PPP Notes - Historical Preservation

(These notes are copied from the SOI's website @http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/standguide/overview/choose_treat.htm)

 

THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR HISTORICAL PRESERVATION

 

The Standards are neither technical nor prescriptive, but are intended to promote responsible preservation practices that help protect our Nation's irreplaceable cultural resources. For example, they cannot, in and of themselves, be used to make essential decisions about which features of the historic building should be saved and which can be changed. But once a treatment is selected, the Standards provide philosophical consistency to the work.

 

The four treatment approaches are Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction, outlined below in hierarchical order and explained:

 

The first treatment, Preservation, places a high premium on the retention of all historic fabric through conservation, maintenance and repair. It reflects a building's continuum over time, through successive occupancies, and the respectful changes and alterations that are made.

 

Rehabilitation, the second treatment, emphasizes the retention and repair of historic materials, but more latitude is provided for replacement because it is assumed the property is more deteriorated prior to work. (Both Preservation and Rehabilitation standards focus attention on the preservation of those materials, features, finishes, spaces, and spatial relationships that, together, give a property its historic character.)

 

Restoration, the third treatment, focuses on the retention of materials from the most significant time in a property's history, while permitting the removal of materials from other periods.

 

Reconstruction, the fourth treatment, establishes limited opportunities to re-create a non-surviving site, landscape, building, structure, or object in all new materials. 

 

Choosing the most appropriate treatment for a building requires careful decision-making about a building's historical significance, as well taking into account a number of other considerations:

Relative importance in history. Is the building a nationally significant resource--a rare survivor or the work of a master architect or craftsman? Did an important event take place in it? National Historic Landmarks, designated for their "exceptional significance in American history," or many buildings individually listed in the National Register often warrant Preservation or Restoration. Buildings that contribute to the significance of a historic district but are not individually listed in the National Register more frequently undergo Rehabilitation for a compatible new use.

Physical condition. What is the existing condition--or degree of material integrity--of the building prior to work? Has the original form survived largely intact or has it been altered over time? Are the alterations an important part of the building's history? Preservation may be appropriate if distinctive materials, features, and spaces are essentially intact and convey the building's historical significance. If the building requires more extensive repair and replacement, or if alterations or additions are necessary for a new use, then Rehabilitation is probably the most appropriate treatment. These key questions play major roles in determining what treatment is selected.

Proposed use. An essential, practical question to ask is: Will the building be used as it was historically or will it be given a new use? Many historic buildings can be adapted for new uses without seriously damaging their historic character; special-use properties such as grain silos, forts, ice houses, or windmills may be extremely difficult to adapt to new uses without major intervention and a resulting loss of historic character and even integrity.

Mandated code requirements. Regardless of the treatment, code requirements will need to be taken into consideration. But if hastily or poorly designed, a series of code-required actions may jeopardize a building's materials as well as its historic character. Thus, if a building needs to be seismically upgraded, modifications to the historic appearance should be minimal. Abatement of lead paint and asbestos within historic buildings requires particular care if important historic finishes are not to be adversely affected. Finally, alterations and new construction needed to meet accessibility requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 should be designed to minimize material loss and visual change to a historic building.