architectural salvage: its use and validity within the

ARCHITECTURAL SALVAGE: ITS USE AND VALIDITY WITHIN THE

PRESERVATION FIELD

A THESIS

SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF

THE REQUIREMNTS

for the degree

MASTERS OF SCIENCE IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION

by

SHERI ELIZABETH REPOVICH

ADVISOR - MICHELE CHIUINI

BALL STATE UNIVERSITY

MUNCIE, INDIANA

MAY 2009

i

AKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank the City of Muncie for their willingness to help me identify

and access abandoned buildings within the city and to the many companies and

individuals who gave me inside knowledge into the architectural salvage field.

To Michele Chiuini, Andrea Swartz & John Vann; thank you for your advice and

valuable criticism through the writing of this thesis.

To my mom, I would not have finished without your knowledge and patience,

thank you.

To Joseph, you gave me something to look forward to, never letting me give up;

you are my rock, thank you.

Finally I would like to thank my family and close friends for their support and

encouragement throughout graduate school. Without you, none of this would have been

possible.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................ i

LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES ............................................................................... v

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 1

Purpose ................................................................................................................. 2

Architectural Salvage & Deconstruction .............................................................. 3

Preservation & LEED Standard ........................................................................... 4

CHAPTER II: MUNCIE, INDIANA .......................................................................... 6

Background Information ....................................................................................... 6

The Housing Dilemma .......................................................................................... 7

Unsafe Building Hearing Authority ...................................................................... 8

Muncie, Indiana Building Material Inventory ...................................................... 10

CHAPTER III: HISTORIC PRESERVATION .......................................................... 23

Using the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards ................................................... 23

Historic Preservation ............................................................................................ 24

Restoration ............................................................................................................ 25

Rehabilitation ........................................................................................................ 25

Reconstruction ...................................................................................................... 26

CHAPTER IV: SALVAGE MARKET ...................................................................... 28

History of the Trade .............................................................................................. 29

iii

Finding Architectural Salvage ............................................................................. 30

Supply & Demand for Salvaged Materials ........................................................... 32

Midwest Architectural Salvage Survey ................................................................. 34

CHAPTER V: DECONSTRUCTION ........................................................................ 44

Deconstruction Industry ........................................................................................ 46

Types of Deconstruction ....................................................................................... 47

Building Assessment .............................................................................................. 48

1 2 3 Deconstruct .................................................................................................. 49

Economics ............................................................................................................. 50

Historic Influence & Benefits ................................................................................ 52

CHAPTER VI: SALVAGED MATERIALS .............................................................. 55

Material Wealth for Historic Preservation ........................................................... 56

Materials Destined for Recycling ......................................................................... 60

Non-Hazardous & Hazardous Materials .............................................................. 63

Material Value: Embodied Energy ....................................................................... 65

CHAPTER VII: SUSTAINABLE DESIGN ............................................................... 69

Preservation vs. Sustainable Design ..................................................................... 70

Preservation Saves Resources .............................................................................. 71

U.S. Green Building Council & LEED ................................................................. 73

LEED, Preservation & Architectural Salvage ...................................................... 75

CHAPTER VIII: CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................ 79

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................... 83

APPENDIX A: ARCHITECTURAL SALVAGE COMPANIES .............................. 90

iv

APPENDIX B: DECONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION COMPANIES ................ 98

APPENDIX C: THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS

FOR THE TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES ............................. 103

APPENDIX D: ARCHITECTURAL SALVAGE SURVEY .................................... 116

v

LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES

Figures

Figure 1: Property Locator Map: Muncie, Indiana ....................................................... 11

Figure 2: Midwest Architectural Salvage Survey Question 11 .................................... 37

Figure 3: Midwest Architectural Salvage Survey Question 6 ...................................... 38






Tables

Table A: Historic Preservation Value of Materials ....................................................... 57

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

Many American cities are facing an abandoned housing problem. Cities such as

Detroit and Flint, Michigan, and Gary, Indiana have lost significant populations due to

the closing of large manufacturing plants; thus leaving houses and commercial buildings

vacant and prone to deterioration, from the climate or vandalism. City governments have

found that the greater the expanse of deterioration, the greater the property crime, and

have grown wary of these problems. Due to budget constraints and the need to address

the problem quickly many cities have turned to demolition as the only answer. With little

private investment for city revitalization, the housing stock has been bulldozed over for

parks, new fashionable housing, or left vacant using Federal incentives through grants.

While some of the housing stock may not be worthy of being placed on the National

Register of Historic Places, their material wealth surpasses their architectural value.

A key group fighting to stop these demolitions are the historic preservationists,

who focus on maintaining a city’s architectural character through sustaining local

housing and commercial architecture. Within the preservation field, demolition is not a

feasible option unless proven inevitable. In cities such as those mentioned above,

deconstruction of the buildings may have proved more feasible to the preservationist then

demolition. Once the abandoned properties have been surveyed and the experts have

decided the buildings are unworthy of National, State, or Local Registers and cannot

1

serve a viable purpose as they stand, then the next reasonable step is to deconstruct and

save as much architectural details and materials as possible, not to simply bulldoze and

add to the already overwhelmed landfills.

Many cities are currently imposing legislation for the limitation of construction

and demolition landfill waste forcing construction and demolition companies to focus on

alternative solutions. The deconstruction industry, which stems from the concepts of

demolition, focuses strictly on the reuse and recycling of building material. This industry

in conjunction with the salvaging of architectural materials is one step to landfill evasion

and building recycling. The architectural salvage which becomes available from

deconstruction can be used in accordance with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards

for the Treatment of Historic Properties and LEED standards, to promote rehabilitation

and the reuse of historic properties. Deconstruction and architectural salvage should not

be considered an alternative to preservation practices but should be considered as an

adjunct, a valuable practice for saving historically significant pieces of history.

Purpose

The purpose of this thesis is to explore the significance of architectural salvage in

conjunction with the preservation and construction fields. This exploration will examine

the salvage market within the Midwest, and will look specifically at the material wealth

of Muncie, Indiana’s vacant structures. Architectural salvage found in the abandoned

housing stock of Muncie will be the basis for examination of the need for deconstruction

for salvageable materials. Muncie is proposed for this case study because of its current

high volume of abandoned structures and the cities motivation to demolish or rehabilitate

2

a vast majority. Currently the City of Muncie has records of over 900 properties within

Delaware County which are considered abandoned and potentially structurally unsound.

Twenty of the structures identified as uninhabitable will be evaluated to estimate

the amount of salvageable and recyclable material which can be used in preservation

practices and new construction. The twenty houses will be defined by square footage and

the materials which can be salvaged and/or recycled. Each building will be inventoried

based on site access (boards on windows, no-trespassing). The average square footage of

the buildings will be used to determine the amount of salvageable material, in order to

determine the need for deconstruction and salvaging practices within Muncie.

By reviewing The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Buildings we

can establish how architectural salvage can be used in building preservation, restoration,

rehabilitation, and reconstruction. Within the rehabilitation field we will also examine the

use of LEED design standards and how architectural salvage can be integrated into

historic structures for LEED accreditation.

Architectural Salvage & Deconstruction

Architectural salvage includes the building materials skillfully removed from a

structure and deemed as valuable or useful. These materials can have a new use in the

same form or can be reconstituted into an alternative material. Architectural salvage

originates on all structures and is rescued from a building which is dilapidated,

structurally unsound, or slated for demolition; and is produced during the deconstruction

or dismantling of said building piece by piece. Architectural salvage is more then the

removal of architectural features, it is the preservation of the material’s physical

character, embodied energy, and material value.

3

Deconstruction as a practice of demolition, focuses on the removal of all materials

which are worthy of reuse and recycling. Deconstruction is an alternative to demolition

where only select materials, if any, are stripped from the building before total demolition

occurs. Deconstruction is also economically equivalent to demolition, where the cost of

the deconstruction may be higher than demolition but the materials recovered can be sold

to offset the deconstruction costs, and at times bring in a significant profit. If a house is

deemed economically feasible for deconstruction the materials are typically removed and

inventoried in a warehouse for further sale. Materials, such as old growth timbers, wood

flooring and moldings, windows, and doors, could be transplanted from one building to

another during a renovation or rehabilitation of another historically significant property.

Preservation and LEED Standards

Historic Preservation and LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental

Design) effectively have the same goal, conserve. Preservation aims to conserve the built

environment and help maintain the historic culture of cities and towns; while LEED

promotes the use of sustainable practices through the mitigation of natural resources and

the use of existing buildings. Preservation has been thought of as the first form of

sustainable design with the ultimate goal being to save a building and reuse it, forgoing a

large strain on our natural resources.

Together the green building and historic preservation movements are looking to

conserve embodied energy and reuse existing resources, conserve untouched resources,

preserve cultural heritage and in some cases some cases also social capital, and adapt

existing historic structures to current social needs. The movements also face many

difficulties when integrating The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and LEED rating

4

systems. When preservation and the LEED standards are jointly used in the rehabilitation

of an historic structure, opportunities arise for the use of architectural salvage.

Architectural salvage is one way to integrate preservation and LEED standards.

The next chapters will deal with the various aspects of historic preservation,

architectural salvage, deconstruction, and sustainable design. By combining all of these

practices, the use of architectural salvage links Historic Preservation and sustainable

design. Buildings and their architectural elements need to be saved, historic or not,

through rehabilitation, deconstruction and architectural salvage.

5

CHAPTER II: MUNCIE, INDIANA

Background Information

In its early years Muncie, Indiana was a “compact town centered around the

courthouse square with a high population density and little class identifications in

residential areas.”1 When natural gas was discovered in 1886 near Eaton, eastern Indiana

boomed. With a large abundance of cheap natural gas, glass industries relocated into

eastern Indiana, growing from only four glass factories in 1880 to over 110 in 1900.

Muncie had six, the most famous of which was Ball Brothers, a company relocated from

Buffalo, New York.2 Iron and steel companies, underwear manufactures, and automobile

factories also found the cheap gas prices alluring and relocated to Muncie from the

1900’s to the 1920’s. With this large influx of industry, the population quadrupled to

20,942 individuals in 1900. The entry of industries into Muncie changed not only the size

but also the shape of the community, beginning the process of dispersion and sprawl.3

Factories sprang up outside of town where the land was cheaper and in doing so, the

working class relocated, establishing an industrial suburb with each factory having its

own small suburbia. By the 1920’s Muncie hit another residential building boom. The

population increased 35% after World War I, because of an increased demand for

1 Dwight W. Hoover, Magic Middletown, (Indiana University Press: Bloomington, Indiana, 1986), 2.

2 Ibid. 3 Ibid.

6

automobiles and goods created during the war. Muncie’s Westwood and West End

neighborhoods were established during this time along with heavy development on the

southeast side of town where “new modern subdivisions” were established.4

The Housing Dilemma

Today, Muncie is stricken with the shrinking city phenomenon. The large

manufacturing companies have moved on, leaving vacant commercial buildings and the

houses that surrounded them. According to the 2005-2007 US Census Bureau, the total

population of Muncie was 63,808 in 2006 with only a slight decline from 67,430 in

2000.5 Muncie is home to Ball State University and its over 22,000 students, faculty, and

staff; approximately one third of the total population, which in large part affects the

housing market. Even with this large influx of students and permanent faculty and staff,

over the years many of Muncie’s properties have become abandoned and neglected. As of

2007 there were an estimated 31,093 housing units in Delaware County; of these, 26,427

were occupied with 4,666 vacant. This calculates out to 15% of total housing units

unoccupied which is 4% higher then the national average.6 The City of Muncie has

estimated that there are over 900 blight stricken properties throughout the city. The

majority are failing due to lack of maintenance because their owners are either deceased,

own multiple properties and do not have the funds to maintain all appropriately, live too

far away to maintain their property or the property has been foreclosed within the past

five years. This number is staggering for Muncie, and plans to either rehabilitate or

demolish have already been put in place.

4 Hoover, 25. 5 “Muncie city, Indiana: Fact Sheet;” 2005-2007 American Community Survey;

http://factfinder.census.gov (accessed January 25, 2009). 6 Ibid.

7

In September 2008, the City of Muncie received one of ten Neighborhood

Stabilization Program grants within Indiana, through the U.S. Department of Housing and

Urban Development, to use towards the demolition, rehabilitation, and the purchase of

fore-closed properties. The Neighborhood Stabilization Program provides “emergency

assistance to state and local governments to acquire and redevelop foreclosed properties

that might otherwise become sources of abandonment and blight within their

communities.”7 Indiana received 84 million dollars which was divided among cities with

the highest local abandonment risk, including: Gary, Hammond, Kokomo, Muncie, and

Anderson. The two million dollars Muncie received will be administered through

Muncie’s Department of Community Development with assistance from the Unsafe

Building Hearing Authority; and have been divided between rehabilitation, demolition,

and administrative costs.

Unsafe Building Hearing Authority

In 2008, Muncie lost a total of 78 homes and/or commercial buildings to

demolition: 40 properties were demolished by the city and 38 by the property owner.

These properties were subjects of abandonment within Delaware County and were

brought to the attention of the Building Commissioner through calls and letters from

neighbors concerned for the neighborhood as well as their own individual property.

Ninety percent of the properties discovered are found this way the other 10% are

discovered during routine site visits. These properties are photographed and a building of

equal or more dilapidation is discovered and reported to the Building Commissioner’s

7 “Neighborhood Stabilization Program Grants,” http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/neighborhoodspg/ (accessed January 25, 2009).

8

office. The Building Commissioner alone determines which structures receive a

demolition order after a city inspector examines the exterior, and interior when possible,

to determine safety and stability and deems the building safe/unsafe. If the inspector

deems the building unsafe the demolition order will go through. Once the demolition

order paperwork is complete it is delivered to the Community Development office where

it is recorded in the County Recorder’s office. During this time, the home or commercial

building is placed on the Unsafe Building Hearing Authority’s agenda where it is

reviewed. The Unsafe Building Hearing Authority (UBHA) started in December 2007 as

a function of the Community Development Department, with a goal of mitigating the

blight problem in Muncie through the rehabilitation of as many residential and

commercial properties as possible and to only demolish properties which are structurally

unsound and uninhabitable. In 2008, the UBHA reviewed 237 homes and/or commercial

buildings.

When a structure is initially added to the agenda for the UBHA a letter is drafted

and sent to the property owner stating the property has been slated for demolition by the

Building Commissioner and the property owners are required to go before the Unsafe

Building Hearing Authority on a specific date, which is 30 days after the postmark. The

letter also states that if the owner plans to rehabilitate the property they must prove intent

by having a budget and a schedule at the hearing; if determined reliable the demolition

order will be changed to a rehabilitation order. The property is required to be

rehabilitated within one year of the issuance of a rehabilitation permit. Property owners

who fail to attend the hearing or fail to rehabilitate within a timely and/or proper manner

are assessed two fines ($2,500 residential/ $5,000 commercial). The property owner will

9

receive an initial fine at the first hearing, if not present or unprepared, and a second fine

at a follow up hearing if no rehabilitation plans are in progress or the owner fails to attend

again. Once a property has received two fines it is removed from the UBHA’s agenda.

The first fine is added to the taxes on the property and the second is sent to collections.

The initial fines on the taxes help to facilitate moving of the property through the tax sale

process. If a property is not sold at the tax sale it can be moved into a land bank to be

managed by the city.

From the date the owner receives their demolition order they have 45 days to

complete the order. If the owner does not have the funding the city will pay for part or all

of the demolition fees; but the owner is still obligated to repay the city for the demolition.

Once the structure is torn down the owner still has the responsibility to maintain the land.

The demolition of the structure goes through a standard bid process, where the lowest

bidder is awarded the demolition.

Muncie, Indiana Building Material Inventory

Muncie, Indiana was chosen for the material inventory because of the high

volume of buildings constructed between 1870 and 1930. These buildings tend to have

higher quality construction materials and are therefore better candidates for

deconstruction. From the 900 abandoned buildings estimated by the Unsafe Building

Hearing Authority twenty local Muncie homes were inventoried, by the author, between

fall 2008 and spring 2009 to determine the significance for deconstruction and

architectural salvage versus traditional demolition. Their size and materials were

documented based on accessibility to the property. Many of the homes have been boarded

up to help relieve vandalism, meaning no interior elements could be documented making

10

the inventory partially incomplete. The following pages list all materials found on site

and the square footage of each home. The Muncie, Indiana map below indicates the

location of each home corresponding to the information of the following pages.

