1

A111D3 DbbBlM

NATL INST OF STANDARDS & TECH R.I.C.

A1 11 030663 14

JX-.^ Keune, Russell V/Assessment of current b ^Si^ ^

QC100 .U57 N0.524. 1978 C.2 NBS-PUB-C 19 SPECIAL PUBLICATION 524

Assessment Of Current Building

Regulatory Methods As Applied To The

Needs Of Historic Preservation Projects
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The National Bureau of Standards' was established by an act of Congress March 3, 1901 . The

Bureau's overall goal is to strengthen and advance the Nation's science and technology and

facilitate their effective application for public benefit. To this end, the Bureau conducts

research and provides: (1) a basis for the Nation's physical measurement system, (2) scientific and technological services for industry and government, (3) a technical basis for equity in trade, and (4) technical services to promote public safety. The Bureau's technical work is performed by the National Measurement Laboratory, the National Engineering Laboratory,

and the Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology.

THE NATIONAL MEASUREMENT LABORATORY provides the national system of

physical and chemical and materials measurement; coordinates the system with measurement

systems of other nations and furnishes essential services leading to accurate and uniform

physical and chemical measurement throughout the Nation's scientific community, industry,

and commerce; conducts materials research leading to improved methods of measurement,

standards, and data on the properties of materials needed by industry, commerce, educational

institutions, and Government; provides advisory and research services to other Government

Agencies; develops, produces, and distributes Standard Reference Materials; and provides

calibration services. The Laboratory consists of the following centers:

Absolute Physical Quantities' — Radiation Research — Thermodynamics and

Molecular Science — Analytical Chemistry — Materials Science. THE NATIONAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY provides technology and technical

services to users in the public and private sectors to address national needs and to solve national problems in the public interest; conducts research in engineering and applied science

in support of objectives in these efforts; builds and maintains competence in the necessary

disciplines required to carry out this research and technical service; develops engineering data and measurement capabilities; provides engineering measurement traceability services; develops test methods and proposes engineering standards and code changes; develops and

proposes new engineering practices; and develops and improves mechanisms to transfer

results of its research to the utlimate user. The Laboratory consists of the following centers:

Applied Mathematics — Electronics and Electrical Engineering^ — Mechanical

Engineering and Process Technology- — Building Technology — Fire Research —

Consumer Product Technology — Field Methods.

THE INSTITUTE FOR COMPUTER SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY conducts

research and provides scientific and technical services to aid Federal Agencies in the selection, acquisition, application, and use of computer technology to improve effectiveness and

economy in Government operations in accordance with Public Law 89-306 (40 U.S.C. 759), relevant Executive Orders, and other directives; carries out this mission by managing the Federal Information Processing Standards Program, developing Federal ADP standards

guidelines, and managing Federal participation in ADP voluntary standardization activities; provides scientific and technological advisory services and assistance to Federal Agencies; and

provides the technical foundation for computer-related policies of the Federal Government.

The Institute consists of the following divisions:

Systems and Software — Computer Systems Engineering — Information Technology.

'Headquarters and Laboratories at Gaithersburg, Maryland, unless otherwise noted; mailing address Washington, D.C. 20234. Some divisions within the center are located at Boulder, Colorado, 80303.

The National Bureau of St?ndards was reorganized, effective April 9, 1978.
• . • - OCT 2 7 12:.

Assessment Of Current Building

Regulatory Methods As Applied To The

Needs Of Historic Preservation Projects

Project directed by

Russell V. Keune, AIA

National Trust for Historic Preservation

740 Jackson Place, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006

1 ^ --^1

V

Prepared for the Building Economics and Regulatory Technology Division Center for Building Technology

National Engineering Laboratory

National Bureau of Standards Washington, D.C. 20234

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Juanita M. Kreps, Secretary

Dr. Sidney Harman, Under Secretary

Jordan J. Baruch, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Director

Issued October 1978
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 78-600107

National Bureau of Standards Special Publication 524

Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Spec. Publ. 524, 87 pages (Oct. 1978) CODEN: XNBSAV

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1978

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402

Stock No. 003-003-01990-9 Price $2.75

(Add 25 percent additional for other than U.S. mailing).
ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT BUILDING REGULATORY METHODS AS APPLIED TO THE NEEDS

OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROJECTS

Project director: Russell V. Keune, AIA, Washington, D. C.

Project consultants: Orin M. Bullock, Jr., FAIA, Rising Sun, Md.

Giorgio Cavaglieri, FAIA, New York, N. Y. Nicholas H. Holmes, Jr., FAIA, Mobile, Alab.

M. Hamilton Morton, Jr., AIA, Washington, D. C.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation is the only private, nonprofit

organization chartered by the Congress to encourage public participation

' in the preservation of sites, buildings and objects significant in United

I States history and culture. National Trust support is provided by memberI ship dues, endowment funds, contributions and grants from public agencies.
ABSTRACT

To meet contemporary safety and health requirements as defined by the

building regulatory system, conflicts frequently occur with the needs of

historic building preservation projects. This report (1) identified, evaluated

and proposed historic preservation categorical definitions as applied to

buildings; (2) developed performance objectives, requirements, criteria and

tests for each definition category; and (3) identified and assessed those

current methods most commonly used by regulatory jurisdictions to mitigate

adverse impacts on historic preservation projects.

KEY WORDS: Architecture; building regulatory system; codes; health and safety;

historic buildings; historic preservation; impacts; performance -based

standards; research.
CONTENTS

Page

1 . Introduction 1

2. Methdology 3

2.1 Definitions 3

2.2 Performance Objectives to Meet Preservation Needs 3

2.3 Mitigation of Adverse Impact of the Building

Regulatory System on Preservation Projects 3

2.4 Assessment Methodology in Sample Projects 3

3. Findings 4

3.1 Historic Preservation Definitions 4

3.1.1 National Park Service, "Treatment of

Historic Resources" 4

3.1.2 National Park Service, "Terminology" 5

3.1.3 National Park Service and Advisory Council

on Historic Preservation, "Project Performance Standards" 6

3.1.4 "On Formulating New Parameters for

Preservation Policy," James Marston Fitch 9

3.1.5 "Definitions of Terms Used in the Treatment

of Historical Architecture," National

Conservation Advisory Council 11

3.2 Performance Objectives for Historic Preservation 12

3.2.1 Category/Definitions 13

3.2.2 Building Elements 13

3.2.3 Performance Objectives 14

3.3 Adverse Impact of the Building Regulatory System 24

3.3.1 Problems Encountered with Code Requirements 24

3.3.2 Methods Utilized to Mitigate Impact 25

3.3.3 Sample Projects 25

4. Recommendations for Further Research 70

5. Bibliography 72

6. Illustration Credits 73

7. Appendices 74
TABLE OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Pa

Illustration 1. Brooklandwood Mansion, Brooklandville, Md.

south elevation 2

Illustration 2. Brooklandwood Mansion, Brooklandville, Md.

west and east elevations 2

Illustration 3. Brooklandwood Mansion, Brooklandville, Md.

ground floor 30

Illustration 4. Brooklandwood Mansion, Brooklandville, Md.

first floor 31

Illustration 5. Brooklandwood Mansion, Brooklandville, Md.

second floor • • • 32

Illustration 6. Brooklandwood Mansion, Brooklandville, Md.

third floor 33

Illustration 7. Hezekiah Alexander House, Charlotte, N.C.

north elevation 35

Illustration 8. Hezekiah Alexander House, Charlotte, N.C.

upper drawing - second floor plan;

lower drawing - first floor plan 36

Illustration 9. First White House of the Confederacy, Montgomery,

Alab.

exterior front elevation 40

Illustration 10. First White House of the Confederacy, Montgomery,

Alab.

entrance hall 41

Illustration 11. First White House of the Confederacy, Montgomery,

Alab.

first floor plan 42

Illustration 12. First White House of the Confederacy, Montgomery,

Alab.

second floor plan 43

Illustration 13. Bemstein-Bush House, Mobile, Alab.

exterior front elevation 46

Illustration 14. Bemstein-Bush House, Mobile, Alab.

entrance foyer 47
Page

Illustration 15. Bernstein-Bush House, Mobile Alab.

first floor plan 48

Illustration 16, Bemstein-Bush House, Mobile, Alab.

second floor plan 49

Illustration 17. Restored Chapel of the Good Shepherd, New York,

N. Y.

exterior aerial view 53

Illustration 18. Restored Chapel of the Good Shepherd, New York,

N. Y. basement plan 54

Illustration 19. Restored Chapel of the Good Shepherd, New York,

N. Y.

longitudinal section 55

Illustration 20. New York State Maritime Museum, Schermerhom Row,

New York, N. Y.

view to the south 61

Illustration 21. New York State Maritime Museum, Schermerhom Row,

New York, N.Y.

ground level plan 62

Illustration 22. New York State Maritime Museum, Schermerhom, Row,

New York, N. Y. attic level plan 63

Illustration 23. New York State Maritime Museum, Schermerhom Row, cross sections

I

1 . INTRODUCTION

At the request, and with the support, of the Building Economics and

Regulatory Technology Division, Center for Building Technology, National

Engineering Laboratory, National Bureau of Standards, the National Trust

for Historic Preservation undertook an assessment of current building

regulatory methods as applied to the needs of historic preservation

projects.

It has been recognized that the needs of assuring safety and health,

as defined by the building codes, standards and federal regulations of

the building regulatory system, frequently conflict with the needs of

historic preservation projects. It was a premise of this study that one potential answer to resolving this conflict may be the development of a performance-based standard or set of regulations that would not specify

design solutions to meet the needs of health and safety but would, rather,

specify these needs in goal-oriented (i.e., performance language),

rather than prescriptive, solutions. This would allow the architect

undertaking an historic preservation project the maximum freedom in

meeting the needs of safety and health while not compromising the historical

and architectural integrity of the building.

It is recognized that such performance-based standards and regulations

require extensive building research to develop. In the short term, other

methods must be investigated to mitigate any adverse impact imposed on historic preservation projects by the building regulatory system. In

fact, regulatory jurisdictions are utilizing primarily administrative

methods to mitigate the adverse impact on historic preservation projects.

The purpose of this project was to identify those methods currently

in use by regulatory jurisdictions and to assess the impact and effectiveness of those methods on historic preservation projects. To do this,

the following major tasks were undertaken in the course of the project:

Definitions - Identify all categories of historic preservation activity,

defining each category by making reference to authoritative sources, and

identify any definitional discrepancies arising from these authoritative

sources.

Development of performance objectives of historic preservation needs - For each of the definition categories identified, specify the building's

characteristics that should be maintained for historic preservation purposes and develop detailed performance requirements. Where possible,

further identify criterion for each performance requirement (the measurable

or quantifiable level that should be met to assure the intent of the

requirement is met) and the test (the method of assessing whether the

criterion is met)

.
Methods utilized to mitigate adverse impact of the building regulatory

system on historic preservation projects - Identify the methods commonly

used and the extent of usage in the United States. Identify three of

the most important methods and sample at least three jurisdictions that

utilized these methods. Based on the developed performance standards,

develop methodology for the purpose of assessing the effectiveness of

each of the three methods. Utilize this methodology in assessing

sample projects in each of the identified jurisdictions. Provide recom- mendations for needed further research as might be determined from this

proj ect

.

- 2

-
2 . METHODOLOGY

2.1 Definitions

The existing body of recent preservation literature which was national

in scope was reviewed by the project director for terms and definitions

related to building activity. Based on the project director's best

judgement, a survey package was developed which included a cover questionnaire and copies of the selected terms and definitions (Appendix A)

.

This package was mailed to a national sampling of federal preservation

agencies, state historic preservation offices, local landmarks and historic district commissions, member organizations of the National Trust

and professional staff of the National Trust. While the survey was underway, the project director was serving on a National Conservation Advisory

Council (NCAC) subcommittee that was preparing a report on the state of

architectural conservation in the United States. The subcommittee report

included an appendix, "Definitions of Terms Used in the Treatment of

Historical Architecture." This appendix, together with the previously

selected terms and definitions and the survey responses to those terms

and definitions, formed the collection of definitions from which the

performance objectives were developed.

2.2 Performance Objectives to Meet Preservation Needs

The working chart was developed by the project director and a first

draft prepared from his working experience; the draft was reviewed and

revised principally by M. Hamilton Morton, Jr., under subcontract to the

National Trust. Each of the other subcontractors, Messrs. Bullock,

Cavaglieri and Holmes, also reviewed and commented on the initial draft.

