Risk_Assesement___Refurbishment-The_Case_of_Ipoh_Railway_Station_Project.pdf

Management in Construction and Researchers Association (MICRA)

Meetings and Conference, 28-29 Aug 2007, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia 1

RISK ASSESSMET AD REFURBISHMET:

THE CASE OF IPOH RAILWAY STATIO

PERAK, MALAYSIA

Saipol Bari Abd Karim1, Kamarul Syahril Kamal

2, Lilawati Ab Wahab

3,

and Mahanim Hanid4.

1,4

Centre for Project & Facilities Management, Faculty of the Built Environment,

University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

2,3

Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying,

Universiti Teknologi MARA, Perak, Malaysia.

ABSTRACT

This paper focuses on the refurbishment project of Ipoh Railway Station as its case

study including an overview of the risk assessment and its issues related to the project.

As today, most people wish to preserve their heritage building and have attached them

to the idea of refurbishment, more for economics reasons than reasons for historical

and heritage. As a result there is a danger that refurbishment becomes thought of as

synonymous with conservation. In fact refurbishment, although often embracing

conservation, is much wider in scope and is thoroughly economically motivated.

Refurbishment, therefore, is a very important and necessary part of the building

heritage today as well as in previous centuries. This paper aims to review in detail the

current conditions of the building elements of Ipoh Railway Station before the

refurbishment project started by investigating at their major building elements such as

foundations, walls, windows and doors, columns, first floor and mezzanine floor, roof

and domes. It will also discuss and outlines some recommendations for the

refurbishment work as to preserve and maintain the building facade as well as to

replace and upgrade other works deemed necessary for the new look of the Ipoh

Railway Station, Perak.

Keywords: risk management, risk assessment, refurbishment, historical buildings,

building elements.



1.0 ITRODUCTIO

Referring to the Risk Management Standard (2002), risk can be defined as the

combination of the probability of an event and its consequences. Meanwhile Chapman

& Ward (2003) defined risk management as an uncertain event or set of circumstances

that, should it occur, will have an effect on the achievement on the project’s

objectives. These definitions have common understanding of risk that is an event and

its consequences with the purpose of improving performance through systematic

strategies named risk management plan namely risk identification, risk analysis, risk

response and, risk monitoring and control. The overall of the risk management process

are as follow:

Figure 1: The Risk Management Process. [Source: Risk Management Standard (2000)].

According to Burden (2004), refurbishment means to bring an existing building up to

standard, or to make it suitable for a new use by renovations, or by installing new

equipment, fixtures, furnishing and finishes. Highfield (2000) referred building

refurbishment as part of repair, restoration and extension. The overall purpose of

refurbishment is to extend the beneficial use of an existing building (Mansfield, 2000).

According to Brochner & Holm (2000), the construction market in many developed

countries is increasingly directed towards refurbishment of existing structures, which

involves more work on surfaces and on building services than on the load-carrying

structure itself. The principle advantages for refurbishment and re-use of an existing

building rather than demolition and new construction normally gives the following

financial benefits:

The Organization’s Strategic

Objectives

RISK ASSESSMET

Risk Analysis

• Risk identification

• Risk description

• Risk estimation

Risk Reporting

Threats and Opportunities

Risk Evaluation

Decision

Risk Treatment

Residual Risk Reporting

Monitoring

Modification Formal Audit



1. The shorter contract duration reduces the effects of inflation on building costs.

2. The shorter overall development period reduces the cost of financing the

scheme.

3. The client obtains the building sooner, and therefore begins to earn revenue

from it.

Meanwhile if the building which is going to be refurbished is a historical building, it

could give some more advantages such as:

1. Preserving the architectural character and integrity of the building.

2. Keeping intact the sensitivity towards the past historical value and aesthetic of

the building.

3. Generate income throughout heritage tourism to the country.

However, refurbishment should not be confused with conservation, although it does

conserve old buildings and thus helps to preserve a continuous and evident building

tradition. Refurbishment is also nothing to do with maintenance although, in the

process of adapting a building element for a revised use, maintenance will have to be

carried out on the existing structure. But this is a secondary component of

refurbishment and should not be confused with its primary purpose. Therefore,

refurbishment is a good management of the building stock of a country as we have

seen enough examples of the way buildings of the past have been modified, extended

and restyled to suit changing needs of the building owner.

