Get help from the best in academic writing.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Building Restoration

Using examples explore the advantages and disadvantages of allowing redevelopment and reconstruction of historic buildings.
For the purposes of this discussion it is primarily important to determine what is meant by historic and to rationalize the terms redevelopment and reconstruction. The terms will be used in the context of preserving and conserving buildings. This includes maintaining their predominant features and characteristics, whilst enhancing new features in keeping with the style and building constraints relating to traditional use of materials and resources. According to English Heritage buildings exist across the UK that span over a thousand years.
They also work with the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and local authorities to allocate buildings such as these according to their criteria for listing – or categorizing for the purposes of their historic importance. These are identified using the following criteria:
Those having architectural interest: buildings which are nationally important for the interest of their architectural design, decoration and craftsmanship; also important examples of particular building types and techniques.
Those deemed of historic interest: this includes buildings which illustrate important aspects of the nation’s social, economic, cultural or military history.
A variety of places that have a close historical association with nationally important buildings or events.
Places which have group value, especially where buildings are part of an important architectural or historic group or are a fine example of planning (such as squares, terraces and model villages) [1]
English Heritage define historic in relation to a number of factors. All buildings constructed before 1700 are automatically listed. Similarly this is the case with most properties up to 1840. A number of post 1945 buildings are also included in these terms. A comprehensive breakdown of listed buildings statistics across the UK is illustrated below:
38% are domestic dwellings
15% date from before 1600
nearly 20% date from the 17th century
31% from the 18th century
32% from the 19th century
3% from 1900-1944
0.2% from 1945 or later[2]
Introducing conventional features can have negative consequences on properties such as those defined above. Not only for cosmetic or domestic purposes but also in relation to implementing safety measures into a property. and accessibility by way of lifts and hand rails etc for the benefit of people with disabilities.
There is also a trend for interpreting properties of historical interest into entertainment or ‘edutainment’ orientated experiences which can be argued devalues the historic importance and often encourages historical inaccuracy from the learning perspective. The final consideration to be made in relation to this essay question is the notion of whether old buildings should remain preserved exactly as they are without any enhancement, improvements, additions or restorations. That they should reflect the period they were constructed in and be immortalized as a historical or scientific study.
This paper will seek to exemplify many of these issues relating to the redevelopment and reconstruction of historic buildings which covers a broad argument for discussion.
The English Tourist Board published a paper in 1991 entitled ‘Maintaining the Balance’ which proposed new schemes designed to ensure that historic town environments worked in sync with their communities whilst providing the visitor with a traditional experience. Visitor Management Plans were adopted and Town Centre Managers were recruited as means of taking these initiatives forward. The conservation and preservation of built heritage often involves maintaining tight restrictions and limited planning opportunities which is not conducive to new housing projects or business opportunities which could generate enterprise and economic benefits. Instead many of the UK’s classified historic towns remain stagnant and non progressive.[3] Similarly there are currently plans to renovate and restore the city centre of Amsterdam in keeping with its cultural heritage. The city centre is divided by two groups of residents. One enjoys the aesthetic benefits of living in this area, while the second are simply living centrally for the purposes of work and being close to amenities. This second group is unconcerned with the historical importance of the city and is not prepared to invest in maintaining or developing it as such. Often when areas such as this are under preservation orders high costs are incurred for maintenance and renovation in the style accustomed to the period. This in turn raises the rents of properties which become too high for existing residents to afford, eventually forcing them out of their homes, as is feared in Amsterdam.[4]
When considering the practical aspects of individual houses, when a building is disassembled or exposed for the purposes of renovation or reconstruction, a great many vital elements which are original to its heritage can be lost. This might include clay or lime mortars used in between joist, foundations and chimney linings. Wooden frames held together by pegs can fracture if disengaged and it is crucial that that high levels of carpentry skills and traditional craftsmanship techniques are applied when rebuilding and renovating buildings.[5]
