- Email: [email protected]
The role of a conservationist architect
The Internutlonal3~7ournaIof‘Mustm
Management and Curatorshrp (1984), 3, N-349
The Role of a Conservationist Architect SURESH DHARGALKAR
Curators,
Conservators
and Architects
It is paradoxical that curators and conservators appear to coexist compatibly because I believe that their respective functions are totally opposed. The curator wishes to display the object, whilst the conservator is preoccupied with the preservation of that artefact which he can only truly achieve by locking it away safe from fluctuating temperatures and natural or artificial light. Perhaps a common interest in the intellectual dimensions of artefacts draws them together into harmony. One thing is certain, this harmony usually gets disturbed when an architect introduces the problems of preserving yet another artefact-the building, which houses collections and which has become, in its own right, an item of collection. At this point, the architect inevitably turns the company of the former two into the proverbial crowd. If the architect also happens to be an experienced conservationist, his or her enthusiasm for that particular ‘cultural property’ warms visibly, and in turn detracts from the original brief for the display and preservation of the collection. Climatic control, security, fire precautions and lighting are the elements of preventive conservation. But the architect also has to deal with the other elements of that environmental/spatial/structural system with due regard to the thermal capacity and buffering materials in the building structure. This particular role of a conservationist architect’s work is that most often regarded as contentious by the collective museum clients. Heritage
Buildings
Museum buildings are often considered simply as envelopes to enclose an environment suitable for the collections. This view may be logical for a new purpose-built museum or an existing building, without particular architectural merit, converted into a museum. Conversions abound, but museums and galleries in totally new buildings are few indeed. The word ‘Museum’ usually evokes a mental picture of an edifice of grandeur, majestic architectural features of sculptured stone, lofty entrance, whispered conversation in vast galleries with clerestorey lighting: a temple of art where the visitor is awed with the magnificence of the architecture first, before getting down to look at the artefacts. This image is very much alive in most of the historic centres, where the established museums are housed in old and ancient buildings forming part of the heritage. Some of these buildings were built as museums, others were palaces, town halls, castles and fortresses, ancestral homes or even ecclesiastical masterpieces. Almost all of them, in our present time, have become architectural artefacts-more commonly termed within the United Kingdom ‘Listed Buildings’.
‘0 Crown Copyright 1984. Reproduced with permission of the Controller of HMSO.
344
The Role
of u Conserzutionist ,4rt-hitet-t
Flexibility of Historic Structures The extent to which it is possible to preserve the identity of a ‘Listed Building’ amidst all the complex scientific requirements of preventive conservation of collections depends a great deal upon the flexibility of its structure. Skilful adaptation of the existing forms and their visual qualities becomes a challenge to the architect. Some of these buildings are totally unsuitable for use as museums, especially when you consider the wide range of artefacts of stone, metals, ceramics, wood and textile, as well as paintings, miniatures, papers, natural history specimens and organic material, that often has to be housed. Some buildings are adaptable as picture galleries only. Many a structure can accommodate stone, metal and ceramics without much ado. On the other hand, textiles, water colours, wood and bone impose great constraints on the adaptation. Above all, the modern-day concepts of preventive conservation, those of climatic control, security and provision of conservation laboratories on the premises, greatly reduce the available degree of flexibility. Curators and conservators today maintain a close and vibrant liaison with their counterparts in museums throughout the world. They are perhaps more aware of these conflicts and constraints than the architect, who has limited opportunity for wide travel. However, it is not difficult to imagine the problems of those great historic museums in Florence, Rome, Vienna, Dresden, Paris or Leningrad, with the different climatic characteristics of these cities. In the United Kingdom, the museums at South Kensington, the British Museum, the National Maritime Museum, and the Queen’s House at Greenwich are prime examples of constraints. The introduction of new air-conditioning or mechanical air-handling and lighting are the two most common causes of drama in historic buildings. Conservators and the mechanical and electrical engineers will discuss at great length a skilful manipulation of these sciences to conserve the artefacts. The architect, however, is concerned with the impact of their new physical presence or changes to the existing form of the historic structure. The architectural geometry, its style in context with its period, and the visual effects which make the building historic, are usually threatened. The changes are generally to be achieved in one of two ways. Either by introducing the new elements within the available cavities and adapting the visible existing forms, hopefully without detriment to the past visual qualities and proportions, or by boldly implementing new measures, though only if these actions are not irreversible with regard to any future reinstatement of the original elements. Consultative Bodies The philosophy and arguments for and against the two options of adaptation and new build depend upon the merits of the historic elements and a judgement of the extent to which the changes and adaptation could be termed acceptable. We are well aware of the role played by public bodies such as the Directorate of Ancient Monuments and Historic Buildings and the Inspectorate of Ancient Monuments (now reformed into ‘English Heritage’), together with the GLC (Greater London Council) Historic Buildings Council and the Royal Fine Art Commission. The ever-present awareness of the need to preserve the British architectural heritage has caused successive governments to maintain a constructive attitude towards consultation through such public sector expertise. Often their recommendations are challenged in respect to their mandatory status in obtaining planning consents. However, prior consultations with individual experts in particular fields can help to present a balanced argument to the planning authorities. Their range of expertise is very wide-the structural engineer, experienced in detecting peculiarities of construction of the period; the stone and brick conservationist; the interior designer who specializes in decorations of the particular
