|
SITE INSPECTION REPORT
25 ST. FRANCIS STREET, ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA
Inspection Date:
April 25, 1986
Bureau of Historic Preservation
Division of Archives, History and Records Management
Department of State
June 1986
CONTENTS
Introduction 2
Significance 2
Condition and Rehabilitation Feasibility 3
Evaluation of Effect 4
Rehabilitation Recommendations 6
Rehabilitation Cost 8
Recommended Conditions of Acquisition 9
Appendix A: Photographs Describing the Surrounding Area 10
Appendix B: Interior and Exterior Photographs 15
Appendix C: Photographs Describing the Condition of
Framing and Piers under the Building, and
Framing Visible in the Attic 33
Appendix D: Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
(Revised 1983) 43
Appendix E: Chapter 267, Florida Statutes 100
INTRODUCTION. This report documents the observations and recommendations
resulting from an inspection of the residential structure at 25 St. Francis
Street, St. Augustine, conducted on April 25, 1986, by David E. Ferro,
preservation architect and administrator of the Architectural Preservation
Services Section, Bureau of Historic Preservation. This inspection was
conducted at the request of the Florida Department of Military Affairs (DMA),
pursuant to the provisions of Section 267.061(2), Florida Statutes.
The three principal objectives of this inspection and the analysis
presented herein were to assess:
1. the significance of this building to the St. Augustine Historic
District,
2. the current condition of the building and the feasibility of its
rehabilitation, and
3. the effect of each of three development options on the historic
integrity of 25 St. Francis Street and the surrounding area of the
St. Augustine Historic District which is listed in the National
Register of Historic Places. These options are being considered
by DMA in conjunction with its development of a master plan for the
renovation/expansion of its headquarters at the State Arsenal
Complex.
Mr. Ferro's observations and the recommendations of this office regarding
these issues follow:
SIGNIFICANCE. The design of the modest two story residential structure
on this site was heavily influenced by the Queen Anne Style, popular in the
late nineteenth century. Other residential structures on this block exhibit
stylistic influences of this period. Several of these buildings, though of
earlier initial construction, were heavily altered in the late nineteenth
century. Of particular note in this regard is the two story residential
structure at 28 St. Francis Street. The lower portion of this building was
constructed much earlier than the upper portion which is roughly contemporary
with the building under investigation. In scale and architectural detail
these two buildings complement one another and add significantly to the
historic integrity and architectural variety of this block. Photographs
describing each of the buildings on this block are contained in Appendix A.
The building at 25 St. Francis Street remains largely unaltered from its
circa 1890 form, with the exception of the enclosure of the rear porch and a
small addition at this porch. The original interior also remains largely
intact, although in some areas wood finish materials have been damaged due to
termite infestation.Photographs describing the interior and exterior of the
building are contained in Appendix B.
In light of its integrity of design, its compatibility in scale and
architectural character with other buildings in this part of the District, and
its strong contribution to the streetscape, this building is considered to be
of historic and architectural significance to the District.
The garage at the rear of the site, dating from the 1920s, is not
considered to be of historic significance and can be removed with no effect to
the historic integrity of the site or District.
CONDITION AND REHABILITATION FEASIBILITY. This evaluation is based upon
evidence visible or uncovered during inspection and the past experience of
this office with development projects involving the restoration and
rehabilitation of wood frame buildings of comparable age, construction and
apparent condition. These observations and past experience notwithstanding,
the precise extent of the deterioration noted herein cannot be determined
without further selective removal of interior finishes.
The building has sustained considerable drywood termite damage. At first
sight, this damage appeared to be grievous. However, on closer inspection, it
appears to be relatively localized. Some wooden members and finish materials
have been severely attacked while adjacent ones have suffered no damage at
all. This type of localized damage is common in buildings which have been
infested by drywood termites. It is our opinion that the structural integrity
of the main portion of the building has not been affected by this damage.
Porch deck framing has been damaged by termites and rot. Some perimeter
sills have also suffered termite damage. Several of the built-up corner posts
evidence substantial termite damage. This also is a common condition in
buildings which are sided in wood, due to the ineffectiveness of corner boards
in preventing moisture penetration. The resulting high moisture level within
the framing behind the corner boards provides an attractive environment for
termites.
At the interior, the wood flooring, particularly at the second and
third levels, evidences extensive termite damage. The stair handrail at the
second level and trim in localized areas at the second and third levels have
also sustained termite damage.
Aside from localized damage at the perimeter of the main envelop, most
sill and floor framing deterioration is confined to the porches and areas at
the rear of the building, principally an infilled porch and poorly constructed
addition, where long-term plumbing leaks have fostered wood rot and termite
infestation. The balance of the floor framing and supporting structure under
the main portion of the building are stable and evidence little or no termite
damage or other deterioration. Further, the floor joists beneath even the
most heavily deteriorated flooring at the second floor appear to be undamaged.
In the attic, less than ten percent of the framing exhibits termite damage.
Photographs describing the condition of framing and brick piers beneath the
building, and framing visible in the attic are contained in Appendix C.
Some settling of brick piers has occurred during the ninety-plus years of
the building's history. This is common and is no reflection on the structural
integrity of the original portion of the building. Routinely buildings of
this type require leveling during rehabilitation. As a matter of course in
such projects, the brick piers (at a minimum, those at the perimeter of the
building) are reconstructed to meet current life safety requirements. The
principal reason for this work is to establish an effective connection between
the pier and sill to resist uplift. As would appear to be the case in this
building, the bearing capacity of most original piers is sufficient to
accommodate loads imposed by contemporary use.
While having sustained some termite damage, the condition of this
building is as good or better than many buildings being rehabilitated today in
the private sector. The structural frame appears to be essentially sound and
the siding, windows, doors, etc., are in relatively good condition. The
process of rehabilitating such a building is routine and involves no
complicated or "exotic" treatments, skills or materials. Further, the
existing floor plan is considered to be particularly compatible with reuse of
the building as guest or tourist accommodations, or as offices.
Based upon evaluation of recent rehabilitation costs for buildings of
similar age, construction and apparent condition, it is our opinion that the
rehabilitation of this building is economically feasible. Comparisons of the
estimated cost of rehabilitating this building with the cost of new
construction and with the actual cost of similar rehabilitation projects are
included in the Rehabilitation Cost section of this report.
EVALUATION OF EFFECT. Three alternative development options for this
site have been discussed with DMA representatives. These are:
1. Rehabilitation of the existing residential structure on its present
site.
2. Demolition of the existing structure to allow
reconstruction of an earlier building documented to have occupied the
site and construction of a parking lot at the rear of the site.
3. Demolition of the existing structure to allow
construction of a landscaped parking .lot on the site.
The effect of each of these options is evaluated in the following
discussion.
1. Rehabilitation. Sensitive rehabilitation of the existing residential
structure on its present site as would have a positive effect
on the historic integrity of both the building and the surrounding
area of the St. Augustine Historic District. Not only would a
historic building be preserved, but of equal importance, the historic
character of the late-nineteenth-century streetscape to which it
contributes would be preserved and enhanced. This would be the
preferred preservation treatment.
2. Demolition of the Existing Building and Reconstruction of an Earlier
Building. This alternative is considered a poor preservation
solution for two reasons:
a. The building proposed for reconstruction is documented by partial
views in historic photographs (presumably dating to the 1870s or
1880s) and such yet unknown archaeological evidence as may be
discovered during the investigation which would necessarily
precede any new development on the site. This is hardly
sufficient information to allow a credible reconstruction of such
a building. Demolition of a historic building to replace it with
a reconstruction which would necessarily rely heavily on
conjecture for its design is inconsistent with current
preservation theory and practice.
b. Even if sufficient information was available to allow a credible
reconstruction of a building which occupied the site prior to
construction of the existing residence, the effect of such a
reconstruction on the historic character of the street would be
considered adverse. In comparing the current streetscape with
the photographs submitted to describe the proposed
reconstruction, considerable change is evident. The street has
evolved from an austere vernacular character to a street lined
with buildings of great architectural diversity, ranging from
a 1950's interpretation of the Spanish Colonial Style (Llambia
House) to the influences of the Second Empire, Italianate and
Queen Anne styles of the last quarter of the nineteenth century.
Thus, an accurate reconstruction of the earlier building, if
possible,would be an anachronism on St. Francis Street and would
have an adverse effect on the historic integrity of the street..
3. Demolition of the Existing Building and Construction of a Parking
Lot. This alternative is also considered to have an adverse effect
on the historic character of the street. At present the street is
lined by two story residential structures and possesses a distinct
domestic character. Removal of the existing building and development
of a parking lot on this site, even if walled and heavily landscaped,
would erode the residential character of the street. It is noted
that there is a walled parking lot immediately across St. Francis
Street on an equally prominent site. This lot was constructed
prior to the adoption of the current local controls which guide
development in areas of historic significance. The existence of
this "grandfathered" intrusion does not establish an acceptable
precedent for construction of a parking lot on the site under
consideration.
A fourth option, discussed briefly with DMA representatives, involves
relocation and rehabilitation of the existing building, on its present site or
on an appropriate new site elsewhere in the District, to allow development of
its original site. Relocation and rehabilitation of a historic building in a
new setting and general environment which are consistent with the
characteristics of its original site can sometimes satisfactorily mitigate the
effect of new development on a historic site. However, in the case of a site
within a historic district, while the effect of the new development on the
property directly affected by the project may be satisfactorily mitigated, the
adverse effect on the character and historic integrity of the district would
remain undiminished.
While relocation of the residential structure at 25 St. Francis Street is
considered technically feasible, the narrow streets and overhanging balconies
in this area of the District would likely preclude relocation off-site without
incurring substantial expense in dismantling or segmenting and reassembling
the building. Relocation of the building on-site would yield little
additional useable space and would place the building in a historically
inappropriate relationship to the street and its neighbors. Thus, this
preservation approach would appear to have no practical application in
mitigating the adverse effects of the development options described in 2 and 3
above.
It should be noted that in the development options described in 2 and 3
above, archaeological testing and salvage excavation would be required to
mitigate project impact on the significant archaeological remains on the
property. The cost and time required for this work should be carefully
considered in evaluating the feasibility of these development options.
REHABILITATION RECOMMENDATIONS. In the following discussion, we address
the "rehabilitation" of the building rather than its "restoration." The term
"rehabilitation," as used here, refers to the process of returning a historic
property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes
possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and
features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural
and cultural values. By contrast, the often misused and misunderstood term,
"restoration," refers to the process of accurately recovering the form and
details of a property and its setting as it appeared at a particular period of
time by means of the removal of later work or by the replacement of missing
earlier work. Most projects in which this office is involved, whether under
federal or state statutory authority, are considered rehabilitation projects.
However, in reality, most development projects involving historic properties
employ a combination of these processes, usually restoration of the exterior
and rehabilitation of the interior.
The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and
Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings are routinely employed by
this office as the basis for evaluations of development projects affecting
historic properties. These standards, developed by the National Park Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, in 1976, encourage the repair and retention
of the original fabric and character-defining features of historic properties.
A copy of the Standards for Rehabilitation is contained in Appendix D.
The Standard for Rehabilitation will be formally adopted later this year
as the professional standards mandated by Section 267.061(3)(k), Florida
Statutes, for the preservation of historic resources in state ownership or
control.
The rehabilitation approach described in the following discussion is
fully consistent with the Standards for Rehabilitation.
Because of the need to inspect and repair the structural framing, all
interior finishes should be removed at the first and second levels. Original
trim and wainscotting should be carefully removed and salvaged for reuse. The
existing stairs should be protected and retained in-place. The front porch
roof should be shored, and the deck and deck framing removed in their
entirety. The posts and brackets should be salvaged and repaired and, upon
reconstruction of the deck, reinstalled in their original locations.
At the rear of the house, the two story addition and porch enclosure
should be removed. The remaining porch framing should be repaired in-place if
possible. If removal and reconstruction is necessary, remaining sound framing
should be shored, and the chamfered posts retained in-place or salvaged for
reuse.
The porch piers and all piers at the perimeter of the building envelop
should be dismantled and rebuilt so as to comply with the requirements of the
prevailing building code. This work entails constructing a reinforced
concrete footing into which a threaded steel rod is anchored. The piers are
rebuilt around the rod, using the original brick and a mortar which matches
the existing material in compressive strength, color and texture. In all
masonry repair or reconstruction in which old, relatively soft masonry units
are used, the compressive strength of new mortar must be no greater than that
of the masonry unit to avoid an incompatibility of physical properties in the
masonry matrix which can result in accelerated deterioration of the masonry
units. A steel plate is secured to the pier by the rod and is then anchored
to the sill by lag or through bolts. Termite shields are installed during
this procedure. Shields are installed at existing interior piers as the floor
framing is leveled. Parenthetically, termites shields are not effective
against drywood termites, the type which infested this building.
All deteriorated framing should be repaired or replaced. Pressure
treated material is recommended for sill repair, porch framing and exterior
stair construction. This repair can be accomplished with only minor removal
of exterior siding. Any deteriorated siding encountered in this process
should be replaced in-kind.
A plywood subfloor should be installed at the first and second floors,
assuming that the third level garret will not be rehabilitated because of its
small size and limited accessibility.
The existing roofing should be removed, the roof framing repaired as
necessary and plywood sheathing installed. The original roofing appears to
have been wood shingles not shakes which are riven rather than sawn.
Fiberglass shingles which replicate the appearance of wood shingles would be
an acceptable alternative to new wood shingles.
