SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Sustainable Construction Materials and Technologies / 2025 / Volume: 10 Issue: 1

Informative integration of modern spolia in public landscapes

Deniz Üçer Erduran(BILKENT UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-7284-7209
Pages
—
Publication Date
2025-03-29
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It also offers a proposal that contributes to the community's memory through the materials of a demolished neigh- borhood structure while highlighting the importance of recovering materials from waste streams.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Spolia refers to repurposing components from older buildings into new constructions, a concept with a rich history.
📊
Key Findings & Data:When a 1970s movie theatre in Moscow, Russia, was demolished in 2019, a substantial amount of steel was recycled, while brick and concrete were sent to landfills.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It also offers a proposal that contributes to the community's memory through the materials of a demolished neigh- borhood structure while highlighting the importance of recovering materials from waste streams.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2019 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Demolition · end-of-life · repurposing

Abstract

Spolia refers to repurposing components from older buildings into new constructions, a concept with a rich history. Traditionally, unique components were the primary focus; however, this ap- proach remains relevant today for mass-produced components. By diverting materials from waste streams, spolia preserves their inherent properties and facilitates the rapid transfer of stylistic fea- tures in the modern world. When a 1970s movie theatre in Moscow, Russia, was demolished in 2019, a substantial amount of steel was recycled, while brick and concrete were sent to landfills. This study investigates potential spolia options as an alternative to demolition. The research involved documenting the building's urban and architectural context through a literature review and on-site visual documentation conducted during the demolition. This process also aimed to uncover the history related to the production and characteristics of the materials used in the building. The study focused on estimating the building's material stock and identifying the approximate quantity of reusable items to strengthen the rationale for potential spolia execution. The research emphasizes developing a design alternative that utilizes the identified materials within a public landscape. This approach includes adding data labels to inform the community about the source of the materials. The significance of this study lies in providing a valuable record of this lost building. It also offers a proposal that contributes to the community's memory through the materials of a demolished neigh- borhood structure while highlighting the importance of recovering materials from waste streams.

🔖

Cite This Article

Erduran, D. Ü. (2025). Informative integration of modern spolia in public landscapes. Journal of Sustainable Construction Materials and Technologies, Volume: 10 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.47481/jscmt.1666198

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (45)

