This document provides a summary of a survey and assessment of preservation issues affecting two streets in Block 10 of Akko's Old City: Louis IX Street and HaBahaim Street. The survey found varying levels of deterioration from insignificant to material being lost. Major causes included high-velocity water and wind, inappropriate additions like cement and metal bolts, and drainage issues. Past interventions are also discussed, with some like old plaster and concrete blocks considered problematic. The document provides thorough documentation, mapping, and typologies of the observed conditions to aid future conservation planning.

1. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page
Block 10 Conservation Follow-Up
Prepared by Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Intern at the International Conservation Center,
Citta di Roma
Saving the Stones, session 5
This project has been under guidance from
David Zell Shelley-Anne Peleg
Special Thanks to: Tsili Giladi, Alison Goren, Uri Jeremias, Raanan
Kislev, Faina Mishin, Jacques Negeur, Yoram Saad, Yaacov Scheffer,
Ornit Schnecke, Ram Shoeff, Kemi Zrihan-Heller

2. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page
Contents
Introduction Rationale 3
Orientation Documentation 4
State of Preservation 6
Destruction Deterioration 12
Past Interventions 17
Intervention Planning 27
Maintenance Planning 28
Emphasized issues 28
Appendices 31
Works Consulted 33
List of Figures 35
Image Credits

3. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page
Introduction Rationale for Project
Block 10 is a part of Akko’s Old City retroactively defined by the British Mandate-era authorities.
Since 2001, it has been the location of pilot projects by the OADC, IAA, and other Israeli government
agencies, ministries, and Non-Governmental Organizations working together. These projects have been
undertaken in order to test historic building conservation measures in an inhabited, mixed-use urban envi-
ronment that also receives visitors from all over the world on a consistent basis.
Block 10 is distinguished by three streets running North-South for most of their lengths.
• HaHaganah Promenade defines the Western boundary and is dominated by the two Baha’i facilities, sev-
eral renovated houses, and the Ottoman-era sea wall.
• HaBahaim St. runs through the middle of the block, widening at its North and middle, and running East-
ward at its Southernmost segment before opening into Kikar Habud.
• Louis IX St. begins at its North end in Kikar Tawfesh and acts as a border between Blocks 10 12 before
the border turns Eastward at buildings 010/93 and 012/43 (the Effendi Hotel). The street continues South,
going under a an arch, and two “bridge houses” before terminating in Kikar Habud.
This project was undertaken as a monitoring survey of the major interior North-South streets in Block 10.
Louis IX St. HaBaha’im St. were chosen as project areas for a variety of reasons:
• Presence in Block 10 as the IAA pilot project area, and the multiple buildings along their length that have
undergone repairs, conservation, and restoration.
• Clearly-delineated lengths that can be quickly recognized on maps of the Old City.
• Lack of automobile access makes them more suitable for uninterrupted pedestrian survey, as well as more
representative of typical residential streets.
• Interior streets not directly exposed to the sea - again, acting as a sort of “control group.”
• Louis IX St. contains the two main house types in the Old City (Courtyard Central Hall), along with
variations of both. HaBahaim St. also has Captain’s Houses.
• Residential area - most of the buildings here are primarily for residential use. Block 10 doesn’t have the
Churches, restaurants, or wharf of Block 11, nor the Mosques of Block 12, nor the commercial infrastruc-
ture of Block 13, or the major tourist attractions that comprise the other blocks.
• Potential for greater visitor traffic in the future - the combination of the Effendi Hotel, the small squares,
and the religious buildings (Baha’i, Muslim, and Christian) could lead to greater visitor traffic in the future.
• As part of a World Heritage Site, the major public streets of Block 10 should be able to “put its best face
forward,” as much as the rest of the Old City.
This survey is extremely preliminary. As a post-graduate in Archaeological Heritage Management,
I am neither a minerologist, chemist, qualified to work on roofs, nor a fluent speaker of Hebrew or Arabic
- all of which would be needed to do a complete literature search and proper survey of conservation issues
in Block 10. However, regular monitoring surveys can save time, money, and effort in the long run, catch-
ing problems before they get serious. Monitoring surveys have sucessfully caught minor problems before
they became major in surveys of Ottoman structures in Turkey, Greece, and elsewhere (Aras; Disli et al;
Stefanidou et al; etc) - there is no reason to not attempt similar surveys in Israel.

4. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page
Survey Documentation
Orientation Identification:
Block 10 takes up most of the Northwestern quadrant of the Old City, and is anchored by the major non-
residential infrastructure within it.
• Western border is HaHaganah promenade.
• Southwest corner is occupied by the Abud house (#053), owned by the Baha’i.
• South-central in the quarter is Kikar Abud, or Genoa Square.
• Southeast corner is occupied by St. George’s Church (#142), owned by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate.
• Eastern border defined largely by Louis IX Street and the Effendi Hotel (012/45).
• Finally, the Northern portion of Block 10 is dominated by Kikar Tawfesh and the walled Baha’i com-
pound of the Abdullah Pasha House.
• Most of the ~140 other buildings in the block are of residential use, divided up into multiple apartments,
and are subsidized housing. Small businesses are often installed at street level, including convenience
stores, a cushion workshop, and a grocer.
List of buildings on Louis IX
Street (from Abud Square):
East side: West side:
109 108
110 58
111 105
112 104
113 103
114 102
117 101
012/43 93
012/213 92
012/45 91
90
83
82
81
80
78
77
List of buildings on HaBahaim
Street (from Abud Square)
East Side: West Side
55 53
54 52
55A 51
56 48
57 45
59 44
60 43
60A 42
61 39
62 38
64 36
65 34
66 33
67 32
68 29
69 28
72 148
73
74
75
76
Documentation:
Because of its use as a Pilot Project area by the IAA OADC, Block 10 has a great deal of survey material
available for use if the relevant people are asked. Most of it is in Hebrew but can be translated fairly quickly
or simply used for the images. These were used to assemble this report and as reference materials. Most of
the information on building conservation in the Old City is with in the IAAAkko Inspector’s office. This
material is typically solely in Hebrew in a mix of papers and reports organized spatially. An upcoming
phase of this project is an index of when particular buildings wwere conserved. Eventually, someone who
can read Hebrew should also centralize digitize available records of interventions done, with the end goal
of better documentation and data on historic building conservation repair.

5. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page
Map Key
HaHaganah Promenade █
HaBaha’im Street █
Louis IX Street █
Kikar Tawfesh █
Kikar Abud █
Figure 0:Map of Block 10 showing
major pedestrian areas and routes in
color.
Louis IX Street was chosen as the
primary focus of the project, with
the other marked areas as secondary.
Historical Background
During the Crusader era of Acre
(1104 to 1187 1191 to 1291),
what would become Block 10 be-
longed to three quarters:
• Genoese Quarter = The Northern half of this quarter was represented here, including their main congrega-
tion, the Church of St. Lorenzo/Lawrence, which is now the site of the Church of St. George.
• Burgos Novus/Rectangular/Dominican Quarter = This former quarter is enclosed within Block 10 entirely,
forming the Southwest portion of Block 10. It ran/runs parallel to the sea wall. During Crusader times,
houses were kept to one storey, so as to remain behind the protective fortification and (possibly) provide an
additional line of defense in case of breaches.
• Hospitalier Quarter = The Southwest outer wall of the Hospitalier Citadel extends into modern Block 10.
The area of the Abdullah Pasha compound, belonging to the Baha’i, is sometimes also counted within
Block 10. It corresponds to an area labeled “St. Michael’s” (presumably a church) in Kesten’s 1993 report.
What was to become Block 10 was adjacent to the Templar Quarter to the South (abutting Genoa Square/
Kikar Abud) and the Boverel/Cattle Market/Butchers’ Quarter.

6. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page
Figure 1: Map of Block 10, showing level of stone/
mortar facade quality for buildings on Louis IX St.
Note the concentrations of severe deterioration
materials lost on the Northern Southern ends of
the street. These have comparable causes that need
to be accounted for in the ongoing conservation ef-
forts undertaken by the IAA others.
Planning the Conservation Process:
State of Preservation
Map Key
U = Undergoing conservation
█ = Insignificant deterioration
█ = Cosmetic interruption
█ = Minor deterioration
█ = Major deterioration
█ = Material lost
█ = Problem Areas
U
U
U
U U

7. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page
Typologies
Section 1: Deterioration scale.
Level 1 - Insignificant de-
terioration (Blue on map).
Figures 2 (left) 3 (below):
Mortar is of a lime base, is
well-applied, and in good
repair. Stone is pristine and
free of large holes, unneeded
coatings, cracks, etc.
Occurs on Southern front
facade of Effendi hotel, as well
as the of buildings 101, 102,
and 103. New conservation
efforts on buildings 83 82
have also achieved this condi-
tion during the drafting of this
report.

8. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page
Level 2 - Cosmetic inter-
ruption (Green on map).
Figures 4 (general to the
left) and 5 (close-up, be-
low): Stone appears to be
in good condition but is
covered by innapropriate
plaster, graffiti, or some
other covering that obscures
its historic character.
Innapropriate plaster
present on/near buildings
191, 116, and 77.
Graffiti present on building
104 nearby, as shown in
photograph to the left.

9. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page
Level 3 - Minor deterio-
ration (yellow on map).
Figures 6(general to the
left) and 7 (close-up,
below): Can be character-
ized as “normal wear
tear;” needing monitor-
ing.
Condition characterizing
most of the Old City’s
exterior facades.
Stones here are some-
what weathered, with a
mix of tiny and medium-
size pits that do not con-
nect to each other.
Inappropriate inclusions
can also be present, such
as nails.

10. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 10
Level 4 - Major deterioration (orange
on map). Figures 8 (general to the left)
and 9 (close-up, below):
Initial observations indicate that this level
of erosion is characteristic of many side
streets in the Old City, as well as areas
that have seen some neglect, innapropriate
interventions, or stress.
In the case above, the wall is both lacking
in mortar, and cement mortar is present to
protect electrical wiring. Joints in similar
walls have the same two issues. Although
the light cement mortar around the electri-
cal boxes is not an issue in and of itself, it
can aggravate existing problems.
In the IAA stone conservation manual,
this level typically exhibits stones that are

11. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 11
Level 5 - Material lost (red on map). Fig-
ures 10 (general to the left) and 11 (close-up,
below): Mortar is typically missing in entirely,
or is of cement origin and actively damaging
nearby stone.
Stones in these areas have disintegrated in
part or wholly. Material from these lost stones
can often be found in joints or on the ground.
The kurkar endemic in the Old City typically
crumbles, leaving a concave remnant, as shown
here.
In the IAA stone conservation manual, this
level typically exhibits pulverization or exfolia-
tion.
These areas occur along Louis IX St. in two
clusters:
1. Within and near the bridge houses arch
near the street’s Southern end (where this
photo was taken). Walls are often damp, with
lichen and larger plants growing in-between
the stones. Electrical boxes (and their attend-
ant concrete to put them in) are present, albeit
not to the extent they are further North on the
street, as some of the buildings here appear to
be at least partially abandoned.
2. The North end of the street and facing Kikar
Tawfesh. Problems here are twofold, with large
areas of innappropriate cement mortar use on
the lower storey of the Effendi Hotel’s North-
ern building (formerly the Palace Community
Center). In addition, the “wind tunnel effect”
coming into the Square from the Northwest
likely causes a great deal of erosion, which is
aggravated by innappropriate repairs and ad-
ditions to the buildings on the Square’s West
side, particularly the use of lime mortar atop
cement.

12. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 12
Causes of Destruction Deterioration
Typology section 2: Problems. In the following sections, top photo is general, bottom is close-up.
Fig. 12 (up) 13 (down): The wind tunnel to the NW of Kikar Tawfesh erodes material quickly.

13. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 13
Figure 14: Cement-based mortar/plaster/lintel in a blocked doorway. Stones nearby are lacking mortar; all
stones show moderate or worse damage - a confluence of weathering and innapropriate materials.
Figure 15: These white boxes (circled in red) are ubiquitous in the Old City - for electricity or telecommu-
nications. Nearly all (and their accompanying wiring) are installed with concrete-based mortar, though it is
usually the less destructive white concrete.

14. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 14
Figure 16: Sediment deposits next to buildings #77-82 in Kikar Tawfesh indicate poor drainage engineer-
ing. Water is seeping into bottoms of walls and can subsequently travel upward through capillary action.
Figure 17: Cement patches, metal bolts (circled in green), and wiring. Problems with cement have already
been explained. Metal bolts drilled into stone weaken it, and their subsequent rusting stains stones, or even
breaks it apart. Exposed wires disrupt historic appearance and are a safety hazard if cut.

15. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 15
Figure 18: Plants (micro and macro). Lichen appears in very damp areas, while weeds take root in deposit-
ed, crumbled stone, or blown soil. The larger plants’ roots are very threatening to stone integrity over time.
Figure 19: Window frame covered in graffiti and installed with lighter cement.

16. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 16
Conclusions from Problems
Within Block 10, there are three major causes for problems impacting stone wall preservation:
1. High-velocity water and wind running along steeply-inclined streets squares.
2. Innapropriate additions to walls - especially black cement and rusty metal bolts. Both of these can pul-
verize kurkar into sand in a matter of years.
3. Drainage of water into buildings, whether from roofs, gutters, or capillary action from below.
Drainage issues in the Southern tunnels are complicated, and their exact cause has not been resolved as to
what damage comes from above versus below and where. In contrast, the steep slopes and open space in
Kikak Tawfesh clearly point to running water as a culprit, with only corners being impacted by winds (and
consequently looking worse than the walls running between).
Inappropriate additions to walls are common, although they are particularly egregious on the Northern end
of the tunnel, on the Eastern facade of building 92, and the Western facade of building 114. These addi-
tions include cement, wiring, metal bolts, and decorative facings on the stone. All can ultimately contrib-
ute to loss of of original materials.

17. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 17
Typology section 3: Interventions.
Interventions marked with an asterisk are also considered problems from a conservation perspective.
Figure 20 (above) 21 (below): Old plaster and “zivziv” blocks* to replace lost stones along a staircase
in front of building 108. Mortar used to put blocks in place can damage the stones below.

18. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 18
Figure 22 (above) 23 (below): Plasters of unknown composition and British origin on building 109. This
was done as part of more than one past conservation efforts. Plaster under the gray layer in the upper right
is disintegrating, taking the upper layer with it. Permeability of material is unknown, though exposed stone
underneath appears intact.

19. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 19
Figure 24 (above) 25 (below): Stone refacing with plaster. Stones have had lost portions replaced. Poten-
tial for damage to stones in dispute by local experts.

20. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 20
figure 26 (above): New stones. These were likely inserted to replaced those lost through the innapropriate
manner in which the electrical boxes were put in. Not a common intervention due to inconsistent availabil-
ity of kurkar.

21. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 21
Figure 27 (above): Close-up of building anchor on #010/109. These were installed relatively early on.
Figure 28 (left): Anchors on the Effendi Hotel are
camoflaged to look like kurkar.

22. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 22
Figure 29 (above) 30 (below) Cement mortar* is present in several places along Louis IX St., particu-
larly near electrical boxes.

23. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 23
Figure 31 (above) 32 (below): Cement patches* (circled in red) appear to be attempt to stop stone degra-
dation with material that ultimately accelerates deterioration. Two kinds are present in this photo - black in
the upper left concealed in the bottom right. The black cement appears to be much more destructive.

24. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 24
Figure 33 (above) 34 (below): Lime mortar of good quality from the facade of the Effendi Hotel.

25. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 25
Fig 35 (up) and 36 (down) pinkish mortar with large ceramic inclusions near the tunnel. While appearing
to be of appropriate composition, it is quite soft and comes out as dust when rubbed and warrents regular
inspection. Mortar was improperly mixed - bricks not pulverized enough mix was dehydrated too much.

26. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 26
Figure 37: In absence of mortar, expedient adhesives and wooden slats* (circled in blue) are sometimes
used to stabilize stones. These do not protect the stones from water and salts.
Conclusions Regarding Previous Interventions
Initial conclusions are fairly inconclusive, albeit mostly encouraging:
• Many conservation efforts within the block are too recent to properly evaluate. However...
• The buildings with the worst facade quality are generally those that have not previously undergone con-
servation. This shows that interventions are working - so far.
• Black cement is by far the most destructive intervention, as well as one of the most pervasive. It is prob-
ably an older cement mix. Large segments of walls can be pointed with it, and decaying stones are covered
with it. Of course, this patching and pointing only accelerates loss of the original material and should be
chiselled away, followed by repointing and stone replacement (if the latter is required).

27. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 27
Intervention
Short-Term Goals:
• Create standards best practices for follow-up surveys in historic areas.
• Upgrade views for people on the streets.
Long-Term Goals:
• Help develop long-term, lower-cost solutions for building conservation problems through additional data.
• Allow for better conservation planning implemenation in Block 10, Old Acre, and ultimately other IAA
projects in Israel through monitoring surveys.
• Improve quality of life for residents, business owners, and employees in Old Acre.
What’s needed:
• Meetings between stakeholders in Block 10 to create best practices.
• Consistent scheduling and budgeting for monitoring surveys. Monitoring should be worked into plans and
budgets from the start of projects.
• A training or grants program for residents?
• Improved organization of conservation data for buildings (who/what/where/when/why/how) - preferably
digitized and searchable.
Order/Stages:
1. Survey roofs atop and adjacent to tunnel, bridge house, buttress for areas of pooling after rains. Spend
time on second floor facades, and interiors if at all possible.
2. Clear out vegetation, repoint, and waterproof topside. Repair drainage pipes and redirect water to resolve
the drainage issues along Louis IX Street’s Southern third.
3. Have a meeting with the Municipal Engineer’s office, encouraging them to install electrical infrastruc-
ture with lime mortar in the future.
4. Remove concrete mortar from walls near electrical boxes and repoint with lime mortar. Paint the boxes a
less obvious color so they stick out less.
5. Correct the drainage issues in Kikar Tawfesh through coordination with the Municipal Engineer’s office.
6. Increase collaboration and information-sharing with the Municipal Engineer’s office, the OADC, Uri
Jeremias, the Baha’i, and local residents for building conservation materials and techniques.
Materials/Tools Needed for Survey:
• Good-quality camera
• Booms and clamps for camera
• Ladders
• Harnesses
• Hard hats
• Something for determining slopes
Materials/Tools Needed for Implemenation
• Additional data
• Repointing supplies
• Documentation of implementation
• Building files from IAAAkko office

28. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 28
Maintenance
Ultimately, this project should be a part of the management plan for Block 10. The 5-color survey system
used in this report should be reasonably quick and easy for a trained conservator to perform.
The Southern bridge houses and arch on Louis IX Street should be addressed due to its status as an eyesore
and potential structural hazard. Vegetation should be cleared; stones and mortar should be replaced. How-
ever, those things are only treating the symptoms - the problem is drainage from roofs. Workers should go
up to the roofs after a rain and survey for problems before correcting them. I spotted some broken drainage
pipes from the street, but I’m sure there is more going on there.
In Kikar Tawfesh, there are two problems - the Wind Tunnel and street water draining into buildings along
the square’s Northern side. The only solution to the wind tunnel is regular repointing - which IS being
done. Solving the drainage problem can only be done with repaving the street or adding some sort of sacri-
ficial layer to direct water away from the buildings.
Electrical boxes are ubiquitous in the Old City - often, there are several on one building, multiple dwell-
ings, or if some are no longer in use. Nearly all were put in with concrete mortar, knocking out a stone or
two below the box to install wires. However, this work was done with a lighter concrete mortar than the
black stuff used to patch stones along Louis IX Street, which (as yet) does not appear to damage the stone
- except in cases where the installation site coincides with additional problems such as wind, drainage, or
black cement. The Eastern facade of 010/78 is a good example of this situation.
Figure 38 (above): Protruding Eastern facade of building 010/78. Electrical boxes are circled in green, ar-
eas of severe stone damage loss are circled in red. Multiple destructive forces are converging here - the
square draining into the side of the building, water dripping from the roof, large amount of concrete be-
tween stones, lime mortar pointed over concrete and subsequently being lost, etc. Photo credit David Zell.

29. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 29
Figures 39 (left) 40 (below-left): Additional pho-
tos of corners on the same building.

30. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 30
1 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 13
10
12
14
15
16
17
11
18
19
2021
22
23
24
25
26
27
29
30
31
32
35
36
37
38
39
40 41
28
3334
43 42
Figure 41 (Left): Map of
Block 10 showing location of
electrical boxes (in large, red
numbers) along HaBaha’im
Street. Notably, NO BOXES
were found facing HaHaga-
nah - this is good planning for
maintaning historic views.
Figures 42 43 (below):
Examples of electrical boxes
installed with concrete and
potentially aggravating dam-
age to the stones present.

31. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 31
Appendix: Instructions for “5-color” Survey technique.
Supplies needed:
• Blank map of survey area.
• Something to add colors to the map (blue/green/yellow/orange/red). This color scheme is immediately
recognizable to people.
• Digital camera to catalog damage (especially problem areas)
This survey should only be undertaken by a trained person familiar with the materials that are to be stud-
ied, or at least someone who has been working with the materials for a long period of time and can recog-
nize patterns of deterioration specific to the material.
Survey area should have a literature search conducted before walkthrough, in order to see what buildings
were conserved. If survey will take multiple days, it should ideally be done with lighting at similar angles,
to facilitate consistent, good photography of damaged areas.
Pedestrian survey results should specify what forms and standards of deterioration are being evaluated in
the report. If a specific scale has not been created for the setting material, create one from notes taken
during the survey. In general -
• Blue areas should either have no damage or be stable (from a conservation perspective) for the forseeable
future. Alternately, they may have just been conserved or restored - surveyor should note as such.
• Green areas are identical to blue, except that they don’t look as good.
• Yellow areas should be those that require monitoring, rather than intervention. Damage mostly reflects
issues with appearance, but could grow more serious over time without a good monitoring schedule
• Orange areas have gone beyond monitoring or maintenance; however, the intervention required will not
demand significant investment.
• Red areas will need significant resources committed to resolution of problems, possibly including but not
limited to expert personnel, costly or rare materials, multiple days labor, etc, etc.

32. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 32
Appendix 2: Sample monitoring survey documentation system
Name of Location:
GIS Coordinations:
Address:
Owner of Structure:
Name of Inspector:
Inspecting Organization:
Date(s) of Monitoring Survey:
Supervising Conservator:
Organization Responsible:
Dates of Previous Conservation:
Problems before conservation:
Suspected cause(s) of problems:
Condition of Stones:
Use IAA glossary, as well a 5-color scale
Condition of Mortar:
Condition of other Material(s):
List other materials if present
Problems found during conservation:
Unsolved problems after conservation:
Attach the following to this form if available:
• General photo
• Close-up photo
• 3d model
• List of works consulted
Attach this form and accompanying documents to existing information about the structure.

33. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 33
Works Consulted
Adorni, Elisa Giampiero Venturelli
2010 Mortars and Stones of the Damascus Citadel (Syria)
International Journal of Architectural Heritage: Conservation, Analysis, and Restoration, 4:4, 337-50
Abu Al Haija, Ahmed H.
2012 Jordan: Guidelines for Urban and Architectural Heritage Conservation: Umm Qais Case Study.
International Journal of Architectural Heritage: Conservation, Analysis, and Restoration, 6:1, 62-85.
Al-Taie, Entidhar, Nadhir Al-Ansari, Sven Knutsson
2012 Progress of Buildings Style and Materials from the Ottoman and British Occupations of Iraq, the
Journal of Earth Sciences and Geotechnical Engineering, 2:2, 39-49 Scienpress Ltd.
Aras, Fuat
2010 Damage Assessment and Mortar Identification in Beylerbeyi Palace
Gazi University Journal of Science GU J Sci 23(2): 211-26
Arıoglu, N. and S. Acun
2006 Research about a method for restoration of traditional lime mortars and plasters:
A staging system approach. Building and Environment 41 (2006) 1223–30. : Science Direct.
Burian, S.J., S.J.Nix, S.R. Durrans, R.E. Pitt, C.-Y. Fan, and R. Field.
1999 Historical Development of Wet-Weather Flow Management.”
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 125(1): 3-11.
Butler, D. and Davies, J.W.
2000 Urban drainage. London: E. F.N. Spon .
Davis, James
2013 Documentation and Conservation of the Southwest Facade of the International
Conservation Center. Unpublished manuscript. Akko, Israel: International Conservation Center.
Disli, Gulsen, Ayse Tavukcuoglu, Levent Tosun, Ermanno Grinzato.
2008 Assessment of Roof Drainage System of a Historical Turkish Bath: Sengul Hammam, the.
Paper presented at 11DBMC International Conference on Durability of Building Materials and
Components. Istanbul, Turkey 11th-14th May.
Echavarri, Mikhail
2013 Streamlining the Documentation Process.
Unpublished manuscript. Akko, Israel: International Conservation Center.
Ersen, Ahmet, Erol Gürdal, Ahmet Güleç, Nilüfer Baturayoğlu Yöney, Işıl Polat Pekmezcï, İrem Verdön
2010 An Evaluation of Binders and Aggregates Used in Artificial Stone Architectural Claddings and
Elements in late 19th-early 20th Centuries METU JFA 27:2, 207-21
Elsen, Jan, Koenraad Van Balen, Gilles Mertens
2012 Hydraulicity in Historic Lime Mortars: A Review

