brighton & hove city council court.pdf · brighton & hove city council park court...

Brighton & Hove City Council

1-9 Park Court Queens Park Road Feasibility Report Date : 07th November 2014 Ref : 1331 Revision : 1

Brighton & Hove City Council Park Court Feasibility Report

pod LLP – November 2014 P a g e | i

Copyright

© This report is the copyright of pod LLP. Any unauthorised reproduction or usage by any person other than the addressee is strictly prohibited.

Limitation

This report has been produced by pod LLP for the sole use of Brighton & Hove City Council in accordance with the commission and brief of this project.

No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by us. This report may not be used or relied upon by any other party without the prior and express written agreement of pod LLP.

The external survey in order to compile this report was carried out from ground level and no close up access to the elevations was provided. A further detailed survey of the building will need to take place once an access scaffold has been erected.


pod LLP – November 2014 P a g e | ii

Report Details

Carried out at: 1-9 Park Court Queens Park Road Brighton BN2 0GH

Prepared by: Andrew Kilford BSc (Hons) AMFPWS pod LLP Unit 1.3 13 The Leathermarket Weston Street London SE1 3ER Prepared for: Ms. Theresa Youngman Brighton & Hove City Council

1st Floor Brighton & Hove Housing Centre Unit 1 Fairway Trading Estate Eastergate Road Brighton BN2 4QL


pod LLP – November 2014 P a g e | 2

Contents

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 3-4

2. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 5

3. General Condition............................................................................................................................... 6-9

4. Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 10

5. In Flat Survey Results ........................................................................................................................... 11

6. Fabric Refurbishment Options ........................................................................................................ 12-13

7. Budget Estimate ............................................................................................................................. 14-15

8. Environmental Improvement Options................................................................................................. 16

9. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 17

Appendix A – Condition Photographs



1. Introduction pod LLP were appointed to survey and provide a report on the roof condition and external areas at Park Court, Queens Park Road. We were asked to identify any roof defects and make additional recommendations on the level of repairs required to bring the blocks up to a good standard of repair.

Queens Park Road is situated around half a mile from the seafront in Brighton, with the block being set over four floors, containing a total of nine flats. The flats form an isolated block on the corner of Queens Park Road and Southover Street. The main body of the building sits on a concrete frame to the ground floor, which acts as an under croft facility, providing parking for residents.

For the purpose of this report the front of the building shall be deemed to be facing south.

Detailed Brief

The client’s detailed brief requested that the following information be provided:

i. Carry out a survey to assess the condition of the roof and make necessary recommendations;

ii. Carry out a survey to assess the general condition of the external fabric of the building, prioritising those repairs needed to complete environmental improvements and immediate repairs affecting the integrity of the building.

iii. Make recommendations on reasonable environmental improvements to the building.

iv. Carry out a survey to assess the general condition of the landscaping, pathways, roadways of the estate.

v. Provide an estimate for any works recommended for client budgetary purposes.

Survey

The inspection of the external elements and a selection of flats was carried out on 28th October 2014.

The weather at the time of inspection was sunny and dry.

The surveys were carried out by Andrew Kilford BSc (Hons) on behalf of pod LLP.

Given the nature of works identified within this report it is not anticipated that a fire risk assessment will be required at this stage.

Construction of Park Court

Park Court is four stories high and constructed using a combination of a concrete frame and masonry cavity wall construction, with concrete separating floors and roof. The external walls are constructed using a brickwork outer leaf and blockwork inner leaf; with a number of elevations having been finished in tile hanging. A single stair core serves all nine flats, with access available at ground floor level; fronting Queens Park Road. The concrete frame occupies the ground floor only and supports a concrete floor slab; providing structural stability to the cavity wall construction on the upper floors and an under croft parking area to the ground floor.

The roof of the building consists of a concrete roof deck, with brick built parapet walls and concrete coping stones; the roof remains un-insulated. The roof is generally separated into three areas, all of which are treated with differing materials. Roof areas benefit from a single access hatch located within the common parts [above stairs], with no high level brickwork other than parapet walls. Rainwater is predominately collected in flat roof sump outlets, with a single parapet outlet and hopper head to the rear of the block. The single hopper head is likely to have been retrospectively installed; with an area of flat roof having been overlaid in a single layer felt membrane and solar reflective paint. This has resulted in a requirement to move the rainwater outlet.