There are an abundance of sites, Museums and stately homes which are testaments to ‘living history’ and function for the benefit of the public across the world today. Colonial Williamsburg and the Historic Charleston Foundation in the United States, Slave Forts in Africa and Weald and Downland Open Air Museum in the UK to name a few. They all encourage the preservation of old buildings. With this redevelopment comes the opportunity of numerous availability of grants and Heritage Lottery funding to help with this process. They enable people to remain aware of what is important historically and that reflects the lives and communities from which we all originate. People managing these processes need the necessary expertise with which to achieve these renovations and reconstructions. Acquiring documentation of age is essential as is being true to the period in which it was built architecturally. Architectural historians in the United States for example have divided buildings into around half a dozen significant periods of half a century each. These phases are then sub-divided into over-lapping periods. Even then not all of these categories are universally recognized.[6] This suggests reason enough for ensuring that each building selected for re-development is accurately assessed and renovated accordingly and appropriately. It is important also to remember that this is not a new phenomenon. In 1877 the painter and writer William Morris wrote a manifesto against the proposed restoration of Tewkesbury Abbey. During this and subsequent periods architects considered restoration to be about changing a building for the purposes of altering it to reflect its key historical importance. For example during the late nineteenth century many Anglo-Saxon churches in the UK were ‘restored’ into Gothic interpretations. This was a reflection of people’s attitudes then surrounding medieval masons, who were deemed uninitiated into religion. Consequently the Gothic form and design purported to purist representations and was in essence closer to God.[7]
It is important then to remember that when renovating buildings they do not become exploited for the benefit of contemporary tastes and trends. It can be argued that many of these ‘living history’ experiences have become just that and are able to be devalued very easily.
Accuracy based on the facts available to the architects is what should remain of paramount importance when reconstructing any historic building.
One of the most exceptional examples of reconstruction to be seen today is with the city of Warsaw in Poland. During the Second World War over 85% of the city centre was destroyed. A huge campaign and total restoration took place over a number of years. The results of which stand today including replica churches, palaces and a market places all sensitively and historically representative of a history which spans some eight hundred years in its reconstruction. [8]
On the other hand reconstruction is never going to be entirely accurate in some instances and it is these examples that encourage debate. Take for example the tourist reconstruction site at Mount Vernon in Washington where the coach house, slave quarters/ greenhouse and ‘stercorary’ have all been restored following fire damage that occurred in the mid nineteenth century. Some of which was based on documents and reminiscence accounts from past generations. Parts of the stercorary were rebuilt in 2001 incorporating the original cobbled stones and brickwork uncovered by archaeologists with research sourcing a drawing from 1807 which provided structural accuracy to be maintained. However when builders came to reconstruct the blacksmiths shop the old plantation ledgers illustrated detailed records pertaining to its location and activities. Whilst other archives provided details relating to the working blacksmiths themselves. Nonetheless contradictions began to appear relating to the shop’s exact location and its appearance during the year 1799. This contention has raged for over fifty years and has raised all the issues regarding physical reconstruction and the amount of evidence that is required in order to support the justification for re-building the property without sufficient authenticity.[9]
Another similar example of this where reconstruction has been curtailed is with the handling of Franklin Court in Philadelphia, the residencies of the former President Benjamin Franklin. During the 1970’s an extensive programme of research both archaeological and archival was carried out on the assumption that the house and grounds would be renovated and fully furnished into an interpretative museum. But the research revealed little evidence of any pictures or drawings of what the house had actually looked like. Consequently no reconstruction took place other than the outbuildings and grounds which had retained more documented evidence. Proving that accuracy is reassuringly not always taken for granted in this type of work.
Future functional requirements of a building are also aspects of development to consider within a historic building, as the law now governs that public buildings need to comply with the DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) by ensuring they have accessible routes both internal and external as well as ramps, lifts and toilets where necessary. This legislative requirement has had an impact on the way in which many historic buildings have had to alter their environment, which is of course an enormous and necessary benefit for people with a disability; although it remains one more area of concern where public renovations and redevelopments are taking place.
