Amid the Ruins of the 20th Century

In the 1990s media attention was drawn to the peculiar emerging trend of long abandoned nuclear missile silos being converted into unique subterranean homes. Inspired by a couple midwestern communities that converted local abandoned missile complexes into a school and small business incubator, a handful of speculators began acquiring abandoned missile silos en masse, reselling them to individuals seeking to exploit the atom-bomb-proof structures to create the ultimate survival shelters. These unusual homes were soon featured in various home improvement and architectural media and later appeared on mainstream television. This media attention, combined with growing millennial anxiety, actually inspired a real estate rush, quickly depleting the small supply of these defunct artifacts of the Cold War and driving the value of the better homes made from them into the millions of dollars.

These missile silo homes are one of the most eclectic examples of the potential of obsolete military, industrial, and commercial structures to be recycled for other uses, the most 'conventional' form of this being the well known loft housing based on recycled urban warehouse buildings. There are many other examples. Huge concrete grain silo complexes have been turned into elegant hotels and condominium buildings. Turn-of-the-last-century factories and waterfront piers have been converted into shopping malls. Obsolete railway stations have been converted into massive museums. And unusual homes have been built from just about anything -lighthouses, barns, churches, rural train stations, grain silos, old busses and railway cars, aircraft fuselages, barges and tugboats, and boat houses removed from large ships.

Considering this phenomenon, pundits of post-modernism have often suggested that the idea that any structure has a fixed function over its lifetime is itself obsolete. The nature of domestic utilities technology -the technology which enables structures to be comfortable and habitable- has long experienced a trend of increasing flexibility because of the demand for retrofit upgrade in spite of architecture designed without forethought. In other words, because most architecture is 'overdesigned' to the extent that its function and technology is often foolishly presumed to be fixed indefinitely, the manufacturers of the basic utilities technologies -the systems of plumbing, wiring, HVAC, and telecommunications- have needed to engineer their products for a certain flexibility so that the old technology original to these structures could be upgraded to meet contemporary standards. This has, inadvertently, made these technologies so flexible that they now have the capability to make virtually ANY weather resistant structure of ANY form or composition comfortably habitable. All it takes is a little ingenuity. And today this trend is not only making an increasing range of structures potentially habitable, it's also starting to make them increasingly independent of the municipal infrastructures which have traditionally limited the locations where people can comfortably live. Just like overdesigned buildings, these older infrastructure systems are simply not evolving fast enough to keep up with contemporary patterns of change and growth and, as a result, the market for domestic technology is starting to obsolesce them just like antiquated wiring or leaky old-fashioned plumbing.

There are many advantages to recycling older structures like this. Cost can be very low and often the structures are large, offering great amounts of potentially usable space at very low costs per square foot. They are often very well suited to multiple uses, such as combining business with residence. These virtues are what attracted artists to warehouse structures in the 1970s, inspiring the Lofting movement. Being already built, these structures may avoid complications with increasingly obstructive building codes, though these codes can also present barriers to reuse. (for instance, many US communities maintain a prohibition on the use of greenhouses for permanent habitation -possibly due to concerns about injuries from broken roof glass originating with 19th century greenhouses but with no apparent rationale in the present) Large clear-span structures offer extremely great flexibility for interior design, which is one of the greatest virtues of Loft housing. Often these structures are orders of magnitude more durable than that of any conventional housing, and in the case of military structures so durable that they can readily withstand the most extreme conditions nature can throw at them.

Old military, industrial, commercial, and municipal structures offer potential for reuse as non-toxic housing because of their reliance on inherently non-toxic masonry and metal materials. But, of course, how suitable they are in this role depends on their location and how they were used in their original applications. Obviously, a building used in storing or manufacturing toxic materials is likely to be completely unsuitable but one shouldn't assume that just because a building had an industrial past that this industry involved toxic materials. The more likely problems are more subtle, the most common being paints. Paints can be readily removed and replaced with other less toxic alternatives but the cost of this abatement can be very great and this may have limited success with masonry structures. It's generally a bad idea to paint any kind of masonry but that hasn't stopped it from being extremely common and, as any community with a vandalism problem knows well, it's virtually impossible to completely remove paint from these materials. This is because masonry is not completely impermeable and can readily absorb oils and other solvents. Similarly, residues of oils and fuels from vehicles and indoor stationary engines can likewise contaminate these masonry materials. Sometimes sealing is preferable to removal as an abatement strategy and a number of non-toxic masonry sealants have been developed with that idea in mind -originally intended as a means of abatement in conventional housing.

