Sustainability and You
Sustainability and You
Pocantico group photo - courtesy of the National Trust for Historic Preservation
This past November the Friends of NCPTT and the National Trust for Historic Preservation convened a small group of experts to discuss historic preservation and environmental sustainability.
The group affirmed preservation’s important role in efforts to improve the sustainability of the built environment and resolved to face head-on the global ecological crises that threaten both built and natural resources. After two days of intense discussions, the group developed the core of the Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation.
This proclamation provides a good starting point to further discussion on sustainability of the built environment. Please review the Pocantico Proclamation and add your comments below. Input from the broader preservation community is critical. We appreciate your participation.
 |
 |
Introduction to Pocantico
Introduction to Pocantico
Multi-Disciplinary Team of Experts Issues Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation
Declares: Historic preservation must play a central role in efforts to make the built environment more sustainable
WASHINGTON D.C. (June 10, 2009) – The National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Friends of the National Center for Preservation Technology and Training today published their Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation, which declares: “Historic preservation must play a central role in efforts to make the built environment more sustainable.” The proclamation was conceived by 28 of the nation’s leading experts in sustainability, architecture, landscape architecture, green building design, and historic preservation at a two- day conference in November 2008 at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund’s Pocantico Conference Center in Tarrytown, N.Y.
The Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation focuses principally on providing tools for policymakers who wish to incorporate principles of sustainability into their guidelines, recommendations and regulations. The document articulates both broad underlying principles and specific action items. The proclamation also addresses the function of advocacy and education, the role of local organizations and commissions, energy management, green building rating systems, city and regional planning, economic investment, and rehabilitation.
“This proclamation reflects the broad thinking and inter-disciplinary cooperation necessary for dealing with climate change,” said Richard Moe, president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. “At its core, historic preservation promotes the wise reuse of our built environment, which is an inescapable element of sustainability.”
Robert Silman with the Friends of NCPTT observed, “We currently find ourselves faced with economic, social, and environmental challenges on a scale never before seen. The interdependence and magnitude of these challenges require solutions that are inherently sustainable. In particular, the built environment is a sector of significant potential in transitioning towards a sustainable society. Within the built environment, historic preservation emerges as a prime example for sustainability.”
Discussions at the Pocantico Symposium: ‘Sustainability and Historic Preservation — Making Policy, November 5-7, 2008′ examined areas where
sustainability and preservation align and, occasionally clash. The symposium resulted in two documents. The Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation outlines the need for sustainable solutions and lays forth principles for a sustainable society. The Actions to Further the Pocantico Principles on Sustainability and Historic Preservation offers guidance on implementing sustainable solutions. The documents can be found at http://www.preservationnation.org/issues/sustainability/pocantico.html.
###
The Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation was written by participants in the Pocantico Symposium: ‘Sustainability and Historic Preservation — Making Policy, November 5-7, 2008′ based on materials developed at this symposium and the discussions that took place there. It reflects the views of the authors and not necessarily those of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
The Friends of NCPTT is a 501(c)3 nonprofit corporation created to support the mission and goals of the National Park Service’s National Center for Preservation Technology and Training. NCPTT’s mission is to advance the use of science and technology in historic preservation. Working in the fields of archeology, architecture, landscape architecture and materials conservation, the Center accomplishes its mission through research, training, education, technology transfer, and partnerships.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation (www.PreservationNation.org) is a non-profit membership organization bringing people together to protect, enhance and enjoy the places that matter to them. By saving the places where great moments from history – and the important moments of everyday life – took place, the National Trust for Historic Preservation helps revitalize neighborhoods and communities, spark economic development and promote environmental sustainability. With headquarters in Washington, DC, nine regional and field offices, 29 historic sites, and partner organizations in all 50 states, the National Trust for Historic Preservation provides leadership, education, advocacy and resources to a national network of people, organizations and local communities committed to saving places, connecting us to our history and collectively shaping the future of America’s stories.