Figure 1: Property Locator Map: Muncie, Indiana

11

1101 W ABBOTT1200 Sq. Ft.

315 N PERSHING2100 Sq. Ft.

On-site Materials:Aluminum Siding8” Wood SidingBeadboard Porch CeilingAsphalt Shingle RoofInterior Wood PanelingBrick FoundationConcrete PorchAluminum Storm WindowsWood Sash WindowsWood DoorsWood Frame ConstructionWood Porch Columns

On-site Materials:Wood Lapboard SidingFelt Cover (Cardboard)Fishscale Wood ShinglesBeadboard Porch CeilingBrick FoundationAluminum GuttersAsphalt Shingle RoofFull Concrete BasementWood DoorsWood Sash WindowsWood Frame Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

1

2

12

807 S BURLINGTON1400 Sq. Ft.

411 N MADISON1000 Sq. Ft.

On-site Materials:3” Wood SidingBeadboard Porch InteriorAsphalt Shingle RoofBrick FoundationConcrete Block PorchBrick ChimneyWood Sash Windows8” Wood SidingWood Porch FlooringWood Frame Construction

On-site Materials:4” Wood SidingBeadboard Porch CeilingAsphalt Shingle RoofLathe & Plaster InteriorConcrete Block FoundationIron Porch ColumnsDecorative Wood TrimFishscale ShinglesWood Flooring4” Wood Floor PorchWood Sash WindowsWoof Frame Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

3

4

13

521 W ADAMS4400 Sq. Ft.

804 N JEFFERSON2750 Sq. Ft.

On-site Materials:Wood Lapboard SidingBeadboard Porch CeilingAsphalt Shingle RoofWood Porch FlooringBrick FoundationDecorative Wood RailingBrick ChimneyWood Sash WindowsAluminum GuttersFishscale ShinglesWood Frame Construction

On-site Materials:4” Wood SidingBeadboard Porch CeilingAsphalt Shingle RoofBrick FoundationConcrete PorchWood Sash WindowsFishscale ShinglesAluminum Screen DoorLathe & Plaster3” Wood FlooringWood Frame Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

5

6

14

804 N WALNUT STREET2550 Sq. Ft.

154 E 6TH STREET4400 Sq. Ft.

On-site Materials:8” Wood SidingBeadboard Porch CeilingAsphalt Shingle RoofConcrete Block Porch & FoundationAluminum Storm WindowsWood Sash WindowsDecorative MoldingsBrick ChimneyWood Frame Construction

On-site Materials:Asphalt Shingle Siding6” Wood SidingAsphalt Shingle RoofWood Sash WindowsBrick ChimneyConcrete Block Porch & FoundationWood DoorsWood Frame Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

7

8

15

986 S BEACON STREET1500 Sq. Ft.

190 E 6TH STREET3150 Sq. Ft.

On-site Materials:Asphalt Shingle SidingBeadboard EavesWood BracketingAsphalt Shingle RoofWood Sash WindowsBrick FoundationConcrete Porch & StoopAluminum Gutters6” Wood SidingWood Frame Construction

On-site Materials:3” Wood SidingBeadboard Porch CeilingAsphalt Shingle RoofBrick FoundationConcrete PorchBrick ChimneyWood Sash WindowsWood DoorDecorative Wood BracketAluminum GuttersWood Frame Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

9

10

16

710 E JACKSON STREET3650 Sq. Ft.

322 E GILBERT STREET3310 Sq. Ft.

On-site Materials:Wood SidingBeadboard Porch CeilingAsphalt Shingle RoofConcrete PorchBrick FoundationFishscale ShinglesWood Sash WindowsBrick ChimneysWood Porch ColumnsWood Frame Construction

On-site Materials:Asphalt Shingle RoofWood Sash WindowsBrick ChimneyLimestone FoundationConcrete Porch & StoopWood Doors4” Wood SidingFrame/Brick Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

11

12

17

1112 S BROTHERTON STREET1100 Sq. Ft.

856 S BEACON STREET1350 Sq. Ft.

On-site Materials:Wood 3” SidingAsphalt Shingle RoofWood Sash WindowsConcrete PorchConcrete Block FoundationAluminum GuttersWood Porch ColumnsWood Frame Construction

On-site Materials:Wood 3” SidingFishscale SidingAsphalt Shingle RoofBrick FoundationConcrete Porch & StoopBrick ChimneyWood Sash WindowsVinyl Style WindowsWood DoorsWood Frame Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

13

14

18

546 W MAIN STREET1880 Sq. Ft.


On-site Materials:4” Wood SidingAsphalt Shingle RoofConcrete Porch Beadboard Porch CeilingBrick Columns/FoundationWood RailingsWood StairsAluminum GuttersWood Frame Construction

On-site Materials:6” Wood Siding8” Wood SidingFishscale SidingAsphalt Shingle RoofWood Sash WindowsWood Storm WindowsBrick ChimneyConcrete PorchBrick FoundationWood DoorsDecorative WoodWood Frame Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

15

16

19



On-site Materials:3” Wood SidingFishscale SidingAsphalt Shingle RoofWood Sash WindowsBrick FoundationWood Porch FlooringWood Railings & ColumnsWood DoorsWood Frame Construction

On-site Materials:Wood 3” SidingWood 6” SidingAsphalt Shingle RoofConcrete Porch & FoundationAluminum GuttersWood Screen DoorWood Porch ColumnsWood Sash WindowsWood DoorsWood Frame Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

17

18

20



On-site Materials:Wood 3” SidingBeadboard Porch CeilingAsphalt Shingle RoofConcrete Block Porch & FoundationWood Sash WindowsWood DoorsWood Porch Columns &RailingsBrick ChimneyWood Frame Construction

On-site Materials:Wood 3” SidingAsphalt Shingle RoofWood Sash WindowsBrick ChimneyConcrete Block Porch & FoundationBeadboard Porch CeilingWood Porch ColumnsWood DoorsWood Frame Construction

Property Footprint

Property Footprint

19

20

21

While these homes may appear to be significantly dilapidated the majority of the

materials available for salvage are in good condition. Ranging in size from 1000 square

feet to 4,400 square feet; this housing stock has the potential to provide a generous

amount of reusable and recyclable material. All houses are timber frame construction

except for 710 E Jackson, which is brick construction with a timber frame addition to the

rear. According to deconstruction estimator Brian McVay of the Oregon-based nonprofit

Rebuilding Center; 50% of a 1,500 square foot house can be salvaged and the remaining

25% to 30% can be recycled.8 Assuming that the interior of our homes are in decent

condition for salvaging, these twenty homes could produce 36,000 square feet of

salvaged and recyclable materials; diverting up to 288 tons of demolition waste. If

Muncie, implemented a deconstruction policy instead of demolishing their dilapidated

housing stock they could divert over 12,960 tons of demolition waste and could salvage

and recycle over one million square feet of materials.

8 Diana Greer, “Building the Deconstruction Industry,” BioCycle (November, 2004): 36.

22

CHAPTER III: HISTORIC PRESERVATION

The preservation field encompasses more then the idea of maintaining a historic

structure; it also involves the rehabilitation, adaptive use, restoring and reconstructing

processes. The Secretary of the Interior has developed a list of guidelines to be carefully

followed through all of these processes. The involvement of architectural salvage at first

appears hard to define while being integrated into the standards. The idea of replacing

materials on historic structures is carefully examined and only when completely

necessary are materials removed and replaced. This trend subsides as it moves down the

list with preservation using new materials sparsely and reconstruction using all new

materials. Our main focus within this chapter is to identify when and where architectural

salvage has a significant role in the preservation field.

Using the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties

have two important goals:

“1) the preservation of historic materials and 2) the preservation of a building’s distinguishing character. Character refers to all those visual aspects and physical features that comprise the appearance of every historic building. Character defining moments include the overall shape of the building, its materials, craftsmanship, decorative details, interior spaces and features, as well as the various aspects of its site and environment.” 9

9 Lee H. Nelson, “Preservation Briefs: 17,” Technical Preservation Services: National Park Service, pg. 1, http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/briefs/brief17.htm (accessed September 17, 2008).

23

To maintain all of these features the standard’s focus on maintaining as much historic

character as possible, and replacing few materials. When materials are found to be too

deteriorated, damaged, or lost, a feature may be repaired or replaced and “it is almost

always best to use historic materials.”10

In the past, preservationists have found it difficult to find historic materials and as

a result have been forced to use alternative materials, which may not last as long due to

deterioration and lack of material compatibility, or may damage the historic fabric during

the application process or removal. Because of these consequences it is important to

identify a relationship between the need for architectural salvage and preservation. The

following sections: preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, and reconstruction, introduce

where and when replacement materials can be used on a historic structure; the full list of

materials is located in Appendix C.

Historic Preservation

Preservation standards are the strictest, with little to no allowance of removal or

additions to historic structures and features. Preservation at its core is designed to

“sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of an historic property;”11 with an

emphasis on protecting, stabilizing, and maintaining the historic materials and features.

Under these guidelines it is maintained that if “repair by stabilization, consolidations, and

conservation proves inadequate, the next level of intervention involves the limited

replacement of kind of extensively deteriorated or missing parts of features when there

10 Sharon C. Park, “Preservation Briefs: 16,” Technical Preservation Services: National Park Service, pg. 1, http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/briefs/brief16.htm (accessed September 17, 2008).

11 Kay Weeks and Anne Grimmer, The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995), 14.

24

are surviving prototypes.”12 Materials are strictly limited and must match the original

material both physically and visually; and the new materials must be distinguished from

the old for future research and documentation. It is also noted that if prominent features

or materials are significantly damaged, irreplaceable, or missing then a rehabilitation or

restoration treatment should be considered more appropriate.

Restoration

Restoration is the next step down from preservation. Restoration is the act of

taking a building back to a specific point in time by means of “removal of features from

other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration

period.”13 When replacing materials or specific features, restoration is not limited to the

exact material originally used, instead it allows for a compatible substitute. Restoration

does however emphasize that replacement should only be considered when a feature is

too deteriorated to repair and all replacements should be modeled after similar

components.

Rehabilitation

Rehabilitation is the process of giving a building a compatible use through

“repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which

convey its historical, cultural, and architectural value.”14 The rehabilitation process is the

most widely used among the four preservation processes; having great lenience with

material replacement and repair. Similar to preservation and restoration, rehabilitation

calls for replacing materials or features with new material only if the level of

12 Weeks and Grimmer, 17. 13 Ibid, 117. 14 Ibid, 61.

25

deterioration makes it impossible to fix. Similar materials are recommended for

replacement but if not economically feasible, other compatible materials may be used.

Reconstruction

The reconstruction of a structure differs completely from preservation,

restoration, and rehabilitation. Unlike the former, reconstruction deals with new

construction of a historic building. Reconstruction is the process of depicting a historic

site through “form, features, and detailing of a non-surviving site, landscape, building,

structures, or object for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of

time and in its historic location.”15 For the rebuilding of the structure it is imperative to

have clear documentation for the building materials such as masonry, wood, and metals.

Materials should only be incorporated if documented; with the exception of unexposed

structural features which are not historically significant to the building. It is also

recommended to duplicate all historic exterior as well as interior features including

“columns, cornices, baseboards, fireplaces and mantels, paneling, light fixtures,

hardware, and flooring.”16

When selecting what materials should be used for the replacement or repair of

historic features, you should always match the material in color, texture, style, scale, and

type. To accomplish this it best to use the same material which was used, or a salvaged

material with the same characteristics. Preservation and restoration projects tend to be

more specific and the building characteristics which make it historic may be specialized

and more difficult to match with a salvaged item from a local non-historic building. For

15 Weeks and Grimmer, 164. 16 Ibid, 167.

26

rehabilitation projects it is easier to incorporate salvaged building materials since the

standards are more lenient on what can be used. Reconstruction projects may have the

hardest time incorporating salvaged materials. Since a reconstruction represents what was

originally constructed it is important that all document materials are used exactly as they

were which limits the materials available from salvage. Overall, the use of architectural

salvage is possible in the historic preservation process if the materials are available for

use.

27

CHAPTER IV: THE SALVAGE MARKET

The use of architectural salvage in Historic Preservation is only possible if there is

a market where these materials are available. By doing a quick search on the internet you

will discover various outlets where architectural salvage can be purchased across the

country. These outlets consist of salvaged lumber warehouses, architectural antique

shops, Habitat for Humanity ReStores, and deconstruction company warehouses to name

a few. All of these locations are sites of architectural heritage; the pieces they hold in

their stores identify a point in our history. While the item may no longer hold its value

within a structure it can be used again to add historical character and detail to other

buildings.

The architectural salvage industry has been rejuvenated with the growth of the

recycling movement over the last twenty years. New products can be constructed out of

reused materials and recycled materials can replace virgin materials in existing

manufacturing processes.17 The potential for reuse is vast. The U.S. EPA estimates

appliances, furniture, carpets, and other miscellaneous durable goods (not including

construction and demolition waste) comprise 15% of the municipal solid waste stream, or

nearly 32 million tons, with a recycling rate of only 17%. Even after recycling, nearly 26

17 Kivi Leroux & Neil Seldman, “Deconstruction: Salvaging Yesterday’s Buildings for Tomorrow’s Sustainable Communities,” Institute for Local Self-Reliance & Materials for the Future Foundation, 2000): 16.

28

million tons of durable goods are land filled or incinerated each year. These materials

combined with those salvaged through deconstruction; result in a wealth of material

resources available for small business enterprises.18 In the next few pages, will discuss

the long history of architectural salvage, where to find salvaged items and the demand for

salvaged materials. The end of this chapter examines the Midwest salvage market

through a survey of salvaged material retailers, deconstruction and demolition companies.

History of the Trade

The used building materials industry, which is the primary market for salvaged

building materials, is an industry with a long history. Starting in the 1500’s, the trading of

architectural interior salvage became all the rage in the upper classes. During this time, it

is rare to find documentation of the sales of salvaged items until the 1700’s where

auctioning companies began to produce catalogues for each building to be dismantled.

These catalogues demonstrate the elements which were considered the most valuable;

mantel pieces, paneling or wainscot, and other more portable items. Starting in 1747,

there is written documentation for the demolition of the James Duke of Chandos home in

Canons, Middlesex.19 Mr. Cock, the cataloger, took eleven days and went room by room

identifying all salvageable materials. The finished product listed “180 yards of

wainscoting, two circular niches, impost and fluted pilasters,”20 and the list goes on.

Other documentation leads us to believe that the sale of architectural ornaments was not

uncommon and in fact, common place among the privileged. In America this form of

18 Leroux & Seldman, 17. 19 John Harris, Moving Rooms: the Trade in Architectural Salvage, (China, Best-set Typesetter

Ltd. & World Print, 2007), 16. 20 Ibid.

29

deconstruction and salvaging is not documented on the same level as European countries.

Americans never truly began salvaging building materials for use in another structure. It

was only when American museums began purchasing period interiors for displays did we

see a large influx of salvage; but still there is no documentation of salvaging for personal

use.

Finding Architectural Salvage

Depending on the type of architectural salvage dealer, one may stumble across old

doors, windows, fireplace mantels, moldings, claw foot tubs, lighting fixtures, old growth

lumber, cast iron railings, wood flooring, and bricks. In a Habitat for Humanity ReStore,

for example, you may find both new and used materials. Reuse operations include those

organizations that accept used, overstocked, or outdated materials such as furniture,

building materials, appliances, equipment, and other durable goods. Materials are made

available at low cost, and are sold to consumers and the building industry along with

artists and furniture makers looking for low cost items.21

An alternative to purchasing materials at a warehouse is to purchase them directly

from the deconstruction site. Building contractors and craftspeople who are interested in

a particular item/items may chose to purchase this way allowing them to save even more

money by removing the items themselves. The Green Institute, for example, sells two-

thirds of its salvaged material, much of it lesser-value flooring, dimensional lumber and

brick, directly from the deconstruction job site or at a warehouse that complements its

reuse store.22 This allows them to make relatively higher profits since they use less of

21 Greer, 37. 22 Seldman & Jackson, 37.

30

their labor force for material removal and do not need significant storage and display

space.

Most building material dealers sell all products “as is,” while there are some

which reconstitute the material into another product or provide some material cleaning.

Manufactures, for example, have found that “rustic” style furniture, which is defined as

looking old and well worn, are highly desirable. As the company Crate & Barrel

discovered, nail holes and other signs of wear on deconstructed wood are often the

wood’s greatest selling point. They were able to advertize a “60” by 53” table made from

wood salvaged from a deconstructed building, with many visible knots and nail holes, for

$1,499.”23 This demonstrates the potential for salvaged materials, reused or recycled.

Even smaller businesses are remanufacturing architectural salvage from

deconstruction into flooring, siding, and cabinetry. For example, Pioneer Millworks of

Shortville, New York, specializes in remilling large salvaged timbers into products such

as flooring, trim, dimensional lumber, and cabinetry,24 and these products sell. There is a

large market for high quality materials. The value of certain materials salvaged from old

buildings has increased, and people are paying a premium for particular architectural

elements. “A lot of people are demanding heart-of-pine flooring, old bricks, and old

mantelpieces,” says David H. Griffin, Jr., vice president of the Greensboro, North

Carolina—based D. H. Griffin Wrecking Company.25 A majority of these materials you

cannot purchase new, establishing a demand sector within the salvage market.

