Site Development Why Renovate? Consultation Process Findings Next Steps Plan Diagrams Q & A History The Committee Development Brief Architect Construction Logistics Funding Next Steps Contact Us

Q & A - Development Brief

Can you explain exactly what the site development plan will incorporate?

The proposed option is a 2 storey solution which meets the current and anticipated needs of the members.

With this option do we retain any part of the current building?

Yes the current main prayer hall.

How many buildings do we expect there to be at the end of construction?

One single building

Overall, this option incorporates lots of room for storage, decent and plentiful toilets, a large cloak room, large and interconnected halls, more and larger space than at present, functional office accommodation, large lobby area, a permanent Succah, a main entrance, a large roof for potential environmentally friendly energy, PV cells. This option enables us to increase our useable floor space by approximately 70%. The buildings in this option are designed to be hard wearing, low maintenance, bright and inviting.

Who wrote the initial design brief? How did the shul/board decide to go with this particular brief?

The brief was written by the sub committee following extensive consultation. The brief was circulated to the Board and approved unanimously.

You say that this in not the final plan of how it will look. So what is the final plan? If I'm supporting the project I would like to know an approximate outcome.

We do not yet have United Synagogue or Planning permission for the project so these processes may require changes. Also there is no funding at present so the scale may need to be adjusted to reflect funding that may be available.

How did we come up with this new site development plan?

The expert sub committee has taken five years to review all the options thoroughly. Six different options have been looked at. The option we have chosen was consistently shown to be the best and most viable solution to the community's needs.

What were the other options? / Did we consider other options?

Yes, we considered six options in total. We discarded five options which we did not believe were the best for the shul and the community. These included (1) doing nothing, (2) selling up and moving (3) preparing a whole new set of plans for the shul (4) maintaining some of the existing building and (5) building a storey on top and below the existing new building.

Option 1 was found not to be viable at all as the current maintenance of the shul is costing over £60,000 per annum, with additional tent hires, and hiring other facilities for services coming in at around £10,000 per year. That's around £70 per family per year. The problem of maintenance will not disappear and eventually it will not be an option and we'll have to build a new site. The sub committee agreed that the best time to act is now when we are able to do so in our own time.

Option 2 was considered at length. However, after investigation it was found that there are no other available locations in Borehamwood and Elstree which are vacant and also in a good location for the community.

Option 3 was weighed up but not found to be feasible as it took the current sub committee around five years to gain approval on the current plans. These plans incorporate everything our community may need in terms of space and facilities, now and in the future.

Option 4 whereby we retain some of the building and demolish others was reviewed but discarded due to the ongoing and spiralling maintenance costs of the existing buildings. In addition this option was an inefficient use of space and could incur high VAT charges if the buildings are connected.

Option 5 was deemed to be a good option but too costly.

What if I don't like the final proposal?

The sub committee prepared a brief to suit the entire community. It was drafted following the basic architectural maxim, "form follows function" whereby we ensure we don't let the tail wag the dog. It was written to meet the requirements of current and future members. It will not be perfect and there will be compromises. Not everyone will like every aspect, but that is to be expected. Does anyone actually like what we have now?

The brief prepared was reviewed and approved by the Board of Management. At the time, it became clear that professional paid assistance was required, and it took a long time to have the board agree to appoint an architect to start the process. This is just the very first step in a longterm process. Although not far off, this is not the final solution. The designs may be tweaked based on funding. And the plans will be reviewed on an ongoing basis throughout construction to ensure we are adhering to the community's needs.

Why is this site development process happening now? / Is this not too much trouble than it's worth? Why don't we continue as we are?

The current building as it stands is unsustainable. Maintenance alone costs in excess of £60,000 per annum in addition to costs of hiring additional spaces e.g. tent hire, yavneh etc. We also have a committed sub committee of expert property individuals on board who are equipped and willing to take this plan forwards. We can't calculate how much money we have wasted by delaying, but we can avoid further wastage by acting now.