Pocantico Proclamation
|
|
Pocantico Proclamation
Premise
The historic preservation community has a deep tradition of stewardship for our built environment, emerging as leaders in sustainable practices. Consistent with this tradition, historic preservation practitioners resolve to face head-on the global human-caused ecological crises that threaten our built and natural resources. Historic preservation must play a central role in efforts to make the built environment more sustainable. To this end, we urge all policy makers to recognize the following:
- The Climate Change Imperative – Human activity has increased and accelerated global warming putting the environment at risk. It is imperative that we immediately and significantly reduced greenhouse gas emissions to begin reversing extreme climate change patterns within a generation.
- The Economic Imperative – Our current economy is based upon unsustainable consumption and an overreliance on finite resources. A new green economy must rest upon a conservation-based foundation to manage natural and cultural resources in a sustainable and economically beneficial manner.
- The Equity Imperative – In recent years, economic inequalities between rich and poor have grown in the United States and abroad. The disproportionate levels of resource consumption and global pollution are unsustainable. Our consumption patterns must be altered to foster social equity, cultural diversity, and survival of all species.
The Pocantico Principles on Sustainability and Historic Preservation
Therefore, in order to address the three above imperatives, we advocate the following:
- FOSTER a Culture of ReuseMaximizing the life cycle of all resources through conservation is a fundamental condition of sustainability. The most sustainable building, community or landscape is often the one that already exists. Lessons learned from historic preservation are transferable to the entire existing built and landscaped environment.
- REINVEST at a Community ScaleIt is not sufficient to address sustainability on a piecemeal basis through individual building projects. We must consider the larger context of the built environment: our communities. Reinvestment in existing, more sustainable neighborhoods – especially our older and historic ones – saves resources and promotes socially, culturally, and economically rich communities.
- VALUE HeritageThe design of older buildings, landscapes, and communities should inform future building practices. While new green building technology offers promise for reducing the environmental harms caused by new construction, traditional building practices provide a wealth of sustainable design solutions that are premised on sensitivity to local conditions, careful siting and planning, and long-term durability, all of which provide essential models for the future.
- CAPITALIZE on the Potential of the Green EconomyPreservation economics provide a powerful model for shifting away from a consumption-based and energy-inefficient economy. Reinvestment in our existing built environment must become an indispensible part of America’s new green economy. Per dollar spent rehabilitation activities create more new jobs than new construction.
- REALIGN Historic Preservation Policies with SustainabilityToday’s challenges require that historic preservation move beyond maintaining or recovering a frozen view of the past. Historic preservation must contribute to the transformation of communities and the establishment of a sustainable, equitable, and verdant world by re-evaluating historic preservation practices and policies, and making changes where appropriate.
Next Steps
Consequently, we, the historic preservation community, recognize the environmental, economic, and social challenges that face us and call for policies that will result in revising our present course. We stand ready to offer an example for sustainability, while further challenging preservationists to more fully accommodate sustainable practices.
We call for our leaders and fellow citizens to join us in taking immediate action.
The Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation was written by participants in the Pocantico Symposium: ‘Sustainability and Historic Preservation — Making Policy, November 5-7, 2008′ based on materials developed at this symposium and the discussions that took place there. It reflects the views of the authors and not necessarily those of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
Prepared for release by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and Friends of the National Center for Preservation Technology and Training.
Actions to Further the Pocantico Principles
A Call to Action
The Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation lays forth the imperative for sustainability and offers guiding principles for the use of historic preservation as a model and a partner for a sustainable society.
The future success of the Proclamation necessitates tremendous effort and work on the part of historic preservation practitioners. The Actions to further the Pocantico Principles on Sustainability and Historic Preservation represent a vast, diverse, evolving, and flexible inventory of actions aligned with the ideals of the Proclamation. We call upon preservation practitioners to assist in carrying out these and other actions to help in
transitioning to a sustainable society.
