Basic HTML Version
The restored conservatory prior to introduction of loose furniture and tables. The lift housing and stair stand as independent
contemporary interventions in the volume of the restored iron framed conservatory.
14
Historic Gardens 2010
BCD Special Report
with the bowling greens and tennis courts.
While some of these were considered to
be inappropriate in the context of the
restored landscape, many were restored and
presented in the light of their new setting.
One further major structure presented
the greatest challenge in providing a positive
benefit to enhance and promote the regenerated
landscape, the Gladstone Conservatory.
The Gladstone Conservatory
While this iconic building was not an original
feature of the park, its carefully chosen
position complements and enhances the
westernmost section of Kemp’s formal terraces.
The glasshouse was gifted to the park by
Alderman Henry Yates Thompson in 1900.
Earlier, and presumably for fairness, Thompson
also gave Sefton Park in the south of the city
an even grander glasshouse, the Palm House.
Both are predominantly cast and wrought
iron structures by McKenzie and Moncur
of Glasgow. The Palm House restoration in
2000 provided a model for the regeneration
of the Gladstone Conservatory. Indeed, it was
clear that many similar components had been
used through both structures although their
specific function and form are very different.
The development of a business plan based
on audience development research brought
forward proposals for the restoration and reuse
of the building as a function and wedding
venue with the addition of a permanent
café for park users. In essence, the strategy
was to carefully dismantle and restore the
existing historic iron frame off-site while a
contemporary undercroft structure was built to
house the ancillary accommodation required to
serve the new use. The restored iron frame was
then to be re-erected on the new undercroft
structure to present the listed building free
of any of the modern accretions that would
diminish the appreciation of its historic form
and volume. The setting of the conservatory
and the adjacent bandstand would be subject
to a radical reappraisal so that the relationship
between the buildings and landscape could be
enhanced. In effect, a new precinct was created
to lead visitors from the car parking areas
through the building and into the landscape.
Careful attention to documented evidence of
Kemp’s planting plans allowed the landscape
architects (Planit EDC) to propose a form and
plant types which acknowledged his influence.
Following budget cost approval in
November 2005, a detailed survey of the
conservatory structure was carried out in
December of that year. The aim was to
comprehensively analyse the condition of
the ironwork and assess the component
assemblies that made up the walls and roof.
In turn, this would allow the production of
a scope of works to provide both a structure
for cost control and a specification to guide
prospective contractors on materials and
workmanship. The survey was carried out
over a three-day period in two teams; one
assessing the condition of high level elements
using a hydraulic platform and one at ground
level assessing the lower wall structure.
The difficulties of scheduling repairs
in such a structure were acknowledged at a
very early stage in the process. Having been
involved in dismantling three pairs of listed
iron promenade shelters in Blackpool, LEP
knew that the structure’s true condition would
only be revealed once deconstruction and
removal of finishes commenced. Through
discussions with recognised specialists in this
field of work it was resolved that the most
appropriate way to manage this would be to
break the process down into elements that
could be defined and costed (dismantling,
re-erection, glazing, painting and so on), while
accepting some flexibility within the repair
of elements so that the tender figure could
be managed as the restoration progressed.
The detailed survey allowed LEP
to break down the entire structure into
a series of component assemblies. The
building is essentially a kit of parts:
knowing how the components fit together
allows a clear understanding of how best
to dismantle and re-assemble it. Based on
this detailed knowledge, it was also possible
to produce appropriate specifications
and costings for the paint and glazing
systems and to calculate the contractor’s
overheads, scaffolding costs and so on.
This left the restoration of the ironwork
as the element of greatest uncertainty. The
design team carefully considered methods and
proposals for managing this ‘risk’ within a
defined contract cost. In effect, the specification
dictated the materials and restoration
techniques. It was the extent that these would
be required that was impossible to accurately
forecast with the information available at
that stage. The LEP survey had identified a
proportion of the structural elements that
would require replacement. These were
scheduled on a component-by-component basis
so that a unit cost for each could be established
and an overall cost for ‘new’ identified.
The element of ‘repair’ for each
component was also scheduled but it was
down to the expertise and experience of the
chosen specialist subcontractors to reassess
this once deconstruction was under way.
This did not remove the risks involved but
it did allow the design team to establish
and monitor costs as the contract works
progressed. This approach placed a great
deal of responsibility on the design team
to manage the process effectively but it was
agreed that this was the best way forward.
The wrought and cast iron frame was carefully recorded and
dismantled for restoration off site in workshop conditions.
This allowed the construction of the contemporary basement
structure which would provide a café for the park and all
ancillary accommodation. The restored frame was then
re-erected on its new base.
Prior to the regeneration the conservatory was a ruinous shell.