Chapter 3–Report on performance
Performance report for Program 1.1
Program 1.1 ensures that the Old Parliament House building continues to be appropriately maintained and developed, relevant capital works are carried out, and necessary services are provided. Such activities ensure that the museum’s programs and activities can be undertaken while the building’s heritage values are conserved.
Table 1 demonstrates that the performance measures for Program 1.1, as set out in the 2010–11 Portfolio Budget Statements, were met to a high degree.
The following text provides a detailed report of performance against the 2010–11 key performance indicators for Program 1.1.
Managing the heritage values of Old Parliament House
Heritage awareness training
Heritage awareness training for staff, tenants and contractors is a requirement of the agency’s Heritage Management Plan, and promotes cooperation with and respect for the plan’s heritage objectives.
The training, which has been continually improved since its introduction, ensures that people working on site are aware of heritage issues and obligations, and of ways to minimise their impact on the fabric of the building and its collections.
In 2010–11, relevant training was provided for 460 contractors, 118 agency staff (including refresher training), 42 volunteers (including refresher training) and 118 staff of building tenants. Visiting school groups were also instructed in ways to preserve the heritage values of the building.
Heritage Actions Committee
The Heritage Actions Committee discusses and determines appropriate measures for proposed actions and activities in and on the building and its curtilage, in accordance with the Heritage Management Plan and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).
The committee meets fortnightly to discuss proposals, make recommendations (including on whether to seek independent advice), and provide input to ensure that decisions and actions will not have any significant adverse impact on heritage values. The committee’s membership is shown in Table 7 in Chapter 4 of this report.
Under its terms of reference, if the committee determines that the impact of an action proposal is not potentially adverse, the proposal may be approved by the internal delegate. However, should the committee consider that a proposal may, or is likely to, have a significant adverse impact on the listed heritage values of the place, it can refer the proposal to the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (or the minister’s delegate) for approval, under
ss. 26 and 28 of the EPBC Act. The referral process is administered by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.
The committee assessed 27 proposals in 2010–11. Of these:
- 22 were approved by the internal delegate after being assessed as having no adverse impact on the site’s heritage values
- five were declined or deferred awaiting further information.
Collection management
The agency’s Collection Management Policy and Procedures cover objects being accessioned, conserved, stored, displayed and accessed.
Acquisitions and loans
In accordance with the Collection Management Policy and Procedures, the Acquisitions Committee assesses all proposals for new acquisitions for the collections, and all acquisitions and disposals are approved by the appropriate delegate. The committee’s membership is shown in Table 7 in Chapter 4 of this report.
The committee approved the addition of 235 objects to the collection in 2010–11. Details of key acquisitions are shown in Table 4 in the performance report for Program 1.2.
In 2010–11, the agency processed 65 loans of items: 26 new loans, 24 returned loans and 15 renewed loans.
Stocktake
The agency counts all assets annually to ensure the accuracy of data, to check impairment and to meet our stewardship responsibilities. This involves two processes:
- stocktake of the heritage furniture
- stocktake of the remaining departmental and administered assets.
The heritage furniture stocktake involves counting over 3,600 items; a team of up to 20 staff members from across the agency is involved in the process. The agency plans to improve the efficiency of this process by introducing electronic asset-tagging technology.
Effective stocktaking continued to improve the quality and accuracy of the agency’s collection data. The 2010–11 stocktake saw the counting of 3,651 objects from the Heritage and Associated collections, with small teams of two or three staff members working together to confirm that items were in their recorded locations.
Online records
A new project with dedicated staff resources has commenced to publish object records on the museum’s website. Each record includes an image, title, accession number, description, dimensions, history and statement of significance. A total of 311 records were published online in 2010–11 and the listing will be expanded as resources allow.
Storage
The short-term Collection Storage Scoping Plan was developed, examining the current storage of the collection and how it aligns with storage needs. The plan uses a risk management framework, identifying risks to both the collection and staff, and provides a suggested implementation schedule to mitigate or treat the risks. The implementation schedule covers the four years from 2011 to 2015.
A condition assessment of the heritage doors in the newly relocated door store was undertaken in 2010–11. Each door was visually assessed by a conservator to identify any problems associated with its storage and/or physical condition. A list of recommendations for future storage and conservation was outlined in the conservators’ report.
Pest management
As part of its risk management framework, the agency implemented an Integrated Pest Management Plan in 2010–11, to counter the ongoing threat posed by pests which can damage collection material. The plan seeks to keep the Old Parliament House building and its related off-site storage areas free of pests, through monitoring, good housekeeping, building maintenance and eradication.