New electrical, HVAC (heating, ventilating and air conditioning), and
plumbing systems designed to accommodate contemporary needs should be
installed. Two HVAC systems are often employed in the rehabilitation of such
buildings, one system serving each floor. At the first floor, the air
handling unit and duct work are installed beneath the floor. The air handling
unit and duct work for the second floor system are located in the attic. This
approach eliminates the need for chases or dropped ceilings at either level.
Pad mounted condensing units should be located out of view at the rear of the
building.
Batt or foil backed foam insulation can be installed prior to
installation of new interior finishes. Gypsum board is considered an
acceptable substitute for original plaster wall and ceiling finishes in such a
project. It is suggested that new pine flooring be installed in the entry
hall at the first level, and if funding permits, in the original parlor and
dining room. Contemporary floor finishes (carpet, vinyl or vinyl composition
floor covering) may be used throughout the remainder of the building.
Salvaged trim and wainscotting should be reinstalled in the original parlor,
dining room and stairhall at the first floor, and, if sufficient material is
available, in the stairhall and corridor at the second floor.
APPENDIX A
Inspection of 25 St. Francis Street
St. Augustine, Florida
Photographs Describing the Surrounding Area
Photographs by:
Bureau of Historic Preservation
Division of Archives, History and Records Management
Department of State
f .. .. .. .
PA KI NG
r Y <- ST. F,\AWCIS STET
31
25
G)
PARK LLAM5IA SITE DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY
n HOUSE SITE AFFAIRS HEADQUANTE.fS
rn
PHOTOGRAPHIC KEY S \UDlG AEA O SCALE
PMOTOGP\APHIC KY SUH^OUHDIHjG Af^A HO SCALE.
'_5 ST. FI AlCIS STREET ST. AUGUSTINE.
I5HPO0G1786
FIGURE 1. Streetscape. St. Francis Street at Charlotte
Street, looking west. 25 St. Francis Street at left.
..'s;''-""-"".4
FIGURE 2. 25 St Francis Street, view from southwest. Llambia House in background.
FIGURE 3. 28
century frame
significantly
i J
St. Francis Street. Mid-19th
vernacular residence,
altered in late-19th century.
FIGURE 4. 31 St. Francis Street, Llambia House.
Restored/reconstructed to its 1788 appearance in 1954.
/ -7' --
Th!~V
U
FIGURE 5. 32 St. Francis Street. Masonry
vernacular structure with alterations (porch
and dormer) dating to 1920s or 1930s.
FIGURE 6. 34 St. Francis Street. Late 19th century
residential structure. Design influenced by Italianate
Style.
w
FIGURE 7. 279 St. George Street, St. Francis Inn. Late
19th century alterations influenced by Second Empire Style.
FIGURE 8. Park at corner of St. Francis Street and St.
George Street. Residential structures in background: 280
St. George Street at right, late 19th century frame vernac-
ular residence; 282 St. George Street, 1920s Mediterranean
Revival residence.
The existing interior stairs should be repaired and restored. Note that
an exterior stair originally served the second floor at the rear porch. This
stair should be reconstructed per current code requirements to provide a
second means of egress from the second floor.
We recommend that the existing windows be weatherstripped during their
rehabilitation. Tinted or reflective glass should not be used in this
project. These materials significantly alter the appearance of historic
buildings.
Use of a period lighting fixture in the entry hall is desirable.
Lighting throughout the remainder of the building may be of a contemporary
type suitable to the functional requirements of the building's use.
We recommend that historic paint analysis be employed to establish the
building's original exterior color scheme. The Bureau of Historic
Preservation has conducted paint color analyses for several restoration and
rehabilitation projects across the state, and would gladly contribute this
service toward the rehabilitation of this building. Obviously, the ideal
rehabilitation color scheme would replicate the original palette.
Site work, including the development of parking at the rear of the site,
should be undertaken in such a manner as to avoid any adverse visual effect on
the building or the streetscape to which it contributes. Vegetative screening
could be used effectively to reduce the visual impact of any parking on the
site.
REHABILITATION COST. The following is a preliminary cost estimate based
upon our current perception of the condition of the building and the
rehabilitation approach described in the preceding comments (office use
assumed).
Demolition, Termite Treatment $ 8,600
Pier Repair and Reconstruction, Envelop Structural
Repair, Porch Repair and Reconstruction (including
2nd Stair) $17,900
Roof Deck, Roofing $ 9,500
Electrical, HVAC, Plumbing $24,200
Insulation, Interior Finishes, Painting $25,600
Contractor Mobilization/Supervision/Permits $ 8,600
Architectural Services $ 8,500
Contingency @ 10% $10,300
TOTAL $113,200
Current average costs for new lowscale office space range from $35 to $65
per square foot (exclusive of architectural services). Assuming an average
value for the purposes of comparison, the construction cost for new office
space would be $50 per square foot. For new office construction of this size
and type, the typical fee for architectural services would be 8% of the
construction cost, raising the total project cost to $54 per square foot. The
gross enclosed area of the existing building is 2100 square feet. Therefore,
the cost of the new office building would be approximately $113,000.
In comparison, the cost of rehabilitating the existing building as
offices would be approximately equal to the cost of a comparable amount of new
office space.
In a survey of 10 late nineteenth century wood frame residential
buildings rehabilitated as "guest houses" (rental tourist accommodations) in
Key West, the average cost of rehabilitation was $65 per square foot. It
should be noted that the average condition of these buildings was equivalent
to that of the building being evaluated, although some were in considerably
worse condition. Current price level indices indicate that construction and
other costs in Monroe County are approximately 10% higher than costs in St
Johns County. Thus, after adjustment for location, the average rehabilitation
cost for these buildings would be $58 per square foot or $121,800 for a
building comparable in size, age, construction and apparent condition to the
Queen Anne residence at 25 St. Francis Street. Rehabilitation of the St.
Francis Street building as guest or tourist accommodations would increase the
cost of rehabilitation by approximately $8,000 to $121,200, a cost which
compares favorably with the average cost of recent projects of this type.
Based upon these comparisons and all information presently available, we
must conclude that the rehabilitation of the building at 25 St. Francis Street
is technically and economically feasible.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF ACQUISITION. The following recommendations are
provided in accordance with the provisions of Section 267.061(2), Florida
Statutes. The text of Chapter 267, Florida Statutes, is contained in Appendix
E.
In light of the foregoing evaluation, it is the recommendation of this
office that State acquisition of the site designated as 25 St. Francis Street
be conditioned upon:
1. rehabilitation in situ of the existing residential structure in
accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation, and
2. professional archaeological survey and salvage of all subsurface
areas to be disturbed by project related activities. Specific
criteria and guidelines for the conduct of archaeological work shall
be provided by the Bureau of Historic Preservation.
Inquires regarding the comments and recommendations contained in this
report should be directed to:
Bureau of Historic Preservation
Division of Archives, History and Records Management
Department of State
The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32301-8020
(904) 487-2333
APPENDIX B
Inspection of 25 St. Francis Street
St. Augustine, Florida
Exterior and Interior Photographs
Photographs by:
Bureau of Historic Preservation
Division of Archives, History and Records Management
Department of State
V16
PHOTOGRAPHIC
KEY
25 ST. FRANCIS STREET -
- FIST FLOOR
ST. AUGUSTINE
NO SCALE
bEP 0Go786
AFTER DNIAWIIG PfEPAINED 5Y:
MOWAI4D DAVIS ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS
ADDITION (fEMOVAL
',E CO M k! E k DED)
RP-\STOf-ATIOkl OF
FEAIR POPCH A-ID
PLECOJFIGUfATIOIJ OF
STAIP PECOMMEUDED
A INDICATED
L A PMOTOGPNAFP OF ATTIC
FPRAMIWG AbOVE
PHOTOQGRAPhIC
SECOND FLOOh
Z5 ST. FNAIICI5 STE.-T ST. AUGU5T!INE
HO SCALE.
F')H P Or17 b6
AFTEf\ DAWI1U6 PPEPAhED BY:
hOWARD DAVIS A5SOCIATE5 A\CH!TECT5
KEY -
ADDITION ( fEMOVAL
FIECOM M.H DED)
P MOTO G RAPHIC
KE.Y -
THINfD FLOON
165 5T- FfAHCI5 5TEET,' 5T. AUGUSTIlJE
WO 5CALE.
bHP 061758
AFTER DIAWIIJG PlpE-PANIED BEY-
HOWARD DAVIl A15OCIATES AICHITECT5
FIGURE 9. 25 St. Francis Street, view from northeast.
r.
FIGURE 10. 25 St. Francis Street. North elevation.
40
lwff
FIGURE 11. 25 St. Francis Street. East elevation. Note
localized foundation failure at infilled porch (arrow).
FIGURE 12. 25 St. Francis Street.
South elevation.
FIGURE 13. Typical 1/1 double-hung
window. Condition: good.
FIGURE 14. Termite damage
at built-up corner post (see Figure
15).
FIGURE 15. Detail of termite damage
at corner post. Note that window,
siding, lath and adjacent stud have
sustained little or no damage.
11w .' "'^^^^^^y
, .j -i; .
j./;-! "^ ^1
/--
//-zzki--
S*;? I^^w^^
FIGURE 16. Infill at rear porch.
Note settlement at right.
FIGURE 17. Balcony on East
Elevation. Condition: stable.
FIGURE 18. Front porch, east side.
Original millwork in good condition.
Non-historic screened enclosure.
FIGURE 19. Front porch at entry.
Original millwork in fair to good
condition.
FIGURE 20. Roof deck and millwork
at front porch. Deteriorated paint;
deck, framing and ornamental work in
fair to good condition.
FIGURE 21. Deck and post at front
porch. Lower part of post previously
replaced. Previous deck repair
exhibits poor workmanship which has
contributed to recent deterioration.
FIGURE 22. Front entry. Condition:
good.
FIGURE 23.
elevation.
Projecting bay on north
Condition: good.
47it
.11
i-b'
I
ii
FIGURE 24. Post at west side of front
porch. Minor termite damage at base.
Poor quality past repair of post, deck
and framing.
Wt
Ilk
1 A
I A
FIGURE 25. Stair and entry hall. Condition: good to
fair.
Parlor (Room 102). Condition: fair.
FIGURE 27. Enclosed rear porch, first floor. Note
original rear stair stringer (arrow).
FIGURE 26.
FIGURE 28. Stair, second floor landing. Note localized
termite damage at handrail. Balusters remain in good
condition.
FIGURE 29. Floor in Room 202. Flooring damaged by termites,
joist beneath undamaged.
FIGURE 30.
Corridor at second floor (Room 201).
FIGURE 31. Room 207. Frass on floor indicates termite
damage. French doors open onto balcony at west elevation.
FIGURE 32. Room 205. Flooring damaged by termites (see
Figure 33).
FIGURE 33. Flooring at south wall of Room 205. Joist
beneath damaged flooring evidences no termite damage.
FIGURE 34. North wall, Room 301 (garret). Note localized
termite damage in beaded siding (see Figure 35).
FIGURE 35. Detail of siding damaged by termites, Room 301
Stud beneath appears undamaged.
-
'I
\~ ;~
FIGURE 36. Ceiling, Room 301 (garret). Condition: fair to
good.
APPENDIX C
Inspection of 25 St. Francis Street
St. Augustine, Florida
Photographs Describing the Condition of Framing and Piers
under the Building, and Framing Visible in the Attic
Photographs by:
Bureau of Historic Preservation
Division of Archives, History and Records Management
Department of State
LI PE. O --
PORfCM
FOIP LOCATION OF ATTIC PHOTOGAPIiS SeE SECOND FLOOR KEY- APPENDIX b
PMOTOGRAPtIC KEY CfRAWL SPACE.
25 'T. Ff LACI ST,-EET tT. AUGUSTI!E
WO4 noCALE
WHP 061766
AFTER DP\AWIWQ PREPAtNED bY:
HOWARD DAV15 A550CIATE5 AFRCHITECTS
FIGURE 37. Roof and ceiling framing above Room 203. Termite damage confined to
two members (arrows).
AI
FIGURE 38. Roof and ceiling framing above second floor
corridor. Termite damage confined to two members (arrows).
\-' ', ^
--A
FIGURE 39. Roof and ceiling framing above Room 207.
Termite damage confined to one member (arrow).
FIGURE 40. Deck framing and pier at front porch.
quality past repair), deteriorated brick pier.
Deck and framing rotted (poor;
FIGURE 41. Deck framing at front porch. Some deck
deterioration, poor quality past repair.
FIGURE 42. Deck framing at front porch. Framing deteri-
orated due to termite damage, deck rotted in localized
areas. Poor quality past repair.
FIGURE 43. Floor framing and piers under main part of
building. Minor termite damage to beam at pier (arrow)
resulting in slight compression of member. Damage insuf-
ficient to affect structural stability. Remainder of
construction (including piers) stable.
FIGURE 44. Floor framing and pier under main part of
building. All construction stable.
FIGURE 45. Floor framing and piers under main part of building. All construc-
tion, including flooring, stable.
FIGURE 46. Floor framing and pier under rear part of
original building. Floor joist at r igllt is only member
under main part of hu i Icling evidenving i cir astnit1 I termite
damage.
FIGURE 47. Floor framing and pier under rear part of
original building. Framing condition: good; pier condi-
tion: fair.
FIGURE 48. Floor framing and piers under rear addition.
Quality of construction poor, substantial damage due to
wood rot encouraged by leaking plumbing.
FIGURE 49. Floor framing and pier under main part of
building. Framing condition: good; pier condition:
fair.