The most heated debate in terms of redevelopment of historic buildings is of course a matter of architectural and archaeological appreciation. Some sites are considered simply not available to be rebuilt. Sites such as Pompeii for example or the Pyramids of Egypt. They are revered as preserved examples of the past, museums in their own right. They consist of ruins which are fragile and vulnerable. If these ruins become too fragile or it becomes impossible to maintain them then it is understandable that some sort of structure may have to be built around them. This may of course eventually decrease the visual enjoyment of a historical building which is why so many sites of importance are now being re-built. Such historical monuments are now able to be reconstructed far more easily by way of digitization. Several digital projects of this type exist for educational purposes and are becoming more widespread. In addition many historic houses like the Queens House in Greenwich, London provide significant 3D models that demonstrate the different architectural development of the construction and alterations over time. [10]Technology has become so precise and truthful in its interpretations that this may prevail as the preferred method of reconstruction and development in the future.
Many historic buildings get demolished just because they are old, so the modern appreciation for rebuilding and conserving these properties are essential to maintaining the cultural heritage of nations throughout the world. However it is important that the historic environment from which they have descended is fully understood. The right skills, techniques and materials from an archaeological perspective are fundamental to ensuring this process is achieved accurately and sensitively.
Bibliography
Deben, L, Salet, W (2004) Cultural heritage and the future of the historic inner city of Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis
Smith, M.K, Robinson, and S.M (2006) Cultural Tourism in a Changing World: Politics, Participation and (re)presentation: Channel View Publications
Paravalos, P (2006) Moving a House with Preservation in Mind: Rowman Altamira
Nash, G (2003) Renovating Old Houses: Bringing New Life to Vintage Homes: Taunton Press
Sickles-Taves, L (1999) The Use of and Need for Preservation Standards in Architectural Conservation: ASTM International
Jameson, J.H (2004) The Reconstructed Past: Reconstructions in the Public Interpretation of Archaeology and History: Rowman Altamira
Fitch, J.M (1990) Historic Preservation: Curatorial Management of the Built World: University of Virginia Press, 1990
Sourced from: http://www.worldheritagesite.org/sites/warsaw.html, Date accessed, 20/11/08
Sourced from: http://www.nmm.ac.uk/visit/scenic-attractions/architecture-and-views/greenwich-architecture-and-views, Date accessed, 20/11/08
[1] Sourced from: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1373, Date accessed, 19/11/08
[2] Sourced from: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1373, Date accessed, 19/11/08
[3] Smith,M.K, Robinson,S.M (2006:292) Cultural Tourism in a Changing World: Politics, Participation and (re)presentation: Channel View Publications
[4] Deben,L,Salet,W (2004:247-248) Cultural heritage and the future of the historic inner city of Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis
[5] Paravalos,P (2006: 62-63) Moving a House with Preservation in Mind: Rowman Altamira
[6] Nash,G (2003:21) Renovating Old Houses: Bringing New Life to Vintage Homes: Taunton Press
[7] Sickles-Taves,L (1999: 14) The Use of and Need for Preservation Standards in Architectural Conservation: ASTM International
[8] Sourced from: http://www.worldheritagesite.org/sites/warsaw.html, Date accessed, 20/11/08
[9] Jameson,J.H (2004: 80) The Reconstructed Past: Reconstructions in the Public Interpretation of Archaeology and History: Rowman Altamira
[10] Sourced from: http://www.nmm.ac.uk/visit/scenic-attractions/architecture-and-views/greenwich-architecture-and-views, Date accessed, 20/11/08

Building Maintenance Review for University

Strategy As Plymouth University strives to distinguish its legacy through excellence in facility offerings, the maintenance of such structures becomes an essential part of the strategy. Refurbishment has already been undertaken across the campus in the past five years, as major additions and facelifts have offered dimension and expanded capabilities for an expanding student and faculty body. Ultimately in the preservation of this legacy, a proactive revision to campus maintenance is needed, one which will ensure that the lifecycle costs of the multiple structures are limited and appropriate. Reactionary maintenance programmes dramatically detract from such principles; therefore, by following the programmed outlined herein, officials will effectively navigate the broad spectrum of repair and maintenance projects which will develop in the coming decades.
