National Wax Monstrosity

@ConK wrote:

the plans for this site are

Full Development Description

I, Daniel Cassidy, intend to apply for permission for development consisting of the demolition of the existing wax museum building and construction of a 118 bedroom hotel development with ancillary accomodation consisting of seven stories of accomodation over basement service area/car park,new vehicular access way to basement service area/car park off Bethesda Place, reception, lounge, restaurant, bar, kitchen & ancillary facilities at ground level and bedroom and ancillary facilities at upper levels, at the wax museum site bounded by Dorset Street and Granby Row to the West & South and by Bethesda Place to the North located at Dorset Street & Granby Row, Parnell Square, Dublin 1.

planning app 4215/04 . GRANTED. BUT IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEONE TOLD THEM ABOUT THE OLD BUILDING UNDERNEATH. – COZ OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
CONDITION
1. There is a discrepancy between the conclusion of the conservation report submitted with the application and the report of the City Council’s Conservation Officer, dated 18/01/05, following the recent opening up works. In light of the third party objection to the demolition of the existing building, it is considered that the architectural and historic significance of the extant eighteenth-century fabric be fully assessed at this juncture. The applicant is asked to submit a revised Conservation Statement, which should be informed by the nature and extent of original fabric uncovered as a result of the opening up works viewed on the 13/01/05 as part of the submitted additional information request. It is noted that the applicant’s conservation consultant is asked to contact the area planner before the submission of this clarification to facilitate a joint detailed site inspection in conjunction with the City Conservation Officer.

surely if there is anything left of the old church underneath that “fallout shelter” he will not be permitted to demolish it!!!

Is any of the surviving stonework being rescued? Or is it all going to landfill.

Rough text

Enforcement Officer
Dublin 1 section
Enforcement Section
Floor 2 Block 4
Civic Officesw
Wood Quay
Dublin 8

15th Septemeber 2005

Dear Sir,

I wish to complain on breaches of planning permission 4215/04 as granted by Dublin City Council and as qualified by condition 1 of the permission

‘ There is a discrepancy between the conclusion of the conservation report submitted with the application and the report of the City Council’s Conservation Officer, dated 18/01/05, following the recent opening up works. In light of the third party objection to the demolition of the existing building, it is considered that the architectural and historic significance of the extant eighteenth-century fabric be fully assessed at this juncture. The applicant is asked to submit a revised Conservation Statement, which should be informed by the nature and extent of original fabric uncovered as a result of the opening up works viewed on the 13/01/05 as part of the submitted additional information request. It is noted that the applicant’s conservation consultant is asked to contact the area planner before the submission of this clarification to facilitate a joint detailed site inspection in conjunction with the City Conservation Officer.’

It is clear that the conservation report was flawed as indicated by the photos enclosed with this letter. We request that enforcement procedings be commenced with the greatest of urgency given the gravity of this matter.

Yours Sincerely

Concerned Citizen

Enclosures

1. Planning Condition 1
2. Images (2-5)

Do not forget to put your full name and address as it will be invalidated if you do not.

Granted it may be jumping to conclusions but when is out of the country then one can’t jump into the car to check it out and satisfy oneself that only a couple of bricks have come down. I’ve never known Frank to be too wide of the mark and I’ve never seen a conservation report to be questioned as much before either.

If someonhe could get check it out then we will really know one way or the other.

Thats the end of that building

@Thomond Park wrote:

Rough text

Enforcement Officer
Dublin 1 section
Enforcement Section
Floor 2 Block 4
Civic Officesw
Wood Quay
Dublin 8

15th Septemeber 2005

Dear Sir,

I wish to complain on breaches of planning permission 4215/04 as granted by Dublin City Council and as qualified by condition 1 of the permission

‘ There is a discrepancy between the conclusion of the conservation report submitted with the application and the report of the City Council’s Conservation Officer, dated 18/01/05, following the recent opening up works. In light of the third party objection to the demolition of the existing building, it is considered that the architectural and historic significance of the extant eighteenth-century fabric be fully assessed at this juncture. The applicant is asked to submit a revised Conservation Statement, which should be informed by the nature and extent of original fabric uncovered as a result of the opening up works viewed on the 13/01/05 as part of the submitted additional information request. It is noted that the applicant’s conservation consultant is asked to contact the area planner before the submission of this clarification to facilitate a joint detailed site inspection in conjunction with the City Conservation Officer.’