2.0 RISK ASSESSMET I REFURBISHMET PROJECT

All refurbishment projects are made up of a series of one-off problems, which have to

be tackled by the project team on a largely ad-hoc basis. Basically any refurbishment

project doubles the complications experienced by the project team of new building

project, due to the constraints imposed by the original structure. Risk assessment is

therefore, vital for refurbishment projects as the design information such as

specification, duration and costs are vague and inaccurate. Risk assessment is the

overall process of risk analysis and risk evaluation. The refurbishment projects usually

contain technical and economic uncertainties and risks more than new building

projects. According to Avramidou (2001), the repairing or reinforcing works of a

building involves a risk that need to be reduced at the minimum acceptable level.

Mansfield & Reyers (2000) specified that it is the nature of refurbishment projects that

uses pre-determined information and very much dependent on the experts and

specialist consultant and contractor. Mansfield & Reyers (2000) suggested specific

risks for refurbishment projects from the commissioning agent point of view as

follows:

1. No guarantee of available organization with suitable experience and expertise.

2. Too much reliance on the specialist or craftsmanship by the design team.

3. Limited availability and prohibitive cost due to the use of original and

authentic materials or component.

4. Project starts with incomplete design information with assumptions.

5. Minimum statutory requirement that affect the quality of specification.



The process should start at the very beginning of refurbishment projects and should

provide the client or user with sufficient information to start the refurbishment

strategy. Mansfield & Reyers (2000) has conducted a research on the assessment and

concluded that there is no formal approach to risk identification and analysis and the

tendency to go over budget is more than any new build projects while final account

always exceeds the forecasted budget. Reyers & Mansfield (2001b) came out with

five clusters of risks associated with refurbishment projects i.e. design information

risk, cost risk, client / briefing risk, external risk and other internal parties risk. The

following table gives further details of these clusters.

Risk Cluster Risk Descriptions

Design information risk Inadequate completion time, incomplete site / survey information,

efficiency of contractual arrangement, clarity of specification of

workmanship clauses, consistency and completeness of design

information.

Difficulties in providing detailed, concise and inclusive

definitions of the processes which may lead to a decline in value.

Capital and Cost risk Cost and quality procedures instigated by client, reliable cost data,

inadequate fee structure, changes to funding structure, invalid

estimate, cash flow decisions.

Risk in capital investment, influenced by physical deterioration of

the building.

Risk from various accounting regimes, influencing the extent and

timing of the work

Client / briefing risk Vague brief, inflexible requirement, over prescriptive

requirement, over or under involvement in project, limited

awareness of constraints and inflexible to contractors and

suppliers,

Risk of inaccurately identifying boundaries between the processes

in the physical cycle of refurbishment i.e. repair, replacement and

renewal.

Difficulties in identifying problems and appropriate remedial

technique.

Risk of loss of architectural or historical significance of the

original fabric resulting from negligence.

Risk of misunderstanding of liability such as under-insurance and

failure to undertake risk management procedure.

External risk Bureaucratic and slow approval procedures, statutory constraints

and procedures, infrastructure charges, planning condition,

interest rate.

Other internal parties

risk

Continued occupancy during work, involvement of other

consultants, reliable consultants, suitability of experience labour.

Risk from the impact of liability of the designers and contractors

such as bankruptcy due to award of damages.

Risk in the team itself such as client-imposed specialists and those

outside the established team

Risk of divergent aspirations and attitudes between professionals

and participants

Table 1: Risk clusters and descriptions of the risks

[Sources: Reyers & Mansfield (2001b); Mansfield (2002) and Reyers (2003) ]



Furthermore, Mansfield & Reyers (2000) have provided different views of risk for

refurbishment projects as follows:

1. Strict self-denial of archaeologist and self-confidence of creative architect

resulted to balance of subjective judgment.

2. Wider use of skilled labour, craftsmen and specialist contractors.

3. Involvement of statutory agencies, historical associations, interests groups

which lead to reduction of risk without an increase in cost as a result of good

communication and procurement especially partnering.