-I
V4~
-7----,
- -'7r
FIGURE 50. Floor framing and pier under main part of
building. All construction, including flooring, stable.
FIGURE 51. Floor framing at floor furnace. Severed
joists inadequately supported.
00000 ,g-
oP* ..---
FIGURE 52. Floor framing and piers under main part of
building. All construction stable.
- ft-000-
~y~q~fr ~"*9Em
- -~ -
FIGURE 53. Sill at areaway, west elevation. Lower member
of composite sill damaged by termites. Remainder of sill
evidences minor damage.
APPENDIX D
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation
and
Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
(Revised 1983)
Preservation Assistance Division
National Park Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
Washington, D.C.
The Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation
and Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (Revised 1983)
U.S. Department of the Interior
National Park Service
Preservation Assistance Division
Washington, D.C.
The "Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic
Preservation Projects" were initially prepared in 1979 by W.
Brown Morton III and Gary L. Hume. The updated and
expanded Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings that
follow were developed by Gary L. Hume and Kay D. Weeks,
Technical Preservation Services, Preservation Assistance
Division, with the assistance of the professional and support
staff.
CONTENTS
Introduction to the Standards and Guidelines 5
BUILDING EXTERIOR
Masonry: Brick, stone, terra-cotta, concrete, adobe, stucco, and mortar
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 12
Design for Missing Historic Features 15
Wood: Clapboard, weatherboard, shingles, and other wooden siding and decorative
elements
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 16
Design for Missing Historic Features 18
Architectural Metals: 'Cast iron, steel, pressed tin, copper, aluminum, and zinc
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 19
Design for Missing Historic Features 21
Roofs
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 22
Design for Missing Historic Features 23
Additions/Alterations for the New Use 24
Windows
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 25
Design for Missing Historic Features 26
Additions/Alterations for the New Use 27
Entrances and Porches
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 28
Design for Missing Historic Features 29
Additions/Alterations for the New Use 29
Storefronts
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 31
Design for Missing Historic Features 32
BUILDING INTERIOR
Structural Systems
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 33
Alterations/Additions for the New Use 34
Interior Spaces, Features, and Finishes
Preservation of Historic Spaces, Features, and Finishes (maintenance, repair,
replacement) 36
Design for Missing Historic Features and Finishes 39
Alterations/Additions for the New Use 40
Mechanical Systems
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 41
Alterations/Additions for the New Use 42
BUILDING SITE
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 43
Design for Missing Historic Features 45
Alterations/Additions for the New Use 46
DISTRICT/NEIGHBORHOOD
Preservation of Historic Features (maintenance, repair, replacement) 47
Design for Missing Historic Features 48
Alterations/Additions for the New Use 49
HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE REQUIREMENTS 51
ENERGY RETROFITTING 53
NEW ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS 56
Reading List and Ordering Information
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION
The Secretary of the Interior is responsible for establishing standards for all
programs under Departmental authority and for advising Federal agencies on the
preservation of historic properties listed or eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places. In partial fulfillment of this responsibility, the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation Projects have been
developed to direct work undertaken on historic buildings.
Initially used by the Secretary of the Interior in determining the applicability of
proposed project work on registered properties within the Historic Preservation Fund
grant-in-aid program, the Standards for Historic Preservation Projects have received
extensive testing over the years-more than 6,000 acquisition and development
projects were approved for a variety of work treatments. In addition, the Standards
have been used by Federal agencies in carrying out their historic preservation
responsibilities for properties in Federal ownership or control; and by State and local
officials in the review of both Federal and nonfederal rehabilitation proposals. They
have also been adopted by a number of historic district and planning commissions
across the country.
The Standards for Rehabilitation (36 CFR 67) comprise that section of the overall
historic preservation project standards addressing the most prevalent treatment
today: Rehabilitation. "Rehabilitation" is defined as the process of returning a
property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an
efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the
property which are significant to its historic, architectural, and cultural values.
The Standards for Rehabilitation are as follows:
1. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a property
which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or site and its
environment, or to use a property for its originally intended purpose.
2. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure, or site
and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic
material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible.
3. All buildings, structures, and sites shall be recognized as products of their own
time. Alterations that have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier
appearance shall be discouraged.
4. Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the
history and development of a building, structure, or site and its environment. These
changes may have acquired significance in their own right, and this significance shall
be recognized and respected.
5. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which
characterize a building, structure, or site shall be treated with sensitivity.
6. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced,
wherever possible. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should
match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other
visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features should be
based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historic, physical, or
pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different
architectural elements from other buildings or structures.
7. The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken with the gentlest means
possible. Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that will damage the historic
building materials shall not be undertaken.
8. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archeological
resources affected by, or adjacent to any project.
9. Contemporary design for alterations and additions to existing properties shall not
be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant
historical, architectural or cultural material, and such design is compatible with the
size, scale, color, material, and character of the property, neighborhood or
environment.
10. Wherever possible, new additions or alterations to structures shall be done in
such a manner that if such additions or alterations were to be removed in the future,
the essential form and integrity of the structure would be unimpaired.
In the past several years, the most frequent use of the Secretary's "Standards for
Rehabilitation" has been to determine if a rehabilitation project qualifies as a
"certified rehabilitation" pursuant to the Tax Reform Act of 1976, the Revenue Act
of 1978, and the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, as amended. The Secretary is
required by law to certify rehabilitations that are "consistent with the historic
character of the structure or the district in which it is located." The Standards are
used to evaluate whether the historic character of a building is preserved in the
process of rehabilitation. Between 1976 and 1982 over 5,000 projects were reviewed
and approved under the Preservation Tax Incentives program.
As stated in the definition, the treatment "Rehabilitation" assumes that at least
some repair or alteration of the historic building will need to take place in order to
provide for an efficient contemporary use; however these repairs and alterations
must not damage or destroy the materials and features-including their finishes-that
are important in defining the building's historic character.
In terms of specific project work, preservation of the building and its historic
character is based on the assumption that (1) the historic materials and features and
their unique craftsmanship are of primary importance and that (2), in consequence
they will be retained, protected, and repaired in the process of rehabilitation to the
greatest extent possible, not removed and replaced with materials and features
which appear to be historic, but which are-in fact-new.
To best achieve these preservation goals, a two-part evaluation needs to be applied
by qualified historic preservation professionals for each project as follows: first, a
particular property's materials and features which are important in defining its
historic character should be identified. Examples may include a building's walls,
cornice, window sash and frames and roof; rooms, hallways, stairs, and mantels; or a
site's walkways, fences, and gardens. The second part of the evaluation should
consist of assessing the potential impact of the work necessary to make possible an
efficient contemporary use. A basic assumption in this process is that the historic
character of each property is unique and therefore proposed rehabilitation work will
necessarily have a different effect on each property; in other words, what may be
acceptable for one project may be unacceptable for another. However, the
requirement set forth in the definition of "Rehabilitation" is always the same for
every project: those portions and features of the property which are significant to
its historic, architectural, and cultural values must be preserved in the process of
rehabilitation. To accomplish this, all ten of the Secretary of the Interior's
"Standards for Rehabilitation" must be met.
GUIDELINES FOR REHABILITATING HISTORIC BUILDINGS
The Guidelines were initially developed in 1977 to help property owners, developers,
and Federal managers apply the Secretary of the Interior's "Standards for
Rehabilitation" during the project planning stage by providing general design and
technical recommendations. Unlike the Standards, the Guidelines are not codified as
program requirements. Together with the "Standards for Rehabilitation" they
provide a model process for owners, developers, and federal agency managers to
follow.
It should be noted at the outset that the Guidelines are intended to assist in applying
the Standards to projects generally; consequently, they are not meant to give case-
specific advice or address exceptions or rare instances. For example, they cannot
tell an owner or developer which features of their own historic building are
important in defining the historic character and must be preserved-although
examples are provided in each section--or which features could be altered, if
necessary, for the new use. This kind of careful case-by-case decisionmaking is best
accomplished by seeking assistance from qualified historic preservation professionals
in the planning stage of the project. Such professionals include architects,
architectural historians, historians, archeologists, and others who are skilled in the
preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration of historic properties.
The Guidelines pertain to historic buildings of all sizes, materials, occupancy, and
construction types; and apply to interior and exterior work as well as new exterior
additions. Those approaches, treatments, and techniques that are consistent with the
Secretary of the Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation" are listed in the
"Recommended" column on the left; those approaches, treatments, and techniques
which could adversely affect a building's historic character are listed in the "Not
Recommended" column on the right.
To provide clear and consistent guidance for owners,.developers, and federal Agency
managers to follow, the "Recommended" courses of action in each section are listed
in order of historic preservation concerns so that a rehabilitation project may be
successfully planned and completed-one that, first, assures the preservation of a
building's important or "character-defining" architectural materials and features and,
second, makes possible an efficient contemporary use. Rehabilitation guidance in
each section begins with protection and maintenance, that work which should be
maximized in every project to enhance overall preservation goals. Next, where some
deterioration is present, repair of the building's historic materials and features is
recommended. Finally, when deterioration is so extensive that repair is nqt possible,
the most problematic area of work is considered: replacement of historic materials
and features with new materials.
To further guide the owner and developer in planning a successful rehabilitation
project, those complex design issues dealing with new use requirements such as
alterations and additions are highlighted at the end of each section to underscore the
need for particular sensitivity in these areas.
Identify, Retain, and Preserve
The guidance that is basic to the treatment of all historic buildings--identifying,
retaining, and preserving the form and detailing of those architectural materials and
features that are important in defining the historic character- is always listed first
in the "Recommended" column. The parallel "Not Recommended" column lists the
types of actions that are most apt to cause the diminution or even loss of the
building's historic character. It should be remembered, however, that such loss of
character is just as often caused by the cumulative effect of a series of actions that
would seem to be minor interventions. Thus, the guidance in all of the "Not
Recommended" columns must be viewed in that larger context, e.g., for the total
impact on a historic building.
Protect and Maintain
After identifying those materials and features that are important and must be
retained in the process of rehabilitation work, then protecting and maintaining them
are addressed. Protection generally involves the least degree of intervention and is
preparatory to other work. For example, protection includes the maintenance of
historic material through treatments such as rust removal, caulking, limited paint
removal, and re-application of protective coatings; the cyclical cleaning of roof
gutter systems; or installation of fencing, protective plywood, alarm systems and
other temporary protective measures. Although a historic building will usually
require more extensive work, an overall evaluation of its physical condition should
always begin at this level.
Repair
Next, when the physical condition of character-defining materials and features
warrants additional work repairing is recommended. Guidance for the repair of
historic materials such as masonry, wood, and architectural metals again begins with
the least degree of intervention possible such as patching, piecing-in, splicing,
consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing or upgrading them according to recognized
preservation methods. Repairing also includes the limited replacement in kind--or
with compatible substitute material--of extensively deteriorated or missing parts of
features when there are surviving prototypes (for example, brackets, dentils, steps,
plaster, or portions of slate or tile roofing). Although using the same kind of
material is always the preferred option, substitute material is acceptable if the form
and design as well as the substitute material itself convey the visual appearance of
the remaining parts of the feature and finish.
Replace
Following repair in the hierarchy, guidance is provided for replacing an entire
character-defining feature with new material because the level of deterioration or
damage of materials precludes repair (for example, an exterior cornice; an interior
staircase; or a complete porch or storefront). If the essential form and detailing are
still evident so that the physical evidence can be used to re-establish the feature as
an integral part of the rehabilitation project, then its replacement is appropriate.
Like the guidance for repair, the preferred option is always replacement of the
I6-CES 0 83 2
entire feature in kind, that is, with the same material. Because this approach may
not always be technically or economically feasible, provisions are made to consider
the use of a compatible substitute material.
It should be noted that, while the National Park Service guidelines recommend the
replacement of an entire character-defining feature under certain well-defined
circumstances, they never recommend removal and replacement with new material
of a feature that-although damaged or deteriorated-could reasonably be repaired
and thus preserved.
Design for Missing Historic Features
When an entire interior or exterior feature is missing (for example, an entrance, or
cast iron facade; or a principal staircase), it no longer plays a role in physically
defining the historic character of the building unless it can be accurately recovered
in form and detailing through the process of carefully documenting the historical
appearance. Where an important architectural feature is missing, its recovery is
always recommended in the guidelines as the first or preferred, course of action.
Thus, if adequate historical, pictorial, and physical documentation exists so that the
feature may be accurately reproduced, and if it is desirable to re-establish the
feature as part of the building's historical appearance, then designing and
constructing a new feature based on such information is appropriate. However, a
second acceptable option for the replacement feature is a new design that is
compatible with the remaining character-defining features of the historic building.
The new design should always take into account the size, scale, and material of the
historic building itself and, most importantly, should be clearly differentiated so that
a false historical appearance is not created.
Alterations/Additions to Historic Buildings
Some exterior and interior alterations to the historic building are generally needed to
assure its continued use, but it is most important that such alterations do not radically
change, obscure, or destroy character-defining spaces, materials, features, or
finishes. Alterations may include providing additional parking space on an existing
historic building site; cutting new entrances or windows on secondary elevations;
inserting an additional floor; installing an entirely new mechanical system; or
creating an atrium or light well. Alterations may also include the selective removal
of buildings or other features of the environment or building site that are intrusive
and therefore detract from the overall historic character.