23 Leroux & Seldman, 18. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid.

31

Supply & Demand for Salvaged Materials

Currently the demand for salvaged building materials is directed towards high end

salvage: fireplace mantels, decorative elements, elaborate doors and stained glass

windows. There are many factors that could limit potential demand for the entire market

including: “lack of public and/or contractor awareness about the availability of salvaged

materials; lack of an awareness of the significant price difference between new materials

and salvaged materials; the “hit or miss” problem of not being able to find a salvaged

material when needed, or not enough of a particular salvaged material to complete the

project; lack of awareness about the environmental benefits of using salvaged materials;

and perceptions that salvaged materials are inferior to new products.”26 These factors are

also determined by their location. At the Habitat for Humanity ReStore in Kansas City,

Missouri, for example, the Program Manager, Brian Alferman states, “the demand from

the customer is there; if we can get the materials on the floor it will sell.”27

Another concern is where the salvaged materials are coming from that end up in

the retail salvage stores. Some retailers rely completely on donations while others go into

the field and do the deconstruction themselves. In order to reach a larger consumer base,

companies have found themselves starting their own deconstruction company or creating

an alliance with demolition contractors in the area so they can remove items before

demolition. “Donations from contractors provide a more reliable source of material to the

store,” says Alferman, “About a year ago, 75% or more of our donations came from

26 “Building Deconstruction and Material Reuse in Washington, D.C,” Urban and Economic Development Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (December, 1999): 9.

27 Greer, 40.

32

individual home owners or small landlords. Now it is more evenly split, with 50% of the

donations made by retail business and contractors.”28

A more typical concern is from architects and designers who acknowledge the

demand is there but on a smaller scale. Smaller projects, residential home improvements

and small commercial establishments have a large demand for higher end salvaged

materials. The market for larger projects is just beginning to be examined through

programs developed by the U.S. Green Building Council and from city officials wishing

to “green” their cities and reduce landfill waste.

Money and time constraints also limit how many materials are salvaged. On a

demolition site, money and time determines what is going to be saved and/or recycled

and what will be thrown away. “Demolition contractors are in business to make a profit,

and if it’s cheaper to knock stuff down and haul it to a landfill than to recycled it in some

fashion, that is what they’ll do,” says Kurt Buss, executive director of the nonprofit Used

Building Materials Association.29 If the demolition contractor does not acknowledge the

material wealth then no architectural materials will be saved, hindering the supply and

demand infrastructure.

Another problem facing the industry is national and state building codes and

regulations. On a national level there are restrictions on the use of salvaged lumber,

which is currently limited to nonstructural applications. “Building codes require all

structural lumber to be graded,” says Ted Reiff, of The ReUse People. “Right now this is

not a problem,” says Reiff. “But it could impede the growth of the industry as quantities

28 Greer, 40. 29 John S. Manuel, “Unbuilding for the Environment,” Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol.

111, No. 16, (December, 2003): A887.

33

of salvage lumber increase.”30 States have also begun to limit the sale of high-flow toilets

because of the excessive use of water, which hinders the market for used fixtures.

There is also the problem of hazardous chemicals within products, lead, mercury,

and asbestos, which have been banned from new consumer products. For example,

painted materials have a risk of containing lead based paint, if constructed prior to 1970,

which is considered to be unsafe and has to be dealt with before reuse. Today, there are

various products available for concealing lead-based paints making more products

reusable. Items which contain mercury or asbestos are best to be properly disposed

according to local waste management department.

Midwest Architectural Salvage Survey

The goal of conducting a survey of Midwest companies dealing with architectural

salvage was to establish if there is a salvage market and if so, what the key components

are which make up this market. Following a search no existing survey was found so one

was created to answer the hypotheses. The first few questions of the survey were

designed to get a better understanding of the companies and how they interact with

architectural salvage; where they are located, what types of operations they run, and

where they find the architectural salvage to sell. Other questions look at what types of

materials are being salvaged, what materials are being sold and in what quantities, who

are the consumers and, from a historic preservation perspective, what type of information

is recorded. The companies are identified by state, so an analysis could also be done to

see whether there are unique characteristics by location. All of these questions effectively

30 Greer, 41.

34

help gain a better insight into the salvage, deconstruction and demolition fields in the

Midwest.

Once these questions were compiled the target population was selected. The target

population is composed of companies which engage in architectural salvage retailing,

deconstruction, demolition and material recycling in the Midwest. The Midwest is

defined as the following states: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota,

Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin. Companies were

initially selected from the 2007-2008 Guide to Architectural Salvage and Antique

Companies.31 The directory divides companies by state and specialty: salvage sales,

deconstruction, demolition, selective dismantling and materials recycling. From each

category, companies were selected and compiled into a list with the companies name,

location, internet web addresses and specialties; see Appendix A & B. Companies were

also selected based on what information was found on their internet sites, if available. If a

website clearly established that a company engages in the salvaging of architectural

materials then it qualified for the survey. When the companies were selected, the ones

with email contact information were entered into SurveyMonkey, an internet website

designed for sending, collecting and analyzing surveys.

Once the target population (112 companies) was entered into SurveyMonkey, an

initial email was sent to each contact explaining the survey goals, requesting

participation, and for anyone interested, a link to the survey. From this initial email, five

companies opted out of the survey, and nine email addresses failed to be deliverable;

31 Rich Ellis, 2007-2008 Guide to Architectural Salvage and Antique Companies, Virginia: RKE Publishing LLC (2007).

35

leaving a target market of ninety-eight companies. From the initial email only nine

responses were received; from here a second plea was drafted a week after the first email

to encourage more responses. This second email increased responses to a total of twenty-

five or a 25.5% response rate. From the responses the initial questions can be answered

based on the demographics provided. The following is a brief discussion on five survey

questions; the complete survey results are located in Appendix C. While all the survey

questions are interesting in discussion the five questions to be discussed relate closely to

the discussion followed throughout the thesis.

The results below indicate that architectural details, i.e., stair rails, mantels, tin

ceiling tiles, and flooring are frequently requested by customers. Other items which

receive inquiries are hardware, plumbing fixtures, cabinetry, doors, electrical, i.e.,

lighting fixtures and light switches, and lumber. Relating these answers to question 6,

there is a clear connection to what consumers want and what materials are available.

With such a large demand for architectural details it is not surprising to find that it is also

the most likely material to be found for sale. Other items frequently available for sale are

doors, electrical items, hardware, flooring, windows, and plumbing fixtures which

directly correspond to the first graph. Overall architectural details appear to be the mostly

widely available and requested salvaged items.

36

Figure 2: Midwest Architectural Salvage Survey Question 11

Other: Sellers also noted that consumers are interested in purchasing ironwork, garden elements, stonework, paint, fencing, radiators and stained glass windows.

37


Other: unique architectural items, ironwork, gates, garden elements, stonework, paint, cast iron radiators, HVAC units, transformers, value-added wood products.

It is important for the salvage market to understand their consumers, this leads to

what types of materials they purchase and can help establish pricing so the materials will

sell. It is interesting to discover that the largest population of buyers is the private

homeowners sector. The previously stated data indicates these buyers are looking for

replacement materials, potentially for upgrades or remodels. Contractors, architects and

designers along with artists are also taking advantage of this market on a higher level.

38

Disappointingly, historic preservationists, who can gain the most from the architectural

salvage market through the use of these materials in preservation, restoration and

rehabilitation projects, do not appear to be taking advantage of the material wealth

available.


Other: TV and movie companies; and landlords/ house flippers also frequent their stores.

A significant question in this field is what is the source of the salvaged material?

Previously consumers have questioned the source of the materials, because some

homeowners have claimed that people have stolen quality materials from their homes in

order to sell them in the architectural salvage market. The survey asked each consumer to

indicate all the ways in which they obtain their materials. The majority indicated that they

deconstructed buildings as part of their business, allowing for clear documentation of the

origin of the materials. Other frequently used sources of purchase are from other retailers

and at demolition or deconstruction sites.

39


Other: Demolition, construction companies warehouse, trade-ins, customer purchases, and Amish communities.

From the crosstab response chart below we can see how many different salvage

related activities in which companies are engaged. The columns indicate the companies

surveyed, and the percentages below designate the activities in which the companies

participate. It seems that material sales are the most common activity conducted by all

businesses with deconstruction being the second most common activity. The chart

indicates those who engage in demolition all do deconstruction, but only about 30% of

the time do they also engage in either material down cycling or material refurbishing. Of

those companies which perform deconstruction, 37% also participate in demolition, 15%

in material down cycling, and 27% in material refurbishing.

40


Other: Demolition auctions, manufacture garden elements from salvaged materials, lighting restorer, woodworking shop (products made from salvaged lumber), and recycle materials into unique items (i.e. tables).

When it comes to using materials in preservation projects, the life of the new

materials must be fully documented, where they came from, age, and description. It is

interesting to see that the companies which maintain a record of all materials also retain a

significant amount of historic information. While the general material description is kept

on record, the source location for the material is also regularly kept on record along with

quantity, estimated value, and the date received. Half of the retailers keep an estimated

age of the materials along with a third of the companies acknowledging the rarity of the

item. This appears to be linked with how a company prices the item; the more unique/rare

and higher the quality/condition an item the higher the price. In addition to this “value

41

added” price, standard prices are also regularly set relative to national pricing and local

competitor prices.


Other: style or period of design, condition, and size

42


Other: cost involving the removal, transportation, display, and rarity of the materials, professional opinion, price at 1/3 below retail (non-profit), and ½ of retail.

43

CHAPTER V: DECONSTRUCTION

For centuries it was normal for individuals to reuse or deconstruct the structures

available around them. If a new building or a renovation was needed, the town would tear

down buildings which were no longer used and reuse the materials available. It has only

been in the modern era when landfill space has been plentiful and raw materials cheap,

that demolition—knocking down structures without regard for reusing the components—

has become the rule. Today, it is no longer uncommon to knock down massive structures

that are barely 30 years old.32 Recently new incentives for deconstruction have been put

into the mix; landfill space has become sparse and cities are placing regulations on

construction and demolition waste, the green building movement has become well

accepted in the design and construction trades, and the preservation movement has

increased in stamina advocating to save structures and not tear them down. These

elements have allowed the deconstruction industry to gain ground in the past decade.

Originating from standard demolition practices, deconstruction “involves

carefully taking apart portions of buildings or removing their contents with the primary

goal of reuse in mind. Deconstruction can take place prior to standard demolition, be an

32 Manuel, A881.

44

integral part of demolition, or largely take the place of conventional building removal.”33

Deconstruction is by far more environmentally friendly then demolition, diverting a

generous amount of materials from landfills every year while reducing pollution and

energy consumption associated with new material manufacturing and production. Unlike

demolition, deconstruction is considered to be a labor and time intensive procedure using

low-tech methods for material removal, material separation and storage. While this may

seem to be a negative outcome, it actually helps to create jobs and a salvaged material

market.

Deconstruction service providers and advocates are motivated by multiple goals:

“to salvage high-quality materials for reuse and remanufacturing; to make a profit; to

divert as much material as possible from landfill, in order to avoid tipping costs; to

provide short-term job training opportunities; to provide long-term, high-quality

employment; and to preserve the history associated with the building.”34 All of these

components allow for this industry to boom in today’s economy. With a growing market

for salvaged materials, deconstruction has the potential to become common practice.

In the late 1960’s, as the grass roots recycling movement was started, Rick Anthony, an

early pioneer, pointed out that “recycling is a force of nature and it must be obeyed if we

are to survive on the planet.”35

33 NAHB Research Center, Inc., “A Guide to Deconstruction: an Overview of Deconstruction with a Focus on Community Development Opportunities Complete with Deconstruction Project Profiles and Case Studies,” (February, 2000): 1.

34 Leroux & Seldman, 14. 35 Ibid, 16.

45

Deconstruction Industry

According to the U.S. EPA, an estimated 65 million tons of demolition waste are

generated each year, with 31% (20 million tons) coming from residential projects and

69% (45 million tons) from nonresidential projects. “This is equivalent to all of the

containers and packaging waste generated by Americans each year. Yet only about 20% -

30% of demolition waste is reused or recycled.”36 These numbers relate directly to the

consumption practices of our society. Each year, the construction industry is responsible

for the consumption of more than one-third of the world’s raw materials and about 10%

of the total energy consumption in the United States.37 It should also be noted that within

the construction industry approximately 94% of all residential buildings built each year in

the U.S. are light wood-framed construction.38 By conducting deconstruction, a majority

of these materials can be reclaimed and put back into the marketplace for further

consumption.

In 2003, the Department of Environmental Protection in Massachusetts set out to

determine how much construction and demolition material could be diverted from the

landfill if a new law banning waste was implemented. From the study conducted by the

Boston-based firm, Tellus Institute, they estimated “C&D recycling in Massachusetts

would increase from about 3.5 million tons in 2000 to more than 5 million tons in

2010.”39 All of the materials diverted could possibly be used in new construction,

rehabilitation, and/or recycled into new products.

36 Leroux & Seldman, 2. 37 Ibid. 38 Bradley Guy & Sean McLendon, “How Cost Effective is Deconstruction?” BioCycle (July,

2001): 75. 39 Jennifer Weeks, “Finding Markets for C&D (Non) Debris,” BioCycle (November 2004): 45.

46

Types of Deconstruction

There are two phases to deconstruction: soft-stripping and complete

deconstruction. The degree of deconstruction is determined by the site, time constraints,

and materials available. Some demolition jobs will only allow for soft-stripping to occur

due to time constraints. Soft-stripping refers to the removal of specific building

components or equipment prior to demolition of the structure.40 Items typically removed

are “plumbing or electrical fixtures, appliances, HVAC equipment, cabinets, doors,

windows, hardwood and possibly tile flooring;” anything that is easy and quick to remove

and carries a higher retail value, “rafters, floor joists, wall framing members, and perhaps

sheathing materials may be of a size, material, and condition to warrant salvage,”41 but

are more difficult to remove. When a complete deconstruction of a structure is feasible,

then the majority of the building components and materials will be removed. A complete

deconstruction involves initial planning to determine economic feasibility. To prove

deconstruction would be a positive endeavor the following procedure is typically

followed: “a) a thorough inventory of all materials identifying those for salvage,

recycling, or disposal; b) a careful analysis of existing markets or outlets for materials to

be sold; c) sufficient storage space for materials; d) specific contract language which

clearly identifies the intended end-use of the building’s various components; e) careful

scheduling to ensure adequate time for disassembly.”42 Once this procedure is complete,

the deconstruction will take place and materials will be disassembled, sold on the job site

or hauled away to be stored in a warehouse for eventual resale.

40 NAHB Research Center, Inc., 5. 41 Ibid. 42 Ibid.

47

Building Assessment

When establishing the feasibility of a deconstruction project, the most important

part is the proposed building. The size and material wealth of the building will determine

if deconstruction is financially possible. Ted Reiff, President of the ReUse People, points

out that deconstruction costs and savings are completely dependent on the age, location,

types and condition of the materials within the house.43 It has been proposed that the best

building candidates were constructed between 1800 and the 1940’s when high quality

raw materials were still available and used in the construction industry. Virtually all

houses constructed before World War II are candidates for deconstruction, due to the

quality of materials used and the methods used to construct them.44

A through investigation of these buildings will allow for more materials to be

salvaged and recycled. During this process it is common for contracts to establish where

the materials will be going; a materials resale warehouse, a non-profit group, commercial

recycling plants, or even private homeowners. Having prearranged agreements for some

materials allows for cleaner removal and a quick turnaround for the overall

deconstruction. During the initial inspection of a house it is recommended to identify the

following: building size and scale, structural condition, site access, interior access,

hazardous materials, and salvage potential. It is important to do this inspection in order to

identify all materials which will need to be dealt with, the amounts of materials (for

transportation and dumping assessment), how easily will these materials be able to be

removed, and what materials are not salvageable. The tools required for a through

43 Greer, 37. 44 Leroux & Seldman, 5.

48

inspection of a proposed structure may include the following: “insight (an initial visual

inspection for building suitability), inspection forms, camera, hand/power tools (some

intrusive investigation may be useful), respiratory gear (if hazardous materials are

assumed to be present).”45

A typical structure which would be considered economically feasible could be

described as “wood-framed with heavy timbers and beams, or with unique woods such as

Douglas fir, American chestnut, and old growth southern yellow pine; constructed with

specialty materials such as hardwood flooring, multi-paned windows, architectural

moldings, and unique doors or plumbing/electrical fixtures; constructed with high-quality

brick laid with low-quality mortar; structurally sound, i.e. generally weather-tight to

minimize rotted and decayed materials.”46 The structure described above would be an

ideal candidate for deconstruction, because of its high volume of reusable materials

which could be easily deconstructed and sold.

1 2 3 Deconstruct

The following is a quick walk through of a typical deconstruction project.

1) Make a careful inspection of the buildings interior (as described in the previous

section). Remove all appliances, doors, sinks, along with architectural moldings, tin

ceilings, wainscot panels, cabinets, hardware, and miscellaneous items not of a structural

nature.

45 NAHB Research Center, Inc., 4. 46 Ibid, 3.

49

2) Remove and recycle any carpet and/or ceilings tiles which are of no use: some

companies offer reclamations deals in which they will take away old carpets and ceiling

tiles and recycle them.

3) Remove and recycle drywall. Remove old hardwood floors one piece at a time to avoid

damaging the tongues.

4) While interior work is under way, siding, gutters, and exterior trim can be removed.

Veneer surfaces may be removed, along with flashing and windows.

