on the pavilion north wall. The sub station wall has two gates, apparently original but possibly not to the architect's design since they are slightly more traditional than most of the rest of the building. Although heavily rusted, they should be retained and repaired rather than replaced. The early colours appear to be green and black.

On the western of the two pillars to the parking area there are fixings for a standing light fitting.

Area to the West of the Pavilion

The retaining wall along the west side of the access road has been reduced in height and does not have a concrete cast stone cope to match the others.

There is an area of grass, to the west of this retaining wall, between the pavilion and the Apple Tree Nursery, a new building built on top of the terrace. These terraces, steps and paths appear to be part of the original pavilion garden. Against Mackinlay Street and along one part of the access road the walls appear to be the 19th century boundary walls associated with the previous building on the site.

The steps up towards Apple Tree Nursery are wide and it was clearly intended that the area to the west of the pavilion should be used as a small recreational park.

The boundary wall between the Apple Tree Nursery area and the bank is a 19th century wall probably on the original plot division which has been capped relatively recently with concrete paving slabs.

In line with the main west door is a wide flight of steps leading up to the bank, possibly indicating that the bank was or was intended to be used for outdoor functions in association with the pavilion.


Figure 116 Area to the west of the pavilion. S&B

Immediately to the north of the caretaker's house is an area of concrete which has been covered with a play surface in squares. This area is entered by gates, both to the north and facing on to the south terrace. These gates are modern.

Around the caretaker's house are retaining walls. On the south side is a yard which is heavily overshadowed by the adjacent 19th century boundary wall and three concrete buttresses have been placed against the wall including some underpinning. It was clearly a requirement at the time that the pavilion was built that this wall was to be retained.

At the eastern end of the yard is a curved wall between the south-eastern corner of the house and the boundary wall. This is made of brick with a rendered face and copes which match the pavilion.

Area to the South of the Pavilion

Figure 117 Area to the south of the pavilion, adjacent to the stair projection. S&B


This area is a terrace which has well established planting on it and with an access path running along the south wall of the pavilion. At the western end is a garden containing a further rubble wall which retains a flat area of grass, possibly associated with the use of the caretaker's house. To the south of the path is a low wall which rises considerably higher just before the point where it meets the caretaker's house.

At the centre of this side of the building and corresponding with the stair projection is a terrace with a segmental curved south wall. There are planters placed on it. The surface of this area may well be the original one - a red finished tarmac - with concrete repairs.

4.1.7 Stair Design

The stairs in the building all share a key design feature, with a stepped feature to upper level of the newel wall apparent through. All remain except at the main stair where it has been covered over.

Figure 118 The main stair with the distinctive stepped newel wall, repeated in the panelling to the lower flight and to the side walls. S&B

Figure 119 Top flight of NE staircase showing stepped newel wall. S&B

Figure 120 The open-well service stair leading to the roof continues the theme in the brick balustrade. S&B


Figure 121 The feature is also apparent in the stair in the former caretaker’s house. S&B

Figure 122 Stepped copings are also found at exterior stairs. S&B


4.2 Current Management of the Site

4.2.1 Ownership and Management

The building complex is currently owned by Argyll & Bute Council. There is no proposal for this to change.

4.2.2 Current Use

Sports

The main hall is currently used as an indoor football/hockey pitch by local groups and schools and this is the primary function of the hall throughout the year. Removable nets and protection boards are situated around the lowered dance floor. A temporary changing room has been formed in the rear corner of the main hall.

The protection boards give reasonable protection to the fabric of the building, and a use such as this is a reasonable use of such a large span space. It also provides income through out the year. However, changing accommodation is poor, without washing facilities and the temporary partition has an adverse effect on the main space.

Other sports catered for include the shooting range excavated from the ‘basement’ below the main hall and the indoor bowling alley which has been installed in the under stage area. Both of these uses make the maximum use of what are long and otherwise inflexible spaces. However the environmental conditions, particularly ventilation, do not meet current standards and upgrading should be considered if these uses are to be consolidated for the future.

Weddings

The pavilion caters for 2/3 weddings a year as well as other private events, usually held in the café area or main hall; dependant on the size of the function. The majority of these are from the local community.

In order to provide for medium sized functions, the tented ceiling was installed in the main hall to reduce the scale of this space and also to improve acoustics.

No more than one function can take place in the pavilion at one time, as the kitchen is only accessible from the café, therefore if the hall is in use the buffet space cannot be used and vice versa.

Catering is done by outside companies and the kitchen is generally adequate for this.

A bar servery area has been installed in the main hall which has a negative effect on the space, as it infills between the free standing columns and is asymmetrically placed. This is also used as a tuck shop for school/ childrens’ events

One off events

The pavilion plays host to several one off or annual events which take over the main hall. This is a direct continuation of the original purpose of the hall. Much of this takes place in the summer with a weekly tea dance and fortnightly disco. Annual events are the flower show, jazz festival, folk and puppet festivals and an Easter family party. There are occasional plays and opera productions which use the hall when touring. Usually in this case, the companies involved bring in staging and lighting etc, rather than requiring these to be provided. Some sporting tournaments are also held such as the indoor bowls championships. The projection room is no longer in use, and the island cinema is based in the Winter Gardens.


Club meetings

The pavilion provides meeting accommodation for local groups such as the community council, a line dancing class, slimmers’ group and various artistic groups. These are generally accommodated in the café area during the summer, but the poor repair of the external fabric and resultant heating cost of this space require the meeting room downstairs to be used for much of the year.

4.2.3 Caretaker’s house

The caretaker’s house is currently empty after serving as a nursery. As it has no garden, parking or open aspect, the local demand for housing is unlikely to provide an economic solution to this building.

Future tenants and users will be required to adopt the policies and recommendations of the conservation management plan to ensure that the building is maintained and managed according to best conservation practice so that the building is preserved for future generations. This conservation management plan will be a core document to enable the sensitive and appropriate reuse of the site and for its ongoing management.

When repaired and returned to use and with the requirement for public access, the building will need to meet appropriate health and safety, environmental health and access requirements that will apply to the type of use that is finally proposed.

4.2.4 Current Management Policies

As the owners of the building, Argyll and Bute Council has a Health & Safety policy document that is relevant to the current management of the site.

It is expected that health & safety, access, training, education and other policies (as needed) for the ongoing project will be adopted by Argyll and Bute Council as the overall regeneration project progresses.

4.2.5 Statutory & Non-Statutory Designations, Policy & Guideline Documents

The building is category A listed. The listed building report for Rothesay Pavilion is included in this report at Appendix I.

The following documents will apply to the site and surrounds, or may be useful, and should be consulted during the redevelopment process:

• Historic Buildings and Ancient Monuments Act 1953

• Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997

• Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)(Scotland) Act 1997

• Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP)

• Scottish Planning Policy 23: Planning and the Historic Environment (2008)

• Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (2010 – England only, but useful for reference)

• BS 7913 Guide to the principles of the conservation of historic buildings

• Planning Advice Note (PAN) 65 – Planning and Open Space

• Argyll and Bute Council – Argyll and Bute Local Plan (Adopted August 2009)


5.0 ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

5.1 Introduction

The Burra Charter provides the following definition of cultural significance:

‘Cultural Significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations. Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting, use, associations, meanings, records, related places and related objects.’

The following assessment of the heritage value of the Rothesay Pavilion complex is based upon an analysis and understanding of the historical development of the site, including the tangible documentary and physical evidence, as well as intangible historical, and social associations.

The assessment of significance establishes the importance of the pavilion as a place of cultural heritage. In order to establish parameters for appropriate and sensitive ongoing use of the building and site, whilst respecting the historic fabric, the grading of significance will help to identify key elements of the building, as well as those which may be of an intrusive nature – that is, those that adversely impact upon the appreciation of elements of greater significance and should be removed or changed.

Each element of the building and the site overall has been graded according to its significance as an individual item within the overall context of the site.

This information informs policies, or guidelines, which should to be met to ensure that in any future changes to the building, appropriate respect is paid to the site and its components.


Figure 123 Low

er ground

floo

r plan sh

owing sign

ifican

ce. Simpson & Brown, N

ot to Scale


Figure 124 Upper ground

floo

r plan sh

owing sign

ifican

ce. Simpson & Brown, N

ot to Scale


5.2 Historical Significance

Historical significance encompasses the importance of the relationship of a site to the evolving pattern of our cultural or natural history, or has a strong or special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance in our cultural or natural history.

A site may have historical value because it has influenced, or has been influenced by, a historical figure, event, phase or activity, or as the site of an important event. For any given place the significance will be greater where evidence of the association or event survives in situ, or where the setting is substantially intact, than where it has been changed or evidence does not survive. However, some events or associations may be so important that the place retains significance regardless of subsequent treatment.

