The introduction of the National Lottery in 1994 provided the first widespread opportunity for capital building programmes in the arts since the then Arts Council of Great Britain?s ?Housing the Arts? programme in the 1970?s. Nick Allen shares his experience of some renovation projects that have grown out of the Lottery, and explores the key issues that arise at the early stages of such projects.
In the 1990s, partly encouraged by the birth of Lottery funds for the arts, many arts organisations drew up sometimes over-ambitious plans for refurbishing and extending their buildings. Tales now abound ? from major projects such as the Royal Court and Sadler?s Wells to small community arts organisations ? of delays in programme, cost over-runs and subsequent revenue funding problems. It could be argued that national flagship organisations should have the expertise and funds to access professional advice early on. But for smaller outfits, a major building project, often involving several million pounds, can be a frightening leap into the unknown. Assuming the arts organisation has a pretty good idea of what it wants to achieve, the two aspects that cause most problems are programme (how long will it take?) and money (how much will it cost?).
Getting to first base
Estimated costs will inevitably rise during development as a project becomes clearer and better understood. The trick is to ensure that this escalation occurs well before letting tenders, not after. Early cost estimates usually stick in people?s minds, so it is essential to try and avoid this potentially embarrassing, at best, and disastrous at worst, scenario.
Depending on the nature and potential size of the project, there may be several stages to go through before identifying and embarking on the full design and construction phase. Before taking any decisions, it pays to seek out and discuss ideas with those experienced in working on capital projects with arts organisations, probably an architect in conjunction with either a theatre or arts consultant. The experience and understanding the experts bring can get you to first base very quickly ? and cost effectively (architects have an unfortunate habit of giving away advice and experience for nothing if they can see a serious commission over the horizon). The consultants should identify if there is a need for an initial scoping or options appraisal ? or whether the project can go straight into a feasibility study. This exercise should also involve preliminary discussions with the Planning Authority to seek their support in principle for what you aim to achieve, particularly as many arts organisations inhabit listed buildings.
It would generally be unwise to launch straight into a capital programme of refurbishment without this initial work being undertaken. This study becomes the document on which everyone ? the Board of Trustees, Lottery funders and a whole raft of funding agencies, will base their decisions about the level of support they will commit.
Two projects illustrate the validity of this approach, albeit by two rather different routes.
The Richmond experience
In 1995, the Georgian Theatre Royal in Richmond, North Yorkshire, applied for a Lottery award to refurbish its Grade I listed 1788 auditorium. The Arts Council of England (ACE) assessor, Tim Foster, wisely recommended not a capital award, but funding for a feasibility study into the costs of a full refurbishment of the whole Theatre, including improvement to its very inadequate front of house facilities and access.
I was appointed to assemble an experienced team of consultants, which included a theatre consultant, engineers and quantity surveyors with expertise in both arts projects and alterations to important historic buildings. The study developed a robust strategy for refurbishing and developing the Theatre, with cost estimates of around £1m that never escalated beyond what was achievable in funding. The only major glitch came when the project fell foul of ACE?s Lottery funding problems. With the active support of The Theatres Trust, our subsequently successful Lottery application was switched to the Heritage Lottery Fund and a Historic Theatre Consultant was brought in to write a Conservation Plan.
A programme was established for designing and constructing the building, which had lay dormant for over a hundred years before its first re-opening in 1963. We agreed it would re-open exactly forty years to the day after the previous re-launch, and the Trustees set about planning a strategy and series of events to keep alive the idea and presence of the Theatre during the twelve months of construction. We?re now into our eighth year, and the Trustees, consultants and management have all shown an unusually high degree of commitment and enthusiasm through thick and thin (including the liquidation of the Contractor last Christmas) for a project we?ve all grown to love.
Dance development
The Northern School of Contemporary Dance in Leeds took a rather different route. Its ambitions to expand and develop contemporary dance were clear from the outset ? and the land and buildings to achieve this were available, but not the money. Nevertheless, the Trustees were persuaded to invest in a study to develop sketch design proposals and a strategy for the refurbishment and development of the whole site. This exercise proved invaluable for getting the development off the ground, by enabling the project to access underspend from Local Authority regeneration funds. When the Lottery capital funding was announced in late 1994 several major phases had already been completed in this fashion. As a result, we were able to submit a detailed application very quickly, to the tune of £2.8m, to complete the masterplan, including the refurbishment of the Riley Theatre ? the performance venue ? and the development of new studios, library and social facilities. Careful structuring of the bid, taking account of previous expenditure in earlier phases, meant that the School did not have to find any additional cash to fund the project.
Lessons learned
In conclusion, what lessons can be learned, particularly relating to the very early stages of a project?
? Involve experienced consultants as early as you can, and share with them all your hopes and fears so that the collective experience can identify the best, most sustainable way forward.
? Insist on realistic estimates, with generous contingencies, both for construction and for the total project cost. If possible, estimate how revenue costs will impact on your project ? even though these will need to be more thoroughly examined later.
? Establish the development programme with your consultants. Recognise that this will change, and that the cost estimates allow for this. It can easily take several years from the start of a project to obtaining tenders, which could result in an additional 10-15% on the costs.
? Start thinking early about how you will operate during construction. Can you remain in operation by phasing the work, and if so, do the estimates allow for this? If not, and you close or go dark, what are the direct and indirect costs of doing this.
? Finally, talk to others who have gone through the same process. This may well be your one and only capital project, and it might help you avoid the mistakes they made. Forewarned is forearmed.
Nick Allen is a director of Allen Tod Architecture and has been practising in Leeds since 1977. Allen Tod projects include the Northern School of Contemporary Dance, Yorkshire Dance Centre, Georgian Theatre Royal in Richmond, Bradford Design Exchange, The Theatre Royal, York, 20:21 Visual Arts Centre in Scunthorpe and the Marie Curie Hospice in Bradford. e: nkallen@allentod.co.uk