I have posted multiple times arguments for sprinklering buildings. Most of the time when one thinks of fire protection systems, new construction comes to mind. When NBC 29 Television in Charlottesville recently reported that the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation installed a new HI-FOG fire sprinkler at Monticello, it dawned on me that there is a place in historic preservation for fire sprinklers.
That said, when preserving a historic property, first priority is to preserve as much original historic fabric as possible, making “minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, and spatial relationships” 1 To a great extent, it would give one pause to go boring holes in 200+ year old plaster. But think of the consequence of not doing this and losing a significant historic structure to fire.
Most of the historic buildings around here are wood framed, as the colonists did not have the resources to construct stone buildings. As such, given the right combination of ignition and a good draft, the fuel contributed by the unprotected framing would go up in flames quickly running the risk of losing the entire structure and the historic fabric.
So given the advances in fire protection technology over the last century, it makes sense to sacrifice small amounts of historic plaster in discrete locations for the good of the entire structure. To be sure, there may be some water damage following a sprinkler activation, but water damage is reversible. Reducing a historic structure to charred rubble is not.
So to the staff at Mr. Jefferson’s Monticello, I salute you for taking a stand against fire and for preserving the house for the benefit of future generations.
1. From NPS Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
Charlottesville Architect 
Leave a Reply