The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation require
that "deteriorated architectural features be repaired rather than
replaced, wherever possible. In the event that replacement is necessary,
the new material should match the material being replaced in composition,
design, color, texture, and other visual properties." Substitute materials
should be used only on a limited basis and only when they will match the
appearance and general properties of the historic material and will not
damage the historic resource.
Introduction
When deteriorated, damaged, or lost features of a historic building
need repair or replacement, it is almost always best to use historic materials.
In limited circumstances substitute materials that imitate historic materials
may be used if the appearance and properties of the historic materials
can be matched closely and no damage to the remaining historic fabric will
result.
Great care must be taken if substitute materials are used on the exteriors
of historic buildings. Ultraviolet light, moisture penetration behind joints,
and stresses caused by changing temperatures can greatly impair the performance
of substitute materials over time. Only after consideration of all options,
in consultation with qualified professionals, experienced fabricators and
contractors, and development of carefully written specifications should
this work be undertaken.
In the reconstruction of the clock tower at Independence Hall, the substitute materials used were cast stone and wood with fiberglass and polyester bronze ornamentation. Photo: NPS files.
|
The practice of using substitute materials in architecture is not new,
yet it continues to pose practical problems and to raise philosophical
questions. On the practical level the inappropriate choice or improper
installation of substitute materials can cause a radical change in a building's
appearance and can cause extensive physical damage over time. On the more
philosophical level, the wholesale use of substitute materials can raise
questions concerning the integrity of historic buildings largely comprised
of new materials. In both cases the integrity of the historic resource
can be destroyed.
Some preservationists advocate that substitute materials should be avoided
in all but the most limited cases. The fact is, however, that substitute
materials are being used more frequently than ever in preservation projects,
and in many cases with positive results. They can be cost-effective, can
permit the accurate visual duplication of historic materials, and last
a reasonable time. Growing evidence indicates that with proper planning,
careful specifications and supervision, substitute materials can be used
successfully in the process of restoring the visual appearance of historic
resources.
This Brief provides general guidance on the use of substitute materials
on the exteriors of historic buildings. While substitute materials are
frequently used on interiors, these applications are not subject to weathering
and moisture penetration, and will not be discussed in this Brief. Given
the general nature of this publication, specifications for substitute materials
are not provided. The guidance provided should not be used in place of
consultations with qualified professionals. This Brief includes a discussion
of when to use substitute materials, cautions regarding their expected
performance, and descriptions of several substitute materials, their advantages
and disadvantages. This review of materials is by no means comprehensive,
and attitudes and findings will change as technology develops.