<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="static/style.xsl"?><OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd"><responseDate>2026-09-19T02:43:13Z</responseDate><request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/157358" metadataPrefix="dim">https://dspace.mit.edu/server/oai/request</request><GetRecord><record><header><identifier>oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/157358</identifier><datestamp>2024-10-17T04:14:20Z</datestamp><setSpec>com_1721.1_7582</setSpec><setSpec>com_1721.1_7581</setSpec><setSpec>col_1721.1_131023</setSpec></header><metadata><dim:dim xmlns:dim="http://www.dspace.org/xmlns/dspace/dim" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.dspace.org/xmlns/dspace/dim http://www.dspace.org/schema/dim.xsd">
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="advisor">Modesitt, Adam</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="author">Schnitzler, Jenna</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="department">Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Architecture</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="accessioned">2024-10-16T17:45:53Z</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="available">2024-10-16T17:45:53Z</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="issued">2024-05</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="submitted">2024-10-10T15:17:19.634Z</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="uri">https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157358</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="orcid">0000-0001-9429-5556</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" qualifier="abstract">In New York engineer Reginald Pelham Bolton’s 1911 obsolescence study “Building for Profit: Principles Governing the&#xd;
Economic Improvement of Real Estate”, he foretold a truth that remains today, that “the useful or economic existence of&#xd;
all classes of buildings, in the rapid march of modern conditions, is constantly shortening” (Bolton, 68). He details how&#xd;
the parts of buildings lose value at different rates—as they physically deteriorate, materials wear and things fall out of style,&#xd;
but even more quickly, he notes, do our structures become economically obsolete. Then and still today the durability of&#xd;
building materials is the least of our concerns when considering functional obsolescence. The physical is almost certain to&#xd;
exceed the economic durability of a building as a whole.&#xd;
Designers and developers recognize this gap between physical and economic obsolescence, and in response have called&#xd;
for a moratorium on new construction—opting instead to convert existing structures to meet changing programmatic&#xd;
demands. Yet in these conversions, we use the same extractive methods as new construction, filling existing frames and&#xd;
envelopes with non-structural light framing to differentiate the space inside. In this paradigm, to build inside an existing&#xd;
frame still relies first on the tool of demolition.&#xd;
The uneven wearing that Bolton wrote about in 1911, appears again in the iconic shearing layers diagram from Frank&#xd;
Duffy and Stewart Brand, who make a very similar economic argument, demonstrating that the economically fast-wearing&#xd;
interior layer accumulates the most investment over time, rebuilt on a cycle of every 5-10 years. We are facing a turning&#xd;
point in building; as of 2020, over 35% of total construction activity is renovation work, and we are making increasingly&#xd;
rapid changes to building function. This creates a paradigm of fit out architecture that answers unpredictability and&#xd;
shifting values with indeterminacy, perpetuating a cycle of repetitive building. This project takes the converted structure&#xd;
as its starting point, experimenting with disassembly, reassembly, and the boundaries between fit out and frame, sited&#xd;
within a larger material and economic framework that expands the definition of “value” beyond the monetary to include&#xd;
material resources embodied by a given structure.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" qualifier="degree">M.Arch.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="publisher">Massachusetts Institute of Technology</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="rights">In Copyright - Educational Use Permitted</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="rights">Copyright retained by author(s)</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="rights" qualifier="uri">https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="title">Tectonics of the semi-permanent: Reassembling fit-out architecture</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="type">Thesis</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="format" qualifier="mimetype">application/pdf</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="mit" element="thesis" qualifier="degree">Master</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="thesis" element="degree" qualifier="name">Master of Architecture</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dspace" element="entity" qualifier="type">Publication</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="others" element="access-status">unknown</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="others" element="access-status">unknown</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="cerif" element="openaire" authority="" confidence="-1">&lt;Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="06a6c621-a267-4026-be3d-9f667fb4ca89">
	&lt;Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843&lt;/Type>
   	&lt;Title>Tectonics of the semi-permanent: Reassembling fit-out architecture&lt;/Title>
   	&lt;PublishedIn>
    	&lt;Publication>
      	&lt;/Publication>
   	&lt;/PublishedIn>
   	&lt;PublicationDate>2024-05&lt;/PublicationDate>
   	&lt;Authors>
      	&lt;Author>
        	&lt;DisplayName>Schnitzler, Jenna&lt;/DisplayName>
         	&lt;Affiliation>
         		&lt;OrgUnit>
         		&lt;/OrgUnit>
         	&lt;/Affiliation>
      	&lt;/Author>
	&lt;/Authors>
   	&lt;Editors>
	&lt;/Editors>
    &lt;Publishers>
        &lt;Publisher>
            &lt;DisplayName>Massachusetts Institute of Technology&lt;/DisplayName>
            &lt;OrgUnit />
        &lt;/Publisher>
    &lt;/Publishers>
    &lt;License>https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/&lt;/License>
   	&lt;Abstract>In New York engineer Reginald Pelham Bolton’s 1911 obsolescence study “Building for Profit: Principles Governing the&#xd;
Economic Improvement of Real Estate”, he foretold a truth that remains today, that “the useful or economic existence of&#xd;
all classes of buildings, in the rapid march of modern conditions, is constantly shortening” (Bolton, 68). He details how&#xd;
the parts of buildings lose value at different rates—as they physically deteriorate, materials wear and things fall out of style,&#xd;
but even more quickly, he notes, do our structures become economically obsolete. Then and still today the durability of&#xd;
building materials is the least of our concerns when considering functional obsolescence. The physical is almost certain to&#xd;
exceed the economic durability of a building as a whole.&#xd;
Designers and developers recognize this gap between physical and economic obsolescence, and in response have called&#xd;
for a moratorium on new construction—opting instead to convert existing structures to meet changing programmatic&#xd;
demands. Yet in these conversions, we use the same extractive methods as new construction, filling existing frames and&#xd;
envelopes with non-structural light framing to differentiate the space inside. In this paradigm, to build inside an existing&#xd;
frame still relies first on the tool of demolition.&#xd;
The uneven wearing that Bolton wrote about in 1911, appears again in the iconic shearing layers diagram from Frank&#xd;
Duffy and Stewart Brand, who make a very similar economic argument, demonstrating that the economically fast-wearing&#xd;
interior layer accumulates the most investment over time, rebuilt on a cycle of every 5-10 years. We are facing a turning&#xd;
point in building; as of 2020, over 35% of total construction activity is renovation work, and we are making increasingly&#xd;
rapid changes to building function. This creates a paradigm of fit out architecture that answers unpredictability and&#xd;
shifting values with indeterminacy, perpetuating a cycle of repetitive building. This project takes the converted structure&#xd;
as its starting point, experimenting with disassembly, reassembly, and the boundaries between fit out and frame, sited&#xd;
within a larger material and economic framework that expands the definition of “value” beyond the monetary to include&#xd;
material resources embodied by a given structure.&lt;/Abstract>
	&lt;Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right" 
    >
    &lt;/Access>
&lt;/Publication>
</dim:field>
</dim:dim>
</metadata></record></GetRecord></OAI-PMH>