dk nkf - Nordisk Konservatorforbund Danmark

Figure 2. Nature is back at coking plant of Zollverein.
will present a handbook (White Paper) about the
principles for dealing with industrial monuments
including guidelines for concrete measures. Our
recommendations should be applicable in principle to
all industrial monuments. We describe our proposal
in more detail below.
In for a penny, in for a pound?!
According to this maxim, it might be expected that
all German legal statutes dealing with historical
monuments contain a criterion recognizing the
historical value of major industrial sites. This is
by no means the case. The Law for the Protection
of Historical Monuments (Denkmalschutzgesetz),
enacted by North Rhine Westphalia in 1980, has
remained the exception. Only here do we find
a statement recognizing the historical value of
industrial facilities: it is established if a structure had
a noticeable impact upon “the development of the
conditions for labor or production”. Considered in
this light, it is not surprising that the justification of
the value of industrial monuments still entails greater
effort than for established structures such as castles,
public buildings, or basilicas.
Second, it is a tenet of the preservation of historical
monuments that monuments can only be maintained
indefinitely if they can be put to good use. The belief
in the maintainability of major industrial monuments
is thus continually and severely challenged. How
does one preserve a monument that has been seen
through structural change as a portent of failure and
68
as a poisonous legacy and that lacks the “proper age”?
The “International Construction Fair IBA Emscher
Park” did away with this prejudice and showed a way
towards an ecological and cultural representation
of structural change, all the while preserving the
industrial legacy.
Nonetheless, the “generational covenant” promulgated
by the IBA failed because of the resistance by the
objects themselves, i.e. due to the planned obsolescence
of the structures and materials. In the same vein,
this provides an end to the concept of “controlled
breakdown” - acceptance of continuing decay - as a
rhetorical device for justification. It is expensive as a
preservation measure in the medium-term, according
to the principle of “as little as possible, as much as
necessary”. The ability to preserve cannot be obtained
at costs below the going rate (c.f. Section “Assessment
of Expenses and Timeframes”).
Action Plan
Therefore, instead of a comprehensive and complete
restoration in one go, we must follow a strategy of
continuous inspection and maintenance. To this end,
action plans oriented towards a gradual restoration of
monuments are needed. Also, for various reasons, it may
become necessary to consider not only the preservation
of the whole but also the loss of certain parts of the site,
and to plan accordingly. Such a plan is also imperative
for structuring possible rebuilding projects.
With this in mind, a maintenance strategy, in line
with practical experience, should be developed for
the preservation of heritage-protected industrial
sites. The plan of action should follow four basic
principles: The main focus should be the unity of the
site; second, the defined goals of the project should
be achieved before treatment is introduced; third,
treatment should be based on priorities; and fourth,
an action plan should make possible an assessment
of related expenses and time-frames.
Unity of the Site
The main principle is our respect for the whole
range of different levels of information: from
creation of the site, through time of use and finally,
the aftermath. And we see industrial monuments