ADVOCACY AND EDUCATION (AE)
EducationIntegrate sustainability into preservation education
AE1) Incorporate sustainability into preservation curricula at all levels of
education.AE2) Promote service learning opportunities focused on preservation
and sustainability.AE3) Develop educational tool kits custom tailored for various needs
(e.g. policy makers, historic building owners and managers, and
students in primary, secondary, and higher education).AE4) Challenge historic preservation research programs to expand the
understanding of sustainable historic preservation.
Local Organizations and CommissionsEngage local preservation organizations and commissions
AE5) Utilize the more than 3,000 local preservation organizations and
innumerable local commissions to promote preservation as a
sustainable solution, and to become sustainability advocates within
their communities.AE6) Provide local community-based preservation organizations and
local commissions with technical, policy, and practical tools for
promoting preservation as a key to sustainability.AE7) Focus resources at the local level as this is where numerous policy
decisions are made.
Energy Management Actively manage climate control systems
AE8) Encourage property management organizations to adopt flexible
indoor environmental standards that improve operating energy
performance.AE9) Promote the “behavioral wedge” – the concept that we can reduce
one “wedge” (a gigaton) of greenhouse gases by altering our
behavior (i.e. turning off lights, using shades, opening windows,
etc.)
Public Policy (PP)
Green Building Rating SystemsIntegrate preservation into sustainability standards, codes, and rating systems
PP1) Work with developers of green building rating systems to ensure
the value of building reuse is recognized.PP2) Promote the adoption of mandates for the improved energy
performance of historic properties following recognized national
models and timetables.PP3) Develop performance based energy codes, so that historic
properties can find non-standard methods for improved energy
performance.
Historic Preservation PoliciesUpdate historic preservation policies to include sustainability principles and practices
PP4) Identify critical conflicts between sustainable design practices and preservation and develop solutions.PP5) Integrate green design practices into preservation guidelines as part of a fresh look at the Secretary’s Standards (i.e. The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings) by emphasizing ways to enhance building performance while preserving historic character.PP6) Create new Interpreting the Standards Bulletins on common issues related to sustainable design practices and historic projects.PP7) Support research programs that explore new technologies for retrofitting historic structures and quantify the sustainability of preservation.
City and Regional PlanningIntegrate preservation with planning, community development, and transportation
PP8) Illustrate America’s automobile dependence and the drastic divergence from America’s strong transit history.PP9) Encourage all levels of government to fund mass-transit infrastructure instead of personal automobiles in urban settings.PP10) Explore the use of urban growth boundaries and promote sustainable planning as seen in historic districts (e.g. walkable, transit-oriented, and livable communities)
FundingDevelop reliable and professional funding sources
PP11) Promote new sources of funding through environmental, housing, transit, and energy programs promoting sustainable solutions.PP12) Integrate preservation into an economic stimulus plan based on the inherent sustainability of historic preservation.
Economic InvestmentDevelop economic programs to reinvest in existing buildings
PP13) Encourage government to offer incentives for reuse over demolitionPP14) Encourage public and private grants for reinvestment in historic buildings and communities.PP15) Work with the National Park Service and other review agencies to encourage expedited tax credit approval and streamlined reviews for sustainable projects.
TECHNICAL (T)
RehabilitationsAchieve Net Zero historic rehabilitations
T1) Utilize best practices and technologies to ensure long-term viability of historic resources through renewable energy.T2) Aspire to “net zero” historic rehabilitations for all types and scales of historic places.
EnergyPromote and develop technologies and products that support sustainable
practices compatible with historic properties
T3) Work with industry to develop energy conservation and alternative energy products and techniques that respect the characteristics of historic properties.T4) Encourage planning for alternative energy development and distribution that properly considers the impacts on cultural and natural resources.
Demonstration ProjectLaunch a sustainable preservation demonstration project
T5) Design and implement demonstration projects showcasing the best
sustainable design approaches and technologies while utilizing
representative historic properties across America.