The construction of an exterior addition to a historic building may seem to be
essential for the new use, but it is emphasized in the guidelines that such new
additions should be avoided, if possible, and considered only after it is determined
that those needs cannot be met by altering secondary, i.e., non character-defining
interior spaces. If, after a thorough evaluation of interior solutions, an exterior
addition is still judged to be the only viable alternative, it should be designed and
constructed to be clearly differentiated from the historic building and so that the
character-defining features are not radically changed, obscured, damaged, or
destroyed.
Additions to historic buildings are referenced within specific sections of the
guidelines such as Site, Roof, Structural Systems, etc., but are also considered in
more detail in a separate section, NEW ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS.
Health and Safety Code Requirements; Energy Retrofitting
These sections of the rehabilitation guidance address work done to meet health and
safety code requirements (for example, providing barrier-free access to historic
buildings); or retrofitting measures to conserve energy (for example, installing solar
collectors in an unobtrusive location on the site). Although this work is quite often
an important aspect of rehabilitation projects, it is usually not part of the overall
process of protecting or repairing character-defining features; rather, such work is
assessed for its potential negative impact on the building's historic character. For
this reason, particular care must be taken not to radically change, obscure, damage,
or destroy character-defining materials or features in the process of rehabilitation
work to meet code and energy requirements.
Specific information on rehabilitation and preservation technology may be obtained
by writing to the National Park Service, at the addresses listed below:
Preservation Assistance Division
National Park Service
Department of the Interior
Washington, D.C. 20240
National Historic Preservation
Programs
Western Regional Office
National Park Service
450 Golden Gate Ave.
Box 36063
San Francisco, CA 94102
Division of Cultural Resources
Rocky Mountain Regional Office
National Park Service
655 Parfet St.
P.O. Box 25287
Denver, CO 80225
Preservation Services Division
Southeast Regional Office
National Park Service
75 Spring St. SW., Room 1140
Atlanta, GA 30303
Office of Cultural Programs
Mid-Atlantic Regional Office
National Park Service
143 S. Third St.
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Cultural Resources Division
Alaska Regional Office
National Park Service
2525 Gambell St.
Anchorage, AK 99503
BUILDING EXTERIOR
Masonry: Brick, stone, terra cotta,
concrete, adobe, stucco and mortar
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving
masonry features that are important in
defining the overall historic character of
the building such as walls, brackets,
railings, cornices, window architraves,
door pediments, steps, and columns; and
joint and unit size, tooling and bonding
patterns, coatings, and color.
Protecting and maintaining masonry by
providing proper drainage so that water
does not stand on flat, horizontal
surfaces or accumulate in curved
decorative features.
Masonry features (such as brick cornices and
door pediments, stone window architraves,
terra cotta brackets and railings) as well as
masonry surfaces (modelling, tooling, bonding
patterns, joint size, and color) may be
important in defining the historic character
of the building. It should be noted that while
masonry is among the most durable of
historic building materials, it is also the most
susceptible to damage by improper
maintenance or repair techniques and by
harsh or abrasive cleaning methods. Most
preservation guidance on masonry thus
focuses on such concerns as cleaning and the
process of repointing. For specific guidance
on this subject, consult Preservation Briefs:
1, 2, 5, 6, and 7. (See Reading List and
Ordering Information on pg. 58.)
Not Recommended
Removing or radically changing masonry
features which are important in defining
the overall historic character of the
building so that, as a result, the
character is diminished.
Replacing or rebuilding a major portion
of exterior masonry walls that co ld be
repaired so that, as a result, the building
is no longer historic and is essentially
new construction.
Applying paint or other coatings such as
stucco to. masonry that has been
historically unpainted or uncoated to
create a new appearance.
Removing paint from historically painted
masonry.
Radically changing the type of paint or
coating or its color.
Failing to evaluate and treat the various
causes of mortar joint deterioration such
as leaking roofs or gutters, differential
settlement of the building, capillary
action, or extreme weather exposure.
Masonry (continued)
Recommended
Cleaning masonry only when necessary to
halt deterioration or remove heavy
soiling.
Carrying out masonry surface cleaning
tests after it has been determined that
such cleaning is necessary. Tests should
be observed over a sufficient period of
time so that both the immediate effects
and the long range effects are known to
enable selection of the gentlest method
possible.
Cleaning masonry surfaces with the
gentlest method possible, such as low
pressure water and detergents, using
natural bristle brushes. .
Inspecting painted masonry surfaces to
determine whether repainting is
necessary.
Removing damaged or deteriorated paint
only to the next sound layer using the
gentlest method possible (e.g.,
handscraping) prior to repainting.
Not Recommended
Cleaning masonry surfaces when they are
not heavily soiled to create a new
appearance, thus needlessly introducing
chemicals or moisture into historic
materials.
Cleaning masonry surfaces without
testing or without sufficient time for the
testing results to be of value.
Sandblasting brick or stone surfaces
using dry or wet grit or other abrasives.
These methods of cleaning permanently
erode the surface of the material and
accelerate deterioration.
Using a cleaning method that involves
water or liquid chemical solutions when
there is any possibility of freezing
temperatures.
Cleaning with chemical products that
will damage masonry, such as using acid
on limestone or marble, or leaving
chemicals on masonry surfaces.
Applying high pressure water
methods that will damage
masonry and the mortar joints.
Removing paint that is firmly
to, and thus protecting,
surfaces.
cleaning
historic
adhering
masonry
Using methods of removing paint which
are destructive to masonry, such as
sandblasting, application of caustic
solutions, or high pressure waterblasting.
Applying
systems
preparation
compatible
following
paint
proper
coating Failing to follow manufacturers' product
surface and application instructions when
repainting masonry.
Repainting with colors that are
historically appropriate to the building
and district.
Using new paint colors that are
inappropriate to the historic building and
district.
Masonry (continued)
Recommended
Evaluating the overall condition of the
masonry to determine whether more than
protection and maintenance are required,
that is, if repairs to the masonry
features will be necessary.
Repairing masonry walls and other
masonry features by repointing the
mortar joints where there is evidence of
deterioration such as disintegrating
mortar, cracks in mortar joints, loose
bricks, damp walls, or damaged
plasterwork.
Not Recommended
Failing to undertake adequate measures
to assure the preservation of masonry
features.
Removing nondeteriorated mortar from
sound joints, then repointing the entire
building to achieve a uniform
appearance.
Removing deteriorated
carefully hand-raking the
damaging the masonry.
mortar by
joints to avoid
Duplicating old mortar in strength,
composition, color, and texture.
Duplicating old mortar joints in width
and in joint profile.
Repairing stucco by removing the
damaged material and patching with new
stucco that duplicates the old in
strength, composition, color, and
texture.
Using mud plaster as a surface coating
over unfired, unstabilized adobe because
the mud plaster will bond to the adobe.
Using electric saws and hammers rather
than hand tools to remove deteriorated
mortar from joints prior to repointing.
Repointing with mortar of high portland
cement content (unless it is the content
of the historic mortar). This can often
create a bond that is stronger than the
historic material and can cause damage
as a result of the differing coefficient of
expansion and the differing porosity of
the material and the mortar.
Repointing with a synthetic caulking
compound.
Using a "scrub" coating technique to
repoint instead of traditional repointing
methods.
Changing the width or joint profile when
repointing.
Removing sound stucco; or repairing with
new stucco that is stronger than the
historic material or does not convey the
same visual appearance.
Applying cement stucco to unfired,
unstabilized adobe. Because the cement
stucco will not bond properly, moisture
can become entrapped between
materials, resulting in accelerated
deterioration of the adobe.
Masonry (continued)
Recommended
Repairing masonry features by patching,
piecing-in, or consolidating the masonry
using recognized preservation methods.
Repair may also include the limited
replacement in kind--or with compatible
substitute material--of those extensively
deteriorated or missing parts of masonry
features when there are surviving
prototypes such as terra-cotta brackets
or stone balusters.
Applying new or non-historic surface
treatments such as water-repellent
coatings to masonry only after repointing
and only if masonry repairs have failed
to arrest water penetration problems.
Replacing in kind an entire masonry
feature that is too deteriorated to
repair--if the overall form and detailing
are still evident--using the physical
evidence to guide the new work.
Examples can include large sections of a
wall, a cornice, balustrade, column, or
stairway. If using the same kind of
material is not technically or
Not Recommended
Replacing an entire masonry feature
such as a cornice or balustrade when
repair of the masonry and limited
replacement of deteriorated or missing
parts are appropriate.
Using a substitute material for the
replacement part that does not convey
the visual appearance of the surviving
parts of the masonry feature or that is
physically or chemically incompatible.
Applying waterproof, water-repellent, or
non-historic coatings such as stucco to
masonry as a substitute for repointing
and masonry repairs. Coatings are
frequently unnecessary, expensive, and
may change the appearance of historic
masonry as well as accelerate its
deterioration.
Removing a masonry feature that is
unrepairable and not replacing it; or
replacing it with a new feature that does
not convey the same visual appearance.
economically feasible, then a compatible
substitute material may be considered.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing and installing a'new'masonry
feature such as steps'or a door pediment'
when the historic feature is completely
missing. It may be an accurate
restoration using historical, pictorial,
and physical documentation; or be a new
design that is compatible with the size,
scale, material, and color of the historic
building.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced masonry feature is
based on insufficient historical, pictorial,
and physical documentation.
Introducing a new masonry feature that
is incompatible in size, scale, material
and color.
Wood: Clapboard,
weatherboard, shingles,
and other wooden
siding and decorative
elements
Because it can be easily shaped by sawing, planing,
carving, and gouging, wood is the most commonly used
material for architectural features such as clapboards,
cornices, brackets, entablatures, shutters, columns and
balustrades. These wooden features--both functional and
decorative--may be important in defining the historic
character of the building and thus their retention,
protection, and repair are of particular importance in
rehabilitation projects. For specific guidance, consult
Preservation Briefs: 9, 10, and "Epoxies for Wood Repair in
Historic Buildings." (See Reading List and Ordering
Information on pg. 58.)
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving
wood features that are important in
defining the overall historic character of
the building such as siding, cornices,
brackets, window architraves, and
doorway pediments; and their paints,
finishes, and colors.
Protecting and maintaining wood
features by providing proper drainage so
that water is not allowed to stand on
flat, horizontal surfaces or accumulate
in decorative features.
Not Recommended
Removing or radically changing wood
features which are important in defining
the overall historic character of the
building so that, as a result, the
character is diminished.
Removing a major portion of the historic
wood from a facade instead of repairing
or replacing only the deteriorated wood,
then reconstructing the facade with new
material in order to achieve a uniform or
"improved" appearance.
Radically changing the type of finish or
its color or accent scheme so that the
historic character of the exterior is
diminished.
Stripping historically painted surfaces to
bare wood, then applying clear finishes
or stains in order to create a "natural
look."
Stripping paint or varnish to bare wood
rather than repairing or reapplying a
special finish, i.e., a grained finish to an
exterior wood feature such as a front
door.
Failing to identify, evaluate, and treat
the causes of wood deterioration,
including faulty flashing, leaking gutters,
cracks and holes in siding, deteriorated
caulking in joints and seams, plant
material growing too close to wood
surfaces, or insect or fungus infestation.
Wood (continued)
Recommended
Applying chemical preservatives to wood
features such as beam ends or outriggers
that are exposed to decay hazards and
are traditionally unpainted.
Retaining coatings such as paint that
help protect the wood from moisture and
ultraviolet light. Paint removal should
be considered only where there is paint
surface deterioration and as part of an
overall maintenance program which
involves repainting or applying other
appropriate protective coatings.
Not Recommended
Using chemical preservatives such as
creosote which can change the
appearance of wood features unless they
were used historically.
Stripping paint or other coatings to
reveal bare wood, thus exposing
historically coated surfaces to the
effects of accelerated weathering.
painted wood surfaces
whether repainting
or if cleaning is all that
Removing damaged or deteriorated paint
to the next sound layer using the gentlest
method possible (handscraping and
handsanding), then repainting.
Using with care electric hot-air guns on
decorative wood features and electric
heat plates on flat wood surfaces when
paint is so deteriorated that total
removal is necessary prior to repainting.
Using chemical strippers primarily to
supplement other methods such as
handscraping, handsanding and the
above-recommended thermal devices.
Detachable wooden elements such as
shutters, doors, and columns may--with
the proper safeguards--be chemically
dip-stripped.
Applying
systems
preparation
compatible
following
paint
proper
coating
surface
Repainting with colors that are
appropriate to the historic building and
district.
Evaluating the overall condition of the
wood to determine whether more than
protection and maintenance are required,
that is, if repairs to wood features will
be necessary.
Removing paint that is firmly adhering
to, and thus, protecting wood surfaces.
Using destructive paint removal methods
such as a propane or butane torches,
sandblasting or waterblasting. These
methods can irreversibly damage historic
woodwork.
Using thermal devices improperly so that
the historic woodwork is scorched.
Failing to neutralize the wood thoroughly
after using chemicals so that new paint
does not adhere.
Allowing detachable wood features to
soak too long in a caustic solution so that
the wood grain is raised and the surface
roughened.
Failing to follow manufacturers' product
and application instructions when
repainting exterior woodwork.
Using new colors that are inappropriate
to the historic building or district.
Failing to undertake adequate measures
to assure the preservation of wood
features.
36S-698 0 83 3
Inspecting
determine
necessary
required.
Wood (continued)
Recommended
Repairing wood features by patching,
piecing-in, consolidating, or otherwise
reinforcing the wood using recognized
preservation methods. Repair may also
include the limited replacement in kind--
or with compatible substitute material--
of those extensively deteriorated or
missing parts of features where there are
surviving prototypes such as brackets,
moldings, or sections of siding.