Exemplary of campus revisions in the past several years, perhaps the most noticeable addition has been that of the Roland Levinsky building. A remarkable new structure boasting 12,711m2 of spatial area and housing an expanded Faculty of the Arts, this building is representative of all that the university plans for the future of the campus façade and its legacy. These developments include meritorious architecture, active facility management, and long term preservation techniques as structural retention among both new and historic participants becomes an essential part of the long term process.
Supplemental rehabilitations and expansions have included the Rolle Building development and the Nacy Astor building programme. A combined total area of over 11,000 m2, these two structures represent a campus evolution which retains history while at the same time, boasts a progressive vision. Incorporating new student housing and offers substantial revisions to common areas, sports facilities, and office space, the maintenance of such facilities will become a pivotal role in the university reputation for quality and consistency.
To define appropriate and effective maintenance strategies, it become essential to identify the structural frailties which will be encountered over the coming years. A case study conducted of homes in the Midlands area determined that the predominant cause of structural deterioration is underground movement and shifting, while material defects and superstructure decay fill in the remaining sources.[1] Recognising that such variables are essential to maintenance of a building’s lifecycle directs the maintenance programme towards structural components, specifically those of the super and substructures and their material integrity.
In considering that maintaining only such areas would not fully integrate the much broader aesthetic and range of functional components within university buildings, there are other factors which must be considered as well. Similar surveys and studies have identified inadequacy defects within the structure itself which stem from roofing failure (42.9%), walls and column deficiencies (21.2%), lintel failure (18.5), and beam and joist overloading (17.5%).[2] These components broaden the scope of maintenance operations; however, recognition of their frailties and the potential for system-wide failure given component collapse enables maintenance crews to seriously consider structural deviance and proactively reform and refurbish according to the prescribed strategy.
Determining which areas will offer the greatest challenge and thereby warrant the most attention becomes a more difficult task. Material defects are also of considerable concern when designing a maintenance programme, as deterioration stemming from biological, chemical, and physical attack can substantially reduce the longevity of a structure and dramatically increase long term maintenance costs.[3] Understanding that while new structures may incorporate the most advanced materials and construction techniques, recognition of material failure, could highlight additional system deviance such as elemental concerns that undermine functional operation of the building. Similarly, within historic campus structures, the potential for material deterioration is substantially higher, detracting from longevity and reducing functionality without proactive initiatives.
Perhaps the most substantial concern given the prevalence of inclement weather, identifying key seepage points and wet areas will assist maintenance crews in stopping problems before they increase in both cost and severity. The maintenance cost of wet areas within a building’s substructure can extract between 35 and 50% of a building’s annual maintenance cost, in spite of their limited area occupation (10% in most cases).[4] Within the structural elements which are contained in wet areas, studies have demonstrated that there are three main causes of system failure, highlighting water leakages, corrosion of pipes, and the spalling of concrete as substantial modes of foundation decay.[5] From this perspective, regular maintenance and constant evaluation of wet area structures will also be an essential part of the maintenance programme.
The team involved in such initiatives must be one of substantial talent, including abilities directly related to those concerns which will most occupy their time, including routine building maintenance, minor construction, repair, and general upkeep. An in-house team whose number is dictated by the scope of the short term maintenance programme should be able to assume the role of daily operator in terms of duties such as light bulb replacement, leak management in pipe couplings, plumbing blockage, door hinge failure, minor boiler issues, tap washer changes, sign erection, and a host of other duties. Along these lines, internal team members must be coached in awareness faculties, ensuring that they can recognise and act when presented with system frailties or structural deviance. Such identification should include slipped tiling, dampness and wet areas, unnatural ageing, rot or mould, cracking, discolouration, and many other signs that the integrity of each building is being negatively affected by some element. These in house participants should also be versed in decoration and design principles, enabling their participation in an ongoing aesthetic awareness programme where they adjust and alter the decorum to suit university objectives.
