About St George's-Tron Church Glasgow               

A. The building ‘belongs’ to us and it is the responsibility of the congregation of the parish to keep it up, but the title is held for us by trustees, the General Trustees of the Church of Scotland. When a congregation wants to do any significant work on their building, they need permission first from Presbytery, and then also from the General Trustees.  We will go through this formally when we know we are in a position to proceed financially, since that will be the main factor in the response given.  But all informal enquiries suggest that, assuming we are able to finance the project, it will be met with enthusiasm by all relevant bodies.

A. We are showing 240 seats for a normal Sunday arrangement, which is about the occupancy downstairs on a fairly full day. We could comfortably get around 275 seats in front of the glass screen, and this is probably more than we ever normally have downstairs at present, so we are, if anything, increasing the functional ‘normal’ capacity, and doing so even more if the screen is rolled back for larger gatherings. Added to this, the upstairs capacity should usefully increase a bit with the gallery seats nearest the front currently behind the organ pipes having a much improved visibility.

A. The level of the toilets and kitchen below ground level means that they are touch and go in terms of whether a gravity system will work. We have got some invert level information for the external sewer system but it is borderline as to whether we can get enough of a fall to suit a gravity system.

We have therefore made allowance in the costs for a pumped solution. This is not an uncommon situation and providing a good quality pump is installed and maintained this should provide an efficient solution.

Typically it involves waste material moving by gravity into a concrete chamber which has a float detection device which triggers the pump when it reaches a certain level. The pump moves the waste to a higher level where it can discharge by gravity into the mains drainage.

We have allowed for duplicate pumps which alternate in use, one will pump one day the other the next. If one pump fails to cut in an alarm is activated and the other pump immediately kicks in. So both pumps would need to fail before there was a problem. There would also be a level warning device that would indicate if the float is not working.

A. The redevelopment will overall greatly improve access for disabled people and those with walking problems. The lift will be of a simple type, and very reliable. A break-down of anything mechanical is possible, of course, but it would probably be worse if the heating broke down in winter, or if the electrics failed!  Temporary loss of the lift would not affect the disabled toilet provision (disabled wc is at ground level for that reason) and if needed, tea and coffee can be prepared in the tea prep located at the side of the fellowship space which serves as a backup.

A. Yes. A transverse beam will be located in the gallery ceiling to provide a housing for the moveable screen. There are three components to the existing columns - a dwarf wall located under the ground floor upon which the columns sit - the structural core of the column (timber in some cases, cast iron in others) - and the decorative part of the column (mainly formed in plaster).

In developing the downstairs we require to remove the dwarf walls, this means that the balcony will be temporarily supported allowing the removal of the dwarf walls and columns. New foundations and steel columns will then be installed before taking down temporary support to the balcony. The columns will be fire proofed to give 1-hour fire rating then redecorated to match the original profile. So the intention is for the columns to appear exactly as they presently do, (although they will be stronger and fire proofed), except for central column located under balcony - it is to be removed to provide greater flexibility.

A. The combination of two staircases, distance to be travelled and the re-opening of the east north door means that Fire regulations are met. Moreover, it is difficult to see where a west fire-escape would land. The cost would be prohibitive.

To introduce fire escape stairs at the west end of the sanctuary would require stairs located in fire rated enclosures - we have no prospect of getting listed building or planning consent for this - especially when Building Control will have no objection to the fire issues as they are proposed. As mentioned in the presentation, we are making improvements to the fire rating and escape from the balcony which bring it to 99% compliance to the CURRENT 2005 Building Regulations - for a building of this age that is remarkable. Even the 1% non-compliance has extenuating circumstances, so in effect we could make a case for having attained 100% compliance!

A. Best use of available space has been a priority. The floor area by the western staircase (below the pulpit) is an awkward shape; a fat 'L' which would affect the flexibility (and divisibility) of the meeting room. The toilets can better use this space to no disadvantage, and it is not a long walk to reach them. Additionally, we want the meeting area to be immediately seen on going downstairs, so that visitors coming in for a meeting see where to go easily.