Replacing in kind an entire wood feature,
that is too deteriorated to repair--if the
overall form and detailing are still
evident--using the physical evidence to
guide the new work. Examples of wood
features include a cornice, entablature
or balustrade. If using the same kind of
material is not technically or econom-
ically feasible, then a compatible
substitute material may be considered.
Not Recommended
Replacing an entire wood feature such as
a cornice or wall when repair of the
wood and limited replacement of
deteriorated or missing parts are
appropriate.
Using substitute material for the
replacement part that does not convey
the visual appearance of the surviving
parts of the wood feature or that is
physically or chemically incompatible.
Removing an entire wood feature that is
unrepairable and not replacing it; or
replacing it with a new feature that does
not convey the same visual appearance.
The following work is highlighted because it represents the particularly complex
technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be considered
after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing and installing a 'new wood
feature such 'as a cornice'or. doorway
when the historic feature is completely
missing. It, may .be an" accurate
restoration' using historical,' pictorial,
and physical documentation; or be 'a new
design that is compatible with the size,
scale, material, and color of the historic
building.
Creating -a false historic appearance
because the replaced wood feature is
based on insufficient historical, pictorial,
and physical documentation.
Introducing a new wood feature that is
incompatible in size, scale, material, and
color.
Architectural Metals: Cast
iron, steel, pressed tin,
copper, aluminum, and zinc
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving
architectural metal features such as
columns, capitals, window hoods, or
stairways.that are important in defining
the overall historic character of the
building; and their finishes and colors.
Protecting and maintaining architectural
metals from corrosion by providing
proper drainage so that water does not
stand on flat, horizontal surfaces or
accumulate in curved, decorative
features.
Cleaning architectural metals, when
necessary, to remove corrosion prior to
repainting or applying other appropriate
protective coatings.
Architectural metal features--such as cast-iron
facades, porches, and steps; sheet metal cornices,
roofs, roof cresting and storefronts; and cast or rolled
metal doors, window sash, entablatures, and
hardware--are often highly decorative and may be
important in defining the overall historic character of
the building. Their retention, protection, and repair
should be a prime consideration in rehabilitation
projects. For specific guidance, consult "Metals in
America's Historic Buildings." (See Reading List and
Ordering Information on pg. 58.)
Not Recommended
Removing or radically changing
architectural metal features which are
important in defining the overall historic
character of the building so that, as a
result, the character is diminished.
Removing a major portion of the historic
architectural metal from a facade
instead of repairing or replacing only the
deteriorated metal, then reconstructing
the facade with new material in order to
create a uniform, or "improved"
appearance.
Radically changing the type of finish or
its historic color or accent scheme.
Failing to identify, evaluate, and treat
the causes of corrosion, such as moisture
from leaking roofs or gutters.
Placing incompatible metals together
without providing a reliable separation
material. Such incompatibility can
result in galvanic corrosion of the less
noble metal, e.g., copper will corrode
cast iron, steel, tin, and aluminum.
Exposing metals which were intended to
be protected from the environment.
Applying paint or other coatings to
metals such as copper, bronze, or
stainless steel that were meant to be
exposed.
Architectural Metals (continued)
Recommended
Identifying the particular type of metal
prior to any cleaning procedure and then
testing to assure that the gentlest
cleaning method possible is selected or
determining that cleaning is
inappropriate for the particular metal.
Cleaning soft metals
copper, terneplate,
appropriate chemical
their finishes can be
blasting methods.
such as lead, tin,
and zinc with
methods because
easily abraded by
Using the gentlest cleaning methods for
cast iron, wrought iron, and steel--hard
metals--in order to remove paint buildup
and corrosion. If handscraping and wire
brushing have proven ineffective, low
pressure dry grit blasting may be used as
long as it does not abrade or damage the
surface.
Applying appropriate paint or other
coating systems after cleaning in order
to decrease the corrosion rate of metals
or alloys.
Repainting with colors that are
appropriate to the historic building or
district.
Applying an appropriate protective
coating such as lacquer to an
architectural metal feature such as a
bronze door which is subject to heavy
pedestrian use.
Evaluating the overall condition of the
architectural metals to determine
whether more than protection and
maintenance are required, that is, if
repairs to features will be necessary.
Not Recommended
Using cleaning methods which alter or
damage the historic color, texture, and
finish of the metal; or cleaning when it is
inappropriate for the metal.
Removing the patina of historic metal.
The patina may be a protective coating
on some metals, such as bronze or
copper, as well as a significant historic
finish.
Cleaning soft metals such as lead, tin,
copper, terneplate, and zinc with grit
blasting which will abrade the surface of
the metal.
Failing to employ gentler methods prior
to abrasively cleaning cast iron, wrought
iron or steel; or using high pressure grit
blasting.
Failing to re-apply protective coating
systems to metals or alloys that require
them after cleaning so that accelerated
corrosion occurs.
Using new colors that are inappropriate
to the historic building or district.
Failing to assess pedestrian use or new
access patterns so that architectural
metal features are subject to damage by
use or inappropriate maintenance such as
salting adjacent sidewalks.
Failing to undertake adequate measures
to assure the preservation of
architectural metal features.
Architectural Metals (continued)
Recommended
Repairing architectural metal features
by patching, splicing, or otherwise
reinforcing the metal following
recognized preservation methods.
Repairs may also include the limited
replacement in kind--or with a
compatible substitute material--of those
extensively deteriorated or missing parts
of features when there are surviving
prototypes such as porch balusters,
column capitals or bases; or porch
cresting.
Replacing in kind an entire architectural
metal feature that is too deteriorated to
repair--if the overall form and detailing
are still evident--using the physical
evidence to guide the new work.
Examples could include cast iron porch
steps or steel sash windows. If using the
same kind of material is not technically
or economically feasible, then a
compatible substitute material may be
considered.
Not Recommended
Replacing an entire architectural metal
feature such as a column or a balustrade
when repair of the metal and limited
replacement of deteriorated or missing
parts are appropriate.
Using a substitute material for the
replacement part that does not convey
the visual appearance of the surviving
parts of the architectural metal feature
or is that physically or chemically
incompatible.
Removing an architectural metal feature
that is unrepairable and not replacing it;
or replacing it with a new architectural
metal feature that does not convey the
same visual appearance.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing-. and installing a, new
architectural metal feature such as a
sheet metal'cornice or, .cast iron capital
when the historic feature is completely
missing. It may be an accurate
restoration using, historical, pictorial,
and physical documentation; or be a new
design that is'compatible with the size,
scale, material, and color of the historic
building.
Creating a false historic appearance
because the replaced architectural metal
feature is based on insufficient
historical, pictorial, and physical
documentation.
Introducing a new architectural metal
feature that is incompatible in size,
scale, material, and color.
The roof--with its shape; features such as cresting, dormers,
cupolas, and chimneys; and the size, color, and patterning of the
roofing material--can be extremely important in defining the
building's overall historic character. In addition to the design role
it plays, a weathertight roof is essential to the preservation of
the entire structure; thus, protecting and repairing the roof as a
"cover" is a critical aspect of every rehabilitation project. For
specific guidance on roofs and roofing material, consult
Preservation Briefs: 4. (See Reading List and Ordering
Information on pg. 58.)
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving
roofs--and their functional and
decorative features--that are important
in defining the overall historic character
of the building. This includes the roof's
shape, such as hipped, gambrel, and
mansard; decorative features such as
cupolas, cresting, chimneys, and
weathervanes; and roofing material such
as slate, wood, clay tile, and metal, as
well as its size, color, and patterning.
Not Recommended
Radically changing, damaging, or
destroying roofs which are important in
defining the overall historic character of
the building so that, as a result, the
character is diminished.
Removing a major portion of the roof or
roofing material that is repairable, then
reconstructing it with new material in
order to create a uniform, or "improved"
appearance.
Changing the configuration of a roof by
adding new features such as dormer
windows, vents, or skylights so that the
historic character is diminished.
Stripping the roof of sound historic
material such as slate, clay tile, wood,
and architectural metal.
Applying paint or other
roofing material which
historically uncoated.
Protecting and maintaining a roof by
cleaning the gutters and downspouts and
replacing deteriorated flashing. Roof
sheathing should also be checked for
proper venting to prevent moisture
condensation and water penetration; and
to insure that materials are free from
insect infestation.
Providing adequate anchorage for roofing
material to guard against wind damage
and moisture penetration.
coatings to
has been
Failing to clean and maintain gutters and
downspouts properly so that water and
debris collect and cause damage to roof
fasteners, sheathing, and the underlying
structure.
Allowing roof fasteners, such as nails and
clips to corrode so that roofing material
is subject to accelerated deterioration.
Roofs
Roof (continued)
Recommended
Protecting a leaking roof with plywood
and building paper until it can be
properly repaired.
Repairing a roof by reinforcing the
historic materials which comprise roof
features. Repairs will also generally
include the limited replacement in kind--
or with compatible substitute material--
of those extensively deteriorated or
missing parts of features when there are
surviving prototypes such as cupola
louvers, dentils, dormer roofing; or
slates, tiles, or wood shingles on a main
roof.
Replacing in kind an entire feature of
the roof that is too deteriorated to
repair--if the overall form and detailing
are still evident--using the physical
evidence to guide the new work.
Examples can include a large section of
roofing, or a dormer or chimney. If
using the same kind of material is not
technically or economically feasible,
then a compatible substitute material
may be considered.
Not Recommended
Permitting a leaking roof to remain
unprotected so that accelerated
deterioration of historic building
materials--masonry, wood, plaster, paint
and structural members--occurs.
Replacing an entire roof feature such as
a cupola or dormer when repair of the
historic materials and limited
replacement of deteriorated or missing
parts are appropriate.
Using a substitute material for the
replacement part that does not convey
the visual appearance of the surviving
parts of the roof or that is physically or
chemically incompatible.
Removing a feature of the roof that is
unrepairabtle, such as a chimney or
dormer, and not replacing it; or replacing
it with a new feature that does not
convey the same visual appearance.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only, be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing and constructing a new feature
when the historic feature is completely
missing, such as a chimney or cupola. It
may be an accurate restoration using
historical, pictorial and physical
documentation; or be a new design that
is compatible with the size, scale,
material, and color of the historic
building.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced feature is based on
insufficient historical, pictorial, and
physical documentation.
Introducing a new roof feature that is
incompatible in size, scale, material, and
color.
Roof (continued)
Recommended
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Installing mechanical and service
equipment on the roof such as air
conditioning, transformers, or solar
collectors when required for the new use
so that they are inconspiuous from the
public right-of-way and do not damage or
obscure character-defining features.
Designing additions to roofs such as
residential,. office, or storage spaces;
elevator housing; decks and terraces; or
dormers or skylights when required by
the new use so that they are
inconspicuous from the public right-of-
way and do not damage or obscure
character-defining features.
Not Recommended
Installing mechanical or
equipment so that it damages or
character-defining features;
conspicuous from the public
way.
service
obscures
or is
right-of-
Radically changing a character-defining
roof shape or damaging or destroying
character-defining roofing material as a
result of incompatible design or improper
installation techniques.
A highly decorative window with an unusual shape, or glazing
pattern, or color is most likely identified immediately as a
character-defining feature of the building. It is far more
difficult, however, to assess the importance of repeated windows
on a facade, particularly if they are individually simple in design
and material, such as the large, multi-paned sash of many
industrial buildings. Because rehabilitation projects frequently
include proposals to replace window sash or even entire windows
to improve thermal efficiency or to create a new appearance, it
is essential that their contribution to the overall historic
character of the building be assessed together with their physical
condition before specific repair or replacement work is
undertaken. See also Energy Retrofitting. Preservation Briefs: 9
should be consulted for specific guidance on wooden window
repair. (See Reading List and Ordering Information on pg. 58.)
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving
windows--and their functional and
decorative features--that are important
in defining the overall historic character
of the building. Such features can
include frames, sash, muntins, glazing,
sills, heads, hoodmolds, panelled or
decorated jambs and moldings, and
interior and exterior shutters and blinds.
Protecting and maintaining the wood and
architectural metal which comprise the
window frame, sash, muntins, and
surrounds through appropriate surface
treatments such as cleaning, rust
removal, limited paint removal, and
re-application of protective coating
systems.
Not Recommended
Removing or radically changing windows
which are important in defining the
overall historic character of the building
so that, as a result, the character is
diminished.
Changing the number, location, size or
glazing pattern of windows, through
cutting new openings, blocking-in
windows, and installing replacement sash
which does not fit the historic window
opening.
Changing the historic appearance of
windows through the use of inappropriate
designs, materials, finishes, or colors
which radically change the sash, depth of
reveal, and muntin configuration; the
reflectivity and color of the glazing; or
the appearance of the frame.
Obscuring historic window trim with
metal or other material.
Stripping windows of historic material
such as wood, iron, cast iron, and bronze.
Failing to provide adequate protection of
materials on a cyclical basis so that
deterioration of the windows results.
k1E-688 0 83 I
Windows
Windows (continued)
Recommended
Making windows weathertight by re-
caulking and replacing or installing
weatherstripping. These actions also
improve thermal efficiency.
Evaluating the overall condition of
materials to determine whether more
than protection and maintenance are
required, i.e. if repairs to windows and
window features will be required.
Repairing window frames and sash by
patching, splicing, consolidating or
otherwise reinforcing. Such repair may
also include replacement in kind of those
parts that are either extensively
deteriorated or are missing when there
are surviving prototypes such as
architraves, hoodmolds, sash, sills, and
interior or exterior shutters and blinds.
