Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS The historic preservation free range. |
Date: | Tue, 10 Feb 1998 08:47:17 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>> >>
>> >> What is the relationship of preservation to restoration?>
>> >
>> >I offer a first pass at, ten words or less, definitions of what I
>> >perceive to be the five levels of preservation.
>> >
>> > - Stablization: to stablize and maintain
>> > - Conservation: to stablize and repair
>> > - Restoration: to return to a previous condition
>> > - Renovation: to fix up and change for new use (Remodeling)
>> > - Reconstruction: to build new to some level of artifical old
>> >JBB
--------
>> I am constantly suggesting and encouraging "preservation" groups to use
>> vocabulary for which they agree on a definition. It seems to me that for
>> good or bad it is best to use the most widely circulated and available
>> definitions: The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment
of
>> Historic Properties. The four catagories as outlined, Preservation
>> (protection and stabilization), Rehabilitation, Restoration and
>> Reconstruction should serve as the broader context for our debates.
>>
>> Leland
>----------
>
>Can you provide brief definitions for the four categories as represented
>by the Sec. of the Int. Stand.(SIS)?
> JBB
-----------
Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties:
1) Preservation: focuses on the maintenance and repair of existing
historic materials and retention of a property's form as it has evolved
over
time. (Protection and Stabilization have now been consolodated under
this
treatment.)
2) Rehabilitation: Acknowledges the need to alter or add to a historic
property to meet continuing or changing uses while retaining the
properties
historic character.
3) Restoration: is undertaken to depict a property at a particular
period
of time in history, while removing evidence of other periods.
4) Reconstruction: recreates vanished or non-surviving portions of a
property for interpretive purposes.
- Leland
--------------
>The SIS is a document that occasionally needs to be tweaked. I find the
>word 'preservation' being used more and more as the overall descriptive
>word in what we are talking about. As a result, I find it hard to also
>use it as one of the four or five categories.
>
>If the four work, fine. If five or six work better lets not be tied down
>by the thinking that has gone before. Lets use it as, possibly, a common
>starting point.
> JBB
---------
Agreed on both accounts. We should submit our modifications or
additions to
SIS and NTHP and NPS. Is Tom McGrath or Vitanza Pinheads?
-Leland
I do not believe either Tom is a member (McGrath or Vitanza).
Tom [log in to unmask]
Tom [log in to unmask]
JBB
|
|
|