5) Slate and tile roofing are extremely durable and can typically be reused “as-is,” but

their underlayment will need to be disposed. Slate and tile can be resold unlike asphalt

shingles which have no resale value but may be recycled into road paving material in

some states.

6) Remove heavy roofing timbers and wall beams. At this point you may also remove any

chimneys.

7) Deconstruct exterior walls removing any old bricks and wood.

8) Demolish and crush concrete foundations into small pieces and use on site as a fill for

the next foundation or give to a local aggregate company for recycling.47 Brick and stone

foundations should be removed for reuse.

Economics

The economics behind deconstruction are always evaluated in comparison with

demolition. While demolition takes less time and labor then deconstruction, it pays more

for transportation and removal of materials not to mention the long-term environmental

cost of holding materials in landfills. When the right buildings are selected, the cost of

47 Matthew Power, “How To: Cost-Cutting Teardowns,” Builder (March 2003): 54-55.

50

deconstruction is less than or similar to the cost of demolition because additional labor

costs are offset by the sale of salvaged materials and avoided disposal fees; even when

deconstruction can require 10% to 15% more time and labor then traditional demolition

practices.48

Deconstruction is typically thought to be less cost effective than traditional

demolition when in fact you have the potential to make a profit from deconstruction

which cannot be obtained through demolition. By conducting deconstruction, companies

and individuals can potentially generate revenue. First, companies generate revenue by

selling the salvaged materials. Second, deconstruction companies can reduce costly

investments in heavy equipment, and significantly reduce the capital costs associated

with clearing a site. Third, deconstruction companies avoid the disposal costs associated

with landfilling the demolition debris.49

The largest percentage of time spent on any deconstruction is the actual

deconstruction activity, an average of 26% of total time. Because you must take the

building down schematically, versus plowing through the structure, time increases

significantly in comparison with demolition which on average takes less then 10% of the

total time. “The next greatest percentage of time was in processing materials, an average

of 24%. Disposal and cleaning required an average of 17% of total time.”50 Clearly

deconstruction is a labor intensive activity, but it also creates jobs and increases revenues

through materials sales.

48 Leroux & Seldman, 12. 49 Ibid, 3. 50 Guy & McLendon, 76.

51

Deconstruction is a way of creating jobs. Unskilled and low-skilled workers can

receive on-the-job training in use of basic tools and techniques for carpentry,

construction, and materials recovery, as well as critical thinking, problem-solving, good

work habits, and team work.51 Cities concerned with a large abandoned housing market

should look at deconstruction as a means of relinquishing the problem while creating job

training and employment benefits at relatively the same cost of demolition.

Deconstruction, if fully integrated into the U.S. demolition industry, could create 200,000

jobs and salvage $1 billion worth of building materials from the deconstruction of the

estimated 200,000 buildings it takes down annually.52

Historic Influence & Benefits

Deconstruction allows communities to retain some of the historical significance of

buildings slated for removal by reusing the components of the old building in new

construction or in the renovation of other historic structures. In Hartford, Connecticut, for

example, deconstructed lumber and bricks were used in the rebuilding of the downtown

riverfront district,53 helping to maintain the fabric of the community and the historic

character which makes it unique. Community’s nation-wide having the same opportunity

as Hartford, Connecticut, should identify the material significance of their older buildings

which are slated for demolition or need to be rehabilitated. By identifying these

resources, buildings can be rehabilitated with salvaged items while other non-historic

buildings are deconstructed and their materials put back into the market.

51 Leroux & Seldman, 4. 52 Seldman & Jackson, 34. 53 Leroux & Seldman, 5.

52

Other factors which can make deconstruction more financially appealing are the

tax benefits which companies or individuals can receive. For example: if a private owner

donates the salvaged materials from their building to a nonprofit, they can receive tax

deductions worth the value of the recovered materials. “A large motivator is the tax

benefit homeowners get from donating salvaged building materials to non-profits,” says

Julie Larson;54 Assistant Program Director for Deconstruction at the nonprofit Green

Institute in Minneapolis. Property owners who donate materials to nonprofit

organizations get to deduct “the entire appraised value of the materials to be salvaged.”55

Tax benefits can make deconstruction financially feasible for both private homeowners

and deconstruction and demolition companies.

Overall, the use of deconstruction in every city would generate more jobs,

increase revenues (private and government), and would promote the use of salvaged

materials, reducing the strain on our environment by lessening the need for new materials

for construction and helping the city maintain its historic fabric. Deconstruction, while

more expensive up front then demolition, pays for it self through landfill evasion, the

retention of historically beautiful materials, and through the sale of these materials.

Deconstruction is not only an industry but a social instrument which can help cities

minimize neighborhood blight creating an environment the citizens are proud to call

home; while creating jobs allowing people to maintain their own structures beautifying

the community further. Deconstruction may seem to be a loosing battle for the

54 Greer, 36. 55 Preservation: 22-23.

53

preservation movement, but the materials removed can be used in preservation projects

helping to maintain our culturally significant structures and a cities architectural heritage.

54

CHAPTER VI: SALVAGED MATERIALS

For many years, salvagers and savvy demolition companies have recovered the

more valuable elements from buildings before they were destroyed. But doing so was

only a minor consideration in the plan to remove the building and was done in a

haphazard way that only salvaged the best, most accessible pieces. This process is called

“architectural salvage.” Deconstructing a building allows for a more comprehensive

recovery of these materials, because the process is designed around reuse and recycling

of much or all of the structure, “rather than salvaging only the easy targets before the

wrecking ball swings through.”56

On a deconstruction site, materials are separated into reusable, recyclable,

nonhazardous waste, and hazardous waste. By initially identifying these types of

materials the deconstruction process may increase materials salvaged and be more

profitable. Materials which are removed during the deconstruction process are generally

easy to remove, resist damage during removal, and have a high resale value. While this is

not true for all materials, the majority which are in selling condition will be removed and

the rest will be recycled or thrown away. Materials which can be recycled vary

throughout the country; your local city or county determines what can be recycled based

56 Leroux & Seldman, 8.

55

on their facilities. There are also private/commercial material manufacturing companies

which will recycle used materials, such as Mohawk, a national flooring manufacturer.

Mohawk will accept carpet for recycling if it is not significantly soiled or damaged

because they can recycle the fibers into new carpet. Nonhazardous waste is considered to

be materials which are free of toxins, but can not be used as is or reconstituted into

another material; these materials should be disposed of at construction and demolition

landfills. Materials which contain chemicals which are now known to be toxic to humans

are considered hazardous waste and must be removed and disposed of carefully at a

specific location determined by your city. In the following pages we will discuss the

reusable materials pertinent to Historic Preservation, materials which can be recycled,

and materials which are considered hazardous and ways which they can be saved.

Material Wealth for Historic Preservation

As with all materials removed during deconstruction, style, age, uniqueness, and

condition affect the value of the object. Unique or historic architectural components, such

as stained glass, fireplace mantels, ornate doorknobs, and other fancy hardware, always

command the highest prices and require relatively little labor to remove. These materials

also are historically important when looking into the type of materials used and how it

can be implemented back into the preservation and design fields. Removing cabinets,

plumbing fixtures, windows and lumber require the most time and labor, but have a high

resale value within the industry; while also having a place within historic preservation.

When conducting a rehabilitation, preservation or restoration the following items will

prove to be helpful when an item needs replacing or is not historically accurate for

maintaining the historic character of the property.

56

The following table identifies the materials available from deconstruction, the

difficulty of removal (easy to difficult), any concerns regarding the material, and the

historic preservation value. The historic preservation value distinguishes each material

through a tier system, with 1st tier materials in good condition and quality and has a

valued use in preservation while 2nd tiered materials can be in moderate to good

condition, but have no place within the preservation field. 1st tier plus materials have a

known historic value and are excellent condition.

Table A: Historic Preservation Value of MaterialsMaterial Removal Concerns Historic Preservation Value

Lighting Fixtures Easy No ground wire, missing parts or damaged

Original metal and little damage – 1st tier Painted metal – 2nd tier Paint removed – 1st tier

Switch Plates & Outlet Covers

Easy If building wiring is updated, they may not fit the new switch or outlet

Decorative or metal and little damage – 1st tier If unusable may be important to create a historical replacement

Wiring & Metal Conduit

Moderate Not to code Not reusable, but can be recycled for materials, i.e., copper

Kitchen Appliances Easy to Moderate

Not energy efficient if more than 5 yrs old May not match current trends even if in working order – i.e., colored vs. stainless steel

If in working order – 1st tier especially for house museums If in working order but not historic – resale in smaller marketsNot working – provide resource for research or recycled for materials

HVAC Easy toDifficult

Not energy efficient if more than 5 years old may require asbestos removal to access

If in working order: Radiators/steam heat – 1st tier Wall or window units – 1st tier Fans – 1st tier If not in working order – recycled for materials Whole house – generally recycled but possibly hazardous waste

Gas Stoves and Fireplaces

Easy Technology issues if installed prior to 1970

If in working order and newer than 1970 – 1st tier

57

Older than 1970 recycled for materials

Tubs, & Sinks Easy to Difficult

Water conservation laws may prevent use Fiberglass difficult to remove without damage

Claw foot tubs (6’) and pedestal sinks especially white – 1st tier Claw foot tubs – odd sizes, and non-decorative feet – 2nd tier Colored or period fixtures may be 1st tier to match a period building or may be disposed in landfillsChipped or with rust stains – 2nd tier with repair or disposed in landfills Fiberglass enclosures or whirlpool tubs are not historic but may be resold

Toilets Easy Water conservationlaws usually prevent use

If in working order – 1st tier especially for house museums If in working order but not historic – may be recycled or disposed in landfills

Kitchen & Bathroom Cabinetry

Easy to Moderate

Not standard sized, or built as units May be compromised during removal if attached to wall with a fixative rather than hardware

Hardwoods (oak, cherry, hickory, and walnut), and unpainted – 1st tier Cabinet styles from a period building for a similar period building – 1st or 2nd tier

Other wood features – stairs, railings, trim, paneling, and mantelpieces

Easy to Difficult

Many of the pieces are built for a specific building or space

Mantelpieces – 1st tier because easy to remove but may not be used as intended (may become decorative rather than functional)Paneling from walnut, cherry, or mahogany – 1st tier if undamaged Other pieces may be deconstructed and used in other woodwork

Doors Easy Original frame/casing may be lost or destroyed during deconstruction

Solid wood door with casing and hardware – 1st tier plus Doors with features, i.e., leaded glass or carvings – 1st

tier plus Solid wood doors minus casing – 1st tier Hollow-core door with casing and hardware – 2nd tier

58

Hollow-core door minus casing – 3rd tier – generally used for alternate function

Windows Difficult Painted with lead-based paint Usually not energy efficient

Unpainted, true divided-light windows – 1st tier for restoration or craft projects Lead paint removed – 2nd tier for craft projects Retrofitted double-glazed – 1st

tier for reconstruction Specialty Windows and Window Treatments

Easy to Difficult

Painted with lead-based paint Original glass or casing may be damaged or missing

Stained glass windows – if identified as a particular artisan – 1st tier plus Stained glass windows – not identified – 1st tier Period shutters – 1st tier plus especially for reconstruction or remodel of that period

Hardwood Flooring Moderate to Difficult

Loss of 10% - 15% during deconstruction Must have at least 1/8th

of an inch on the top tab for refinishing or not salvageable

Oak, birch, maple and walnut, 21/4” strips, 12’ or longer – 1st

tier plus All woods all lengths with low to moderate damage – 1st – 2nd

tierIf matching a period building flooring should be stockpiled in anticipation of possible flood or insect damage

Ceramic and Pressed Tin Tile

Moderate to Difficult

Significant loss during deconstruction

Ceramic Tile – if decorative and identified by a period – 1st

tierPressed Tin Tile – if not damaged – 1st tier Any tile used for craft – 2nd tier Pressed Tin Tiles if damaged can be recycled

Exterior Wood Siding – Cedar, Redwood, and Cypress

Moderate to Difficult

Nail holes if covered by aluminum or vinyl siding

Siding – if not damaged – 1st

tierSiding in poor condition can be recycled, used for fuel or reconstituted into another product

Bricks Moderate toDifficult

Vary in size, quality, consistency, and color

Older bricks, locally manufactured, with lime-based mortar – 1st tier plus Older bricks with lime-based mortar – 1st tier

59

Newer bricks with cement-based mortar – 2nd tier Locally made bricks should be stockpiled during deconstruction for repair of similar period buildings

Roofing – Clay Tile, Slate Shingles, Asphalt Shingles, Metal Tiles, & Wood Shingles

Difficult Clay is vulnerable to cracking and deglazing Slate is vulnerable to delaminating and weathering around nail holes

Clay and slate tile in good condition – 1st tier plus Asphalt, metal tiles and wood shingles may be recycled

Wood Framing Easy Do not need to consider historic value if the wood will be coveredMust check material strength (tensile strength) prior to use Not graded for new construction

True 2x4s from old growth trees – 1st tier Damaged framing, but still usable – 2nd tier Framing in poor condition can be recycled, used for fuel or reconstituted into another product

Landscaping Elements – Pavers, and Wood or Iron Structures

Easy to Moderate

May be used for historic preservation if similar materials were on site originally

Cement or brick pavers – in good condition – 1st tier Fences, arbors and gazebos in good condition – 1st tier Anything in poor condition may be recycled or reconstituted into another product

Materials Destined for Recycling

Once materials like wood and metals have been processed and made into building

materials, they have an inherent economic value. Rather than smashing this value into

pieces and burying it in a landfill, reuse and recycling keep value within the local

economy where it can continue to produce financial benefits as it is remanufactured and

used again.57 “The CMRA (Construction Materials Recycling Association) estimates

there are slightly more than 3,100 concrete and asphalt recycling plants in the country,

about 600 single-material or mixed-waste recycling facilities, and several dozen each of

57 Leroux & Seldman, 4.

60

asphalt shingle and gypsum recyclers.”58 Other materials commonly recycled are metals,

plastics, and scrap wood, which all can be reconstituted into another product and used

again. The following is a brief list of items found in a building which are not salvageable,

but can be recycled and reused.

Vinyl flooring and carpet are not typically salvaged, but instead recycled. Vinyl

flooring is often found to be glued down and difficult to remove. It may also contain

asbestos depending on when it was made, so removal should be done carefully so that the

asbestos does not become air born. Carpet is generally not salvaged unless it is brand new

or in extremely good condition; instead carpet can be recycled into new carpeting or other

plastic based products.

When dealing with ceilings and walls, almost always there is either gypsum or

lathe and plaster, neither of which is reusable. Gypsum if clean and free of paint can be

recycled into new gypsum boards. Acoustical tiles found on the ceilings can be recycled

only if they do not contain asbestos, if they do they are considered a hazardous waste.

Insulation will be found in three forms: loose fill, batts, and rigid foam. Loose fill

insulation is hard to collect and is not typically reused. Fiberglass batts can be salvaged

and reused if they are in good condition and show no signs of water damage. Rigid foam

insulation can be saved if the pieces are large,59 otherwise all insulation is recycled.

Bricks of a newer generation may have cement based mortar or are of a lower

quality and therefore are recycled. Because they are joined with newer cement based

mortar, newer bricks tend to be difficult to reuse because they break during removal or

58 Manuel, A883. 59 Faulk & Guy, 83.

61

the mortar can not be removed to allow for reuse. This makes them prime candidates for

recycling and fill material for roadbeds or new construction.

Vinyl siding is easily removed and reused if removed in the exact sequence in

which it was constructed. While vinyl can not be used in historic preservation projects, it

can be used in new construction. Stucco siding while it is a durable and long-lasting

material it cannot be salvaged because of the inherent destructive removal process. Since

stucco is a form of plaster, when removed it cracks and breaks into pieces therefore not

allowing for reuse, but it can be recycled.

Asphalt shingles can be recycled but may contain asbestos; some states will

recycle them into road bed fill. Wood shingles are not reusable; they are prone to weather

deterioration and are commonly chemically treated to prevent fires. If the wood has no

chemical treatment and is free of moss and other vegetative growth it can be recycled into

wood chips for fuel.

Metals found in buildings are known for there high monetary value and are

generally recycled instead of being reused. These products include: plumbing pipes,

heating ducts, metal roofing, gutters, siding, and appliances. It has also been noted that

metals should be divided into ferrous (steel and iron) and nonferrous (brass, bronze,

copper, aluminum) because the nonferrous metals are more valuable.60 “In 1999, more

than 120 million tons of scrap metal were recycled in the United States, according to the

Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, a trade association, and the market is

improving.”61

60 Leroux & Seldman, 63. 61 Manuel, A884.

62

Depending on the construction type, the building may have concrete floors, walls,

or foundations. Concrete recycling is becoming more common and local aggregate

companies offer to recycle the concrete if it contains no lead-based paint or other

materials from the deconstruction site.

Non-Hazardous & Hazardous Materials

During the deconstruction process it is inevitable that materials which are in good

condition will break or become marred to a point where they are no longer useable or

recyclable; but the materials are non-hazardous to the environment. Non-hazardous

materials take the form of insulation (all types), damaged wood, broken bricks/concrete,

lathe and plaster, metals which cannot be recycled, and some roofing materials. All of

these items are destined for the landfill because they are no longer usable in their present

form and cannot be recycled.

