Issuu on Google+

1 | 36

A report in

Structural Conservation of St. John The Evangelist Church, South Parade, Bath Submitted by

Priyanka Talreja Towards the degree of Master of Science in the Conservation of Historic Buildings At the University of Bath, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering. Session 2013-14 Student number: 139392887 Unit code: AR50146B


2 | 36

Synopsis

The focal point of this essay is to scrutinize part by part a structure built in a curiously different style than the rest of the historic city and understand its strength and weaknesses. The study is an example consisting an architectural as well as a technical viewpoint on how a church structure behaves in normal conditions as well as when it is subjected to extreme conditions like an attack during a war. The church of St.John is exemplary to have survived and revived itself and continues to stay strong as it passed its Sesquicentennial in 2013. With its surroundings, people and even structure undergoing drastic changes, this building is an interesting study for whoever wishes to learn more about various levels of conservation- from a regular day to day maintenance to a quick work in a situation of emergency.

The Roman Catholic church of St.John The Evangelist is an intriguing one as it has stood the test of time, suffered under man’s cruelty and yet it stood taller in the silhouette of Bath with not ego, but a peaceful stature.


3 | 36

Contents TITLE PAGE NO. Synopsis.......................................................................................................................................2 Acknowledgements......................................................................................................................4 List of Illustrations........................................................................................................................5 Section A: 1. Historical Research...............................................................................................................9 a. Introduction to St.John The Evangelist Roman Catholic Church.....................................9 b. Gothic Revival in a Georgian Bath..................................................................................10 c. Chronological Record of the church...............................................................................11 2.

In-situ Survey.......................................................................................................................12 a. Building Design- Form & Materials................................................................................12 b. Topographical and Geological Data...............................................................................15

3.

Structural Analysis and Performance Evaluation.................................................................15 a. Foundation.....................................................................................................................17 b. Walls...............................................................................................................................18 c. Buttresses.......................................................................................................................19 d. Arches.............................................................................................................................19 e. Trusses............................................................................................................................21 f. Vaults..............................................................................................................................21 g. Roof................................................................................................................................22 h. Spire................................................................................................................................23

4.

Diagnosis...............................................................................................................................24 a. Defects............................................................................................................................24 b. Post-war Destruction......................................................................................................26

Section B: 5. Proposed Structural Intervention........................................................................................28 a. Survey and Solutions......................................................................................................28 b. Post-war Alteration........................................................................................................29 6.

Discussion of philosophy of structural repair techniques applied.......................................33 a. Observation......................................................................................................................33 b. Conclusion........................................................................................................................34

Bibliography................................................................................................................................35


4 | 36

Acknowledgements

I would like to sincerely express my gratitude towards a few people, whose kind support and encouragement have contributed immensely into the building of this report. Mrs. Jutz Thomas at St. John’s church, Bath. Mr. Martin Pavey, Chairman of the Fabric Committee of the church. Mr. John Mill, John Mill & Associates: Chartered Surveyors, Bleinheim House, Bath. Staff at the Bath Central Library, the Bath Chronicle Archives. Staff at the Bath Record Office, Guildhall Archives. Staff at the University of Bath, Library. The data made available to me and the permission to reproduce them as appropriate is a gratifying gesture and I hope the work stands up to expectations. And a heartfelt appreciation for writings by stalwarts such as Pugin and Feilden whose books helped me understand Gothic Architecture and Structures respectively, like I had never done before. Last but not the least, thank you my friend Katerina, for making work fun.


5 | 36

List of illustrations Serial No.

Title Of The Image/Sketch/Map

Reference/Source of illustration

Fig. 1: (Pg.9)

Plan of the central area of Bath. (St.John’s RC church in highlight)

Fig. 2: (Pg.10)

Church presents very striking silhouette, particularly when viewed across river from east, and adds important vertical interest to lowest part of Bath. Chronology of St.John’s church at a glance. West Elevation of St. John’s complex from Manver’s Street, Bath. Plan of St. John’s complex, Bath.

Abercrombie, P., Owens, J. and Mealand, H. A.1945. A plan for Bath: report prepared for the Bath and District Joint Planning Committee Bath and District Joint Planning, Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons Ltd., London, p.56 Copied from the photographer's original glass negative. 22773, Bath in Time - Bath Central Library Collection, Dafnis, George Love, http://www.bathintime.co.uk/image/327525/st-johns-romancatholic-church-and-st-james-church-spires-6-june-1937. Accessed 15 January 2014.

Fig.3: (Pg.11) Fig. 4: (Pg.12) Fig. 5: (Pg.12)

Exhibit on site, English Heritage Author, 7th January 2014

Alec F. French & Partners, 1951. St. John’s Church, South Parade, Bath. Proposed Reinstatement after damage by Enemy Action. Bath Record Office Archives. Accessed 8 January 2014. Mill, J. 1998. St. John The Evangelist, Survey Floor Plan: Nave, Chancel and Sacristy. Redrawn by author. Author, 7th January 2014

Fig. 6: (Pg.13) Fig.7: (Pg.14) Fig. 8: (Pg.16)

Cruciform plan of St. John’s church, Bath. Apse & Altar of St.John’s Church Load Path diagram with detail element configuration in the church structure.