Six of the nine flats are accessed via open, recessed walkways to the rear of the block; with a total of three flats benefitting from a balcony on the rear elevation. The balconies and walkways are bounded by



galvanised steel balustrading, with timber infill panelling to walkways. All balconies and walkways are finished in a decorative coating and a waterproofing layer of asphalt under foot.

The entrance hall to the block is fairly expansive and is currently being used to house bins and bikes, as well as for general storage by residents. The entrance hall and under croft car park areas are in-filled at their boundaries with a decorative concrete blockwork arrangement and some brickwork. At its abutment with the flats at first floor level; the concrete frame is insulated with an over-clad external insulation system set within a metal frame. The under croft parking area is separated by a large steel gate with chain and padlock, which provides secure access.

The windows to Park Court are all double glazed white UPVC units, with external doors to common parts consisting of stained timber doors with single glazed Georgian wire infill panes. An exception to this is the balcony doors to flats 3, 6 and 9; where double glazed UPVC units can be seen, providing access to balconies.

External areas are limited, with 0.9m high dwarf brick walls to the front of the block housing a raised planter area; and cast concrete to paths on the buildings flanks. To the blocks boundaries, boundary walls are a mix of brickwork and rendered brickwork; however appear to belong to adjoining properties.



2. Executive Summary

This report aims to identify and budget estimate the external repairs and improvements to the block at Park Court, Brighton.

The roof covering was considered very poor, with patch repairs having been made, along with plants and moss growth to the roof. This would suggest that the single ply/asphalt has reached the end of its useful life and may develop further leaks within the next five years. Brick parapets and coping stones were also in a very poor condition with numerous patch repairs and sections of brickwork having been rebuilt in whole. It is clear that the concrete frame and roof need attention to prevent the development of further defects within flats, and to the structural integrity of the building.

Furthermore, the condition of the block is poor with worn pointing and spalling brickwork. The concrete frame is suffering from carbonation and large areas of spalling concrete can be seen. The windows are estimated to be in excess of fifteen years old and in many instances are draughty, distorted and defective. Some glazing panes were misted indicating a breakdown of rubber gaskets and others subsequent penetration of water into the glazing units had occurred.

Photographic evidence can be seen within Appendix A.

Within this report we have explored options for remedial works to key aspects of the building and in summary we have suggested the following:

Carry out general repairs to the fabric of the building and replace windows and doors to ensure structural stability and to maintain a safe, warm and dry environment for its occupants.

Replace existing defective roof covering with new insulated roof system and high performance three layer, felt waterproofing system.

Over-clad the external façade of the block with an insulated render system to reduce maintenance and improve thermal performance.

An insulated render system would vastly improve the thermal performance of the building. We have explored the potential improvements within both Sections 5 & 6 and a potential U-Value of 0.25W/m²K could be achieved to external walls; and when combined with replacement windows (1.6W/m²K) and a replacement roof (0.18W/m²K), the suggestions herein could greatly improve the quality of life for the buildings occupants and reduce heating bills.

In addition to the above there is also funding to be considered and in this regard we believe that under the Energy Companies Obligation (ECO) funding would be available for application of EWI and replacement windows to the block. It is suggested that the client explore options of alternative funding.



3. General Condition

Roof Areas

The roof to Park Court is in a poor condition with a number of defects noted. The roof is generally separated into three sections. The roof build up consists of a concrete roof deck with two layers of asphalt and gravel. At its abutment with parapets and hatches etc. the asphalt is upturned to a height of approximately 3-400mm, where it is overlaid by a lead parapet flashing from the concrete coping stones. Asphalt to the main roof was seen to be sagging and cracking.

There are a number of areas to the roof where pooling of water was evident, this is likely a result of poor falls. Furthermore, gravel, which at one time would have covered the entire roof, has been swept into the central roof area. This is likely a result of a need to carry out roof repairs. The accumulated gravel has promoted the growth of plants and moss.