In spite of the high costs associated with emergency repairs, the best maintenance programme cannot prevent their incidence; therefore maintenance contracts must be designed to ensure cost effectiveness while at the same time encourage a rapid response time. Such partnerships should entail a specific cost basis dependent on the required task, and revolve around a long term relationship in which the maintenance contractors become familiar with the university. A twenty-four hour guideline should be in place for response rates; however, given a major system failure such as a boiler break or plumbing backup, emergency teams must be immediately available.
The maintenance programme will entail a rotation of short, medium, and long term tasks, each assigned to either an in-house participant or contracted to an external maintenance team. As these responsibilities happen at regular intervals, long term contracts can remain in place on a specific rotation to ensure that participants are acting proactively and in accordance with the programme needs, not reaction based hiring. Teams should be qualified according to skill set and appropriateness for the stage of the maintenance programme, ensuring that contractor responsibilities do not exceed their scope of normal operation. As structural and systematic problems are identified during the regular review periods and daily operations, maintenance teams must recognise the severity of the damage or wear on the structure and inform a supervisory team of their findings. From this control position, the team will either instruct on internal repair or will hire out the duty to an outside firm. Managing costs through the maintenance chain will ensure that the university meets their long term cost objectives and yet remains active in the scope of their building maintenance.
Maintenance Policy Review To develop an effective maintenance programme, the university must adopt a perspective of preventative maintenance, one which while often perceived as costly in the short term, will dramatically reduce the systematic failure in the long term. Holmes and Droop (1982) recognised that periodic maintenance is most often directed according to budget instead of aligning with the needs of the building in question.[6] As university expenditure expectations are oftentimes maligned with real working scenarios, the determination of a predictive budget and maintenance policy will enable referral and discussion to be directed towards a proactive scenario. The reality is that instead of developing a systematic maintenance framework, decision makers will often choose to weigh budgeting concerns against the severity of the needed service prior to attempting any form of work.[7] Maintenance of a university campus is not about severity or reactionist tendencies. Instead, the maintenance of school facilities must be directed towards a long term focus of preservation and conservation, ensuring that sustainability is an ultimate objective. The following charts detail the short, medium, and long term focus through which maintenance projects will directly reduce the overall cost basis for renovation and repair over the life of school structures. The representative building is the Reynolds Building, although this plan could be repositioned for any of the many structures on campus with minimal adjustment. In spite of the fact that the costing data is only a general estimate, it places into perspective just how overwhelming major projects can be. Therefore, following a set maintenance plan and integrating professional labour to ensure its validity will enable the university to reduce costs and adequately maintain their diverse structural offering.
It should be noted that all three sections contain a complete interior and exterior survey during which any potential problems are identified long before they become emergency repairs. Such analyses should be performed by a licensed surveyor and entail differing levels of comprehensiveness according to the length of time in between reviews. This process is essential to the preventative maintenance scheme of the university, as in spite of other review, the educated perspective of the surveyor could catch concerns before they escalate into much larger challenges. The relatively low cost of this process would be escalated if problems were found; however, the overall long term savings due to a proactive methodology is substantial
Short Term Costs The following chart details the short term maintenance costs which will enhance the overall operations of university buildings while at the same time ensure that major systems are checked and repaired prior to major collapse. For the purpose of this plan, short term can be considered a one to two year variable in which the repetition of action is essential to preventative techniques. Each of these segments will not individually contribute to costly renovations; however, when considered as a unit, the cost basis for rehabilitating a distressed structure would be substantial and should be avoided at all costs.