Hazardous materials are materials which contain chemicals which the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined to be hazardous to humans if

ingested into our systems. “You’re likely to find several types of potentially hazardous

materials on an unbuilding project, including asbestos, lead, mercury, polychlorinated

biphenyls (PCBs), unlabeled containers of mysterious substances that might be solvents

or oils, and other chemicals in older buildings.”62 Hazardous wastes are more difficult to

deal with then non-hazardous wastes because they have to be disposed of in accordance

to local laws. Fortunately not all hazardous wastes need to be thrown away, some can be

cleaned or the chemical can be encapsulated so that the material can be used again.

62 Faulk & Guy, 65.

63

The most commonly found hazardous materials are asbestos and lead-based

paint.63 The deconstruction of a building produces less risk of these hazardous chemicals

being released into the environment through the careful removal of known hazardous

materials at the being of the process. “At the Federal level, there is at present no

regulatory or policy guidance that permits, prohibits, or qualifies practice for salvaging

and reusing building materials coated with lead-based paint (LBP), in particular lumber

and timber products.64 Lead-based paint is hard to identify on sight without removing

paint samples and having tests run to determine if lead is present. Because of this, many

salvaged items you will find are painted with lead-based paint.

Over the years, the population has grown wary of lead and especially old-houses

which will contain lead-based paint, but there is no need. Lead-based paint does not

release lead into the environment unless it is broken releasing dust into the air, is ingested

into the body through the stomach, or is heated to a point where the chemical is released.

Because of this, it is possible to use materials which are coated with lead-based paint if

the paint is removed and disposed of properly or is encapsulated into the material where

it can no longer be released into the environment.

Encapsulation is the “application of a liquid coating that dries to form a watertight

jacket over the lead paint, is easy, cost effective, and homeowner friendly.”65 This

process is identical to applying a fresh coat of paint to a home. In the past, homeowners

63 Manuel, A884. 64 Thomas R. Napier, Robert H Faulk, George B. Guy, & Suzan Drodz, “Regulatory and Policy

Issues for Reuse and Remanufacture of Wood materials Coated with Lead-Based Paint,” United States Department of Agriculture (December, 2005): 1.

65 “Encapsulating Lead-Based Paint,” http://www.bobvila.com/HowTo_Library/Encapsulating_Lead_Based_Paint-Miscellaneous_Paint_and_Wallpaper-A1620.html (accessed on February 11, 2009).

64

would have to leave their home during the lead-removal process, by encapsulating the

lead-based paint they only have to paint contaminated areas. The encapsulating coating

also is environmentally friendly, meaning it will not omit VOC’s (volatile organic

compounds, which are known to effect human health over extended periods of time) and

is a non-toxic formula. Through the implementation of encapsulating salvaged items

which contain lead, more items can be reused and there would be an increase in the

amount of wood products available from deconstruction lessening the strain for new

wood products.

Other items which contain hazardous chemicals are light bulbs, ceiling tiles,

roofing shingles, and chemically treated wood. “Mercury and lead can be found in

fluorescent light bulbs, high intensity lights, old light switches, thermostats and old

thermometers.”66 While the previously mentioned items cannot be reused for safety

reasons, chemically-treated wood can be reused if handled properly. As with other

materials, the hazardous chemical is not hazardous unless released into the atmosphere.

Chemically-treated wood often contains pentachlorophenol, creosotes, and copper-

chromium-arsenate, but can be reused for sign-posts, parking barriers, retaining walls and

fences.67

Material Value: Embodied Energy

The materials salvaged during deconstruction contain an inherent material value

based on their embodied energy. This material value is what makes these items not just

historically important, but environmentally important. Because the salvaged materials

66 Faulk & Guy, 66. 67 Leroux & Seldman, 13.

65

were manufactured many years ago, they pose little threat to the environment. They

require only removal, transportation, storage and some slight remanufacturing, but

compared to a brand new product they put little strain on our environment. “Savings

include not just virgin material itself, but also the energy that would have been consumed

and the pollution created in extracting, transporting, and manufacturing these new

materials into finished products. Recyclers usually assert that reuse of building materials

generally saves about 95 percent of embodied energy that would otherwise be wasted.”68

The acknowledgment of the material value for salvaged items establishes another reason

to use deconstruction versus demolition.

There are two forms of embodied energy: initial and recurring. The initial

embodied energy in buildings represents the non-renewable energy consumed in the

acquisition of raw materials, their processing, manufacturing, transportation to site, and

construction.69 Initial embodied energy is comprised of direct and indirect energy. Direct

energy is the energy used in the transportation of the materials to the job site and then the

energy used to construct the building. The indirect energy is the energy used in the

process to acquire and manufacture building materials including any transportation

related to these activities.

The recurring embodied energy in buildings represents the non-renewable energy

consumed to maintain, repair, restore, refurbish or replace materials, components or

systems during the life of the building.70 Embodied energy is typically measured as a

68 Manuel, A886. 69 “Measures of Sustainability,”

http://www.canadianarchitect.comasf/perspectives_sustainability/measures_of_sustainability (accessed on November 9, 2008).

70 “Measures of Sustainability.”

66

quantity of non-renewable energy per unit of building material, component or system.

The longer the building survives, the greater the expected recurring energy

consumption.71 The building envelope, structure and services contribute fairly equally

and account for about three-quarters of totally initial embodied energy. The finishes,

which represent only 13% of the embodied energy initially, typically account for the

highest increase in recurring embodied energy.

Embodied energy may not be significantly different between building systems

(e.g. wood versus steel versus concrete), however, the environmental impacts associated

with one material versus another can be dramatically different.72 “First, to the credit of

civil engineers, the structures of buildings normally do not expend recurring embodied

energy, lasting the life of the building. By year 25, however, a typical office building will

see an increase of almost 57% of its initial embodied energy due mostly to envelope,

finishes and services. By year 50, recurring embodied energy will represent about 144%

of the initial embodied energy, and it was projected that by year 100, this proportion

would rise to almost 325%. This relationship is a direct result of what is referred to as

differential durability; there the service lives of the various materials, components, and

systems comprising the building differ dramatically. The recurrent preoccupation with

lower first costs in buildings reveals its disregard for sustainability when viewed from a

building life cycle perspective.”73

Historic and non-historic buildings contain a wealth of materials for salvaging,

recycling, and disposing. While each building has a unique supply of materials, the

71 “Measures of Sustainability.” 72 Ibid. 73 Ibid.

67

majority of which are in good condition warrant the need for deconstruction. The

embodied energy of older structures is also important in the consideration for

deconstruction. Older materials are generally of higher quality and the embodied energy

has already been captured. By using salvage you save this embodied energy and reduce

the amount of embodied energy in the manufacturing of new materials.

68

CHAPTER VII: SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

It is difficult today to find a manufacturer which does not produce one “green”

product, green being the latest buzz word for sustainable and environmentally friendly

practices. Sustainability in our society has been said to mark the “advent of the fifth

industrial revolution, where human enterprise is retooled to achieve its economic and

social goals without unwanted environmental consequences.”74 Historic preservation has

been practicing sustainability since the late 1850’s with the purchase of George

Washington's Mount Vernon in 1858, by the Mount Vernon Ladies Association.

Historic preservation achieved national acknowledgement in 1949 with the advent

of the National Trust for Historic Preservation whose main goal is to sustain America’s

built heritage, and among preservationists has been considered the first form of the

sustainability movement. As of today “older and historic buildings comprise more than

half of the existing buildings in the United States and the retention and reuse of these

buildings preserves the material’s embodied energy, and human capital already expended

in their construction. The recycling of buildings is one of the most beneficial “green”

74 Carl Elefante, “Historic Preservation & Sustainable Development: Lots to Learn, Lots to Teach,” ATP Bulletin: Journal of Preservation Technology, Vol. 36, (July, 2005): 53.

69

practices, and stresses the importance and value of historic preservation in the overall

promotion of sustainability.”75

Preservation and sustainable design in conjunction with the U.S Green Building

Council promotes the use of older buildings and architectural salvage. By reusing,

restoring and adapting historic structures to the needs of today, society is able to

effectively leverage the energy and resource expenditures of past generations, while

minimizing waste and current energy and materials usage.76 “Based upon the savings in

embodied energy, reusing historic buildings should be preferable to building new…This

experience has shown that buildings, no matter how well built, will be sustained only if

they are seen as having a positive cultural and economic value.”77

Preservation vs. Sustainable Design

Preservation and sustainable design groups over the years have grown

apprehensive of each other, “the former seeking to protect our history and culture,

typically by applying traditional methods of construction and conservation to familiar

buildings from the past; the later trying to protect human health and natural habitat and

promote alternative sources of energy, often through the application of innovative

technologies and construction methods to novel forms.”78 Overall, preservation and

environmental design have the same goal in mind; conserve what resources we already

have. “We in the preservation business have always been about sustainability and

75 “LEED: 2007 NCSHPO Annual Meeting Squaretable Discussion,” http://www.ncshpo.org/HPFPreservation/LEED.htm (accessed November 11, 2008).

76 “The Greening of Historic Properties National Summit: White Paper.” Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation & Green Building Alliance, (2006): 5.

77 Mike, Jackson, “Building a Culture that Sustains Design,” ATP Bulletin: Journal of Preservation Technology, Vol. 36, (July, 2005): 2-3.

78 Nancy B. Solomon, “Tapping the Synergies of Green Building & Historic Preservation,” Architectural Record: Green Source.

70

stewardship,” said Mike Jackson, chief architect with the Illinois Historic Preservation

Agency, at the Traditional Building Exposition and Conference in New Orleans last

fall.79 Over the years, preservationists have struggled to save some of our nation’s most

prominent structures; Pennsylvania Station: New York City, for example, was demolition

in 1964 resulting in the gain of more advocates for preservation. Because of this,

preservationists have become more focused and driven to protect our historic resources,

this being an inherently “green” practice.

Preservation Saves Resources

With an increased interest in sustainability, numerous studies have been

conducted to determine the material value of new construction and historic buildings. The

original hypothesis portrayed historic buildings as energy guzzlers, which needed to be

actively retrofitted with the newest products in order to make them environmentally

friendly. This was proven to be an over estimation. “According to the U.S. Energy

Information Administration, commercial buildings constructed prior to 1920 have an

average energy consumption of 80,127 BTUs per square foot. For the more efficient

building built since 2000, that number is 79,703 BTUs. (The energy efficiency of

buildings constructed between these years was less enviable—reaching around 100,000

BTUs—reflecting the cheap oil and electricity of the thermostat age.)”80 Historic

buildings are effectively equal to brand new sustainable buildings; which is possible

because of the inherent value and the quality of craftsmanship in older structures.

79 Wayne Curtis, “Amid our Green-Building Boom, Why Neglecting the Old in Favor of the New just Might Cost Us Dearly,” Preservation (January/ February 2008): 20.

80 Ibid.

71

Because sustainable-design decisions are often based on whether or not a material

is durable, locally available, or salvaged, the preservation of historic structures is the best

method for sustainable design. “The analogous criteria for materials used in preservation

work are longevity, regional appropriateness, and in-kind replacement to retain historic

character.”81 When evaluating historic structures we look at materials-performance, life-

cycle studies, and energy efficiency: which are the same criteria for new sustainable

construction. The effective part for historic structures is the materials are already there,

the majority of labor has been used, and little needs to be done to make them more energy

efficient; new sustainable buildings have to start from square one.

Buildings constructed prior to 1920, were typically built using local materials,

local labor, and were designed for the site/region. In the South buildings would be

designed with high ceilings and operable shutters allowing for cross ventilation. In the

North, buildings were constructed with thicker walls, smaller windows and shutters, to

assist with maintaining a comfortable temperature during the winter months, and sun

porches for summer time sleeping. Today, modern buildings are identical no matter what

the environment and the majority of materials are transported from thousands of miles

away, even the sustainable ones.82 Even during repairs to historic structures, preservation

promotes sustainable practices by encouraging the use of local labor, which can supply

higher wages and steady jobs for the community. Possibly the strongest argument is in

most cases “the effective lifespan of many materials used in historic structures extends

81 Helena Maryman, “Structural Materials in Historic Restoration: Environmental Issues and Greener Strategies,” APT Bulletin: Journal of Preservation Technology, Vol. 36, Num., 4 (April 2005): 31.

82 Kim K. Del Rance, “Preservation and Sustainability: The Greenest Building is the One Already Built,” American Institute of Architects, 2004.

72

far beyond that of most materials used in modern structures” 83 making a clear point to

use historic materials and methods in new construction.

U.S. Green Building Council & LEED

The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) is a non-profit organization;

established in 1993, and is a leader in the movement to create a more sustainable built

environment. The USGBC’s mission statement reads: “to transform the way buildings

and communities are designed, built and operated, enabling an environmentally and

socially responsible, healthy, and prosperous environment that improves the quality of

life.” The USGBC promotes sustainable building through a conglomerate of over 15,000

organizations that are “working to advance structures that are environmentally

responsible, profitable, and healthy places to live and work.”84 To accomplish this, the

UAGBC created the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), a point

system developed to identify buildings which have been environmentally conscious in

their design and construction. Many states and local governments have begun to require

LEED certification for all new commercial buildings. The “U.S. General Services

Administration, now recommend or require that construction projects earn a LEED

rating.”85 States and cities are even offering financial incentives to promote the LEED

system. While the USGBC has had a positive effect on new construction, it lacks a

needed connection to the historic preservation movement.

83 “The Greening of Historic Properties National Summit: White Paper,” 5. 84 “About UAGBC,” www://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=124 (accessed

March 14, 2009). 85 Barbara A. Campagna, “How Changes to LEED will Benefit Existing and Historic Building,”

Forum News: National Trust for Historic Preservation, Vol. XV, No. 2 (November/December 2008): 1.

73

With such a wide acceptance and promotion for LEED accredited buildings,

historic buildings have become vulnerable. When initially developed, the point system

was designed for new construction. Over the years they have expanded into existing

buildings, neighborhood development, commercial interiors, schools, healthcare, and

retail. While not all of these rating systems relate to historic buildings, even the existing

buildings category, which one would assume was for historic structures, is focused on the

operation and maintenance of the building not the significance of material. It has been

generally noted within the preservation movement that 2.0 “versions of LEED:

1) overlook the impact of projects on cultural value; 2) do not effectively consider the

performance, longer service lives, and embodied energy of historic materials and

assemblies; and 3) are overly focused on current or future technologies, neglecting the

advantages of many traditional building practices.”86

The quality of materials within historic buildings is also neglected in the LEED

point system. “Historic buildings and their existing low energy designed systems (e.g.

prismatic glass, reflective tin ceilings, and durable materials such as marble) are not

given equitable points in the scoring system as noted under the LEED Existing Building

grading system.”87 There have been other problems incorporating LEED into historic

structures since preservation entails that historic character remains unaffected. When it

comes to energy efficiency, preservation standards have remained strong for our “most

precious historic properties.”88 When it comes to adding a live green roof or photo-voltaic

panels to a structure, preservation practices have held strong to protect the most important

86 Campagna, 2. 87 “LEED: 2007 NCSHPO Annual Meeting Squaretable Discussion.” 88 Del Rance.

74

structures not allowing for these elements to be constructed. Structures of lesser historic

importance have been shown more leniencies, allowing these types of changes, helping to

negate the difficulties of applying the LEED point system to historic properties.

LEED, Preservation & Architectural Salvage

In 2009, the U.S. Green Building Council launched a revised LEED accreditation

system, reevaluating how points are earned and making a stronger connection to historic

preservation with the LEED v3 accreditation system. For historic preservation,

rehabilitations and restoration projects, LEED NC (New Construction) is the most

commonly used. Within this point system it is best to focus on the “Materials &

Resources” section which can relate to preservation practices. Under the LEED point

system each section: sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy & atmosphere, materials

& resources, indoor environmental quality, and innovation & design process, lists

different categories. Under the “Materials & Resources” heading LEED points are

designated for building reuse, waste management, materials reuse, recycled content,

regional materials, rapidly renewable materials, and certified wood. For our purposes we

are only concerned with building reuse, waste management and materials reuse.

For building reuse credits 1.1 and 1.2, points are awarded for maintaining the

existing materials. Under credit 1.1 there are three chances to earn points if you “maintain

the existing building structure (including structural floor and roof decking) and envelope

(the exterior skin and framing, excluding window assemblies and non-structural roofing

material).”89 The points you achieve are based upon the percentage of material reused; to

89 “LEED for New Construction & Renovations,” U.S. Green Building Council (November 2008): 48.

75

earn one point you must maintain 55%, for two points 75%, and three points 95%. All

hazardous wastes removed from the site are not included within the above percentages

and if there is an addition to the structure, which is two times the square footage of the

existing building, the credit is not applicable. Credit 1.2 deals with interior non-structural

elements stating that in order to earn one point you must “use existing interior

nonstructural elements (e.g., interior walls, doors, floor coverings and ceiling systems) in

at least 50% (by area) of the completed building, including additions.”90 Again with this

credit, if there is an addition to the structure which is two times the square footage of the

existing structure, the points are not applicable. These points promote the use of historic

materials helping to maintain the buildings character and helps keep materials out of the

landfill.