Replacing in kind an entire window that
is too deteriorated to repair--if the
overall form and detailing are still
evident--using the physical evidence to
guide the new work. If using the same
kind of material is not technically or
economically feasible, then a compatible
substitute material may be considered.
Not Recommended
Retrofitting or replacing windows rather
than maintaining the sash, frame, and
glazing.
Failing to undertake adequate measures
to assure the preservation of historic
windows.
Replacing an entire window when repair
of materials and limited replacement of
deteriorated or missing parts are
appropriate.
Failing to reuse serviceable window
hardware such as brass lifts and sash
locks.
Using a substitute material for the
replacement part that does not convey
the visual appearance of the surviving
parts of the window or that is physically
or chemically incompatible.
Removing a character-defining window
that is unrepairable and blocking it in; or
replacing it with a new window that does
not convey the same visual appearance.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing and installing new windows
when the historic windows (frame, sash
and glazing) are completely missing. The
replacement windows may be an
accurate restoration using historical,
pictorial, and physical documentation; or
be.a new design that is compatible with
the window openings and the historic
character of the building.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced window is based on
insufficient historical, pictorial, and
physical documentation.
Introducing a new design that is
incompatible with the historic character
of the building.
Windows (continued)
Recommended
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Designing and installing additional
windows on rear or other-non character-
defining elevations if required by the
new use. New window openings may also
be cut into exposed party walls. Such
design should be compatible with the
overall design of the building, but not
duplicate the fenestration pattern and
detailing of a character-defining
elevation.
Providing a setback in the design of
dropped ceilings when they are required
for the new use to allow for the full
height of the window openings.
Not Recommended
Installing new windows, including frames,
sash, and muntin configuration that are
incompatible with the building's historic
appearance or obscure, damage, or
destroy character-defining features.
Inserting new floors or furred-down
ceilings which cut across the glazed
areas of windows so that the exterior
form and appearance of the windows are
changed.
Entrances
and Porches
Entrances and porches are quite often the focus of historic
buildings, particularly when they occur on primary elevations.
Together with their functional and decorative features such as
doors, steps, balustrades, pilasters, and entablatures, they can be
extremely important in defining the overall historic character of
a building. Their retention, protection, and repair should always
be carefully considered when planning rehabilitation work.
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving
entrances--and their functional and
decorative features--that are important
in defining the overall historic character
of the building such as doors, fanlights,
sidelights, pilasters, entablatures,
columns, balustrades, and stairs.
Protecting and maintaining the masonry,
wood, and architectural metal that
comprise entrances and porches through
appropriate surface treatments such as
cleaning, rust removal, limited paint
removal, and re-application of protective
coating systems.
Evaluating the overall condition of
materials to determine whether more
than protection and maintenance are
required, that is, if repairs to entrance
and porch features will be necessary.
Not Recommended
Removing or radically changing
entrances and porches which are
important in defining the overall historic
character of the building so that, as a
result, the character is diminished.
Stripping entrances and porches of
historic material such as wood, iron, cast
iron, terra cotta, tile and brick.
Removing an entrance or porch because
the building has been re-oriented to
accommodate a new use.
Cutting new entrances on a primary
elevation.
Altering utilitarian or service entrances
so they appear to be formal entrance's by
adding panelled doors, fanlights, and
sidelights.
Failing to provide adequate protection to
materials on a cyclical basis so that
deterioration of entrances and porches
results.
Failing to undertake adequate measures
to assure the preservation of historic
entrances and porches.
Entrances and Porches (continued)
Recommended
Repairing entrances and porches by
reinforcing the historic materials.
Repair will also generally include the
limited replacement in kind--or with
compatible substitute material--of those
extensively deteriorated or missing parts
of repeated features where there are
surviving prototypes such as balustrades,
cornices, entablatures, columns,
sidelights, and stairs.
Replacing in kind an entire entrance or
porch that is too deteriorated to repair--
if the form and detailing are still
evident--using the physical evidence to
guide the new work. If using the same
kind of material is not technically or
economically feasible, then a compatible
substitute material may be considered.
Not Recommended
Replacing an entire entrance or porch
when the repair of materials and limited
replacement of parts are appropriate.
Using a substitute material for the
replacement parts that does not convey
the visual appearance of the surviving
parts of the entrance and porch or that is
physically or chemically incompatible.
Removing an entrance or porch that is
unrepairable and not replacing it; or
replacing it with a new entrance or porch
that does not convey the same visual
appearance.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing. and, constructing a-' new
entrance or porch;. if the .historic
entrance or porch is completely-
missing, It may be a restoration based
on historical, pictorial, 'and physical
documentation; or.be a new design .t at
is compatible with the historic character.
of the building.
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Designing enclosures for historic porches'
when required by the. new use in a
manner that preserves the historic'
character of the building. This can
include using large sheets of glass and
recessing the enclosure wall behind
existing scrollwork,- posts, and
balustrades.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced entrance opr porch
is based on insufficient historical,
pictorial, and physical documentation.
Introducing a new entrance or pprch that
is incompatible in size, scale, material,
and color.
Enclosing porches in a manner that
results in a diminution or loss of historic
character such as using solid materials
such as wood, stucco, or masonry.
Entrances and Porches (continued)
Recommended
Designing and installing additional
entrances or porches when required for
the new use in a manner that preserves
the historic character of the building,
i.e., limiting such alteration to non-
character-defining elevations.
Not Recommended
Installing secondary service entrances
and porches that are incompatible in size
and scale with the historic building or
obscure, damage, or destroy character-
defining features.
Storefronts
Storefronts are quite often the focus of historic commercial
buildings and can thus be extremely important in defining the
overall historic character. Because storefronts also play a crucial
role in a store's advertising and merchandising strategy to draw
customers and increase business, they are often altered to meet
the needs of a new business. Particular care is required in
planning and accomplishing work on storefronts so that the
building's historic character is preserved in the process of
rehabilitation. For specific guidance on the subject Preservation
Briefs: 11 should be consulted. (See Reading List and Ordering
Information on pg. 58.)
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving
storefronts--and their functional and
decorative features--that are important
in defining the overall historic character
of the building such as display windows,
signs, doors, transoms, kick plates,
corner posts, and entablatures.
Protecting and maintaining masonry,
wood, and architectural metals which
comprise storefronts through appropriate
treatments such as cleaning, rust
removal, limited paint removal, and
reapplication of protective coating
systems.
Protecting storefronts against arson and
vandalism before work begins by
boarding up windows and installing alarm
systems that are keyed into local
protection agencies.
Not Recommended
Removing or radically changing
storefronts--and their features--which
are important in defining the overall
historic character of the building so that,
as a result, the character is diminished.
Changing the storefront so that it
appears residential rather than
commercial in character.
Removing historic material from the
storefront to create a recessed arcade.
Introducing coach lanterns, mansard
overhangings, wood shakes, nonoperable
shutters, and small-paned windows if
they cannot be documented historically.
Changing the location of a storefront's
main entrance.
Failing to provide adequate protection to
materials on a cyclical basis so that
deterioration of storefront features
results.
Permitting entry into the building
through unsecured or broken windows and
doors so that interior features and
finishes are damaged through exposure to
weather or through vandalism.
Stripping storefronts of historic material
such as wood, cast iron, terra cotta,
carrara glass, and brick.
Storefronts (continued)
Recommended
Evaluating the overall condition of
storefront materials to determine
whether more than protection and
maintenance are required, that is, if
repairs to features will be necessary.
Repairing storefronts by reinforcing the
historic materials. Repairs will also
generally include the limited
replacement in kind--or with compatible
substitute material--of those extensively
deteriorated or missing parts of
storefronts where there are surviving
prototypes such as transoms, kick plates,
pilasters, or signs.
Replacing in kind an entire storefront
that is too deteriorated to repair--if the
overall form and detailing are still
evident--using the physical evidence to
guide the new work. If using the same
material is not technically or
economically feasible, then compatible
substitute materials may be considered.
Not Recommended
Failing to undertake adequate measures
to assure the preservation of the historic
storefront.
Replacing an entire storefront when
repair of materials and limited
replacement of its parts are appropriate.
Using substitute material for the
replacement parts that does not convey
the same visual appearance as the
surviving parts of the storefront or that
is physically or chemically incompatible.
Removing a storefront that is
unrepairable and not replacing it; or
replacing it with a new storefront that
does not' convey the same visual
appearance.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing and constructing a new
storefront when the historic storefront is
completely missing. It may be an
accurate restoration using historical,
pictorial, and physical documentation; or
be a new design that Is'compatible with
the size, scale, material, and color of the
historic building. Such new design should
generally be flush with the facade; and
the treatment of secondary design
elements, such as awnings or signs, 1
as simple as possible. For example, new
signs should fit flush with the existing
features of the facade, such as the fascia
board or cornice.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced storefront is based
on insufficient historical, pictorial, and
physical documentation.
Introducing a new design that is
incompatible in size, scale, material, and
color.
Using new illuminated signs;
inappropriately scaled signs and logos;
signs that project over the sidewalk
unless they were a characteristic feature
of the historic building; or other types of
signs that obscure, damage, or destroy
remaining character-defining features of
the historic building.
BUILDING INTERIOR If features of the structural system are exposed such
as loadbearing brick walls, cast iron columns, roof
Structural System trusses, posts and beams, vigas, or stone foundation
walls, they may be important in defining the building's
overall historic character. Unexposed structural
features that are not character-defining or an entire
structural system may nonetheless be significant in the
history of building technology; therefore, the
structural system should always be examined and
evaluated early in the project planning stage to
determine both its physical condition and its
importance to the building's historic character or
historical significance. See also Health and Safety
Code Requirements.
Recommended Not Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving Removing, covering, or radically
structural systems--and individual changing features of structural systems
features of systems--that are important which are important in defining the
in defining the overall historic character overall historic character of the building
of the building, such as post and beam so that, as a result, the character is
systems, trusses, summer beams, vigas, diminished.
cast iron columns, above-grade stone
foundation walls, or loadbearing brick or Putting a new use into the building which
stone walls. could overload the existing structural
system; or installing equipment or
mechanical systems which could damage
the structure. A
Demolishing a loadbearing masonry wall
that could be augmented and retained
and replacing it with a new wall (i.e.,
brick or stone), using the historic
masonry only as an exterior veneer.
Leaving known structural problems
untreated such as deflection of beams,
cracking and bowing of walls, or racking
of structural members.
Utilizing treatments or products that
accelerate the deterioration of
structural material such as introducing
urea-formaldehyde foam insulation into
frame walls.
Structural System (continued)
Recommended
Not Recommended
Protecting and maintaining the
structural system by cleaning the roof
gutters and downspouts; replacing roof
flashing; keeping masonry, wood, and
architectural metals in a sound
condition; and assuring that structural
members are free from insect
infestation.
Examining and evaluating the physical
condition of the structural system and its
individual features using non-destructive
techniques such as X-ray photography.
Repairing the structural system by
augmenting or upgrading individual parts
or features. For example, weakened
structural members such as floor framing
can be spliced, braced, or otherwise
supplemented and reinforced.
Replacing in kind--or with substitute
material--those portions or features of
the structural system that are either
extensively deteriorated or are missing
when there are surviving prototypes such
as cast iron columns, roof rafters or
trusses, or sections of loadbearing
walls. Substitute material should convey
the same form, design, and overall visual
appearance as the historic feature; and,
at a minimum, be equal to its
loadbearing capabilities.
Failing to
maintenance
deterioration
results.
Utilizing
that will
material.
provide proper building
on a cyclical basis so that
of the structural system
destructive probing techniques
damage or destroy structural
Upgrading the building structurally in a
manner that diminishes the historic
character of the exterior, such as
installing strapping channels or removing
a decorative cornice; or damages interior
features or spaces.
Replacing a structural member or other
feature of the structural system when it
could be augmented and retained.
Installing a replacement feature that
does not convey the same visual
appearance, e.g., replacing an exposed
wood summer beam with a steel beam.
Using substitute material that does not
equal the loadbearing capabilities of the
historic material and design or is
otherwise physically or chemically
incompatible.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Limiting any new excavations adjacent
to historic foundations to avoid
undermining the structural stability of
the building or adjacent historic
buildings.
Carrying out excavations or regrading
adjacent to or within a historic building
which could cause the historic foundation
to settle, shift, or fail; or could have a
similar effect on adjacent historic
buildings.
Structural System (continued)
Recommended
Correcting structural deficiencies in
preparation for the new use in a manner
that preserves the structural system and
individual character-defining features.
Designing and installing new mechanical
or electrical systems when required for
the new use which minimize the number
of cutouts or holes in structural
members.
Adding a new floor when required for the
new use if such an alteration does not
damage or destroy the structural system
or obscure, damage, or destroy
character-defining. spaces, features, or
finishes.
Not Recommended
Radically changing interior spaces or
damaging or destroying features or
finishes that are character-defining
while trying to correct structural
deficiencies in preparation for the new
use.
Installing new mechanical and electrical
systems or equipment in a manner which
results in numerous cuts, splices, or
alterations to the structural members.
Inserting a new floor when such a radical
change damages a structural system or
obscures or destroys interior spaces,
features, or finishes.
Inserting new floors or
ceilings which cut across
areas of windows so that
form and appearance of the
radically changed.
furred-down
the glazed
the exterior
windows are
Creating an atrium or a light well to
provide natural light when required for
the new use in a manner that assures the-
preservation of the structural system as
well as character-defining interior
spaces, features, and finishes.
