subscribe
e-newsletter
contact us
advertise
from our archive
Resources   Continuing Education
Off the Record: Recent Blog Posts
The blog written by the staff of Architectural Record
View all blog posts >>
Recently Posted Reader Photos

View all photo galleries >>
Reader Commented / Recommended
Most Commented Most Recommended
Rankings reflect comments made in the past 14 days
Rankings reflect votes made in the past 14 days

Designing for Disassembly and Deconstruction
Innovation, fueled by economic incentives and sustainability goals, have inspired the building industry to reduce construction waste
[ Page 4 of 8 ]

By Barbara Knecht

 

Renovation and remodeling make up the lion’s share of that huge volume of C&D waste. According to some EPA statistics from 1996, demolition and renovation constitute 92 percent of construction waste. That is a tangible incentive to increase the life of the building and its materials by designing a building that can respond to changing programmatic needs. According to Croxton, “If a building doesn’t support change and reuse, you have only an illusion of sustainability. You may have excellent building orientation and other energy-saving systems, but the building must also be able to be flexible to meet a change in curriculum.” Indeed, building types that were once thought of as fixed, from research labs to university classrooms, have become examples of the imperative of flexible planning [see Record, August 2003, page 147].

 

The 200-foot-tall smokestack at the Nashville Thermal Transfer Corporation facility was brought down using controlled demolition. Electrical equipment from other parts was auctioned off as part of the demolition and dismantling of the entire complex.
Photography: Courtesy Robert Brickner/GBB

 

Mechanical systems that typically run in false ceilings or are otherwise bound to the structure complicate disassembly and may necessitate destructive demolition for renovations. At Rinker, the Croxton Collaborative created a “highway” for the mechanical runs and placed them overhead, but they are masked from sight by manipulations of architectural elements such as the roof slope. Open and accessible to facilitate nondestructive changes, they are also generously sized to provide maneuvering room for unanticipated technologies. The resulting spaces are open and flexible to meet with a strong connection to the external environment and the changing patterns of light and shade through large windows and facade screens. Open, flexible spaces that are readily adaptable coincide with the goals of the internationally emerging Universal Design movement [discussed in Record, January 2004, page 145].

 

 

[ Page 4 of 8 ]
Special Subscription Offer: Get Architectural Record Digital Free!

 

ADVERTISEMENT
© 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
All Rights Reserved