Credit 2 deals with construction waste management. To earn one point here you

must divert 50% of non-hazardous waste from disposal; which means the recycling

and/or salvaging of materials. To earn a second point you must divert 75% of materials

from the landfill. This section allows for material recovery, helping to promote the saving

of historic materials for alternate use.

Under Credit 3, materials reuse, we find a need for architectural salvage. To earn

one point, you must “use salvaged, refurbished or reused materials such that the sum of

these materials constitutes at least 5%, based on cost, of the total value of materials on the

project.”91 In order to earn an additional point, this percentage increases to 10%. The

LEED guidelines also help to identify how salvaged materials can be incorporated into

90 “LEED for New Construction & Renovations,” 49. 91 Ibid, 51.

76

the structure. “Identify opportunities to incorporate salvaged materials into building

design and research potential materials suppliers. Consider salvaged materials such as

beams and posts, flooring, paneling, doors and frames, cabinetry and furniture, brick and

decorative items.”92 By earning these points one can assume if material costs are

$100,000 you spent a minimum $10,000 on salvaged materials. While this may seem low

overall, it still promotes the use of historically significant high quality materials within

new construction and rehabilitations, therefore creating a need for deconstruction and

architectural salvage.

For all of the various LEED point systems, the “Materials & Resources” section;

is the only section where the material value of historic buildings is identified. By starting

with an older structure, earning LEED NC accreditation becomes easier, helping to earn a

potential seven points out of the 40 points needed for the basic certified accreditation. To

achieve silver you must earn 50 points, to achieve gold you need 60 points, and to reach

platinum you must earn a minimum of 80 points. The seven points possible for reusing a

historic building and materials helps a building become LEED certified while protecting

and reusing the historic quality and character we love in older buildings and architectural

details.

Overall, it is up to the architect and contractor to maintain and/or add historic

character to buildings. Since historic and older structures are inherently sustainable they

should be maintained. When undergoing rehabilitation, preservation or restoration

projects, a structure can become even more sustainable by maintaining the historic fabric

and the incorporation of salvaged building materials. Not only does the use and reuse of

92 “LEED for New Construction & Renovations,” 51.

77

historic buildings become less invasive to our landfills and our environment, but they

help to sustain better communities.

78

CHAPTER VIII: CONCLUSIONS

Validating the use of architectural salvage within the preservation field is

complicated unlike the use of salvaged materials in new construction. There are pro’s and

con’s to the use of architectural salvage, being that the materials must be taken from an

existing building and when conducting historic preservation projects, it is more difficult

to implement these materials. Historic preservationists promote the saving of buildings,

landscapes, and structures of significances; while deconstruction produces architectural

salvage from these structures. The argument stands that buildings, no matter how run-

down or dilapidated, still have a use. This is not possible in many parts of the United

States where the population has fled the city, creating both an abandoned inner city and

an over abundance of housing in the suburbs. With the closing of significant

manufacturing plants within these areas, populations have had no choice but to relocate to

other cities leaving houses and commercial buildings abandoned and vulnerable to

deterioration. In cases such as the above where cities have begun to mandate demolitions

because the buildings pose a threat to neighboring structures; deconstruction and salvage

should be implemented.

As discussed in Chapter II, Muncie, Indiana is a prime example of a shrinking city

with over 900 houses and commercial buildings abandoned or neglected. Of these

structures a majority of the houses are great examples of buildings which can be

79

deconstructed and the materials reused within the construction market. Few of these

homes are historically significant as they stand, the ones which are should be considered

for rehabilitation rather than deconstruction. They range in sizes from 1000 square feet to

over 4,000 square feet; and have a significant amount of material which can be salvaged.

If allowed these buildings could add to the growing market for architectural salvage. For

the buildings inventoried in Muncie, Indiana their useful lives may have already passed

and deconstruction not demolition should be the next step. The materials which would be

collected from the deconstruction of these homes can be implemented into historic

building in conjunction with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic

Preservation.

Within the preservation field there is a recognizable place for the use of

architectural salvage, typically for the replacement of historic fabric. Although salvaged

materials can be incorporated into every form of preservation, they can be used

significantly in rehabilitation projects. Rehabilitations are the most lenient when it comes

to replacement materials. Preservation, restoration and reconstruction have a place for

salvage, but it is more difficult to determine. For all of these processes, a material must

be significantly dilapidated or missing to warrant the use of salvaged materials. If a

material does need replacing it is best to use materials of similar style, type and

craftsmanship to preserve the significance of the historic structure. If salvaged materials

were implemented for these projects, new materials would not be needed and historically

significant materials will be free of the lasting effects of newer replacement materials.

This would also increase the use and need for salvaged materials, increasing the demand

and supply for the market.

80

According to the Midwest Salvage Market Survey, there is a demand and a large

supply of architectural salvage within the Midwest: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas,

Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota and

Wisconsin. The results of the survey prove that deconstruction and salvaged material

sales are prominent and there is a consumer base made up of architects, designers,

contractors, private homeowners, and preservationists, to name a few. It was also found

that companies who took part in material sales also deconstructed their own buildings

creating a reliable stream of materials for reuse. With this information we can determine

that there is a need for the availability of architectural salvage.

In order to get architectural salvage we must use deconstruction, a sector of the

demolition field which proves to be more profitable with a growing demand for salvaged

material. By deconstructing we can save thousands of tons of materials from the landfill

and incorporate them into new construction and preservation projects. The materials

found are of a higher quality and have more character and distinguishing features then

new materials. Through the incorporation of these materials into communities, more

buildings can be rehabilitated using like materials keeping them historically accurate and

new construction can be less invasive towards the environment.

The need for architectural salvage increases with the increased promotion of

sustainable design and construction practices throughout the nation which has been

established through the use of LEED for certifying buildings as sustainable entities.

Sustainability and preservation can be incorporated through the use of architectural

salvage in rehabilitation projects which are aiming to be LEED certified. The LEED 3v

point system, while still not completely acknowledging the value of historic/older

81

structures, does allow for the use of salvaged building materials and encourages the

removal and reuse of unwanted materials. The significance of the embodied energy

within salvaged materials is justified through their incorporation within LEED projects.

The salvaging of America’s heritage, while not directly in line with Historic

Preservation practices, is another form of sustainability. Through the adaptive use and

rehabilitation of vacant and underdeveloped buildings in conjunction with the use of

architectural salvage, communities capture the embodied energy and quality of older

materials while minimizing needs for new materials and demolition waste. Architectural

salvage has found a place, not just in new construction, but in the replacement of

dilapidated materials in historic structures and revitalization projects.

82

Bibliography

Books:

Davey, Norman. A History of Building Materials. London: Phoenix House, 1961.

Ellis, Rich. 2007-2008 Guide to Architectural Salvage and Antique Companies. Virginia:

RKE Publishing LLC, 2007.

Emmitt, Stephen, John Olie, & Peter Schmid. Principles of Architectural Detailing.

United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2004.

Faulk, Robert H. & Brad Guy. Unbuilding: Salvaging the Architectural Treasures of

Unwanted Houses. Newton, Connecticut: The Taunton Press, Inc., 2007.

Hamin, Elisabeth M., Priscilla Geigis, and Linda Silka. Preserving and Enhancing

Communities: A Guide for Citizens, Planners, and Policymakers. United States of

America: University of Massachusetts Press, 2007.

Harris, John. Moving Rooms: The Trade in Architectural Salvage. China: Best-set

Typesetter Ltd. & World Print, 2007.

Hoover, Dwight W. Magic Middletown. Bloomington, Indiana: Historic Muncie Inc.,

1986.

Litchfield, Michael. Salvaged Treasures: Designing and Building with Architectural

Salvage. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1983.

83

Rhatigan, Joe & Dana Irwin. Salvage Style: 45 Home & Garden Projects Using

Reclaimed Architectural Details. New York: Lark Books, 2001.

Roberts, Jennifer. Redux: Designs that Reuse, Recycle, and Reveal. Salt Lake City: Gibbs

Smith, Publisher, 2005.

Sherwood, Gerald E. New Life for Old Dwellings. New York; London: Drake Publishers

Inc., 1977.

Simpson, Pamela H. Cheap, Quick & Easy: Imitative Architectural Materials, 1870-

1930. Knoxville, Tennessee: The University of Tennessee Press, 1999.

Thompson, Elisabeth Kendall. Recycling Buildings: Renovations, Remodelings,

Restorations, & Reuses. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1977.

Articles:

Bennink, David. “Refine and Redesign: Eleven Years of Reuse.” Deconstruction and

Building Materials Reuse Conference.

“Builder’s Guide to Reuse & Recycling: A Directory for Construction, Demolition &

Landscaping Materials.” Green Building in Alameda County, (2007).

“Buildings and the Environment: A Statistical Summary.” U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency Green Building Workgroup, (December 20, 2004).

“Building Deconstruction and Material Reuse in Washington, D.C.” Urban and

Economic Development Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

(December, 1999).

Campagna, Barbara A. “How Changes to LEED will Benefit Existing and Historic

Building.” Forum News: National Trust for Historic Preservation, Vol. XV, No. 2

(November/December, 2008), pp. 1-2, 6.

84

Cathcart, James, Frank Fantauzzi & Terence Van Elslander. “Gravity.” Princeton

Architectural Press: New York, New York, (2003), pp. 18-23.

Crisman, Phoebe. “Materials.” Whole Building Design Guide, (September 28, 2007).

Curtis, Wayne. “Amid Our Green-building Boom, Why Neglecting the Old in Favor of

the New Just Might Cost Us Dearly.” Preservation, (January/February 2008), pp.

19-24.

Del Rance, Kim K. “Preservation and Sustainability: The Greenest Building is the One

Already Built.” American Institute of Architects, (2004).

Elefante, Carl. “Historic Preservation & Sustainable Development: Lots to Learn, Lots to

Teach.” ATP Bulletin: Journal of Preservation Technology, Vol. 36, (July, 2005),

pp. 53.

“Encapsulating Lead-Based Paint,”

http://www.bobvila.com/HowTo_Library/Encapsulating_Lead_Based_Paint-

Miscellaneous_Paint_and_Wallpaper-A1620.html (accessed February 11, 2009).

Fuller, Sieglinde. “Life-Cycle Cost Analysis.” Whole Building Design Guide, (December

3, 2008).

Greer, Diane. “Building the Deconstruction Industry.” BioCycle, (November, 2004), pp.

36-42.

Gresock, Amy R., Judd H. Michael, Ann E. Echols, Paul M. Smith. “The Habitat for

Humanity ReStore System: Sourcing and Sales of Donated Wood-based Building

Materials.” Forest Products Journal, Vol. 56, No. 10, pp. 37-41.

Guy, Bradley & Sean McLendon. “How Cost Effective is Deconstruction?” BioCycle,

(July, 2001), pp. 75-82.

85

Guy, Bradley & Timothy Williams. “Final Report: Design for Deconstruction and

Reuse.” The Powell Center for Construction and Environment. (September,

2003).

Jackson, Mike. “Building a Culture that Sustains Design.” ATP Bulletin: Journal of

Preservation Technology, Vol. 36, (July, 2005), pg. 2-3.

Jackson, Mike. “Embodied Energy & Historic Preservation: Needed Reassessment.” Apt

Bulletin: Journal of Preservation Technology, Vol. 36, (July, 2005), pp. 47-52.

Joslin, Jeff. “The Waste Papers: Analysis and Discussion of the Potential for Salvage and

Reuse of Construction Materials from Residential Demolition.” Sustainable

Strategies for Communities and Building Materials, (October, 1993), pg. 8-9.

Kuykendall, K.C., David Bennink. “Fort Carson: Deconstruction Pilot Project.”

(September 20, 2004).

Langdon, Davis. “Cost of Green Revisited: Reexamining the Feasibility and Cost Impact

of Sustainable Design in the Light of Increased Market Adoption.” (July, 2007).

“LEED: 2007 NCSHPO Annual Meeting Squaretable Discussion.”

http://www.ncshpo.org/HPFPreservation/LEED.htm (accessed November 11,

2008).

“LEED for New Construction & Renovations,” U.S. Green Building Council (October,

2005).

Leroux, Kivi & Neil Seldman. “Deconstruction: Salvaging Yesterday’s Buildings for

Tomorrow’s Sustainable Communities.” Institute for Local Self-Reliance &

Materials for the Future Foundation, (2000).

86

Manuel, John S. “Unbuilding for the Environment.” Environmental Health Perspectives,

Vol. 111, No. 16, (December, 2003), pg. A880-A887.

Maryman, Helena. “Structural Materials in Historic Restoration: Environmental Issues

and Greener Strategies.” APT Bulletin: Journal of Preservation Technology, Vol.

36, Num., 4 (April, 2005), pp 31-38.

“Measures of Sustainability.”

http://www.canadianarchitect.com/asf/perspectives_sustainibility/measures_of_su

stainability (accessed November 9, 2008).

Mooallem, Jon. “This Old Recyclable House.” The New York Times, September 28,

2008.

“Muncie, Indiana: Fact Sheet 2005-2007 American Community Survey 3-Year

Estimates.” U.S. Census Bureau.

Murray, Nick. “Green Starts with Energy.” Boma Kinsley Quarterly, the Green Issue,

(Spring, 2006), pp. 9-11.

NAHB Research Center, Inc. “A Guide to Deconstruction: An Overview of

Deconstruction with a Focus on Community Development Opportunities

Complete with Deconstruction Project Profiles and Case Studies.” (February,

2000).

Napier, Thomas R., Robert H Faulk, George B. Guy, & Suzan Drodz. “Regulatory and

Policy Issues for Reuse and Remanufacture of Wood Materials Coated with Lead-

Based Paint.” United States Department of Agriculture, (December, 2005).

87

Nelson, Lee A. “Preservation Briefs: 17,” Technical Preservation Services: National Park

Service, http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/briefs/brief17.htm (accessed September 17,

2008).

Park, Sharon C. “Preservation Briefs: 16 The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic

Building Exteriors.” Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, &

U.S. Department of the Interior.

http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/briefs/brief16.htm (accessed September 9,

2008).

Power, Matthew. “How to: Cost-Cutting Teardowns.” Builder (March, 2003), pp. 54-55.

Roysdon, Keith. “Blight has Significant Impact.” The Star Press, March 16, 2008.

Salant, Katherine. “Deconstructing an Old Home Can Give You Building Blocks for a

New One.” The Washington Post, December 13, 2008.

Seldman, Neil & Mark Jackson. “Deconstruction Shifts From Philosophy to Business.”

BioCycle, (July, 2000), pp. 34-38.

Slabaugh, Seth. “City Plans to Demolish 40 Homes.” The Star Press, November 3, 2008.

Solomon, Nancy B. “Tapping the Synergies of Green Building & Historic Preservation.”

Architectural Record: Green Source.

Sturdivant , Frederick D. “Community Development Corporations: The Problem of

Mixed Objectives.” Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 36, No. 1,

Community Economic Development: Part 1, (Winter, 1971), pp. 35-50.

“The Greening of Historic Properties National Summit: White Paper.” Pittsburgh History

& Landmarks Foundation & Green Building Alliance, (2006).

88

Weeks, Jennifer. “Finding Markets for C&D (Non) Debris.” BioCycle, (November,

2004), pp. 43-45.

Werner, Nick. “Home Frustrates Neighbors.” The Star Press, November 10, 2008.

Werner, Nick. “Fight Blight: City Hopes to Turn Tide Against Blight.” The Star Press,

November 23, 2008.

89

APPENDIX A:

ARCHITECTURAL SALVAGE COMPANIES

90

Com

pany

Nam

eLo

catio

nW

ebsi

teD

escr

iptio

n

Ada

ms

Bric

k C

o., I

nc.

