I believe one of the biggest challenges facing rail preservation is to get most of the equipment that has been saved out of the weather. Paint only lasts a few years, and those who presently have the energy and enthusiasm to apply it are aging, with fewer replacements coming along. Wooden equipment is especially vulnerable, though Strasburg's "cocooning" methods of saving derelict wooden cars appear to work well.

New buildings or even roofed shelters are expensive, requiring a lot of fundraising, which is harder to do now than it was. Thus, I wonder how many organizations have used materials from buildings being demolished to construct shelter for the equipment they are preserving?

Every day, it seems, older shopping centers, malls, mini-malls, supermarkets, gas stations and big box stores are being razed to make way for new construction. From what I've seen, most of the buildings are simply reduced to rubble and end up in the landfill. Yet there would seem to be some materials, like roof trusses and steel beams, lighting fixtures and so on, that could be reused, saving lots of money for those who could use it.

It's much easier, of course, to pay someone else to construct a building or shelter, but for many groups this is out of their budget. Also, it is cheaper for the construction company to simply smash everything with a big excavator and haul it off. Taking buildings apart piece by piece takes longer, so a salvage agreement would need to be in place with the owners before the destruction took place, yet it doesn't seem impossible, considering some corporations seek to improve their public image.

Some recent programs on National Public Radio have highlighted such practice. In one, a non-profit organization helping hurricane battered villages in Central America has made deals with construction companies and building owners to allow them to come in and strip doomed structures. They then load the materials into banana containers which would otherwise return empty, saving transportation costs. A similar program is going on in New Orleans, recycling materials from condemned houses and buildings there.

So I'm just wondering how many rail organizations have done so, and what are the examples and/or possibilities?

Brilliant line of thinking, Bob.

However, I'm inclined to think that the obstacle to this practice would be local building codes. Nobody looks too hard when you're patching the roof of an 89-year-old sharecropper's shack after a hurricane (been there, done that), but try to put up a shelter on your museum property--or better, the city-owned loco in the city park--and you will be read various "riot acts" about local building codes, quality of work, mandatory inspections, fees, permits, etc. Sure, I'd love to disassemble a roof frame and put it atop some disused telephone poles, but after all the adjustments made to satisfy inspectors, it would probably be just as expensive to go all-new.

Another line of thinking, however: Many industrial buildings are designed these days not only for ease of construction, but also of reuse/removal. Britain's Deltic Preservation Society had donated to it many years ago a former National Coal Board building that, had it been reconstructed on another property, would have offered room for six full-sized locomotives plus shop space. Ultimately, they went with another plan and sold/re-donated the building to another party. But just to expand the outside-the-box thinking..........

There would undoubtedly need to be engineering and construction plans developed and submitted, and all codes met. However, the ranks of rail enthusiasts contain numerous professionals who might have these skills and might donate their services, as might others who simply see it as helping the community. America is a wasteful society, and it seems a shame to see materials destroyed when they might be reused with a little foresight.

One example with possibilities I saw on the web a while back was this open sided shelter that appears unused at Blanca, Colorado (east of Alamosa). A photo can be found by scrolling down (way down) on this page:

http://www.trainweb.org/chris/dunes.html

If dismantled and re-erected at Antonito, it looks like it could cover a number of those cars the Friends of the C&TS have worked hard to restore.

One of the members of our museum worked at a company that was going to tear down one of their old buildings; a 60' x 100' machine shop. He asked the company if our museum could have it and they replied in the affirmative, with the restriction that it would have to be completely moved off of their property within 2 months after it was vacated. The building had been built with nuts and bolts holding the various components together (including the trusses) and museum members took it apart well within the alloted time and moved it piecemeal to the museums site. The building was not tall enough to accomodate railroad equipment so concrete posts that were 6 feet high (from ground level) were poured and the building re-erected to sit on those posts, rather than sitting on the ground as it had been at the original site. Corrugated metal then was applied to enclose this 6' space. Two openings were made in one end and custom made swinging doors were built for access. The museum ended up with its first two track shop building.

So it CAN be done!

Les Beckman (Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum/North Judson, Indiana)

Old airport hangers that are bolted together metal buildings are excellent for this purpose. Years ago while working for Middletown and Hummelstown we dismantled two hangers from the Hershey airport. I do not know if they were ever reassembled but it could have easily been done.

John Bohon

Les, did you have any local engineering or building code problems with the building or the foundations/piers?

Howard P.

Howard -

As I recall, we received a building permit from the Town of North Judson to re-erect the building on our property. And we built the forms for the concrete posts using rebar in the concrete both in-the-ground and above-ground. The museum members did all of the reconstruction. The scariest part was the first two sections that went up. The old steel posts attached to the 6' high posts, then the trusses put up on the top and the cross braces holding one to the other. We ran out of daylight that first day and attached ropes staked into the ground to keep the first two sections "tight." Fortunately, we did not have any storms or high winds that week. The following Saturday, more sections went up and with each one, the structure got stronger. We have videos as part of our "museum video collection" that documents both the disassembly of the building and the reassembly at North Judson.

Les

Les,

We started the Car Barn Three design at the Western Railway Museum with a re-cycled steel frame building. In the end we found a larger building was needed and we gave the frame to the WP Museum at Portola.

However, what really changed the amount of money needed for the project was the sprinkler system. When you dig a well, build a pump house and a water tank then things go skyhigh! Project cost doubled!

We had to do it to get the collection under shelter. Others are doing the same thing. It is called preservation.

Ted Miles

NJMT bought a building that had been torn down. Must have been about 90 by 160 feet. That was back in the 1980s and over a period of several years it was built on the new site with some help of Navy Seabees. Today it is a 4 track building, probably cost in the area of $100,000 total. In the 1990s a "car port" along one side was added so it is now 5 bays. It was a good deal but it is a process that takes vision.

Wow it's great to see others looking at older buildings and materials like I do, I always look at items in how they could be used in other than there designed or built purpose.

When I was stationed on the Pensacola Naval Air Station a couple summers ago they were in the middle of removing many of the bases older buildings to include many of the WWI era hangers, all I could think of was wow would those great open building make great museum spaces. I remember stopping and talking with one of the contractor directors and talking about a huge timber frame building they were tearing down and asked if anything was being done to rescue some of the materials. He said that the US Government has been moving more and more in the direction of GREEN remediation. He said that the Government went to extra efforts to have less and less of their "Waste" going into the ground, and credits are being given for the recycling and saving of materials. Contractors are now even encouraged to recycle the government structures. As for the Timeframe building that they were tearing down at the time a preservation group was on site removing the large timber trusses that were at least 12"x12" square and 50 or more feet long bolted together with large cast plates. In the six months I was on this base three large and I mean large hangers were torn down. I would think we might want to look to the Department of Defense (Military Bases) for older larger buildings that could be reused, given the toll of Brac (Base Relocation And Closer) efforts recently I think there could be many donor structures available around the country that could very well meet our needs. The removal of many of the structures on the Pensacola Naval Air Station were in part the result of the Hurricane damage that made there way through the area in the last couple of years.

I'm currently still working with the Navy and all over the World but when I do return home this next Fall, I plan on visiting a couple area Military bases to consider building donations. I have seen some nice structures no longer in use and they do look the part when a car or locomotive shelter is needed.

Currently taking in the Railroading and Architecture of Tokyo Japan.

Student of Industrial Design & Engineering, Virginia Tech
Working to complete a Masters in Historic Preservation, Urban Planning.

Most any structure that will be reused or recycled into some other purpose will require a substantial amount of paperwork before it can be re-erected. These costs can be large. One roundhouse restoration group I know has been quoted engineering costs to replace their roof that are as high as actually replacing the roof itself.

Considering that the roundhouse is a simple structure, built of simple materials by simple men with simple tools in a simple age (and would be kept as such, rather than adaptive reuse), this seems exhorbitant. Most flat-roof roundhouses were built to be kept warm inside, which melted snow off the roof, keeping the snow load at a minimum. The rebuilt roundhouse will not be kept warm in the winter, thus the roof must carry a heavier snowload, but engineering the new roof to carry the load is not rocket science. The roof boards must be heavier as must the supporting timbers, but it is really not much more than that. It would seem a first year engineering student (perhaps one who liked trains) could handle the job.

When public funds are involved (as in this case), more scrutiny is also, but it seems some firms are treating such restoration projects as the gold at the end of the rainbow. With that in mind, I'd like to know how others may have gotten around the problem and kept costs lower?

The only problem is the first year engineering student isn't licensed or bonded. Much of the engineering fee goes to paying the firms "errors and omissions" insurance. Basically, if the roof does fail and people are injured, someone has to pay, and pay big time. The engineer's seal on the drawings puts him at risk, and he wants to be paid to assume that risk.

I ran into something similar when I wanted to graft a high bay metal building to the back of an existing brick structure. The new wall would extend eight feet above the existing wood framed flat roof, and that required a higher snow load to account for the potential of a drift against the wall. NO ONE was willing to calculate and certify a new snow load for the existing forty year old roof, even though it was in good condition and its construction was plainly visible. Our solution was to build a new 12' wide low roof bay against the existing building, then step the roof line up. That way, the pre-engineered low bay met code for the snow load at no extra cost.

A lot of the different results in this discussion are caused by differing building codes in different areas. My advice, check with the building department before you even think about committing to taking and existing building. Then, once you have it, don't store it, erect it quickly, before the local code changes.