|
Post by EXO on Oct 29, 2019 8:15:52 GMT 8
29 Oct 2019
Jayveemdr of Quezon City has joined us with a view to prompting a conversation about Fort Drum's "Adaptive Reuse." Lest he not be misunderstood, an examination of adaptive reuse is a genuine learning exercise for students of architecture and the built environment. It's theoretical, and partly designed to tease the thinking and creative analysis processes. I will let him introduce himself:
|
|
|
Post by EXO on Oct 29, 2019 8:31:28 GMT 8
V154. This is the stbd set of steps, coming down from the upper interior berthing deck and we are looking forward, standing on the mess deck. These, steps, port and stbd are attached to the after 14 inch turret, Battery John M. Wilson. Below these steps are the magazine spaces and above them is the Hospital Deck. This is 2009-08-14 photo from Karl Welteke. Hello Jayveemdr, Hopefully by now you will have found the Concrete Battleship section of our Forum. There are a lot more people interested in Ft. Drum than have ever been there, because it's not just costly to get there, even getting there doesn't guarantee getting aboard. On two occasions I've paid to get out there, and not been able to get on board, as the approach was difficult because of a changing tide, or choppy waters. Approaching Drum in a banca in choppy waters risks severe damage to the craft, and the swim home is a long way. A few years back, there had been talk about funding it as a maritime safety or security facility or some such, though all that seemed to happen was that even more of its contents disappeared. That's its fate, what's there is open game for thieves. As my adaptive reuse of an old joke goes, "Everything on Ft. Drum is stolen, they just haven't picked it up yet." There was even some controversy over photographs taken by visitors being published, as they evidenced the deterioration of the interior by the scrappers through the recent years. This seemed to be an embarrassment to those whose responsibility might be thought of as including prevention of further scrapping. They seemed to be more enraged by foreign photographers than by local scrap metal thieves. For a while, visits there were prohibited. That's the reality, for as much as anyone would like to imagine a reuse for Drum, it suffers from a number of very harsh realities which are impossible to overcome. Nothing about Drum is that important to support the cost of refurbishment or reuse. I would hazard a guess that for every ten thousand tourists who visit Corregidor, maybe only ten would go to Drum. It is age which has destroyed it physically. It is the scrappers who have destroyed its utility, because they have removed most all of the interior support columns. It is the tourists who fund the bancas. That the decks haven't collapsed is a testimony to their robust construction, but the place is now quite dangerous and unsafe, there's no doubt about that. ( I happen to think that people shouldn't be able to go there without signing a serious injury or death waiver.)The concept of adaptive reuse is a good teaching/learning exercise for architecture and built environment students, but the reality is that in Ft. Drum's case, it's an exercise in blue sky imagination because of the cost and the impossibility of a return on investment. That being said, enjoy your research and adapt away!
|
|
|
Post by EXO on Oct 31, 2019 12:57:03 GMT 8
This may be a little off our usual track, but it is determinative of many efforts to preserve historic and heritage buildings. It may, indeed, condemn some historic buildings that may otherwise have been thought viable. In the past, I have often hoped that there would be some factor which would make Ft. Drum more of a tourist attraction. I was day dreaming. In those days, I didn't know anything about asbestos. Something that can absolutely prevent any form of adaptive reuse is the possible contamination by asbestos. From as early as the 1900s, asbestos was used to make concrete less permeable and less likely to crack. Asbestos was considered a good fiber reinforcement since it was inexpensive, readily available, and easily blended into the concrete mix. Spotting asbestos in concrete products can be difficult. Since the fibers were evenly distributed throughout the concrete mixture and are now set in the hardened matrix, they cannot be seen with the naked eye. Unlike tiles or wallboard that may show wispy asbestos fibers as they disintegrate, concrete products do not show asbestos when broken. I am not a professional, and so I cannot determine whether Ft. Drum was built of concrete containing any asbestos mix. Professional testing would be needed to confirm the presence (or absence) of asbestos before any work is performed on potentially asbestos-contaminated concrete. Anyone visiting Ft. Drum today would be wise to assume the presence of asbestos in Drum's interior spaces, and act accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by jayveedr on Oct 31, 2019 13:17:46 GMT 8
V154. This is the stbd set of steps, coming down from the upper interior berthing deck and we are looking forward, standing on the mess deck. These, steps, port and stbd are attached to the after 14 inch turret, Battery John M. Wilson. Below these steps are the magazine spaces and above them is the Hospital Deck. This is 2009-08-14 photo from Karl Welteke. ____________________________ Hello Jayveemdr, Hopefully by now you will have found the Concrete Battleship section of our Forum. There are a lot more people interested in Ft. Drum than have ever been there, because it's not just costly to get there, even getting there doesn't guarantee getting aboard. On two occasions I've paid to get out there, and not been able to get on board, as the approach was difficult because of a changing tide, or choppy waters. Approaching Drum in a banca in choppy waters risks severe damage to the craft, and the swim home is a long way. ____________________________ Hello! I am planning to go to the fort soon, to get a feel of what it feels like to be "aboard" the ship, also to see the view FROM the ship. How far apart were your attempts to get on board? And were you from Ternate or from Corregidor?