The rear section of roof has been retrospectively repaired with a single layer of felt, which has been coated in a solar reflective paint. Having carried out core sampling, moisture was evident beneath the felt overlay which indicates a breakdown of this membrane. Where these repairs have been carried out, it is likely that the existing rainwater sump outlet has been overlaid and a parapet outlet with hopper head has been installed to the rear elevation.

Rainwater to this area is collected by a UPVC hopper head and discharged down the building in a UPVC downpipe. Rainwater to other areas is collected by flat roof sumps and discharged down the building in cast iron rainwater pipes. Sump terminals were displaced and missing, and would need replacement.

Brickwork to parapets is met by concrete coping stones. Generally the condition of brickwork is poor with pointing missing and defective. Large sections of parapets have been rebuilt, evidence of this can be seen within Appendix A. Coping stones are heavily weathered, with cracking noted to various areas and a general saturation of the concrete noted. Mortar joins to copings are missing in part and degrading in a number of areas. A series of temporary repairs have been undertaken, an example being that coping stones having been overlaid with felt. The felt itself has also degraded with heavy moss and lichen growth.

The level of cracking to asphalt, along with the number of patch repairs; is testament to the fact that this roof has a very short life remaining. It is likely that further leaks and issues will occur within the next five years.

In summary the following defects were noted to roof areas:

Breakdown of single layer felt waterproofing membrane/asphalt.

Breakdown/failure of up-stands and flashings.

Missing flue and sump terminals.

General degradation of brick parapet walls.

Poor quality roof hatch.

Failure of concrete coping stones.

No roof edge protection.

External Elevations

Walls were considered to be in a poor condition. Prior to our inspection; a section of wall was opened up to facilitate a proper inspection of the external elevations. A review of the opening revealed a cavity wall construction; with 102mm external brickwork laid in stretcher bond, a 70mm insulated cavity and a blockwork inner leaf. The opening up was carried out to an external wall enclosing a habitable space, and it is therefore likely that this construction is uniform across the block. In addition to this, all of the



elevations fronting Southover Street have received tile hanging which has been applied to the cavity construction.

Whilst the cavity wall is insulated it must be noted that the walls will still perform poorly, when reviewed against the current Building Regulations. Residents within the block also complained that the flats were very cold, something that is likely a result of both poorly performing external walls and defective windows/doors. Moreover, mineral wool insulation is not appropriate for coastal towns; especially where moisture is already present within the cavity/structure. Any cavity fill could easily be saturated, becoming ineffective and leaving bridges within the cavity. The building would therefore benefit from an insulated over cladding rendered scheme, which will greatly improve the thermal efficiency of the dwellings within.

Furthermore, the opening made within the structure presented a single fish tail wall tie. Given the size of the opening it was impossible to determine the pattern and spacing of wall ties. Should further opening up take place, a larger portion of brickwork should be removed to ascertain this information. From inspection there was no evidence of rusting to the tie. There was however clear evidence of debris within the cavity, with a large timber section lodged within the cavity space.

The concrete frame of the block consists of a series of reinforced concrete columns supporting a concrete floor slab. The frame is insulated at its abutment with the floor slab by an over-clad insulation system set within a metal frame, with a rendered panel finish. It was clear from inspection that a number of the concrete columns are suffering from advanced carbonation, with others showing early signs. To a portion of the columns, rusting reinforcement was seen; combined with large sections of spalling concrete. In addition, the over-clad insulation system is showing signs of wear with age. The metal frame is rusting quite significantly to the front and flank elevations of the block. In other areas, including the under croft soffit; the frame itself is missing which has resulted in a breakdown or loss of the insulation. Obviously this leaves the frame un-insulated and exposed, which can cause further defects.

There was no evidence of a DPC material separating the concrete frame and masonry cavity wall; however inspection from ground level made this difficult and this report does not necessarily negate its presence. Openings within the structure were also absent of cavity trays or weep holes. The missing cavity trays/weep holes could present future problems with interstitial condensation, among other defects.

The brickwork was generally poor, and there was evidence of localised staining to the rear elevation where overflow pipes have leaked historically. There is a continually leaking overflow pipe on the rear elevation. Brickwork pointing to all elevations was poor, with the majority of mortar heavily weathered or missing. As discussed earlier, large sections of brickwork to parapets have been re-built which is a clear indication that brickwork and pointing is not of sound condition. Tile hanging was generally considered poor with a large number of dislodged and missing tiles.

