In a message dated 1/20/00 11:42:37 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<<  Has this been used
 as a reference document for HSRs and preservation plans yet? >>

Having just completed a preservation plan, our team tried to use these
guidelines -- it looks temptingly simple -- checkboxes under each (HSR, PP),
blacked in if required, empty if not. However, in the major categories --
resource ID, significance statement, methodology, development history, and
architectural description, among other things -- requirements for HSRs and
PPs were identical. Where they differed (HSRs need more information) were in
Code & Accessibility Review, Structural Evaluation, and Materials Analyses.

However, we found that these small differences were illusory. Although not
required for a PP, how on earth can you come up with a coherent preservation
plan if you don't know what the code requirements are? Evaluate the
structure? We found that a building chronology demanded a materials analysis,
whether the guidelines said we needed them or not.

The NJ guidelines are valuable, however, in that they lay out the fundamental
categories of information that should be addressed in HSRs and PPs. The issue
of "how much" for each, however, still is a professional judgement call, on a
project-by-project basis.

Mary