Rothesay Pavilion maintains considerable historical significance, as a key part of the Rothesay and Bute community since it was opened in 1938. Wider still, the building encapsulates the phenomenon of mass-market seaside tourism, and the strong links between Rothesay and urban centres of the mainland, most notably Glasgow. As a response to the changing nature of the ‘Doon the Watter’ trend in the inter-War years, the pavilion represents an attempt by the local authority to enhance the appeal of Rothesay in the face of imminent competition from an increasing choice of holiday destinations. With the rise in expectations of tourists, the building allowed for a greater variety of indoor and up-market activities – paid-for entertainment and catering of a nature that was not previously found at such seaside resorts, the main attraction having been sea-air and salt-water alone.

The building also contains considerable historical significance as a key work of inter-War architectural aspirations in Scotland. The building reflects the optimism and faith in future that was evident in the building of such an imposing public hall at the time of the depression. It also represents the acceptance and reinterpretation of the ‘modern movement’ in Scotland and has had influence on subsequent generation of Scottish architects. The building is a good and early example of International Style architecture in Scotland and demonstrates a unique and successful Scottish crafts tradition interpretation of American and European modernism.

It is a rare survivor of a public building of this type, with only minor external alterations and with considerable original fabric remaining, even if in some cases hidden.

That other major contemporary works by the same architect have now been lost makes Rothesay Pavilion even more significant. The loss of other major civic buildings in Rothesay such as cinemas and churches means that in the immediate context of Rothesay, the continuing existence of the pavilion is of considerable significance.


5.3 Architectural, Aesthetic and Artistic Significance

The importance of the site in terms of its contribution to an understanding of the architectural development of the site and broader context locally, regionally, nationally or internationally. Aesthetic value includes aspects of sensory perception such as consideration of the form, scale, colour, texture and material of the fabric; the smells and sounds associated with the character of the place and its use.

Rothesay Pavilion is built using an interesting hybrid of traditional and modern construction material and techniques, such as cast stone, metal lath, concrete construction, metal windows which show the introduction of branded and factory made products into mainstream building. The long spans to the main hall creating a clear space of approximately 35m x 35m, are also of interest. It is interesting to note that recent engineering investigations have found that the structure is over-engineered. This suggests that the architect was aware that engineering limits were being pushed, over-compensating as a result. This implies both a degree of experimentation and inventiveness, and simultaneously a lack of precedent from which to draw experience from.

The aesthetic value of Rothesay Pavilion cannot be underestimated. The form of the building is clearly demonstrative of its function and its history. The scale of the building is exceptionally well-suited to its surroundings, and when built demonstrated this sensitivity in a manner that was not a characteristic of many 19th century architectural responses to the seafront of Rothesay. The form is easily appreciated as ‘seaside architecture’, and with its large windows, generous dimensions and open roof-top, clearly demonstrate it is a building for leisure.

The principal aesthetic value of the pavilion is, crucially, not when viewed within the surrounding townscape – indeed, being set-back from the street-frontage and of limited height, the building is almost completely hidden from view when approaching from either direction by road – and is instead deliberately designed as a focal point for the town when viewed from approaching boats. The line of approach to Rothesay means that the pavilion is directly in the line of sight and is presented as a welcoming and distinctive feature of the Rothesay townscape, terminating the ‘public’ domain spreading between the ferry pier and the promenade.

Key spaces and features of the interior remain within the pavilion, including entrance hall, staircase, buffet and main hall. Despite loss, and covering up of original fabric, the form and aesthetics of the interiors can still be understood.

5.4 Social Significance

Social value represents the strong or special association of the site with a recognisable community or cultural group for social, spiritual or cultural reasons.

Rothesay Pavilion has been used by generations of tourists and locals as a popular and memorable venue for holiday and entertainment events and as such is regarded with great affection not just by the local, but also the wider population. It has continuously provided a local community focus and its facilities have maintained many local and social groups with diverse interests, even with the economic decline, and radical changes in society of the latter half of the 20th century.

In the period that Rothesay Bay was used as a base by the Royal Navy, from 1940 until 1957, the pavilion was an important social and recreational venue for Royal Navy personnel. As a key component of the connection between Rothesay and the wider war effort, the pavilion is therefore of considerable importance.


For the local community, the pavilion has carried out an important civic role since its construction – from concerts and performances to school award ceremonies, through to everyday community meeting and catering facilities. As a key part of individuals’ personal histories therefore, the pavilion is particularly significant. This is amply demonstrated by the community awareness of the pavilion and the support that has been demonstrated for its regeneration.

5.5 Archaeological Significance

Rothesay Pavilion was constructed on the site of four terraced houses, likely to have dated from the early 19th century. It is unlikely that there would be any significant archaeological remains on the site. At the time of this study, the site was not identified as a site of archaeological interest by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service.


6.0 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

The Rothesay Pavilion is listed at category A. The conservation management plan has examined the historical development of the building and determined that the building is of considerable overall significance and should be respected as an excellent example of the work of its architect, James A Carrick and for its significance historical, social and architectural associations.

James A Carrick won the design competition for the Rothesay Pavilion at the relatively young age of twenty-four, and the pavilion survives as a rare survival of his early works. That his pavilion at Gourock no longer survives, and his project for Dunoon was never built, makes his building at Rothesay all the more significant.

Aside from the importance of the pavilion in the ouvre of its architect, the pavilion holds greater significance as a uniquely Scottish response to the International Style. The age of the architect at the time the competition was held is perhaps a contributing factor – as the competition was limited to Scottish architects, it could be argued that many of Carrick’s competitors would have been more established in their approach. That previous works by the practice of J & J A Carrick are perhaps typical of the inter-war Scottish architectural trends underlines the importance of the younger Carrick’s more experimental approach to the competition. That Thomas S Tait was one of the judges is also of significance, and with his enthusiasm and firmly established enthusiasm for the International Style the outcome was perhaps expected. It is the principal elevation that remains of greatest significance – using all the motifs of the streamline moderne, but softened with the use of cast stone to firmly establish the building in the Scottish context. For this reason, the principal elevation has been identified of being of outstanding significance.

The pavilion is also of considerable historical significance, primarily for its role in the ongoing historical narrative of Rothesay as a tourism-focussed seaside resort. That the pavilion was constructed as a response to greater competition, and increasing expectations of tourists is of particular interest. The 1930s represents the tail-end of the ‘Doon the Watter’ hey-day of the Clyde Estuary resorts – visitors continued to arrive in Rothesay in their thousands, but with increased travel options, more time and more money, they had greater expectations. The pavilion was thus an attempt to keep tourists coming to Rothesay, and to ensure the town appealed not only to the mass-market, but to place it deliberately up-market.

After the War, decline was perhaps inevitable, but the pavilion survived with a combination of continuing tourist-trade, local residents and naval personnel based in the Bay. The greatest challenge was to come in the 1960s and 1970s with increased car ownership and foreign holidays: many other attractions in the town closed as a result, but the pavilion survived, largely as a result of its continuing civic importance to the local population. With this, the pavilion holds considerable social significance both for visitors to the town and to locals alike.


7.0 GRADING OF SIGNIFICANCE

7.1 Introduction

The various elements of the building have been assessed and graded to assist with the future conservation and management of the site and its elements.

Grading of the individual elements of a site is based on the contribution each element makes to each component of significance, (i.e. historic, archaeological, architectural and aesthetic, landscape, social and spiritual etc) whether it be at a local (Isle of Bute), regional (Scotland), national (United Kingdom) or international level.

7.1.1 Elements of Outstanding Significance

A building or element of international importance, or a fine, intact (or little altered) example of a particular period, style or type that embodies the importance of the building or site overall.

7.1.2 Elements of Considerable Significance

A building or element of regional (Scotland) or national (United Kingdom) importance, or a good example of a particular period, style or type with a high degree of intact original fabric that contributes substantially to the importance of the building or site overall.

7.1.3 Elements of Moderate Significance

A building or element of local (Glasgow) importance, or an element that contributes to, but is not a key element to the importance of the building or site overall.

7.1.4 Neutral Elements

An element which neither contributes, nor detracts from the importance of the building or site overall.

7.1.5 Negative Elements

A building or element which detracts from the overall significance of the building or site overall.


7.2 Graded Elements

The key elements of Rothesay Pavilion have been graded according to the above following criteria and are shown graphically in figures 123 & 124.

The grading of significance informs policies contained within section 9.0 of this report.