Fig. 9: (Pg.17)

Transverse section of St. John’s church structure

Author, 15 January 2014.

Fig. 10: (Pg.18)

Enlarged South Aisle Section of St.John’s church in the Reinstatement Proposal by Alec French & Partners. Forces acting on a Buttress

Alec F. French & Partners, 1951. St. John’s Church, South Parade, Bath. Proposed Reinstatement after damage by Enemy Action. Bath Record Office Archives. Accessed 8 January 2014.

Fig. 12: (Pg.20)

Nave Arcade Longitudinal Bay Detail

Author, 15 January 2014.

Fig. 13: (Pg.21)

Forces acting on a Vault

Feilden, B. M.2003.Conservation of historic buildings. Oxford

Fig. 11: (Pg.19)

Author, 15 January 2014.

Feilden, B. M.2003.Conservation of historic buildings. Oxford


6 | 36 Fig. 14: (Pg.22)

Understanding the Roof structure of St. John’s church, Bath.

Author, 15 January 2014.

Fig. 15: (Pg.23)

Three-stage Octagonal spire of St.John’s church (based on that of Salisbury Cathedral): Action of forces. Cracking on N wall, Black encrustation, and damp vegetation, St.John’s church Bath

Author, 18 January 2014 Cap: eng her

Fig. 17: (Pg.25)

Broken tiling, St.John’s church Bath

Author, 18 January 2014.

Fig. 18: (Pg.25)

Vents and Fissures on transept wall

Author, 18 January 2014.

Fig. 19: (Pg.25)

Salt staining/ efflorescence

Author, 18 January 2014.

Fig. 20: (Pg.25)

Starkly different materials used for repair: cement on W door hood mould

Author, 18 January 2014.

Fig. 21: (Pg.26)

Ruined S aisle on day after bombing.

Fig. 22: (Pg.26)

Post bombing condition of St.John's site.

Blitz negatives nos. 266291, 266425, 266428, 266429 , Bath in Time - Bath Central Library Collection, http://www.bathintime.co.uk/image/266422/the-bombed-outinterior-of-st-johns-roman-catholic-church-south-parade-april1942. Accessed 15 January 2014. Borough of Swindon: Number 6 Rescue Party Sketch, 1942. Post bombing condition of St.John's site. [Online] Available from: http://www.bathblitz.org/ Accessed: 8 January 2014.

Fig. 23: (Pg.29)

Post -war changes #1 L. North west-Baptistery Groin vault. R. South westChapel Flat Ceiling.St. John’s church, Bath. Post -war changes #2 L. North Aisle roof supported by timber trusses to arcade, each pierced by octofoil. R. South Aisle Lean to roof without foiled decorations. St. John’s church, Bath. Reinstatement Proposal and effect of the South West Room by Alec French & Partners

Fig. 16: (Pg.24)

Fig. 24: (Pg.30)

Fig. 25: (Pg.30)

Heyman Author, 18 January 2014.

Author, 15 January 2014.

Author, 15 January 2014.

Author, Alec F. French & Partners, 1951. St. John’s Church, South Parade, Bath. Proposed Reinstatement after damage by Enemy Action. Bath Record Office Archives. Accessed 8 January 2014.


7 | 36 Fig. 26: (Pg.31)

Fig. 27: (Pg.31)

Fig. 28: (Pg.32)

Reinstatement Proposal and effect of the exterior South West wall, St.John’s church, Bath by Alec French & Partners Post -war changes #3 L. North Aisle Porch Door with old metal hinges R. South Aisle new Office Door. St. John’s church, Bath. Damaged and rebuilt South Aisle by Alec French & partners in 1956

Author, Alec F. French & Partners, 1951. St. John’s Church, South Parade, Bath. Proposed Reinstatement after damage by Enemy Action. Bath Record Office Archives. Accessed 8 January 2014.

Author, 15 January 2014.

Author, Alec F. French & Partners, 1951. St. John’s Church, South Parade, Bath. Proposed Reinstatement after damage by Enemy Action. Bath Record Office Archives. Accessed 8 January 2014.


8 | 36

Section A


9 | 36 Structural Conservation Report: Roman Catholic St. John The Evangelist Church (Decorated Gothic Revival), South Parade, Bath Site Visits (January 8-15, 2013)

1. HISTORICAL RESEARCH 1.1 Introduction to St. John The Evangelist Roman Catholic Church : The historic city of Bath, known for the fine Bath Abbey as the core for religious worship, includes about 80 churches and chapels that are there representative of practically every denomination.1 St. John The Evangelist was one of Jesus’ twelve apostles; he witnessed Resurrection and received the Holy Spirit sent to found the Christ’s Church. 2 Just a hundred years after the Gordon riots had wrecked Catholic chapels and homes all over the city3; this High Victorian Gothic Revival Church of St.John was constructed by a prolific church architect (Charles Francis Hansom: 1817-1888). Hansom considered the church as the best reflection of A.W.N. Pugin- his mentor’s principles of Gothic architecture. 4 With its soaring spire visible from a variety of perspectives, St.John The Evangelist church, is one of only two Roman Catholic (R.C.) churches in this so called ‘cathedral city’; St. Mary being the other-in the same style- though unfinished. 5 The stone and slate Gothic church sits peacefully by the Avon river off South Parade, in contrast to the ‘scale and grain’6 of other buildings in the heart of the city. 7 (Fig.1)