Pest management activities in 2010–11 included:
- monitoring of 90 ‘blunder traps’ located around the building
- an anti-pest spray of the building, with additional sprays of the Senate press offices and the storage areas, and of the off-site storage area in Fyshwick, Australian Capital Territory
- refresher training for staff in pest awareness and identification
- cross-agency collaboration to design a new pest management contract, to ensure a comprehensive and coordinated approach to pest management.
Ensuring the ongoing conservation of the site
Capital Works Program
The capital works undertaken in 2010–11 mainly reflected the implementation of the agency’s Life Cycle Cost Plan 2007–22. The plan sets out projects, with indicative costs, for the conservation, refurbishment and cyclical maintenance works required to maintain the building.
All works were planned and undertaken within the requirements and guidelines of the Heritage Management Plan, ensuring that the building is maintained and developed in accordance with its heritage significance.
Two major projects that commenced in 2009–10 were completed in 2010–11:
- refurbishment of the front stairs and lower entry—this project greatly improved access to the building, particularly for people with disabilities, with the installation of a new lift and the resealing and tiling of the steps
- installation of closed circuit television—this project replaced the building’s security system, moving to a fully digital video management system. The project involved the replacement of all existing cameras and significantly increased camera numbers, improving overall internal and external security.
The render project on the external facade commenced in 2010–11, and is planned to be carried out in five stages through to 2014–15. This work covers all walls, soffits, piers and balustrades, terraces and access bridges on the rear facade of the building. It includes reattaching render, replacing sections of it and repairing the surfaces.
As part of the project, the museum and heritage consultants researched the original design intent and finish in order to select an appropriate modern equivalent paint system. The new paint system has a low sheen level, is UV stabilised, and has a high capacity to breathe. This means the paint will keep surface water out but allow any moisture which enters the building fabric by other means to escape. The new system will enhance the appearance of the building and require minimal maintenance for 15 years or more. All products were selected for their low environmental impact.
Other projects undertaken during 2010–11 covered a wide range of areas and activities, including:
- replacement of lighting in the House of Representatives and Senate chambers
- fire services enhancements
- installation of new exit signs and emergency lighting
- replacement of light well decking
- roof upgrades
- replacement of flooring and minor refurbishment of the catering kitchen
- installation of supplementary mechanical services
- rebuilding sections of the House of Representatives and Senate terrace stairs
- installation of reproduction Axminster carpet on the House of Representatives main floor.
These works were managed either by in-house program managers or by project managers and architects engaged through approved providers. The majority of works were undertaken by firms on the agency’s Minor Works and Consultancy Services panels. Where specialist expertise required to undertake particular tasks was not available through panel arrangements, appropriate tender processes were used.
LEFT – carpet before replacement; RIGHT – carpet after replacement. Photos – OPH Collection
Case Study:
Holly tree relocation
During the year, works were undertaken to re-line damaged drains at the front of the Old Parliament House building.
A high-pressure water jet was used to remove obstacles such as tree roots, silt and debris from the drains. Where blockages occurred, a closed circuit television (CCTV) survey was undertaken to determine the cause and check the structural integrity of the pipe work in the area. The survey showed that in some instances the earthenware pipes were fractured, missing segments or in danger of collapse.
In one particular area, under the Senate committee room portion of the building, the pipe appeared to have collapsed. Further CCTV investigation revealed a significant break—in fact, no connecting pipe was locatable. Over time, stormwater-generated soil erosion had created a significant void that extended back to the footings of the building and contained sheets of corrugated iron, bricks and what appeared to be building rubble.
A holly tree was sitting directly above several cubic metres of empty space. Removal of the tree was essential to allow necessary repairs to the pipes; however, the tree was included in the heritage-listed curtilage of Old Parliament House.
Following advice from an expert arborist, the agency decided to attempt to temporarily relocate the tree while the repair work was undertaken, and return it to its original location when the work was completed.
Careful preparations were undertaken to minimise risks to the life of the tree. Measures included injecting the tree with an anti-shock treatment and reducing the size of its root ball. As an extra precaution, grafts were also taken to be used for propagation should the tree fail to survive.
The delicate removal operation was preceded by digging a one metre trench around the tree, allowing metal pipes to be inserted beneath it. The tree was then carefully removed by crane and temporarily relocated while the necessary works were carried out.
The tree was returned to its original location by crane once the works were complete.
The tree survived its relocation unscathed, and is healthy; and the vista of the building is unaltered.
The measures taken were in accordance with the agency’s Heritage Management Plan, and provide an excellent example of the special issues that may arise in effective property maintenance within a heritage context.
A number of substantial projects were undertaken to conserve and protect the building and collections during 2010–11.