SURESHDHARCALKAR
345
age; the period paint consultant, capable of advising on pigmentation of the original colours; a lighting specialist and, finally, the architect, a brave individual who is able to simplify the views of these experts and present a solution for final arbitration. But a word of warning-all these views require close scrutiny. Are these experts seeking a perfect solution without cost effectiveness? Can they examine alternatives in the true spirit of conservation? Are they able to reconcile their views to advise on an acceptable compromise? The problem often lies in an intransigent attitude, bordering on fanaticism. One can illustrate these dangers in the context of our old museum buildings. Almost all of them were built in pre-electricity days of coal or gas fuel. Draught ventilation brick ducts are common in such structures as the British Museum. Fireplaces adorn the principal rooms, as in the seventeenth century Queen’s House at Greenwich and eighteenth century Hertford House (Wallace Collection). Are we then to insist upon gas-lit interiors? Are we to arrange the show-cases housing the collections to suit the period setting of the interior? Will the mortar jointing of modern constituents change the character of the stone or brick facade? Will the change in internal environment change the traditional detail? Should we insist upon old traditional methods of cast-lead covering instead of the modern techniques for the sake of preserving the old craft? These may be utterly ridiculous extremes, but they are not far from some of the dialogue in the birth pangs of a project. The balance of the consultation lies in recognizing the expertise of the eminent, and accommodating their views in an acceptable compromise within the financial constraints. It is fortuitous that the expertise and experience of the consultative bodies is also to be found amongst the boards of trustees of the various museums. It helps them to understand the architect’s dilemma. However, consultation is chiefly a team effort, the architect being the principal coordinator. Overriding priorities of the conservation of the collections, financial restrictions and the time-scale of a project, which are the realities architects have to face, drive them to optimize. Changing
Concepts
of Public Amenities
Let us now examine the concepts of public amenities in a museum or an art gallery. In the present day they have acquired new dimensions. They impose new requirements remote from the fundamental functions of display and conservation to which we had been accustomed. Almost all add further constraints on preservation of the fabric of the historic building. They also demand increased flexibility of services, structure and security control. Foremost amongst these is the installation of climatic control, whilst ultra-sensitive material demands the cocooned atmospheres of micro-climatic show-cases. The introduction of higher relative humidity levels in previously stable structures of old buildings proves detrimental to timber components, and it adds the requirement of vapour barriers and insulation in the hidden cavities of roofs and external walls to prevent condensation. Increases in art robberies, vandalism and terrorist activities have made security and surveillance a growth industry. Such electronic installations are now coupled with automatic fire alarm and detection systems, and linked with computerized video scanning. However, engineers are wary of such sophistication because occasional failures in such systems need specialist attention which is expensive. Emergency and standby power supplies are necessary to avert the danger of damage to the artefacts during any climatic breakdown. Advances in security installations have not reduced greatly the need for wardering, and while the number of visitors grows every year, the problems of their mobility and circulation result in replanning and alterations to the structure. Thus the requirements of the Means of Escape Regulations present structural difficulties in demanding new circulation routes in the old buildings. Access for the disabled
The Role of u Consemationist
316
Architect
by ramps and chair lifts, public educational facilities, and on-site design studios and conservation laboratories add further statutory requirements to those of public health and safety. The structural elements of these constructions impose new dimensions alien to the historic form. It is clear that although the majority ofthese requirements fall within the scope of the mechanical and electrical engineers, they influence architects’ actions in their struggle to preserve the historic identity of the fabric.
Coordination
of Services
and
Collective
Attitudes
The architectural role, therefore, includes the complex coordination of allied services, ensuring that they not only meet the exacting criteria of the conservator, but that their design and juxtaposition are compatible and maintain the structural form, historic fabric and visual qualities which the interior and the exterior enjoyed in the past. The key to a successful solution lies in a constructive collaboration between the curator, the conservator, the environmental engineer and the architect. However, many an initial briefing meeting is lacking in liaison. It is either the architect without the engineer or the curator, or museum works services without the conservator. Often it is necessary for museum works services, or, in some cases, the museum design team to take the lead in briefing, thus assuming the responsibilities of the conservators. Sometimes, this practice stems from the well-meaning administrative structure of the museum, but, as you can well appreciate, it relays the conservator’s brief serond-hand, frequently resulting in misconceptions. The absence of engineers at this early stage can rob the architects of the opportunity to point out to them the sensitivity of the fabric of the building and, conversely, deprives the engineers of a preliminary assessment of their services, which could be detrimental to the fabric and the finishes. New engineering services are always an intrusion. However, the architects’ performance will be lacking in svmpathy for the user if they are intransigent and purist in their attitudes to conservation. Rigidity ought to be avoided, for such an attitude will defeat the aims of conservators and restrict the scope and ingenuity of the engineers. Architects and engineers must demonstrate that they are creatively supportive and recognize that the suit must be cut from the cloth available.