Conclusion
Preservation practitioners must rise to the sustainability challenges we face to inspire and inform society at large. Building upon the Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation, the action items provide guidance in transitioning historic preservation to the forefront of the sustainability movement.
The objectives of the actions are twofold. Firstly, illustrate that historic preservation offers a model for sustainability. Secondly, challenge preservation to more fully incorporate sustainable building practices. Through interdisciplinary collaboration, partnership between government and the private sector, and diligent work on behalf of preservationists, we can transform historic preservation into a leading, relevant, and
timely exemplar for a sustainable twenty-first century.
Pocantico Participants
Pocantico Participants
Sustainability and Historic Preservation – Making Policy
November 5-7, 2008
Ms. Elaine Gallagher Adams
Senior Consultant, BET
Rocky Mountain Institute
Boulder, CO
Mr. John Anderson
Anton Tedesko Fellow on Sustainability
Robert Silman Associates
New York, NY
Mr. Gustavo Araoz
President of ICOMOS
Washington, D.C.
Mr. Charles Birnbaum
President
The Cultural Landscape Foundation
Washington, D.C.
Mr. Lane Burt
Energy Policy Analyst
Natural Resources Defense Fund
Washington, D.C.
Ms. Jean Carroon
Principal
Goody Clancy Architects
Boston, MA
Mr. Kirk Cordell
Executive Director
National Center for Preservation Technology and Training
Natchitoches, LA
Mr. Ralph DiNola
Principal
Green Building Services
Portland, OR
Mr. Milford Wayne Donaldson
SHPO
Office of Historic Preservation, Department of Parks and Recreation
Sacramento, CA
Mr. Carl Elefante
Principal and Director of Sustainable Design
Quinn Evans Architects
Washington, D.C.
Mr. Andy Ferrell
Chief, Architecture and Engineering
National Center for Preservation Technology and Training
Natchitoches, LA
Mr. John Fowler
Executive Director
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Washington, D.C.
Ms. Patrice Frey
Director of Sustainable Research
National Trust for Historic Preservation
Washington, D.C.
Mr. Jorge L. Hernandez
Jorge L. Hernandez, Architect
University of Miami School of Architecture
Coral Gables, FL
Mr. James Hulme
Director of Public Affairs
The Princes Foundation
London, UK
Mr. Mike Jackson
Chief Architect
Illinois Historic Preservation Agency
Springfield, IL
Dr. Amos Loveday
Preservation Specialist
Atchley Hardin Lane, LLC
Columbus, OH
Dr. Janet Matthews
Assoc. Director, Cultural Resources and Keeper, National Register
National Park Service
Washington, D.C.
Mr. Richard Moe
President
National Trust for Historic Preservation
Washington, D.C.
Ms. Sharon Park
Chief, Architectural History and Historic Preservation
Smithsonian Institution
Washington, D.C.
Mr. Andrew Potts
Partner
Nixon Peabody
Washington, D.C.
Mr. Jonathan Rose
President
Jonathan Rose Companies
Katonah, NY
Mr. Les Shephard
Chief Architect
General Services Administration
Washington, D.C.
Mr. Robert Silman
Principal
Robert Silman Associates
New York, NY
Mr. Jonathan Spodek
Associate Professor of Architecture
College of Architecture and Planning, Ball State University
Muncie, IN
Mr. Paul Stoller
Director
Atelier Ten
New York, NY
Ms. Emily Wadhams
Vice President for Public Policy
National Trust for Historic Preservation
Washington, D.C.
Ms. Elizabeth Waters
Moderator
Charlottesville, VA
Mr. Drane Wilkinson
Program Coordinator
National Alliance of Preservation Commissions
University of Georgia
Athens, GA
Should the idea of the manmade economic crisis be included in the first paragraph as well?
I like the fact you hit upon the economic benefits in the second paragraph and it might be another way to tie together the first and second paragraph.
Guy,
Thanks for taking the time to read the Proclamation and for your thoughtful input. That is exactly the kind of participation necessary to move this process forward.