Chi

cago

ww

w.a

dam

sbric

k.co

mO

ld B

rick

Am

eric

an B

arn

Com

pan y

Chi

cago

ww

w.a

mer

ican

barn

com

pany

.com

Old

Woo

dA

rcha

ic A

rchi

tect

ural

Arti

fact

sC

hica

gow

ww

.arc

hite

ctur

alar

tifac

ts.c

omC

hica

go A

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Arc

hite

ctur

al A

rtifa

cts

Chi

cago

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsA

sset

Rec

over

y C

ontra

ctin

gS

koki

ew

ww

.arc

dem

o.co

mU

sed

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Bra

nden

burg

Indu

stria

l Ser

vice

Com

pany

Chi

cago

ww

w.b

rand

enbu

rg.c

omD

emol

ition

/ Sal

vage

/ Rec

yclin

gB

uild

ers

Sal

vage

Farm

er C

ityA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

C

arls

on's

Bar

nwoo

d C

ompa

nyC

ambr

idge

ww

w.c

arls

onsb

arnw

ood.

com

Bar

n W

ood/

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geC

olon

ial B

rick

Com

pan y

Chi

cago

ww

w.c

olon

ialb

rickc

hica

go.c

omO

ld B

rick

Coo

k C

ount

y D

emol

ition

Sal

e sG

lenv

iew

ww

w.d

emol

ition

sale

s.co

mB

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lD

arra

h-B

arns

Roc

kton

Old

Woo

d/ D

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing

Dix

Lum

ber a

nd R

ecyc

ling

Dix

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsH

FH o

f McL

ean

Cou

nty

Blo

omin

gton

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsIs

land

Girl

Sal

vage

Elk

Gro

ve V

illag

ew

ww

.isla

ndgi

rlsal

vage

.com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge

Jan'

s A

ntiq

ues

Chi

cago

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsJ

Stu

art C

orsa

-Pur

veyo

rs o

f Sal

vage

Mat

eria

lR

ockf

ord

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsK

imba

ll &

Bea

n A

rchi

tect

ural

& G

arde

n A

ntiq

ues

Woo

dsto

ckw

ww

.kim

balla

ndbe

an.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Gar

den

Orn

amen

tsLo

cket

t's L

umbe

r & S

alva

geE

ast S

t. Lo

uis

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsLo

wde

r Con

stru

ctio

n A

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Wav

erly

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsM

id-A

mer

ica

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geG

rays

lake

ww

w.a

rchi

tect

ural

-ant

qs.c

omU

sed

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Mur

co R

ecyc

ling

Ent

erpr

ises

Inc.

LaG

rang

e P

ark

ww

w.m

urco

.net

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

ge/ R

ecyc

ling

Old

Hou

se H

eave

nJa

ckso

nvill

ew

ww

.old

hous

ehav

en.c

omU

sed

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Old

Hou

se S

ocie

ty W

areh

ouse

Blo

omin

gton

ww

w.o

ldho

uses

ocie

ty.c

omU

sed

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Pur

veyo

rs o

f Sal

vage

Mat

eria

lR

ockf

ord

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge

Ren

aiss

ance

Roo

fing,

Inc.

Bel

vide

rew

ww

.cla

ytile

roof

.com

Roo

fing

Tile

/ Sla

teR

eviv

al A

rchi

tect

ural

Eye

Cat

cher

sC

hica

gow

ww

.rere

viva

l.com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge

Riv

er C

ity D

emol

ition

Peo

riaw

ww

.rive

rcity

dem

oliti

on.c

omU

sed

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Sal

vage

One

Chi

cago

ww

w.s

alva

geon

e.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

l sS

pies

s A

rchi

tect

ural

Ant

ique

sJo

liet

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsTh

e R

enov

atio

n S

ourc

e In

c.Jo

liet

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsTh

e R

esto

ratio

n P

lace

Roc

k Is

land

Use

d B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsTh

e R

euse

Peo

ple

of A

mer

ica

Nor

thbr

ook

ww

w.th

ereu

sepe

ople

.org

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nTi

le R

oofs

Inc.

Fran

kfor

tw

ww

.tile

roof

s.co

mR

oofin

g Ti

le/ S

late

The

Sto

reho

use

of V

isio

nC

hica

gow

ww

.thes

tore

hous

e.or

gU

sed

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Urb

an R

emai

nsC

hica

gow

ww

.urb

anre

mai

nsch

icag

o.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Vin

tage

Det

ails

Gle

n E

llyn

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ D

econ

stru

ctio

n

Illinois

91

Com

pany

Nam

eLo

catio

nW

ebsi

teD

escr

iptio

n

Arc

hite

ctur

al A

ntiq

ues

of In

dian

apol

i sIn

dian

apol

isw

ww

.ant

ique

arch

itect

ural

.com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geB

ringi

ng it

Bac

kIn

dian

apol

isD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing/

Sal

vage

Cap

ellie

r Sal

vage

& W

reck

ing

Cam

byD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing/

Sal

vage

C

row

e W

reck

ing

Co.

Eva

nsvi

lleD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ng/ S

alva

geD

oc's

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geIn

dian

apol

isw

ww

.doc

sarc

hite

ctur

alsa

lvag

e.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Ant

ique

sE

ric's

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geIn

dian

apol

isw

ww

.eric

ssal

vage

.com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geE

dgew

ood

Bui

ldin

g S

uppl

yIn

dian

apol

isw

ww

.edg

ewoo

dbui

ldin

gsup

ply.

com

Sal

vage

d B

rick

& S

tone

Fi

rst S

atur

day

Con

stru

ctio

n S

alva

geS

penc

erw

ww

.con

stru

ctio

nsal

vage

.com

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

ge/ R

ecyc

ling

Har

ris B

uild

ing

& S

alva

geM

oroc

coA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Reh

ab R

esou

rces

, Inc

.In

dian

apol

isw

ww

.reha

bres

ourc

e.or

gA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Ric

hey

Sal

vage

& D

emol

ition

Gre

ensb

urg

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geS

earc

y A

ntiq

ue W

oods

Ced

ar G

rove

ww

w.s

earc

yant

ique

wod

s.co

mD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing/

Sal

vage

Tim

& B

illy'

s S

alva

ge S

tore

Indi

anap

olis

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geTh

e R

euse

Dev

elop

men

t Org

aniz

atio

nIn

dian

apol

isw

ww

.redo

.org

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geTh

e W

ood

Sha

ckFo

rt W

ayne

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geW

hite

Riv

er A

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

& A

ntiq

ues

Indi

anap

olis

ww

w.w

hite

river

salv

age.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge

Bui

ldin

g S

aver

sE

mm

etsb

urg

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geC

edar

Val

ley

Rec

over

y &

Dem

oliti

onW

ater

loo

Sal

vage

/ Dem

oliti

onE

co-Y

outh

Ced

ar R

apid

sA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Foun

d Th

ings

Des

Moi

nes

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geFu

ller S

alva

ge &

Wre

ckin

gW

ater

loo

Sal

vage

/ Dem

oliti

onG

avin

His

toric

al B

ricks

Iow

a C

ityw

ww

.his

toric

albr

icks

.com

Bric

k/ L

ands

capi

ng E

lem

ents

Hom

e R

ecyc

ling

Exc

hang

eD

es M

oine

sA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Hou

se a

nd C

arge

n R

esto

ratio

n S

peci

altie

sD

es M

oine

sA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Ken

Hun

t Bui

ldin

g S

uppl

y &

Sal

vage

Des

Moi

nes

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geO

ld W

oodw

orks

ND

Mill

wor

k S

alva

geP

aulli

naw

ww

.old

woo

dwor

k.co

mD

econ

stru

ctio

nR

eSto

re H

abita

t for

Hum

anity

Qua

d C

ities

Bet

tend

orf

ww

w.re

stor

eqc.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geR

ock

Cre

ek T

ree

& B

uild

ing

Sal

vage

Osa

geD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing

Res

tora

tion

War

ehou

seD

ubuq

uew

ww

.rest

orat

ionw

areh

ouse

.net

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geW

areh

ouse

Iow

a C

ityw

ww

.ic-fh

p.or

g/sa

lvag

ebar

n.ht

ml

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Sof

t-Stri

ppin

gW

est E

nd A

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Des

Moi

nes

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge

Indiana Iowa

92

Com

pany

Nam

eLo

catio

nW

ebsi

teD

escr

iptio

n

Bah

m D

emol

ition

Silv

er L

ake

ww

w.b

ahm

dem

oliti

on.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Ben

Tar

be U

se B

rick,

Inc.

Mis

sion

Use

d B

rick/

Lum

ber/

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Bill

Por

ter W

reck

ing

Der

byA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Bob

Sm

ith S

alva

geN

ew C

ambr

iaA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

BO

GE

Iron

& M

etal

Com

pany

Inc.

Wic

hita

Scr

ape

Met

als

McP

hers

on W

reck

ing

Inc.

Gra

ntvi

lleA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Nov

ick

Iron

& M

etal

Wic

hita

Scr

ape

Met

als

Ree

ves

Lum

ber &

Sur

plus

Wic

hita

New

& S

alva

ged

Lum

ber

Wis

e B

uys

Bel

oit

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge

21st

. Cen

tury

Sal

vage

Yps

ilant

iS

alva

ge/ D

emol

ition

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge W

areh

ouse

of D

etro

itD

etro

itw

ww

.asw

detro

it.or

gA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge W

ing-

Gra

nd Il

lusi

onG

rass

Lak

eA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

B&

C E

mpo

rium

Alle

gan

ww

w.b

-c-e

.biz

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geD

&M

Wre

ckin

g C

ompa

nt, I

nc./

Axx

iom

Kal

amaz

ooA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Det

roit

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Det

roit

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geD

etro

it R

ecyc

led

Con

cret

e C

o.D

etro

itA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Gra

nd Il

lusi

on G

alle

ry &

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geG

rass

Lak

eA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Hab

itat R

eSto

re D

etro

itD

etro

itw

ww

.hab

itatd

etro

it.or

g/R

esto

reA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Her

itage

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge &

Sup

ply

Kal

amaz

ooA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Her

itage

Bui

ldin

g &

Mat

eria

ls C

o.D

etro

itA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Hom

e R

epai

r Ser

vice

sG

rand

Rap

ids

ww

w.h

omer

epai

rser

vice

s.or

gC

onst

ruct

ion/

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

geK

D U

sed

Bric

k &

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ial

Det

roit

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geLa

rry'

s B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

lsD

etro

itA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Mat

eria

ls U

nlim

ited

Yps

ilant

iw

ww

.mat

eria

lsun

limite

d.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Mot

orci

ty B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

ls C

ente

rD

etro

itA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Odo

m R

eusa

ble

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Trav

erse

City

ww

w.o

dom

reus

e.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Rec

ycle

Ann

Arb

orA

nn A

rbor

ww

w.re

cycl

eann

arbo

r.org

Sal

vage

/ Mat

eria

l Rec

yclin

gR

obin

son'

s A

ntiq

ues

Lake

Ode

ssa

ww

w.ro

bins

onsa

ntiq

ues.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ H

ardw

are

The

Her

itage

Com

pany

Roy

al O

akA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

The

Reu

se C

ente

rA

nn A

rbor

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ U

sed

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ial s

Tim

ber &

Sto

ne B

arn

Rem

oval

How

ell

Old

Woo

d/ B

arn

Rem

oval

Toth

Bro

ther

sG

rass

Lak

ew

ww

.toth

bros

.com

Old

Woo

d/ B

arn

Rem

oval

Will

iam

s A

rt G

lass

Stu

dio

Inc

& S

unse

t Ant

ique

sO

xfor

dw

ww

.will

iam

sartg

lass

.com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge

Kansas Michigan

93

Com

pany

Nam

eLo

catio

nW

ebsi

teD

escr

iptio

n

All

Sta

te S

alva

ge In

c.S

t. P

aul

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geA

ntiq

ue W

oodw

orks

Nor

woo

dw

ww

.ant

ique

woo

dwor

ks.c

omO

ld W

ood/

Flo

orin

g/ F

urni

ture

Arc

hite

ctur

al A

ntiq

ues

Min

neap

olis

ww

w.a

rcha

ntiq

ues.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geB

auer

Bro

ther

s S

alva

geM

inne

apol

isw

ww

.bau

erbr

othe

rssa

lvag

e.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Car

l Bol

ande

r & S

ons

Co.

St.

Pau

lw

ww

.bol

ande

r.com

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

ge/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nC

ity S

alva

ge &

Ant

ique

s, In

c.M

inne

apol

isw

ww

.city

salv

age.

com

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

ge/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nC

omm

on G

roun

d D

econ

stru

ctio

n &

Reu

seD

ulut

hA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Dul

uth

Tim

ber

Dul

uth

ww

w.d

ulut

htim

ber.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

F.M

. Fr

atta

lone

Exc

avat

ing

St.

Pau

lw

ww

.fmfra

ttalo

ne.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Gre

en In

stitu

teM

inne

apol

isw

ww

.gre

enin

stitu

te.o

rgA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Gui

lded

Sal

vage

Min

neap

olis

ww

w.g

uild

edsa

lvag

e.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Hab

itat f

or H

uman

ity o

f Sou

th C

entra

l MN

Man

kato

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

His

toric

Sto

ne C

ompa

n yM

inne

apol

isw

ww

.his

toric

ston

e.co

mS

alva

ged

Sto

ne/ U

sed

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ial s

Min

neso

ta T

imbe

r Sal

vage

Fore

ston

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nN

orth

Sho

re A

rchi

tect

ural

Ant

ique

sTw

o H

arbo

rsw

ww

.nor

th-s

hore

-arc

hite

ctur

al-a

ntiq

ue.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Old

Gro

wth

Woo

dsS

t. P

aul

ww

w.o

ldgr

owth

woo

ds.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

PP

L S

hop

Min

neap

olis

ww

w.p

plsh

op.o

rgA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Rur

al R

esou

rce

Rec

over

yS

t. P

aul

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geTh

e R

euse

Cen

ter

Min

neap

olis

ww

w.g

reen

inst

itute

.org

/reus

ecen

ter.h

tmA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Minnesota

94

Com

pany

Nam

eLo

catio

nW

ebsi

teD

escr

iptio

n

And

erso

n Fi

ne C

arpe

ntry

& S

alva

geK

ansa

s C

ityA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Ant

ique

s &

Odd

ities

K

ansa

s C

ityw

ww

.aoa

rchi

tect

ural

salv

age.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geB

en T

arbe

Use

d B

rick

Inc.

Kan

sas

City

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geC

entu

ry U

sed

Bric

kS

appi

ngto

nA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Chu

ck's

Sto

ne a

nd B

rick

Co.

St.

Loui

sA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Cro

ss C

reek

Arc

hite

ctur

al A

rtifa

cts

Spr

ingf

ield

ww

w.c

ross

cree

karti

fact

s.co

mB

ricks

/ Pav

ers/

Flo

orin

g/ L

umbe

rE

lmw

ood

Rec

laim

ed T

imbe

rK

ansa

s C

ityw

ww

.elm

woo

drec

laim

edtim

ber.c

omB

ricks

/ Pav

ers/

Flo

orin

g/ L

umbe

rFe

llenz

Ant

ique

s &

Arc

hite

ctur

al A

rtifa

cts

St.

Loui

sA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Hab

itat f

or H

uman

ity R

eSto

reS

prin

gfie

ldw

ww

.hab

itatre

stor

e.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Har

dico

Kirk

woo

dA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Hea

rtwoo

d A

ssoc

iate

s In

t'lS

t. Lo

uis

ww

w.h

eartw

ooda

ssoc

iate

s.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Mac

k C

ircle

Use

d B

rick

& W

reck

ing

St.

Loui

sA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Mad

get &

Grif

fin In

c.S

t. Jo

seph

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geP

erha

t Lum

ber C

o.S

t. Lo

uis

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geP

eter

son

Wre

ckin

g U

sed

Lum

ber

Lexi

ngto

nA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Pitc

hpin

e Lu

mbe

rS

aint

e G

enev

ieve

ww

w.p

itchp

ine.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nP

lane

tReu

se, L

LCK

ansa

s C

ityA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Riv

ersi

de A

rchi

tect

ural

Ant

ique

sS

t. Lo

uis

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geS

eldo

m F

ound

Arc

hite

ctur

als

Kan

sas

City

ww

w.s

eldo

mfo

und.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geS

t. Lo

uis

Arc

hite

ctur

al A

rt C

o.S

t. Lo

uis

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geS

t. Lo

uis

Hab

itat f

or H

uman

ity R

eSto

reS

t. Lo

uis

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geS

tock

ton

Hea

rtwoo

ds L

imite

dS

t. Lo

uis

ww

w.h

eartw

oods

.com

Ant

ique

Flo

orin

g/ B

arn

Woo

d

A&

R S

alva

ge &

Rec

yclin

gO

mah

aw

ww

.ars

alva

ge.c

omD

econ

stru

ctio

nC

onne

rs A

rchi

tect

ural

Ant

ique

sLi

ncol

nw

ww

.con

ners

arch

itect

ural

antiq

ues.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geM

T S

alva

geO

mah

aA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

RP

M S

alva

geO

mah

aA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Sch

erer

's A

rchi

tect

ural

Ant

ique

sLi

ncol

nA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Missouri Nebraska

95

Com

pany

Nam

eLo

catio

nW

ebsi

teD

escr

iptio

n

Acm

e C

onst

ruct

ion

Ser

vice

sC

inci

nnat

iA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Alli

ed E

rect

ing

and

Dis

man

tling

You

ngst

own

ww

w.a

ed.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Ang

elo

Bui

ldin

g W

reck

ers

Col

umbu

sA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Arc

hite

ctur

al A

rtifa

cts

Tole

dow

ww

.coo

lstu

ffisc

ools

tuff.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ L

ands

capi

ngB

arnw

ares

Cop

ley

ww

w.b

arnw

ares

.com

Bar

n W

ood/

Bea

ms/

Lum

ber/

Floo

ring

B&

R A

rchi

tect

ural

Ant

ique

sY

oung

stow

nA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

B a

nd B

Wre

ckin

g an

d E

xcav

atin

g In

c.C

leve

land

ww

w.b

bwre

ckin

g.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Bro

adw

ay C

ontra

ctin

g In

c.C

leve

land

ww

w.b

road

3939

.com

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Sal

vage

Buc

keye

Wre

ckin

gC

anto

nD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ng/ S

alva

geB

uild

It A

gain

Cen

ter

Col

umbu

sw

ww

.hab

itat-c

olum

bus.

org

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Sal

vage

Bui

ldin

g V

alue

Cin

cinn

ati

ww

w.b

uild

ingv

alue

-cin

cy.o

rgS

alva

ge/ D

econ

stru

ctio

n/ C

onst

ruct

ion

Col

umbu

s A

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Col

umbu

sA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Eag

le C

reek

Des

igns

, Inc

.M

antu

aw

ww

.eag

lecr

eekd

esig

ns.n

etA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Fire

hous

e A

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Co.

