Although the work in the following sections is quite often an important aspect of rehabilitation projects, its is usually not part of the overall process of rehabilitating character-defining features (maintenance, repair and limited replacement); rather, such work is assessed for its potential negative impact on the landscape’s historic charascter. For this reason, particular care must be taken not to obscure, alter, or damage character-defining features.

ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS

Identifying the cultural landscape’s character-defining features, materials and finishes so that accessibility code-required work will not result in their damage or loss.

Complying with barrier-free access requirements, in such a way that character-defining features, materials and finishes are preserved. For example, widening existing stone walks by adding new stone adjacent to it to achieve the desired width.

Working with local accessibility and preservation specialists to determine the most appropriate solution to access problems which will have the least impact on character-defining features.

Providing barrier-free access that promotes independence for the disabled person to the highest degree practicable, while preserving character-defining landscape features, materials and finishes. For example, incorporating wider sidewalks only at intersections where ramps are being installed, leaving the main runs of historic sidewalks in place.

Undertaking code-required alterations before identifying those features, materials and finishes which are character-defining and must therefore be preserved.

Damaging or destroying character-defining features in attempting to comply with accessibility requirements. For example, paving over gravel walks with blacktop.

Altering, character-defining features, materials and finishes without consulting with local experts.

Making access modifications that do not provide a reasonable balance between independent, safe access and preservation of character-defining landscape features, materials and finishes. For example, replacing three foot wide stone, brick, or historic concrete sidewalks with new wider concrete sidewalks

Making modifications for accessibility without considering the impact on the cultural landscape. For example, introducing a new access element (ramp or lift) that destroys the symmetry of a foundation planting along a building’s main facade.

HEALTH AND SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS

Identifying the cultural landscape’s character-defining features, materials and finishes so that code-related work will not result in their damage or loss.

Complying with health and safety code requirements in such a manner that character-defining features, materials and finishes are preserved. For example, recognizing standards for the application of herbicides.

Removing toxic materials only after thorough testing has been conducted and only after less invasive abatement methods have been shown to be inadequate.

Providing workers with appropriate personal protective equipment for hazards found in the worksite.

Working with local code officials to investigate systems, methods, or devices of equivalent or superior effectiveness and safety to those prescribed by code so that unnecessary alterations can be avoided.

Upgrading character-defining features to meet health and safety codes in a manner that assures their preservation. For example, upgrading a historic stairway without destroying its character-defining handrails and balustrades.

Installing safety-related systems that result in the retention of character-defining features, materials, and finishes; for example, fire-suppression systems or seismic retrofits.

Applying the necessary materials to add protection to character-defining features, materials and finishes. For example, applying fire retardant, intumescent paint coatings to a deck to add thermal protection to its steel.

Adding new features to meet health and safety codes in a manner that preserves adjacent character-defining features, materials and finishes. For example, providing a new fire access route along a derelict historic corridor.

Undertaking code-required alterations before identifying those features, materials and finishes which are character-defining and must therefore be preserved.

Altering, damaging or destroying character-defining features, materials and finishes while making modifications to a cultural landscape to comply with safety codes.

Destroying a cultural landscape’s character-defining features, materials and finishes without careful testing and without considering less invasive abatement methods.

Removing unhealthful materials without regard to personal and environmental safety.

Making changes to cultural landscapes without first exploring equivalent health and safety systems, methods, or devices that may be less damaging to character-defining features, materials and finishes.

Damaging or obscuring character-defining features, materials and finishes or adjacent areas in the process of doing work to meet code requirements.

Covering character-defining features with fire resistant sheathing which results in altering their visual appearance.

Using materials intended to provide additional protection, such as fire-retardant coatings, if they damage or obscure character-defining features, materials and finishes.

Radically changing, damaging or destroyingcharacter-defining features, materials and finishes when adding new code-required features.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

Identifying the cultural landscape’s character-defining features, materials and finishes so that environmental protection-required work will not result in their damage or loss.

Complying with environmental protection regulations in such a manner that character-defining features, materials and finishes are preserved. For example, protecting historic vegetation in which rare and endangered species nest.

Working with environmental protection officials to investigate systems, methods, devices or technologies of equivalent or superior effectiveness to those prescribed by regulation so that unnecessary alterations can be avoided.

Reclaiming or re-establishing natural resources in a manner that promotes the highest degree of environmental protection, while preserving significant historic features, materials and finishes. For example, reclaiming a wetland to comply with applicable environmental regulations, while re-establishing the feature as it appeared historically.

Undertaking environmental protection-required work before identifying those features, materials and finishes which are character-defining and must therefore be preserved.

Altering, damaging, or destroying character-defining features, materials and finishes while making modifications to a cultural landscape to comply with environmental protection regulations.

Making changes to cultural landscapes without first exploring equivalent environmental protection systems, methods, devices or technologies that may be less damaging to historic features, materials and finishes.

Making environmental protection modifications that do not provide a reasonable balance between improved environmental conditions and the preservation of historic features, materials and finishes.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Retaining and maintaining those energy efficient features or parts of features of the landscape. For example, maintaining vegetation which performs passive solar energy functions.

Improving energy efficiency of existing features through non-destructive means. For example, utilizing a recirculating system in a fountain rather than uncontrolled discharge to a storm system.

Removing or altering those features or parts of features which play an energy conserving role. For example, removing a historic windbreak.

Replacing energy inefficient features rather than improving their energy conservation potential. For example, replacing an entire historic light standard rather than retrofitting the fixture to be more efficient.

This accessibility solution for Denver, Colorado’s Civic Center, retains character-defining features and visual relationships. The new ramp is not visible from the plaza’s east-west vista and, thus, respects its symmetrical design. (NPS, 1993)