Damaging the structural system or
individual features; or radically
changing, damaging, or destroying
character-defining interior spaces,
features, or finishes in order to create an
atrium or a light well.
Interior: Spaces, Features, and
Finishes
Recommended
An interior floor plan, the arrangement of
spaces, and built-in features and applied
finishes may be individually or collectively
important in defining the historic character of
the building. Thus, their identification,
retention, protection, and repair should be
given prime consideration in every rehabili-
tation project and caution exercised in
pursuing any plan that would radically change
character-defining spaces or obscure, damage
or destroy interior features or finishes.
Not Recommended
Interior Spaces
Identifying, retaining, and preserving a
floor plan or interior spaces that. are
important in defining the overall historic
character of the building. This includes
the size, configuration, proportion, and
relationship of rooms and corridors; the
relationship of features to spaces; and
the spaces themselves such as lobbies,
reception halls, entrance halls, double
parlors, theaters, auditoriums, and
important industrial or commercial use
spaces.
Radically changing a floor plan or
interior spaces--including individual
rooms--which are important in defining
the overall historic character of the
building so that, as a result, the
character is diminished.
Altering the floor plan by demolishing
principal walls and partitions to create a
new appearance.
Altering or destroying interior spaces by
inserting floors, cutting through floors,
lowering ceilings, or adding or removing-
walls.
Relocating an interior feature such.as a
staircase so that the historic relationship
between features and spaces is altered.
Not Recommended
Interior Features and Finishes
Identifying, retaining, and preserving
interior features and finishes that are
important in defining the overall historic
character of the building, including
columns, cornices, baseboards, fireplaces
and mantels, paneling, light fixtures,
hardware, and flooring; and wallpaper,
plaster, paint, and finishes such as
stenciling, marbling, and graining; and
other decorative materials that accent
interior features and provide color,
texture, and patterning to walls, floors,
and ceilings.
Protecting and maintaining masonry,
wood, and architectural metals which
comprise interior features through
appropriate surface treatments such as
cleaning, rust removal, limited paint
removal, and reapplication of protective
coatings systems.
Removing or radically changing features
and finishes which are important in
defining the overall historic character of
the building so that, as a result, the
character is diminished.
Installing new decorative material that
obscures or damages character-defining
interior features or finishes.
Removing paint, plaster, or other
finishes from historically finished
surfaces to create a new appearance
(e.g., removing plaster to expose
masonry surfaces such as brick walls or a
chimney piece).
Applying paint, plaster, or other finishes
to surfaces that have been historically
unfinished to create a new appearance.
Stripping historically painted wood
surfaces to bare wood, then applying
clear finishes or stains to create a
"natural look."
Stripping paint to bare wood rather than
repairing or reapplying grained or
marbled finishes to features such as
doors and paneling.
Radically changing the type of finish or
its color, such as painting a previously
varnished wood feature.
Failing to provide adequate protection to
materials on a cyclical basis so that
deterioration of interior features results.
Recommended
Interior Features and Finishes (continued)
Recommended
Protecting interior features and finishes
against arson and vandalism before
project work begins, erecting protective
fencing, boarding-up windows, and
installing fire alarm systems that are
keyed to local protection agencies.
Protecting interior features such as a
staircase, mantel, or decorative finishes
and wall coverings against damage during
project work by covering them with
heavy canvas or plastic sheets.
Installing protective coverings in areas
of heavy pedestrian traffic to protect
historic features such as wall coverings,
parquet flooring and panelling.
Removing damaged or deteriorated
paints and finishes to the next sound
layer using the gentlest method possible,
then repainting or refinishing using
compatible paint or other coating
systems.
Repainting with colors that are
appropriate to the historic building.
Limiting abrasive cleaning methods to
certain industrial or warehouse buildings
where the interior masonry or plaster
features do not have distinguishing
design, detailing, tooling, or finishes; and
where wood features are not finished,
molded, beaded, or worked by hand.
Abrasive cleaning should only be
considered after other, gentler methods
have been proven ineffective.
Evaluating the overall condition of
materials to determine whether more
than protection and maintenance are
required, that is, if repairs to interior
features and finishes will be necessary.
Not Recommended
Permitting entry into historic buildings
through unsecured or broken windows and
doors so that interior features and
finishes are damaged by exposure to
weather or through vandalism.
Stripping interiors of features such as
woodwork, doors, windows, light fixtures,
copper piping, radiators; or of decorative
materials.
Failing to provide proper protection of
interior features and finishes during work
so that they are gouged, scratched,
dented, or otherwise damaged.
Failing to take new use patterns into
consideration, so that interior features
and finishes are damaged.
Using destructive methods such as
propane or butane torches or
sandblasting to remove paint or other
coatings. These methods can irreversibly
damage the historic materials that
comprise interior features.
Using new paint colors that, are
inappropriate to the historic building.
Changing the texture and patina of'
character-defining features through
sandblasting or use of other abrasive
methods to remove paint, discoloration
or plaster. This includes both exposed
wood (including structural members) and
masonry.
Failing to undertake adequate measures
to assure the preservation of interior
features and finishes.
Interior Features and Finishes (continued)
Recommended
Repairing interior features and finishes
by reinforcing the historic materials.
Repair will also generally include the
limited replacement in kind--or with
compatible substitute material--of those
extensively deteriorated or missing parts
of repeated features when there are
surviving prototypes such as stairs,
balustrades, wood panelling, columns; or
decorative wall coverings or ornamental
tin or plaster ceilings.
Replacing in kind an entire interior
feature or finish that is too deteriorated
to repair--if the overall form and
detailing are still evident--using the
physical evidence to guide the new work.
Examples could include wainscoting, a
tin ceiling, or interior stairs. If using the
same kind of material is not technically
or economically feasible, then a
compatible substitute material may be
considered.
Not Recommended
Replacing an entire interior feature such
as a staircase, panelled wall, parquet
floor, or cornice; or finish such as a
decorative wall covering or ceiling when
repair of materials and limited
replacement of such parts are
appropriate.
Using a substitute material for the
replacement part that does not convey
the visual appearance of the surviving
parts or portions of the interior feature
or finish or that is physically or
chemically incompatible.
Removing a character-defining feature
or finish that is unrepairable and not
replacing it; or replacing it with a new
feature or finish that does not convey
the same visual appearance.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing and installing a new. interior
feature or finish if the historic feature
or finish is completely missing"-. This
could include missing' partitions, stairs,
elevators, lighting fixtures,' and wall
coverings; or even-...entire 'rooms if all
historic spaces, features, and finishes are
missing or have. been destroyed by
inappropriate "renovations." The design
may be a restoration based onh historical,
pictorial, and physical documentation; or
be a new design that is compatible with
the historic character of the building,
district, or neighborhood.
Creating a
because the
insufficient
pictorial
information
building.
false historical appearance
replaced feature is based on
physical, historical, and
documentation or on
derived from another
Introducing a new interior feature or
finish that is incompatible with the
scale, design, materials, color, and
texture of the surviving interior features
and finishes.
Interior Features and Finishes (continued)
Recommended
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Accommodating service functions such
as bathrooms, mechanical equipment,
and office machines required by the
building's new use in secondary spaces
such as first floor service areas or on
upper floors.
Reusing decorative material or features
that have had to be removed during the
rehabilitation work including wall and
baseboard trim, door moulding, panelled
doors, and simple wainscoting; and
relocating such material or features in
areas appropriate to their historic
placement.
Installing permanent partitions in
secondary spaces; removable partitions
that do not destroy the sense of space
should be installed when the new use
requires the subdivision of character-
defining interior spaces.
Enclosing an interior stairway where
required by code so that its character is
retained. In many cases, glazed fire-
rated walls may be used.
Placing new code-required stairways or
elevators in secondary and service areas
of the historic building.
Creating an atrium or a light well to
provide natural light when required for
the new use in a manner that preserves
character-defining interior spaces,
features, and finishes as well as the
structural system.
Adding a new floor if required for the
new use in a manner that preserves
character-defining structural features,
and interior spaces, features, and
finishes.
Not Recommended
Dividing rooms, lowering ceilings, and
damaging or obscuring character-
defining features such as fireplaces,
niches, stairways or alcoves, so that a
new use can be accommodated in the
building.
Discarding historic material when it can
be reused within the rehabilitation
project or relocating it in historically
inappropriate areas.
Installing permanent partitions that
damage or obscure character-defining
spaces, features, or finishes.
Enclosing an interior stairway with fire-
rated construction so that the stairwell
space or any character-defining features
are destroyed.
Radically changing, damaging, or
destroying character-defining spaces,
features, or finishes when adding new
code-required stairways and elevators.
Destroying character-defining interior
spaces, features, or finishes; or damaging
the structural system in order to create
an atrium or light well.
Inserting a new floor within a building
that alters or destroys the fenestration;
radically changes a character-defining
interior space; or obscures, damages, or
destroys decorative detailing.
The visible features of historic heating, lighting, air
Mechanical Systems: conditioning and plumbing systems may sometimes
Heating, Air Conditioning, help define the overall historic character of the
Electrial, and Plumbing building and should thus be retained and repaired,
whenever possible. The systems themselves (the
compressors, boilers, generators and their ductwork,
wiring and pipes) will generally either need to be
upgraded, augmented, or entirely replaced in order to
accommodate the new use and to meet code require-
ments. Less frequently, individual portions of a
system or an entire system are significant in the
history of building technology; therefore, the
identification of character-defining features or
historically significant systems should take place
together with an evaluation of their physical condition
early in project planning.
Recommended Not Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving Removing or radically changing features
visible features of early mechanical of mechanical systems that are
systems that are important in defining important in defining the overall historic
the overall historic character of the character of the building so that, as a
building, such as radiators, vents, fans, result, the character is diminished.
grilles, plumbing fixtures, switchplates,
and lights.
Protecting and maintaining mechanical, Failing to provide adequate protection of
plumbing, and electrical systems and materials on a cyclical basis' so that
their features through cyclical cleaning deterioration of mechanical systems and
and other appropriate measures. their visible features results.
Preventing accelerated deterioration of Enclosing mechanical systemsfin areas
mechanical systems by providing that are not adequately ventilated so
adequate ventilation of attics, that deterioration of the systems results.
crawlspaces, and cellars so that moisture
problems are avoided.
Repairing mechanical systems by Replacing a mechanical system or its
augmenting or upgrading system parts, functional parts when it could be
such as installing new pipes and ducts; upgraded and retained.
rewiring; or adding new compressors or
boilers.
Mechanical Systems (continued)
Recommended
Not Recommended
Replacing in kind--or with compatible
substitute material--those visible
features of mechanical systems that are
either extensively deteriorated or are
missing when there are surviving
prototypes such as ceiling fans,
switchplates, radiators, grilles, or
plumbing fixtures.
Installing a replacement
does not convey the
appearance.
feature that
same visual
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Installing a completely new mechanical
system if required for the new use so
that it causes the least alteration
possible to the building's floor plan, the
exterior elevations, and the least damage
to historic building material.
Installing the vertical runs, of .ducts,
pipes, and cables in 'closets, service
rooms, and wall cavities.
Installing a new mechanical system so
that character-defining structural or
interior features are radically changed,
damaged, or destroyed.
Installing vertical runs of ducts, pipes,
and cables in places where they will
obscure character-defining features.
Concealing mechanical equipment in
walls or ceilings in a manner ,that
requires the removal of historic building
material.
Installing "dropped" acoustical ceilirgs to
hide mechanical equipment when this
destroys the proportions of character-
defining interior spaces.
Installing air conditioning units if
required by the new use in such a manner
that the historic materials and features
are not damaged or obscured.
Installing heating/air conditioning units
in the window frames in such a manner
that the sash and frames are protected.
Window installations should be
considered only when all other viable
heating/cooling systems would result in
significant damage to historic materials.
Cutting through
masonry walls in
conditioning units.
features such as
order to install air
Radically changing the appearance of the
historic building or damaging or
destroying windows by installing
heating/air conditioning units in historic
window frames.
BUILDING SITE
The relationship between a historic building or buildings
and landscape features within a property's boundaries--or
the building site--helps to define the historic character
and should be considered an integral part of overall
planning for rehabilitation project work.
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving
buildings and their features as well as
features of the site that are important in
defining its overall historic character.
Site features can include driveways,
walkways, lighting, fencing, signs,
benches, fountains, wells, terraces, canal
systems, plants and trees, berms, and
drainage or irrigation ditches; and
archeological features that are
important in defining the history of the
site.
Retaining the historic relationship
between buildings, landscape features,
and open space.
Protecting and maintaining buildings and
the site by providing proper drainage to
assure that water does not erode
foundation walls; drain toward the
building; nor erode the historic
landscape.
Not Recommended
Removing or radically changing buildings
and their features or site features which
are important in defining the overall
historic character of the building site so
that, as a result, the character is
diminished.
Removing or relocating historic buildings
or landscape features, thus destroying
the historic relationship between
buildings, landscape features, and open
space.
Removing or relocating historic buildings
on a site or in a complex o, related
historic structures--such as a mill
complex or farm--thus diminishing the
historic character of the site or complex.
Moving buildings onto the site, thus
creating a false historical appearance.
Lowering the grade level adjacent to a
building to permit development of a
formerly below-grade area. such as a
basement in a manner that would
drastically change the historic
relationship of the building to its site.