Element Grade Comment

Exterior

Principal (east) elevation Outstanding

North elevation Considerable

South and west elevations Moderate

Inserted entrance on east elevation

Negative

Interior – Lower Ground Floor

Principal entrance Considerable

Entrance hall Considerable

Main stair Considerable

Meeting room Moderate Former ladies’ cloakroom

All other areas Neutral

Interior – Upper Ground Floor

Foyer Considerable

Café/Buffet Considerable

Main Hall Considerable

Stage Moderate

Chair store Moderate Former lounge

Main WCs off foyer Moderate

Inserted changing room Negative Partitioned off from the rear of the main hall

Inserted tuck shop Negative Partitioned off from the rear of the main hall

All other areas Neutral


8.0 RISKS & OPPORTUNITIES

8.1 Introduction

The regeneration of Rothesay Pavilion is part of the wider CHORD programme by Argyll and Bute Council to regenerate key coastal towns. The pavilion is in fair condition, but requires restoration and repair work.

There are a number of areas of risk and opportunities associated with Rothesay Pavilion. In summary, they have been identified as follows:

• Conservation and the Existing Fabric

• Maintenance

• Use

• Statutory & Non-Statutory Constraints

• Public & Disabled Access

• Management

• New Work & Alterations

• Setting & Boundaries

• Effects on the Environment & Climate Change

• Interpretation & Understanding

• Management of Information

Policies that respond to this assessment of risks and opportunities are identified and discussed in section 9.0 following.

8.2 Conservation and the Existing Fabric

8.2.1 Significance

Rothesay Pavilion is a category A listed building and is recognised as an important building on a national, and possibly international level. It is in fair condition but will require a considerable investment to repair and restore. It is an excellent example of this type of architecture and it still retains key elements that form the character of this building. The overall original construction quality of the main building is good, meaning that despite lack of significant investment in recent years the building has managed to survive. The building has benefited from continuous use and ongoing maintenance, but alterations have not always been sensitive to the historic fabric.

There is now an excellent opportunity to conserve, repair and restore the existing fabric of the building in order to retain such a valuable heritage asset in Rothesay, and have it play a key role in the overall regeneration of the area.

It is important to retain the overall significance of the building during any proposed work on the site. However, it is recognised that some change will be required to the building and within the site in order to give the building a new and sustainable use. This new use will allow the retention and enhancement of key significant features of the building. Some areas of lesser significance may need to be altered in order to enhance the areas of greater significance as part of future proposals.

Detailed discussion and policies can be found in the following section 9.0.


8.3 Maintenance

The physical condition of the external cladding and roof surfaces is poor, with water ingress causing damage in several areas however this is the result of decay in original materials, rather than a lack of maintenance. The poor condition of windows, which have been difficult to maintain, particularly in the café, causes discomfort to users.

Whilst the modest and piecemeal alterations carried out over the years have enabled the building to maintain and diversify its services and thus allowed its continued survival, the overall impact has been to detract from the significance of the building, by disfiguring the original interiors.

The proposed works to restore and enhance the pavilion building will provide the opportunity for the ongoing maintenance of the building to be easier to manage. A maintenance plan will be required to ensure that problems do not re-occur, and that future repair works do not undermine the restoration works carried out.

8.4 Use

The building was originally built to attract (and retain) visitors into the town and island by providing conference facilities and a ‘bigband’ dance hall, as well as provide sport and leisure facilities for the island’s population.

It is still used in this dual way, but as tourism has declined, the former use has declined with it. Original uses such as trades union conferences have dropped off, primarily because of the perceived lack of quality hotel accommodation now available on the island, and its assumed run-down image. However, recent conferences run by the Council have been successful.

The pavilion now caters primarily for the local and island community, with a remarkable variety of uses. Some large scale functions are still held, more often in the summer months. During the year the majority of use is from social groups based in the buildings and sports use for local schools.

The building is currently under-used and this has had a detrimental effect on the condition and appearance of the building, leading potential loss of historic fabric, and the lower appreciation and enjoyment of key spaces. There is now an opportunity to restore the building to full-use and therefore conserve the remaining historic fabric of the building. The restoration of 1930s detailing and character will add to the appeal of the building. This will in turn broaden the range of users whilst continuing to cater for existing users. If the building continues to be under-used, it will deteriorate further and more significant fabric will be lost.

8.5 Statutory & Non-Statutory Constraints

Rothesay Pavilion is category A listed. Listing gives a building statutory protection against unauthorised demolition, alteration and extension.

The site is not recognised as a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM), nor is it located in the immediate vicinity of a SAM. It is situated within the Outstanding Rothesay Conservation Area. The site is not located within an area identified as being of


archaeological interest by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service on their Sites and Monuments Record.

Listed building consent will be required and the Scottish Historic Environment Policy and Scottish Planning Policy 23 apply to the site. See section 9.0 for further information and relevant policies.

Statutory protection is a positive step for the protection of such a valuable heritage asset. It emphasises the importance of the building in a regional, national and international context. The building is a rare feature in Scotland and it is to continue to be protected with the aim to restore and enhance the building, as well as allow the building to enhance the character of the area and play a key role in the regeneration of Rothesay.

8.6 Public & Disabled Access

The original design and use of the pavilion did not provide disabled access that would meet current regulations. Wheelchair access is currently only achieved via temporary ramp into the side service stair for the lower ground level and from a rear external door, via a chair store, to access the main hall level. There is no lift or wheelchair friendly WC within the building. Any visits require prior arrangement or accompaniment by an able bodied person. This situation is discriminatory to wheelchair users, and with current legislation, will require to be improved. Improvement may also help other users of the building such as those with young families, and some elderly users. Contrasting dados and skirting are excellent aids for those with partial sight to determine edges etc. and should be retained. The original floor patterns where direction of movement, and edge of treads are emphasised may also improve accessibility for people with partial sight. There is no induction loop within the building, to aid those with hearing loss to obtain information or aid with concerts etc. Regeneration of the building provides the opportunity to improve its accessibility.

New or alternative uses may make some areas that were previously accessible to the public less accessible, but the key spaces of the pavilion (e.g. entrance, former cloakrooms, main hall and cafe) should remain accessible and be reused for public/community use. Furthermore there is the opportunity to re-open spaces that have been closed to the public – for example the replacement chair store located in the former public bar. The roof terrace is also closed to the public and re-use of that space is further opportunity.

Refurbishment of the pavilion also provides the opportunity to provide disabled access, to allow people in to the publicly accessible spaces. Disabled access must be considered within the design of any new structures, as per the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA).

8.7 Management

It is proposed that the building will be conserved, repaired and altered and for the existing community and recreational uses to continue, and the opportunity for additional uses to be explored. It is to have a combined community and commercial use and it will continue to form a community hub and attraction for visitors within the regenerated area of Rothesay.


A management strategy is being put in place for the management of the building works, as well as for the future tenancy and management of the facility.

The conservation plan should be adopted by the present owners and any future owners of the site and endorsed by relevant parties such as the local authority and Historic Scotland. The conservation plan should be reviewed at appropriate intervals (recommend once every five years) and at the completion of any major building works. This will ensure that the document remains up-to-date and relevant to the building, and contains information about changes that have occurred.

8.8 New Work & Alterations

The conservation of the building should not only seek to maintain and enhance the existing heritage value of the site but also its value as a financial asset. A long term programme of appropriate ongoing maintenance should be put in place regardless of any proposed redevelopment. Historic Scotland should be consulted for conservation advice.

The building requires to enhance existing, and find new uses which generate sufficient income and interest in the building to enable proper maintenance and further development. It is likely that these further uses will be related to regeneration of tourism and the town itself.

Any new structures on the sites should respect the form, scale and proportion of the existing building but should be readily identifiable as a product of the era in which they are built. They should not attempt to “create history” with conjectural design and construction. Before any works are carried out, the existing layout and use of the areas in question should be recorded photographically and in written form. Works should be carried out with due care and attention with reference to the Conservation Plan and with the services of a recognised conservation architect as consultant.

8.9 Setting & Boundaries

Rothesay Pavilion is a prominent building in the streetscape, as well as a rare building of its age and type both within Rothesay and the wider region. It was built as a focal point for the community and for visitors from across Scotland.

The setting of the pavilion has been urban for all of its life, being constructed on the site of terraced houses built during the expansion period of Rothesay in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. The boundaries of the pavilion grounds have therefore always been somewhat restricted, surrounded on two sides by streets and buildings on the south side. It is recognised that the existing site would be able to be adapted for new structures to improve the setting and appreciation of the existing buildings. In the long-term, it is proposed that greater links between the pavilion and the garden grounds to the rear will be established.

The site is impacted upon by traffic noise, owing to its location on a relatively busy road. Under current proposals for the area, this will not change and traffic noise will need to be addressed in any new use and development on the site, particularly for acoustic-sensitive performances within the main hall.