I really appreciate this proclamation. As a student of Restoration Ecology, I would love to see some language supporting the harmony of human settlements with native flora and fauna, which are also members of the broader community.
Identify sustainable practices in a more concise explaination of it’s uses, ie: economically, socially, technologically, etc.
Break down the global warming to a more definate definition of its posibilities and ramifications on the future of the air polution for the next ten years.
Modern tecnologies are coming faster than a speeding train in architectural designs for more efficient homes in a conservation minded community.
Mostly-more public input from local communities that have varied definitions of sustainability that might conlict with each other.
sustainability and historic preservation needs more imput to explain what is the difference between them and various cross connections on the same plain of future thought and continuity.
these need more imput before any definite quadrants are proposed for finalization of a workable plan for the future of all communities.
Very well said. The second point about Reinvesting hit the nail on the head and will hopefully speak to not only planners, but also to those who design the infrastructure improvements for new and older neighborhoods.
1. Promote research and experimentation in combining rehabilitation and energy conservation to preserve historic buildings’ character while upgrading their envelopes and mechanical systems.
2. Do some punctuation and grammar [verb agreement] checking on what’s there so far.
3. I recommend statements with more punch, more action verbs. For example:
“Reinvestment in our existing built environment must become an indispensible part…” could read “We must reinvest in our existing built environment to transform it into an indespensible….”
I am pleased that the Pocantico Principles stress that preserving the built environment is an inherently sustainable practice. After all, historic preservation and sustainability are not (or do not have to be) mutually exclusive. While the principles largely reinforce this point, I am concerned about a couple of things:
1) Placing “Sustainability” before “Historic Preservation” in the full name of the principles. “The Pocantico Principles on Historic Preservation and Sustainability” would appear to be a more appropriate title, especially coming from the preservation community. And it reflects that historic preservation is a crucial tool in achieving sustainability goals.
2) The wording of Principle #5, “Realign Historic Preservation Policies with Sustainability.” This wording implies a couple of things: a) that sustainability trumps historic preservation; and b) that historic preservation policies are an impediment to achieving sustainability goals, rather than emphasizing that preservation and green practices can work synergistically to achieve mutually desirable goals.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Greetings:
Several comments:
1. First of all, historic preservation is one of the basic building blocks in the efforts to develop a sustainable civilization. The other key blocks are the conservation of natural resources from the atmosphere to salt & fresh water to all the flora and fauna.
2. The reduction in natural resource consumption, the movement away from a fossil fuel based economy, and the reduction in all climate changing gases released into the atmosphere are three critical actions that are paramount.
3. Any action or decision today has to be evaluated against the touchstone of what does this mean for natural resources conservation and the reducing the release of climate changing gases.
4. The “Premise” paragraph is not forceful enough in staking out the claim that the historic preservation movement along with the land trusts, the natural resource conservation advocacy groups, and other environmental groups have all been at the forefront in advocating for what is the common and unspoken end goal of creating a sustainable civilization.
All of these movement and groups have been working on their agendas for many years now without much coordination. Also, these various movements and groups do not seem to understand they are part of this larger movement for creating the basis for a sustainable civilization. It is as if they are part of a large choral performance, say by Handel, and have their little scores in front of them, but they do not understand the larger piece for which they are singing.
5. The various “green” building groups have been very adept at focusing public attention on the matter of resource and energy use in building stock. But, these various groups and their standards seem to think that we can find the pathway to a sustainable civilization by tearing down the old and building new. This strikes me as being very myopic because any new construction means brand new carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere whereas an existing building’s carbon impact from construction is now old carbon dioxide and I would think these gases are now sequestered in trees or in the ocean and thus not impacting further climate change. It seems to me that one of the most important decisions to make is how to release the least amount of new carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. A direct way to achieve this is to keep the existing building stock we have now and make what additional repairs or improvements to it so as to better the performance of these buildings. Building something brand new would appear to me as one of the least beneficial actions considering all the impact of the new construction and all the new carbon dioxide being released. I just do not understand why the various “green” building groups do not see that existing building stock should be the first focus for attention before anything new is built.