A. We are right in the middle of the busiest city centre area and certain noises (such as occasional sirens) are inevitable and their very nature is that you can hear them whether inside or out.

There are other lesser noises that still are heard – buses and cars/football fans singing/bagpipes/busking – in considering these it is important to note where this sound is penetrating the building. This is airborne sound, and the weak spot is undoubtedly the existing windows - if you have ever lived in a flat, or house that has been upgraded from single glazing to double glazing you will appreciate that as well as improving thermal performance, double glazing greatly improves acoustic performance. If we could upgrade the windows to double glazing it would greatly help with airborne noise.

We have, however, a problem in upgrading our windows in that double glazing effectively is about twice the weight of single glazing, we therefore would require larger transoms and mullions (the subdividing timber elements which split the windows into smaller panes of glass) to support the glass weight - this changes the proportion of the windows and is likely to be unacceptable to Historic Scotland and the Planning Department (as would a secondary glazing system – which would in any case be inferior to double glazing). New glazed elements, such as the proposed picture window (located at the war memorial), would not fall under these restrictions, and could be double or even triple glazed to give adequate acoustic performance.

The lower floor should provide much better acoustic performance for airborne sound, (it does not have any weak spots like single glazed windows), airborne sound will have to travel through the church walls into the sanctuary then through the new ground floor construction (which has excellent acoustic rating) or through the downstairs walls (also excellent acoustic rating) before penetrating the downstairs accommodation - so airborne sound has to go through two structures before reaching the lower floor, whereas at present it just has to get through a single sheet of glass to be heard in the sanctuary.

Other noises are from impact sound – e.g. someone drilling in the street outside, or the subway. These sounds travel through the ground and vibrate through the structure of the building. (If someone is drilling up the pavement - using pneumatic tools - directly outside the church then this will create a major amount of noise regardless of our building construction - that is why their use is generally controlled by restricted hours).

It would be extremely difficult to do anything retrospective to the church to reduce this - as effectively you need to isolate the structure of the building from the ground, although the proposals go some way to improve this.

The noise from the subway is something every building within 75 yards of the underground line will experience - it is not unique to our building. Subway noise may still be heard in the lower floor area, but we would not expect it to be as loud as what we hear in the sanctuary at present - we have a concrete floor slab that will be laid on an insulation material - this is not only for thermal insulation, in specifying a product such as Rockfloor we get a product that also gives an excellent acoustic performance - and will provide a greater level of acoustic isolation than we have at present.

The new ground floor construction has a greater mass than the existing timber floor and should absorb more sound. It is proposed to form the floor in a concrete construction with a finishing layer of either a concrete screed, or a timber floor on acoustic battens (one offers increased mass which helps acoustic performance, the other provides added acoustic insulation). At present the noise from the subway passes through the ground into the external walls and dwarf walls (supporting the ground floor) and can be heard as a vibration in the sanctuary floor. Our proposals involve the removal of the dwarf walls and replacement with beams and columns – this should greatly reduce the cross sectional area of structure in direct contact with the floor/ground thus minimising the potential paths for transfer of noise.

Noise from plant - comfort controlled cooling - ceiling mounted units are pretty much standard installations giving heating/cooling and generally do not give acoustic problems. Ventilation of toilets – yes, you will hear the vents, of course, but really only in the toilets.

A. The remit handed to the Development Team by the Kirk Session directed their attention to the development of the building, to maximise the infrastructure to serve mission in line with the Kirk Session’s vision for SG-T.  That is what was presented on the Wednesday evening meeting.

Alex and Agnes both spoke a lot about many of the things going on presently in week to week evangelism in and around the premises, and many more are involved in serving these things directly and indirectly. The life of the church is (or ought to be) wholly mission-centred, and the responsibility for carrying it out lies with the whole congregation. The best place to learn about this is at the regular updates to the congregational prayer meeting, which obviously all who have a heart for evangelism will want to make a priority.