Fig.1: Plan of the central area of Bath .(St.John’s RC church in highlight)

1

Abercrombie, P., Owens, J. and Mealand, H. A.(1945) Jubilee 1863-2013 (Insitu Exhibition Panels) 3 Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos). (2006) P.104-5 4 Forsyth, M., S. Bird. (2003) 5 Foyle, A., N. Pevsner, M. Forsyth and S. Bird. (2011) 6 Gorst,T., Collie,K. (1997) 7 Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos). (2006) 2


10 | 36 1.2 Gothic Revival in a Georgian Bath : During early 19th century, the use of classical styles in church building went on a downhill slope, at least with the Anglicans. 8 If Catholic worship were to be revived, it was assumed that Gothic architecture –the embodiment of the Christian style must also be restored. Gothic revival became the architectural tool of the church’s development.9 ‘What was not gothic was not Christian, and therefore, not suitable.’10 And to promote the fact that Catholicism was back, churches as landmarks, were deliberately big and placed prominently to give evidence. 11 The Decorated Gothic Revival style (C1830-1890)12 came later and was considered to be the most beautiful style in English ecclesiastical architecture. 13 St John is the most Puginian church remaining in Bath-as the centre of the Roman Catholic Church.14 (Fig.2) Distinguishing features of this style are as follows:      

Decorations: compel, flowing tracery, florid carving, naturalistic foliage decoration, slender Crocketed spires Roof: pitched Ceilings: vaulted with intricate patterns of ribs Windows: broader, complex tracery Arches: pointed and intricately moulded Details: naturalistic15

Fig.2: Church presents very striking silhouette, particularly when viewed across river from east, and adds important vertical interest to lowest part of Bath. 8

Jackson, Neil. (1991) p.59 Madsen, Stephan Tschudi., (1976) p.24-25. J.mordaunt Crook, ‘’john Britton and the genesis of the Gothic Revival’’, in John Summerson, concerning Architecture, 1968, 3ondon, pp.97-119. 10 Jackson, Neil. (1991) p.139. 11 Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos).(2006) p.87 12 Wilkinson, Philip. (2009) p.32 13 Bloxam, M. H. (1845) p.196 14 Jackson, Neil. (1991) 15 Wilkinson, Philip. (2009) p.32 9


11 | 36 1.3 Chronological Record of the church at a glance :

Fig.3: Chronology of St.John’s church at a glance.


12 | 36 2. IN-SITU SURVEY 2.1 Building Design : Form: Interior: The church structure was planned with an eastward orientation towards a shallow polygonal apse on the river side and the bell tower at the West towards Manver’s street.

Fig.4: West Elevation of St. John’s complex from Manver’s Street, Bath.

Fig.5: Plan of St. John’s complex, Bath. .


13 | 36 The Entrance porch is through the NW part of the Aisle and the nave terminates in a semi- octagonal apse flanked by two side chapels- the Lady Chapel and Blessed Sacrament. (Fig.6) The Nave Arcades are made up of moulded arches, resting on marble shafts and topped with clerestory lights which run across transepts. The transepts are lit by two rose windows.16 Above, in the spandrels between the arches, angels in roundels play on a variety of musical instruments. 17 On the west end is the narthex below the bell tower, with the Baptistery and South Side Chapel abutting it. 18

Fig.6: Cruciform plan of St. John’s church, Bath

The internal measurements of the church are 140' by 60' increased at the Transept to 73'. 19 The chancel is the same height and width as the nave. Sanctuary and nave are the same height and of the same width as each other. The spacious nave is attached to a comparatively plain vault. Exterior: As the structure touched 222 feet, the church became, for 12 years, the tallest building in bath. 20 The aisle roof is broken up into a number of gables.21 At the east end of the church, the ground falls away quickly to the River Avon, giving the effect of great height to the polygonal apse.22

16

Gorst,T., Collie,K. (1997) Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos).(2006) P.104-5 18 Church Official Website (www.stjohnsrcbath.org.uk) 19 Church Official Website (www.stjohnsrcbath.org.uk) 20 Jackson, Neil. (1991) 21 Church Official Website (www.stjohnsrcbath.org.uk) 22 Jackson, Neil. (1991) 17


14 | 36 Materials: Interior: The dignified interior of the church is a good manifestation of mid-Victorian taste23 through its marble columns, foliated capitals and a deeply carved pulpit.24 Red Devonian marble pillars with Ancaster25stone capitals is seen in the nave arcade.26 INTERIOR ELEMENT Bells Transept windows

YEAR 1868 and 1878. -

Outside clock High Altar Altarpiece, Tabernacle Altars Baptistery, an ornate shrine Organ

1868 1871 -

Alabaster Stained glass and metalwork Ironwork parclose screens

-

Reredo Panels

-

DETAIL Cast by Loughborough firm27 Adam and Eve in Paradise, Christ in Majesty White marble with coloured columns Polished marble carved by Thomas Earp Edward Hansom Walker of Barndon, from university of Hull Earl of London Hardman of Birmingham Blue and gold and delicate communion rails: John Hardman Powell, a protégé of Pugin.

