A Pointless Plot

Deconstruction received significant coverage in the September 26, 2008 edition of The New York Times Magazine. If you didn't read, "This Old Recyclable House," which details at considerable length a pilot deconstruction project in Cleveland, Ohio (where, incidentally, I was born and raised).

 Here is a link to the article: www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/magazine/28house-t.html

A lot of industry people, including myself, are disappointed with the article, particularly its overall tone and the magazine's decision to chronicle a pilot project in a blighted neighborhood with numerous conditions operating against it. Pilot projects, by definition, are supposed to test the need for, or viability of, something. They are largely a waste of time in the deconstruction industry. We've got hundreds of professionals deconstructing thousands of buildings every year, including single family residences and commercial buildings. That's a lot of salvaged materials. Why would someone propose another pilot project?

To its credit, the article points out how deconstruction may help to alleviate various problems posed by abandoned housing stock. It also examines numerous issues faced by the deconstruction industry. What troubles me is that these problems are self-induced by well-meaning industry insiders. Factors include: 

1.  A lack of understanding regarding how economic forces intersect with environmental policies and decisions, 

2.  A need to educate the public, neighborhood groups and politicians on the benefits of deconstruction and building-materials salvage, and

3.  The need for well designed training programs that stress not only the how, but also the why, where, when and who. 

Unfortunately, the author of the Times article does not appear to have thoroughly researched deconstruction, building materials salvage, and existing reuse markets in the U.S. and abroad. In the U.S. alone, hundreds of organizations and thousands of people are involved in many aspects of this business, from deconstruction, to selling and distributing reusable building materials, to actual reuse. And I'm pretty sure the article doesn't mention the excellent book, UNBUILDING (The Taunton Press, 2007), coauthored by the pilot project's manager, Brad Guy, along with Bob Falk of the U.S. Forest Products Laboratory. UNBUILDING describes in detail the best practices in deconstruction from east coast to west. 

Almost two years ago I was invited to Cleveland by a local Community Development Organization whose sphere of influence included hundreds of abandoned buildings constructed in the early 20th century. I examined many of those buildings. While the copper pipes and wiring had been stripped and most were missing better architectural features, the buildings still contained outstanding doors, flooring, wood siding, beautiful old-growth straight grained framing lumber and antique brick foundations. In August of this year I met with several members of the Cleveland City Council and the heads of various departments and community development corporations. One thing I'm sure of as a result of that meeting is that Cleveland, like most old manufacturing cities in the Upper Midwest and East, did not need to spend limited resources on a pilot project. To rebuild and repopulate its core, Cleveland needs long-range programs that are economically focused, include training, and target more than a couple of houses. 

###