Constraints
of Engineering
Services
At this point it is appropriate to turn briefly to matters of detail regarding engineering services. Plant assemblies and their housings, ventilation trunkings and grilles impose new physical and visual elements, and quickly become obtrusive. Chiller plants for air-conditioning, humidification plants, lift motor-rooms, dilution and exhaust systems for fume cupboards and boilers, sound attenuators and silencers, are some of the larger and more difficult components to accommodate, threatening both the internal and external appearance of a listed building in a conservation area. Any dialogue between engineers and Health and Safety Officers, and the discussions over these matters, tend to be protracted. Mercifully, a number of mechanical plant units can be accommodated in the nether regions or roof spaces of a building, whilst service pipes can be embedded in the floors and the walls. Access to these services can be skilfully located, but the cost of such clever manipulation is always high. The electrical services present comparatively fewer difficulties. Mechanical protection for them is smaller in scale, and therefore usually can be concealed in the structure-but skill, imagination and ingenuity are at a high premium. The elements of environmental engineering installations are designed for continual and long-term operation, and their physical presence is irreversible. Thus their design at conception must be considered with
SURESHDHARGALKAR
347
due regard for future maintenance and health and safety requirements. Disregard them, or lower the engineering standards to minimize their intrusion in the historic fabric, and you will inherit operational difficulties, mounting repair costs, inadequate and unsafe working conditions, and rapid obsolescence of components. And so, once again, I stress that a practical and balanced evaluation of all these factors takes time, and involves painstaking research and dialogue, but, provided the museums continue their patience, a satisfactory, if not optimum solution is born. Examples of bad compromises become evident in substandard fume cupboards, noisy pressurization plants, breakdown in humidity control equipment, recurrent problems with lift machinery, and so on.
Lighting and Redecoration The most contentious element of preventive conservation is lighting-general illumination or special lighting. The light fittings as the source of illumination, the colour rendering qualities of the lamps and the heat generated by them are of prime concern, and a new lighting system can dramatically alter the visual effect previously associated with the historic ambience of an interior. It can alter the previously warm feeling to a cold and austere atmosphere, or vice versa. Furthermore, lighting and redecoration cannot be considered independently-they are meant to complement each other. Redecoration schemes have always been a subjective and personal issue. Its age-old philosophy has not changed, but we have made significant advances in the science of artificial lighting and its coexistence with natural daylight. The conservators are aware of the rate of damage to the collections from long exposures to high levels of illumination and, not least, infra-red and ultra-violet radiation. The architect must also examine the effect of such lighting on the original fabric and finishes of the structure. Risks incurred could be structural as well as visual. Tungsten spots, much beloved by exhibition designers, emit considerable heat, and their extensive use can set up cycles of expansion and contraction in the fragile surfaces of ancient timbers. Sensitive surfaces of plaster, lime washes and old pigments are all susceptible. New lighting proposals may create problems of heat gain and increased loads on heating and ventilation or air-conditioning plants. Equally, reliance on the benefits of natural light also has its pitfalls. Most historic buildings rely primarily on natural light, but if the windows are retained, the display designers are faced with inflexibility of space and the engineers with unpredictable heat gains or losses. However, any elimination of windows will inevitably destroy the historic interior and lose valuable casual contact with ‘outside’. Lighting can be employed in a manner whereby its installation is reversible, and can also be complemented by equally new decoration which is again reversible. Technological innovations have produced a large selection of fittings and light sources. High-intensity lights with low-voltage sources, diffusion by directional cellular prisms, pencil beams, anti-glare devices, multi-circuit tracks, control by photo-electric cells and a choice of colour rendering in fluorescent as well as tungsten lamps are some of the aids which the architect can employ to maintain the sensitive visual quality of an interior. Adapting an interior for use as an exhibition gallery opens a floodgate to the opportunist manufacturers of the proverbial spotlight. Museum design offices who mount exhibitions are inundated with persistent sales drives by the lighting manufacturers. Very often such a continual liaison between a manufacturer and a design office, on a non-obligatory basis, traps the exhibition designer into assuming the role of lighting consultant. Only a handful of museums have professional lighting consultants on their staff, and not many manufacturers can provide a selective lighting consultancy to back up their sales promotion. They are technically competent to provide a suitable specification
The Role of a Conservationist
348
Architect
to order, but their commercial interests in their own products debars them from the realm of comprehensive design issues. A liaison on such a poor foundation cuts across common sense in economy, cost effectiveness and future maintenance issues. It negates the sensitive dialogue on colour rendering, light intensity and visual dimensions. Spotlights have their own place in less exacting exhibition lighting, but not necessarily so in the conservation of historic cultural property. Tungsten sources and their colour rendering qualities are synonymous, and are often selected for lighting historic interiors. But equally dramatic and sensitive effects, matching the mood of the period, can also be achieved by fluorescent sources of correct colour rendering, without the concentrations of heat generated by spotlights.
