|
Programming
Repairs
Martin
Ashley
The care and conservation
of cathedrals, churches, chapels and other places of worship is almost
invariably complicated by their size, the high cost of scaffolding and
repair work, and the time it takes to raise the required funds. It is
therefore necessary to prepare a 'forward plan' which establishes the
priorities for the repair and conservation of a building's fabric, and
sets out a programme for the work. Each element can then be costed, budgeted
for and co-ordinated with other expenditure necessary for liturgical and
pastoral purposes.
If properly planned,
repair and conservation works can actively contribute to the life and
use of the building, and should not be seen simply as competing for limited
funds and resources. The aim should be to incorporate into the projected
cost plan not only those works which are necessary for the operation and
maintenance of the building but also for its enhancement. This will ensure
that the opportunity is taken to improve the presentation of the church,
and maximise effective use of funds and the fund-raising potential of
the works.
Programming should
be carried out from the basis of a thorough inspection of the building
and its condition, with the results set out in an inspection report, together
with recommendations for prioritising repair and conservation works. To
make such recommendations, it is important that the architects, surveyors
and engineers are trained in historic building conservation and are highly
experienced in this type of work, as this is a specialised field and mistakes
can be expensive. (The Cathedral Architects Association, the Council for
the Care of Churches, and the Ecclesiastical Architects and Surveyors
Association, can advise on suitability and training requirements.
A thorough inspection
report may also recommend further specialist advice on such aspects as
heating, lighting, acoustics, fire precautions, bells, organs and archaeology.
The report will identify the needs of the building fabric, and prioritise
recommendations for repair and conservation works over the following five
years (in the case of ,quinquennial' inspections) or ten years (in the
case of 'decennial' inspections).
Quinquennial inspections
are generally frequent enough to catch problems before significant damage
occurs, and allow a reasonable time interval for fabric committees to
organise fund raising, undertake programmes of work, and to spread the
expenditure incurred. A decennial report is more appropriate to large
minster churches, where the scale of the works and costs, the time required
for fund raising, and the time required for inspection of the building
itself are all substantially greater.
The
Quinquennial Survey
The survey should be
pre-planned as much as possible. A meeting to obtain maintenance log information
and arrange key access is essential, as is a site meeting with the maintenance
contractor, whose ladders can be used to obtain high level access to wall
plates, windows, roofs, valleys and eaves.
After the roofs an
external tour of walls will assist interpretation of defects found during
the subsequent interiors inspection. It seems natural to start with the
spire and tower roof, and then progress down through the belfry and other
chambers in the tower, gaining access to the nave roof void, then down
and out via the nave, aisles, transepts, organ loft, chancel, sanctuary,
side chapels, presbyteries and vestries. Interiors can be surveyed in
any reasonable sequence. The churchyard is easily returned to later, if
one runs out of time or daylight, and is usually surveyed last. A typical
parish church will take a full day to survey. Larger churches and chapels
take a few days, and the great cathedrals and abbeys require months to
inspect due to their sheer scale and complexity.
The specialist appointed
needs to understand the history of the building, as the chronology of
construction and restoration of a building will often provide clues to
persistent problems such as cracking in masonry and failure of timber
structures. The building's own archive, local historians, county records
and the Public Records Office are all excellent sources of information.
Through the survey
process, the inspecting architect or surveyor should come to understand
the building so well that its maintenance needs become self evident. In
effect the building will tell you what its own repair priorities are.
This is to some extent an intuitive and holistic process, and mastering
it represents the very pinnacle of expertise. There are familiar problems
where the cause is relatively easily understood, but there are also intractable
problems where the symptoms are clear but the cause is not, particularly
where there are several interdependent possible causes.
| Inspection
Tips |
| 1 |
Severe
problems are regularly found in the most inaccessible places. It is
important to get into these awkward spaces, with assistance and proper
safety precautions. |
| 2 |
Defects
are quite often the result of historical alterations or repairs, which
have been carried out to lesser standards of workmanship, disturbing
the integrity of the original construction. |
| 3 |
Severe
defects are commonly those which are not easily resolved, and where
the solution has been fudged in the past, frequently several times
over. Previous repairs may have dealt with the symptom rather than
the cause of the problem, such as repairs to the plaster without resolving
the source of the dampness. |
| 4 |
It
is surprising how often fine buildings have appaling arrangements
for draining water from roofs and walls, have difficult and dangerous
arrangements for maintenance access, and have poor fire detection
and compartmentation. |
The
Quinquennial Survey
The survey report must
accurately identify problems, draw realistic conclusions and make practical
recommendations without overstating the extent or urgency of repair works
required. Recommendations should give high priority to defects which constitute
a safety hazard, or significant risk to the building fabric or its contents.