____________________________ A few years back, there had been talk about funding it as a maritime safety or security facility or some such, though all that seemed to happen was that even more of its contents disappeared. That's its fate, what's there is open game for thieves. ____________________________ This is interesting, where were these talks from and where did you find out about it? I've been thinking about possible uses for the aforementioned "adaptive reuse" of the fort, as a war memorial, museum, or an important navy and coast guard outpost as it lies at the mouth of Manila Bay, and can serve as an effective gateway into the capital. (Maybe bit of all)____________________________ As my adaptive reuse of an old joke goes, "Everything on Ft. Drum is stolen, they just haven't picked it up yet." ____________________________ ____________________________ There was even some controversy over photographs taken by visitors being published, as they evidenced the deterioration of the interior by the scrappers through the recent years. This seemed to be an embarrassment to those whose responsibility might be thought of as including prevention of further scrapping. They seemed to be more enraged by foreign photographers than by local scrap metal thieves. For a while, visits there were prohibited. That's the reality, for as much as anyone would like to imagine a reuse for Drum, it suffers from a number of very harsh realities which are impossible to overcome. Nothing about Drum is that important to support the cost of refurbishment or reuse. I would hazard a guess that for every ten thousand tourists who visit Corregidor, maybe only ten would go to Drum. ____________________________ I've readfrom US Engineer reports that the annual cost for maintenance of just the fort (drum) itself cost $25M USD in 1914, and, a quick google conversion brought that to about $628M USD, though I'm not sure if I have interpreted the data correctly, but sad to know that the fort now suffers from scrappers, who sell the scrap for roughly Php 17/kg (quick google: $0.33 USD/kg)____________________________ It is age which has destroyed it physically. It is the scrappers who have destroyed its utility, because they have removed most all of the interior support columns. It is the tourists who fund the bancas. That the decks haven't collapsed is a testimony to their robust construction, but the place is now quite dangerous and unsafe, there's no doubt about that. ____________________________ I agree, section views of the fort appear show 11 meter thick reinforced concrete walls and 7 meter thick roof of the same build, the interior floors would collapse but the shell will remain D:____________________________ ( I happen to think that people shouldn't be able to go there without signing a serious injury or death waiver.)The concept of adaptive reuse is a good teaching/learning exercise for architecture and built environment students, but the reality is that in Ft. Drum's case, it's an exercise in blue sky imagination because of the cost and the impossibility of a return on investment. ____________________________ If blowing it up the only solution during the war then I could just hope that the fort served its cost during the time it was in allied control, but now it could serve as an icon, a symbol of the last stand of Philippines, perhaps as I have mentioned, akin to the Colossus of Rhodes, or the Statue of Liberty, it could be some sort of sentinel, a guardian into the bay, a smaller statue of liberty where the lighthouse(?)/watchtower(?) used to be (it is 2/3 the size of liberty), with a museum beneath.