34. Block 10 Follow-Up
Page 34
in J. Válek et al. (eds.), Historic Mortars: Characterisation, Assessment and Repair
Fitzner, Bernd Kurt Heinrichs
2002 Damage Diagnosis on Stone Monuments – Weathering Forms, Damage Categories and Damage
Indices. Unpublished manuscript. Aachen Geological Institute, Aachen University of Technology.
Gambirasi, Arianna Davide Melica
2007 City of Akko, Israel: Diagnostic Investigation of on Samples of Mortar Plaster.
Venice: Istituto Veneto per i Beni Culturali
Güleç, Ahmet Tülay Tulun
1996 Studies of Old Mortars and Plasters from the Roman, Byzantine, and Ottoman Period of Anatolia
Architectural Science Review, 39:1, 3-13
Hill, D.
1984 A History of Engineering in Classical and Medieval Times. London: Croom Helm Ltd.
Hollander, Amy Suzanne
1995 Historical Development of Genoa Square in Acre Israel from the Seventh Century to the Present
Day, the. Master’s Thesis, Historic Preservation Program, University of Pennsylvania.
İpekoğlu, Başak, Hasan Böke, Özlem Çizer
2007 Assessment of material use in relation to climate in historical buildings
Building and Environment 42, 970–8. : Elsevier
Israeli Antiquities Authority
1994 Beit Vitzo (WIZO/Women’s International Zionist Organization)
Tiktiyut - unpublished draft copy. Old Akko Development Company.
Israel Antiquities Authority, Conservation Department
2007 ‫לאבן‬ ‫מונחים‬ ‫מילון‬ (Conservation Manual for Stone)
Kesten, Alex
1993 The Old City of Acre: Re-Examination Report. Jerusalem: Prime Minister’s office,
Department for Landscaping and the Preservation of Historic Sites.
Keypour, Hafez, Yasin M. Fahjan, Ali Bayraktar
Analysis and Strengthening Methods for Historical Masonry Structures
Macedo, N’zinga de Andrade
2010 Research for Historic Mortars and their Durability, in the Old City of Akko
Unpublished Manuscript, Akko: Saving the Stones
Makhouly, Naim Johns, C.N.
1946 Guide to Acre. 2nd Edition. Jerusalem: Government of Palestine, Department of Antiquities.
Middendorf, B., J.J Hughes, K. Callebaut, G. Baronio, and I. Papayianni
2005 Investigative methods for the characterisation of historic mortars- Part 1:

35. Benjamin Cantor-Jones
Page 35
Mineralogical characterisation. Materials and Structures 38, pp 761-9. : Rilem.
Moropoulou, Antonia, Asterios Bakolas, Katerina Bisbikou
2000 Investigation of the technology of historic mortars.
Journal of Cultural Heritage 1, 45–58
Ozgunler, Mustafa and Seden Acun Ozgunler
2011 Research on Karamursel Region Volcanic Tuff as a Pozzolanic Additive in Repair Mortars Used
for Historical Buildings, a Scientific Research and Essays Vol. 6(3), 641-7. : Academic Journals
Sidwick, J.M.
1977 A Brief History of Sewage treatment. Middlesex, England: Thunderbird Enterprises, Ltd.
Stefanidou, M., I. Papayianni, an V. Pachta
2012 Evaluation of Inclusions in Mortars of Different Historical Periods from Geek Monuments
Archaeometry 54, 4. Pp. 737–51
Winter, Percy
1940 Preservation Reconstruction of Acre: Survey Report.
Government of Palestine: Public Works Department.
List of Figures:
All images credit Benjamin Cantor-Jones or the International Conservation Center unless otherwise
noted by the images.
Cover: signs in Block 10.
Figure 0:Map of Block 10 showing major pedestrian areas and routes in color.
Figure 1: Map of Block 10, showing level of stone/mortar facade quality for buildings on Louis IX St.
Figures 2 through 11: deterioration scale.
Figures 12 through 19: problems.
Figures 20 through 37: interventions.
Figures 38 through 40: corners emphasized.
Figures 41 through 43: electrical boxes emphasized.