Primary Systems Maintenance
To begin to exploit the systems which most influence the structural security and stability of a building, a composite of form and function must be evaluated and long term costs prohibited. The key systems within the university building structures include heating and cooling systems, gutters and down pipes and fire protection tools. Aligning these systems around a schedule of regular repair will elongate the life of these instrumental participants and ensure that building stability is upheld.
The consideration within this model for gutters and down pipes as essential modes of preservation is directly due to the nature of groundwater seepage and runoff. In order to ensure a long lifecycle for each structure, the water diversion systems must be intimately linked to a maintenance schedule. By cleaning on a 6 month frequency, maintenance technicians are ensuring that any foreign debris that might have filled those units, particularly during the Autumn season, is removed prior to more wet and rain-filled weather.
Secondly, ensuring that heating and cooling systems operate at maximum efficiency over their lifecycle assists the university budget on many levels. First and foremost, efficiency measures reduce the overall energy costs associated with maintaining an appropriate temperature within the structure. As global concern regarding energy usage continues to overwhelm headlines and Parliamentary initiatives, complying with social and political expectations places the university at the forefront of ‘green’ supporters. Alternately, when considering the costs of unit replacement in comparison with the minor costs of unit overhaul and monitoring, the potential for unforeseen budgeting problems is very prevalent. Through preventative maintenance on these units which includes a cleaning of the ducts and system components in addition to oiling the motor and replacing belts, the university will ensure that systems operate at extreme efficiency. This maintenance should be done in accordance with season frequencies, including the Winter and Summer seasons during which units will be taxed to their maximum capacity.
Secondary Systems Maintenance
Within the scope of this maintenance schedule, there are other systems which are essential for appropriate functioning of building operations as well as those, that if not well maintained, can cause higher long term costs for the university. Lighting, weather proofing, and drainage are all within this category, and although their functions can easily be considered a primary concern to daily campus life, their long term impact on the university budget is limited in the scope of material costs and lifecycle.
Lighting replacement and repair is an essential step to ensuring that daily operations are performed in an attractive and well supplied environment, encouraging patrons to continue their use of university facilities. When replacing bulbs within a regular cycle, maintenance crews are identifying any faults within the lighting system which could turn into critical electrical failure at a later date. Similarly, the replacement of bulbs enables the most efficient and environmentally friendly units to be placed into rotation at regular intervals. This expected maintenance will need to be altered according to technological advances and lifecycle.
Within the whole life cost cycle of a structure, the potential for inclement weather and more importantly, the failure of structural systems to prevent penetration by this weather, can dramatically reduce the longevity and efficiency of a building. Therefore, checking the weather stripping and ensuring that all door and window seals function appropriately ensures that time sensitive erosion and wear on the structure does not occur. This maintenance also ensures that the crew evaluates a variety of key entry and exit points for rodent or insect incursions and eliminates the potential for such future problems.
Finally, within the secondary modes of short term maintenance, drainage systems are an oft ignored reactive form of maintenance which, when properly maintained, can substantially contribute to structure longevity and limit the propensity for future problems. Ensuring that the proper flow of waste waters away from the building is regular and consistent eliminates the costly reactive calls to plumbing contractors after emergency situations have dictated refurbishment. Similarly, proactive evaluation of this system offers plumbers the opportunity to note any potential cracks, fissures, or weak points within the piping system and ensure that all drive mechanisms are appropriately synced for efficient operation.
Short Term
Maintenance Item
Description
Frequency
Additional Equipment
Anticip. Cost
Notes
Gutters
Cleaning and debris removal
6 Months (After Autumn/Spring)
Scaffolding
£270.00
Price Includes Scaffolding
Down Pipes
Cleaning and debris removal
6 Months (After Autumn/Spring)
Scaffolding
Included in Gutter Cost
Price Includes Scaffolding
Fire Equipment
System evaluation, recharge, and certification
3 Months (Seasonal)
Replacement Extingusihers
£180.00
Price includes system certification
Heating System
System evaluation, vent cleaning and tubing refurbish (As Needed)
6 Months (Prior to Winter and After Summer)
Ladder, Replacement Parts
£240.00
Price includes cleaning
Fire/Smoke Alarms
Check batteries, test function, and replace if needed
3 Months (Seasonal)
Replacement alarm
£115.00
Indicates replacement
Cooling System
System Evaluation, recharge, system cleaning
(6 Months Prior to Summer and After Winter)
Ladder, Replacement Parts
£310.00
Includes Recharge
Lighting
Light bulb replacement, system overhaul as needed
Monthly as Needed, 6 months for major systems
Ladder, Replacement Bulbs, Replacement Housing
£85.00
Includes Replacement of bulbs at 6 month interval
Weather proofing
Reapply stripping to interior and exterior door and window seals
Anuual (Prior to Winter)
Weather Stripping, Sealant
£110.00
Includes replacement throughout building
Windows
Cleaned, debris removed, function certified
3 Months (Seasonal)
Ladder, Scaffolding
£270.00
Includes Cleaning and scaffolding rental
Drainage Analysis
All drains inspected for free flow action and plumbing repaired as needed
Annual (Prior to Summer)
Snaking system, chemical unblock system
£320.00
Includes Cleaning of problem areas
Interior Eval
Full analysis of problem areas and survey of interior
Annual (Prior to Spring)
Ladder
£180.00
Full inspection
Exterior Eval
Full analysis of problem areas and survey of exterior (Includes ground variance and nearby incidences)
Annual (After Autum)
Ladder
£180.00
Full inspection
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
£2,260.00
Medium Term The medium term responsibilities offer an ideal time frame for replacement and refurbishment that includes more substantial, and generally, more costly repairs than those attempted in the short term. The expectation remains that any problem which arises during routine inspections must be dealt with according to the needs of the university, not the maintenance schedule or proposed budget. Through adherence to this strategy throughout the whole life costing of the structure, quality will be maintained and the overall lifecycle costs will be reduced.
Primary Systems Maintenance
The primary systems evaluated during the medium term are directly related to the essential operations of the structure, including those systems which can debilitate and detract from the consistent workings of the building, including the boiler, the electrical system, and the gutter system. Recognising that the replacement of these systems at the medium term interval will substantially improve cost savings over emergency repair and expensive maintenance projects is a priority for committee members.
The boiler replacement is most likely one of the most expensive, but most rewarding measures to be taken at the medium term interval. Given that the average life-span of a boiler could potentially last longer than the ten year period listed here, the maintenance team must be able to recognise the characteristics of a well-functioning or suffering unit and offer advice regarding its condition during standard evaluations before and after this period. Replacement is highly recommended at the ten year mark because this essential systems component could substantially increase costs of a disaster repair in the event of its failure.
Analysis of the electrical system will be included within the survey report conducted at the short-term intervals and expanded into the full spectrum 10 year evaluation in the medium term. Those systems which are deemed faulty during this period should be replaced immediately, as malfunctioning electrical systems can become an unanticipated fire hazard. Replacing the electrical system at ten year intervals ensures that the insulation efficacy is maintained and that updated wiring is installed for new technology to function properly.
Finally, within the primary systems, the gutter and down pipe components become an essential mode of structural preservation, as the water transport away from the building limits the amount of erosion and decay over a lengthy period of time. At the ten year period, however, the prediction is that most of the system will have begun to demonstrate signs of wear, specifically around the hardware and jointing sections of the unit. Repair teams should undergo substantial overhaul to replace mounting brackets and pipe couplings as well as replacing any sections of the system which are cracking or developing holes due to exposure to the elements.
Secondary Systems Maintenance
The medium term secondary systems are represented by those that both enhance the standard operations of the structure and offer the most cost versus value refurbishment within the maintenance system. Although primary systems are deemed essential components, the high visibility of the secondary systems ensures that they are of an essential nature to the continued functioning of the structure.
The building decoration, and in essence, the prescribed character of the interior structure is a maintenance project that requires substantial investment and vision. External contractors participating in the decoration revision every six years should replace drapes and visible accessories, alter furniture to match the expected period representation, and dramatically alter any additional components which add to the building aesthetics. The cost in this plan is a best case scenario cost and will have to be updated according to the broad range of needs.
Aligned with redecoration, the repair and replacement of both internal and external finishes dramatically improves the user perception of the building, supporting operations and ensuring that during this activity that walls and beams are in good repair. While the costs in these sections are an estimate, paint quality must be chosen of a high enough grade to endure elements and use over the coming decade, and of a colouring that matches the prescribed decoration aesthetics of the contractors’ vision.
Finally, within the medium term, updating carpet and repairing the flooring become enhancement variables which ensure both function and aesthetics are aligned throughout the building. Although the wear lifecycle of both of these systems may offer a longer term operation, by replacing these components within the medium interval sustains the overall appearance of the building as well as identifies any underfoot rot or decay which could cause substantial problems later in the building lifecycle. These costs are only estimates, and depending on the quality or installation costs, the replacement of these elements could be substantially higher.
Medium Term
Maintenance Item
Description
Frequency
Additional Equipment
Anticip. Cost
Notes
Decoration
All interior and exterior decorative features cleaned or retouched as needed, application of desired new features
6 Years
Added moulding and New decoration features
£1,400.00
Includes interior design revision
Interior Wall Finish
Paint or stain alteration throughout interior of structure
8 Years
New Paint colours
£2,800.00
Includes new paint for all surfaces
Exterior Wall Finish
Paint or stain alteration throughout exterior of structure
8 Years
New Paint colours
£3,200.00
Includes new paint for all surfaces
Gutters
Gutters repaired or replaced as needed
10 Years
Remove and Replace hardware
£1,100.00
Includes hardware replacement and repair to system
Boiler
Boiler system cleaned, repaired, or replaced
10 Years
New Boiler System
£2,200.00
Replacement of Boiler System
Heating System
System Features and couplings replaced, vent system replaced
10 Years
New vent system
£2,700.00
Includes labour and cost of new venting system
Flooring
All Flooring examined for structural soundness and replaced as needed
7 Years
New Flooring
£1,700.00
Includes New Flooring
Carpeting
All carpeting examined for fraying and stains and replaced as needed
7 Years
Replacement Carpet
£1,400.00
Includes New Carpeting
Interior Eval
Full analysis of problem areas and survey of interior
10 Years
Structural Modifications
£240.00
Includes in-depth survey only
Exterior Eval
Full analysis of problem areas and survey of exterior (Includes ground variance and nearby incidences)
10 Years
Structural Modifications
£240.00
Includes in-depth survey only
Electrical Eval
Explore electrical system and replace any frayed wiring or non-working areas
8 Years
New Wiring system
£1,700.00
Includes cost of new wiring system
Roofing Repatch
Patch and fill areas demonstrating extensive wear or lack of structural stability
5 years
Roofing shingles or covering
£400.00
Includes labour and new shingles
Damp proofing
Analyse all areas for wet seepage, fill and fix problem areas
7 Years
Mastic replacement and filling
£700.00
Includes replacement of all mastic and fillings
Drainage Clear
Drains cleaned and pumped through ensuring proper rate of flow
4 years
Pressurised Cleaning
£350.00
Complete system cleaning and pumping
TOTAL MEDIUM TERM COSTS
£20,130.00
Long Term As the building lifecycle reaches the long term variables of the maintenance plan, substantial wear and repair throughout the passage of time will have altered many of the structural variables within the system. From this perspective, an according chart of timelines must be maintained to identify when particular items have been replaced prior to the lifecycle prediction. Overall, the long term costs will be substantially higher than either the short or medium term; however, the replacement of major systems offers an improved structural integrity and preserves the structure for many more decades of use.
Primary Systems Maintenance
As with the other timeline components,

[casanovaaggrev]