The relationship between the Pavilion and the northern end of the esplanade needs to be reassessed to allow for improved pedestrian access. Furthermore, the full


pedestrian path between ferry, esplanade and pavilion needs to be reviewed, with particular regard to the main pier area where the vehicular priority makes direct pedestrian access on the shore side difficult.

The setting of Rothesay Pavilion is not identified as an area of archaeological interest. It is unlikely that archaeology will be an issue within this site. However, care should always be taken during ground works to look out for any previously unknown below-ground archaeological evidence of earlier structures.

8.10 Effects on the Environment & Climate Change

The reuse of the existing buildings retains the energy embodied in their original construction. Any proposed structures should be designed to complement the existing building, but also incorporate energy efficient technologies and environmentally sound materials.

Climate change, in particular increased rainfall, will continue to cause the building to deteriorate if it is left in its current state, as water ingress is the main cause of material failure in the building. In repairing flat roofs, flashings, gutters and rainwater goods, the likelihood of increased rainfall should be taken into account in designing replacements. A greater number or size of conductor pipes would both help to increase the provision for increased rainfall.

8.11 Interpretation & Understanding

There is a great opportunity for Rothesay Pavilion to provide a strong educational role for the public in the conservation of historic buildings of the inter-War period.

It is recognised that it will not be possible to provide access for all visitors to all parts of the building for a variety of reasons such as physical access restrictions, health and safety, or for management reasons. Ways of presenting the inaccessible parts of the building that are considered important for visitors to understand the site should be explored as part of an Interpretation Plan.

Although the building is often open during the day, there is limited information on the building/events either at the site or the local tourist office. This reinforces the view of it being a local building, as others may not be aware of the significance of the building or the events being held.

There is no material on the building and its history within the public areas, and information on events is present is varying formats from temporary display boards to A4 sheets attached to windows.

As with most restoration and repair projects, there would be good opportunities to provide specialist training in conservation work during the construction phase of Rothesay Pavilion. Conservation professionals are committed to ongoing training and teaching of students and colleagues during involvement in such projects. The restoration and repair of the pavilion would provide an excellent opportunity for the development of a training programme for those interested in conservation, including students and volunteers.


8.12 Management of Information

This conservation management plan aims to aid in the conservation and repair of Rothesay Pavilion by providing a thorough understanding of the history, significance and issues facing the building. The plan is to be adopted by Argyll and Bute Council, future users, as well as consultants and contractors working on the building.

It will be the responsibility of the owner and/or building manager to ensure that the conservation management plan is disseminated to all relevant stakeholders for their information.


9.0 CONSERVATION ISSUES & POLICIES (AIMS & OBJECTIVES)

9.1 Introduction

A project of repair, restoration and sympathetic alteration is being developed. Recommendations are in the form of guidelines and provide parameters for the nature of such a project.

The site is of considerable significance. The key features of this site identified as being of heritage value and significance should be protected and managed for future generations through the implementation of appropriate conservation policies based upon recognised good practice.

There are a number of reasons for the preservation of a building and its setting on cultural grounds. One is historical: for the information or evidence of the past embodied in it. Another reason is aesthetic: for its beauty, for its value as a work of architecture. Yet another is social: for the value embodied in both the tangible and intangible attributes of the site to the local and wider community.

Nearly all buildings are built with the intention that they should look well, in addition to being sound and useful. The beauty of a building, or a work of architecture, may depend on the formal qualities of its design. Unlike historical authenticity, which once lost can never be regained, the formal beauty of a work of architecture may be recovered, through restoration and by careful alteration.

The aim of this conservation management plan is to inform the conservation, repair and reuse of Rothesay Pavilion on the basis of good conservation practice. This section of the conservation management plan establishes policies to guide the care of the site as a whole based on issues previously discussed in Section 7.0. The policies aim to inform the management and use of the building in accordance with its assessed level of significance.

Adoption and implementation of the policies by the managers, designers, conservators, specialist contractors, architects and end users of the building will enable the retention and enhancement of significance of the building for the future.

9.2 Base Policies – Conservation

A firm resolution to act in a conservation-led way must be taken from the beginning to ensure the principles of ‘informed conservation’ are key elements of its future. These base policies should encourage the protection and enhancement of the significant elements of the site and the reduction of risk to important fabric and character within the building.

Policy 1 – Strategy

A clear strategy for the use, conservation and management of the site should be established as a framework for the making of individual decisions

Policy 2 – Resolution

A conservation-led approach to the future repair, conservation and management of the building should be adopted by all interested parties, based an understanding of its significance.


Policy 3 – Vision

Through active and informed conservation, enhancement and interpretation, Rothesay Pavilion should be put to an appropriate new use as a landmark building and focal point in the CHORD initiative.

9.3 Conservation and the Existing Fabric

Policy 4 – Outstanding Significance

Great care should be taken so that work considered to be of the highest level of importance (i.e. the principal elevation) is not adversely affected or changed by any future works, use or management.

Policy 5 – Work of Considerable Significance

Works of considerable significance should be retained, repaired and restored where possible. These parts of the building may be changed, with care, to make them suitable for a new use. However, any proposed alterations must be considered on a case by case basis to determine the appropriateness of the proposal and the need for mitigation.

Policy 6 – Work of Lesser Significance

While there should be a general presumption against change, areas of lesser significance should be regarded as being capable of being altered, providing such alteration can be justified and providing it is planned and executed with appropriate consideration, skill and care.

Policy 7 – Negative Elements

Negative elements detract from the heritage value of the building and should be removed as the opportunity arises and the original layout and fabric made good as far as possible.

The significance of Rothesay Pavilion should not be put at risk and good conservation principles should be followed when considering alterations. Conservation principles for works to historic fabric should be sufficiently flexible to achieve an appropriate balance between the need to protect the significance of the building and the need for it to live, be used and ‘earn its keep’.

Policy 8 – Conservation Principles

i. In general, all work should be carried out in accordance with the British Standard Guide to the Principles of Conservation of Historic Buildings BS7913:1998. The definitions of terms used in this conservation management plan are those set out in BS7913.

ii. Minimum intervention – No change should be effected without proper consideration, justification and good reason.

iii. Repair should be preferred to replacement.

iv. Repair should use like-for-like techniques and materials. Materials should be salvaged and re-used where possible.

v. Priority should be given to maintaining and enhancing the integrity of the historic fabric over other regulations and requirements.


vi. New work should not be intrusive, and should be of the highest quality in terms of design, material and workmanship, whether it is in matching or contrasting style.

vii. Adequate historical research, investigative opening-up, recording and sampling should be carried out before and during work (as necessary) to inform good design and technical solutions.

viii. The design of repair works should be undertaken with a thorough knowledge of traditional construction history and practice.

ix. Repair work should be designed to be carried out safely and consideration should be given to safety issues arising from the continued maintenance of the building.

x. It is essential that conservation work is carried out by experienced tradespeople. The work should be designed, specified and inspected by a suitably experienced conservation accredited architect. A large part of the success of any project is in the understanding of the task and sharing of experience between all professionals and all the tradespeople involved.

xi. Whether in repair, restoration or alteration, new work should not draw attention unnecessarily, but should be identifiable to a discerning eye.

xii. Particular attention should be paid to matters of detail to help preserve and enhance fabric and character including, for example, specific choice of materials, detailed location of services, methods of fixing, etc.

xiii. Fabric or spaces to be altered or removed should be adequately recorded before works, following relevant guidelines and the record lodged with an appropriate public archive, such as the RCAHMS.

xiv. Detailed design development should precede implementation of all on-site works.

xv. Any compromises proposed to the above principles should flow from an options analysis and should be fully justified and agreed by all interested parties.

Harm could result from differing approaches or standards in different parts of the building, such as changes in appearance or character. A holistic approach is important.

Reference should also be made to the findings of the visual inspection and diagnostic analysis of the concrete structure carried out as part of the Design & Feasibility Study.

The Architecture of the Exterior

The roof surfaces were not intended to be seen as part of the architecture of the building. The exception to this were the terraces that were accessible at upper ground floor and first floor level. The surface of these terraces would have been seen by people using the building rather than people viewing the building from a distance. Most roof surfaces and roof lights are hidden by parapets.

The appearance of the roofing material is therefore of little significance and a roofing material should be chosen which offers the best, most effective and most easily maintained repair.

The exterior of the building is either clad with cast concrete panels which imitate stone, or is render, also finished, and originally coloured, to imitate stone.


At the time of writing the report there is insufficient information on the composition of the fabric of the cast stone panels or in the nature or condition of the fixings. The condition analysis indicates that there is some possibility that these fixings are in poor condition. Several of the cast stone walling elements have been damaged. One of the possible causes for this damage is the rusting of fixings. The conservation and repair strategy for the exterior can only be determined following detailed physical research. It is possible that there are further documentary sources which would provide information on the specification and construction techniques of the external walls but this seems unlikely.