6. As a template for my decision-making, I have composed the several lines that follow. These can be adjusted and changed in working through a decision tree, but the end goals should remain the same in conserving natural resources and reducing fossil fuel consumption.
“Every decision and action regarding the existing environment of buildings, infrastructure, and cultural landscapes considers the impacts on climate change and resource consumption.
Before I consider building something new, I will try to find something existing that would serve the purpose or could be changed or expanded with minimal efforts and resources or consider whether the purpose and needs could be modified to fit what I have found.
If I can not find something existing that will serve the needs I have, I will look for vacant or brownfield land in an existing community and work with that land in a careful and respective manner for its conditions and its context.
If there is no vacant land within an existing community, I will look to existing developed land and determine if new activities can be added to that site without over-burdening it or if what exists there now is beyond its useful life and can be recycled.
If the developed land has building stock of a low density and if it is within an urban context and has new infrastructure nearby that would support a higher density, I will consider whether there is a greater good to be achieved in recycling the low density existing building stock and redeveloping this site for a higher density.
If there is no such vacant, brownfield, or developed land within an existing community that would serve the need I have, then I will look for land immediately adjacent to the community where such new infrastructure and change would be appropriate and would not degrade valuable natural resources.
If there is no adjacent land, then I would try to find land currently with or planned for linking infrastructure to an existing community where the existing land is such that change in use would be considered appropriate and important natural resource values would not be lost.
If I could not find such land and needed a free-standing site for the needs at hand, I would look for a brownfield site that could be developed and consider how to minimize the energy and resources needed to service it.
Every I decision I make and the actions I do are evaluated against the template of how can I minimize my climate change impact and natural resource consumption.”
This is excellent as far as it goes.
You have left out an important part about our exiting buildings, especially those built before WWI, and often those built before WWII.
When we could not depend on central heat nor a/c for comfort, we “built to the weather”. We designed our buildings to work with the climate. Our historic infrastructure is often quite green. We just haven’t noticed.
I write about this quite extensively on my blog, trying to help us see what we already have. This construction is often called “original green”.
This is a great public step forward for preservationists. That said, I must agree with the comments of Jane Radocchia concerning the need for more emphasis on our preservation of climate oriented design. I also echo Gary Sachau’s suggestions for better semantics and word placement, and share Joseph Balachowski’s concern over the lack of emphatic action words within the document. In building upon Mr. Balachowski’s suggestion, I would reword the second sentence of the “Next Steps” section from “We stand ready to offer an example for sustainability, while further challenging preservationists to more fully accommodate sustainable practices.” to “We will actively provide and fully promote an essential example for sustainability, while further ….”
I would also place more emphasis in the premise on the credibility we bring with this proclamation to the larger sustainability movement, given the scores of years preservationist have worked in the face of often tremendous opposition to “recycle” the built environment. After all, to paraphrase a saying often quoted in relation to Vermont, “preservation was green before green was cool.”
I would like to echo Gary Sachau’s comments. It is important that historic preservation remain our primary focus while encouraging sustainable practices; after all, we are preservationists.
In addition, the statement that encourages expedited review of tax credit projects that are sustainable should be re-examined. “Sustainable” projects are still very ill defined. A “green” project by one man’s standard may not be environmentally-friendly by another’s. Some review would have to take place to determine if a project meets whatever sustainable criteria is set, which would ultimately slow down the process for all applicants. If a shortcut were proposed (i.e. all LEED registered projects get expedited review) then that necessarily creates a problem by a government agency seemingly endorsing a private, non-profit group. Not to mention, LEED is not the only rating system out there. If review times are causing a major problem, then perhaps looking at the application process holistically and making improvements that benefit all applicants would be the preferred method.
I concur with Mr. Sachau’s comment that the document would be better titled, “Pocantico Proclamation on Historic Preservation and Sustainability,” since it hopes to represent the historic preservation community.
