Heading for a fall?The Health and Safety Authority (HSA) has published a new 'Code of Practice forSafety in Roofwork' for the Republic of Ireland. Gerard O'Neill MCIAT looks at what itmeans for Centre 02 members. REVIEWThe Health and Safety Authority (HSA) in theRepublic of Ireland has published a newdocument Code of Practice for Safety in Roofwork.The operative date of the Code is 1 September2011.The aim of the new document is 'to improvestandards of safety during roofwork', inparticular to 'reduce the incidence of falls fromor through roofs during or after construction'The document is structured in 12 sectionscovering client role, working safely, controllinghazards etc. Section 04, 'Role of Designer,' willbe of particular interest to CIAT members.The legal status of this document is explained inthe foreword page:'As regards the use of codes of practice incriminal proceedings, section 61 of the Safety,Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 provides asfollows: A document bearing the seal of theAuthority and purporting to be a code ofpractice or part of a code of practice publishedor approved of by the Authority shall beadmissible as evidence in any proceedings underthis Act'. Falls from a height, in particular falls from roofs,account for a large percentage of seriousconstruction and maintenance accidents. Asdesigners, we will be conscious of health andsafety in roof design, future maintenance andspecification, most notably in the design of flatroofs. We will consider provisions to limit therisks of falls during construction and throughoutthe life of the building. It is not always possible,indeed it is quite rarely possible, to incorporatethe ideal fall barrier, the 1100mm high solid roofperimeter parapet, into our roof designs. Wemust therefore consider a range of less robustdesign interventions which may includeanchorage points for fall arrest systems,protected walkways etc. The roof safety decision making process is alonely one. In many aspects of our design andspecification work, we will turn to industrysources for support and guidance. We will beconscious that many of these sources have acommercial, product promoting agenda and wewill keep this in mind when receiving advice. When dealing with providers of roof safetysystems there can be a tendency on the part ofsome industry sources to err aggressively on theside of over-provision, not only to promoteproduct but also to avoid comeback in the eventof a roof accident. Hence the designer of anover-sailing, slim section tower roof with noparapet may be strongly encouraged by the roofsafety system provider to incorporate pop-uprails around the entire roof perimeter and then toincorporate railed walkways leading across theroof at several locations to the pop-up latches.While safety is a critical concern, our final safetydesign decision is sometimes a compromise, abalance between absolute 'watertight' safety andwhat is reasonable and practical having regard toa broad range of criteria including buildability,appropriate budgeting, aesthetics etc. We mayrecord our design decision carefully on ourhealth and safety file, but we will do so with aniggling worry that the basis of our decision,which we feel is balanced and prudent, might bescrutinized with a very different bias in a courtof law in the event of a fatal fall from our roof.The possible legal argument raised against thedesigner might best be illustrated in theaccusation 'You say, Mr/Miss designer, that yourdesign was adequate to prevent falls...but clearlyit was not adequate as we are all here in this courtbecause a fatal fall didhappen!' It is in thiscontext that the value of this latest HSA code ofpractice must be viewed. In relation to the duties of the designer, the textof the new document includes guidance to theeffect that the designer must apply the principlesof prevention to the extent that it is reasonableto expect the designer to do at the time thedesign is prepared and to the extent that it isotherwise reasonably practical to do. Thedocument includes statements clearlyacknowledging the balance and compromisewhich regularly applies in design work, forexample:It would be naïve to read this statement (or otherbalanced guidance in the new code) as lesseningthe designers duty to very carefully consider roofsafety provisions. However, this document mustbe welcomed for the extent to which itacknowledges the reality that we, as designers,juggle several balls when arriving at ourdecisions. The new code can be downloaded freeof charge at www.hsa.ie (click 'publications andforms' tab).our final safety designdecision is sometimes acompromisePerimeter edge protection should, wherepracticable, be incorporated during the designprocess, for example, by incorporating a parapetaround the building. However, the everincreasing number of designs employing newstyles of roofing (eg curved and highly visibleroofs) means parapets may be viewed asinterfering with the desired shape of thebuilding.ATSEPTEMBER/OCTOBER201115

ATSEPTEMBER/OCTOBER2011CONSERVATIONCurrently, and for at least the last decade, therehas been a high level of UK architectural activityand other investment in Poland, and in Warsawin particular. Until recently however there waslittle academic interest in the Warsawreconstruction (a World Heritage site since 1981)or indeed architecture generally in easternEurope. It was not until 2006 that BannisterFletcher's History of Architecture included amention of it, describing it as 'The mostsignificant post-war national initiative.From asocial, psychological, symbolic and a practicalpoint of view the reconstruction united thenation'.In this article I discuss the reconstruction andarchitectural merit of Stare Miasto -The OldTown at the core of the Polish capital Warsaw(Warszawa) of which more than 85% wasdestroyed in the Second World War. However aswell as to praise the achievement and resolve ofthe Polish people in carrying this out, I wish todiscuss the wider context and the lessons whichmight be learnt here for us in the UK.The Department of Polish Architecture atWarsaw University began to make collections inits libraries of measured survey drawingsprepared by students and others from 1906 withthe inception of the Protection of MonumentsDepartment. In the redevelopment strategydecided in 1945, many large parts of damagedhouses and shops, along with thousands ofsmaller pieces among the ruins were preserved,surveyed and incorporated in the subsequentrebuilding of the Old Town, which commencedin 1948. In The Old Town and The Royal Castle in Warszawa(Trans) Jerzy A.Baldyga 1988, p20, we read: 'This fact permitted two simultaneous actions tobe undertaken. One consisted in the soonestpossible protection of the walls of buildingswhich survived despite the destruction, the otherlay in the recording of relics still among the ruinsand in a quest for inventory, archival andiconographic materials, scattered all over thecountry'. There were small alterations to suit modernconditions eg the number of unlit rooms werereduced. Originally the residences of the ownerswere above the shops. When rebuilt, however,the shops were preserved on the ground floorand separate autonomous flats were providedabove. A district heating system was utilised; and six churches were also rebuilt.Thus, in the master plan of Warsaw, thelocalisation of the Old Town as a districtdesigned to fulfill housing needs was retainedand the conditions were ensured for its existencein the town planning system of a city with amillion inhabitants. When preserved andintegrated organically into the city organism, theoldest area of the Warsaw spatial system requiredneither a change in scale, nor an expansion, norsuch transformations as would to any degreedisturb its historical conceptionThe original varied colours on the walls ofdwellings were also incorporated. Axiomatically,many dwellings in London had this characteristic,however, by the late nineteenth century most ofthe walls in London had became white and therailings black.So on a mediaeval plan a new restored baroque,and partly late renaissance Old Town ofWarszawa arose, a rich and diverse collection ofbaroque and renaissance buildings restored as faras possible to their original state .Crucially the most important consideration ofthe reconstruction venture, was that it was doneat all, and it was only possible due to theavailability of measured surveys and otherdrawings held by the Polish HistoricalCommission and its related universities. Inaddition the historical importance of themeasured surveys in themselves was and still isemphasized in the Polish architectural academicstructure. The survey consisted of:1)Measured survey work (mainly carried out, butnot exclusively, by architectural students.2)Photographic and other records.3)The remaining fabric and recovered andreassembled remains.The reconstruction was therefore based on theoriginal historical building designs, techniquesThe postwar restoration of Warsaw's Old Town was only possible due to carefullypreserved historic architectural surveys. Guy Isitt MCIAT looks at how the restoration wascarried out, and questions whether similar work could ever be undertaken in the UnitedKingdom.Saved by the survey16