2.3 Mitigation of Adverse Impact of the Building Regulatory System on Preservation Projects

A survey form to identify the primary adverse impacts and the mitigating techniques (Appendix B) was developed by the project director for

circulation to local landmarks and historic district commissions. Data

previously collected from a survey sampling of attendees at a national

conference on historic preservation and building codes (primarily practicing

architects and building officials) was also utilized. These mail survey

results were randomly checked in personal conversation with preservation

project directors and professional consultants.

2.4 Assessment Methodology in Sample Projects

This phase of the project was conducted primarily by subcontractors

to the National Trust who are practicing architects specializing in historic preservation. Six sample projects in five differing geographic

locations were selected in consultation with the project director to obtain a sampling which was representative of the most common forms of

contemporary preservation activity, ranging from a traditional small

historic house museum restoration to a large adaptive use project.

- 3

-
3. FINDINGS

3. 1 Historic Preservation Definitions

The first element of this project called for the identification and

evaluation of the general national acceptance of common historic preservation

definitions as applied to buildings. A suiT'ey of recent preservation

literature which is national in scope identified the following as being

an appropriate base on which to conduct the evaluations.

3.1.1 Administrative Policies for Historical Areas of the National Park

System (revised September 1975) , U. S. Department of the Interior,

National Park Service, Washington, D. C. , pp. v-12.

"TREATMENT OF HISTORIC RESOURCES

For purposes of preservation treatment, the Service

recognizes three classes of historic resources: historic

sites, historic structures, and historic objects (which

differ from structures in being generally movable)

.

Perpetuation of these resources will be accomplished by one or more of the following methods: preservation, restoration,

or reconstruction.

Preservation involves the application of measures to sustain

the existing terrain and vegetative cover of a site and

the existing form, integrity, and material of an object

or structure. It includes initial stabilization work,

where necessary, as well as ongoing maintenance.

Restoration is the process of recovering the general

historic appearance of a site or the form and details of

an object or structure by the removal of incompatible

natural or human- caused accretions and the replacement

of missing elements as appropriate. For structures,

restoration may be for exteriors and interiors and may be

partial or complete.

Reconstruction involves the accurate reproduction of an object or structure, in whole or in part."

The evaluative comments received included the following:

National Park Service: These definitions are designed to apply to properties

in public ownership intended for interpretation and public visitation,

not private use.

South Carolina Department of Archives and History: Prefers the term

"stabilization" to "preservation" because of the associative value the

word "preservation" has assumed in the public mind.

- 4 -
Historic Savannah, Inc., Ga.:- Prefers "stabilization" in the context

designated for "preservation" because of the public's general use and

understanding of the term "preservation."

The Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities: A new

category, "conservation," should be considered either by itself of as a part of "restoration" or "preservation."

Midwest Regional Office, Southwest/Plains Field Office of the National Trust,

and Utah Heritage Foundation: The word "preservation" can mean a system

of architectural approaches which includes adaptive use and restoration,

or it can mean a particular method of building treatment, or it can mean a field of study and work, or it can refer to a popular movement. "Preservation"

should have a broad, more all-inclusive definition encompassing such terms

as "adaptive reuse," "restoration," "reconstruction," etc.

Midwest Regional Office, National Trust: This office holds the position

that the definition for "preservation" is misapplied and is in fact a definition for "stabilization."

Utah Heritage Foundation: Foundation maintains that the definition of

"historic" is lacking in that this determination is critical to application

of the other tenns.

3.1.2 The National Register of Historic Places Supplement 1976 , U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington,

D. C, p. vii.

"Terminology (as used in published edition of the

National Register of Historic Places )

1. Building - a structure created to shelter any form

of human activity.

2. Structure - a work constructed by man.

3. Object - a material thing of function, aesthetic,

cultural, historic, or scientific value that is

usually by nature or design, movable.

4. Site - the location an event, building, structure,

or object.

5. District - a geographically definable area, urban

or rural, possessing a significant concentration or linkage of sites, buildings, structures, or objects

unified by past events or aesthetically by plan or physical development."

- 5 -
"Terminology (expanded and as used in the published How to

Complete National Register Nomination Forms )

A. A district is a geographically definable area, urban

or rural, possessing a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects

which are united by past events or aesthetically by plan

or physical development. A district also may be comprised

of individual elements which are separated geographically

but are linked by association or history.

B. A site is the location of a significant event,

activity, building, structure, or archeological resource where the significance of the location and any archeological

remains outweighs the significance of any existing structures.

C. A building is a stnacture created to shelter any form

of human activity. This may refer to a house, bam, church,

hotel, or similar structure. Buildings may refer to a historically related complex, such as a courthouse and

jail or a house and bam.

D. A structure is a work made up of interdependent and

interrelated parts in a definite pattem of organization.

Constructed by man, it is often an engineering project

large in scale.

E. An object is a material thing of functional, aesthetic,

cultural, historical, or scientific value that may be,

by nature or design, movable yet related to a specific

setting or environment."

The evaluative comments received included the following:

Commission on Chicago Historical and Architectural Landmarks: Somewhat

vague and abstract as used in this abbreviated format. Actual experience

in working with this terminology illustrates the need to refer to the

National Park Service's expanded definitions.

Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission: Definition for "structure'

in abbreviated form is hopelessly vague.

3.1.3 "Project Perfomiance Standards," description from March 16, 1976,

draft of Memorandum of Agreement between Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the National Park Service.

"VII. Project Performance Standards

Acquisition: Acquisition is defined as the act or process of acquiring absolute ownership (fee simple acquisition) ,

- 6 -
or the act or process of acquiring a specific interest

other than absolute ownership (less-than-fee-simple ac- quisition). Less- than-fee-simple ownership includes:

a. The acquisition of development rights. The preservation objective may be achieved in certain cases through

acquiring negative easements limiting a property owner's

right to develop, alter, or use all or part of the property.

For example, a facade easement binds an owner for specified

compensation not to alter an exterior without the permission

of the easement holder; b. Acquisition of remainder

interest, such as the acquisition of property subject to

a life estate.

Protection: Protection is defined as the act or process of

applying measures designed to affect the physical condition

of a property by defending or guarding it from loss or attack or to cover or shield the property from danger or injury. Protection does not include rebuilding or recreating

lost historic features. Protection includes improvements

to the physical condition or environment of a property to

safeguard it from weather or other natural, animal, or human intrusion which could be harmful to the historic

resource

.

Stabilization: Stabilization is defined as the process

of applying measures designed to reestablish the structural

stability of an unsafe or deteriorated property while

maintaining the essential form as it exists at present.

Stabilization aims at halting further deterioration and

enhancing safety. It does not include rebuilding or re- creating lost prehistoric or historic features. Stabilization includes: a. techniques to arrest or slow structural

failure or material deterioration of a property; b. improvement in physical conditions to make the property safe, habitable,

or otherwise useful.

Preservation: Preservation is defined as the application of

measures designed to sustain the form and extent of a property essentially in its existing state. It aims at

halting further deterioration and providing structural

safety, but does not include significant reconstruction or restoration of lost historic features. Preservation includes

techniques of arresting or retarding the deterioration of

a property; or improvement of structural or mechanical

conditions to make a property safe, habitable or otherwise

useful without removal of original fabric. All historic

property is suitable for preservation.

- 7

-
Restoration: Restoration is defined as 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 and by the

replacement of missing earlier work. Restoration may be

of the following kinds: full restoration (exterior and

interior) or partial restoration (exterior, interior, or any part thereof) . The extent of restoration to be undertaken, whether full or partial, must be evaluated on a case by case basis by qualified professional persons.

Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation is defined as the process

of returning a property to a state of efficiency to sound- ness by repairs or alterations so that it will serve a useful continued or adaptive purpose. Those portions of

the property (external, internal, or in combination)

which are important to its significance are preserved or restored. A property is not suitable for rehabilitation

when such treatment would significantly diminish or destroy

the historical or architectural integrity of the property.

Reconstruction: Reconstruction is defined as the process

of reproducing by new construction the exact form and

detail of a vanished building, structure, or object, or a part thereof, as it appeared at a specific period in time.

A property is suitable for reconstruction when it is essential to fill a gap in a historic district or scene, and when

a contemporary design solution is not acceptable. Reconstruction is an appropriate treatment of a historic resource

only when the property to be reconstructed is essential for

understanding and interpreting the value of a historic

district when no other building or structure with the same association has survived, and sufficient historical documentation exists to insure an exact reproduction of the

original."

The evaluative comments received included the following:

South Carolina Department of Archives and History: Distinction between

"preservation" and "stabilization" is not very clear. "Adaptive restoration"

(used in "Treatment of Historic Resources") seems to be more expressive

than "rehabilitation" since the latter is also used for buildings with no architectural value.

Midwest Regional Office, National Trust: "Rehabilitation" is in fact

a definition for "adaptive reuse." "Rehabilitation" under popular usage

implies considerable leeway to alter relative to personal choice. "Adaptive

reuse" as used traditionally by architects and preservationists has implied

changes with sensitivity to important existing fabric and as little as is

- 8 -
practical for contemporary use. We might begin to think about "maintenance"

for that is really the best and only true way we can ever hope to preserve

anything. We encourage and promote this way too little.

Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission: As with the definitions

for "preservation," "stabilization" need not imply the additional work

required to make a structure "habitable or otherwise useful" which is more

properly associated with the term "rehabilitation." Often with obsolete or remote buildings, it is sufficient to simply halt further deterioration

and restore structural integrity to the point that public safety is insured.

Office of Historic Properties, National Trust: Questions whether the term

"preservation" should not be used in the generic term; questions the applicability to all situations of the last sentence of the definition of

"rehabilitation" and suggests that some of these entries, such as "acquisition" and "reconstruction" go beyond the basic definition.

3.1.4 Table 1, "On Formulating New Parameters for Preservation Policy,"

James Marston Fitch, in Preservation and Conservation: Principles

and Practices , The Preservation Press, National Trust for Historic

Preservation, Washington, D. C. 1976, p. 312.

Although. not definitions per se, the categories and examples listed

below identify the range of scale and degree encountered in historic preservation projects.

Profundity of Intervention

(in ascending order of severity or radicalness)

1 . Conservation

a. Natural features: California redwoods

Rare birds and animals

b. Works of art: Sculpture, painting, frescoes, mosaics

2. Preservation : Hyde Park, New York

Brighton Royal Pavilion, England

Wavel Palace, Warsaw

3. Restoration : Independence Hall, Philadelphia

Hradcany Castle, Prague

Monticello, Virginia

4. Adaptive modification : Castello Sforszeca, Milan

Casa Rosa, Genoa

Opera House, Warsaw

Ford's Theatre, Washington, D. C.

5. Structural consolidation : White House, Washington, D. C.

York Minster, England

Norwich Cathedral, England

- 9 -
6. Re constitution

a. In situ: Santa Trinita Bridge, Florence

Iwo Treasure Houses, Japan

Illinois State Capitol, Springfield

b. On new sites: Skansen, Stockholm

Abu Simbel, Egypt

London Bridge, Arizona

7. Reconstruction : Governor's Palace, Williamsburg

Church of Jan Hus, Prague

Fort Louisbourg, Canada

Stoa of Attalus, Athens

8. Replication : Full-scale replica of the Parthenon, Nashville, Tenn.

Use of sculptural replicas outdoors, Pisa and Florence

Scale of Intervention

(in descending order of physical magnitude)

1. Entire historic towns : Tele, Czechoslovakia

Venice, Italy

Williamsburg, Virginia

2. Historic districts : Vieux Carre, New Orleans

Mala Strana, Prague

Stare Miasto, Warsaw

3. Historic building complexes : Regent's Park, London

Lafayette Square, Washington, D. C. Kremlin Palace , Moscow

4 . Individual historic buildings

a. In situ: Versailles, France

Hampton Court, London

Mount Vernon, Virginia

b. Relocated on new sites: Boscobel Garrison, New York

Abu Simbel, Egypt

c. Relocated in groups: Skansen, Stockholm

Cooperstown Fami Museum, New York

Freiland-museet , Copenhagen

5 . Building fragments--decorative arts museums :

Victoria and Albert Museum, London

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City

National Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography, Mexico City

- 10 -
' 3.1.5 "Definitions of Terms Used in the Treatment of Historical Architecture,"

Subcommittee on Architectural Conservation, National Conservation

Advisory Council.