I also concur with Mr. Breitkreutz’s and Mr. Balachowski’s comments that document could be bolder in affirming the contributions historic preservation already makes to sustainability.
If the hope is to have widespread support for the Proclamation, the wording of Principle #5 – Realign Historic Preservation Policies with Sustainability, and its first sentence, “Today’s challenges require that historic preservation move beyond maintaining or recovering a frozen view of the past,” is not very inviting of support. The implication is that historic preservation policies do not support sustainability, which is a startling statement for the historic preservation community to make about itself. The “frozen view of the past” attitude is one that preservationists have combated for decades. Most likely this was unintentional, but the proclamation appears to accuse preservationists of what others have accused us of for so long.
The underlying point could be addressed more positively: “Ensure that Historic Preservation Policies Support Sustainability. Historic preservation contributes to the transformation of communities and the establishment of a sustainable, equitable, and verdant world. Historic preservation practices and policies at all levels should support sustainability.”
Regarding Actions – Public Policy – Historic Preservation Policies. PP4, Identify the critical conflicts . . . What critical conflicts? If they exist, they should be stated so that they can be evaluated by the preservation community.
PP5 mentions a fresh look at the Secretary’s Standards. The National Park System Advisory Board did this in 2006. Their conclusion: “The Committee finds that the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation remain appropriate . . ., and therefore recommends that there be no change to them.” (Federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit Program: Recommendations for Making a Good Program Better (September 2006), page 4, available at http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/tax/committee.htm).
PP5 and PP6 both discuss materials published by the National Park Service and would be more effective if combined and expanded beyond one agency: “Integrate green design practices into preservation guidelines and encourage policymakers at all levels to publish materials illustrating the use of sustainable design practices in historic preservation projects.”
The Conclusion could be strengthened as a call to action. Phrases like “transitioning historic preservation to the forefront of the sustainability movement” and “transform historic preservation into a leading, relevant, timely exemplar . . .” do not give enough credit to the important work in support of sustainability that historic preservation has done and does every day. Emphasizing what historic preservation has done to date and calling upon the historic preservation community to reaffirm and increase its commitment to a sustainable future would be a stronger conclusion.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
There are a lot of great reasons to preserve our present and past through preservation of old structures. Greenhouse gas and climate change are way down on the list. It seems like kind of a stretch to say that we’d be making great differences in affecting climate change. Climate change and greenhouse warming ARE important but put the focus where the problems really are, not toss heritage preservation on for fairly transparent political reasons.
I really enjoyed my trip on three old railways over the past couple of years by the way. Loved that coal-powered steam engine! Sustainable heritage tourism, downtown renewal, education and voyages of discovery for our children and visitors simply make life more enjoyable in these rapidly changing times.
Here’s an issue: Destruction of old structures – or even their stabilization – can result in enormous amounts of waste: lumber, insulation, glass, lead paint, and creosote. The nation does not have unlimited landfill space.
The challenge is always to think smart. Keep it real.
Thanks for all of the thoughtful comments.
[...] November of 2008, the Friends of NCPTT and the NTHP convened a small group of experts to discuss historic preservation and environmental sustainability. The group affirmed [...]
I support the Pocantico Principles on Sustainability. Climate change is especially important to this initiative. I am a member of the NIST-SGIP and always stress the importance. http://www.examiner.com/x-43343-Energy-Policy-Examiner
The topic of sustainability in environment through historic preservation is such a thing that needs a long and continuous discussion. If this has been taken up as a consideration, its a commendable initiative taken by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Friends of the National Center for Preservation Technology and Training. I am in favor of the Pocantico Principles on Sustainability. I support them… And, yes, thanks for this informative article.
[...] (NTHP) to convene experts to address sustainability and preservation. The group created the Pocantico Proclamation on Sustainability and Historic Preservation, which was followed in 2009 by the “Nashville Challenge” focusing on the impact of increased [...]