Refurbishment of existing buildings in increasingly performed in the presence of

tenants or tenant employees (Brochner & Holm, 2000). Thus, this will affect the

overall planning of the project hence identified as one of the source of risk. Preparing

a proper method statement in refurbishment projects helps to identify what exists on

site and its condition as well as to check the original scope definition. Additionally,

conducting survey to the structures of the building will enable the consultant and the

contractor to know the status and the level modification needed and decide how to

deal with it. For the purpose of this paper, the authors will not discuss in detail on the

risk assessment activities but on the results of the identification, assessment and the

method of how to respond with the situation. As such, this project uses a very simple

assessment method, begins with building investigation and followed by analysis of the

defects and proposed a solution in responding to the situation. However, the process

should not stop here but followed by monitoring the actions and managing the

feedback instead.

3.0 BACKGROUD OF THE IPOH PROJECT

The Ipoh Railway Station, an architectural grandeur and pride of the city, is

undergoing major refurbishment to complement Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad’s

RM4.2 billion electrified double tracking project from Rawang to Ipoh. The

refurbishment project started in 2002 and scheduled to complete in 2006. Once

completed, it will blend the 90-year-old colonial atmosphere with the unique ultra-

modern facilities. Historically, the Ipoh Railway Station was complete in 1917. The

station with its “Moorish” architecture ranks second in terms of elegance after Kuala

Lumpur’s landmark station (Ahmad, 1997). Both stations were designed and construct

under the supervision of a government senior architect, Arthur Benson Hubback in

1914. Local sources indicate that the building was originally designed as a hospital

and used as such prior to the 1900’s and its subsequent conversion to the station

building. The Ipoh station is sometime referred to the “Taj Mahal” of Ipoh due to its

Indian influences in architecture. The architecture of the station would be classed as a

“Straits Eclectic”, which is a blend of the Indian and European styling primarily found

in Malacca, Penang and Singapore (Fee, 2006).



Figure 1: Ipoh Railway Station before refurbishment

Figure 2: Ipoh Railway Station after refurbishment in 2006.

4.0 BUILDIG IVESTIGATIOS

Building investigation as defined by Spada (2002) is an examination and observation

of the exterior and interior of buildings including the grounds, the structure, and the

mechanical systems to determine the defects and other conditions. Before any

refurbishment projects started, a building investigation has to be carried out as part of

the risk assessment process, in order to obtain sufficient information about the

building condition in the form of drawings, photographic records, considered opinions

as well as the condition of the structure. All information gathered is compiled into a

report for a further study on the conditions and method to incorporate with the new

structure. Hence, the purpose of building investigation according to Watt (1999) is to

identify, investigate and diagnosis of defects in existing buildings, and also to

recommend for the most appropriate course of action. Various physical aspects of

building investigation referring to Friedman (2000) include identifying types of

building systems, looking for evidence of material deterioration and identifying

combinations of movement and load effects. Apart from that, issues on safety and

hazards to personnel, buildings and environment need to be considered during the



whole course of the project. For this particular project, the results of the building

investigations as part of the risk assessment process are shown in Table 2.

Building Elements Building Investigations

1. Foundations Given the age of the structure and that all construction settlement

would have been complete by now, the foundations are deemed

sufficient for their intended purpose of use.

2. Walls All the exterior walls are in good repair. There are signs of

effervescence on the south-west and south of the building,

however, though this may be related to the paint materials used in

the periodic repainting of the structure. There is some lime burns

associated with birds’ nests within the main arch under the main

dome. In areas where leaking is noticeable especially from the

mezzanine floor and first floor bathrooms to the hotel rooms, paint

peeling has occurred with noticeable mould growth present.

3. Windows and doors All original woodwork and joinery which is believed to be dated

from the time of the original construction are in good condition.

The timber is sound with little to no presence of rot or infestation.

Substantial checking of paintwork has occurred exposing large

areas of wood. These conditions are due to the over painting of the

old oil based paints with newer water based paints. The window

panes are all intact with isolated broken panes. The majority of the

panes are well fixed and rattle free. All doors and openings are

serviceable. Internal modern door fixtures within the building

require repairs specifically re-hanging and refining of fixtures.

4. Columns Structurally the columns are considered sound. Given the method

of the construction, all loads applied to the masonry are distributed

through plate girder beams and therefore can be considered as

uniformly distributed with no moment applied.