Concurrent with this phase of the project, the NCAC Subcommittee on Architectural Conservation was preparing a report concerning the state of

architectural conservation in the United States. Their report, submitted

and accepted by the full Council in November 1976, includes a set of terms

used in the treatment of historic architecture. These definitions represent

a consensus of current thinking among nationally recognized preservationists.

' The subcommittee consisted of representatives from the National Park Service,

j National Trust, Office of the Architect of the U. S. Capitol, American Institute of Architects, Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities,

j Columbia University School of Architecture (preservation program), and

I University of Florida Department of Architecture (preservation program)

.

"DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN THE TREATMENT OF HISTORICAL

ARCHITECTURE

PRESERVATION : The maintenance of the structure in the same physical condition as when it was received by the

curatorial agency. Although the word has assumed varied

meanings, its definitions fall under two basic headings.

When applied to the preservation movement, it basically

denotes halting the demolition of old and/or historic

buildings and finding means for their retention and reuse. When applied architecturally, its meaning narrows. The

National Park Service defines preservation as:

the application of measures designed to sustain

the form and extent of a structure essentially

as existing when the National Park Service assumes responsibility. Preservation aims at halting

further deterioration and providing structural

safety, but does not contemplate significant

rebuilding. Preservation includes techniques

of arresting or slowing the deterioration of a structure; improvement of structural conditions

to make a structure safe, habitable or otherwise

useful; normal maintenance and minor repairs that

do not change or adversely affect the fabric or appearance of a structure.*

RESTORATION : The process of accurately recovering, by the

removal of later work and the replacement of missing

earlier work, the form and details of a structure, together with its setting, as it appeared at a particular period of time.

^ Activity Standards , Section III, Part IV, National Park

Service, U. S. Department of the Interior, December 21,

1971, p. 18.

- 11 -
REHABILITATION : The process of returning a structure to

a state of usefulness by repairs or alterations when its

significance does not justify full restoration and when

its condition or proposed use precludes preservation in

its existing form.

ADAPTIVE USE : The process of adapting a building to a use other than that for which it was designed, e.g., a piano

factory being converted into housing or a mansion into offices.

This usually involves restoration and/or rehabilitation,

and can be accomplished with varying changes to the appearance of a structure from minimal to major,

RECONSTITUTION : A more radical version of the above, in

which a structure can be saved only by piece-by-piece

reassembly, either in situ or on a new site. Reconstitution

in situ is ordinarily the consequence of disasters like war

or earthquakes, where most of the original constituent

parts remain. On occasion, it may be necessary to dismantle

a building and reassemble it on the same site, but recon- stitution on new sites is more common.

RECONSTRUCTION : The process of rebuilding a non-extant

structure to its original appearance through archival and

archeological investigation. Although parts of the original

structure are sometimes included in the reconstruction,

the process usually involves new construction materials.

REPLICATION : The construction of an exact copy of a still

extant building on a site removed from the prototype."

It is this set of NCAC definitions that the National Trust elected

to use as the basis for the second phase of this project, with some modification reflecting comments on the previous sections.

Although outside of the scope of this project, it should be noted that

the subject of historic preservation definitions is also the current subject of a study by the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)

.

The United States is represented by the U. S. Committee for ICOMOS. This

effort is attempting to survey and develop international terminology standards

3.2 Performance Objectives for Historic Preservation

Using the NCAC subcommittee definitions as a basis, the definitions

which follovv were used in this project.

Also, the following categories of building elements were developed

for this phase of the project and are used in the subsequent charts. These

elements represent a range of differing factors which have to be considered

in both determining and evaluating performance objectives.

- 12 -
3.2.1 Category/Definitions

a. Preservation; The maintenance of the structure in the same physical

condition as when it was received by the curatorial agency.

b. Rehabilitation: The process of returning a structure to a state of

usefulness by repairs or alterations when its significance does not justify

full restoration and when its condition or proposed use precludes preservation in its existing form.

c. Adaptive use: The process of adapting a building to a use other than

that for which it was designed. It usually involves restoration and/or

rehabilitation and can be accomplished with varying changes to the appearance of a structure.

d. Consolidation: The physical intervention in the actual fabric of the

structure to insure its continued structural integrity. Such intervention

can range from relatively minor to very radical actions and may be an integral

part of broader programs of recycling for adaptive use.

e. Restoration: The process of accurately recovering, by the removal of

later work and the replacement of missing original work, the form and

details of a structure together with its setting, as it appeared at a particular period of time.

f. Reconstitution : The saving of a stnacture by the piece-by-piece

reassembly, either in situ or on a new site.

g. Reconstruction: The process of rebuilding a nonextant structure to its

original appearance through archival, architectural and archeological

investigation.

h. Replication: The construction of an exact copy of an extant building

on a site removed from the prototype.

3.2.2 Building Elements

a. Use/occupancy - program/compatible/noncompatible

- use/assembly/residential/business/educational/ etc.

- private/public/museum/landmark

- compatible/adaptive use

b. Site/land use - orientation/surrounding area

- yard/set-back requirements

- walks/ramps/parking

- accessory buildings

- landscaping

- 13 -
Form/vo lume/penet rat ions

/

projections - exterior enclosure/walls/roof

- penetrations/doors/windows/areades

- proj ections/comices/balconys/ chimneys /dormers/

towers /balustrades

d. Interior space/ floor plan - public space/foyers /major/minor

- private space/rooms/offices

- service spaces/storage/mechanical/attics/

basement

e. Egress/circulation engress/protected horizontal exitways/fire doors/

stairs /protected/unprotected/handicap access circulation/halls/ foyers/elevators/ conveyor equipment

Exterior materials - wall surface/roof

- penetration/doors /windows

- details/comices/shutters

- water control/gutters/downspouts

Interior materials - wall/ceiling/ floor surfaces (hard)

- soft materials (decorations)

- material finishes/color/visual appearance

- specialities/ fireplaces/balustrades

h. Structural system/materials

i. Environment/comfort/safety

3.2.3 Performance Objectives

- design loads/dead and live

- structural system exposed/concealed

- part it ions /bearing/nonbearin

g

heating/ventilating/air conditioning

lighting/electrical

plumbing/vents/toilets

safety/alarm/smoke systems/fire extinguishers

a. Preservation: The maintenance of the structure in the same physical

condition as when it was received by the curatorial agency.

Building

elements

Use/occupan cy

Site/land use

Design goals/

requirement

Determine by

purpose

.

Maintain existing conditions,

Criterion

Adhere to existing or accommodate without

alterations

.

Adhere to historical

and architectural

evidence

.

Performance

test

Historically and

architecturally

accurate representation.

Ditto.

r

- 14 -
Building

elements

Design goals/

requirement Criterion

Performance

test

Form/volume/

penetrations/

projections

Interior

space/floor

plan

Egress/

circulation

Exterior

materials

Interior

materials

Ditto.

Ditto.

Determine by

purpose

.

Maintain

existing

conditions

Ditto.

Adhere to existing Ditto,

conditions.

Ditto. Ditto.

Adhere to existing Ditto, or accommodate without alterations.

Preserve surviving Ditto,

materials as possible

and replicate original

materials in all

replacements

.

Preserve surviving Ditto,

materials where possible

and meet use/occupancy

needs with compatible

or concealed architectural installation.

Structural

system/

materials

Environment/

comfort/

safety

Service for

intended use/

occupancy.

Ditto.

Preserve surviving as possible and meet use/

occupancy needs with

compatible or concealed

architectural

instal lation

.

Preserve surviving systems

as possible (may or may

not be operative) and

meet use/occupancy needs

with compatible architectural installation.

Provide new systems

with minimum

interference and

preserve historically and

architecturally

accurate representation.

Ditto.

b. Rehabilitation: The process of returning a structure to a state of use- fulness by repairs or alterations when its significance does not justify

full restoration and when its condition or proposed use precludes preservation in its existing form.

- 15 -
Building

elements

Use/occupancy

Design goals/

requirement Criterion

Degree of change Accommodate without dismay or may not ruption of surviving

be anticipated, plan and materials.

Performance

test

Retain basic

historic/

architectural

integrity with

compatible

alterations

.

Site/land

use

Ditto. Respect basic characteristics of structure and

site in alterations.

Ditto.

Form/volume/ Ditto.

penetrations/

projections

Interior Ditto.

space/ floor

plan

Egress/ Ditto,

circulation

Exterior Ditto,

materials

Retain basic form/volume Ditto.

with compatible new

elements.

Retain basic plan with Ditto,

compatible new elements.

Accommodate with minimum Ditto,

disruption of surviving

plan and materials.

Retain surviving materials Ditto,

as possible and be sensitive in use of new

materials.

Interior

materials

Ditto. Ditto. Ditto.

Structural

system/

materials

Envi ronment/

comfort/

safety

Service for

intended use/

occupancy.

Ditto.

Retain usable systems

and materials with com- patible or concealed

architectural installation

of new.

Ditto.

Meet use/occupancy

and retain basic

historic/

architectural

integrity.

Ditto.

c. Adaptive use: The process of adapting a building to a use other than

that for which it was designed. It usually involves restoration and/or

rehabilitation and can be accomplished with varying changes to the appearance

of a structure.

- 16 -
Bui Iding

elements

Design goals/

requirements Criterion

Performance

test

Use/occupancy Change from New use compatible with

original architectural constraints

anticipated. of structure.

Site/land

use

Form/volume/

penetrations/

projections

Interior

space/

floor plan

Egress/

circulation

Degree of

change from

original

anticipated.

Degree of

change from

original may- or may not

be

anticipated.

Ditto.

Change from

original

anticipated.

Alter respecting basic

character.

Ditto.

Alter to minimally impact

exterior character and

retain major significant

interior spaces.

New compatible with archi

tectural constraints of

structure

.

Exterior Degree of

materials change from

original

anticipated.

Preserve surviving

materials and restore as possible with new work

being compatible with

surviving materials.

Interior Ditto. Ditto,

materials

Structural Service for Install replacement or system/ intended supplementary systems

materials use/ occupancy. in manner compatible or concealed with original

and new fabric.

Minimum alteration

to existing

stnjcture with

compatible

alterations

.

Alterations

executed in architectural compatibility

with site.

Alterations

architecturally

compatible.

Ditto.

Minimum alteration

to existing structure with com- patible

alterations

.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate representation

for surviving while new work is architecturally compatible

with surviving

fabric.

Ditto.

Meet use needs while

remaining sensitive

to overall exterior

and interior architectural character.

- 17 -
Building Design goals/ Performance

elements requi rement Criterion test

Environment/ Ditto. Meet use needs with modem Ditto.

comfort/ systems installed in manner

safety compatible or concealed

with original and new fabric

fabric.

d. Consolidation: The physical intervention in the actual fabric of the

structure to insure its continued structural integrity. Such intervention

can range from relatively minor to very radical actions and may be an integral

part of broader programs of recycling for adaptive use.

Use /occupancy Determine by Adhere to specified period Historically

puipose. of interpretation while accurate repreany new use adheres or is sentation while

compatible with form/ new functions

volume and plan. are compatible

with form/volume

and plan.

Site/ Maintain Retain character as Accurate and

land use existing found. compatible

conditions

.

setting.

Form/ volume/ Ditto. Adhere to existing Historical ly

penetrations/ conditions. and architecturally

projections accurate representation

Interior Determine by Adhere to specified Historically

space/floor use/ occupancy. period while nonpublic and architecturally

plans spaces may or may not accurate represenbe adapted for new tation while new

functions

.

functions may or may not be historically and architecturally accurate

representation

.

Egress/ Determine by Adhere to specified Historically

circulation purpose

.

period for interpre- accurate representation while new use tation while new

adheres or is compatible functions are with form/ volume and compatible with

space

.

form/volume and plan.

Exterior Conserve/ Adhere to specified Historically and

materials consolidate period for interpretation architecturally

all possible while new use adheres or accurate

surviving. is compatible with form/ representation

.

volume and space.

- 18 -
Building

elements

Design goals/

requirement Criterion

Performance

test

Interior

materials

Ditto. Ditto.

Structural

system/

materials

Environment/

comfort/

safety

Service for

intended

use/occupancy.

Ditto,

Preserve surviving where

possible and meet new use/

occupancy and code needs

with compatible or con- cealed architectural

installation.

Preserve surviving systems

as possible (may or may

not be operative) and meet new use/occupancy and code

needs with compatible or concealed architectural

installation

.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate representation to degree

necessary to

meet use/occupancy

requirements

.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate representation to degree

necessary to meet

use/occupancy and

architectural

requirements.

Ditto.

e. Restoration: The process of accurately recovering, by the removal of later

work and the replacement of missing original work, the form and details of a structure together with its setting, as it appeared at a particular period of

time.

Use/occupancy

Site/

land use

Form/volume/

penetrations/

projections

Determine by

purpose.

Restore to a period in

time

.

Ditto,

Adhere to evidence of

period represented and

accommodate new work

without alteration to

period represented.

Adhere to historical and

architectural evidence of

period. Conceal modem

functions to degree

possible

.

Adhere to historical and

architectural evidence

of period.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate

repres ent at ion

.

Ditto,

Ditto.

- 19 -
Building

elements

Interior

space/ floor

plan

Egress/

circulation

Exterior

materials

Interior

materials

Design goals/

requirement

Ditto.

Determine by

purpose

.

Restore to a period in

time

.

Ditto.

Criterion

Ditto,

Adhere to evidence of

period represented and

accommodate new work

without alteration to

period represented.

Preserve surviving

materials, adhere to historical and architectural

evidence of period and

replicate evidence of

period in new.

Ditto.

Performance

test

Ditto.

Ditto.

Ditto.

Ditto.

Structural

system/

materials

Environment/

comfort/

safety

Service for

intended use/

occupancy.

Ditto.

Adhere to period represented and meet new use/

occupancy and code needs

with compatible or con- cealed architectural

installation.

Preserve surviving systems,

as possible (may or may

not be operative) and meet new use/occupancy and

code needs with compatible or concealed architectural

installation.

Provide new systems

to meet needs of use/

occupancy and architectural requirements

with a minimum of

interference and pre- serve historically and

architecturally accurate

statement.

Ditto.

f. Reconstitution: The saving of a structure by the piece-by-piece reassembly,

either in situ or on a new site.

Use/ occupancy Determine by Adhere to original as purpose. required by interpretation

and by form/volume and

and space.

Historically

accurate statement

while new work

conforms and is

compatible with

form/volume and plan.

- 20 -
Building

elements

Site/

land use

Form/volume/

penetrations/

projections

Interior

space/floor

plan

Design goals/

requirement

Replicate

conditions of

period represented by

project

.

Replicate

original.

Determine by

purpose

.

Criterion

Restore original to period

represented, while new

replicates period represented. Conceal modem

functions

.

Adhere to original.

Adhere to specified period,

nonpublic spaces may be

adapted for new function.

Egress/ Determine by Adhere to original as circulation purpose. required by interpretation

and by form/volume and

space.

Exterior

materials

Interior

materials

Structural

system/

materials

Reuse surviving

materials and

replicate

missing.

Ditto.

Service for

intended use/

occupancy.

Preserve and reuse sur- viving materials as possible while new

replicates surviving.

Preserve and reuse surviving materials as possible while new replicates surviving or is

compatible with surviving,

depending on use/

occupancy.

New systems to be compatible with interpretation

and compatible or con- cealed with form/volume

and space.

Performance

test

Historically and

architecturally

accurate

representation.

Ditto.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate representation

while new work may

or may not represent

historically and

architectural ly

accurate

representation

.

Historically accurate

representation while

new work conforms and

is compatible

with form/volume and

plan.

Historically and

architectural ly

accurate

representation

.

Historically and

architectural ly

accurate representation to meet needs

of use/occupancy.

Meet requirements

and may or may not

,

depending on use, be

historically and

architecturally

accurate

representation.

- 21 -
Building

elements

Design goals/

requirement Criterion

Performance

test

Environment/

comfort/

safety

Ditto. Preserve systems where

possible (may or may

not be operative) and

meet new use/occupancy

and code needs with

compatible or concealed

architectural installation,

Ditto.

g. Reconstruction: The process of rebuilding a non-extant structure to its

original appearance through archival, architectural and archeological investigation.

Use/occupancy

Site/

land use

Form/ volume/

penetrations/

projections

Interior/

space/ floor

plan

Egress/

circulation

Determine by

purpose

.

May or may not

be on original

site

.

Replicate original exterior,

while depending on use, interior may

or may not replicate

original

.

Depending on use, may or may not

replicate

original

.

Determine by

purpose

.

Adhere to specified period

of interpretation, while new use adheres or is

compatible with form/

volume and space.

Restore original surroundings and design new sur- roundings that are com- patible with structure.

Adhere to original where

required.

Adhere to specified period

for interpretation, while

new use may replicate all or portion of original

.

Adhere to specified period

for interpretation, while new use adheres or is com- patible with form/volume

and space.

Historically accurate

representation while

new functions are compatible with form/

volume and plan.

Historically and

architecturally accu- rate representation

while new work is

compatible with or concealed visually

from original.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate

representation

.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate representation to degree

necessary to meet

use/occupancy needs.

Historically accurate

representation while

new functions are compatible with form/

volume and plan.

- 22 -
Building

elements

Exterior

materials

Interior

materials

Structural

system/

materials

Design goals/

requirement

Replicate

original.

Replicate

original to

degree required by use.

Service for

intended use/

occupancy.

Criteri on

Reuse surviving in identical context of original

structure while new materials replicate

original

.

Reuse surviving in identical context of original

structure, while new materials may or may not

replicate original depending on use/occupancy.

New structure to be com- patible with interpretation, with form/volume

and space or to be

concealed.

Performance

test

Historically and

architectural ly

accurate

representation

.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate representation to degree

necessary to meet

needs of use/

occupancy.

Provide new systems

to meet needs of

use/occupancy and

architectural requirements with a minimum

of interference and

preserve historically

accurate

representation

.

Environment/ Ditto. Meet new use/occupancy Ditto.

comfort/ and code needs with corn- safety patible or concealed

architectural installation.

Historical systems may

or may not be operative.

h. Replication: The construction of an exact copy of an extant building

on a site removed from the prototype.

Use/ occupancy

Site/

land use

Form/volume/

penetrations

.

proj ections

Determine by

purpose.

Compatible with

purpose of

replication

.

Replicate

original

.

Compatible with purpose

of replication.

Compatible with purpose of

replication.

Adhere to prototype,

Historically accurate

representation to

degree necessary.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate representation to degree

necessary.

Ditto.

- 23 -
Bui Iding

elements

Design goals/

requi rement Criterion

Performance

test

Interior

space/floor

plan

Egress/

circulation

Exterior

materials

Interior

materials

Ditto.

Determine by

purpose.

Replicate

original

.

Ditto.

Ditto.

Compatible with purpose

of replication.

Adhere to prototype.

Ditto.

Ditto.

Historically accurate

representation to

degree necessary.

Historically and

architecturally

accurate representation to degree

necessary.

Ditto.

Structural

system/

materials

Environment/

comfort/

safety

Service for

intended

vise/occupancy.

Ditto.

Adhere to prototype but

may utilize concealed

modem systems.

Ditto.

Meet requirements for

use/occupancy and

architectural

compatibility.

Ditto.

3.3 Adverse Impact of the Building Regulatory System

3.3.1 Problems Encountered with Code Requirements

The survey sample indicated that four most common problems are:

a. accommodating a change in the principal use and accommodating mixed use;

b. having existing stairways and exits meet requirements, including access

for the handicapped, and/or integrating new ones which do not violate the

aesthetic/historic character of the building;

c. providing fire rated egress routes while maintaining the character of

the existing structures and materials;

d. changing existing and/or adding new electrical, mechanical, ventilation

and fire detection/protection systems / signage which do not violate the

aesthetic/historic character of the building.

- 24 -
The survey sample indicated the most commonly dealt with historic building

types were residential, commercial and institutional, in that order of

frequency. Tlie building uses which presented the most commonly encountered

problems were public assembly, commercial and residential, in that order.

The information for this section of the report was gathered from questionnaires completed by a national sample of 50 architects specializing in

preservation work, local building officials, city and state preservation

agency administrators, and chairpersons of 25 local landmarks/historic district

commissions.

3.3.2 Methods Utilized to Mitigate Impact

The four most common general methods employed to mitigate adverse impact

of the building regulatory requirements on historic buildings are:

a. face-to-face negotiation with local building regulatory representatives

throughout the building preservation process to meet the code requirements and

to minimize adverse impact on the building;

b. development of specific historic building provisions in the code which

permit the granting of variations from the code for historic buildings;

c. use of an existing special appeal board process for requirements as applied

to historic buildings;

d. the proposal of revised code provisions to alleviate the most objectionable parts of the existing requirements.

3.3.3 Sample Projects

The specifics of the above general methods are included in the following six case examples.

a. Brooklandwood Mansion, Falls Road, Brooklandville, Baltimore County, Md.

Built in 1790 by Charles Carroll of Carrollton, the house passed

through a series of ownerships before becoming, in 1952, the principal building

of St. Paul's School. Each successive owner/occupant made substantial changes

in the mansion while retaining its essential late 18th-century character.

The modifications which had been made to adapt it to meet the needs of the

school were of a temporary and cosmetic character. The mansion is entered in

the National Register of Historic Places.

In 1969-70, a project was undertaken to restore most rooms to their

period character including the kitchen on the first floor and one bathroom on the second floor. Contemporary modifications were provided on the second

floor to provide domestic facilities for the headmaster's family and guests,

facilities for a small infirmary, as well as school offices in the basement

and first floor. The applicable code was the Building Officials and Code

Administrators (BOCA) code which was adopted by the county.

- 25 -
PROBLEM 1: Occiq)ancy Classification

Three occupancy classifications were required to meet the client's

program for the use of the building: business office, infirmaiy and residential.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

Negotiations were conducted with the building officials to secure approval of the three split-use classification.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard of historic preservation: Within the owner's

established prograjn to justify continued use and, thus, existence of the

building within the school's campus, all occupancy classifications had to be

used,

b. The achievable performance standard: Desired standard achieved through

cooperation of building officials.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

Split-use classification permitted the project to be undertaken and the

building saved and reused.

Re commendat i ons

Establish performance guidelines for authorizing mixed use and

for providing for a determination of probably risks incurred by proposed

occupancies and subsequent modifications of exit requirements, fire separations, etc., based on the retention of maximum historic values while

incurring minimum risks.

PROBLEM 2: Exterior Fire Escapes

The approved occupancy classification combined with the existing floor

plan and the overall historic preservation objectives mandated the retention

of the two exterior fire escapes, one fire escape to serve the first and

second floors, the second to serve the second and third floors (see illustrations

1, 2, 4, 5 and 6)

.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

The fire escapes were painted white to blend as much as possible with

the mansion's white exterior walls.

Identification of Performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: Tlie exterior

of the building would not have to be altered by the installation of exterior

fire escapes.

- 26 -
b. The achievable performance standard: The fire escapes were required and,

thus, the combination of their location toegether with the painting to reduce

the contrast with the exterior walls represented the achievable standard.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

Both fire escapes were in place before the project was started. One

is very noticeable and detracts seriously but it provides a second means of

escape from the attic rooms; no other solution was achievable. The other fire

escape in the rear of the building is also architecturally incompatible but

to a degree is screened by planting.

Required fire escapes cannot be concealed on the exterior of a building.

Seldom can historic buildings safely be used for public assembly without

either some defacement of the exterior or modification in the interior.

Recommendations

Restrictions in use and early warning systems, plus an automatic fireretarding system may held avoid unsightly exterior fire escapes in many similar

cases.

PROBLEM 5: Fire Alarm Bells, Exit Signs and Doors

The occupancy classification required a fire alarm bell system in the

office and infirmary area, illuminated exit signs in the office area, and

exit doors from the office and infirmary areas opening outwards (see illustration 3)

.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

Illiiminated green exit signs were installed in the office area. A fire

alarm bell system was installed in the office and infirmary areas from which

exit doors open outwards. Those doors exiting directly to the outside from

the resid'ential areas were able to remain opening inwards as there are more

than the required number of exit doors securing this area.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: From this

viewpoint, the conspicuous exit signs and alarm bells would have been omitted

and all exterior doors would swing inwards.

b. The achievable performance standard: The standard accomplished within

the applicable regulations involved using exit signs in the office area only,

and changing exterior doors to open outwards from the office and infirmary

areas

.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

The lack of need for exit signs can usually be established in most historic

building restorations or their presence is of minor importance in the overall

- 27 -
I

- 28 -
Oi

(0

Oi OMH

09

<!HOIH >

-ac

03

i-HOo

DQ t/5 C - o O +-) •H 03

I/) > C (U

03 r-H ooOo

03

M

V5

03

<D -ac

03

4->

CD2 - 29

^3Ca

I* o

o

O

s,

T3O

O

3 O

-a o

C '

.—

I

^ -M O '-0 o s- CO
- 32 -

evaluation of the monument. Since the greatest source of fire is open flame,

it should be possible in most restorations to avoid the use of open flame

heating plants within the building.

Recommendations

Illuminated exit signs should only be required in historic buildings in

places where strangers and the public will assemble. They serve no real

need in the spaces occupied by relatively few persons on a regular workday

basis. Doors providing egress from historic areas which will not be used

for public assembly should not be required to open outwards, particularly

from areas where there are two or more other exitways.

b . Hezekiah Alexander House, 3420 Shamrock Drive, Charlotte, N.C.

The home of Hezekiah Alexander, signer of the Mecklenburg "Resolves,"

in Charlotte, has been accurately restored by a local foundation to the condition as it appeared c. 1774, and is on exhibition as an historic house museum

operated by the City of Charlotte. It is a stone house consisting of a basement,

two stories, and an attic, 960 square feet per floor and is located in an open

suburban setting. Supporting visitor and interpretation facilities are in a contemporary building located about 300 yards away. The house is entered in

the National Register of Historic Places. The applicable code was the Southern

Standard Building Code (SSBC) as adopted by the city.

PROBLEM 1: Exits

Three exterior doors serving the first floor of the building were re- tained and restored. The door ways open onto stoops approximately four feet

above grade level (see illustrations 7 and 8).

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

Having the building treated as an educational, three-dimensional object,

the exterior doors were viewed as an integral part of accuracy of the total

restoration project and, thus, historic preservation objectives prevailed.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: Retain the three

original exterior doors in their original locations, dimension, material and

with their door swings remaining inwards

.

b. The achievable performance standard: The historic preservation standard

was adhered to instead of changing location, dimension, material or making

the doors opening outwards

.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

All of the historic preservation objectives were achieved for this

element of the building.

- 34 -

Illustration 8: Hezekiah Alexander House, Charlotte, N.C.

upper drawing: second floor plan; lower drawing -

- 36 - first floor plan j
Recommendations

Such 18th century buildings used only as museum objects, might be

posted with signs stating "This 18th century building may be hazardous

to your health and safety. Enter with extreme caution." With historic

accuracy in restoration being the goal for such educational purposes,

the hazards to visitors must be mitigated by restricting the number of

visitors and providing escorts.

PROBLEM 2: Interior Stairway

One original, enclosed wooden and winding stairway, the only one in

the building, was to be restored to link the basement, first, second and

attic floors. Visitors actually only go into two rooms on the first floor

and only one room on the second floor (see illustration 8)

.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

Visitations to interior is both controlled in numbers and escorted

by guides. Modern handrail provided on stairs for visitors use.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: The one original 18th century interior stairway is to be retained in place with

no changes in dimension and material.

b. The achievable performance standard: The historic preservation standard

was adhered to instead of altering location, design, dimension or material.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

All of the historic preservation objectives were achieved for this

element of the building.

Recommendations

Same recommendation as in problem 1 above.

PROBLEM 5: Mechanical Systems

The fireplaces were retained and restored to their 18th century

appearance. The restoration program did not call for the fireplaces to

be operative. The building was provided with a modem electrical service

heating and air conditioning system (see illustration 8).

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

The modem mechanical systems were installed, one in a basement room and

under the low headroom in the attic. The heated and cooled air is distributed

- 37 -
through the unused chimney flues and fireplaces so as to be concealed from

view, and provide the specified needs without detracting from the 18th

century appearance of the interior. No open flames are allowed within the

building.

Minimum electrical lighting is achieved by low voltage fixtures

which are concealed from the view of visitors behind the exposed ceiling . beams

.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: Retain the

18th century historic appearance of the interior spaces.

b. The achievable performance standard: Standard achieved only with the

sacrifice of not having authentic operating 18th century fireplaces.

The fireplaces adequately serve aesthetic historical requirements.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

The basic historic preservation objective was achieved with the

compatible addition of required modem heating and air conditioning equipment necessary for the proper conservation of artifacts displayed within

the building and for employee and visitor comfort.

Re commendati ons

Satisfactory resolutions of the historic preservation objectives and

mechanical requirements were achieved.

c. The First White House of the Confederacy, southwest comer of Washington

Avenue and South Union Street, Montgomery, Alab.

In the early 1830' s, William Sayre built a two-story frame dwelling;

in 1854, the building was substantially altered and a one-story frame

addition was built on the rear. In 1861, it was leased by the Confederate

govemment and served for several months as the residence of Jefferson

Davis, President of the Confederate States of America. In 1920, it was acquired by the State of Alabama and moved to its present site, across

the street from the State Capitol.

Since that time, the White House been open as a museum. It is

entered in the National Register of Historic Places. At the time of its

relocation and through the succeeding years, all manner of inappropriate

and intrusive elements have been added. During the period 1973-76, a project was completed to restore the building to its condition (as best

as could be determined) when it was occupied by Mr. Davis. The total cost

of the project was $250,000.

- 38 -
This project qualifies as a restoration project under the category/

definitions of this report. Under the SSBC, it is classified by usage

as a place of small assembly and according to its construction as type

VI, wood frame. There is no statewide building code in Alabama.

PROBLEM 1: Occupancy Classification

As a two-story frame structure, it was technically illegal under the

city code for use as a place of small assembly (see illustration 9).

Identification of method utliized to mitigate adverse impact

The mitigation method for this project was primarily administrative

rather than technical. By virtue of the project having been conducted

under the direction of the Building Commission of the State of Alabama,

a higher unit of state government, the project did not have to comply

with all of the provisions of the local city code. The building was exempted under the "Existing Buildings" section of the code. WTiile used

as a private residence for its first 90 years, the building had been a public museum for the last 55 years-- longer than the local code had been

in existence.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: To be fully

utilized as an educational, three-dimensional public museum property, the

building's first two floors have to be accessible to the public.

b. The achievable performance standard: The building, being classified

as an "Existing Building," was subjected to the following positive actions

taken in accordance with the code: all structural defects were corrected;

a new concealed sprinkler system replaced an older, undersized system; a new heating, ventilation and air conditioning system contained local

alarms and smoke detection devices tied directly to local fire departments;

and a new electrical system was installed.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

The occupancy classification determination set conditions for other

code determinations. The building was restored to meet historical evidence

and the client's use program. The local building official's determination

of less than 50 percent "physical value" contributed to the resolution of

this determination.

Recommendations

At the time the project was conducted, the historic building section

of the code had not been adopted by the SSBC; state and local building

officials, together with the architect agreed that the process would have been

- 39 _
z

2. ^ 5 §

I—I <

<DBO

W) MCoXo

03

<DouX o M -HP

M-i 03 ~o >

CD

t/1 CD o +-i o

0)

M

•P <+H •H

rC

U S o

•H

M f-l

t/) 0 ^ -P •H X co

•HP

03

?H P

!/) - 40 -
- 41 -
THE FIRST WHITE HOUaE

OF THE COINFEDERACY

PIR-^T FLOOR P L A FN

o 5 lo 16 20

Illustration 11: First White House of the Confederacy, Montgomery, Alab.

first floor plan

- 42 ~
/VRE>V OF /ACCESS

~ro THE. PUBUI C THE F/g^T WHIT£ HOUSE

OF THE COrir£DE.gACY

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

O 5 lO 15 20

Illustration 12: First White House of the Confederacy, Montgomery, Alab.

second floor plan

- 43 -
easier had the section been present in the SSBC. Under the provisions of

this historic building section, the final judgement is made by the building

official but the request must be made by a professional architect or engineer.

Clearly, there must be agreement between the two sides prior to formal

application by the project designer and formal approval by the official.

It is during these early stages that the technical trade-off and compensating

features must be reviewed and the actual risk involved analyzed by both

sides

.

To utilize the "physical value" concept for historic preservation,

one must be able to show the official that the value of the restoration work

is less than 50 percent of the existing physical value. Also, obviously,

the usage cannot change. As this concept requires a dialogue between

the project designer and the building official, it is not unusual at all

that the "compensating elements" and "technical trade-offs" enter the picture

whether specifically mandated by code or not.

Third is the provision under the SSBC for appeal. The code establishes

a technical board of appeals consisting of architects, engineers and other

members of the construction industry. This arrangement is utilized in many

areas. Also utilized is the "political" board of appeals such as that in

Mobile where the board consists of three elected city commissioners. Each

system has advantages and disadvantages. The technical board is better

acquainted with actual risks. On the other hand, the political board is

probably more responsive to requests from the electorate.

PROBLEM 2: Interior Stairs

The first and second floors were linked by a single, open wood

stair (see illustrations 10, 11 and 12).

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

The local code requirements for two enclosed stair towers to the

second floor of a building used for public assembly were waived under the

occupancy classification determination. The building is only open to

visitors when guides are present and is not occupied at night.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: The stair

had to be retained in place without altering dimensions or materials.

Public access to the second floor was required by the use of the building.

b. The achievable performance standard: Achieved in full but done so in

concert with other requirements such as controlled visitor accesss, open

flame restrictions and installation of adequate fire and smoke detection

and suppression systems.

- 44 -
Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

Achieved in full.

Recommendations

Same recommendations as in problem 1.

PROBLEM 5: Exits

The principal first floor front entry door opened inwards. The rear

exit was in a wing where the floor level was six inches lower than that

of the main house. The rear exit is in an egress path and had only one riser instead of the required three (see illustration 11)

.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

The principal front entry door remained swinging inwards; however,

all doors to the rear exit had to be swinging in the direction of travel.

Therefore, the rear door had to be altered to swing outwards; this door is

in a lattice-enclosed porch and almost invisible; it is adjacent to the

ramp. One exit light was installed in the public space to mark the rear

exit.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal perfoiroance standard for historic preservation: All door

dimensions, materials and swings should remain historically accurate.

b. The achievable performance standard: The front main exterior door

dimensions, materials and swings remained historically accurate while all

interior doors in the direction of travel, to the altered rear exit, had

only the swings changed to conform with the direction of travel.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

A satisfactory compromise permitted achievement of major historic

preservation objectives while meeting the local building official requirements.

Recommendations

Same recommendations as in problem 1. While not in full technical

compliance with the local code, the building is far safer after the restoration

than it had been in the proceeding 145 years.

d. The Bemstein-Bush House, 355 Government Street, Mobile, Alab.

This building was constructed in 1872 and consists of two stories plus

a partial basement, masonry exterior walls and wood interior framing. In the

early part of the 20th century, several additions were made and it became a mortuary. It remained in that usage until the 1960's when it was acquired

- 45 -
t-H <O c S O

t/) > d 0) O t-H

x: +-» d o

CQ ^ c

•H ^

QJ

O

+-1 -H

(/) f-l

CD

X

CQ

O

too

•HM

03

Jh

4-1

t/) d - 46 -

Illustration 15: Bernstein-Bush House, Mobile, Alab.

first floor plan

- 48 -
Illustration 16: Bemstein-Bush House, Mobile, Alab.

second floor plan

- 49 -
by the Mobile Housing Board as part of its urban renewal activities.

Subsequently, the building was purchased by the City of Mobile and during

the period 1971-75 a project was undertaken to adapt it for use as a part

of the museum system of the city. Mobile's museum system consists of

four buildings- -tv/o older buildings adapted for reuse, one "reconstitution"

and one "reconstruction." The building is entered in the National Register

of Historic Places as part of a listed historic district.

The objective of the project was to preserve the exterior appearance

of the building including the later additions, and to adapt the interior

spaces for display uses, offices, preparation areas and so forth.

Additional work is still required to finish the second floor and

the rear wing. To date, the work has cost approximately $300,000.

The project is classified as "adaptive use" under the category/

definitions of this report. Under the SSBC usage classification, the

building is type V, masonry exterior walls with unprotected interior framing.

PROBLEM 1: Occupancy Classification

The ground floor was larger than the allowable floor area for a building of its use and type (see illustration 15).

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

A portion of the ground floor is separated by making an existing

masonry wall between the display area and receiving room into a fire wall.

One window on the rear wall was closed and two openings were filled with

fire-rated doors. The partial basement was sealed off from the crawl

space beneath the first floor and given a fire-rated ceiling.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: The basic

use of the building was changed from a mortuary to a city museum. Since

the program called for saving the building and adapting it as part of a museum complex, some alterations to accomplish this were recognized as being necessary.

b. The achievable performance standard: For the purpose of intended use,

the desired standard was achieved.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

The necessary alterations were completed in accordance with overall

historic preservation objectives for the project. The most important goal

of retaining a building long a part of the cityscape was achieved.

- 50 -
Recommendations

This project was conducted without the benefit of the historic

building section of the SSBC, and the building official extended the limitations of the "physical value" of the existing structure. The historic

building section will be an extremely effective tool, more effective than

any of the other methods previously available. However, even the use of

this section will or should not be the basis for the deletion of some of

the most basic elements required by the responsible professional code by

common sense. Exit lights, ramps, handrails and other 20th century safety

elements will and should continue to find their way into both pure restoration work and adaptive use projects. These may offend the purist but will

comfort the professional who knows of the possible liability when the

letter of the code has been breached.

PROBLEM 2: Exits

The monumental front entrance was to be retained and restored.

Other exits were to be provided as determined by the building's intended

use and code requirements (see illustrations 13 and 14).

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

A required ramp was built on one side of the house and a full length

window was replaced with a new door. This door, coupled with a rear exit

door, provided the two exits required by the code so that the monumental

front entrance could remain swinging inwards.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: Same standard

as in problem 1 performance standard.

b. The achievable performance standard: Same standard achieved as in

problem 1

.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

The necessary alterations were completed in accordance with the overall

historic preservation objectives for the project. The most important goal was that the building was retained.

Recommendations

Same recommendations as in problem 1.

PROBLEM 5: Interior Stairs

A single interior, winding stair existed in the main portion of the

house, linking the first and second floors. However, since it is an open

- 51 -
stair it is not considered legal means of egress. A second, enclosed

rear stair was added to comply with the code requirements. The balcony

did not satisfy the code requirements (see illustrations 15 and 16)

.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

Two legal means of egress from the first to second floors were required plus an elevator for the handicapped. An enclosed new stair

fire tower was built at the rear of the house to serve as one legal means

of egress from the second floor. An elevator was accommodated in the plan.

This was justified by securing an exemption under the "existing buildings"

section of the local code. The building had previously been a mortuary,

a place of small assembly, hence, there was no change of occupancy.

Other mitigating factors noted were: the museum was not occupied over- night; its fire and smoke detection systems would be tied directly to

the city fire department; its exits were clearly marked; and its guides were all off-duty city firemen.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: Installation

of the required means of egress was completed in a manner to require

minimal alteration to the building's plan and structure.

b. The achievable performance standard: Only one legal means of egress

from the second floor is provided. The existing stair is intact but is

illegal. The balcony is also illegal.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

Same comments as in other problems.

Recommendations

Same recommendations as in above problems.

e. The Restored Chapel of the Good Shepherd, Roosevelt Island, New York, N. Y.

Following the decision to establish a "new town" on what was then

Welfare Island, now Roosevelt Island, measures were defined for the protection of the seven existing landmark buildings on the island. The measures were published by the New York State Urban Development Corporation (UDC) in "Protection of Landmark Buildings, Welfare Island, NYC". After

construction work started on the island, the Urban Development Corporation

began the search for a specific use for the abandoned chapel, a building

entered in the National Register of Historic Places. At first, the goals

of converting the building into a "meeting room- theater" with commercial

possibilities and flexibility of use was pursued. The applicable code

was the New York State Building Code (NYSBC)

.

- 52 -

- 54 -
7Co

-po

"H, o

-aoo

-H

O 4-> o

r—I 0) c

J= CO U CH O

?^o

+->

•S) o 3Hco co

•H

•Mu

i->

!/; 3

55
PROBLEM 1: Occupancy Classification

Calculations showed that the wood joists were capable of carrying

a live- load of 60 pounds per square foot. The timber girders which

supported the joists could not; nor could the cast iron columns which

carried the girders. Live-load requirements of the NYSBC relate to, each

specific use. The figure for each use is established as the one necessary

to protect the occupants in accordance with what is considered today to

be the safe practice for the use intended. In order to meet the code

requirements for the intended use of the building, the live-load of

100 pounds per square foot for theater use demanded structural changes.

The owner then considered the option of regarding the use of the ground

floor as a "place of assembly with fixed seats" (the original pews were

still in place) thereby permitting the live-load to be set at 60 pounds

per square foot. However, it was finally decided that movable seating

was required to allow the room to be used for the varying functions that were expected. The structure then had to be upgraded (see illustration 19).

The NYSBC on this particular matter is in a sense a performance code

because it demands only that the floor carrying capacity be proven to be

adequate by engineering calculations. The architect is to select the

method of calculation to prove the capacity. From the historical point

of view, the best solution for the Chapel would have been to maintain the

floor as it was in order not to interfere with the appearance of the

ceiling in the spaces below. In the original construction, typical

milled wood, tongue- and- groove boards, were nailed to the underside of

the wood joists. Wood girders which were below the joists were left

exposed as was their connection to the cast iron columns.

Applicable regulations permitted the wood joists to remain;

additional joists were added to upgrade the capacity of the floor.

Girders and columns had to be changed or reinforced. The substitituion

of the original timber girders with some other much larger wood girders,

sized to meet live-load requirements, would have changed the appearance

of the room below. It was decided to install new steel girders in place

of the existing wood ones because other elements within the space under

the main auditorium, such as ducts and sprinklers, caused inevitable

visual changes to the room, making the historic interior almost impossible

to maintain. A hung ceiling seemed inevitable.

Fortunately, but with great effort in sizing and routing the ducts,

the new hung ceiling could be set high enough to permit full exposure

to the existing cast iron columns. The cast iron columns could have been

removed and substituted with steel columns or with masonry piers.

Neither solution would have maintained the appearance of the room. However, the possibility occurred and was favorably tested, to retain

the cast iron columns by filling them with concrete; this increased

their loading capacity but it did not meet the fire rating requirement

established in the code for columns. The fire rating requirement was

- 56 -
waived because of the special activities expected in the rooms, hopefully

under supervision, and in any event, exiting from all levels of the

building was easy and direct. Today, the cast iron columns are still

in place and their decorative features have not been obscured by fireproofing.

Another live- loading item of concern was the certification required

by the owner (who was mandated by the law which created UDC to act as its own code administrative entity) of the soundness of the trusses

supporting the roof. These were of a Gothic hammer-beam type, built of

wood members with a super structure of purlins, rafters and planking.

The timbers being 100 years old were exceptionally dry; some were checked.

All joists were mortised and tenoned and pegged with wood dowels, thus,

discouraging new nailing or drilling, particularly at connection points.

According to engineering calculations, the cross section arrangement of

these structural members was capable of supporting the snow load as required by the code but some doubt remained regarding the connections.

It was decided after very careful visual investigation that if no new

added loading was applied to the system, the diagonal planking and the

existing wood ceiling could provide adequate rigidity to the existing

structure to permit it to last through a possible second century of life.

The above demonstrates that besides code definitions and calculations,

it is absolutely essential to properly evaluate conditions in the field.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

The capacity of the existing structural system was upgraded to meet

code requirements. Fire rating requirements for the cast iron columns were

waived.

Identification of performance standards

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: In this

instance, it was a program requirement of the project to have flexibility

in seating arrangements on the ground floor level. The live- loading

standard for this purpose ssems to be appropriate and to be a proper

performance standard which should not be modified.

b. The achievable performance standard: Existing structures can be reinforced, partly or wholly replaced to successfully meet the standard.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

While the historic appearance of the basement level ceiling was modified, the higher goal of safely using a completely restored main ground

floor space was achieved. Even the original floor planks of this space were left in place and refinished and the historic appearance maintained.

- 57 -
Recommendations

It is not foreseen that any possibility of significantly changing

live- load requirements can be done without proper research. It is specifically endorsed that the method established by the state code which permits

the architect to determine the proper method of calculating the capacity

of the existing structure be free of prescribed procedures and formulas.

PROBLEM 2: Ventilation

Ventilation requirements for the chapel auditorium space created an adverse impact which needed to be resolved. The state code sets a minimum

figure for the openable windows in a room depending on the square footage

of its floor to achieve proper ventilation, IVhile such criterion is of a completely empirical nature, it clearly expresses a relationship desired

between the number of occupants in a room and the amount of fresh air which

the openings can let in. In the Chapel of the Good Shepherd, the windows

are enclosed by fixed panes of stained glass with openable sections limited

to less than a third of the size of the window openings. Neither the

apse windows, nor the rose window of the western wall, have openable

sections (see illustration 17).

All of the stained glass of the windows could have been reset into

fully openable frames; however, such a procedure would have been costly

and would have made it difficult to properly operate the windows. Moreover, even if the complete surface of all window openings had been made

openable, the required five percent of floor space for openable fenestration

would not have been obtained because of the height of the windows. To

increase the number of openings from the main auditorium would have meant

to change the design of the facades with the addition of windows and,

therefore, would have defeated the concept of rehabilitation of the original Withers' Chapel and its design.

It was, therefore, decided to install mechanical ventilation. With

a minor budget addition, the system could be made to provide summer cooling

and climate control, more suitable to 20th century use. This brought about

a completely new problem. Space had to be found for the mechanical equipment and ducts which had to be installed. The installation of a climatization

system requires space for rather large equipment.

The decision was reached to use the existing bell tower by removing

the bell and creating in it two separate mechanical levels for the installation of equipment. The existing stained glass windows in the tower were maintained; the louvered stone openings at the top where the bell was located were used to ventilate the cooling tower. From the tower, ducts

were lead to a space within the attic roof trusses and inserted along the

lentgh of the chapel over the existing wood ceiling of the auditorium.

- 58 -
Only a minor change on the surface of the roof had to be made to

permit a duct from the tower to enter the attic; some grilles had to be

installed in the existing wood ceiling. Apart from this, the entire

mechanical installation is hidden and does not impair either the plaza or the historical appearance of the building.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

The requirement to provide proper ventilation in contemporary terms

frequently creates an adverse impact on historic structures where window

openings are often small in size when compared to today's standards.

Rather than to deface the facade by widening existing openings and changing

the design of the stained glass, a mechanical ventilation system had to be

provided. To increase the capability of the system, a cooling tower was installed in the bell tower with a regrettable displacement of the tower

bell; it was replaced on a specially designed base in the plaza surrounding

the chapel.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: Ventilation

requirements set at contemporary standards might be waived or modified

for historic buildings when a public assembly use is desired.

b. The achievable performance standard: Mechanical ventilation system

was introduced to meet code requirements with minimum impact on building.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

For cost reasons, requirements for ventilation can frequently discourage

historic preservation particularly when mechanical ventilation is the only

alternative.

Recommendations

Requirements for ventilation could be waived or reduced for historic

properties, in some instances.

PROBLEM 3: Access for the Handicapped

A third item of the code requirements affecting the chapel rehabilitation was the one of access for the handicapped. This was resolved by the

installation of an elevator, accessible at the basement level through a

xaxap sunk inconspicuously into the plaza. For this intermediate lower

level of offices, a handicapped individual can reach the multi-purpose

room which is at the lowest basement level through another ramp. With

the same elevator, he can reach the level of the main auditorium (see

illustration 18)

.

- 59 -
The shaft for the hydraulic elevator was set within the existing

projection in the facade which links the main church column with the bell

tower. In the original design, the organ had been installed in this area. The organ had to be removed and a new decorative wood enclosure was set

in front of the former organ niche and the elevator installed along with

a fire exit leading to a new stair in the bell tower.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse mmpact

Code and other requirements to provide access for the handicapped

can frequently have an adverse impact on the historic fabric of a building.

In the case of the Chapel of the Good Shepherd, ramps and an elevator had

to be installed. The elevator is a costly item; it also displaced the

original pipe organ which needed extensive and equally costly repair.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: Historic

preservation and access by handicapped individuals are legislated goals

of society which frequently come into conflict. Code requirements for

access by handicapped individuals to all public assembly spaces and similar

requirements which are part of the criteria for various state and federally

funded programs, demand, as has been our experience, costly installation of

elevators, ramps, etc. Ths installation of these elements can be done in

an ingenious way but they, most certainly, have an impact on historic

preservation. The ideal standard for historic preservation would be to

permit, in some instances, waiving of the requirement of providing facilities for the handicapped.

b. The achievable performance standard: Access by the handicapped can be

provided frequently at considerable cost and modification to the historic

appearance of the building and site as well.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

It is beyond the scope of this report to decide which is more

important: access by the handicapped or historic preservation. None

the less, the subject should be raised.

