£100 MILLION
Giant bill to save Rennie Mackintosh masterpiece
IT WILL cost £100million to save the Glasgow School of Art building that was devastated by a second massive blaze, experts said yesterday.
MORE than £100million will be needed to restore the fire-ravaged Glasgow School of Art. The massive cost of a complete rebuild was revealed by experts yesterday after Friday night’s devastating blaze at the iconic Charles Rennie Mackintosh building. It comes amid fears the damage is so severe that the architectural masterpiece – which was also hit by a major fire in 2014 – will need to be restored brick-by-brick. Billy Hare, professor in construction management and deputy director of the BEAM Research Centre, said: “The damage appeared to be overwhelming, much worse than the last fire from which recovered materials were painstakingly analysed and used in the refurbishment. “It is, sadly, questionable what, if anything, will be left that could be salvaged, restored or recreated after this fire. It remains to be seen if it will be possible to retain a facade from the current building.
“If not, damaged buildings have been taken down almost stone by stone in the past and rebuilt with a new, internal frame. This sort of project will cost a great deal more than the estimated £35million after the last fire in May 2014.
“It will be north of £100million to recreate the exterior and interior of the art school this time around.”
Yesterday, dozens of firefighters remained at the scene of the blaze, which had spread to buildings including music venue the O2 ABC.
The art school had been undergoing a multi-millionpound restoration to return it to its former glory after the fire four years ago. The project was about 80 per cent complete.
Yesterday, ministers rejected calls for a public inquiry into the latest blaze, amid claims that a sprinkler system was not yet operational. Culture Secretary Fiona Hyslop said: “I can understand
people want lots of their questions answered but we’ve got to have the process in place first.
“We have to have the fire investigation and we should give people the time to carry out those very responsible duties to best effect and that will give us clarity of what is possible going forward.
“The sensible thing to do is to find out what the source of the fire was and how that spread in the initial stages. All these questions will be addressed by the fire investigation.” She confirmed that Historic Environment Scotland (HES) had taken a digital record of the building and its contents after the previous 2014 fire but added: “The severity of this is very severe, so I’m not giving any commitments at this stage.”
A few pockets of fire remained at the site and crews were using thermal imaging cameras to identify any remaining hotspots.
Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) group manager Martin Hill said: “We will remain on the scene for as long as it takes – we are committed to preventing any further damage to surrounding properties and ensuring the area is made safe.”
The SFRS said it was too early to determine the cause of the fire. Once the scene has been declared safe, building control and HES officials will assess the situation and the exterior.
Hare added: “At this stage, there are more questions than answers. It could have been
caused by a small fire that burned for a substantial length of time and then accelerated – or it could have grown much more rapidly.
“Either way, there was a fully-developed fire when the fire service arrived.
“The undiscovered, slow burning fire seems less likely. The upper floors and roof appear to have been well ablaze from the first images reported, which could suggest the fire started on the upper levels and burned down through the building. When a building is under construction – or in this case reconstruction – it is much more vulnerable to fire. It can mean more timber is exposed, as well as there being other openings in the structure that can allow a fire to spread unchecked.
“Having said that, a typical cause of ignition on construction sites is ‘hot work’ involving flames. Yet our understanding is that there was no such work taking place and no work-people on site.”