|
|
|
Post by jayveedr on Oct 31, 2019 13:44:41 GMT 8
This may be a little off our usual track, but it is determinative of many efforts to preserve historic and heritage buildings. It may, indeed, condemn some historic buildings that may otherwise have been thought viable. In the past, I have often hoped that there would be some factor which would make Ft. Drum more of a tourist attraction. I was day dreaming. In those days, I didn't know anything about asbestos. Something that can absolutely prevent any form of adaptive reuse is the possible contamination by asbestos. From as early as the 1900s, asbestos was used to make concrete less permeable and less likely to crack. Asbestos was considered a good fiber reinforcement since it was inexpensive, readily available, and easily blended into the concrete mix. Spotting asbestos in concrete products can be difficult. Since the fibers were evenly distributed throughout the concrete mixture and are now set in the hardened matrix, they cannot be seen with the naked eye. Unlike tiles or wallboard that may show wispy asbestos fibers as they disintegrate, concrete products do not show asbestos when broken. I am not a professional, and so I cannot determine whether Ft. Drum was built of concrete containing any asbestos mix. Professional testing would be needed to confirm the presence (or absence) of asbestos before any work is performed on potentially asbestos-contaminated concrete. Anyone visiting Ft. Drum today would be wise to assume the presence of asbestos in Drum's interior spaces, and act accordingly. Pretending that asbestos doesn't exist, I am interested to know how, or what images have you thought for Fort Drum that would or you think could make it a viable tourist attraction? Is it similar to the monuments I've mentioned? Something more of a fantasy? Realistic? Anything at all
|
|
|
Post by EXO on Nov 1, 2019 10:00:18 GMT 8
Jayveedr, Our groups have only ever boarded Drum by taking the banca from Corregidor. This was because Corregidor had been our primary study visit, and accommodation. Ft. Drum is generally on the bucket list of anyone seriously interested in Coastal Defense or the history of WWII in the Philippines. My initial visit was 2002, with others in 2006 and 2009, I think. So I haven't been there for ten years. You can follow the "Years of Neglect" from the index HERE. Many people don't take asbestos contamination seriously. It's something that I have had to deal with obliquely in the course of my consulting. In the Philippines, it's not something that people are even generally aware of. Suffice it to say, if asbestos were to be confirmed on Drum, by all building, work, health and safety standards applicable in the EU, US and Australia, no permits to work would (or should) be allowed there, no company would (or should) provide insurance for work to be carried on there, and no bank would (or should) finance it. It is unlikely I will revisit Drum, though not because of asbestos, of course. If you are wondering how long you can be exposed to asbestos before it becomes harmful, the truth is that there is no "safe" level of asbestos exposure. Asbestos can cause cancer and chronic respiratory diseases after any asbestos fibers are inhaled or ingested. Generally, these diseases take a long time to develop after exposure, with symptoms appearing anywhere between 10 to 80 years later. So while no exposure to asbestos fibers is considered safe, the news is that most everyone of my age (mid 60's) dies of something else, rather than of Mesothelioma. I haven't envisaged any modern use of Drum, except in its present, abandoned and miserable state. My thoughts at the time were generally about how it might be made into a safer place for tourists to board. (Tourism doesn't work to profit if the only people who visit are young males in good physical condition, it requires safe access for every physical type.) On each visit, we had great difficulty boarding. I recall that on one visit, Ron Benadero had to swim to drum and climb the concrete wall before a rope could be thrown to him. Bancas are unsuitable, and IMHO, a single hull launch (which is better) should have a boarding ladder with a steel ring affixed to the bow, both to be placed over a pipe on the sally port, and to hold the boat away from potential damage. I gave up on the idea entirely, some years back. None of this matters for the learning process for adaptive reuse of old buildings, though. But in your analysis, you should be examining the issue, and you may end up being one of the experts in the field. Bottom line? I wouldn't espouse any use of Drum unless a reputable and licenced consulting company specializing in HAZMAT and workplace safety certified it.
|
|
|
Post by cbuehler on Nov 6, 2019 7:59:05 GMT 8
Jayveemdr, Having been one of the last of our members (perhaps THE last) to explore and report on Ft. Drum in 2012, I can confirm the perilous state of condition. Unless this has been changed, it has also been off limits to visitors since about that time, which is just as well. We never considered the possibility of Asbestos contamination, but unfortunately it most likely is contaminated to some degree, although this is a mute point now in my opinion. The interior was absolutely not safe to rummage about in, Asbestos or not, but of course our enthusiasm to explore overruled this! Large sections of the flooring on the different levels had collapsed, including stairways. The bottom level is flooded and it also contains live ammunition for the guns strewn about on the lower level mostly buried by collapsed structure.I can only surmise that it has become even worse during the past 7 years, both from scavengers and inevitable decay. I cannot envisage any way to salvage it to a degree that would make it safe to visit.
