CONEIDENTIAL
into the basement.
secondary fires.
This concrete floor should also protect people in the basement from
If contractors could be persuaded to build some new houses of this type,
each house could offer protection from low overpressures to 20 families. At the present
home-building rate of approximately a million units a year, this could provide relatively
cheap protection for people in suburban areas (where most new building is taking place).
Among the disadvantages to this and to the bathroom-type homeshelter shown in Fig. 45
are that they are limited to new construction (hence’ only certain newersections of cities)
and have not been subjected to proving-ground tests.
Fig. 45 — Reinforced-Room Shelter
A mixed shelter program is probably necessary, since people near the center of the city
have no land for family shelters. One possible mix would be shelter for one-half the population in dome-type shelters at the center of the city, 4 in family underground shelters
(Fig. 46), and ¥ in buildings with reinforced-room or reinforced-concrete-floor construction.
Such a mix for the 25 major targets would cost $3.3 billion, and for all 170 major cities
$4.7 billion. However, since shelter space cannot be optimally used because of the day-
night ebb and flow of the cities’ population to and from the center, these costs have to be
increased by about }, or to $4.4 billion for the 25 cities and $6.3 billion for the 170, These
costs do not include land costs, which vary greatly.
Another possible mix might be one-half community redoubts, one-eighth family under-
ground shelters, one-eighth reinforced-room or reinforced-floor shelters, and the remaining
ORO-—R-17 (App B)
Toat
ES eit
FETEACEEEEBS
aEESE
tHE
RZ:OE 2
ee
Sn Ta eee
7 orks
Sipe
See
63
7
Tree
2
RIeT
ye EE
a
aians
Gone
a
a
¥
=
TEU
ayy sa d SETT:
cr
ee
Boatsa0saeeerear
BROeT
ete
ie a
et
i)
ets
Toe
z
ra
Tehinead
nasASoy
eS eee
ST NM,
eaitayat dae toe {PLTRS;
echoSidbots
atts ate peeae
eR ae
ee pa: