10.08.04 AT04 111 rev. 2
Regional Programme for Cultural and Natural Heritage
in South East Europe 2003 - 2005
Terms of Reference for the
Integrated Rehabilitation Project Plan / Survey of the architectural and archaeological heritage (IRPP/SAAH)
Appendix C:
PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT
OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL
HERITAGE IN SOUTH EAST EUROPE
Explanatory introduction to the PTA document
The purpose of the Preliminary Technical Assessment (PTA) is to identify technical requirements and broad cost estimates for buildings and sites identified on the Prioritised Intervention Lists (PIL). The purpose of this PTA document is to present methodological guidelines for this technical activity. It must be stressed that this activity represents a stage in a process rather than being an end in itself. It is preliminary rather than final; it may be revisited at a later stage when more expertise or more knowledge is available; it may be the subject of a phased investigation.
If it is decided that the subject of this PTA requires restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, etc., it will then be the subject of a much more detailed Feasibility Study. It is a fundamental purpose of the PTA to enable the gathering and analysis of information which will lead to an informed decision about the need for such a subsequent Feasibility Study. So the purpose of this document is to present as much information as is possible within the constraints of time, expertise and available knowledge. Compilers should not attempt to provide information which they do not yet have; rather, they should do as much as possible. Compilers should also avoid attempting to make final recommendations for the re-use of buildings; they may wish to make suggestions, but the more detailed findings of Feasibility Studies are required before the complete cost estimates, phasing of work and recommended uses can be finalised. However, although preliminary, the budgetary implications of suggested works should be addressed here in order to give a broad overview of potential costs which will be refined at a later stage. It is likely that the detailed work on the Feasibility Studies will prompt further ideas for future uses so it is important to keep options open at this stage. The PTA is a preliminary, interim stage in a process: it should not be regarded as conclusive. But within its limitations, the PTA should present an opportunity for an analysis which pays particular attention to the following: available documentation, technical conditions, costings, phasing, levels and types of potential intervention.
The document is divided into three sections:
1-5 Introduction and summary, followed by details which draw substantially on the Prioritised Intervention List information.
6-8 The detailed Preliminary Technical Assessment
Appendix 1 and 2 - Checklists for technical description and risk assessment
Particular attention should be paid to those sections of the document which are likely to be emphasised in evaluations of funding potential: the Executive Summary (2), the summary statement of significance (7.2.1); the vulnerability/risk assessment (7.3); the summary of the vision for the site and its sustainability (7.6.1); the summary of recommendations (7.8.4).
PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT
1. Introductory page
At the top of the page include a photograph of the building or site together with an extract from the map showing its location.
List the following organisational and monument details:
1.1 Country or Territory:
1.2 Name of organisation compiling the information:
1.3 Contact name:
1.4 Email address:
1.5 Name and address of building or site:
1.6 Inventory reference number(s):
1.7 Building/Monument/Site type:
1.8 Main dates:
1.9 Current use(s):
2. Executive Summary: the site and its management
This is a summary statement of the significance of the monument or site, the opportunity which will be offered by funding, and the preliminary overall intentions for the future management of the monument or site. It is a summation of the significant points about the monument or site and your preliminary proposals for its future. The summary must be brief and to the point so that it can be quoted directly to government ministers and potential funding bodies as an encapsulation of the situation and proposals. Politicians and funding bodies require short, cogent summaries which will help to convince them of the importance of the subject and the relevance of the proposals. The summary should be written last after all the other information on which it depends has been gathered. It should not exceed 300 words in length.
3. Administrative information
3.1 Responsible Authorities
State here the relevant national, regional or local authorities with statutory or managerial responsibility for the monument.
3.2 Building/Site, Name and Address
Give full details of name and location, stating as applicable the address and the region.
3.3 Map reference
State the spatial referencing system in use, and the X and Y co-ordinates.
3.4 Type of monument
Architectural, Archaeological, Ensemble etc., specifying house, church, mosque, tombs etc. State whether Urban or Rural. Indicate here if there is a combination of architectural and archaeological features.
3.5 Ownership
This should include a statement of ownership, occupation, current use, as relevant.
3.6 Statutory Protection/Constraints
State here the level/grade of statutory protection and the statutory constraints, ie. the limitations on possible actions, the need for official permission for works, etc.
4. Summary of condition
This repeats some elements of the PIL, although the more detailed work on the PTA may prompt a revision of the initial assessment.
4.1 Summary of Physical Condition - very bad to good
4.2 Condition Risk Assessment - graded A-H
4.3 Priority for intervention - High/Medium/Low
5. Existing information
5.1 Documentary sources:
reports, drawings, photography (aerial and terrestrial), photogrammetry, video, publications etc. Comment on their existence, their location, their availability, their applicability and their quality.
5.2 Bibliography:
comment briefly on the availability of published information, listing the main sources. Include internet references.
5.3 Fieldwork already conducted :
state here the technical assessments of restoration/rehabilitation etc. which have already been completed. Give the date and the recommendations which were made at that time.
5.4 Projects in progress :
state whether there are any projects in process on the building or site. State their scope and state who is responsible for the work.
5.5 Projects already planned:
state whether there are any projects planned for the building or site. State the proposed scope and who will be responsible for the work.
5.6 Financial estimates already made:
if estimates have already been made, give dates and details for categories of work; state whether the estimates have been presented as timed and costed phases, eg. i. secure the roof; ii. replace doors and windows; iii. convert to new use. Works to be considered in this section may include engineering and technical works; conservation and restoration works; adaptation; related public services or infrastructure, etc.
6. Scope of the PTA
6.1 Extent/Nature of the assessment:
state the numbers of people involved, their specific expertise, whether national or international experts, the length of time spent on the task.
6.2 Limitations of the study:
give details for example of difficulties of access for reasons of ownership, occupation or dangerous structure; lack of available documentation; difficulty in consulting documentation; indicate time constraints on the study, if any.
7. The PTA
Here there may be repetition and expansion of some of the findings of the PIL.
7.1 Background
7.1.1 Summary description of the building/site
7.1.2 Summary historic development and evolution of the building or site, from the earliest times until the present day.
7.2 Significance
In the assessment of significance it may be necessary to distinguish between the significance of the building or site for heritage management professionals and its significance as a building or site for the community. For example, a building which has been considerably altered from its original appearance, losing much of its historic or architectural specificity, may still carry great significance for its users, as for example, a site of memory - this should be acknowledged here.
7.2.1 Summary statement of significance/historical and heritage importance. It is very important to emphasise here the historical, archaeological, architectural, artistic, scientific significance of the monument or site, as applicable. Mention any important association with historic and/or cultural events. This summary statement should not exceed 300 words in length.
Where applicable, qualify the summary by evaluating the significance of the building or site by reference to the following check-list. This enables grading (1-3) under the following categories: 1 (low), 2 (medium), 3 (high). State also the category of significance of the building, if known.
7.2.2 Historical
7.2.3 Artistic/Aesthetic
7.2.4 Technological
7.2.5 Religious/Spiritual
7.2.6 Symbolic/Identity
7.2.7 Scientific/Research
7.2.8 Social/Civic
7.2.9 Natural
7.2.10 Economic
7.2.11 Category of significance: International, National, Regional or Local
7.3 Vulnerability/Risk assessment.
State fully the issues which have affected the condition of the site in the past. State the current problems of vulnerability or risk. Attempt to predict the potential future problems which will need to be addressed in order to ensure the appropriate continuity of the building or site. The issues may be natural, physical, developmental, concerning inappropriate interventions, lack of care from owners, administrative and financial weaknesses, etc. The main points should be summarised here, using the checklist of indicative threats in Appendix 2.
7.4 Technical condition
Summarise here the physical situation.
Assess levels and types of appropriate intervention: what could be conserved; what must be conserved; what could be changed (eg. intrusive later additions). Comment on the possible phasing of the proposed work, distinguishing between immediate stabilisation measures and longer term future interventions.
The detailed technical description of the components of the building or site should be given utilising the guidelines given in Appendix 1A and 1B, as relevant. For a site which contains both architectural and archaeological components, you may wish to utilise headings from both of the appendices. This technical description will be further developed in the event of a feasibility study.
7.5 Outline summary of required repairs
This is a preliminary, summary assessment, based on the findings of the assessment of technical condition. It will be the subject of greater refinement in the event of a feasibility study, but if some consideration is given to it here, it will act as a guide to those carrying out the more detailed, later work. Comment on the possible phasing of the repair programme.
7.6 Conservation policy and proposals
This should represent a broad statement of intention rather than a final manifesto for the building or site. It is a starting point, giving initial ideas, to be tested and elaborated at feasibility study stage. The following headings should be considered, and information provided as appropriate.
7.6.1 Broad summary of the vision for the site, and its sustainability, at this preliminary stage. Here there should be a consideration of the sustainability of the project and the proposed development. It should include a statement of intention and expectation of how the building or site will be managed in the future in order to ensure its long-term continuity and viability.
7.6.2 Conservation philosophy - summarise purpose, scope, intentions; describe the authenticity of the structure, the appropriateness of the materials.
7.6.3 Level of intervention - state whether the preliminary intention is to conserve as found; to repair, reconstruct or add to enable beneficial re-use; wholly to reconstruct as a monument of national significance, etc.
7.6.4 Reconstruction - if this is proposed, state the reasons for the recommendation.
7.6.5 Preliminary proposals for appropriate uses, as applicable - eg. commercial, residential, community use, to be further tested at feasibility stage.
7.6.6 Opportunities for social uses and sustainable development - eg. creation of work places, engagement in social services, promotion in association with other activities such as tourism, commerce, information, museum activities etc.
7.6.7 Broad assessment of priorities for consolidation/covering, repair, conservation, restoration, rehabilitation - divide these into discrete stages if desirable.
7.6.8 Public access - wholly or partly, by arrangement; potential community benefit.
7.6.9 Other benefits - eg. engagement of a wider audience; features capable of particular exploitation
7.7 Finance
It is recognised that the detailed costings for a monument or site will not be achieved until feasibility study stage. It is also clear that even at that later stage, costings will vary according to levels of intervention, phases of work, choices for future uses of the building (where appropriate). It is however desirable to offer broad estimates of cost here in order to offer a relative measure of the scale of the proposed project.
7.7.1 Broad assessment of budgetary needs and phasing; this is not binding and is to be more fully assessed at feasibility stage.
7.7.2 Assessment of possibilities for attracting investments. State here the nature of any objective financial estimates or projections which have been made, giving references to any supporting documentation.
7.7.3 Assessment of possibilities for recovering investments. State here the nature of any objective financial estimates or projections which have been made, giving references to any supporting documentation. This may include scientific assessment of potential tourism but may include also other assessment of potential benefits to business or the local economy.
7.7.4 Have you already tried to raise funds for this site or monument? If so, provide details.
7.7.5 Have you already received funds for this site or monument? If so, provide details.
7.8 Recommendations
These are preliminary at this stage but should be considered since they will be a factor in determining the order in which feasibility studies may be carried out. In the event of the feasibility studies being carried out, the recommendations will be capable of being amended in the light of greater knowledge and experience.
7.8.1 The Building or Site
Highlight here the preliminary intentions for the building or site and the urgency of the proposals:
Intended outcome for the building or site
Urgency, timing and phasing of works
Broad budget assessment
7.8.2 Requirement for further assessment/further documentation/survey works/feasibility studies/detailed costings
Highlight here the recommended further work which may be carried out in a feasibility study: What is required - eg. further survey and analysis of structure to provide cost certainty; need for equipment - scaffolding etc.
Further or improved documentation.
Recommended proposed levels of intervention: eg. the architectural analysis and overview; the need for structural analysis, engineering proposals, environmental assessment, conservation plan, etc.
Stages of intervention.
Technical professional expertise required.
Site management requirements.
Timing and costing of next stage of assessment - it is suggested that the costs of a feasibility study could be borne by the potential donor so it is important to arrive at an estimated figure here.
7.8.3 Management
Describe here the long-term and short-term arrangements for the management of any project for the building or site. Comment on any training needs which you have identified to ensure appropriate management practices and the long-term continuing viability of the building or site.
Institutional arrangements and responsibilities - national and local.
Institutional philosophy - commitment to sustainability, access etc.
Managing the process - who is accountable, who is responsible, who carries it out.
Project board - composition and responsibilities, if applicable.
Proposals for the long term management of the monument or site to ensure sustainability.
Consider any preconditions, opportunities or constraints which are relevant to the sustainable development.
7.8.4 Summary of Recommendations
This summary should take into account some of the pre-requisites for grant aid: policy background; degree of sustainability; institutional capacity - support, management and participation. The summary should not exceed 300 words.
There must be clear evidence of the significance of the building or site (see also 7.2); an objective risk assessment (see also 7.3); a clear statement of sustainability (see also 7.6.1); clear evidence of the stability and competence of the beneficiary institution; clear ownership of the project; firm assurance of the availability of necessary technical and project management expertise;
8. Supporting Documentation
It is recommended that the PTA is supported by photographs, drawings and a location map to supplement the written information. The photographs should illustrate the general points rather than attempting to cover all the detail, and may be limited to 6-10, although this may vary according to the complexity of the monument or site. The drawings also should be explanatory rather than comprehensive. Although detailed measured drawings will be needed for subsequent phases of work, at this stage sketches, or copies of archive drawings, will suffice.
PTA carried out by:
sign and date:
Note on feasibility studies
These represent the next stage of the assessment process, but should be borne in mind during the compilation of the PTA. They will vary according to the type of monument or site. They are likely however to include the following: general statement; technical assessment; financial assessment; specialist assessments from quantity surveyors, structural engineers etc; existing fabric and condition; structural and service requirements; health and safety issues; design (and drawing) proposals; function recommendations; responsible authorities; outline of works - levels and phasing of intervention and associated costs; detailed account of beneficiary institution and management of the investment; next steps.
PTA Appendices
The following appendices present formats and checklists for the technical descriptions of the monument, ensemble or archaeological site, together with a list of indicative threats. Use these formats and lists as guidelines in this preliminary analysis: they are advisory rather than mandatory. Try to provide as much information as possible within the constraints of time, expertise and accessibility. A more detailed analysis may be expected in any subsequent feasibility study. Some sites will include both archaeological and architectural components so the compiler will need to refer to both checklists. These checklists of technical elements are generic rather than specific to a particular building type or national situation. Different types of buildings or sites may require the consideration of further, more specific elements. You are encouraged to develop your own type-specific descriptive checklists, based on these guidelines, as the need arises.
APPENDIX I
A. TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION – Monuments and Ensembles
0. The overall structure (summary)
0.a. Description/constraints:
0.b. Damage Assessment* (effects)/Threats**:
0.c. Diagnosis (causes)/ Rate of deterioration:
0.d. Proposed type of intervention:
0.e. Priority of intervention:
0.f. Estimated cost:
1. Foundations
1.a. Description / constraints:
1.b. Damage Assessment* (effects)/Threats**:
1.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
1.d. Proposed type of intervention:
1.e. Priority of intervention:
1.f. Estimated cost:
2. Walls / Supports
2.a. Description / constraints:
2.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
2.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
2.d. Proposed type of intervention:
2.e. Priority of intervention:
2.f. Estimated cost:
3. Floors and ceilings
3.a. Description / constraints:
3.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
3.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
3.d. Proposed type of intervention:
3.e. Priority of intervention:
3.f. Estimated cost:
4. Roofs
4.a. Description / constraints:
4.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
4.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
4.d. Proposed type of intervention:
4.e. Priority of intervention:
4.f. Estimated cost:
5. Staircases
5.a. Description / constraints:
5.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
5.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
5.d. Proposed type of intervention:
5.e. Priority of intervention:
5.f. Estimated cost:
6. Doors and Windows
6.a. Description / constraints:
6.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
6.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
6.d. Proposed type of intervention:
6.e. Priority of intervention:
6.f. Estimated cost:
7. Balconies and Verandas
7.a. Description / constraints:
7.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
7.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
7.d. Proposed type of intervention:
7.e. Priority of intervention:
7.f. Estimated cost:
8. Wall Plasters
8.a. Description / constraints:
8.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
8.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
8.d. Proposed type of intervention:
8.e. Priority of intervention:
8.f. Estimated cost:
9. Decoration
9.a. Description / constraints:
9.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
9.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
9.d. Proposed type of intervention:
9.e. Priority of intervention:
9.f. Estimated cost:
10. Infrastructure
10.a. Description / constraints:
10.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
10.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
10.d. Proposed type of intervention:
10.e. Priority of intervention:
10.f. Estimated cost:
11. Auxiliary Structures
11.a. Description / constraints:
11.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
11.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
11.d. Proposed type of intervention:
11.e. Priority of intervention:
11.f. Estimated cost:
12. Out-door space / courtyards
12.a. Description / constraints:
12.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
12.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
12.d. Proposed type of intervention:
12.e. Priority of intervention:
12.f. Estimated cost:
* Damage Assessment and Diagnosis may be presented together
** For Threats see the indicative check-list in Appendix 2.
B. TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION – Archaeological Sites
1. Broader Region / Environment
Urban / non urban (in antiquity / modern)
Landscape Values (in antiquity / modern)
Accessibility (in antiquity / modern)
Other points of interest in the vicinity (natural, cultural)
Protective Zoning
1.a. Description / constraints:
1.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
1.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
1.d. Proposed type of intervention:
1.e. Priority of intervention:
2. Site
Boundaries, fencing, security
Accessibility, circulation within the site (access for people with disabilities)
Excavated area (%), state of in between areas
Indications of unexcavated monuments
Shelters
2.a. Description / constraints:
2.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
2.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
2.d. Proposed type of intervention:
2.e. Priority of intervention:
3. Monuments
3.a. Description / constraints:
3.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
3.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
3.d. Proposed type of intervention:
3.e. Priority of intervention:
4. Public Facilities / Site Presentation
Public Access, car park
Visitors’ centre and facilities
Exhibition and Educational areas, Museum
Circulation (routes, paths, observation areas)
Signage, Site interpretation
Administrative facilities
Infrastructure
4.a. Description / constraints:
4.b. Damage Assessment (effects) / Threats:
4.c. Diagnosis (causes) / Rate of deterioration:
4.d. Proposed type of intervention:
4.e. Priority of intervention:
* Damage Assessment and Diagnosis may be presented together
** For Threats see the indicative check-list in Appendix 2
APPENDIX 2 INDICATIVE CHECKLIST OF THREATS
Use this list of headings as an aide-memoire to identify and itemize those threats which apply in individual cases.
1.Natural Threats:
Extreme natural phenomena (earthquake, tornadoes, volcanic eruptions)
Natural phenomena triggered by human misuse (e.g. flood, fire, landslide, pollution)
Erosion
Pests, bird nesting, animal activity
Climatic factors (wind, rain)
Groundwater management (humidity migration, ponding, capillary flows of water, high or low water tables)
Solar radiation as an agent of deterioration
Thermal Fluctuations (expansion/contraction, wetting/drying cycles, migration and crystallization of salts)
Pollution
Decay of materials
2. Development – demographic growth:
Urban spread
Agriculture (land use, mechanization, salinization of soils due to fertilizers)
Industrial Development, Infrastructure
Abandonment of countryside due to urbanization
Loss of handicraft tradition
3. Tourism
Lack of signage, clear paths, guarding, maintenance (’everything is allowed’ attitude)
Encroachment of sites with visitor facilities (and hotels)
Vandalism (e.g. graffiti)
Intensive visiting or usage
4. Lack of planning measures:
Isolated ‘digs’
Sites treated as ‘obstacles to development’ – garbage dumps
Provisionally fenced (to save the remains or to protect from the public)
5. The Impact of Social Unrest
Vandalism for political or social reasons
Destruction of symbols
Sites used for military purposes
Conflict of values
Staff of antiquity departments not trained for emergency actions
6. Looting
Demand in international antique markets
Poverty of rural areas – organized crime
Archaeology perceived as a foreign import
Treasure hunting
Failure to protect sites
7. Archaeological excavation as a damaging factor
Digs and trenches left open (no back-fill)
Consolidation, conservation and protection (and site presentation) not taken into consideration
Lack of coordination between scientific mission and local authority
8. Inappropriate Interventions as a damaging factor
Untrained personnel
Outdated methodology
Incompatible materials
Undocumented reconstruction disguised as restoration
Irreversible and ethically incorrect reconstructions
9. Lack of maintenance
Vegetation growth
Accumulated dirt
Stagnating water
10. Lack of administration and legislation
Inadequate institutional support
Unclear definition of the status of archaeological remains on private property
Vague criteria for designating protection zones
Poor integration of heritage into development plans
Inadequate training
Consciousness raising
Emergency plans
11. Structural destabilization
Structural failure – deformations, collapse
Loss of material, detachment, cracking
Additive effects –surface deposits, additions, replacements
12. Ownership and occupation
Absentee owner
Multi-occupation
No responsibility for maintenance
13. Function
Inappropriate function
Conflicting uses
14. Resources
Lack of finance for maintenance and repair
Lack of skills for project management
Lack of technical restoration skills
|
