Maintain our Heritage logo Home | Activities | About us | Resources | Enquiries
|                                    
Bath-area pilot | Putting it off
                    |
                Research reports

 

 
 

Prevention is better than cure

Attic maintenance

Roof-top maintenance

Roof-top maintenance

 


Module 1
Best Practice Maintenance Management for Listed Buildings

Contents of the report on this module are listed below. Click the links to view each item in pdf format.

Contents, Executive Summary and 1. Introduction
1.1 The significance of maintenance for historic buildings
1.2 Aims of this research
1.3 Definition of maintenance adopted for this research
1.4 Structure of the report

2. The Statutory and Policy Context for Maintenance
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Context
2.3 Legislation
2.4 Planning policy
2.5 Value Added Tax (VAT)
2.6 Health and safety
2.7 Buildings at risk
2.8 Grant aid and maintenance
2.9 Current views and trends in conservation policy
2.10 Conclusions

3. European Maintenance Initiatives
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Methodology
3.3 Monumentenwacht, Holland
3.4 Raadvad Bygningssyn, Denmark
3.5 The Risk Map of Cultural Heritage, Italy
3.6 Conclusions

4. Best Practice Maintenance Management for Listed Buildings
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Methodology
4.3 Literature review
4.4 Three illustrations of maintenance management from the non-heritage sector
4.5 Conclusions

5. Organisational Approaches to the Maintenance of Listed Buildings
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Research methods
5.3 Structure of the report
5.4 Findings
5.5 Conclusions

6. Examining the Financial and Non-financial case for Maintenance
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Evolution of the survey proforma
6.3 General observations on property profiles
6.4 Dealing with the ‘cultural increment’
6.5 Conclusions

Note Chapter 6, section 6.2.6, includes a link to an Interactive Financial Model. You can also view the model by clicking here.

References and bibliography

Appendices
Appendix 1: Three illustrations of maintenance management from the non-heritage sector
Appendix 2: Questionnaire sent to heritage and non-heritage organisations
Appendix 3: Quantitative results from questionnaires sent to heritage and non-heritage organisations
Appendix 4: What counts as ‘culturally significant’?
Appendix 5: Illustrations from the pro-forma survey

List of Figures
Figure 6.1: The six historic buildings used in this research
Figure 6.2: Digital images of Hill Gate Cottage from the web enabled condition survey
Figure 6.3: Differing estimates of life expectancy for rainwater goods
Figure 6.4: Comparative 30 year maintenance profiles
Figure 6.5: Pessimistic and optimistic maintenance profiles compared
Figure 6.6: A comparison of the original and optimistic Selworthy Barn property profiles

List of Tables
Table 4.1: Summary comparison of maintenance management in three non-heritage organisations
Table 5.1: Profile of heritage organisations that responded to the questionnaire
Table 5.2: Profile of non-heritage organisations that responded to the questionnaire
Table 5.3: Profile of heritage organisations that took part in interviews
Table 5.4: Profile of non-heritage organisations that took part in interviews
Table 6.1: 1 Royal Crescent Bath
Table 6.2: St James Church, Southstoke
Table 6.3: Selworth Barn, Devon
Table 6.4: Hill Gate Cottage, Devon
Table 6.5: Maintenance profile
Table 6.6: Comparative maintenance profiles
Table 6.7: Achieving consistency
Table 6.8: Original property profile for Selworthy Barn
Table 6.9: More optimistic profile for Selworthy Barn
Table 6.10: Cost projection for Hill Cottage
Table 6.11: Sinking fund and borrowing calculator
Table 6.12: Sinking fund and borrowing calculator with changed inflation rates and interest rates