Depiction of life of St.John’s well as his vision of the Apocalypse.

Fig.7: Apse and Altar of St. John’s church, Bath

23

Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos).(2006) P.104-5 Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos).(2006) P.104-5 25 Jackson, Neil. (1991) 26 Jubilee 1863-2013 (Insitu Exhibition Panels) 27 English Heritage, 2010. (List entry description) 24


15 | 36 Exterior: The Church was built in coursed, rustic Bath stone rubble with dressed stone used as quoins and around openings only.28 The walls are faced on both sides with free stone. Quoins and stones forming door and window jambs are quite regular. 29 Welsh slate roofs have been used as roof-tiles. Despite the departure from a common style, the continued use of the common building material, Bath stone, allowed the cohesion of the 18th century city to remain.30

2.2 Topographical and Geological Data : Surface data (Topography): Bath is surrounded by steep hill slopes in a widening of the river valley.31As cool winds blow over the ridges of the hills enclose Bath, the city huddles down below in the bottom of the Avon valley basin with its hot springs. The topography of the city is undoubtedly a significant factor in enabling acid rain to cause the decay of the beautiful oolitic limestone of the city’s historic buildings.32 Sub-surface data (Geology): The bedrock type in Bath is sedimentary. Because of the fissured nature of the stone, it is possible for gas to seep up from deep-seated under layers. The floor of the Avon valley consists of the lower LIAS beds so that most of the lower parts of the city are on this formation, with the exception of areas adjacent to the river, which are situated on alluvial ground which is naturally damp.33 Bath Stone, Bath Oolite Limestone is a cream coloured, medium- to coarse-grained, cross-bedded, ooidlimestones. It tends to be a very pure oolite, lacking the amounts of scattered fine-grained shell debris and calcite stringers.34 Ancaster Stone is an ooidal and bioclastic limestone which is white to pale yellow, related to local fault movements.The stone is dark grey, dark purple, dark green-grey and very occasionally pale green where silty laminations occur in the mudstone.35

3. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION It is rightly said that the two great rules for design are1. There should be no features about a building which are not necessary for convenience, construction or propriety. 2. All ornament should consist of enrichment of the essential construction of the building.36

28

Mill, John. (2004) Jubilee 1863-2013 (Insitu Exhibition Panels) 30 Jackson, Neil. (1991) P5. 31 Abercrombie, P., Owens, J. and Mealand, H. A.(1945) 32 McLaughlin, D. (1993) 33 Abercrombie, P., Owens, J. and Mealand, H. A.(1945) P7 34 English Heritage. (2011,12) 35 English Heritage. (2011,12) 36 Pugin, A. W.(1969) 29


16 | 36

Fig.8: Load Path diagram with detail element configuration in the church structure of St.John, Bath


17 | 36 The following elements form major parts of the skeleton of the R.C. Church and they have been analyzed to understand their behavior in the structure.

3.1 Foundation : Insitu survey: The length and width of the church are supported by stone pillars, placed at intervals, but not in straight rows, so that the support is spread evenly across all the structure. The foundations are however virtually inaccessible and are apparently infested with vermin. 37 Behavioural analysis: A foundation must satisfy 2 design criteria it must not cause the underlying soil to fail in shear (bearing capacity failure) and  it must not be subject to excessive settlement. Since the foundations of the church are made up of stone, they have a high compressive strength and as they are placed at intervals, excessive loading has been avoided. The ground usually gets harder with an increased depth. The soil has already been subject to considerable weight from the weight of overburden soil. It is good to make the weight of the excavated soil same as the new structure –so the load on the soil is the same.38

Fig.9: Transverse section of St. John’s church structure

37 38

Pavey, Martin (2014) [From an electrician’s account] Seward, Derek (1998) p 269, 271.


18 | 36

Fig.10: Enlarged South Aisle Section of St.John’s church in the Reinstatement Proposal by Alec French & Partners.

3.2 Walls : Insitu survey: The peripheral masonry walls of the church are made up of Bath stone with ragstone rubble and ashlar facing. The gable walls are supported by low pedimented buttresses and walls have multiple string courses running across them which provide additional stability. The walls support a lean to aisle roof on the interior side. Behavioural analysis: The correct slenderness ratio-effective height to thickness makes structures stable.39 The massive weight of the walling evenly diverts the thrusts developed by thin continuous barrel vaults resting on arcades in a downward direction.40 Diagonal Shear and tensile cracks are common in masonry walls resulting due to settlements or inherent design defects. The importance of soft thick mortar joints is allowing small movements to take place without damage. Compressive cracking consists of fine vertical cracks in an individual stone. Slow shrinkage or compression in the mortar joints of the clerestory wall has been observed. The low tensile resistance of masonry set in soft elastic lie mortar leads to particular formation of cracks.41

39

Sharpe, G.R. (1999)p.67 Feilden, B. M.(2003)p.40 41 Feilden, B. M.(2003) p.62 40


19 | 36

3.3 Buttresses : Insitu survey: Short buttresses have been introduced to the external face of the structure to reduce bending moments in the high walls42.The horizontal thrust from the internal arch is transmitted to the buttresses which are particularly impressive in the tension material such as stone. 43(Fig.11) Buttress diminishes as naturally as it rises and has less to resistthe lateral thrust of the nave groining is thrown over the aisles.44 For strength and beauty, breaks or projections are necessary in architecture. 45 Behavioral analysis: The effect of buttressing depends on the

depth of its projection and the top weight of the pinnacles which could help maintain the line of outward thrust within the safe limits of the masonry.46

