Historic Preservation for All People: Reconceptualizing Accessibility in Historic Buildings

Abstract

Increasing physical access to everyday historic buildings is a concept often in conflict with the practice of historic preservation. Making these places more accessible frequently requires physical changes, while many aspects of our current preservation model seek to protect and preserve historic materials against change. This tension can result in historic buildings that are either partially or completely inaccessible to people with physical disabilities, or that are accessible in ways that create inequitable experiences. In this treatise, I propose changes to our field’s mindset towards and practice of improving accessibility in historic buildings that instead encourage equitable experiences for everyone.

In recent years, practitioners in our field have expressed interest in moving towards a people-oriented preservation movement that promotes preservation of the relationships people create and sustain with historic properties. Place attachment theory illuminates that these relationships grow through the experiences that people have with place. An analysis of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and examples from our field’s federal preservation resources reveals that these documents encourage practitioners to use preservation of historic fabric as the bellwether for designing accessibility improvements. This approach, and our field’s emphasis on preserving historic façades and entrances, contributes to experiences of inequity when people with disabilities enter historic buildings. These inequitable experiences conflict with people-focused preservation because they diminish opportunities for people with disabilities to build relationships with historic places.

In response to these findings, I propose changes to how our field understands and approaches improving access to historic buildings that align with a people-focused preservation model. These recommendations draw ideas from the social model of disability, critical disability theory, and Universal Design. I also argue that preservationists should reconsider historic façades and entrances as points of engagement between people and place. I support these assertions with suggested revisions to our federal accessibility resources that reflect this new perspective.