5. First floor and

mezzanine floor

The first floor tiles in the main restaurant area are in good

condition, however, there are signs of negative bending cracking

moments over the beams .The majority of the tiles is in-place and

uncracked with the exception of the beam line areas. The ground

floor flooring is recent and tiled. Normal cracking is expected for

this type of floor.

6. Roofs The structural steel within the roof areas is in good condition. The

ridge timbers and the major purlin along the major rooflines are

still serviceable and show little to no sign of rot. The major purlin

at the jack roof, the portion of the roof which overhangs the wall,

does contain rot. The timber purlin secondary rafter and minor

purlin in the gable end and hop gable are in poor condition and

extensively rotted. The roof and tiles are in a sorry state of repair.

Approximately 40% of the tiles are cracked, dislodged or missing.

The cast iron access doors to the roof are broken with the door

unit missing and doorframes partially removed.

7. Domes The three major domes are in good condition except for one minor

defect. However, there are indications of dilapidation of

brickwork infill panels to the steel framework. The level of

corrosion is less than 1mm and steel work would be considered to

be pristine condition.

Table 2: The Result of Building Investigations. [Source: Higgs, (2000)].



5.0 RECOMMEDATIO FOR REFURBISHMET WORK

The recommendations for refurbishment of Ipoh Railway Station are based on the

information obtained from the previous building investigation as part of the risk

assessment process. The recommendations for refurbishment works are considered as

the minimal repairs to enable the building to be fit for its purpose of use. The

recommendations are also based on a service life of an additional 20 years on the

assumption of a regular maintenance. The following are some of the recommendations

proposed for the refurbishment works on major building elements such as:

Building Elements Proposed Recommendations

1. Foundations Given that the foundation is in a considered good condition, no

repair works is required.

2. Walls Given that there is no debonding of the stucco finishes in the walls

except for the minor areas where services have been laid and

poorly repaired, the recommendations are confined to finishing

and paint work.

3. Windows and doors It is proposed that only paint re-application is required for the

exterior woodwork and that the interior woodwork is subject to

interior design requirements. A standard paint preparation can be

applied similar to the following.

4. Columns Given that the columns are in a considered good condition, no

repair works is required except for some plastering work on

defects area and paint work.

5. First floor and

mezzanine floor

Given that the floors are in a considered good condition, no repair

works is required. But there are two possible courses of action for

the rehabilitation on the floor tiles. These are divided into

complete replacement or removal and partial replacement of the

floor tiles. It is estimated that removal of the existing tiles would

result in only 30% of the original tiles. Matching of the old and

new tiles may prove difficult. Therefore our recommendation is to

remove all the existing tiles and replace with modern but similar

like tiling.

6. Roofs There are two possible courses of action for the rehabilitation on

the roof. These are divided into complete replacement or removal

and partial replacement of the roof. It is estimated that removal of

the existing tiles would result in only 50% of the original tiles that

could be re-used in the new roof. Matching of the old and new

tiles may prove difficult. If this course was proceeded with then it

would be recommended that the existing tiles be used on the front

side of the building with the newer tiles being placed at the rear.

Tuscany roof tiles are still being manufactured in Australia and

Europe. Given the size of the roof, it will be reasonably economic

to import sufficient tiles for a complete re-roofing. Therefore our

recommendation is to remove all the existing tiles and replace

with modern tiling.

7. Domes As this structure is steel supported, the overall structural stability

of the dome is not in question. However, there are indications of

dilapidation of brickwork infill panels to the steel framework. We

would, therefore, recommend that our repairs are concentrated

towards the repair and reinstatement of the integrity of these infill

panels.



8. Ceiling Given that the ceiling is in good condition, only small cut out and

replacement of planting is required. However it is recommended

that in certain area, the use of suspended ceiling is necessary due

to the installation of air conditioning ducting.

9. Drainage Clean and expose existing drains and repair collapsed culvert. Re-

instate the drainage system in the parking area and corridor at the

front of the main building.

Table 3: Proposed Recommendations for Refurbishment. [Source: Higgs, (2000)].