External walkways serve six flats, with balconies provided to three flats. Balconies and walkways consist of a concrete slab with decorative coating to soffits and a waterproofing layer of asphalt under foot. All open walkways/balconies are bounded by galvanised steel balustrading, with walkways receiving additional timber panelling. The asphalt waterproofing layer was seen to be cracking. Generally, the decorative breakdown to soffits has resulted in spalling of concrete. Exposed reinforcement can be seen at high level. Moreover, the galvanised steel balustrading has rusted and eroded in several locations with fixings to balconies also showing advanced rusting. A number of tenants questioned the safety of the balconies given the condition of railings and fixings. On inspection it was seen that these balconies are unsafe.

Rainwater, as mentioned earlier, is typically discharged through the building in cast iron rainwater pipes. These penetrate the floor slab at first floor level and run into the under croft parking area. Where the sump outlet on the roof has been over-clad; the rainwater pipe has been terminated at first floor level within the slab. Generally rainwater goods were considered to be in poor condition with a breakdown of the decorative coating and rusting evident. The termination of the central rainwater pipe has left exposed areas of concrete and insulation; the opening also presents a potential fire hazard, breaching



the structure above. The UPVC hopper head and downpipe was considered to be in a reasonable condition, with no significant defects noted.

In summary the following defects were noted:

Poor decorative/waterproofing finishes.

Poorly performing external walls – Thermal Insulation; to include existing defective frame protection.

Concrete defects to balconies and soffits.

Concrete defects to frame columns.

Rusting/unsafe balustrading to balconies and walkways.

Poor brickwork and brick pointing.

Lack of cavity trays/weep holes.

Poor quality rainwater goods.

Continually leaking overflow pipes.

Windows & Doors

The existing windows to the block are generally UPVC double glazed units, with a small number of timber single glazed units to common parts. From a visual inspection alone it is difficult to ascertain the exact age of the windows, but based on a review of their condition; we anticipate them to be in excess of fifteen years old.

All windows to the block have UPVC cills and communal windows and doors; timber cills. All of the openings within the structure receive a steel lintel above. Lintels were seen to be rusting, with some windows showing signs of sagging. A subsequent review of internal areas showed diagonal cracking to heads of windows which may suggest early signs of lintel failure.

The doors/windows to common parts consist of a timber frame with Georgian wire, single glazed infill panes. These doors appear to be in excess of twenty five years old. The stained and decorative finish to doors has worn with age; with rear access doors presenting timber rot at low level. Main entrance doors have dropped leaving gaps in the frame. Generally, moving parts and hinges are rusting which make operation of some doors difficult.

An internal review of a number of flats and common areas revealed the following defects with windows:

Moving parts to windows were generally very stiff, rusting and required some force to operate the window mechanism correctly. The operation of the windows for the elderly, infirm and disabled would be very difficult.

Numerous double glazed units have failed resulting in misting panes and condensation on the inside face of panes of glass.

A number of side and top hung casements had dropped, leaving them difficult to open or close and in some instances leaving gaps at the heads of windows where air leakage and draughts have presented issues. Some residents have installed draught strips themselves.

Door furniture was loose and rusting of the mechanisms within the door was evident, leaving them in an unsecure condition.

General Landscaping and Estate Areas

As discussed earlier, external landscaping and estate areas to the block are fairly limited. To the front of the block, dwarf brick walls flank the main entrance path and pedestrian walkway, providing a raised planter area. Generally brickwork was considered satisfactory, however planter areas would benefit from upgrading as part of routine maintenance. Walls to boundaries were a mix of exposed brickwork



and rendered brickwork. The decorative coating to render was of poor condition, with paint flaking. Generally boundary walls would benefit from re-rendering and redecorating.

Quite heavy moss and plant growth were seen to tarmac in the exposed parking areas. Exposed sections of tarmac would benefit from reinstatement. Tarmacking to the under croft was generally seen as satisfactory.



4. Recommendations

In order to bring this building to a good state of repair we would recommend the following works:

Roof Areas

Renew all roof coverings to the building, including insulation to the main roof, given the condition as referred to above.