Temporary
Exhibitions
So far, my observations are in respect of a permanent display. The scope for temporary exhibitions in historic buildings is, of course, as wide as that in any other building. The architectural historians and the planning authorities look at such proposals with an open mind, so long as the new installations and building services are of a temporary nature and no irreversible measures are taken; and by that I mean that the fabric of the building can be restored to its original state after the event is over. Many architects have become very successful exhibition designers in this field and the curators often look upon them as arbiters and principal consultants, even in major projects for permanent displays. My experience leads me to believe that many of these successful designers have yet to match their expertise with the spirit of conservation in an historic building.
Maintenance Let us look at maintenance issues. Historic buildings, by virtue of their age, need a programmed maintenance strategy. Galleries need redecoration, and plants require overhauling and upgrading. Maintenance work always means disruption to the environment in which the artefacts are kept. As a result, the artefacts are often moved to be stored elsewhere, frequently in a less desirable or uncontrolled environment, where dust penetration becomes a serious hazard, and the collections can suffer considerable deterioration in consequence of these moves. Not unusually, during the maintenance work, unforeseen contingencies are encountered, such as the discovery of a beetle attack in the old timbers, ingress of water in the enveloping structure, or overloaded electrical installations, which cause a dangerous deterioration in its mechanical protection. It is therefore important to introduce a system of regular joint inspection of services and their functions by the architect and museum departments. Such inspections reduce cost and events of crisis. Finally, the implications of the cost of preserving the historic heritage and its maintenance brings me to the funding issues. Architects, inevitably, get embroiled in the ramifications of financial strategy as they are the coordinators of all actions which lead to the final tally. Finance
and
Administration
Museums and galleries housed in historic buildings need the usual two classes of financial aid-for maintenance and for new works-except that their bill for maintenance is usually much higher than that for new works. HM Government Agencies’ bidding for expenditure on roof repairs, drainage, brick and stone exteriors, dry rot eradication and structural strengthening forms a large percentage of the annual vote. Consequently, the funding of new
SURESHDHARGALKAR
349
projects, improved lighting and environmental needs, are seriously affected. The level of finance is generally inadequate, even for maintenance alone, and as a result there is a substantial backlog of essential and urgent repairs. The deferred maintenance costs rise rapidly as time elapses and in some cases the damage to the fabric is beyond repair. More and more museums are turning to private sponsorship for funding, and they are encouraged to do so by the government-a refreshing concept, notwithstanding the challenging administrative and legal issues, calling for imaginative handling. It is difficult, nevertheless, to attract donors for maintenance work which is unglamorous and in most cases invisible to the general public. Some museums are attempting to raise loans on a long-term repayment basis as an alternative, but such proposals are fraught with innumerable administrative and legal difficulties. However generous these gifts may be, they are set, in the case of the PSA, in the context of public funds, requiring public accountability. Private sponsorship encourages freedom in design issues for the museums-but it is well to remember that future maintenance costs arise out of a new design, and, in our case, they fall to the Property Services Agency. Not unnaturally, HM Treasury is averse to anything which might carry a financial liability. It is enough in itself that an increase in the estate carries the potential of additional funds for running costs and general maintenance. Understandably, a museum or a gallery wishes to maximize the use to which money is put. As an agency, the PSA’s wish is to rationalize both the practical elements and the policy implications. Private funding for new projects within an existing building, or adjacent to it, must also cover the alterations to the existing installations which may in turn have to include the renewal of or extensions to the existing plant some distance away. Many museum or gallery exhibition design offices or accommodation o&es are without their own in-house support of works designers, engineers and maintenance staff. The English national museums and galleries have the advantage of the PSA’s Museums and Galleries Group which provides such a service. Working closely with its administrative colleagues, it ensures that the museums and galleries get the best value from the limited resources available. Even though other museums and galleries may feel they get too little of the national cake, they may be able to take some comfort in realizing that the PSA, too, consider that the slices are cut too sparingly. On a personal note, I would like to conclude by declaring that the professionals who are engaged in the care of our historic museums and galleries and their environments are as dedicated as the curators and the conservators. Our mutual interest must lie in consolidating this liaison.