6.0 COCLUSIO

As a conclusion, we can conclude that risk assessment is important during an

extensive period of consultation by the project team at the early stages of any

refurbishment projects. It is very critical part where the design, method of statements,

specification, duration and cost are determined. Risk assessment is also a process

whereby the project team can methodically address the risk attaching to their activities

with the goal of achieving sustained within each activity and across the portfolio of all

activities in the past, present and in particular, future. The focus of good risk

assessment in this refurbishment project was on the building investigation stage as the

result from it can determine the recommendations for the refurbishment works. It can

be concluded from the assessment that the Ipoh Railway Station is structurally sound.

The most imposing portion of the station is the Majestic Station Hotel which occupies

the mezzanine and upper floors. Except for a new coat of paint, minor repairs and a

change of roofing, the main structure and the facade of the heritage building would

remain unchanged. The bulk of the refurbishment works would be on the platform

area located behind the station building. Since the refurbishment designer’s team is to

make use of the basic value in the building and with it create a new life for the ageing

building, the Ipoh railway station would be maintained as it was a heritage building.

REFERECES

Ahmad, A.G. (1997). British Colonial Architecture in Malaysia 1800-1930. Museums

Association of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur.

Avramidou, N (2001). Application of Quality Assurance Systems in the Rehabilitation

of the Architectural Heritage. 7th International Conference on Inspection,

Appraisal, Repairs & Maintenance of Buildings & Structures, 11-13 Sept 2001.

Nottingham, United Kingdom

Brochner, J & Holm, M (2000). Contractual Relations and Information Flows to

Building Users in Refurbishment Project. Information and Communication in

Construction Procurement, Proceedings W92 Procurement System Symposium,

24-27 April 2000, Santiago, Chile.

Burden, E. (2004). Illustrated Dictionary of Architectural Preservation. Mc Graw

Hill, New York.

Chapman, C. and Ward, S. (2003). Transforming Project Risk Management into

Project Uncertainty Management. International Journal of Project Management,

21:97-105.

Fee, C.V. (2006). Landmarks of Perak. Raja Nazrin Shah Publications Sdn. Bhd.,

Kuala Lumpur.



Friedman, D. (2000). The Investigation of Buildings. W.W. Norton & Company, New

York.

Higgs, J.S. (2000). Structural Assessment and Re-measurement Survey for Ipoh

Railway Station. Materials Consultants (Asia) Sdn. Bhd. Project Reports,

Selangor.

Highfiled, D. (2000). Refurbishment and Upgrading of Buildings. E & FN Spoon,

London.

IRM (The Institute of Risk Management), (AIRMIC) The Association of Insurance

and Risk Managers and (ALARM) The National Forum for Risk Management in

the Public Sector (2002). Risk Management Standard. The Institute of Risk

Management, London.

Mansfield, J.R (2002). What’s in the Name? Complexities in the Definition of

“Refurbishment”. Property Management. 20(1):23-30.

Mansfield, J. and Reyers, J. (2000). Conservation Refurbishment Projects: A

Comparative Assessment of Risk Management Approach. The Cutting Edge-The

Real Estate Research Conference of the RICS Research Foundation, Sept 6-8,

2000.

Marsh, P. (1983). The Refurbishment of Commercial and Industrial Buildings.

Construction Press, London.

Reyers, J (2003). Risk and Liability for Consultants Advising on the Built Heritage.

Structural Survey, 21(1):8-15

Reyers, J. and Mansfield, J. (2001a). A Practitioner Perspective on Risk Management

in Conservation Refurbishment Projects. COBRA Conference Papers.

Reyers, J. and Mansfield, J. (2001b). The Assessment of Risk in Conservation

Refurbishment Projects. Structural Survey, 19(5):238-244.

Spada, M.D. (2002). The Home Inspection Book. South-Western, Ohio.

Tyler, N. (2000). Historic Preservation; An Introduction to its History, Principles and

Practice. W.W. Norton & Company, New York.

Watt, D.S. (1999). Building Pathology; Principles and Practice. Blackwell Science,

Oxford.

Risk_Assesement___Refurbishment-The_Case_of_Ipoh_Railway_Station_Project.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Risk_Assesement___Refurbishment-The_Case_of_Ipoh_Railway_Station_Project.pdf