Remove existing coping stones and carry out necessary brickwork repairs and reinstate pointing to parapets. Replace with new coping stones.

Replace flue/outlet terminals.

Replace roof hatch and provide steel balustrading around hatch.

Renew all rainwater goods.

Provide fall arrest system or install roof edge protection.

External Elevations

Allow for brick cleaning to all elevations and re-point all elevations of the block with a suitable mortar mix and a clean bucket handle joint.

Reinstate/replace tiles to tile hung elevations.

Installation of an External Wall Insulation system to all elevations of the block. Subject to suitability of the structure and wall tie inspection.

Carry out concrete repairs to columns and frame.

Replace over-clad insulation and system to concrete frame and under croft soffits.

Carry out concrete repairs to balcony soffits.

Replace balustrades to balconies and walkways.

Redecorate all exposed concrete and previously decorated surfaces. Concrete to receive faring and protective coat.

Investigate and stop leaking overflow pipe.

Windows and Doors

Replace all UPVC windows and doors to the block.

Replace lintels to windows.

Replace main entrance doors & rear access door with UPVC or aluminium alternative.

Replace ‘walkway’ communal doors with timber or UPVC alternative.

General Landscaping and Estate Areas

Re-render boundary walls within under croft area.

Reinstate section of tarmac to under croft area.



5. In Flat Survey Results

Whilst on site, access was available to a selection of flats. The flats appeared to be in a reasonable condition although there was evidence of some defects/issues, which are listed below:

Residents complained that it was cold during the winter and difficult to heat/maintain any reasonable level of heating.

A lack of mechanical ventilation to Kitchens and Bathrooms.

No fire collars to pipework penetrating the structure.

Windows dropped, with blown casements and rusting moving parts.

Flats are not served by gas central heating. Fan/electric heaters.



6. Fabric Refurbishment Options

External Façade

Given the earlier survey notes regarding the external fabric of the building we believe that there are two general repair approaches, these being:-

Option 1 – General Repairs

The first option would be to carry out general repairs based on the refurbishment of the existing external elements of the building, to areas identified in a poor condition as per the previous sections within this report. This is with a view to extend the life of the property but not to include for any thermal improvements to the building. Works would include the following:

Redecorating works and concrete repairs.

Brickwork repairs to include repointing and making good.

Replacement external windows and doors.

Replacement rainwater goods.

Roof replacement and associated works.

We believe these works to be the minimum required to bring the blocks back into an acceptable state of repair. The benefit of such limited works is primarily a reduced budget, with the main disadvantage being that the key issue of heat loss is not addressed. The residents experience excessive heat loss in the winter and the installation of an insulated render system addresses this, as well as reducing maintenance to the external façade of the block in future years.

The cost of the repairs option is difficult to quantify at feasibility stage but could quite easily be similar to that of the over cladding system, especially as health and safety regulations would dictate that these works could only be carried out safely with a full access system, whereas the over cladding could be carried out using mast climbers that are cheaper to install and use. This would be further enhanced by the fact that the repairs to the build would attract no grant funding unlike the insulated render system.

The approximate budget cost of these works is detailed further in Section 7 of this report.

Option 2 – General Repairs and EWI

The second option would be to carry out repairs based on refurbishment of the existing external elements in addition to cladding the external walls with a system incorporating insulation that improves the thermal performance of the building fabric. This option will help to eradicate the instances of condensation whilst protecting the external brickwork, reducing the need for future maintenance; to include additionally the following:

Redecorating works and concrete repairs.

Replacement external windows and doors.

Replacement rainwater goods.

Roof replacement and associated works.

These works we believe offer the client and residents a far better solution to problems that currently affect the estate, namely condensation, heating of the building (in part) and protection of the brickwork that currently requires continual repairs.

The benefit of such works would be to provide thermal properties of the buildings to modern standards i.e. raising the U value to 0.25W/m2K and reducing significantly the effects of condensation within the dwellings. The repairs needed to repair and repoint the brickwork could be left untreated and enclosed



within the new insulated render system. The applied render system would then protect the façade from further deterioration.