Management and Curatorshrp (1984), 3, N-349
The Role of a Conservationist Architect SURESH DHARGALKAR
Curators,
Conservators
and Architects
It is paradoxical that curators and conservators appear to coexist compatibly because I believe that their respective functions are totally opposed. The curator wishes to display the object, whilst the conservator is preoccupied with the preservation of that artefact which he can only truly achieve by locking it away safe from fluctuating temperatures and natural or artificial light. Perhaps a common interest in the intellectual dimensions of artefacts draws them together into harmony. One thing is certain, this harmony usually gets disturbed when an architect introduces the problems of preserving yet another artefact-the building, which houses collections and which has become, in its own right, an item of collection. At this point, the architect inevitably turns the company of the former two into the proverbial crowd. If the architect also happens to be an experienced conservationist, his or her enthusiasm for that particular ‘cultural property’ warms visibly, and in turn detracts from the original brief for the display and preservation of the collection. Climatic control, security, fire precautions and lighting are the elements of preventive conservation. But the architect also has to deal with the other elements of that environmental/spatial/structural system with due regard to the thermal capacity and buffering materials in the building structure. This particular role of a conservationist architect’s work is that most often regarded as contentious by the collective museum clients. Heritage
Buildings
Museum buildings are often considered simply as envelopes to enclose an environment suitable for the collections. This view may be logical for a new purpose-built museum or an existing building, without particular architectural merit, converted into a museum. Conversions abound, but museums and galleries in totally new buildings are few indeed. The word ‘Museum’ usually evokes a mental picture of an edifice of grandeur, majestic architectural features of sculptured stone, lofty entrance, whispered conversation in vast galleries with clerestorey lighting: a temple of art where the visitor is awed with the magnificence of the architecture first, before getting down to look at the artefacts. This image is very much alive in most of the historic centres, where the established museums are housed in old and ancient buildings forming part of the heritage. Some of these buildings were built as museums, others were palaces, town halls, castles and fortresses, ancestral homes or even ecclesiastical masterpieces. Almost all of them, in our present time, have become architectural artefacts-more commonly termed within the United Kingdom ‘Listed Buildings’.
‘0 Crown Copyright 1984. Reproduced with permission of the Controller of HMSO.
344
The Role
of u Conserzutionist ,4rt-hitet-t
Flexibility of Historic Structures The extent to which it is possible to preserve the identity of a ‘Listed Building’ amidst all the complex scientific requirements of preventive conservation of collections depends a great deal upon the flexibility of its structure. Skilful adaptation of the existing forms and their visual qualities becomes a challenge to the architect. Some of these buildings are totally unsuitable for use as museums, especially when you consider the wide range of artefacts of stone, metals, ceramics, wood and textile, as well as paintings, miniatures, papers, natural history specimens and organic material, that often has to be housed. Some buildings are adaptable as picture galleries only. Many a structure can accommodate stone, metal and ceramics without much ado. On the other hand, textiles, water colours, wood and bone impose great constraints on the adaptation. Above all, the modern-day concepts of preventive conservation, those of climatic control, security and provision of conservation laboratories on the premises, greatly reduce the available degree of flexibility. Curators and conservators today maintain a close and vibrant liaison with their counterparts in museums throughout the world. They are perhaps more aware of these conflicts and constraints than the architect, who has limited opportunity for wide travel. However, it is not difficult to imagine the problems of those great historic museums in Florence, Rome, Vienna, Dresden, Paris or Leningrad, with the different climatic characteristics of these cities. In the United Kingdom, the museums at South Kensington, the British Museum, the National Maritime Museum, and the Queen’s House at Greenwich are prime examples of constraints. The introduction of new air-conditioning or mechanical air-handling and lighting are the two most common causes of drama in historic buildings. Conservators and the mechanical and electrical engineers will discuss at great length a skilful manipulation of these sciences to conserve the artefacts. The architect, however, is concerned with the impact of their new physical presence or changes to the existing form of the historic structure. The architectural geometry, its style in context with its period, and the visual effects which make the building historic, are usually threatened. The changes are generally to be achieved in one of two ways. Either by introducing the new elements within the available cavities and adapting the visible existing forms, hopefully without detriment to the past visual qualities and proportions, or by boldly implementing new measures, though only if these actions are not irreversible with regard to any future reinstatement of the original elements. Consultative Bodies The philosophy and arguments for and against the two options of adaptation and new build depend upon the merits of the historic elements and a judgement of the extent to which the changes and adaptation could be termed acceptable. We are well aware of the role played by public bodies such as the Directorate of Ancient Monuments and Historic Buildings and the Inspectorate of Ancient Monuments (now reformed into ‘English Heritage’), together with the GLC (Greater London Council) Historic Buildings Council and the Royal Fine Art Commission. The ever-present awareness of the need to preserve the British architectural heritage has caused successive governments to maintain a constructive attitude towards consultation through such public sector expertise. Often their recommendations are challenged in respect to their mandatory status in obtaining planning consents. However, prior consultations with individual experts in particular fields can help to present a balanced argument to the planning authorities. Their range of expertise is very wide-the structural engineer, experienced in detecting peculiarities of construction of the period; the stone and brick conservationist; the interior designer who specializes in decorations of the particular
