February 2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Feb 06 04 10:08a The Westerly Group, Inc. 812-273-8826 p.3 -2- Has the agency (Park Department or HPC) conducted a detailed assessment of the existing condition of the walls to determine the exact level and quantity of replacement needed and to visually document (with photographs) the full range of conditions? Given the requirement that replacement is a last resort option in this treatment, and the possibility that some areas are more deteriorated than others, the commission should have the benefit of this kind of assessment. They should also be privy to the steps which justify the restoration design decisions which have been made. If such a detailed document has been prepared, has this assessment included an evaluation of the chronology of the various repair episodes and an analysis of those which continue to be important to the historic character of the feature? In addition, any varieties of historic construction techniques employed should be analyzed and documented. When the existing condition assessment report recommends that repair is needed, the NPS guidelines for Preservation treatment indicate that the maximum amount of existing materials and features be retained while utilizing as little new material as possible.3 Thus, any original parts of the sea wall, such as concrete or stones which may have dropped off into the river bed or slough might be retrieved for the repair work. The guidelines for this treatment remind us that: "In all cases, work should be non-destructive, physically and visually compatible and documented for future research. While substitute materials are not appropriate in this treatment, an exception could be a modification which is required to preserve the feature's structural stability --such as hidden structural reinforcement (our emphasis). In these cases, it is important that all new material be non-destructive, identified, and properly documented for future research. 4 In general, however, substitute materials should be avoided, unless in-kind replacement is absolutely not possible or the feature's structural stability is threatened. Without completing a proper design and study of the sea walls, here are a few additional suggestions which may be of help to you in determining proper methods of repair construction. The island which appears in the upper right hand comer of the Beyer plan (1905) was not named but does show an additional crit at the tip of the island. Other evidence has displayed that the island at that time did not have sea walls. However, by the NPA era, during the depression, e_ 1933-39, the sea wall was built around the entire island and the eastern portion of the park as it abuts the slough. 5 The 1939 WPA plan did not have detail 3 Ibid, P.23 4 Ibid. S The Westerly Group, Inc., .eche /'ark C.'uhural Landseape Rej)orl. S. Bend/St. Josepli County FIPC, Mi1y 19k)K. 11. 556 W. 1175 N. Rd. +Farmemburg IN 47850♦Tel: (8 12) 696-2415 Fax: (812) 696-0420+ e-mail: westerlygp@aol,com