[ Page 3 of 7 ]

By Barbara Knecht

Designing for deconstruction

According to Charles Kibert, founder and director of the Powell Center for Construction and the Environment at the University of Florida in Gainesville, “We are starting to do a good job of diverting construction waste, but we are not yet very good at preventing waste in the first place.” Kibert points out that the LEED system, which has proved to be a huge catalyst for diversion of waste materials during construction, has been in place considerably less than a decade, but we have hardly begun to address the companion movement—Design for Deconstruction or Disassembly (used interchangeably)—that integrates waste prevention into the design process. Together they approach the problem from material and design decisions. First, individual building products should produce little waste in their use and installation and have high value for reuse and recycling; and second, the building itself should be designed with its disassembly or deconstruction in mind. As Kibert points out, we don’t yet have an integrated system to deal with all aspects of construction waste prevention and recycling, but it isn’t for lack of talent dedicated to providing solutions.

 

At Rinker Hall at the University of Florida, the Croxton Collaborative designed for disassembly by eliminating multiple layers of material and leaving structure exposed when possible. Image: Courtesy The Croxton Collaborative

Kibert was the owner’s representative, and the Croxton Collaborative/Gould Evans was the architect for Rinker Hall, home of the M.E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction at the University of Florida. It was an opportunity for both Kibert and Croxton to explore Design for Deconstruction ideas. Randy Croxton, principal of the Croxton Collaborative, advocates an approach that he calls “materials minimization.” In Croxton’s words, “There are three aspects to our design philosophy. The first is that we look for ways not to build; that is, we explore solutions to programmatic requirements that don’t create fully enclosed, energy-consuming space. The second is that we minimize in design and detail by avoiding glued and composite systems and by using assemblies of resources that can be retrieved and reused at the highest value. And finally, we facilitate disassembly by avoiding situations that require destructive demolition.”

At Rinker Hall, the philosophy led to the selection of steel over concrete, while avoiding layers of fireproofing, Sheetrock, and other finishes. Floor slabs are concrete, but sealed and left exposed or covered only with resilient floor tiles rather than layers of carpets and pads. Partitions do not engage columns, anticipating and facilitating change and reuse. One of the hallmarks of Design for Deconstruction or Disassembly is a respect for change over the lifetime of a building.