SURESHDHARCALKAR
345
age; the period paint consultant, capable of advising on pigmentation of the original colours; a lighting specialist and, finally, the architect, a brave individual who is able to simplify the views of these experts and present a solution for final arbitration. But a word of warning-all these views require close scrutiny. Are these experts seeking a perfect solution without cost effectiveness? Can they examine alternatives in the true spirit of conservation? Are they able to reconcile their views to advise on an acceptable compromise? The problem often lies in an intransigent attitude, bordering on fanaticism. One can illustrate these dangers in the context of our old museum buildings. Almost all of them were built in pre-electricity days of coal or gas fuel. Draught ventilation brick ducts are common in such structures as the British Museum. Fireplaces adorn the principal rooms, as in the seventeenth century Queen’s House at Greenwich and eighteenth century Hertford House (Wallace Collection). Are we then to insist upon gas-lit interiors? Are we to arrange the show-cases housing the collections to suit the period setting of the interior? Will the mortar jointing of modern constituents change the character of the stone or brick facade? Will the change in internal environment change the traditional detail? Should we insist upon old traditional methods of cast-lead covering instead of the modern techniques for the sake of preserving the old craft? These may be utterly ridiculous extremes, but they are not far from some of the dialogue in the birth pangs of a project. The balance of the consultation lies in recognizing the expertise of the eminent, and accommodating their views in an acceptable compromise within the financial constraints. It is fortuitous that the expertise and experience of the consultative bodies is also to be found amongst the boards of trustees of the various museums. It helps them to understand the architect’s dilemma. However, consultation is chiefly a team effort, the architect being the principal coordinator. Overriding priorities of the conservation of the collections, financial restrictions and the time-scale of a project, which are the realities architects have to face, drive them to optimize. Changing
Concepts
of Public Amenities
Let us now examine the concepts of public amenities in a museum or an art gallery. In the present day they have acquired new dimensions. They impose new requirements remote from the fundamental functions of display and conservation to which we had been accustomed. Almost all add further constraints on preservation of the fabric of the historic building. They also demand increased flexibility of services, structure and security control. Foremost amongst these is the installation of climatic control, whilst ultra-sensitive material demands the cocooned atmospheres of micro-climatic show-cases. The introduction of higher relative humidity levels in previously stable structures of old buildings proves detrimental to timber components, and it adds the requirement of vapour barriers and insulation in the hidden cavities of roofs and external walls to prevent condensation. Increases in art robberies, vandalism and terrorist activities have made security and surveillance a growth industry. Such electronic installations are now coupled with automatic fire alarm and detection systems, and linked with computerized video scanning. However, engineers are wary of such sophistication because occasional failures in such systems need specialist attention which is expensive. Emergency and standby power supplies are necessary to avert the danger of damage to the artefacts during any climatic breakdown. Advances in security installations have not reduced greatly the need for wardering, and while the number of visitors grows every year, the problems of their mobility and circulation result in replanning and alterations to the structure. Thus the requirements of the Means of Escape Regulations present structural difficulties in demanding new circulation routes in the old buildings. Access for the disabled
The Role of u Consemationist
316
Architect
by ramps and chair lifts, public educational facilities, and on-site design studios and conservation laboratories add further statutory requirements to those of public health and safety. The structural elements of these constructions impose new dimensions alien to the historic form. It is clear that although the majority ofthese requirements fall within the scope of the mechanical and electrical engineers, they influence architects’ actions in their struggle to preserve the historic identity of the fabric.
Coordination
of Services
and
Collective
Attitudes
The architectural role, therefore, includes the complex coordination of allied services, ensuring that they not only meet the exacting criteria of the conservator, but that their design and juxtaposition are compatible and maintain the structural form, historic fabric and visual qualities which the interior and the exterior enjoyed in the past. The key to a successful solution lies in a constructive collaboration between the curator, the conservator, the environmental engineer and the architect. However, many an initial briefing meeting is lacking in liaison. It is either the architect without the engineer or the curator, or museum works services without the conservator. Often it is necessary for museum works services, or, in some cases, the museum design team to take the lead in briefing, thus assuming the responsibilities of the conservators. Sometimes, this practice stems from the well-meaning administrative structure of the museum, but, as you can well appreciate, it relays the conservator’s brief serond-hand, frequently resulting in misconceptions. The absence of engineers at this early stage can rob the architects of the opportunity to point out to them the sensitivity of the fabric of the building and, conversely, deprives the engineers of a preliminary assessment of their services, which could be detrimental to the fabric and the finishes. New engineering services are always an intrusion. However, the architects’ performance will be lacking in svmpathy for the user if they are intransigent and purist in their attitudes to conservation. Rigidity ought to be avoided, for such an attitude will defeat the aims of conservators and restrict the scope and ingenuity of the engineers. Architects and engineers must demonstrate that they are creatively supportive and recognize that the suit must be cut from the cloth available.