CB PS If I might add this; even though the exterior walls and top appear to be still strong, the internal and external explosions Ft. Drum endured during the war have undoubtedly caused fractures throughout the structure that are not immediately visible. This alone would condemn it for restoration, not to mention the degradation and damage over time. I have to admire your interest in this wonderful piece of history and wish that it could be saved!
|
|
|
Post by jayveedr on Nov 7, 2019 12:29:34 GMT 8
My thoughts at the time were generally about how it might be made into a safer place for tourists to board. (Tourism doesn't work to profit if the only people who visit are young males in good physical condition, it requires safe access for every physical type.) On each visit, we had great difficulty boarding. I recall that on one visit, Ron Benadero had to swim to drum and climb the concrete wall before a rope could be thrown to him. Bancas are unsuitable, and IMHO, a single hull launch (which is better) should have a boarding ladder with a steel ring affixed to the bow, both to be placed over a pipe on the sally port, and to hold the boat away from potential damage. I gave up on the idea entirely, some years back. None of this matters for the learning process for adaptive reuse of old buildings, though. But in your analysis, you should be examining the issue, and you may end up being one of the experts in the field. Bottom line? I wouldn't espouse any use of Drum unless a reputable and licenced consulting company specializing in HAZMAT and workplace safety certified it. Based on everything you have said, it is highly unlikely to be renovated, as such, Theoretically.. Do you think boarding ladders on boats, both on bangkas and single hulls, along with the previously existing quay would be sufficient enough regarding the matter of getting onto the fort? Also, how about anchoring on the side without a quay: A replica of the American boat with the siege tower used to board the fort as part of an immersion when getting into the fort? Would this provide the intended immersion or would it be in bad taste?
|
|
|
Post by jayveedr on Nov 7, 2019 16:25:48 GMT 8
Jayveemdr, Having been one of the last of our members (perhaps THE last) to explore and report on Ft. Drum in 2012, I can confirm the perilous state of condition. Unless this has been changed, it has also been off limits to visitors since about that time, which is just as well. We never considered the possibility of Asbestos contamination, but unfortunately it most likely is contaminated to some degree, although this is a mute point now in my opinion. The interior was absolutely not safe to rummage about in, Asbestos or not, but of course our enthusiasm to explore overruled this! Large sections of the flooring on the different levels had collapsed, including stairways. The bottom level is flooded and it also contains live ammunition for the guns strewn about on the lower level mostly buried by collapsed structure.I can only surmise that it has become even worse during the past 7 years, both from scavengers and inevitable decay. I cannot envisage any way to salvage it to a degree that would make it safe to visit. CB PS If I might add this; even though the exterior walls and top appear to be still strong, the internal and external explosions Ft. Drum endured during the war have undoubtedly caused fractures throughout the structure that are not immediately visible. This alone would condemn it for restoration, not to mention the degradation and damage over time. I have to admire your interest in this wonderful piece of history and wish that it could be saved! Thank you! And thank you for sharing your story However, given that if budget and resources are not issues, as I've asked EXO previously, how would you imagine and envision a re-use for such building? Being the Fort Drum, what future use do you see for it? what and who for? from fantasy to realistic, without limitations
|
|
|
Post by cbuehler on Nov 8, 2019 1:45:38 GMT 8
The best I think to hope for would perhaps have it designated an historical monument to be protected. Have its approaches sealed off somehow to prevent scavengers and fisherman etc., from getting in and on it would certainly help. Sealing off the two sally ports alone would achieve this. Some kind of water barrier around it? Perhaps have it illuminated at night as a monument in Manila bay to seen for miles around.
CB
|
|