Until such research is carried out, policies have to be fairly general and be expected in terms of guidance according to conservation principles.

As part of the assessment of the appearance of the building, it should be noted that this is a single period building and we have a reasonable understanding of the aesthetic intention behind the building which still accords, to some extent, with contemporary architectural appreciation. The alterations to the building have been almost entirely utilitarian and none of these alterations have added to the significance of the building. There is no important subsequent phase of alterations.

In all conservation areas a balance can be struck between retention of fabric and the significance of the original design. In this case, subsequent, non original fabric is not significant. Neither is the pattern of staining or decay. This building looked its best soon after completion.

There is some evidence that the render on the west and south sides were surface stained or painted, and it is possible to make a conservation argument to reinstate this colouring both over original render and render repairs, and over elements of cast stone where new cast elements would be intrusive in appearance.

This work should be carried out with considerable care, according to careful sampling on each elevation of the building and using materials and techniques that are reversible.

The original colour on exterior windows and doors should be researched. Colours should be reinstated during repair and alteration works.

Policy 9 – Intactness & Composition

Rothesay Pavilion should be considered as a whole, including all building components and the context of the building. This will ensure that component elements and spaces, and the relationships between them, are protected and enhanced where possible.

9.3.1 Exterior Restoration

The east side of the pavilion is its most significant exterior face. It has an outstanding significance because it relates to a small group of highly significant buildings, such as the De La Warr Pavilion, some of which have been demolished. Some of the interiors have considerable significance but they are not as important as this one external element. It is considered important that the east elevation should be restored as much as possible to its original appearance. This includes external masonry repaired and without staining or marks of decay. The window and door colours should be the original ones and the external landscaping should also reflect the original design intention. The design of exterior lighting should carefully consider the evidence of how the building was originally designed to be lit. 1930s public architecture was one


of the first generation of buildings where the possibilities of external lighting were a serious component of the original design. The single element which most detracts from the original design is the insertion of a door on the main east front, slightly to the north of the main entrance. This door has negative significance. Serious design consideration should be given to removing this door and reinstating the original wall design. The original planter and landscape design should also be reinstated in this position although it is recognised that an alteration might be needed in this position to provide a ramp for disabled person’s access..

Policy 10 – Exterior Restoration

Restoration may be appropriate where there is sufficient evidence.

Any repair and restoration of missing elements should be based on detailed examination of the relevant parts of the existing structure or feature. The specification of materials in building restoration should match the existing in terms of quality, materials, colour, and finishes.

Elevation drawings should be prepared which will demonstrate the best guess of the extent of masonry repairs based on these findings. The project quantity surveyor can then apply costs to these drawings. Since this could be a high cost element of the work and since there are several possible results, it is important to commission this work in advance of the production of tender drawings because it might have a fundamental effect on the costs and therefore feasibility of the project.

9.3.2 External Cladding Repairs

External cladding needs detailed investigation so that it can be understood. Research is needed into the composition of cladding panels and their manufacture. This will allow new cladding panels to be made using a similar composition, aggregate, colouring and finishing to the existing.

Research is also needed into the fixings of all components. There may well be a considerable variety of fixing methods over the building and this might take a variety of techniques in order to understand the construction of the building.

As well as determining the condition of fixings, the mechanism and rate of decay must be considered. Although it might be possible to suggest that most of the cast stones on the face of the building could be damaged by rusting fixings at some point in the future, to suggest wholesale renewal will probably be prohibitively expensive and also would be poor conservation practice. It will be important to make a judgement about how much damage will be caused by rusting fixings over the next 50, 100 and 150 years. Although it is clearly an advantage to carry out as much as is necessary when funding is available, it is important to consider that the building might be scaffolded again for repairs in 50 or 75 years. Some repairs, or anticipated repairs at future defects, should be left for the future.

Policy 11 – External Cladding Repairs

The most important face of the building is towards Argyll Street. The attitude to repair should be guided by the significance of the various faces of the building. For the front elevation, the objective of the repairs should be to repair according to best conservation practice. A strategy for research, assessment, specification and planning of repairs to cladding and cladding fixings needs to be determined.


9.3.3 Cleaning

Cleaning of sandstone is generally discouraged in conservation practice but this does not apply to concrete or cast stone. A judgement will need to be made about whether available cleaning techniques, such as the ones used for removing graffiti will make a significant difference in removing staining and other marks from the stone. If the letters spelling out “pavilion” on the east elevation are removed then they are likely to leave a stain, for instance. In this case, where it is the design of the principal face of the building that is most significant, as opposed to its history or alteration, then the design and significance can be recovered by removing marks of aging. It is one of the characteristics of Modern Movement architecture that the way materials aged was not particularly a consideration for designers as it was for the designers who worked in previous architectural styles. Although this is a failing of this type of architecture, it is also an aesthetic which should be respected. There is a stronger case in aesthetic grounds for cleaning the external surface of Rothesay Pavilion then there would be of masonry buildings which are designed with cornices and drips, and designed to weather.

Policy 12 – Masonry Cleaning

Careful consideration should be given to cleaning. Cleaning of external masonry could be considered to be desirable in conservation terms on this building. Techniques should not introduce chemicals irreversibly into the fabric of the building, nor should they erode or otherwise damage the face of the element being cleaned. Cleaning should be carried out according to carefully monitored samples.

9.3.4 Replacement Elements

Replacement elements should match as closely as possible the original element in that position. For an individual cast stone, for instance, the element should match the direction of tooling, colour and dimensions of the existing cast stone to be replaced. In one position the direction of tooling and colour of the elements changes. Care should be taken in considering whether such elements should be replaced to match the change in specification. There is a balance to be struck here. It is considered good conservation practice to match existing materials like for like on a very local basis within a building. However, it could also be considered that all interventions during a major period of repair should be to a single specification which would aid understanding for the specification of further repair projects in the future. The judgement should be made based on how a standard repair block would affect the appearance of a wall which has cast stone cladding of a different type. If it is considered that the standard block type would make a significant difference from a distance which will never weather in to look similar to the surrounding cast stone elements then separate specific elements should be made for the areas of cast stone which are to a different specification.

In areas for render repair the earliest form of render on that surface or building element should be replicated.

Policy 13 – Replacement Elements

Replacement of external materials should be on a like for like basis according to the specific material which is being replaced.


9.3.5 Missing Elements

Some elements are clearly missing from the exterior of the building. The physical inspection has suggested other elements which might be missing but further investigation, either physical or documentary is needed to establish this.

Policy 14 – Reinstatement of Missing Elements

The elements which should be reinstated to the exterior are;

• Possible slab canopies over external doors.

• Exterior light fittings.

• Exterior lighting arrangements, for instance to overhanging roof canopies and to entrance area, including lamp standards.

• Planting style to planters.

• Original windows to the caretaker’s house.

9.3.5 Roofs & Gutters

Samples of the original lavacrete finish should be salvaged and retained as a record.

Consideration should be given to the substrate. In most cases, flat roofs are laid over concrete. This means that a small amount of water penetration, even over a long period, does relatively little damage to the structure overall. Water penetration is more likely to damage the roof finish itself than the structural support below it. For this reason a change to a longer lasting specification, such as metal sheeting, is not appropriate. In addition, metal sheeting would change the build up of the roof because timber decking and steps would have to be introduced to allow correct sheet lengths. There may be circumstances, such as smaller roofs if found to be over timber structures rather than concrete, where it would be appropriate to make a change from short life felt material to a longer life lead or copper. These circumstances would be restricted at Rothesay Pavilion.

Policy 15 – Roofs

Roofs can be repaired with the most effective available material. Some investigation should be carried out as to whether “lavacrete” was used as specified and whether any of it survives. The original material surviving on the roofs is to be a kind of asphalt. In places where the roofing material is visible, such as the accessible terraces, the material should be chosen to have a resemblance in colour and character to the asphalt finish.

Policy 16 – Lead and Copper Flashings

In repair and reinstatement, leadwork and copperwork should be detailed to a standard well established for historic buildings work and maintained by members of the Lead Contractors Association. This will involve lead flashings at junctions between flat roofs and parapets.

The main purpose of urgent work at roof level would be to protect the fabric from immediate leaks.

Many other parts of the building already have temporary felt patching repairs over the damaged roofs. It is unlikely that any further felt patching would be a significant


improvement and significant work will be required to repair the roof to good condition.

Policy 17 –Gutters

All gutters and downpipes should be overhauled, wirebrushed and repainted. Where existing external ironwork is split or corroded it is appropriate to replace the cast iron elements. These elements must be specially made castings to match the existing exactly. It is possible that the original pattern can be found in the archives of one of the firms that still retains traditional casting patterns. Joints should be caulked.