Constraints
of Engineering
Services
At this point it is appropriate to turn briefly to matters of detail regarding engineering services. Plant assemblies and their housings, ventilation trunkings and grilles impose new physical and visual elements, and quickly become obtrusive. Chiller plants for air-conditioning, humidification plants, lift motor-rooms, dilution and exhaust systems for fume cupboards and boilers, sound attenuators and silencers, are some of the larger and more difficult components to accommodate, threatening both the internal and external appearance of a listed building in a conservation area. Any dialogue between engineers and Health and Safety Officers, and the discussions over these matters, tend to be protracted. Mercifully, a number of mechanical plant units can be accommodated in the nether regions or roof spaces of a building, whilst service pipes can be embedded in the floors and the walls. Access to these services can be skilfully located, but the cost of such clever manipulation is always high. The electrical services present comparatively fewer difficulties. Mechanical protection for them is smaller in scale, and therefore usually can be concealed in the structure-but skill, imagination and ingenuity are at a high premium. The elements of environmental engineering installations are designed for continual and long-term operation, and their physical presence is irreversible. Thus their design at conception must be considered with
SURESHDHARGALKAR
347
due regard for future maintenance and health and safety requirements. Disregard them, or lower the engineering standards to minimize their intrusion in the historic fabric, and you will inherit operational difficulties, mounting repair costs, inadequate and unsafe working conditions, and rapid obsolescence of components. And so, once again, I stress that a practical and balanced evaluation of all these factors takes time, and involves painstaking research and dialogue, but, provided the museums continue their patience, a satisfactory, if not optimum solution is born. Examples of bad compromises become evident in substandard fume cupboards, noisy pressurization plants, breakdown in humidity control equipment, recurrent problems with lift machinery, and so on.
Lighting and Redecoration The most contentious element of preventive conservation is lighting-general illumination or special lighting. The light fittings as the source of illumination, the colour rendering qualities of the lamps and the heat generated by them are of prime concern, and a new lighting system can dramatically alter the visual effect previously associated with the historic ambience of an interior. It can alter the previously warm feeling to a cold and austere atmosphere, or vice versa. Furthermore, lighting and redecoration cannot be considered independently-they are meant to complement each other. Redecoration schemes have always been a subjective and personal issue. Its age-old philosophy has not changed, but we have made significant advances in the science of artificial lighting and its coexistence with natural daylight. The conservators are aware of the rate of damage to the collections from long exposures to high levels of illumination and, not least, infra-red and ultra-violet radiation. The architect must also examine the effect of such lighting on the original fabric and finishes of the structure. Risks incurred could be structural as well as visual. Tungsten spots, much beloved by exhibition designers, emit considerable heat, and their extensive use can set up cycles of expansion and contraction in the fragile surfaces of ancient timbers. Sensitive surfaces of plaster, lime washes and old pigments are all susceptible. New lighting proposals may create problems of heat gain and increased loads on heating and ventilation or air-conditioning plants. Equally, reliance on the benefits of natural light also has its pitfalls. Most historic buildings rely primarily on natural light, but if the windows are retained, the display designers are faced with inflexibility of space and the engineers with unpredictable heat gains or losses. However, any elimination of windows will inevitably destroy the historic interior and lose valuable casual contact with ‘outside’. Lighting can be employed in a manner whereby its installation is reversible, and can also be complemented by equally new decoration which is again reversible. Technological innovations have produced a large selection of fittings and light sources. High-intensity lights with low-voltage sources, diffusion by directional cellular prisms, pencil beams, anti-glare devices, multi-circuit tracks, control by photo-electric cells and a choice of colour rendering in fluorescent as well as tungsten lamps are some of the aids which the architect can employ to maintain the sensitive visual quality of an interior. Adapting an interior for use as an exhibition gallery opens a floodgate to the opportunist manufacturers of the proverbial spotlight. Museum design offices who mount exhibitions are inundated with persistent sales drives by the lighting manufacturers. Very often such a continual liaison between a manufacturer and a design office, on a non-obligatory basis, traps the exhibition designer into assuming the role of lighting consultant. Only a handful of museums have professional lighting consultants on their staff, and not many manufacturers can provide a selective lighting consultancy to back up their sales promotion. They are technically competent to provide a suitable specification
The Role of a Conservationist
348
Architect
to order, but their commercial interests in their own products debars them from the realm of comprehensive design issues. A liaison on such a poor foundation cuts across common sense in economy, cost effectiveness and future maintenance issues. It negates the sensitive dialogue on colour rendering, light intensity and visual dimensions. Spotlights have their own place in less exacting exhibition lighting, but not necessarily so in the conservation of historic cultural property. Tungsten sources and their colour rendering qualities are synonymous, and are often selected for lighting historic interiors. But equally dramatic and sensitive effects, matching the mood of the period, can also be achieved by fluorescent sources of correct colour rendering, without the concentrations of heat generated by spotlights.