The external over cladding system will have a 25 year warranty thus significantly reducing the council’s life cycle costing for maintenance of these buildings. If the buildings were to be repaired only, as in Option 1, then it is likely that the remaining areas of the buildings would deteriorate at a similar rate to that of the existing. Due to the cladding warranty any defects noted within the next 25 years will be carried out at nil cost to the council (unless malicious damage or poor maintenance etc.).

The cost of the repairs option is difficult to quantify at feasibility stage but could quite easily be similar than that of the over cladding system, especially as health and safety regulations would dictate that these works could only be carried out safely with a full access system, whereas over cladding can be completed via mast climbers that are cheaper to install and use. This would be compounded by the fact that repairs to the build would attract no grant funding unlike the insulated cladding.

The approximate budget cost of these works is detailed further in Section 7 of this report.



7. Budget Estimate

Below is a budget estimate for works to the fabric of the each building based upon the works identified within this report. This Budget Estimate is for works cost only and does not allow for specialist and professional fees, local authority fees, general asbestos removal, or VAT.

Item Work Element Option 1 Option 2

PARK COURT

1.0 ROOF AREAS

1.1 Renew all roofs to the building £29,500.00 £29,500.00

1.2 Carry out brickwork repairs to parapet walls. £7,500.00 £7,500.00

1.3 Renew coping stones to parapets. £5,000.00 £5,000.00

1.4 Replace roof hatch and install safety balustrades.

£8,000.00 £8,000.00

1.5 Renew all rainwater goods – allow for making good internally.

£10,000.00 £10,000.00

1.6 Install fall arrest system or roof edge protection.

£6,000.00 £6,000.00

Subtotal Item 1.0 £66,000.00 £66,000.00

2.0 EXTERNAL ELEVATIONS

2.1 Install full independent scaffold access/mast climbers.

£20,500.00 £20,500.00

2.2 Install an external wall insulation system. - £105,000.00

2.3 Carry out brickwork/tile repairs and clean & repoint brickwork.

£17,500.00 -

2.4 Carry out concrete repairs to frame and soffits allow for redecorating concrete areas.

£15,000.00 £15,000.00

2.5 Replace frame insulation system to include under croft soffits and entrance hallway

£15,000.00 Inc. 2.2

2.6 Liquid plastic coatings to balconies. £3,500.00 £3,500.00

2.7 Replace balustrades to balconies & walkways. £13,500.00 £13,500.00

2.8 Install mechanical extract to kitchens and bathrooms.

£3,150.00 £3,150.00

Subtotal Item 2.0 £73,150.00 £160,650.00

3.0 WINDOWS AND DOORS

3.1 Renew all windows to flats/elevations. £30,000.00 £30,000.00

3.2 Replace lintels to all windows. £21,00.00 £21,000.00

3.3 Replace main entrance & rear access door sets.

£4,500.00 £4,500.00

3.4 Replace ‘walkway’ communal doors. £3,500.00 £3,500.00

Subtotal Item 3.0

£59,000.00 £59,000.00



4.0 LANDSCAPING AND ESTATE AREAS

4.1 Redecorate gate. £750.00 £750.00

4.2 Reinstate area of tarmac. £5,000.00 £5,000.00

4.3 Render all boundary walls and decorate. £3,500.00 £3,500.00

Subtotal item 4.0 £9,250.00 £9,250.00

5.0 TOTAL WORKS COST £207,400.00 £294,900.00

6.0 SUMMARY

6.1 Total Works Cost £207,400.00 £294,900.00

6.2 Preliminaries and Management £39,406.00 £56,031.00

6.3 Contingency (5%) £10,370.00 £14,745.00

6.4 Fees (5%) £10,370.00 £14,745.00

6.5 Overheads (5%) £10,370.00 £14,745.00

6.6 Profit (5%) £10,370.00 £14,745.00

7.0 TOTAL OPTIONS BUDGET COSTS £288,286.00 £409,911.00



8. Environmental Improvements The current construction of Park Court will fall far short of the current Building Regulations in terms of heat loss. As previously mentioned, the inspected cavity consists of 102mm brickwork laid in stretcher bond, an insulated 70mm cavity and a blockwork internal skin, which we assume measures 100mm.

Mineral wool insulation is not appropriate for coastal towns; especially where moisture is already present within the cavity/structure. Any cavity fill could easily be saturated, becoming ineffective and leaving bridges within the cavity. To alleviate this issue and bring the building to meet with current regulations; the most practical treatment is to over clad the building using an insulated render system.