Recommendations

Each project should be judged on its own, rather than mandating by

law the need to provide facilities for the handicapped in all cases.

f . New York State Maritime Museum, The South Street Seaport, New York, N.Y.

This project entailed the adaptive use of an entire block of buildings

erected at different times throughout the 19th century which are now all

included in the National Register of Historic Places. The purpose was to

- 60 -
- 61 -
oo

(D

CO r-l

(1) >

to 0)

t3oI

1-1

ctJ . M Z

CO

fHO

O 2 Z oH

4-) Oj

?-l P3 - 62 -
- 63 -
- 64 -
transform these largely underutilized and deteriorating group of buildings

into a commercially viable, self-sufficient, mixed use of stores, offices

and museum spaces. Due to a down turn in the city and state economy,

the project has been held in abeyance.

PROBLEM 1: Occupancy Classification

The occupancy classification of this project, which was to be predominantly used for museum purposes, is "assembly." The existing building

construction classification is Type 4a, "ordinary" under the state code,

and Class II B under the city code. The state code prohibited the full use of the existing six and seven story buildings for "assembly" purposes.

By providing sprinklers throughout, however, the lower three floors could

be used. The rest of the floors would have had to be sealed off (see

illustration 22)

.

Another possibility was to change alternating floors into mezzanines.

This could be done by cutting two-thirds of every other floor to make it

into a mezzanine for the floor below. Both solutions would have resulted

in an unacceptable loss of floor area and severe alteration of the historic

appearance of the block. Upper floors would have been sealed off and made

unaccessible , or every other floor level window would not have actually

served a full floor as historically intended.

The building could have been gutted and new floors constructed with

noncombustible materials thereby changing the construction classification

of the building. This would have resulted in an unacceptable loss of historic

elements and details.

The city code while not having significantly different fire resistance

requirements for structural elements, permitted the use of the entire

building for "assembly" purposes. The interrelationship of occupancy

classification, area and height limitation, and construction classification

is always a significant consideration when evaluating the adaptive use of

a building.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

Under the state code, the project would have been impossible; under

I the city code, the project was feasible. The variation between the two

I codes is due to the theoretical difference between the availability of fire

fighting apparatus, the time it takes for it to arrive at the site, and

the quality of the fire fighting force.

For this project, the state agency reluctantly accepted the use of

the city code and, hence the adverse impact of the state code was mitigated.

- 65 -
Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: The interrelationship of use, building size and construction type should be related

to a calibrated scale, and the effectiveness of the fire fighting force

that will be called upon in an emergency at this historic site.

Other fire control systems such as smoke detectors, fire alarms

and standpipe systems, as well as around the clock security guards should

also be considered in setting use, building size and construction type

limitations. In this manner, blanket limitations could be made variable.

b. The achievable performance standard: Adaptive use of a large building

for mixed use is achievable under the New York City code. Under the state

code, it is not. The reason is that the city code is written with its

existing building stock in mind and the quality of its fire fighting force

is taken into account. The state code virtually ignores these considerations

striving for a stiff blanket standard.

Effectiveness in achieving historic presein^ation

Adaptive use and conversion of buildings to new purposes has always

been done and seems to be on the increase in New York City. Less restrictive

but realistic use, building size and construction type limitations seem to

encourage historic preservation.

Recommendations

As outlined in a. above, considerations should be given to occupancy

classification, area and height limitations and construction classification,

and methods of fire control in addition to the favorable consideration given

because of the installation of sprinklers in a historic property.

Frequently, the installation of sprinklers can have an adverse impact

on the historic elements of an interior. Other newly developed fire con- trol systems should be considered along with the quality of the fire fighting

forces and security forces engaged in the protection of a historic building,

when establishing use, size and construction type limitations.

PROBLEM 2: Exits

The occupancy classification of museum spaces as "assembly" under

the city code sets the occupant load at ten net square feet per person

for "exhibit" space. This is the same as that for a theater with movable

seating.

In this project, it was a program requirement to have the museum

spaces located on the top floor so that the more than two story high attic

spaces could be utilized for exhibit purposes (see illustrations 21, 21 and

22)

.

- 66 -
With exhibit space equivalent to the occupant load of a theater,

an incredible number of vertical exits (stairs) were required to bring

the occupants down from the upper floors to the street. This had a particularly adverse impact on the ground and second floors where every square

foot counted for valuable retail space whose rent would be utilized to

offset museum costs. Another adverse impact would have been increased

disruption of the historic building fabric.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

A unique aspect of the city code is its provision for exit reduction

through the utilization of "areas of refuge." This is accomplished by

dividing the floor space vertically with the separations so that one floor

area could be used as a safe place to exit into from another. By doing

this only a percentage of the required number of vertical exits need to

be provided for the total floor area. Each area of refuge must have at

least one vertical means of exit and be sized to hold the occupant load

it receives.

As the existing block of buildings is really composed of a series

of separate structures with supporting members resting on shared masonry

party walls, it was quite a simple matter to divide each of the third

through sixth floors into three areas of refuge. In this manner, it was possible to take a 33 percent reduction in the required number of vertical

exits. The state code does not include nor does it mention the concept

of areas of refuge as a means to reduce the required number of vertical

exits

.

Identification of performance standard

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: The preservation of many large historic buildings can occur through adaptive use employing mixed occupancy. Some spaces within the building, particularly

those of major historic importance, will frequently be considered for

exhibit purposes. The ideal performance standard should take into account

the actual number of visitors expected rather than the veritable stampede

which seems to be anticipated by setting the occupancy load of an exhibit

space equivalent to that of a theater.

b. The achievable performance standard: The concept of establishing

areas of refuge seems to be a sound one and particularly easy to use in

large historic masonry bearing wall buildings. It should be a component

part of any building code.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

The reduction in the anticipated number of occupants for any given

use should not be done merely to reduce the required number of exits;

- 67 -
it should be realistically evaluated. By eliminating exits, construction

cost is frequently reduced and sometimes, more importantly, the historic

fabric of the structure is less disrupted. While these are desirable goals,

public safety must remain as the first goal particularly in the adaptive

use of a building where extensive changes are frequently inevitable and

sacrifices in the area of public safety are less justified.

The concept of areas of refuge seems to be an effective way of

reducing the number of required vertical means of exit. This is effective

in achieving historic preservation in an indirect way.

Recommendations

Occupancy loads should be realistically established for uses in

historic buildings.

PROBLEM 5: Fire Rating of Building Components

This subject is very much related to the previous one of occupancy

classification, area and height limitations, and construction classification.

To reach any construction classification above the lowest one of "Type 5

- frame construction" in the state code, and I-E in the city code, almost

every building component must have some kind of fire rating. Generally,

the requirements for the fire rating of floor and roof construction and

vertical exits seems to have the most impact on the preservation of

historic elements.

The state and city codes run roughly parallel on the fire rating

requirements of each building component as they relate to the construction

classification of the building. The attainment of a higher construction

classification means an increase in permitted area and height, thereby

encouraging the adaptive use of a property. Frequently, existing elements

of construction although appearing quite substantial, such as a decorative

plaster ceiling on wood lath, really do not have any fire rating as measured

in contemporary terms.

In the Maritime Museum project, it was essential that the level of

construction classification II-B be achieved to permit the entire building

to be occupied. As a museum occupancy in anything less than a class II-B

sprinklered building, only the lower four floors could be used. This

would have meant closing off the fifth, sixth tnd seventh levels. The

most adverse impact would have been that the historically important and

useful attic would have had to be sealed off and remain unused and unseen.

Identification of method utilized to mitigate adverse impact

For class II-B construction, floors had to have one hour, roofs

three-fourths of an hour, and vertical exits two hour fire ratings. Ceilings

- 68 -
with the required fire rating had to be installed underneath all existing

wood floor and roof joists. New noncombustible vertical exits had to be

constructed replacing existing wood stairs.

This resulted in a regrettable loss of some wooden stairs which in

the final analysis could have been kept as accessory stairs if desired.

The hung ceilings covered over the original joists and attic trusswork.

This loss was perhaps the most regrettable one but it was necessary in

order to realize the use of the entire building and the attic space itself.

Identification of performance standards

a. The ideal performance standard for historic preservation: There should

be some codified relationship between the historical importance of an element of construction and the need to fire rate it. Often, the end result

of achieving such a rating is to obscure it from view.

The complete abandonment of fire rating requirements particularly

in an adaptive use project, where extensive changes are more likely, seems unadvisable. Partial or complete failure of other fire control systems

such as sprinklers, smoke detectors, etc., could lead to rapid spread of

fire.

However, some standard should be established to allow at least parts

of the original structure to remain exposed for educational purposes,

perhaps compensating by demanding more sophisticated fire detection equipment or reduce the allowed number of people. This might be particularly

acceptable where elements of construction are found in a repetitive situation.

b. The achievable performance standard: Fire rating of construction

elements can be achieved through testing the existing construction to

determine its capacity to meet contemporary standards. Another method

(in cases such as the one of a decorative plaster ceiling) is to carefully

remove its components to insert a fire rated assembly behind it and then

to reinstall the original. Frequently, however, such testing and reassem- bly methods are beyond the financial restraints of the project budget.

Effectiveness in achieving historic preservation

The insertion of new contemporary fire rated materials into the

existing building fabric can frequently mean the difference between the

adaptive use of the building or its abandonment. Frequently, the entire

structure can be saved, revitalized and used only with the sacrifice of

some historic details. Thus, the larger goal of preservation is served.

Recommendations

Where unique elements of construction are found, special fire control

systems such as deluge sprinklers, smoke alarms, etc., should be allowed

to offset, in isolated instances, fire rating requirements.

- 69 -
4. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Based upon the six previous sample projects and the professional

experience of the architects for these projects, the following further

research is recommended:

Research needs to be conducted on commonly found historic building

components, i.e., plaster ceilings on wood lath, metal ceilings, etc.,

which in themselves may have met applicable code standards at the time

they were installed, to determine what their fire rating is or could be

achieved should they remain in place.

In considering the development of a performance-based code, the

potential significant differences between an inner city code and a suburban code should be identified and evaluated.

More investigation and evaluation needs to be conducted on the

administrative types of legislation that will allow more flexibility in

the use of historic property; it has been observed that it is "occupancy

change" which creates most of the problems.

Research should be conducted to determine if the occupancy load

for various uses in historic properties is sufficiently different from

the loads anticipated by many building codes. If so, a special table

should be considered for adaptive use-historic preservation projects on the

design, use and installation.

Research should be conducted to establish the proper condition between

use, size and construction type standards, and fire fighting and control

methods and standards in order to identify possible minimum requirements

and encourage historic preservation through adaptive use and mixed occupancy.

The issues associated with the property owner's and architect's

liability by use of performance-based code standards should receive

further consideration. During the course of this project, the observation

was made that a rigid, prescriptive code may provide the property owner

and the professional with more liability protection than a less explicit,

performance-based standard.

When considering the development of performance-based codes related

to the category of "restoration," particularly as it applies to the highest

quality of museum interpretation and educational programs, research in

the following categories may be especially necessary:

How effective are guides, hosts or docents in controlling the number

of visitors, their circulation and preventing accidents?

What are the statistics on accidents to visitors or to employees

in historic houses and sites? Where did falls take place--on steps or stairs, or on walks or floors? What were the surfaces?

- 70 -
In making emergency exits, what available exit doors are required

to open out and in? \(hat should their opening width be? Should they

remain open or closed? Should they be equipped with panic bars?

What has been the statistical incidence of fires in historic house

museums? What were the causes? Did they occur during hours when the

museum was open to the public? Was there personal injury?

- 71 -
5. BIBLIOGRAPHY

International Council of Monuments and Sites, Monumentum , Vol. XIII,

1976. (Special Bicentennial issue on historic preservation in the United

States)

National Conservation Advisory Council, Report from the Study Committee on Architectural Conservation to the National Conservation Advisory Council , Washington, D. C, 1977

National Trust for Historic Preservation, "Building Codes for Preservation,"

Preservation News (supplement), Washington, D. C, The Preservation Press,

1976

National Trust for Historic Preservation, Preservation and Building Codes , Washington, D. C, The Preservation Press, 1975

National Trust for Historic Preservation, Preservation and Conservation:

Principles and Practices , Sharon Timmons (ed.), Washington, D. C. , The

Preservation Press, 1976

United States Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards,

Research and Innovation in the Building Regulatory Process , Washington, D. C.