9.3.7 Windows

The arrangement and character of windows is one of the most important elements in the architecture of the building. The survival of most of the original window framing is significant. In some cases there might be a tension between these two statements. The fact that the precise alignment, neatness and the narrow cross section of the glazing bars are a very important contributor to the aesthetic of the building, could contradict a wish to retain metal elements which are corroded and distorted. A judgement needs to be made for each window element but, in general, retention of existing fabric is preferable to replacement.

A large percentage of the glass has been replaced. It is important to the aesthetic of the building both internally and externally that the replacement material is removed and replaced with glass which is similar to the original character of glass.

Replacement metal framing is available from specialist companies. It would assist the project to discuss glazing, conservation and requirements with a specialist company as the design develops.

Policy 18 – Windows

Window frames and original glass should be retained where possible. This will involve careful conservation to existing corroded elements and repainting using the original colours. Glass which has been replaced in other materials, such as plastic, should be replaced using a glass specified to match the original design as closely as possible. Where window frames have been removed or altered, where it is possible to restore the original design, and where elements have to be replaced due to their poor condition, it is essential that a very accurate replacement metal window system is used.

9.3.8 Doors

Some changes have been made to doors externally. The original pattern doors survive in some locations, notably on the caretaker’s house.

Policy 19 – Doors

Non original doors to the exterior should be replaced with doors to match the original pattern. The doors should be painted the original colour as established by microscope paint section analysis.


9.3.9 External Planters and Landscaping

The landscape, paving and planters survive to sufficient extent to be repaired and restored, and for sensitive alterations based on existing detailing. The most important landscape elements are those to the east side because they are associated with an elevation of outstanding significance. Landscape elements around the other faces of the building are also significant. The garden on the south side outside the stair landing window acts as an external room and is part of the design of the stair. It therefore shares the considerable significance of the stair.

Alterations may need to be made to form disabled person’s access on the east side. Some alterations, such as the crazy paving on the north side, could be removed and this would enhance the significance of the landscaping in general.

Consideration needs to be given to the specification and maintenance of the planting within the planters. These planters are an important part of the original designer’s perception of the building. They are sufficiently important to have been retained in the design, despite cost savings, and should be considered to be as much part of the design of the main elevations as lighting or surface materials. The use of exotic species associated with warm climates might have been a decision taken when the pavilion was first completed to emphasise the holiday nature of the pavilion. It might also have been the intention that the planters were abundantly stocked so that plants could trail down over the sides. The architectural reference would be planters associated with buildings by Frank Lloyd Wright.

Planters and external landscaping should be integrated with the design of external lighting. It is possible that the original external lighting was insufficient due to the types of light fitting available. Lighting using modern fittings will be both brighter and different in quality to the quality originally intended. However, design consideration should be given to how the building was intended to be seen at night with the original lighting. A successful lighting design is likely to be one which develops from this understanding. The original light fitting poles that survive to the east of the pavilion should be reused and repainted their original colours.

Policy 20 – Landscape and Planters

The external landscape is significant and should be restored. Adaptations to the landscape should be carefully detailed to be in the spirit of the existing landscape as far as is practical. Specification of plant species and the gardening maintenance should both reflect the original intention, which seems to have been toward exotic species and possibly, abundance with parts of plants trailing down the outside of the planter.

9.3.10 Lighting

Policy 21 – Lighting

New external lighting should be based on an understanding of the original lighting design – what was intended to be lit, what practical lighting was required, and how shadows were to be managed across the building. Fixings through cast stone panels or render should be avoided.


9.3.11 General

The wall next to the yard of the caretaker’s house is tall. Its responsibility for its maintenance is not clear. This responsibility might be shared between the pavilion area and the neighbouring property. It might be considered desirable to negotiate a reduction in the height of this wall which would approve the amenity of the caretaker’s house.

Painted signs on walls within landscape to the east of the pavilion should be removed from the masonry surface. The need for such painted signs should be minimised. If they are necessary they should be separate, free standing but discrete signs.

The Architecture of the Interior

The significance of the interiors of the building ranges from considerable, through moderate, to neutral. None of the interiors are as important as the exterior face of the pavilion towards Rothesay Bay. In any conservation project there will be a need to alter and adapt the interior spaces in order to provide a viable future use to the building which helps to continue the preservation of the most significant aspect. In this case, alterations to facilitate a new use or an increase in an existing use which would be concentrated in areas which have neutral significance. There would be a preference for altering areas of moderate significance over areas of considerable significance where necessary.

This does not mean that interiors which have moderate or considerable significance can not be altered successfully in the interests of the building. Alterations should be clearly identifiable and should leave the original architecture, volumes, spaces and details easier to understand. Alterations should be reversible.

Policy 22 – Interventions

The rooflight to the hall should be restored to its original use with light passing down through it. All paint should be removed from the glass. It might be necessary to fit a blackout blind above the level of the laylight in the hall ceiling.

9.3.12 Principal Interiors

The principal interiors, such as the entrance hall, stair, upper lobby, hall and cafe should be restored using their original appearance as a guide. It is clear that the restored quality of these spaces would make a radical improvement to the public perception of the building as a significant heritage site. Such restoration may have to include some more compromises to meet contemporary standards, particularly in services. The visitor should feel that they are in interiors which relate to the original construction of the building. This means that the surface textures, paint colours and missing detail should be restored to the walls and ceilings. Where patterned terrazzo flooring survives it should be cleaned and receive in situ repairs as necessary. If areas of terrazzo flooring have been damaged then these areas should be carefully replicated so that the repaired area is not obvious. Where the finishes have been altered, such as the stair handrails, they should be restored as closely as possible to the original design as determined by physical evidence and photographs.

One of the most important elements in restoration will be the restoration of light fittings. The location and tracks for original light fittings should be opened up for


investigation and measurement. New bespoke light fittings are probably required to match the originals. The photographic evidence of the principal interiors should be examined in detail with a specialist designer/manufacturer of light fittings to get as accurate as possible light fitting restoration.

Policy 23 – Principal Interiors

The significant interiors should be restored based on physical evidence and the evidence of the photographs taken shortly after the building was completed. Surface textures and paint colours should be restored based on physical evidence and terrazzo floors should also be repaired, restored and cleaned.

9.3.13 Internal Doors

Policy 24 – InternalDoors

Doors in screens around the entrance and stair halls have been replaced with fire doors. This detracts from areas of considerable significance which should be restored. Doors to a non original design in parts of the building of considerable and moderate significance should be restored to an appearance which is close to the original appearance. In some cases minor compromises in appearance might be required in order to ensure adequate fire rating. It is important, however, to return the doors to their original appearance as a visual element in interiors of high significance.

9.3.14 Missing Elements

Several significant features have been lost from the building.

Policy 25 – Rooflight

The rooflight to the hall should be restored to its original use with light passing down through it. All paint should be removed from the glass. It might be necessary to fit a blackout blind above the level of the laylight in the hall ceiling.

Policy 26 – Organ

The original organ is still on the island. It is desirable to complete its repair and return it to the pavilion.

Policy 27 – South West Stair

The south west stair has been removed. It is not necessary to replace it to the original design, even if this could be determined. Secondary stair designs survive elsewhere in the building but are not particularly significant. Designs for a new stair in this position should be recognisable as an intervention but leave the evidence of the terrazzo floor visible.

As far as possible, the present location of this furniture should be established and recorded within the conservation management plan or a similar document as the project progresses and as pieces are discovered. The repair and conversion project will, in itself, bring forward information from the community although this is unlikely to be received at the start of the project. Often community consultation and personal contacts will reveal information about the building long after the repairs and conversion project is complete. It is important that there is a way of recording


this information and updating the conservation management plan is a useful way of ensuring that this information is recorded.

There is no need to attempt to reinstate original or replica furnishings. The internal alterations to the building could involve a significant alteration to its internal character and the original building is sufficiently legible to not need furniture to assist with visual interpretation.

9.4 Maintenance

It will be essential as part of the ongoing management of the building to develop a maintenance plan for the site. Immediate appropriate repair and ongoing maintenance will arrest and prevent further decay of the building fabric.

Policy 28 – Maintenance & Management Plan

During completion of urgent works to protect the building, a maintenance schedule and budget for ongoing maintenance should be established. This should be revised on completion of the project to ensure that it is appropriate for the future care of the building.

A log book/maintenance record should be kept of changes to the structure and of future maintenance to monitor what has been done and when and to encourage regular maintenance.

There are a number of actions and issues that should be addressed in the maintenance and management plan. They include the following:

• Advice should be sought from suitably qualified and experienced professionals.

