Passing Permanence:
Reversible Building Practices in the U.S.
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture at Lawrence Technological University. 2023
Aaron Baldwin
Thesis Committee:
Scott Shall, RA, Thesis Committee Chair
Assoc. Prof. Daniel L. Faoro, RA, M.Arch. UD.
Assist. Prof. Sara Codarin, M.Arch, Ph.D.
Scott Shall, RA, Thesis Committee Chair
Assoc. Prof. Daniel L. Faoro, RA, M.Arch. UD.
Assist. Prof. Sara Codarin, M.Arch, Ph.D.
The construction and demolition industries generate incredible amounts of waste through the inefficient generation and unplanned removal of permanently intentioned buildings that cannot last indefinitely. Current strategies of material construction often consume, permanently alter, or degrade materials being used, resulting in the inability to wholly reuse valuable building components. Instead of planning for reuse, existing unused structures will often become waste, or require resource intensive recycling or remanufacturing to salvage portions of material (USEPA 2018).
Buildings are not permanent. The current lack of life-cycle design and expectation for buildings to last indefinitely leads to a loss of “technical nutrient” potential (Braungart 2002). Sustainability, as the ability to maintain a process over time, can be achieved through the reduction of waste, the continued reuse of materials and the support of their longevity. To recapture the potential of a building and remove the ecologically harmful effects of permanence that occur after the building is no longer needed, the production, construction, use and demolition of architecture should ‘leave minimal trace’ on its building materials and site.
A current lack of reversible and circular practice in the US exists due to many existing social, cultural and economic factors. Initial reversible architecture located in the US will not be made out of newly appeared components, but existing standardized materials joined in newly reversible methods.
Architecture should not be destructive. An architecture that leaves minimal trace does not have to employ highly engineered componentry and new modular solutions that restrict design outcomes, but rather can modify existing techniques and tectonic understandings to remove wasteful practices that intentionally degrade or destroy material resources. Minimal trace architecture simultaneously upholds the health of its materiality through the redefinition of connection types while supporting its site and larger context through the removal of systemic inefficiencies and unnecessary permanently-intended change.