,

U. S. Government Printing Office, 1977

United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Administrative Policies for Historical Areas of the National Park System , Washington, D. C, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1975

United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service,

How to Complete National Register Nomination Forms , Washington, D. C.

,

U. S. Government Printing Office, 1976

United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, The National

Register of Historic Places Supplement 1976 , Washington, D. C. , U. S.

Government Printing Office, 1976

- 72 -
6. ILLUSTRATION CREDITS

Pages 28-33 Brook 1 andwood Mansion - architectural drawings of elevations

and floor plans provided by Orin M. Bullock, FAIA.

Pages 35-36 Hezekiah Alexander House - photography provided by

Gordon H. Schenck, Jr.; architectural drawing of floor

plan provided by Mr. Bullock.

Pages 40-43 First White House of the Confederacy - photographs

provided by Carl V. Kling, Jr. ; architectural drawing

of floor plan provided by Nicholas H. Holmes, FAIA.

Pages 46-49 Bernstein- Bush House - photographs provided by Mr. Kling;

architectural drawings of floor plans provided by Mr. Holmes.

Pages 53-55 Restored Chapel of the Good Shepherd - photograph provided by Robert Galbraith; architectural drawings of

floor plans provided by Giorgio Cavaglieri, FAIA.

Pages 61-64 New York State Maritime Museum - architectural drawings

of floor plans provided by Mr. Cavaglieri.

- 73 -
7. APPENDICES

A. Letter/questionnaire on historic preservation definitions

B. Letter/questionnaire on adverse impact of the building regulatory

system

C. Questionnaire to participants of "Preservation and Building Codes

Conference"

- 74- -
APPENDIX A

National Trust for Historic Preservation

74()-748 JACKSON PLACE, N.W. WASHIN(; i ()N, D. C. 20006 1202) (•>^K^2(llt

ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT BUILDING REGULATORY

METHODS AS APPLIED TO THE NEEDS OF

HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROJECTS

Phase 1 - Common historic preservation definitions as applied to

bui Id ings

August 19, 1976

Enclosure 1 - "Treatment of Properties"

/ / I find these to be acceptable definitions.

Comments

:

/ / I find these to be unacceptable definitions.

Comments:

Enclosure 2 - "Terminology"

/ / Acceptable definitions.

Comments

:

/ / Unacceptable definitions.

Comments

:

Enclosure 3 - "Project Performance Standards"

/ / Acceptable definitions.

Comments:

- 75 -
APPENDIX A, page 2

[_ / Unacceptable definitions.

Comments:

Enclosure 4 - "Possibilities for Protecting the Artistic and Historic

Patrimony"

/ I Acceptable definitions.

Comments

:

l_ / Unacceptable definitions.

Comments:

In addition to these definitions, I would suggest you also consider

the following:

name

date

Please return in the enclosed self -addressed and stamped envelope to

Russell V. Keune, Vice President for Preservation Services, National

Trust for Historic Preservation, 740 Jackson Place, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20006.

- 76 -
APPENDIX B

National Trust for Historic Preservation

740-748 JACKSON PLACE, N.W. WASHINcnON, D. C;. 2()()()6 (2021 r>^K 'j200

December 15, 1976

Dear Landmarks/Historic District Commission:

The National Trust would appreciate your assistance in a project in

which we are attempting to assess current building regulatory methods

as they currently apply to historic preservation projects. Your taking

the time to answer the two following questions would contribute to our being able to compile a national perspective of current major

problems and solutions.

A. Please identify up to four major problems your commission is aware of in applying the local applicable building regulatory re- quirements to preservation projects. We are particularly interested

in the reaction to small alterations to buildings the commission

has designated.

B. Please identify up to four of the most current common methods

(waivers, clauses, code revisions, etc.) utilized to mitigate adverse

impacts on preservation projects brought about by those local building

regulatory requirements.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Name and title of individual completing questionnaire:

City and state:

Telephone number: {_( I

area code

- 77 -
APPENDIX B, page 2

Please return to me at the address indicated.

Enclosed is a copy of a special supplement on building codes and

preservation which appeared in the November 1976 issue of Preservation

News . We will be sharing the results of this study with you following

its completion.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

Russell V. Keune, AIA

Vice President

Preservation Services

Enc losure

- 78 -
APPENDIX C

QUESTIONNAIRE

To: Building Codes Conference Participants

From: National Trust for Historic Preservation, Russell V. Keune

740 Jackson Place, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006

title

organization

city

Category:

state

Architect -Engineer

Preservat ionist

Building Code Official

_Other (specify)

1. Name the code you work with most often.

Answer the following questions within the context of your experience with

problems in meeting modern building code requirements in historic buildings

that are being preserved and restored or adapted to new uses.

2. What type of historic building is most often involved? (check one)

Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional

^Other (specify)

"

3. What building use creates the most problems? (check one)

Residential Commercial ^Public Assembly

Other (specify)

4. List the four most common problems you face when dealing with codes

and historic buildings.

a)

b)

c)

d)

- 79 -
U.S. DEPT. OF COMM.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO.

SP 524

2. Gov't Accession

No.

3. Recipient's Accession No.

. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT BUILDING REGULATORY METHODS AS

APPLIED TO THE NEEDS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROJECTS

5. Publication Date October 1978

6. Performing Organization Co(

AUTHOR(S)

Russell V. Keune, AIA (CBT Contact Patrick Cooke)

8. Performing Organ. Report N

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

National Trust for Historic Preservation

740 Jackson Place, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006

10. Project/Task/Work Unit Nc 4601135

11. Contract/Grant No. 613981 ,

!. Sponsoring Organization Name and Complete Address (Street, City, State, ZIP)

National Bureau of Standards

Department of Commerce

Washington, D.C. 20234

13. Type of Report & Period Covered

Final

'

14. Sponsoring Agency Code 1

1

;. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES This publication presents the results of a contract study for an'

nalysis of current building regulatory methods as applied to the needs of historic ' reservation projects. Any conclusions, opinions, or interpretations contained hereii, re the responsibility of the authors of this report. ,

I. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant

bi bl iography or literature survey, mention it here.)

To meet contemporary health and safety requirements as defined by the building

regulatory system, conflicts frequently occur with the needs of historic buildii

preservation projects. This project: (1) identified, evaluated and proposed

historic preservation categorical definitions as applied to buildings; (2)

developed performance objectivies, requirements, criteria and tests for each

definition category; and (3) identified and assessed those current methods most]

commonly used by regulatory jurisdictions to mitigate adverse impacts on building preservation projects.

^

I

I

I

1

;

!

. KEY WORDS (six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the first letter of the first key word unless a proper name; separated by semicolons) Architecture; building regulatory system; codes; health

and safety; historic buildings; historic preservation; impacts; performancebased standards; research.

. AVAILABILITY [X^ Unlimited 19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

21. NO. OF PAG

1

' For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

UNCL ASSIFIED 87 !

[X? Order From Sup. of Doc, U.S. Government Priauag QWlfe-i f. VCashineton. D.C. 20402. SD Cat. No. C13 00J-UOJ-OiyyU-y

20. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS PAGE)

22. Price $2. 7[

1 1 Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

Springfield, Virginia 22151 UNCLASSIFIED
NBS TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS

PERIODICALS

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH—The Journal of Research

of the National Bureau of Standards reports NBS research and development in those disciplines of the physical and

engineering sciences in which the Bureau is active. These

include physics, chemistry, engineering, mathematics, and computer sciences. Papers cover a broad range of subjects, with major emphasis on measurement methodology, and

the basic technology underlying standardization. Also in- cluded from time to time are survey articles on topics closely related to the Bureau's technical and scientific programs. As

a special service to subscribers each issue contains complete

citations to all recent NBS publications in NBS and non- NBS media. Issued six times a year. Annual subscription: domestic $17.00; foreign $21.25. Single copy, $3.00 domestic; $3.75 foreign. Note: The Journal was formerly published in two sections: Section A "Physics and Chemistry" and Section B "Mathematical Sciences." DIMENSIONS/NBS

This monthly magazine is published to inform scientists, engineers, businessmen, industry, teachers, students, and consumers of the latest advances in science and technology, with primary emphasis on the work at NBS. The magazine

highlights and reviews such issues as energy research, fire protection, building technology, metric conversion, pollution

abatement, health and safety, and consumer product per- formance. In addition, it reports the results of Bureau pro- grams in measurement standards and techniques, properties of matter and materials, engineering standards and services, instrumentation, and automatic data processing.

Annual subscription: Domestic, $11.00; Foreign $13.75

NONPERIODICALS

Monographs—Major contributions to the technical liter- ature on various subjects related to the Bureau's scientific and technical activities. Handbooks—Recommended codes of engineering and industrial practice (including safety codes) developed in cooperation with interested industries, professional organizations, and regulatory bodies. Special Publications—Include proceedings of conferences sponsored by NBS, NBS annual reports, and other special

publications appropriate to this grouping such as wall charts, pocket cards, and bibliographies.

Applied Mathematics Series—Mathematical tables, manuals, and studies of special interest to physicists, engineers,

chemists, biologists, mathematicians, computer programmers,

and others engaged in scientific and technical work.

National Standard Reference Data Series—Provides quantitative data on the physical and chemical properties of

materials, compiled from the world's literature and critically evaluated. Developed under a world-wide program co- ordinated by NBS. Program under authority of National Standard Data Act (Public Law 90-396).

NOTE: At present the principal publication outlet for these data is the Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data (JPCRD) published quarterly for NBS by the American Chemical Society (ACS) and the American Institute of Physics (AIP). Subscriptions, reprints, and supplements

available from ACS, 1155 Sixteenth St. N.W., Wash., D.C.

20056.

Building Science Series—Disseminates technical information developed at the Bureau on building materials, components,

systems, and whole structures. The series presents research

results, test methods, and performance criteria related to the structural and environment;il functions and the durability and safety characteristics of building elements and systems. Technical Notes—Studies or reports which are complete in themselves but restrictive in their treatment of a subject.

Analogous to monographs but not so comprehensive in scope or definitive in treatment of the subject area. Often

serve as a vehicle for final reports of work performed at NBS under the sponsorship of other government agencies.

Voluntary Product Standards—Developed under procedures

published by the Department of Commerce in Part 10, Title 15, of the Code of Federal Regulations. The purpose

of the standards is to establish nationally recognized require- ments for products, and to provide all concerned interests with a basis for common understanding of the characteristics of the products. NBS administers this program as a supple- ment to the activities of the private sector standardizing

organizations.

Consumer Information Series—Practical information, based on NBS research and experience, covering areas of interest

to the consumer. Easily understandable language and

illustrations provide useful background knowledge for shopping in today's technological marketplace.

Order above NBS publications from: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

20402. Order following NBS publications—NBSlR's and FIPS from

the National Technical Information Services, Springfield, Va. 22161.

Federal Information Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUB)—Publications in this series collectively constitute the Federal Information Processing Standards Register.

Register serves as the official source of information in the Federal Government regarding standards issued by NBS

pursuant to the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended, Public Law 89-306 (79 Stat. 1127), and as implemented by Executive Order 11717

(38 FR 12315, dated May 11, 1973) and Part 6 of Title 15 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations).

NBS Interagency Reports (NBSIR)—A special series of

interim or final reports on work performed by NBS for outside sponsors (both government and non-government).

In general, initial distribution is handled by the sponsor;

public distribution is by the National Technical Information

Services (Springfield, Va. 22161) in paper copy or microfiche form.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES

The following current-awareness and literature-survey bibli- ographies are issued periodically by the Bureau: Cryogenic Data Center Current Awareness Service. A litera- ture survey issued biweekly. Annual subscription: Domestic, $25.00; Foreign, $30.00.

Liquified Natural Gas. A literature survey issued quarterly.

Annual subscription: $20.00.

Superconducting Devices and Materials. A literature survey

issued quarterly. Annual subscription: $30.00. Send subscription orders and remittances for the preceding bibliographic

services to National Bureau of Standards, Cryogenic Data

Center (275.02) Boulder, Colorado 80302.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

Washington. D C. 20234

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for Private Use. $300

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE COM-215

U.S.MAII

SPECIAL FOURTH-CLASS RATE

BOOK

1298