• Annual inspections for maintenance and basic maintenance tasks such as checking the roofs for cracked or blistered felt, checking and clearing guttering, rainwater heads, downpipes, rainwater gullies and gratings.

• Regular inspection of services by suitably qualified contractors, including electrical, gas, heating, fire and other safety appliances, lightning conductor system and plumbing.

• Regular repainting as required.

• Minor repairs should be carried out as and when needed.

• Maintenance and management of any proposed new elements should be included and the plan updated accordingly to include them.

• Quinquennial inspections should be commissioned. They should be carried out by a conservation accredited surveyor or architect.

• Establish a detailed list of items to be inspected and maintained and how often these should be done – urgent, annual and long term actions, including exterior and interior of the building, surrounding area and associated landscaping, its fittings and fixtures.

• Allocate budget and resources and responsibilities for the building between owner, tenant and users to ensure mutual care of the building.


9.5 Use

It is expected that the building will need to be conserved, repaired and altered in order to bring it into an appropriate use. It is also recognised that works to the building may have some impact on historic fabric.

Policy 29 - Use

An appropriate use and user group for the building should be sought. This new use and user group should be able to secure funding for the conservation, repair and maintenance of the building.

9.6 Statutory & Non-Statutory Constraints

9.6.1 Listed Building Consent

The complex is category A listed. Listing gives a building statutory protection against unauthorised demolition, alteration and extension.

Listed building consent from Argyll & Bute Council will be required prior to any programme of repair, conservation and alteration works. Consultation with the Council should be undertaken early in the programme to determine any specific requirements as part of attaining listed building consent.

Policy 30 - Listed Building Consent

It is important that listed building consent is obtained prior to works being carried out. Although it might not answer specific questions raised as part of a Listed Building Consent applications, the conservation management plan should be used as a tool to assist in this process.

Policy 31 – Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP)

The Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP), October 2008 by Historic Scotland provides guidelines for listed buildings and conservation areas and should be referred to.

9.6.2 Scottish Planning Policy

Scottish Planning Policy 23: Planning and the Historic Environment (SPP 23) 2008

This document applies the provisions of the following pieces of legislation relevant to this site: Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997; the

Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act, 1979; the Town and Country

Planning (Scotland) Act, 1997; and Planning etc (Scotland) Act, 2006. It is an explicit recognition of the need for informed conservation, to understand the significance of historic sites and the potential impacts that any proposed development might have.

Policy 32 - Consultation of SPP23

It is important that SPP23 is consulted in detail to determine specific constraints and requirements that may apply to Rothesay Pavilion.

9.7 Safety, Vandalism & Security

The building is currently in fair condition.


It is considered desirable that the public gain access to the external balconies that were originally intended for use with the hall and the cafe. Detailed discussion with building control will be required about parapet heights.

The maintenance of roofs and gutters at Rothesay Pavilion is fairly easy to carry out safely due to the flat roofs. This ease of access also makes regular inspection relatively straightforward. Some flat roofs have relatively high parapets but probably not to the same height as would be required for current building standards. The upper roof and the roofs of the fly tower and the caretaker’s house do not have tall parapets

Policy 33 – Condition

It is important that the building is made safe to facilitate conservation and maintenance works as soon as possible. In making safe the building and carrying out urgent works to stabilise fabric, care must be taken to not damage existing historic fabric in anticipation of conservation and repair works to follow.

Policy 34 – Safety

Any proposed works and final designs will need to follow appropriate safety guidelines and policies to ensure that fire and health and safety regulations are met, depending on the final use of the building.

Provisions should be made for safe access to flat roofs for maintenance and inspection. This should be partly by risk assessment but it might be necessary to attach harness points to the building. Harness points should be fitted in places which are not visible in the general views of the building, for instance behind parapets. All fixings to existing fabric should be non ferrous, such as stainless steel or bronze.

If parapet heights need to be extended upwards then this should be done by introducing a discrete rail coloured so that it is not obvious in views towards the building from the east.

Policy 35 – Graffiti

Most of the graffiti happens to coincide with areas of cement repair which should be removed. Graffiti removal will not be an issue if the wall is rendered but a rendered wall might encourage further graffiti in the future. Graffiti removal from the surface of original stonework should be undertaken with care using methods recognised for treatment of historic fabric and a specialist should be consulted to determine the most appropriate form of removal.

Policy 36 – Security

The building should be maintained as secure in the short term until work can progress on site. Security of the site should be revised as appropriate during the progress of works and on completion to protect the finished structure and provide security to occupants. An appropriate security system will be needed for the completed building.


9.8 Public & Disabled Access

The building should be upgraded to remove barriers in accordance with the access plan, which should be formulated to take account of the access audit, carried out as part of the Design & Feasibility Study, and the conservation plan.

This should include improved access for wheelchair users, to allow access to all main spaces, ideally via the main entrance. This will also benefit other members of the community such as young parents. If not already fitted an induction loop should be fitted to the main hall. Signs should be clear and include braille.

In order to provide access for wheelchair users and others, a ramp set into the original (now altered) planter zone, to the front elevation, will be the least intrusive way of providing level access to the main entrance doors. A location for a lift should be identified which does not alter significant interiors. It should serve the upper level, and could also be taken up to the sun terrace level. This avoids altering significant spaces, with the loss of some accommodation in the ladies WCs and office spaces. Access to bowling alley and back of house areas could be via external door in Mackinlay Street (as it is likely to be by able bodied persons). The dance floor surround should be redesigned to allow ramped access.

A lift would also have the advantage of being able to relocate the chair store to the undercroft area, freeing up the former lobby for other uses.

An induction loop should be fitted to the main hall.

Reinstatement of original decorative scheme, and lighting strips may also be beneficial for visually impaired people.

Policy 37 – Public Access

It is important that reasonable public access to the key spaces of the building be reinstated once the building is back in good repair.

At present, there is little disabled access provision to the building and no lift between the upper and lower ground floors. The listing of a building does not in itself preclude further access improvements. However, where a solution to improve access conflicts with the need to preserve the heritage value of a property, discussions should be held with the local authority.

Policy 38 – Physical Access

The steps within the main hall are significant as part of the architecture and social history of the building. Most of the upper and lower ground floors are on a single level

Policy 39 – Access Audit

The recommendations of this audit, carried out as part of the Design & Feasibility Study, should be discussed in the light of minimising adverse impact of any suggested improvements on significant fabric.


9.9 Management

Good management of the building and site will be important for the future of the building as a key feature in CHORD initiative regeneration.

Policy 40 – Management

A management strategy must be clearly set out to create an understanding of roles and responsibilities between the owners of the building, managers, tenants and users to ensure the wellbeing of the building for the future.

Policy 41 – Conservation Management Plan

Owners, tenants and users will be required to sign up to the conservation management plan to ensure that the building is maintained and managed according to best conservation practice in order to preserve the building for future generations. This conservation management plan will be a core document to enable the sensitive and appropriate reuse of the site and for its ongoing management.

9.10 Workmanship & Advice

Inexperienced or amateur workmanship can cause irreversible damage to historic fabric, no matter how well intentioned. Relevant professional skills that may be employed at the site in the future may include archaeologists; surveyors; structural engineers; conservation architects; and stone conservators.

Policy 42 – Professional Advice

Suitably qualified and experienced professional advice should be employed on a consultancy basis as needed.

Policy 43 – Skilled Workmanship

Appropriate professional or craft skills and experience should be used in all work including inspection, maintenance and repairs. All contractors and consultants should have relevant historic environment qualification and experience. Earlier inappropriate repairs and materials should be reversed, providing doing so will not cause further irreversible harm to the significant fabric.

Policy 44 – Advice and the Conservation Management Plan

The conservation management plan is designed to provide a framework to inform the future management, use, protection, repair and conservation of the building and it should be adopted by the owner, manager and end users. It is not expected that the conservation management plan could ever be sufficient in detail to provide for every eventuality or answer every question that might arise in the future. It should not be used as a substitute for professional conservation advice. Any professional conservation advice sought should use the conservation management plan as a guide.


9.11 New Work & Alterations

9.11.1 Additions and Alterations

Additions and alterations to the exterior of the building might not be required. There is a possible addition to the building on the roof terrace at first floor level. This may include the projecting flat roof above the café, but not beyond the supporting column line. The fact that this area is not glazed is an important factor in the significance of the east elevation, but a carefully detailed interior space may enhance appreciation of this level without detracting from its significance. Furthermore, it might be possible to form an extension on the south side at this level. It could be on the part of the terrace which is south of the upper part of the hall and projection room. The detailing of an extension should follow similar guidelines to the guidelines for interior interventions and should be designed to be of a piece with them.

The design of alterations to the exterior of the building should follow the sequence of precedence suggested by the various levels of significance attributed to each side of the building.