An insulated render system would produce improved performance to Park Court leading to an approximate reduction of thermal leakage of 35% through the external façade of the building (figure taken from standard industry literature). We have calculated the existing U-Value to be in the region of 1.5W/m²K. The installation of an insulated render system could considerably improve the current situation and exceed the Building Regulations requirements by achieving around 0.25W/m²K with a reputable external wall insulation system of a suitable thickness.

The replacement roof and windows would also contribute to the thermal improvements of the building and all done concurrently; the finished product would significantly improve the performance of the building, providing a new thermal shell to the block. We anticipate the existing roof U-Value to be in the region of 0.48W/m²K. Subject to replacement, the new roof would achieve 0.18W/m²K and windows 1.6W/m²K, meeting the current Building Regulations.

Carbon saving will be achieved through this installation, however the exact saving can only be accurately calculated whilst taking to consideration the building and its occupants use as a whole. We would suggest that carbon savings calculations be carried out by a specialist consultant following agreement on a preferred option, this will save the Client abortive fees.

The client may additionally consider the installation of PV panels to the roof at Park Court.

The benefits of a PV installation to these buildings would be:

1. The electricity produced could be fed into the communal electricity supply, thus reducing the service charge costs to the client and the residents.

2. The client would benefit from the feed in tariff rebate for the system.

3. The client would be seen to be adopting eco technologies which are proven to work and pay back over a reasonable period.



9. Conclusion

In conclusion, we confirm that whilst the building facades are generally in a poor condition, some repairs, possibly in combination with a rendered over cladding system, can be carried out in order to bring the buildings up to a good state of repair and improve their thermal performance.

The recommended repairs noted within this report will ensure that the blocks are wind and water tight and the works will extend the life of the buildings whilst also looking aesthetically pleasing.

With regards to flat roof coverings, and as noted above, the original roof coverings have shown signs of degradation and following core sampling we believe the estimated life expectancy of the current system to be up to 5 years. Given this we have therefore recommended a new high performance felt system be installed to the building.

As noted above other elements of the building have reached the end of their useful life and will require wholesale replacement I.e. windows, doors etc.

Some concrete repairs, as well as brickwork repointing are necessary to mitigate any further deterioration. We would recommend that any exposed concrete has a faring coat and protective coating to reduce the future spalling and corrosion of the underlying reinforcement. In addition the installation of an insulated render system will further improve the heat loss through the structure of the building and will perform to a greater standard than the current Building Regulation U-Value.

The application of a new roof, in combination with new windows and doors and the potential installation of an external insulated render system would not only further the life of the building but would also ensure and promote a better standard of living for the occupants therein. Ultimately reducing instances of condensation as well as reducing fuel bills and preventing further degradation of the structure.

Signed:

Andrew Kilford BSc (Hons) For and on behalf of pod LLP

Date: 7th November 2014



Appendix A

Condition Photographs



Photo 1 Photo 2 Missing insulation and render to concrete frame Missing insulation and rusting fixing

Photo 3 Photo 4 Spalling concrete and rusting reinforcement Spalling concrete



Photo 5 Photo 6 Balconies to rear of block. Rear of block.

Photo 7 Photo 8 Rusting to balconies and insulation framing. Rusting to insulation framing.



Photo 9 Photo 10 Spalling of concrete and exposed reinforcement. Poor brickwork pointing to brick parapets.

Photo 11 Photo 12 Gravel to roof with moss and plant growth Core sampling.

Photo 13 Photo 14 Poor brick pointing and degraded copings Poor flashing details & felt overlay.



Photo 15 Photo 16 Condensation and diagonal cracking to window. Condensation in bathroom – retrospective fan.

Photo 17 Photo 18 Internal condition of windows Rusting to balcony fixings.

Contact details

Andrew Kilford BSc (Hons) AMFPWS pod LLP Unit 1.3 13 The Leathermarket Weston Street London SE1 3ER

Telephone: 02031 765 590 Mobile: 07736 298 666

Email: [email protected] Web: www.podpartnership.com

brighton & hove city council court.pdf · brighton & hove city council park court...

Documents