dk nkf - Nordisk Konservatorforbund Danmark

Principles for Measures
The following principles are to be recognized in
the implementation of restoration measures on
monuments:
• The task differs completely from other
(re)building projects and often represents
a departure from established technical
procedures.
• The static-constructive treatment of industrial
monuments requires experience and good
judgment.
• Durability of construction is substituted for
regular inspections.
• The aging process must be accepted as an
unavoidable, continuous change of material
properties.
• Maintenance means preventive conservation,
viz. precautions and indirect measures aimed
at the prevention and reduction of further
degeneration or loss.
• Conservation (as defined above)
• Repair (as defined above)
• Renewal or Renovation (as defined above)
• Reconstruction consists of the rebuilding of an
object with old or new materials in its presumed
original form based on documentary or material
evidence.
For sources of terms and definitions, see [2]
Treatment Priorities
Simple first! More extensive treatment follows,
if simple fails. As a consequence we establish a
hierarchy starting with conservation, restoration,
reconstruction followed by repair / rehabilitation.
This will result in significant cost savings effects
with a significant amount depending on the size of
the site.
Preservation: dos and don‘ts
The preservation of industrial monuments should be
guided by four principles:
1. Look for a strategy to estimate levels for proper
action and safety
2. Be different, which may mean
- do it later
- do it partly
- don‘t allow access
- back the structure
- remove it (and save examples)
- Decision-making means setting priorities
3. Define standards for action
4. Guide volunteers and ‚non-experts‘ from makework
programs
Assessment of Expenses and
Timeframes
The definition of goals has consequences. It results
in treatment and allows an assessment of expenses
and timeframes. Both are effects of goals – never
vice versa! Our action plan will point out this fact
very clearly.
A special problem is the question of extent and
means of financing of measures to restore industrial
monuments: large industrial sites do not fit into
the classical system of support for monuments.
So far there are no “pots of money” for industrial
monuments in Germany.
In this context, a comparison with established objects
of monument preservation may be helpful. Consider,
for instance, the Frauenkirche in Munich: Over the
next 20 years, half a million Euros will be provided
“preliminarily” each year for the renovation of the
facade of this-admittedly very prominent-edifice.
This amounts to an expected total of 10 million
Euros, a sum in which cost overruns due to the
ambitious choice of restoration measures are already
anticipated. In comparison, the four sites of our case
studies (see Figure 4) require only a fraction of this
amount, even though each individual construction
volume is comparable to that of the Frauenkirche!
Consequently, the handbook for our action plan will
make the case that major industrial monuments rank
on the same level of importance as other monuments.
This also means that they should be treated similarly
financially.
Case Studies
As examples we will discuss several industrial
sites in the Rhine-Ruhr area: The blast furnaces of
the Henrichshuette at Hattingen and Meiderich /
71