The forms of these structures varies greatly but can be categorized as several basic types. With metal structures one has either 'barns', arches, silos, or mezzanines. Barn type structures are characterized by simple very wide span frame systems, sometimes self-supporting or sometimes functioning as 'stressed skin' systems in conjuntion with corrugated metal cladding plates. I refer to them as barns because they are duplicating the basic structure of the barn using metal frames rather than wood. Arches are based on self-supporting arches of corrugated metal and usually offer only their ends for windows and doors. Silos work much like arches, relying on a mostly continuous circle of corrugated metal for structural integrity. Mezzanine frames are the same kind of framing system typical of skyscrapers and is also known as a 'ramen' structure. It is a gridded free-standing box frame which usually employs corrugated steel decking topped in concrete and exterior cladding formed of cement block or modular panels, often of light masonry or metal composites. In some cases the perimeter steel frame members will be enclosed in concrete block walls.

Adaptation of these structures usually involves stripping away paints, primitive forms of insulation, and conventional sheet-rock partitions, installing non-toxic forms of insulation and new windows and doors where desired, and replacing ducted HVAC systems with more suitable systems. Often based on prefabricated building systems, these structures do not get reused as often because they are usually destroyed completely as soon as they become obsolete for their original use -ironically even though their structural components can be readily dismantled and reused. I've often felt a sense of outrage seeing these buildings demolished, their easily demountable parts just torn up and crumpled together, seeing in my mind all the other types of structures those parts could have been made into.

Non-residential masonry structures tend to fall into the categories of brick/block wall enclosures, brick vaults, concrete shells, and concrete mezzanine systems. The brick/block wall enclosures are what the classic buildings of the industrial revolution tended to use. These were barn-like structures which used massive scale wooden post and beam frame systems with heavy wooden plank decking internally but which were enclosed on the outside by brick or block masonry walls. Often these structures were organized into bays with dividing walls or masonry arch systems between which massive deck beams would be set. Sheet metal or 'compound' roof systems were commonly used. These types of structures were largely obsolesced by metal frame structures after WWII. Brick vaults are an even older type derived from Roman building technology. They are akin to shell structures organized into barrel vault bays divided by solid walls or arch systems. They were rarely used for more than single storey structures in modern times. Similar construction was used to make cylindrical and domed forms for silos and tanks. This is a very rare type of structure, almost unknown in the US but more common in Europe. Concrete shells are basically monolithic concrete shapes which can be fabricated in a great variety of ways and can assume an infinite variety of forms. With these structures the concrete will often serve as roof, walls, and floor and they are often prefabricated in large sections or whole structure units. This is the common form for underground structures. Concrete mezzanines are essentially the same as their steel frame counterparts except that they are made out of concrete, sometimes slip-formed and sometimes built of prefabricated concrete components. These are typically enclosed in light in-fill block masonry or modular panels.

Adaptation of these masonry structures generally involves sand-blast cleaning and stripping or sealing of painted or oil contaminated surfaces, replacement of antiquated HVAC systems, and then retrofitting exterior cladding in the form of discrete windows and window-walls along with various interior furnishings. Many of these structures -particularly when underground- are already adequately insulated. Others can be insulated in a variety of fashions depending on size and shape.

The general process of recycling these old structures, of course, varies greatly with their form and composition but is generally akin to the process of adapting warehouses to loft housing. Essentially, one is treating the original structure as a simple clear-span weather shelter and little else, relying on light retrofit items to make them habitable. It is generally not cost-effective to try and modify these primary structures. One must adapt one's design of habitation to the forms imposed by them. Some very large structures present, because of their size, a problem with climate control. For instance, if one were adapting a structure as large as a big jet aircraft hangar or a gigantic factory building it simply wouldn't be practical to try and heat that whole structure like a house. The installation of heating systems would be expensive and the energy cost impossible. So instead one uses the primary structure as a weather shelter and builds small insulated enclosures within it from light materials that would not tolerate exposure to the elements but do well to provide a controlled climate. Some large structures, though, offer low climate control cost because of a very high thermal mass afforded by being partially or wholly underground -as in the case of those missile silos whose owners have often boasted how a single woodstove could keep the whole thing toasty warm in winter.

Perhaps the most expensive thing to adapt in these structures is very large window openings. Sometimes one is dealing with structures that have no windows in a conventional sense, only a few very large openings. Other structures may be mere skeletons; a stack of decks on columns with nothing that constitutes 'walls' except for the remnants of metal plate skins or light masonry panels. And most challenging of all, some structures may have no possible window openings at all, having only door openings. In the case of large window openings we now have a number of interesting non-toxic options. One is commercial glazing systems, both framed and unframed planar glass systems, which can be mounted into any opening that offers at least two edges for a rigid connection. Insulated glass can be expensive with these systems so it's often more practical to use translucent panels composed of other cheaper materials, like corrugated acrylic panel or sheet polyester which can be made into a novel form of insulated translucent window by filling the gap between sheets with recycled PET fiber -also a potentially good alternative to cotton as filler in non-toxic furniture. Opaque panels of most any kind of material with also fit in with these modular framing systems. Glass block is another option well suited to masonry structures, though in America this theoretically economical and once very commonly used product has become high-priced. With large open sided stacked structures it does not pay to try and enclose and heat/cool the whole structure. It is more practical to enclose just the necessary spaces one needs, in the manner of pavilion architecture.