Fig.11: Forces acting on a Buttress

3.4 Arches : Insitu survey: Gothic arches are distinctive by the point at the apex which acts like a hinge in case of

thermal movements or excessive loadings.47 Traditional masonry arches operate entirely in compression. 48 The arches in the nave of the church support the timber trussed roof and distributes it load to the columns below. (Fig.12)The tower arch (inside towards the nave) is structurally very hard to alter without risking stability-& is often the best indicator of the original date.49 Behavioural analysis:

The source of stress in arches come from weight of the structure, dead loading and applied loads. 50 The stability of an arch depends on the ability of the supports to resist the horizontal component without excessive movement51. Cracks in the spandrel near the quarter points of a span indicate that the arch is acting as a hinged frame but does not indicate a dangerous state. 52 The pinnacles prestress the vertical buttresses so that they can resist more lateral force without tensile cracking.53

42

Seward, Derek (1998) p.278 Seward, Derek (1998) 44 Pugin, A. W.(1969) 45 Pugin, A. W.(1969) 46 Feilden, B. M.(2003)p.40 47 Feilden, B. M.(2003) p.39. 48 Seward, Derek (1998) 43

49

Foyle, A., N. Pevsner, M. Forsyth and S. Bird(2011) P 32: Feilden, B. M.(2003) p.39 p.40 51 Seward, Derek (1998) p.253. 50

52 53

Feilden, B. M.(2003) Seward, Derek (1998)


20 | 36

Fig.12: Nave Arcade Longitudinal Bay Detail


21 | 36 3.5 Trusses : Insitu survey: The nave of the church consists of a timber trussed barrel roof while the aisle roofs are

supported by lean-to timber trusses. The main truss has a curved blade with mouchette design . The cruck system of framing is designed to transfer the entire load of the roof directly to the ground by a series of arch-shaped trusses spaced apart to form bays.54 Behavioural analysis:

Trusses are determinate structures- which can collapse if even one element fails, for it lacks the ability to readjust itself.55 Moderate tensile loads are beneficial on tensile structures giving greater stiffness and stability. Bracing in timber arches stiffens them in the same way as spandrels stiffen a masonry arch ring. They can deform without collapse in accommodating themselves to imposed loads and support movements. 56 Strength of the wood work is attained by bracing the various pieces together on geometrical principles. 57

3.6 Vaults : Insitu survey: A Vaulted ceiling has been observed in

the Baptistery as well as in the inaccessible Basement rooms. These were used as air-raid shelters during the war and have substantial brick dividing walls, though these were poorly founded and are settling. 58

Spire and vaults are sound structurally.59 Spaces between ceiling rafters in the Baptistery are painted azure and powdered with stars and other celestial emblems.60 Behavioural analysis:

Vaulting is designed to concentrate forces into frames of stone. Groined vaults are naturally stiff in effect diagonal arches and have maximum compressive forces at the springing of the arch.61 (Fig.13) Bosses rather than pendants stud the ceiling of the chancel. As Pugin explained, ‘a key stone is necessary for the support of the arched ribs.62 Fig.13: Forces acting on a Vault

54

Sharpe, G.R. (1999) p.89 Feilden, B. M.(2003) p.25. 56 Feilden, B. M.(2003) p.339 57 Pugin, A. W.(1969) 58 Mill,J (2004) 59 Pavey, Martin (2014) 60 Pugin, A. W.(1969) 61 Feilden, B. M.(2003) p.28,p.40 55

62

Jackson, Neil. (1991)


22 | 36 3.7 Roof :

Fig.14: Understanding the Roof structure of St. John’s church, Bath. Insitu survey: The roof of the church is complex, with gables and narthex jutting out and a five sided apse.63

High unbroken ridgelines served to make the church more noticeable above surrounding houses. Roof of the nave merges smoothly with that of the Apse and chancel was defined by the cresting by Hansom, of pointed and gilded ironwork along the eastern roof line.64 Timbers are concealed by arched ceilings and packed insulation and on detail survey it was noted that woodwork is of a highly resinous nature (e.g. Pitch Pine) Behavioural analysis:

The pitch of the roof or gable end must be sufficiently inclined to throw off snow- when the pitch is increased to its proper elevation, the whole pressure of the wind is lateral, and forces the covering closer to the roof.65 Welsh slates- can easily be distinguished being thinner, smaller and finer than Westmorland slates. Ridge tiles are usually bedded in lime mortar supported by piles of broken stone. Roof valleys formed with valley boards, slates.66

63

Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos).(2006)p.104-5 Jackson, Neil. (1991)p.145 65 Pugin, A. W.(1969) p.10-11 66 Sharpe, G.R. (1999) p.143 64


23 | 36 3.8 Spire : Insitu survey: The spire was added some four years later but the original lead flat roof of the tower,

constructed before the spire, is still in place above the bell chamber. 67 At 222 feet, the tower is the highest in Bath and half as tall as Salisbury Cathedral’s.68 The spire rises from the outer wall with an intervening parapet, is octagonal with sides facing the cardinal points, slopes down eaves, connected at base with angular wedge like projections: broach spire. Windows set within acute pedimented headed projections with vertical faces placed alternatively.69 Behavioural analysis: Pinnacles are not carried up for mere ornament but by their weight to increase the

resistance at the point of thrust.70 (Fig.15)

Fig.15: Three-stage Octagonal spire of St.John’s church (based on that of Salisbury Cathedral): Action of forces.Bath.