The top ten priorities
for recommended works might be as follows, not necessarily in order:
- Risk to safety
in use
- Fire risk
- Structural safety
- Water ingress
- Damage to historic
fabric (including any unique elaboration, decoration, or artefacts in
particular)
- Building security
- Risk of dry rot
- Active structural
movement
- Accelerating decay
of building fabric
- Improvement in
use (including disability access improvements)
The prioritisation
of work will be influenced not only by the immediate priority of a problem
or defect but also by other considerations such as the grouping of works
into packages, fund raising potential of packages, and also user priorities.
This last factor must not be underestimated. The church community will have views on when certain works should be undertaken
to meet their own requirements for the building. Morale-boosting works
with visible impact such as heating and lighting improvements and redecoration
may help to avert the conflict which sometimes arises between the perceived
needs of 'the living church' and of the church as a monument.
Some priority headings
have gained increased importance in more recent times. High profile fires
in major buildings have raised the priority of fire detection and compartmentation
works. Increased expectations for environmental comfort, audio-visual
installations and electronic security have increased priority for improved
electrical and heating services. Improved disability access in particular
is now a priority requirement in all works programmes, and major funding
bodies usually require evidence of suitable provisions before grant aiding
proposed works.
Programming
Repairs
Inspection report recommendations
will usually put works into an initial priority programme order, to which
cost plan and cash flow analysis can then be applied by the Fabric Committee.
Priority headings can vary, but at their simplest for quinquennial report
purposes these include:
| 1 |
Urgent
work (safety risk, risk of fire, structural risk) |
| 2 |
Work
required within two years (water ingress, dry rot, damage to interior,
security) |
| 3 |
Work
required within five Years (structural movement, accelerating decay) |
| 4 |
Desirable
work (improvements in use, cosmetic improvements) |
'Good housekeeping'
maintenance works tend to be distributed through the priority order according
to urgency. The list can also identify elements which may be carried out
by volunteers.
Some funding organisations
require more sophisticated lists of priority headings according to the
fund's applications. It is difficult enough to prioritise works under
relatively simple headings, and too many headings quickly become unwieldy,
so it is preferable to prepare a further 'post-inspection' report which
summarises the principal findings of the inspection report and provides
detailed costings of recommendations.
Available funding,
together with the time constraints of fund raising, obtaining consents,
and competitive tendering will dictate a magnitude of works achievable
over the survey interval period. Little is achieved without fund raising,
and works need to be assessed for fund raising potential and 'income generation.
Potential funding bodies set down eligibility criteria, towards which
packages of works can be assembled. Packages can include associated smaller
work items to attract grant assistance awarded to the larger structural
works.
Work packages are
best programmed to take advantage of scaffolding and temporary site set-up
arrangements. For example, Phase A works to a Lady Chapel might include
repairs to the roof carpentry, lead roofing, stone pinnacles and parapets,
rainwater goods and lightning conductor. Phase B might include stone walling
and windows, glazing repairs and rainwater goods from lower lifts on the
same scaffolding. Phase C might be internal repairs, re-servicing and
decorations Such phases also provide identifiable appeal fund packages.
Phasing will deal with the most urgent problems first, which tend to be
at high level.
Further
Reading
- The Role and
Duties of the Cathedral Architect, Cathedral Architects Association
- Inspection and
Repair - A Guide to Church Quinquennial Surveys, Council for the
Care of Churches
|
This
article is reproduced from The Conservation and Repair of Ecclesiastical Buildings, 1998
Author
Martin
Ashley Dipi Arch RIBA was consultant architect to the restoration of
The Queen's Chapel, St James's Palace, and is inspecting architect to
Dorchester Abbey. He is an architect member of Guildford Diocesan Advisory
Committee, and regularly lectures on the philosophy and principles of
historic building conservation.
Further
information
|
RELATED
ARTICLES
Quinquennial
Reports
RELATED
PRODUCTS AND SERVICES
Architects
Surveyors
Advisory
Bodies |
| |
© Cathedral Communications Limited 2005 |