martinhouseclr

223 5 // TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS solution is feasible. For the purposes of this treatment plan it is assumed that option two, being some level of specialty or reinforced turf profile will be needed to accommodate future program needs. However, the preference should be to keep all new circulation infrastructure out of the interpretive core if possible. Some reconstructed materials and features of the circulation network have been reconstructed based on insufficient documentation not available at the time of reconstruction. These non-contributing features should be removed and reconstructed in the long-term, particularly if the MHRC wishes to acquire expanded preservation status or designations. However, in the context of the effort the rehabilitate the overall landscape to a point where it exhibits the defining characteristics of the Period of Significance, these are low-priority tasks. Regarding the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and accessible routes through the site, the primary goal should be to simply provide the highest level of access with the lowest level of impact. It would not be appropriate to provide paved accessible routes throughout the interpretive core, but linking historic structures that have been already been or are planned to be made accessible should be a priority. In all cases, accessible infrastructure should be subordinate to the broader historic landscape or the interpretive experience of that landscape. This includes accessible devices or features inside and outside the interpretive core. The existing mechanical lift discretely installed at the front of the house should serve as a guide, as it accommodates a high level of need while impacting the character or interpretive experience to a very small degree. Signage & Wayfinding Signage and wayfinding is an important issue as it is both necessary to support the contemporary use but also has the potential to conflict profoundly with the character of the historic landscape. It is reported that visitors currently do not know where to go when they arrive on site. The multiple walkway options, on both the historic property and the visitor services properties, present confusing options that diminish the early interpretive experience. It is believed that part of this can be overcome by the complete rehabilitation of the landscape. The rehabilitation will better define boundaries between the historic property and the auxiliary properties, more clearly identify the openness of the visitor center pedestrian entry, and present the historic property as curated landscape that may inhibit casual access by visitors. However, it is recognized that signage plays an important role in both interpretation and wayfinding within historic properties and the Martin House demonstrates a clear need. The preference is that all visitors go to the visitor center when first arriving so efforts should be made to more clearly identify this pedestrian Fig. 209, top The existing site with the preferred entry route indicated for all visitors to the property (to visitor center). Fig. 210, bottom The entry route to the visitor center with interpretive signage along pathway.