Temporary
Exhibitions
So far, my observations are in respect of a permanent display. The scope for temporary exhibitions in historic buildings is, of course, as wide as that in any other building. The architectural historians and the planning authorities look at such proposals with an open mind, so long as the new installations and building services are of a temporary nature and no irreversible measures are taken; and by that I mean that the fabric of the building can be restored to its original state after the event is over. Many architects have become very successful exhibition designers in this field and the curators often look upon them as arbiters and principal consultants, even in major projects for permanent displays. My experience leads me to believe that many of these successful designers have yet to match their expertise with the spirit of conservation in an historic building.
Maintenance Let us look at maintenance issues. Historic buildings, by virtue of their age, need a programmed maintenance strategy. Galleries need redecoration, and plants require overhauling and upgrading. Maintenance work always means disruption to the environment in which the artefacts are kept. As a result, the artefacts are often moved to be stored elsewhere, frequently in a less desirable or uncontrolled environment, where dust penetration becomes a serious hazard, and the collections can suffer considerable deterioration in consequence of these moves. Not unusually, during the maintenance work, unforeseen contingencies are encountered, such as the discovery of a beetle attack in the old timbers, ingress of water in the enveloping structure, or overloaded electrical installations, which cause a dangerous deterioration in its mechanical protection. It is therefore important to introduce a system of regular joint inspection of services and their functions by the architect and museum departments. Such inspections reduce cost and events of crisis. Finally, the implications of the cost of preserving the historic heritage and its maintenance brings me to the funding issues. Architects, inevitably, get embroiled in the ramifications of financial strategy as they are the coordinators of all actions which lead to the final tally. Finance
and
Administration
Museums and galleries housed in historic buildings need the usual two classes of financial aid-for maintenance and for new works-except that their bill for maintenance is usually much higher than that for new works. HM Government Agencies’ bidding for expenditure on roof repairs, drainage, brick and stone exteriors, dry rot eradication and structural strengthening forms a large percentage of the annual vote. Consequently, the funding of new
SURESHDHARGALKAR
349
projects, improved lighting and environmental needs, are seriously affected. The level of finance is generally inadequate, even for maintenance alone, and as a result there is a substantial backlog of essential and urgent repairs. The deferred maintenance costs rise rapidly as time elapses and in some cases the damage to the fabric is beyond repair. More and more museums are turning to private sponsorship for funding, and they are encouraged to do so by the government-a refreshing concept, notwithstanding the challenging administrative and legal issues, calling for imaginative handling. It is difficult, nevertheless, to attract donors for maintenance work which is unglamorous and in most cases invisible to the general public. Some museums are attempting to raise loans on a long-term repayment basis as an alternative, but such proposals are fraught with innumerable administrative and legal difficulties. However generous these gifts may be, they are set, in the case of the PSA, in the context of public funds, requiring public accountability. Private sponsorship encourages freedom in design issues for the museums-but it is well to remember that future maintenance costs arise out of a new design, and, in our case, they fall to the Property Services Agency. Not unnaturally, HM Treasury is averse to anything which might carry a financial liability. It is enough in itself that an increase in the estate carries the potential of additional funds for running costs and general maintenance. Understandably, a museum or a gallery wishes to maximize the use to which money is put. As an agency, the PSA’s wish is to rationalize both the practical elements and the policy implications. Private funding for new projects within an existing building, or adjacent to it, must also cover the alterations to the existing installations which may in turn have to include the renewal of or extensions to the existing plant some distance away. Many museum or gallery exhibition design offices or accommodation o&es are without their own in-house support of works designers, engineers and maintenance staff. The English national museums and galleries have the advantage of the PSA’s Museums and Galleries Group which provides such a service. Working closely with its administrative colleagues, it ensures that the museums and galleries get the best value from the limited resources available. Even though other museums and galleries may feel they get too little of the national cake, they may be able to take some comfort in realizing that the PSA, too, consider that the slices are cut too sparingly. On a personal note, I would like to conclude by declaring that the professionals who are engaged in the care of our historic museums and galleries and their environments are as dedicated as the curators and the conservators. Our mutual interest must lie in consolidating this liaison.