67

Mill, John. (2004) Jubilee 1863-2013 (Insitu Exhibition Panels) 69 Bloxam, M. H. (1845) p.186 70 Pugin, A. W.(1969)p.5. 68


24 | 36 4. DIAGNOSIS St.John’s R.C. Church and its attached structures have withstood floods, war and the deteriorating effects of the weather for 150 years and have acquired ‘honorable scars of age' 71 These scars are marks of structural activity- visually apparent due to cracks, subsidence, settlement, bowing or leaning of walls- due to problems associated with ground movement around foundations, thermal expansion and contraction, component failure and overloading.72

4.4 Defects observed on Site: i.

External a. Cracking Caused due to varying loads and deformations due to thermal or moisture movements and wind. b. Spalling Caused by thin mortar joints73 c. Water Ingress Caused due to incorrect orientation of bedding planes or permeable stone being used for rain-shedding features- copings and parapets74 d. Black encrustation Chemical attack exfoliation due to acid rain.

Fig.16: Cracking on N wall, Black encrustation and damp vegetation St.John,Bath

e. Natural Weathering Current rates of weathering of stone on historic buildings are higher than natural rates and weathering on all buildings is greater in urban areas. 75 This may be caused due to neglect

71

72

Mill, John. (2004)

Sharpe, G.R. (1999)p.67 Feilden, B. M.(2003) 74 English Heritage. (2006) 75 McLaughlin, D. (1993) 73


25 | 36 ii.

Internal

Fig.18: Vents and Fissures on Transept wall Fig.17: Broken tiles at St.John,Bath

Fig.19: Salt staining/efflorescence SW chapel

Fig.20: Starkly different material used for repair: Cement on W main door hood mould


26 | 36 c. Post-war Destruction : When the Second World War broke out in 1939, Bath was chosen as a safe destination for evacuees. 76 St John's prospered from its consecration until the second night of a German air attack on Bath on 27th April 1942 when the church was bombed. 77 The Air raid damage resulted in the major defacement of the city with about 245 buildings of architectural or historical interest seriously affected.78 Four People died, the presbytery received a direct hit and was destroyed and the south aisle was completely damaged. 79 Part of the roof caved in and the stained glass windows were irreparably lost. 80 A team of about 100 Irish workmen volunteered to clear up the mess.81 Vibration caused by the bomb aggravated existing stresses within the structure. Load pattern changed through the redistribution of loads and resulted in a major deflection caused by the sudden lifting and dropping down of the structure. 82 The south aisle and presbytery was rebuilt in the traditional Gothic style of the church, to the disappointment of some enthusiasts for the modern. The note of tradition was further maintained by the inscription on the wall commemorating the air raid being carved in Latin, when the church was ‘HOSTILI INCURSIONE DIRUTA...’ 83

Fig.21: The ruined South aisle on the day after the bombing.The presbytery of St.John which took a direct hit killing 5 people.

76

Jubilee 1863-2013 (Insitu Exhibition Panels) Church Official Website (www.stjohnsrcbath.org.uk) 78 Abercrombie, P., Owens, J. and Mealand, H. A.(1945) p10 79 Church Official Website (www.stjohnsrcbath.org.uk) 80 Jubilee 1863-2013 (Insitu Exhibition Panels) 81 Jubilee 1863-2013 (Insitu Exhibition Panels) 82 Pavey, Martin (2014) 83 Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos).(2006) p.104-5 77

Fig.22: Borough of Swindon: Number 6 Rescue Party Sketch, 1942. Post bombing condition of St.John's site. [Online] Available from: http://www.bathblitz.org/Accessed :8 January 2014.


27 | 36

Section B


28 | 36 1. PROPOSED STRUCTURAL INTERVENTION Without adequate preventative maintenance, deterioration may eventually lead to more extensive consequential damage and mounting costs of repair.84 Hence interventions must be carried out but care must be taken that they must not hinder later access to all the evidence incorporated in the building and allow maximum amount of existing material to be retained.85 The Fabric Committee has prepared an order for planning repairs and consequences of disrepair based on the different levels of priority of work. Emergency work: To avert serious consequential damage or injury Mandatory work: To comply with Statutory provisions such as Fire Precautions, Health and Safety, Disability Discrimination, other legislation or directives: Contractual work the subject of recurring contract agreements e.g:- Gas Safety Tests, boiler service agreements daylight saving changes to the clock, etc. Cyclical maintenance: Known recurring costs repeated Planned maintenance: Known works phased with availability of funds and planned works. The Committee prepares a report every 5 years inspecting the church very much in detail and the following are some important defects and reinstatement works that guide them.

ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENT

DEFECT OBSERVED

PROPOSED SOLUTION

Arches, Walls

Cracks/ abrasion

Raking and pointing joints

Wall (base), Buttress

Rising damp and Salt staining

Walls

Frost damage

Remedial salt neutralization and shelter coating treatment Hood moulds must be inspected

Walls

Loose linen fold paneling

Fixing with nails

Sacristy Wall

Vegetation and penetration of moisture

Clear

Basement Vaults Baptistery

Damp, have rotting joinery (doors and windows) and fractured drainage pipes Open joints in stone under sill

Repointing

Windows

Leakage

Flooring

Broken and dangerous marble flooring

Spire

Spalling

Gutters (Lead valley, parapet and back gutters) Roof

Blockage and overflow into the internal fabric (causing serious consequential damage. ) Slipped or broken slates

Roof

Roof

84 85

Mill, J.(2004) Feilden, B. M.(2003)

Repair glass, stone window surrounds pointed-up to prevent penetrating moisture repair lead flashings Laddered every 10 years to repair and re-point masonry Fitted with overflow chutes to overcome any blockage Replace

Damaged ceilings

Replaster

Pigeons: scratching up the ceiling insulation, and causing pungent smellscreate a loading hazard to lath and plaster ceilings and a health hazard. Missing/Broken Finial

Seal up trefoils and comprehensive clearance and preventative wiring Wire mesh used is bat friendly. Remove iron rod, repair lower boss and refix with stainless steel rod


29 | 36 1.1 Post-war Alteration : Following the devastation of the Blitz, debris had been cleared up and the nave repaired, the arches were filled in with red bricks so that the rest of the church could be used again. 86 The façade was rebuilt without decorated gablets or porch and the structure was put up in load bearing brickwork, faced in rustic stone on the front and a mixture of ashlar and cement render on the rear. 87 The original color scheme has survived bombing and redecoration, architecturally thin and muted88 Original timber floors were replaced with composite floors of reinforced concrete and terracotta blocks. 89 During roof repairs carried out in 1994, the original polychromatic slating scheme was reinstated.90 The new roof in the chapel has proved solid and satisfactory but the design was simple owing to economy and speed at that time. 91 There was uncertainty whether the spire was safe and investigation lead that it was stable. It took ten years to repair the church and rebuild the presbytery. The Victorian stained glass was replaced with a complete new set of windows, designed and installed by Hardman & Co.92

86

Jubilee 1863-2013 (Insitu Exhibition Panels) Mill, John. (2004) 88 Jackson, Neil. (1991) 89 Mill, John. (2004) 90 Gorst,T., Collie,K. (1997) 91 Pavey, Martin. (2014) 92 Jubilee 1863-2013 (Insitu Exhibition Panels) 87

Fig.23: .Post -war changes #1 L. North westBaptistery Groin vault. R. South west-Chapel Flat Ceiling. St. John’s church, Bath.


30 | 36

Fig.24: Post -war changes #2 L. North Aisle roof supported by timber trusses to arcade, each pierced by octofoil. R. South Aisle Lean to roof without foiled decorations. St. John’s church, Bath.

Fig.25.


31 | 36

Fig.26: Reinstatement Proposal and effect of the exterior South West wall, St.John’s church, Bath by Alec French & Partners

Fig.27: Post -war changes #3 L. North Aisle Porch Door with old metal hinges


32 | 36

Fig.28


33 | 36 2. DISCUSSION OF PHILOSOPHY OF STRUCTURAL REPAIR TECHNIQUES APPLIED Till today, Catholic churches remain under-valued all over. Of over 3000 churches and chapels, only 625just 18% are ‘listed’.93 Pugin’s concern was not about preservation of the original historical material, but rather about fulfillment of the original idea in the Catholic Church. 94 Too often there is a gap between theoretical objective and realistic implementation, and diverse influences certainly add to the difficulty of interpreting conservation policies in practice. 95 Under the Ecclesiastical Exemption, certain buildings in the ownership of the Roman Catholic church (any listed church) are exempted from some provisions of the Planning legislation. However most external works will require planning permission from the local authority and consent from the faculty under the Directory. Some philosophies explored in the conservation of St. John The Evangelist Roman Catholic Church are:  Minimal Intervention: Post war economic and simple work that stands till date.  Documentation: Archival data of exact interventions have been listed.  Respect for age and patina: External weathering has been left untouched in cases of gargoyles, arch caps; internal walls haven’t been painted or redone.

However, it would have been better if some of the following were explored with enthusiasm.  Like for like repair/Conserve as found: Timber trusses have been coated for protection and do not look like they have existed for 150 years now.  Post war changes haven’t been exact in following the designs of the original church.  Reversibility: The use of cement for jointing and other purposes totally defies this principle and reduces the chances of longevity of the structure.  Where possible, the original finish should be matched, except when, for reasons of historical accuracy, the repair stone is deliberately left to a simpler profile or with a distinctive finish. Sometimes the original profile may not be readily determined, especially when there has been extensive weathering or where there has been a succession of repairs and replacements perhaps over several hundred years.96

93

Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos).(2006) p.7 Jokilehto, J. (1999) p.112 95 Jokilehto, J. (1999) p.313 96 Ashusrt, J., Dimes, F.G. (1998) p.15 94