It is clear that the conservation report was flawed as indicated by the photos enclosed with this letter. We request that enforcement procedings be commenced with the greatest of urgency given the gravity of this matter.

Yours Sincerely

Concerned Citizen

Enclosures

1. Planning Condition 1
2. Images (2-5)

Do not forget to put your full name and address as it will be invalidated if you do not.

That’s a request for clarification of further information you’ve quoted, not a grant of planning permission.

An Taisce and the Irish Georgian Society had made third party submissions to the original planning application, expressing concern that the remaining extent of the classical stone building underneath the ‘60s skin needed to be established – and to ask whether there was a possibility of saving the building – before proceeding with redevelopment plans. When it became clear that the building was beyond saving (i.e. after opening up works described in a Further Information report had shown incompleteness in the remains of the building – the portico had been mostly removed and sections of wall to Dorset Street had been replaced in render – and also because, were the shell of what remained of the building to be kept at that point, who would have taken on the immense task of restoring it?), a meeting was held to discuss a Salvage Plan for the building as it survived. It was agreed that a section of wall would be salvaged and reconstructed either within the new hotel, or somewhere else in the vicinity. Other good stonework would also be salvaged.

The demolition of the building has to be carried out in accordance with this Salvage Plan (which is available at the public planning counter).

Just on the subject of Luke Gardiner we have Blooms day tours also 1916 walking tours – why not a Luke Gardnier architectural and planning tour – for in my estimation he was the only thinking town planner this city ever had. It’s really amazing to think that there is not even a statue or plaque to the man responsible for what we know as Georgian Dublin – if ever the term airbrushed out of history was apppropriate it applies to Luke Gardnier.

Rachel Whiteread’s alter ego?

Based on the Abbey and Cork Opera House, I’ll guess Michael Scott (no, I haven’t Googled it). The possibilities are fairly narrow, given the date and the fact that you’re even asking- it’s hardly going to be some County Council fella from Tullamore, is it? 🙂

🙁 (sob)

Oh I think my professional reputation remains intact- had I advertised myself as a bunker historian (a la Paul Virilio?) then perhaps your criticism would be more wounding, but the Monstrosity hardly qualified as architecture now, did it? 🙂

At 1967, it was fairly early for auld Sammy I think. He and Arthur Gibney entered the UCD competition in 1963-64 as relatively fresh graduates and their scheme, which came 4th, was actually pretty interesting. Instructive to see how far he’d fallen in the space of a few short years.

(Do I sound like an Architectural Historian now? 😎 )

I was struck by a little browsing today in Easons – I came across a picture book about Dublin’s cinemas, and I have to say the loss of so many buildings and fine interiors is quite a shame – The National Wax Museum building (c1967) was a cinema both before the re-cladding and after – they have a photo of it in that book as well as the old cinema. It was quite stark as a cinema.

Aswell as this, there were phenomenal shots of the interior of the Savoy,Metropole, Theatre Royal and Carlton – I was shocked to learn that the Savoy once had an enormouse 2,900 seat auditorium – it was lavishly decorated. Similar auditoriums existed in the Metropole, Carlton and Theatre Royal.

The exteriors of the original Savoy were quite dignified and restrained, and if there was ever a case for re-instatement, this would be one of them. The canopy was well finished with urns and other Egyptian fanciful decoration.

Have to say seeing the Wax Monstrosity as it was orignially intended – a new cinema – was not too bad.