A History of the Architecture of the USDA Forest Service

Talk given by John Grosvenor to a symposium in 1976.

In discussing the Forest Service architectural design approach to vandalism in recreation structures, I will touch on three types of abuse. The most obvious is overt human actions, such as defacing buildings and breaking items. But there are also two additional types to consider. One is covert human actions—unthinking destruction and mistreatment of the facilities, such as flushing down toilets or drains objects that disrupt sewage septic action or plug the waste lines, pouring gasoline or other volatile liquids into vault toilets, or leaving doors or windows open to the elements, allowing the facilities to be damaged by wind, rain, snow, or ice. The third type of vandalism is nonhuman damage created by natural agents, including water in its various forms, earthquakes, or various animals and birds.

The earliest Forest Service toilet structures were very primitive and simple, with rough sawn wood, concrete block, or stone masonry exteriors. The interiors were of similar character. Public use was low; therefore, vandalism was slight. After the Second World War and into the 1960's, many more people were using the national forest campgrounds, and with this increase came more vandalism. The architectural designs became larger and more sophisticated and the materials more finished, so the repair costs of vandalism increased greatly. Attempts were made to use materials and finishes that might deter or limit abuse. These included plywood interior walls with sealed flush joints and painted with a two-part epoxy paint. Extra blocking and backing was added to toilet fixtures, toilet enclosures, doors, and windows, and details were simplified to keep repair costs down. Floors were treated with epoxy and exterior finishes were natural.

In the late 1960's, public usage was increasing even more, so even larger and more complicated buildings were designed and constructed. We were still looking toward preventing overt vandalism through the designs and materials, but at this time we also began to face the other two types of vandalism. Oversized wastelines were put in to accommodate rocks, sanitary napkins, and plastic bags. The height and location of water closets and urinals for use by children and the handicapped were considered. Larger door closers were used to resist wind damage. Windows were eliminated and skylights or clearstories were added to bring in natural light. To provide heat to keep pipes from freezing in spring and fall, tamperproof electric heaters were found. The type of glue used in the plywood, the wood species of trim, and the type of roofing materials were considered in areas where animal vandalism was prevalent (porcupines have eaten exterior plywood and woodpeckers have ruined trim and roofs).

As we entered the 1970's, the cost of maintenance and the amount of vandalism had again increased, together with the number of public users, to a point where new design approaches were needed. With the increased construction costs, we found it necessary to reduce the size of the buildings to stay within budget. About this time, we discovered that esthetics were a factor in deterring vandalism; more pleasing buildings, lighter interiors, and good quality materials seemed to keep the public from vandalizing our structures. On the other hand, heavy, dark, dank spaces seemed to increase public misuses. With the decrease in size of the building and to keep the scale of the structure appropriate for the location, we tried turning the axis of our roofs 45 degrees, giving us what we called the "handkerchief roof."

In 1972, the Forest Service began an extensive water-pollution abatement program, during which hundreds of old toilet buildings were replaced with modern sanitary structures. Again, construction and maintenance costs were soaring much faster than money was becoming available. In order to better utilize the funds available, the concept of men's and women's toilets was dropped and the water closets assigned to a campground were placed in separate cubicles, each with an exterior lockable door. Once more, materials were carefully studied to give functional, attractive, easily maintained buildings. Split-faced concrete blocks with integral coloring selected for the specific campground were used for the exteriors. Easily cleanable interiors (factory applied epoxy finish or ceramic tile) were chosen. The need for fragile toilet partitions was eliminated by the either-sex concept, and an easily accessible pipe chase also held the electrical equipment and allowed space for storage of supplies. Interior lights were also placed in the pipe chase to keep public access down and reduce damage and theft. Exterior lights were specially designed for our buildings to be vandal resistant. Floors were drained into the pipe chase, with only one floor drain per building. Natural light was brought in through the roof to keep the interior of the building well illuminated. Ventilation was introduced at the top of the block walls, with closure panels to be installed in the winter. The designs were again moving toward the simple but rustic approach, with heavy flat wood beam roofs and rough concrete block walls.

Up to this point, I have been talking about toilet buildings, but the Forest Service has many other types of public-use recreational structures. Our children's play structures are simple, rugged, and very natural. Native materials are used with natural finishes. The scale of these is designed for the users. We have had very little vandalism. Footbridges in our campgrounds have been designed using low-maintenance, damage-resistant materials; cor-ten steel open web joists, heavy natural redwood handrails and decking, and exposed aggregate concrete abutments. Our designs for drinking fountains, again, are simple and natural, using heavy timber or stone pedestals and stainless steel bowls and bubblers.

A fairly recent addition to our campgrounds has been entrance stations. With these buildings we have tried to establish an architectural style for each campground or group of campgrounds. They have been in character; therefore, we have used lexon-type plastic windows to deter vandalism, with shutters for the winter season. The materials have been rugged (heavy timber or concrete bock) with natural finishes. Another new addition has been overlook structures along road systems and along reservoirs. These have been designed to invite people to use them, and have been open and clean to reduce vandalism. Again, natural finishes and vandal-resistant materials have been employed.

In our visitor centers, we have been aware of the possible effects of natural elements as well as human vandalism. Native stone, concrete, and heavy timber are used to create a building which is resistant to all three types of vandalism. Materials and design concepts have been used to create structures which express a rustic bold character and invite the public to use them. Hopefully, the new deigns will not only invite use, but vandalism-free use.