“The Conservation of Katherineberg: Conservation vs. Disasters”

The Association for Preservation Technology International, Annual Meeting, Toronto, Canada, October 2002.

Speakers: Joseph Sembrat and Martin E. Weaver
Authors: Joseph Sembrat and Martin E. Weaver

ABSTRACT

The overall structure of the project was quite unique in that each of the conservation specialists and the contractors negotiated and contracted directly with the client instead of a general contractor. This situation required that a project manager be hired to act as a liaison between the various parties and to coordinate with the client, the architectural conservator, the conservation specialists, and the various contractors to develop a project/task timeline that broke the project down into definable tasks with time and cost estimates for each task. This information also provided the basis for the formation of the associated spreadsheets and cost graphs that were used to track the project.

The project manager also acted as a Quality Control (QC) representative for the architectural conservator to verify the quality of the workmanship and materials used in the restoration processes. Each contractor was responsible for quality control and established and maintained an effective quality control system. The QC representative for the architectural conservator coordinated with the contractor’s/conservation specialist’s QC representative to insure that all workmanship and materials met the requirements stated in the specifications.

The dual use of the building, serving as both residence and office to the Governor, required that the work be performed as efficiently as possible. To help facilitate matters and allow several tasks to be performed simultaneously, the project was broken down into three major phases. The three phases were as follows:

Phase 1 – Fungicidal treatment and clean up of contaminated materials.

Phase 2 – Removal and disposal of deteriorated roof. Installation of a new roofing system.

Phase 3A – Restoration of the governor’s bedroom and bathroom, kitchen, recreation room, and        replacement/repair of all structural timbers.

Phase 3B – Restoration of the remaining portions of the house, electrical work, and plumbing up-grade.

Because of the sensitive nature of the project and the fact that the historic structure was used as both an office and residence for the governor, it became apparent quite quickly that efficient lines of communications needed to be established. Coordination between the various parties and the project manager were performed through verbal and written communications, electronic transmission of photographic documentation, and weekly on-site meetings. These lines of communications proved to be invaluable in quickly obtaining answers to specific questions posed by the specialists and contractors when the architectural conservator was not on-site. It also provided the project manager with an indispensable tool in reassuring the client and the governor that their concerns were being addressed in an efficient and timely manner.