  1. Dimaculangan, E. (2023). Current construction and demolition waste management strategies for Philippine construction sector - A systematic literature review. J Sust Constr Mater Technol, 8(1), 66-77. [CrossRef]
  2. Tiza, M. T. (2022). Sustainability in the civil engineering and construction industry: A review. J Sust Constr Mater Technol, 7(1), 30-39. [CrossRef]
  3. Heaton, M. (2016). Spolia Britannica: The historical use of salvaged building materials in Britain. In Further Studies in the History of Construction: The Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the Construction History Society (pp. 215).
  4. Plevoets, B. (2022). Heritage in fragments: On spolia and other forms of preservation of architectural fragments through reuse. J Archit Conserv, 28(3), 145-159. [CrossRef]
  5. ICOMOS. (1964). The Venice Charter. ICOMOS.
  6. Ross, S. M. (2020). Re-evaluating heritage waste: Sustaining material values through deconstruction and reuse. Hist Environ Policy Pract, 11(2-3), 382-408. [CrossRef]
  7. Arlotta, A. I. (2020). Locating heritage value in building material reuse. J Cult Herit Manag Sustain Dev, 10(1), 6-15. [CrossRef]
  8. Alchermes, J. (1994). Spolia in Roman cities of the late empire: Legislative rationales and architectural reuse. Dumbarton Oaks Pap, 48, 167-178. [CrossRef]
  9. Brenk, B. (1987). Spolia from Constantine to Charlemagne: Aesthetics versus ideology. Dumbarton Oaks Pap, 41, 103-109. [CrossRef]
  10. Payne, A. A. (1998). Creativity and bricolage in architectural literature of the Renaissance. RES: Anthropol Aesthet, 34(1), 20-38. [CrossRef]
  11. Kiilerich, B. (2005). Making sense of the spolia in the Little Metropolis in Athens. Arte medievale, 4(2), 95-114.
  12. Amateur Architecture Studio. (2008). Ningbo History Museum. https://www.chinese-architects.com/
  13. Kalakoski, I., & Huuhka, S. (2018). Spolia revisited and extended: The potential for contemporary architecture. J Mater Cult, 23(2), 187-213. [CrossRef]
  14. Brilliant, R. (2016). Epilogue Open Sesame: The art treasures of the world on call. In Reuse Value (pp. 251-254). Routledge. [CrossRef]
  15. Wharton, A. J. (2016). The Tribune Tower: Spolia as despoliation 1. In Reuse Value (pp. 179-198). Routledge.
  16. Greenhalgh, M. (2016). Spolia: A definition in ruins. In Reuse Value (pp. 75-96). Routledge.
  17. Palich, P. (2013). Cubomania. Green Mag, June, 40-46.
  18. McCarthy, T. M., & Glekas, E. E. (2020). Deconstructing heritage: Enabling a dynamic materials practice. J Cult Herit Manag Sustain Dev, 10(1), 16-28. [CrossRef]
  19. H.C. White Co. (1901). The Small Metropolis, a church built of ancient fragments, Athens, Greece. https://www.loc.gov/
  20. Hengzhong, L. (2008). Ningbo History Museum. https://www.archdaily.com/
  21. Phooey Architects. (2013). Cubo House. https://www.phooey.com.au/
  22. Ergun, D., & Gorgolewski, M. (2015). Inventorying Toronto’s single detached housing stocks to examine the availability of clay brick for urban mining. Waste Manag, 45, 180-185. [CrossRef]
  23. Axelsson, N. (2023). Value, fragment, narrative: Exploring spoliation in preserving built heritage [Master Thesis], Chalmers School of Architecture.
  24. Hebel, D. E., Wisniewska, M. H., & Heisel, F. (2014). Building from waste: Recovered materials in architecture and construction. Birkhäuser. [CrossRef]
  25. Huuhka, S., Kaasalainen, T., Hakanen, J. H., & Lahdensivu, J. (2015). Reusing concrete panels from buildings for building: Potential in Finnish 1970s mass housing. Resour Conserv Recycl, 101, 105-121. [CrossRef]
  26. Erduran, D. U. (2020). Precast block houses built in the 1950s and urban mining potential. Constr Unique Build Struct, 91, 9102.
  27. Huuhka, S., Aarikka-Stenroos, L., Lahdensivu, J., Jonker-Hoffrén, P., Arnold, V., Stenberg, E., Blok, R., Gudmundsson, K., Teuffel, P., & Mettke, A. (2023). Recreating the construction sector for circularity: Catalysing the reuse of prefabricated concrete elements. In The Routledge Handbook of Catalysts for a Sustainable Circular Economy (pp. 42-66). Routledge. [CrossRef]
  28. Ashby, J. (1999). The aluminium legacy: The history of the metal and its role in architecture. Constr Hist, 15, 79.
  29. de Campos, I. D. (2015). Rehabilitation of the [Portuguese] Traditional Heritage in conjugation with steel architecture. Eur Sci J, 11(9), 104-116.
  30. Xiong, X., Wang, Y., Ma, C., & Chi, Y. (2023). Ensuring the authenticity of the conservation and reuse of modern industrial heritage architecture: A case study of the large machine factory, China. Buildings, 13(2), 534. [CrossRef]
  31. Dzen. (2019). This is Belyaevo. Belyaevo is part of the Konkovo District. Has it always been like this? https://dzen.ru/media/thisisbelyaevo/
  32. Nolen, J. L. (2010). Peoples’ friendship University of Russia. https://www.britannica.com/
  33. Ermolaev, N. (2020). Cinema Pervomaisky. Obituary. https://www.archnadzor.ru/
  34. Avdeev, I. G. (1975). Cinema Vityaz. https://pastvu.com/
  35. 101kinoteatr. Cinema Formula Vityaz. http://m.moscow.101kinoteatr.ru/
  36. Wikimapia. (2016). Demolished Cinema Vityaz Moscow. https://wikimapia.org/
  37. Strategic Development Agency. (2015). Invitation Booklet: Open Competition for the Development of the Concept of Redevelopment of Two Cinemas Varshava and Voskhod. https://assets.cinemarenovation.com/
  38. Shubin, L. F. (1975). Arkhitektura Grazhdanskikh i Promyshlennykh Zdaniy v Pyati Tomakh. Tom 5. Promyshlennyye Zdaniya [Architecture of Civil and Industrial Buildings in Five Volumes. Volume 5. Industrial buildings]. Higher School Publishing House.
  39. McCutcheon, R. (1989). The role of industrialised building in Soviet Union housing policies. Habitat Int, 13(4), 43-61. [CrossRef]
  40. ArchDaily. (2016). 100 Years of mass housing in Russia. https://www.archdaily.com/
  41. Arhplan. (2016). Construction organizations, industrial base, and experimental construction of Minsk. https://www.arhplan.ru/
  42. Burdenkov, E. (2019). Sbornyye paneli [Precast panels]. https://ekb7.ru/
  43. Wright, J. R. (1971). Industrialized building in the Soviet Union: A report of the US delegation to the USSR No. 334. Washington D.C.: US Government Printing Office. https://www.govinfo.gov/
  44. Cooper, R. C., & Schipper, L. (1992). The efficiency of energy use in the USSR - An international perspective. Energy, 17(1), 1-24. [CrossRef]
  45. Krausmann, F., Gaugl, B., West, J., & Schandl, H. (2016). The metabolic transition of a planned economy: Material flows in the USSR and the Russian Federation 1900 to 2010. Ecol Econ, 124, 76-85. [CrossRef]