A. Because the new development will be flexible, the classes could be held in a variety of places, for the Primary Sunday School, Toddlers and Nursery. We will now have a much greater range of spaces where the youngest part of our congregation can be accommodated, and we can certainly cut the journeys of the toddlers and very youngest children up to the halls.

A. For privacy at funerals, we could have a recessed curtain or blind that could be drawn across the picture window, or possibly glass that turns opaque at the flick of a switch.

If it proves necessary to increase security during services, we can close the wrought iron gate or the storm doors during the service as at present (we’ll have extra doors, not fewer).

A. Yes. Two possibilities have been discussed. Firstly, the use of the small room in the fellowship space created by the sliding partitions, and secondly to create a zone in the south vestibule in the area created by the removal of the ladies toilets. This would be under the staircase and would require a fold away screen. In addition, if someone falls ill on the balcony, they can be taken to one of the rooms at the head of the stairwells.

A. That has not been decided. It is an important design question, but somewhere appropriate will be found.

A. As above. These plaques, the last one being made by Alex Falconer a silversmith and a member, have been erected to celebrate Jubilees, viz 100, 150 years. We will consider in the future what form this will take for the 200 years in 2008.

A. What type has yet to be determined, but a critical part of the project will be greatly improved audiovisual provision.

A. These have not been selected yet, though some possibilities have been seen. Light-weight chairs with book trays, stackable (preferably on dollies) would perhaps be easiest to manage.

A. There are notes for this on the back of the pledge form, but please speak to Margo or one of the finance team if in doubt.

A. No; for two reasons. First, we wouldn't get them for the interior, having already received grants for the roof. But, more importantly, we, the people of God are being invited to pray and pledge to give sacrificially to Him for this project, and through the tithe to fund other work here and overseas. Our response will be the answer. We know that grant funding, even if any were available, would be minimal. And, even if it were included in our calculations, we can’t avoid the question as to whether we are willing to rise to the challenge together.

A. Be assured that putting the names on the pledge form will not breach any confidentiality; only a couple of people will see the names. It is necessary in order to help the Treasurer keep track of those pledging and evaluating the response, and because they are to be regarded as firm pledges. It will help us to encourage folk to take advantage of Gift Aid, if they have any doubts.

A. As soon as possible after the final pledge day on 27th November, and all the pledges are received, the finance team will analyse the figures. Once the situation is clear, we shall know the extent the congregation has backed the proposal with pledges. The only difficulty will be if we have not reached the financial target. Obviously, the easiest and best outcome is if the figures speak for themselves!

A. The chart was based on numbers we had received earlier from the Development Team combined with a giving scenario, very similar to the one presented. The value of this was purely to show the concept of a 'funding gap' and have some idea how much it might be, nothing more.  We did experiment with one or two other scenarios. It will only become a science when we have the pledge data.

A. We would expect the funding to be all completed by the end of the three year term proposed, with no significant debt carried forward. However, we have provided for people to indicate a willingness to extend the period of pledged giving if there is a cost over-run. Any prospect of a burden of long term debt would be a major factor to be considered in the Kirk Session’s deliberations about going ahead if the pledges fall short of what we need.  Again, we hope that will not be the case.

A. Loans were not incorporated in the funding model. Any loans will be honoured, to the letter. In each case this would be discussed to the satisfaction of the individuals concerned.

A. Yes. The aim would be to use such a loan to help cash flow needs, and to be covered by pledge money coming in over time. We believe Presbytery and the General Trustees would be supportive of the project. Interest was not included in the funding model because it would be offset by gains while we have a positive balance.

A. No. The firstfruits will NOT necessarily be first in order of expenditure. There is no reason for this to be the case, and of course we shall need time to decide how best to use this money. That is something that cannot be rushed, and there is no reason it should be.