34 | 36 2.2 Conclusion: St.John’s R.C. church required a sensitive yet rigorous approach to its conservation, and that is what it got during fluctuating times of unrest. It is only in the recent times that neglect, vandalism, use of concrete for quick repairs, have resulted in the reflection that it would rather have been better left alone, much like what is suggested in the following lines: ‘Delay the ruthless work awhile- o spare, Thou stern, unpitying demon of Repair, This precious relic of an early age! It were a pious work, I hear you say, To drop the falling ruin, and to stay The work of desolation. It may be That ye say right; but, O! Work tenderly; Beware lest one worn feature ye effaceSeek not to add one touch of modern grace; Handle with reverence each crumbling stone, Respect the very lichens o’er it grown… Rev John Louis petit, 1841, Remarks on church architecture, chapter: modern repairs and adaptations.97

DIFFERENT TYPES OF WINDOWS ON THE FACADE OF ST.JOHN THE EVANGELIST CHURCH (Author) 97

Jokilehto, J. (1999)p.160


35 | 36 Bibliography Books HISTORY AND ARCHITECTURE Abercrombie, P., Owens, J. and Mealand, H. A.1945. A plan for Bath: report prepared for the Bath and District Joint Planning Committee Bath and District Joint Planning, Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons Ltd., London Bloxam, M. H. 1845. The principles of Gothic Ecclesiastical Architecture. 7ed. David Bogue, 86, Fleet Street.

Forsyth, M., Bird, S. 2003. Pevsner Architectural Guides: Bath. Yale University Press, New Haven & London Foyle, A., N. Pevsner, M. Forsyth and S. Bird.2011. Somerset: North and Bristol. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.; London Gorst, T., Collie, K. 1997. Bath An architectural guide. Ellipsis London Limited, London. Jackson, Neil. 1991. Nineteenth century Bath. Architects and Architecture. Ashgrove Press, Bath. Jokilehto, J. 1999. A history of Architectural Conservation. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. Martin, Christopher; Ramsay, Alex (photos). 2006. A Glimpse of Heaven: Catholic Churches of England and Wales. English Heritage, Swindon. Pugin, A. W.1969.The true principles of pointed or Christian architecture: set forth in two lectures delivered at St. Maries, Oscott. St. Barnabas Press Wilkinson, Philip. 2009. The pocket guide to English Architecture. Pen & sword Books Ltd, South Yorkshire.

STRUCTURE AND CONSERVATION Ashurst, J and Dimes, F. G. 1998. Conservation of building and decorative stone. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford Woburn, Mass. Feilden, B. M.2003.Conservation of historic buildings. Oxford Heyman, J.1995 .The stone skeleton: structural engineering of masonry architecture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Madsen, Stephan Tschudi., 1976. Restoration and Anti-Restoration. A study in English restoration philosophy. Edgar Hogfeldt, Norway 2nd ed. Seward, Derek.1998. Understanding structures. Analysis materials and Design.2nd ed. Macmillan Press Ltd., London Sharpe, G.R., 1999. Works to Historic Buildings- A Contractor’s Manual. Pearson Education Inc., New York, USA.


36 | 36 Journals Bishop’s Conference of England and Wales, 2001. Directory on the Ecclesiastical Exemption from Listed Building Control.2nd ed. Liturgy office, London. English Heritage. 2006. Identifying and Sourcing Stone for Historic Building Repair: An approach to determining and obtaining compatible replacement stone English Heritage. 2011, 12. Strategic stone study -A Building Stone Atlas of AVO, DEVON, LEICESTERSHIRE, RUTLAND McLaughlin, D. 1993. Acid rain and the cleaning and conservation of stonework in Bath. Nimbus conservation group. Department of Environmental Services Bath City Council. Mill, John.2004. Church of St. John the Evangelist South Parade, Bath: Quinquennial Survey Report John Mill Associates

Internet references Canon Kelly’s Story, Swindon’s story. Memories of the Blitz. [Online] Available from: http://www.bathblitz.org/ [Accessed on 8 January 2014] English Heritage, 2010. Roman Catholic Church of St John, South Parade. List entry description [Online] Available from: http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1394998 [Accessed on 3 January 2014] Heritage Data Management, English Heritage. Church of St. John The Evangelist [Online] Available from: http://www.pastscape.org.uk/hob.aspx?hob_id=1483316#aRt [Accessed on 19 January 2014] History of St.John’s The Evangelist Catholic Church. [Online] Available from: http://www.stjohnsrcbath.org.uk/ [Accessed on 17 December 2013]

Other references Alec F. French & Partners, 1951.Proposed Reinstatement after damage by Enemy Action. St. John’s Church, South Parade, Bath. Bath Record Office Archives. Accessed 8 January 2014. (Drawing) The Builder, 22 February 1862, 132-33, Rory O'Donnell, 'Church of St John, Bath' (unpublished notes, 1989) The Bath Chronicle: Images of Bath: Derby: 1994: [English Heritage Primary References] Jubilee 1863-2013. 150 years of St. John The Evangelist Church, Bath. [Accessed 7 January 2014] (Insitu Exhibition Panels)

Further reading Differences in Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christian beliefs. [Online] Available from: http://www.orthodoxresource.co.uk/comparative/roman-catholic.htm [Accessed on 5 January 2014]


UoB 4 Structural Conservation B