Members’ Bar
The Members’ Bar forms part of the Members’ Dining Room area, which is leased to a commercial operator for use as a function venue. A conservation project to repair, clean and stabilise elements in the bar was undertaken to safeguard the heritage fabric and facilitate the ongoing use of the bar. In particular:
- delaminated areas of the black rubber bar surface were re-adhered with a waterborne contact adhesive, and gaps at the edges of the surface were filled with a black acrylic caulk to protect the masonite underlay from damage
- perspex shelf covers were installed and the redundant sink was covered with clear perspex to prevent inadvertent use while ensuring that it remains visible
- all timber elements were cleaned, shellac was applied where varnish losses had occurred, and a microcrystalline archival wax was applied to all timber surfaces to seal and protect them
- the brass bar footrest was stripped, polished and lacquered to reduce tarnishing.
President of the Senate corridor
The linings of the corridor walls in the President of the Senate’s area were installed during the early 1950s in preparation for the visit of Queen Elizabeth II to Australia. They consist of linen-covered (adhered) panels, with timber veneer skirting boards and door jambs. During the year they were cleaned using brush vacuuming, dry cleaning and solvent cleaning techniques. The wooden elements around the architrave and skirting boards were treated with isinglass, wax and shellac.
Furniture
Eleven fragile leather-upholstered easy chairs and lounges from the Senate Opposition Party Room were conserved, using a technique that improves the deteriorated internal structure of the furniture while keeping the aged outer layer of leather. This resulted in more structurally sound chairs with increased longevity.
A project was commenced in response to the gradual deterioration of the fabric of heritage dining chairs in use in the Dining Room functions area.
There are 242 dining chairs in the collection; the agency determined to display the best six examples, store the 50 next best examples, and restore the remaining 186 chairs for use. In the first stage of the project, completed in 2010–11, 70 of the chairs in the worst condition were restored, with newly upholstered seats and replacement timber joinery as needed. These chairs are now available for use within the building. The project will continue in 2011–12.
Asbestos removal
Contractors removed and disposed of doors containing asbestos, as well as friable asbestos rope from heritage ovens in the Old Kitchen area of the building. The Environmental Asbestos Survey and Management Plan 2010 was updated following the removal.
Case Study:
Photo – OPH Collection
King’s Hall and adjacent areas floor refurbishment
King’s Hall was once the venue for the exchange of information and discussion of political issues by parliamentarians, journalists, public servants, staff, lobbyists, constituents and visitors. Today, King’s Hall plays a vital role in the orientation of visitors to the museum and its activities. In 2011, major work was carried out to restore the timber floors in this area to their original appearance.
The current parquetry floor in King’s Hall was laid in 1959 as a repeat of the original 1927 timber and pattern. The darker timber is jarrah and the lighter timber is silver ash. In 1959 the jarrah would have had a warm red-brown colour and the silver ash would have been almost white.
Over time, the floor became much darker through use and the reaction between the layers of protective wax and light; the jarrah became dark brown, the silver ash appeared yellow and the entire floor had a high-gloss finish.
Conservation reports recommended stripping the wax protective coating and refinishing the floor, but indicated that there was only sufficient timber left to allow a very limited number of sanding processes before the floor would have to be turned or replaced.
From mid-May, King’s Hall and the building’s foyer were closed to the public so that the necessary work could be undertaken. The majority of the museum and its exhibits remained open via alternative access points, with the main entry and reception point moving to the eastern terrace at the front of the building.
A range of sealing techniques were evaluated and it was determined that a waterborne polyurethane finish would provide the best long-term protection. The timber floor was cleaned to remove loose dirt, then sanded to remove built-up layers of wax and tung oil. Four layers of new finish were applied; each layer was applied to a perfectly clean surface and left to dry before being buffed in preparation for the next layer.
In mid-June, King’s Hall was re-opened, and work continued on the adjacent timber floors and the foyer. At the completion of the project, approximately 800 square metres of floor had been treated by removing 250 kilograms of sawdust and applying 320 litres of floor finish.
As well as restoring the floor to its original appearance, the new surface coating means that in future the floor will not have to be sanded every time the protective finish needs to be reapplied. The result is that the heritage flooring will last well into the future, and generations of Australians to come will be able to enjoy it.
Since King’s Hall is a major thoroughfare, it was inevitable that the removal of access during the conservation work would be disruptive. The project required close cooperation across the agency to identify alternative access routes, inform visitors and staff and plan interpretive, education and function activities around access. This cooperation enabled the project to be carried out effectively and with minimal impact on the visitor experience.
Without such consultation and cooperation, this project would not have had such a successful conservation outcome. It was an excellent example of management and maintenance of a public area within a heritage building and successfully extending the life of heritage fabric.