The truly windowless structures present both a technical and psychological challenge. Free-standing structures like this -concrete silos for instance- can often accommodate modification in the form of cutting holes for modest size windows, though it is very important to understand the engineering of the structure to do this safely. But underground structures or extremely heavy bunker-like structures are a special problems. Here one would have no possibility to make window openings for external views or skylights but one can still readily bring in natural light through the use of a Japanese products called a Himawari which consists of an external light collector which pipes natural sunlight into a building via fiber optic cables. If one can learn to live without seeing the landscape outside, even these extreme structures are potentially useful. (indeed, I've even considered the seemingly outrageous idea of trying to rent space in the famous Subtopolis complex in Kansas City but feared the routine truck traffic in that vast underground complex would make it intolerable)

rock roof concept

I first explored the concept of recycled structures when considering the adaptation of natural caves into homes. Noting the versatility and visual elegance of planar glass wall systems, I realized that most any dry rock overhang or cave could make a very beautiful home simply by enclosing it with these window walls and constructing mezzanine decks or using poured concrete to make a level floor that could accommodate hydronic heating. The high termal mass of the rock would offer fair thermal efficiency despite large window expanses and if situated right one could readily exploit passive solar heating. The problem with this idea, though, is that finding such natural spaces is a matter of providence. Since so few people have ever done things like this, real estate agents don't 'deal in' caves as real estate. Indeed, it's rather rare that one can get any information on the specifics of property landscape or geology from real estate agents. It's simply not considered relevant.

It was with the intent of expanding the range of 'found' non-toxic structures that I began to explore the various obsolete man-made structures. I already knew the history of the Lofting Movement and it was obvious to me that the same strategy could apply to more types of structures. When I learned about the trend in missile silo adaptations I was imediately interested but after some investigation I found that there were some unique problems with those structures. The most obvious problem with them was that, thanks to the media attention the trend received, demand far exceeded supply and it soon became clear that all the 'good' missile silos were gone. What was left? Silos which were largely useless because the military had been treating them as toxic waste dumps for many decades. The US military has a bad habit of ignoring their responsibilities as toxic materials users and once obsolete many missile silos were exploited as convenient waste dumping grounds that, thanks to Cold War security restrictions, could be kept beyond the scrutiny of the EPA. And even when not used as dumping grounds, the toxic remnants of their original application -asbestos and fuel residues in particular- were just never cleaned up. It soon became apparent that most of the success stories associated with missile silos were the product of large but overlooked (by the media and resellers) investments. For most people these structures just weren't cost effective.

Other military structures are more promising. Recycling steel quonset huts after WWII was very common because they were relatively easy to dismantle and transport. Few of these can be found on US military bases today but recently a large cache of porcelain coated steel panel Lustron homes was found on a military base in Virginia. Masonry structures, of course, will only be found in facilities abandoned by the military altogether since they aren't demountable. Most of these are either Cold War or pre-WWII artifacts since the US military -due to the fact that the US has no modern history of invasion- has tended to favor lighter non-armored structures.

Industrial, commercial, and municipal structures offer many more prospects than military structures since there are so many more of them to begin with. But there are far fewer to be found in the rural areas that offer low pollution. The most likely prospects are to be found in boom-towns gone bust, mining facilities, agricultural processing and collection centers, telecommunications installations, abandoned railway facilities, (consider culverts and concrete bridges used to span dry gulches) and abandoned tourist attractions. (even an old swimming pool could be made into housing with a little ingenuity) There is even some possibility of the ruins of one kind of residence being used to make another. Unlike in Europe, the relics of the American Gilded Age garnered less respect and many rural areas -particularly on the East Coast- are littered with the rotting remains of abandoned estates and mansions. Most of these offer no prospect of recycling because they lacked the quality of construction of their European counterparts. But because the American upper-class has often been the first adopters of new architecture some of these relics were built with slip-formed and ferro-cement construction, creating very resilient non-toxic primary structures with potential for recycling.

Unfortunately, after lengthy study of this concept I was forced to realize that there was one critical problem with this idea. Just like the caves I first considered, the availability of recyclable structures in low-pollution areas is purely providential and real estate agents don't deal in these things. It really takes locals with inside knowledge of a region to lead one to these unique opportunities and that seemed unlikely to me. So while the potential for this concept is very great, the odds of finding these things in exactly the right location and in exactly the right condition to serve the needs of economical non-toxic housing are very poor.