Failing to maintain site drainage so that
buildings and site features are damaged
or destroyed; or, alternatively, changing
the site grading so that water no longer
drains properly.
BUILDING SITE (continued)
Recommended
Not Recommended
Minimizing disturbance of terrain around
buildings or elsewhere on the site, thus
reducing the possibility of destroying
unknown archeological materials.
Surveying areas where major terrain
alteration is likely to impact important
archeological sites.
Protecting, e.g. preserving
known archeological material
possible.
in place
whenever
Planning and carrying out any necessary
investigation using professional archeo-
logists and modern archeological
methods when preservation in place is
not feasible.
Protecting the building and other
features of the site against arson and
vandalism before rehabilitation work
begins, i.e., erecting protective fencing
and installing alarm systems that are
keyed into local protection agencies.
Providing continued protection of
masonry, wood, and architectural metals
which comprise building and site features
through appropriate surface treatments
such as cleaning, rust removal, limited
paint removal, and re-application of
protective coating systems; and
continued protection and maintenance of
landscape features, including plant
material.
Evaluating the overall condition of
materials to determine whether more
than protection and maintenance are
required, that is, if repairs to building
and site features will be necessary.
Introducing
equipment
presence
materials.
heavy
into areas
may disturb
machinery or
where their
archeological
Failing to survey the building site prior
to the beginning of rehabilitation project
work so that, as a result, important
archeological material is destroyed.
Leaving known archeological material
unprotected and subject to vandalism,
looting, and destruction by natural
elements such as erosion.
Permitting unqualified project personnel
to perform data recovery so that
improper methodology results in the loss
of important archeological material.
Permitting buildings and site features to
remain unprotected so that plant
materials, fencing, walkways,
archeological features, etc. are damaged
or destroyed.
Stripping features from buildings and the
site such as wood siding, iron fencing,
masonry balustrades; or removing or
destroying landscape features, including
plant material.
Failing to provide adequate protectiFn of
materials on a cyclical basis so that
deterioration of building and site
features results.
Failing to undertake adequate measures
to assure the preservation of building and
site features.
BUILDING SITE (continued)
Recommended
Repairing features of buildings and the
site by reinforcing the historic
materials. Repair will also generally
include replacement in kind--with a
compatible substitute material--of those
extensively deteriorated or missing parts
of features where there are surviving
prototypes such as fencing and paving.
Replacing in kind an entire feature of
the building or site that is too
deteriorated to repair--if the overall
form and detailing are still evident--
using the physical evidence to guide the
new work. This could include an
entrance or porch, walkway, or
fountain. If using the same kind of
material is not technically or
economically feasible, then a compatible
substitute material may be considered.
Not Recommended
Replacing an entire -feature of the
building or site such as a fence, walkway,
or driveway when repair of materials and
limited replacement of deteriorated or
missing parts are appropriate.
Using a substitute material for the
replacement part that does not convey
the visual appearance of the surviving
parts of the building or site feature or
that is physically or chemically
incompatible.
Removing a feature of the building or
site that is unrepairable and not
replacing it; or replacing it with a new
feature that does not convey the same
visual appearance.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation project work and should only
be considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing and coistfucting a new feature
of a buildin'gor site when the historic
feature is completely missing, such as anr
outbuilding,,terrace, or driveway. It may
be based on historical, 'pictorial, -and
physical documentation; or be a new
design that. is" compatible.- with the
historic character of the building and
site. .
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced feature isibased on
insufficient historical, pictorial, and
physical documentation.
Introducing a new building or site feature
that is out of scale or otherwise
inappropriate.
Introducing a new landscape feature or
plant material that is visually
incompatible with the site or that
destroys site patterns or vistas.
BUILDING SITE (continued)
Recommended
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Designing new onsite parking, loading
docks, or ramps when required by the
new use so that they are as unobtrusive
as possible and assure the preservation of
character-defining features of the site.
Designing new exterior additions to
historic buildings or adjacent new
construction which is compatible with
the historic character of the site and
which preserve the historic relationship
between a building or buildings,
landscape features, and open space.
Removing nonsignificant buildings,
additions, or site features which detract
-from the historic character of the site.
Not Recommended
Placing parking facilities directly
adjacent to historic buildings where
automobiles may cause damage to the
buildings or landscape features or be
intrusive to the building site.
Introducing new construction onto the
building site which is visually
incompatible in terms of size, scale,
design, materials, color and texture or
which destroys historic relationships on
the site.
Removing a' historic building in a
complex, a building feature, or a site
feature which is important in defining
the historic character of the site.
DISTRICT/NEIGHBORHOOD The relationship between historic buildings, and streetsca
and landscape features within a historic district
neighborhood helps to define the historic character a
therefore should always be a part of the rehabilitation plar
Recommended Not Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving Removing or radically changing those
buildings, and streetscape, and landscape features of the district or neighborhood
features which are important in defining which are important in defining the
the overall historic character of the overall historic character so that, as a
district or neighborhood. Such features result, the character is diminished.
can include streets, alleys, paving,
walkways, street lights, signs, benches,
parks and gardens, and trees.
Retaining the historic relationship Destroying streetscape and landscape
between buildings, and streetscape and features by widening existing streets,
landscape features such as a town square changing paving material, or introducing
comprised of row houses and stores inappropriately located new streets or
surrounding a communal park or open parking lots.
space.
Removing or relocating historic
buildings, or features of the streetscape
and landscape, thus destroying the
historic relationship between buildings,
features and open space.
Protecting and maintaining the historic Failing to provide adequate protection of
masonry, wood, and architectural metals materials on a cyclical basis so that
which comprise building and streetscape deterioration of building, streetscape,
features, through appropriate surface and landscape features results.
treatments such as cleaning, rust
removal, limited paint removal, and
reapplication of protective coating
systems; and protecting and maintaining
landscape features, including plant
material.
Protecting buildings, paving, iron Permitting buildings to remain
fencing, etc. against arson and vandalism unprotected so that windows are broken;
before rehabilitation work begins by and interior features are damaged.
erecting protective fencing and installing
alarm systems that are keyed into local Stripping features from buildings or the
protection agencies. streetscape such as wood siding, iron
fencing, or terra cotta balusters; or
removing or destroying landscape
features, including plant material.
DISTRICT/NEIGHBORHOOD (continued)
Recommended
Evaluating the overall condition of
building, streetscape and landscape
materials to determine whether more
than protection and maintenance are
required, that is, if repairs to features
will be necessary.
Repairing features of the building,
streetscape, or landscape by reinforcing
the historic materials. Repair will also
generally include the replacement in
kind--or with a compatible substitute
material--of those extensively deter-
iorated or missing parts of features when
there are surviving prototypes such as
porch balustrades, paving materials, or
streetlight standards.
Replacing in kind an entire feature of
the building, streetscape, or landscape
that is too deteriorated to repair--when
the overall form and detailing are still
evident--using the physical evidence to
guide the new work. This could include a
storefront, a walkway, or a garden. If
using the same kind of material is not
technically or economically feasible,
then a compatible substitute material
may be considered.
Not Recommended
Failing to undertake adequate measures
to assure the preservation of building,
streetscape, and landscape features.
Replacing an entire feature of the
building, streetscape, or landscape such
as a porch, walkway, or streetlight, when
repair of materials and limited
replacement of deteriorated or missing
parts are appropriate.
Using a substitute material for the
replacement part that does not convey
the visual appearance of the surviving
parts of the building, streetscape, or
landscape feature or that is physically or
chemically incompatible.
Removing a feature of the building,
streetscape, or landscape that is
unrepairable and not replacing it; or
replacing it with a new feature that does
not convey the same visual appearance.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing and constructing a new feature
of the building, streetscape, or landscape
when the historic feature is completely
missing, such as row house steps, a
porch, streetlight, or terrace. It may be
a restoration based on historical,
pictorial, and physical documentation; or
be a new design that is compatible with
the historic character of the district or
neighborhood.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced feature is based on
insufficient historical, pictorial and
physical documentation.
Introducing a new building, streetscape
or landscape feature that is out of scale
or otherwise inappropriate to the
setting's historic character, e.g.,
replacing picket fencing with chain link
fencing.
DISTRICT/NEIGHBORHOOD (continued)
Recommended
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Designing required new parking so that it
is as unobtrusive as possible, i.e., on side
streets or at the rear of buildings.
"Shared" parking should also be planned
so that several businesses can utilize one
parking area as opposed to introducing
random, multiple lots.
Designing and constructing new additions
to historic buildings when required by the
new use. New work should be compatible
with the historic character of the
district or neighborhood in terms of size,
scale, design, material, color, and
texture.
Removing nonsignificant buildings,
additions, or streetscape and landscape
features which detract from the historic
character of the district or the
neighborhood.
Not Recommended
Placing parking facilities directly
adjacent to historic buildings which
cause the removal of historic plantings,
relocation of paths and walkways, or
blocking of alleys.
Introducing new construction into
historic districts that is visually incom-
patible or that destroys historic
relationships within the district or
neighborhood.
Removing a historic building, building
feature, or landscape or streetscape
feature that is important in defining the
overall historic character of the district
or the neighborhood.
Although the work in these sections is quite often an important aspect of rehabilitation
projects, it is usually not part of the overall process of preserving character-defining
features (maintenance, repair, replacement); rather, such work is assessed for its
potential negative impact on the building's historic character. For this reason, particular
care must be taken not to obscure, radically change, damage, or destroy character-
defining features in the process of rehabilitation work to meet new use requirements.
As a part of the new use, it is often necessary t'o make
HEALTH AND SAFETY modifications to a historic building so that it can
CODE REQUIREMENTS comply with current health, safety and code
requirements. Such work needs to be carefully planned
and undertaken so that it does not result in a loss of
character-defining spaces, features, and finishes.
Recommended Not Recommended
Identifying the historic building's Undertaking code-required alterations to
character-defining spaces, features, and a building or site before identifying those
finishes so that code-required work will spaces, features, or finishes which are
not result in their damage or loss. character-defining and must therefore be
preserved.
Complying with health and safety codes, Altering, damaging, or destroying
including seismic codes and barrier-free character-defining spaces, features, and
access requirements, in such a manner finishes while making modifications to a
that character-defining spaces, features, building or site to comply with safety
and finishes are preserved, codes.
Working with local code officials to Making changes to historic buildings
investigate alternative life safety without first seeking alternatives to code
measures or variances available under requirements.
some codes so that alterations and
additions to historic buildings can be
avoided.
Providing barrier-free access through Installing permanent ramps that damage
removable or portable, rather than or diminish character-defining features.
permanent, ramps.
Providing seismic reinforcement to a Reinforcing a historic building using
historic building in a manner that avoids measures that damage or destroy
damaging the structural system and character-defining structural and other
character-defining features. features.
Upgrading historic stairways and Damaging or obscuring historic stairways
elevators to meet health and safety and elevators or altering adjacent spaces
codes in a manner that assures their in the process of doing work to meet
preservation, i.e., so that they are not code requirements.
damaged or obscured.
Installing sensitively designed fire Covering character-defining wood
suppression systems, such as a sprinkler features with fire-resistant sheathing
system for wood frame mill buildings, which results in altering their visual
instead of applying fire-resistant appearance.
sheathing to character-defining features.
HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE REQUIREMENTS (continued)
Recommended
Applying fire-retardant coatings, such as
intumescent paints, which expand during
fire to add thermal protection to steel.
Adding a new stairway or elevator to
meet health and safety codes in a
manner that preserves adjacent
character-defining features and spaces.
Placing a code-required stairway or
elevator that cannot be accommodated
within the historic building in a new
exterior addition. Such an addition
should be located at the rear of the
building or on an inconspicuous side; and
its size and scale limited in relationship
to the historic building.
Not Recommended
Using fire-retardant coatings if they
damage or obscure character-defining
features.
Radically changing, damaging, or
destroying character-defining spaces,
features, or finishes when adding a new
code-required stairway or elevator.
Constructing a new addition to
accommodate code-required stairs and
elevators on character-defining
elevations highly visible from the street;
or where it obscures, damages or
destroys character-defining features.
ENERGY RETROFITTING
Recommended
District/Neighborhood
Maintaining those existing landscape
features which moderate the effects of
the climate on the setting such as
deciduous trees, evergreen wind-blocks,
and lakes or ponds.
Some character-defining features of a historic building
or site such as cupolas, shutters, transoms, skylights,
sun rooms, porches, and plantings also play a secondary
energy conserving role. Therefore, prior to
retrofitting historic buildings to make them more
energy efficient, the first step should always be to
identify and evaluate the existing historic features to
assess their inherent energy conserving potential. If it
is determined that retrofitting measures are
necessary, then such work needs to be carried out with
particular care to insure that the building's historic
character is preserved in the the process of
rehabilitation.
Not Recommended
Stripping the setting of landscape
features and landforms so that the
effects of the wind, rain, and the sun
result in accelerated deterioration of
historic materials.
Building Site
Retaining plant materials, trees, and
landscape features, especially those
which perform passive solar energy
functions such as sun shading and wind
breaks.
Installing freestanding solar collectors in
a manner that preserves the historic
property's character-defining features.
Designing attached solar collectors,
including solar greenhouses, so that the
character-defining features of the
property are preserved.
Removing plant materials, trees, and
landscape features, so that ttey no
longer perform passive solar energy
functions.,
Installing freestanding solar collectors
that obscure, damage, or destroy historic
landscape or archeological features.
Locating solar collectors
radically change the
appearance; or damage
character-defining features.
where, they
property's
or destroy
|
RSS
HIDE