Policy 45 – Additions and Alterations

It is possible to add or alter the exterior of the buildings. Such work has to be carried out with considerable skill and care, and to the highest standards of design. External alterations would not be appropriate on the parts of the building exterior which have considerable significance. Alterations and additions are possible on part of the building exterior which have moderate significance. They should be justified in terms that the alterations provide a sustainable future use which protects the parts of the building which have higher, considerable significance.

It would be possible to build on the land to the west of the pavilion. The design for a new building should be high quality, as is appropriate for the context of a category A listed building, but need not match the existing building in detailing, proportion, massing or materials.

Policy 46 – West Side

The west side of the building has the least significance of any part of the exterior.

A recognisably and legibly contemporary approach to any extensions would be desirable in this case.

Policy 47 – Qualities to be Addressed

There are five qualities about the existing exterior which should influence the design of an extension:

a) Height

The existing building form comprises a group of simple horizontal blocks. The interplay of rectangles is part of the aesthetic of the building as well as being a result of antiquarian correctness. A new building could be considered to the west of the pavilion without affecting the significance of the building. New buildings should avoid affecting the outline of the buildings when viewed from the north or east, or across Rothesay Bay.

b) Scale and Massing

The building is a group of rectangular forms. This form proportion and alignment could form a strong precedent for a new building or an extension.


The existing massing is very simple, particularly in the views from the north and east. A new design could take this as a starting point.

c) Materials

The predominant material of the existing building is glass, cast stone and render. The rendered faces to the south, west and north walls were less important than the east side.

Building materials are likely to be the main difference between the existing buildings and new construction.

The building is faced with cast stone with prominent glazed elements. Materials could be derived from the pavilion building.

• Sandstone or cast stone, formed or clad in ashlar course. Some stone surfaces should be tooled rather than left plain.

• Painted metal frames.

• Render

• Painted timber doors.

• Framed glazing.

• Metal gutters and down pipes

This does not exclude some materials commonly used in contemporary design such as timber cladding.

Material such as concrete tiles, UPVC gutters or windows are all considered to be of too poor quality to be used on this site. The only precedent for brick on this site is in the wall construction which was not intended to be seen.

A contemporary palette of materials is not excluded but it must be of high quality and bear some relationship to the materials of the buildings on and around the site.

It is desirable that there should be some apparent compatibility between the weathering of the new materials and the old. This can be achieved by designing the same degree of protection by cornices and other over-projecting detailing, although this need not replicate original decorative detail.

d) Detailing

The detailing of the new buildings will depend on the material chosen. If the new buildings contain detailing which refers in any way to the mouldings and other architectural form of the existing building, this detail must be handled very carefully. If details are to be repeated as a reference to the existing building, then they should be repeated accurately to avoid the unsatisfactory approximation generally associated with pastiche. Accurate reproduction would include choice of the same cast stone or metal frame sections, the same stone tooling, and an exact copy of mouldings, joint positions and widths. The relationships between detailed decorative features should also be understood.

It is possible to make detailing which relates to the original, either in size, position, heights, or by lining through horizontally with the existing building but which is expressed quite differently.

The architectural response which is least likely to be acceptable is a design between these two positions which involves an approximation of historic detailing without an understanding of its purpose or construction.


e) Symmetry

The quality of the existing building in its show front facing east is of a balanced group but not of symmetry. The quality of masses and forms balancing is an attractive precedent for new design. Precise symmetry is not important.

Policy 48 – Maintenance in New Buildings

It is important, as with the maintenance of the existing buildings, that good access for ongoing maintenance is built into the design of new structures.

Policy 49 – Interior Work

Work proposed to the interiors of the pavilion should be reversible and still allow appreciation of the key spaces.

Policy 50 – Physical Evidence and Building Recording

A photographic survey should be undertaken before and during alterations. A general programme of building recording should be developed in consultation with Historic Scotland, Council and the West of Scotland Archaeology Service, as required. Assessment and recording should be carried out by an experienced archaeologist or buildings historian. The results should be made publicly available i.e. by submission to the RCAHMS.

9.12 Setting & Boundaries

It is recognised that future works would need to be contained within the existing boundaries of the site. These works should improve on the physical and visual connection between the buildings and access from the surrounding area.

Policy 51 – Setting

The primary elevation of the pavilion should be respected as a key feature in the setting of Argyle Street. The setting of the building could be further enhanced by sensitive repair and restocking of the existing planters. An alteration or addition project, perhaps situated to the rear of the building, should include the design of new landscaping that would improve the setting and appreciation of the historic building, as well as access to the site from the surrounding area.

Policy 52 – Traffic

Traffic noise and vibration will need to be considered in the design of any new work on the site.

It is considered that there is low chance of any archaeological deposits in the vicinity of Rothesay Pavilion.

Policy 53 – Archaeological Potential

Prior to any works proposals for the site, discussion should be undertaken with the Council archaeology officer to assess any possible archaeological implications of work within the site. It may be necessary to undertake further desk based assessment to inform specific future proposals, provide monitoring of works and possibly recording on site.


9.13 Effects on the Environment & Climate Change

Conservation and repair work, as well as new work, will have some potential impact on the environment through choices of materials, design and siting of structures and choice of services for the building.

Policy 54 – Environmental Impact

All work to the existing building and any new structures should be designed and managed to minimise adverse impact on the environment.

Policy 55 – Maintenance

To maintain optimum energy efficiency for the building and any new structures, ensure that all heating and other services are regularly maintained and kept in good working order.

Through climate change, it is likely that there will be an increase in rainfall in particular.

Policy 56 – Climate Change

Design and specification of repairs and new structures should take into account the possibility of increased rainfall and wind, particularly in the detailing of outlets from flat roofs, overflows and rainwater pipes.

9.14 Interpretation & Understanding

Interpretation and encouragement of heritage skills training on the site will help those directly involved in the project, as well as users in the future, to understand the conservation and repair project and to appreciate the building and how it has been developed for the community.

In the first instance, consideration should be given to raising awareness and appreciation of the importance of the building and its significance and current condition, and its continued existence. Consideration should be given to press releases, exhibitions and the setting up of a ‘friends’ association.

The building, and associative literature, signs should be given a strong graphic identity, designed in sympathy with the design of the building. The thirties were a golden age for typeface and graphic design and these could form the basis of a scheme. The De la Warr Pavilion publicity shows how architecture and graphic design can mutually support each other.

The siting and design of interpretative material within the building should be the product of a design team including a conservation professional and graphic artist. Information contained in the interpretative material should include history of the development of the site and identification of important social history associated with the site. The presentation should be low maintenance, resistant to vandal damage, and clearly legible and accessible to people of all reading abilities.

Policy 57 – Interpretation

An Interpretation Plan should be carried out for Rothesay Pavilion to enhance its visitor use once repaired and restored. This can explore the best ways that the building’s history and the overall conservation and repair project can be presented to the public to improve understanding of the site.


Policy 58 – Heritage Skills Training

A heritage skills training programme could be developed as part of the conservation programme for Rothesay Pavilion, to help in the development of local specialist heritage conservation skills. This could include skilled training in cladding and interior repair.

9.15 Management of Information

Adopting the conservation management plan establishes a formal arrangement and allows policies within the plan to help protect and enhance what is important. It places an onus on all parties to use the plan as a basis for decision making.

Policy 59 – Adoption

This conservation management plan should be adopted by all relevant stakeholders and used to help guide the conservation, use and development of Rothesay Pavilion

Policy 60 – Updating the Conservation Management Plan

This conservation management plan is a dynamic document and it should be reviewed every five years to maintain its reliability. The plan should also be updated, preferably by the original author, when further information becomes available. Any new material for the project in the future should be kept in a secure location and be accessible along with the Conservation Management Plan.

Policy 61 – Archiving & Dissemination

A copy should be kept on site in a secure, but accessible location for ready reference when required by staff and users. A copy should also be lodged in a suitable public archive, such as the local library and the RCAHMS.

A copy should be made available by the owner and/or manager of the building to all consultants and occupants working on or in the building, now and in the future. A copy could also be maintained for ready access on the owner and/or manager’s website.

A digital copy will be maintained by the author, Simpson & Brown Architects.

Policy 62 – Further Building Research

Substantial archival research and consultation has been carried out for this study, but time was limited. More detailed study may be possible if another research source becomes available in the future. This might include interviews with prople who used the building. It might help recover fittings and fixtures that are now missing.

If further research is carried out in the future on the Rothesay Pavilion, any new information should be used to inform ongoing management of the building and to update the conservation management plan.

Policy 63 – Social Research

Further research into the social importance of the building is desirable. Aspects of research could include the people involved in the construction of the Pavilion, from those organising the work to those who contributed.