My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1984-066 - ARCHITEXAS proposal for architectural services
City-of-Paris
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
1889-2010
>
1930-1999
>
1980-1989
>
1984
>
1984-066 - ARCHITEXAS proposal for architectural services
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/17/2017 10:40:19 AM
Creation date
6/3/2005 9:37:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
Doc Name
1984
Doc Type
Resolution
CITY CLERK - Date
9/10/1984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
44724 Federal Register / Vol. 4R, No. 190 / Thursday. September 29, 19[13 / Notices <br />Standard IV. Evahrotion Results Art <br />Made Available to the Public <br />Evaluation is the basis of registration <br />and treatment decisions. Information <br />about evaluation decisions should be <br />organized and available for use by the <br />general public and by those who take <br />part in decisions about registration and <br />treatment. Use of appropriate computer- <br />assisted data bases should be a part of <br />the information dissemination effort. <br />Sensitive information, however, must be <br />safeguarded from general public <br />distribution. , <br />Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines for <br />Evaluation <br />Introduction <br />These Guidelines link the Standards <br />for Evaluation with more specific <br />guidance and technical information. <br />These Guidelines describe one approach <br />to meeting the Standards for Evaluation. <br />Agencies, organizations, or individuals <br />proposing to approach evaluation <br />differently may wish to review their <br />approach with the National Park <br />Service. <br />The Guidelines are organized as <br />follows: <br />The Evalauation Process <br />Criteria <br />Application of Criteria within a Historic <br />Context <br />Inventory <br />Recommended Sources of Technical <br />Information <br />The Evaluation Process <br />These Guidelines describe principles <br />for evaluating the significance of one or <br />more historic properties with regard to a <br />given set of criteria. <br />Groups of related properties should be <br />evaluated at the same time whenever <br />Possible; for example, following <br />completion of a theme study or <br />community survey. <br />Evaluation should not be undertaken <br />using documentation that may be out of <br />date. Prior to proceeding with evaluation <br />the current condition of the property <br />should be determined and previous <br />analyses evaluated in light of any new <br />information. <br />Evaluation must be performed by <br />persons qualified by education, training <br />and experience in the application of the <br />criteria. Where feasible, evaluation <br />should be performed in consultation <br />with other individuals experienced in <br />applying the relevant criteria in the <br />geographical area under consideration; <br />for example, the State Historic <br />Preservation Officer or local landmarks <br />commission. <br />Evaluation is completed with a <br />written determination that a property is <br />or is not significant based on provided <br />information. This statement should be <br />Part of the record. <br />Criteria: The purposes of evaluation <br />criteria should be made clear. For <br />example, the criteria may be used "to <br />evaluate properties for inclusion in the <br />county landmarks list," or "to implement <br />the National Register of I listoric places <br />program." <br />For Federal cultural resource <br />management purposes, criteria used to <br />develop an inventory should be <br />coordinated with the National Register <br />criteria for evaluation as implemented in <br />the approved State comprehensive <br />historic preservation plan. <br />Content of Criteria: Criteria should be <br />appropriate in scale to the purpose of <br />the evaluation. For example, criteria <br />designed to describe national <br />significance should not be used as the <br />basis for creating a county or State <br />inventory. Criteria should be categorical <br />and not attempt to describe in detail <br />every property likely to qualify. Criteria <br />should outline the disciplines or broad <br />areas of concern (history, archeology, <br />architectural history, engineering and <br />culture, for example) included within the <br />scope of the inventory: explain what <br />kinds of properties, if any, are excluded <br />and the reasons for exclusion; and <br />define how levels of significance are <br />measured, if such levels are <br />incorporated into the criteria. If the <br />criteria are to be used in situations <br />where the National Register criteria are <br />also widely used, it is valuable to <br />include a statement explaining the <br />relationship of the criteria used to the <br />National Register criteria, including how <br />the scope of the inventory differs from <br />that defined by the National Register <br />criteria and how the inventory could be <br />use to identify properties that meet the <br />National Register criteria. <br />Information Needed to Evaluate <br />Properties: The criteria should be <br />accompanied by a statement defining <br />the minimum information necessary to <br />evaluate properties to insure that this <br />information is collected during <br />identification activities intended to <br />locate specific historic properties. <br />Generally, at )east the following will be <br />needed: <br />1. Adequately developed historic <br />contexts, including identified property <br />types. (See the Guidelines for t <br />Preservation Planning for discussion of <br />development of historic contexts.) <br />2. Sufficient information about the <br />appearance. condition and associative <br />values of the property to be evaluated <br />to: <br />a. Classify it as to property type; <br />b. Compare its features or <br />characteristics with those expected for <br />its property type; and <br />C. Define the physical extent of the <br />property and accurately locate the <br />property. <br />To facilitate distinguishing between <br />facts and analysis, the information <br />should be divided into categories, <br />including identification and description <br />of pertinent historical contexts; <br />description of the property and its <br />significance in the historical context; <br />and analysis of the integrity of the <br />Property relative to that needed to <br />represent the context. <br />Usually documentation need not <br />include such items as a complete title <br />history or biography of every owner of a <br />property, except where that information <br />is important in evaluating its <br />significance. Information on proposed or <br />potential treatments or threats, such as <br />destruction of a property through <br />uncontrollable natural processes, is also <br />not needed for evaluation, unless those <br />effects are likely to occur prior to or <br />during the evaluation, thereby altering <br />the significant characteristic of the <br />Property, If archeological testing or <br />structural analysis is needed for <br />evaluation, it should not proceeded <br />beyond the point of providing the <br />information necessary for evaluation <br />and should not unnecessarily affect <br />significant features or values of the <br />property, <br />When more information is needed: <br />Evaluation cannot be conducted unless <br />all necessary information is available. <br />(See Information Needed to Evaluate <br />Properties.) Any missing information or <br />analysis should be identified (e.g. <br />development of context or information <br />on the property) as well as the specific <br />activities required to obtain the <br />information (archival research, field <br />survey and testing, or laboratory <br />testing). When adequate information is <br />not available, it is important to record <br />that fact so that evaluation will not be <br />undertaken until the information can be <br />obtained. In some cases needed <br />information is not obtainable, for <br />example, where historical records have <br />been destroyed or analytical techniques <br />have not been developed to date <br />materials in archeological sites. If au <br />evaluation must be completed in these <br />cases, it is important to acknowledge <br />what information was not obtainable <br />and how that missing information may <br />affect the reliability of the evaluation. <br />Application of the Criteria within a <br />Historic Context <br />The first step in evaluation is <br />considering how the criteria apply to the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.