Cin

cinn

ati

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geH

abita

t for

Hum

anity

ReS

tore

Day

ton/

Col

umbu

sA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

J &

J B

arnw

ood

Sal

inev

ille

Bar

n W

ood/

Old

Dim

ensi

onal

Lum

ber

Linc

oln

Stre

et S

alva

geM

iner

vaA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Loew

endi

ck's

Hea

lthA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Nat

iona

l Sal

vage

Sup

ply

Inc.

Akr

onA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Nor

th H

ill S

alva

ge S

tore

Akr

onA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Old

e W

ood,

Ltd

.M

alve

rnA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Rex

Sal

vage

Sto

reA

kron

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geS

alva

ge II

Min

erva

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geS

alva

ge M

aste

rsP

aine

svill

eA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Sci

oto

Sal

vage

Chi

llico

the

ww

w.s

ciot

osal

vage

.com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nTh

e S

tock

Pile

Can

ton

ww

w.th

esto

ckpi

le.o

rgA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

The

Sto

ne S

alva

ge C

ompa

nyC

leve

land

ww

w.s

tone

salv

age.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geTr

ista

te H

abita

t Res

tore

Ham

ilton

ww

w.h

abita

t-tris

tate

.org

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ U

sed

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Uni

ted

Sal

vage

Co.

Akr

onw

ww

.sto

nesa

lvag

e.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Val

ley

Bui

ldin

g M

ater

ials

Cin

cinn

ati

ww

w.v

alle

ybui

ldin

gmat

eria

ls.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Woo

den

Nic

kel A

ntiq

ues

Cin

cinn

ati

ww

w.w

oode

nnic

kela

ntiq

ues.

net

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge

Ohio

96

Com

pany

Nam

eLo

catio

nW

ebsi

teD

escr

iptio

n

Arc

hite

ctur

al E

lem

ents

Sio

ux F

alls

ww

w.a

rchi

tect

ural

-ele

men

ts.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Kee

tagi

ll yB

altic

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geM

ater

ials

Cle

aran

ce &

Sal

vage

Rap

id C

ityA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Sec

ond

Cha

nce

Lum

ber

Vib

org

ww

w.s

econ

dcha

ncel

umbe

r.com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge

Am

eric

an R

esou

rce

Rec

over

yM

ilwau

kee

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geB

arnw

ood

Pro

duct

sB

lack

Riv

er F

alls

Bar

n W

ood/

Bea

ms/

Lum

ber/

Floo

ring

Cou

ghlin

Con

tract

ors

Inc.

Wat

erto

wn

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geC

resc

ent M

oon

Ant

ique

s &

Sal

vage

LLC

Osh

kosk

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geD

eCon

stru

ctio

n In

c.M

adis

onw

ww

.dec

onst

ruct

inc.

com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geG

erov

ac W

reck

ing

Com

pany

Fran

klin

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geG

reat

Lak

es C

ompa

n yB

arab

oow

ww

.gre

atla

kesc

ompa

ny.c

omB

arn

Woo

d/ B

eam

s/ L

umbe

r/ Fl

oorin

gH

abita

t for

Hum

anity

ReS

tore

Mad

ison

ww

w.re

stor

edan

e.or

gA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Hom

esou

rce

Cen

ter

Milw

auke

eA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Milw

auke

e Ti

mbe

r Com

pany

Bar

aboo

ww

w.re

clai

med

-tim

bers

.com

Bar

n W

ood/

Bea

ms/

Lum

ber/

Floo

ring

Old

Hou

se S

alva

geW

ausa

uw

ww

.old

hous

esal

vage

.com

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Sal

vage

Orp

han

Woo

dB

ayfie

ldw

ww

.orp

hanw

ood.

com

Bar

n W

ood/

Bea

ms/

Lum

ber/

Floo

ring

Osc

eola

Ant

ique

sO

sceo

law

ww

.osc

eola

-ant

ique

s.co

mA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Pag

enko

pfG

reen

Bay

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geR

ecla

imed

Lum

ber C

o.B

arab

oow

ww

.recl

aim

ed-lu

mbe

r.com

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Sal

vage

Rec

laim

ed L

umbe

r Com

pany

Wau

kesh

aw

ww

.old

-bar

n-w

ood.

com

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Sal

vage

Hea

ven

Wes

t Alli

sw

ww

.sal

vage

heav

en.c

omR

ecyc

led/

Sal

vage

Sca

rbor

o R

iver

Bar

n &

Lum

ber

Gre

en B

ayA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Sch

uler

's C

ount

ry S

tore

& W

orks

hop

Jane

svill

ew

ww

.sch

uler

coun

try.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

SC

S o

f Wis

cons

in In

c.M

ilwau

kee

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

geTh

e IM

Sal

vage

Com

pany

Milw

auke

ew

ww

.imsa

lvag

e.ne

tA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Tim

eles

s Ti

mbe

rA

shla

ndw

ww

.tim

eles

stim

ber.c

omA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

Trad

ition

al W

oodw

orks

& L

umbe

r Com

pany

Som

erse

tw

ww

.trad

woo

d.co

mB

arn

Woo

d/ B

eam

s/ L

umbe

r/ Fl

oorin

gU

rban

Evo

lutio

nsM

enas

haw

ww

.urb

anev

olut

ions

.com

Arc

hite

ctur

al S

alva

ge/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nW

isco

nsin

Woo

dchu

ck L

LCS

uper

ior

ww

w.w

isco

nsin

woo

dchu

ck.n

etA

rchi

tect

ural

Sal

vage

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

WisconsinSouthDakota

97

APPENDIX B:

DECONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION COMPANIES

98

Com

pany

Loca

tion

Web

Add

ress

Serv

ices

A&

T W

reck

ing

& L

umbe

r Co.

Mar

kham

/ Chi

cago

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Sof

t-Stri

ppin

gA

mer

ican

Dem

oliti

on C

orpo

ratio

nE

lgin

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Ass

et R

ecov

ery

Con

tract

ing

Sko

kie

Dem

oliti

on/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nB

rand

enbu

rg In

dust

rial S

ervi

ce C

ompa

nyC

hica

gow

ww

.bra

nden

burg

.com

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

ge/ R

ecyc

ling

Del

ta D

emol

ition

, Inc

.C

hica

gow

ww

.del

tade

moi

nc.c

omD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngD

ix L

umbe

r & R

ecyc

ling

Dix

Dem

oliti

on/ R

ecyc

ling

Eco

logi

c, In

c.W

auke

gan

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Env

ironm

enta

l Cle

ansi

ng C

orpo

ratio

nM

arkh

amw

ww

.env

ironm

enta

lcle

ansi

ngco

rpor

atio

n.co

mD

emol

ition

/ Rec

yclin

g/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nH

eneg

han

Wre

ckin

g C

o.; I

nc.

Chi

cago

ww

w.h

eneg

hanw

reck

ing.

com

Dem

oliti

on/ R

ecyc

ling/

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Hab

itat f

or H

uman

ity o

f McL

ean

Cou

nty

Blo

omin

gton

ww

w.h

abita

tmcl

ean.

org

Con

stru

ctio

n/ R

ehab

ilita

tion

J. H

offm

an C

o.Jo

ilet

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Mur

co R

ecyc

ling

Ent

erpr

ises

Inc.

LaG

rang

e P

ark

ww

w.m

urco

.net

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

ge/ R

ecyc

ling

N.F

. Dem

oliti

onC

hica

gow

ww

.nfd

emo.

com

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Om

ega

Dem

oliti

on C

orpo

ratio

nS

tear

mw

ood

ww

w.o

meg

a-de

mol

ition

.com

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Riv

er C

ity D

emol

ition

Peo

riaD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing

Rob

inet

te D

emol

ition

, Inc

.O

akbr

ook

Terr

ace

ww

w.rd

idem

oliti

on.c

omD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngTh

e R

enov

atio

n S

ourc

e, In

c.C

hica

goD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing

The

Res

tora

tion

Pla

ceC

hica

goD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing

Uni

ted

Dem

oliti

on In

corp

orat

edD

es P

lain

esw

ww

.uni

ted-

dem

oliti

on.c

omD

emol

ition

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Cro

we

Wre

ckin

g C

o.E

vans

ville

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

geH

anne

lls W

reck

ing

Co.

Cla

yton

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Sof

t-Stri

ppin

gN

orth

lake

Exc

avat

ion

& D

emol

ition

Gar

yD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngR

ehab

Res

ourc

es, I

nc.

Indi

anap

olis

ww

w.re

habr

esou

rce.

org

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Mat

eria

l Rec

yclin

gR

iche

l Sal

vage

and

Dem

oliti

onG

reen

sbur

gD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngTh

e S

hroy

er B

roth

ers

Mun

cie

ww

w.s

hroy

erbr

os.c

omD

emol

tion/

Rec

yclin

g

IndianaIllinois

99

Com

pany

Loca

tion

Web

Add

ress

Serv

ices

Ced

ar V

alle

y R

ecov

ery

and

Dem

oliti

onW

ater

loo

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

ge D

ism

antli

ngC

entra

l C&

D R

ecyc

ling

Des

Moi

nes

Con

stru

ctio

n/ D

emol

ition

/ Rec

yclin

gC

oncr

ete

Rec

ycle

rs L

td.

Oss

ian

Mat

eria

l Rec

yclin

gFu

ller S

alva

ge a

nd W

reck

ing

Wat

erlo

oD

emol

ition

/ Sal

vage

Dis

man

tling

Hom

e R

ecyc

ling

Exc

hang

eD

es M

oine

sM

ater

ial R

ecyc

ling

Hom

e &

Gar

den

Res

tora

tion

Spe

cial

ties

Des

Moi

nes

Mat

eria

l Rec

yclin

g/ R

esto

ratio

nIo

wa

Dem

oliti

on &

Rec

yclin

g S

ervi

ces

Ced

ar R

apid

sD

emol

ition

/ Rec

yclin

gJ.

Myr

on O

lson

& S

on In

c.S

ioux

City

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

ge D

ism

antli

ngJi

m's

Sm

all D

emol

ition

Dub

uque

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Sof

t-Stri

ppin

g

Bah

m D

emol

ition

Silv

er L

ake

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Bill

Por

ter W

reck

ing

Der

byD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngB

ob S

mith

Sal

vage

New

Cam

bria

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

McP

hers

on W

reck

ing

Inc.

Gra

ntvi

lleD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ng

Ada

mo

Dem

oliti

onD

etro

itD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngB

est W

reck

ing

Co.

Det

roit

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Bie

rlein

Com

pani

es, I

nc.

Mid

land

ww

w.b

ierle

in.c

omD

emol

ition

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Det

roit

Rec

ycle

d C

oncr

ete

Co.

Det

roit

Mat

eria

l Rec

yclin

gD

&M

Wre

ckin

g C

ompa

nyK

alam

azoo

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Dor

e &

Ass

ocia

tes

Con

tract

ing,

Inc.

Det

roit/

Bay

City

ww

w.d

orea

ndas

soci

ates

.com

Dem

oliti

on/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nH

ome

Rep

air S

ervi

ces

Gra

nd R

apid

sw

ww

.hom

erep

airs

ervi

ces.

org

Con

stru

ctio

n/ D

emol

ition

Nor

th A

mer

ican

Dis

man

tling

Cor

p.La

peer

ww

w.n

adc1

.com

Dem

oliti

on/ D

econ

stru

ctio

nP

itsch

Wre

ckin

gG

rand

Rap

ids

ww

w.p

itsch

co.c

om/s

alva

ge.h

tml

Dem

oliti

on/ D

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

alva

geU

prig

ht W

reck

ing

Det

roit

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Cen

tury

Con

stru

ctio

n C

o. In

c.S

t. P

aul

ww

w.c

entu

ryco

nstru

ct.c

omD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Ser

vice

sM

inne

apol

isw

ww

.gre

enin

stitu

te.o

rgD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing

F.M

. Fra

ttalo

ne E

xcav

atin

gS

t. P

aul

ww

w.fr

atta

lone

com

pani

es.c

omD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ S

oft-S

tripp

ing

Kel

lingt

on C

onst

ruct

ion

Inc.

Cor

cora

nD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngS

KB

Env

ironm

enta

lS

t. P

aul

ww

w.s

kbin

c.co

mD

emol

ition

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Rec

yclin

g

MinnesotaMichiganKansasIowa

100

Com

pany

Loca

tion

Web

Add

ress

Serv

ices

Mad

get &

Grif

fin In

c.S

t. Jo

seph

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

ge D

ism

antli

ngM

isso

uri D

econ

stru

ctio

nC

olum

bia

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Dec

o C

ompa

nies

Kan

sas

City

ww

w.d

eco-

kc.c

omD

emol

ition

/ Dec

onst

ruct

ion

San

ders

Ent

erpr

ise,

Inc.

Sco

tt C

ityD

econ

stru

ctio

nS

pirta

s W

reck

ing

Com

pany

St.

Loui

sD

emol

ition

/ Sal

vage

Dis

man

tling

Acm

e C

onst

ruct

ion

Ser

vice

sC

inci

nnat

iD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ C

onst

ruct

ion

Alli

ed E

rect

ing

& D

ism

antli

ngY

oung

stow

nw

ww

.aed

.com

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Am

eric

an S

ervi

ces

Gro

up, I

nc.

Cle

ves

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Ang

elo

Bui

ldin

g W

reck

ers

Col

umbu

sD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngB

& B

Wre

ckin

g &

Exc

avat

ing

Inc.

Cle

vela

ndw

ww

.bbw

reck

ing.

com

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Bro

adw

ay C

ontra

ctin

g In

c.C

leve

land

ww

w.b

road

3939

.com

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Buc

keye

Wre

ckin

gC

anto

nD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngB

uild

ing

It A

gain

Cen

ter

Col

umbu

sw

ww

.hab

itat-c

olum

bus.

org

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Cle

vela

nd D

econ

stru

ctio

n In

c.S

agam

ore

Hill

sD

econ

stru

ctio

nC

ompl

ete

Res

ourc

es C

o.C

olum

bus

ww

w.c

ompl

ete-

reso

urce

s.co

mM

ater

ial R

ecyc

ling

Day

ton

Dem

oliti

on &

Con

tract

ing

Inc.

Day

ton

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Ken

t Dem

oliti

on T

ool

Ken

tD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngK

ing

Wre

ckin

g C

o., I

nc.

Cin

cinn

ati

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

L &

L D

emol

ition

Exc

avat

ing

Inc.

Spr

ingf

ield

Dem

oliti

on/ S

alva

geLo

ewen

dick

'sH

ealth

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Sal

vage

Mur

phy'

s P

lum

bing

Sup

plie

sD

ayto

nw

ww

.mur

phys

wed

oplu

mbi

ng.c

omP

lum

bing

Con

stru

ctio

n/ S

alva

geO

'Rou

rke

Wre

ckin

g C

ompa

nyC

inci

nnat

iw

ww

.oro

urke

wre

ckin

g.co

mD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngP

reci

sion

Env

ironm

enta

lIn

depe

nden

cew

ww

.pre

cisi

on-e

nv.c

omD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngR

aisc

h Jo

hn P

Con

tract

orM

iam

isbu

rgD

emol

ition

/ Rec

yclin

gS

tark

Wre

ckin

g C

ompa

nyM

iam

isbu

rgD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ D

emol

ition

/ Sal

vage

The

Ros

e G

roup

Ltd

.N

ew L

eban

onw

ww

.rose

-grp

.com

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

The

Sto

ne S

alva

ge C

ompa

nyC

leve

land

ww

w.s

tone

salv

age.

com

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Uni

ted

Sal

vage

Co.

Akr

onM

ater

ial R

ecyc

ling/

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

OhioMissouri

101

Com

pany

Loca

tion

Web

Add

ress

Serv

ices

Kee

tagi

llyB

altic

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Sec

ond

Cha

nge

Lum

ber

Vib

org

Dec

onst

ruct

ion

Am

eric

an R

esou

rce

Rec

over

yM

ilwau

kee

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Aza

rian:

Sam

Wre

ckin

gR

acin

eD

emol

ition

/ Sel

ectiv

e D

ism

antli

ngC

ough

lin C

ontra

ctor

s, In

c.W

ater

tow

nD

econ

stru

ctio

n/ C

onst

ruct

ion

DeC

onst

ruct

ion

Inc.

Mad

ison

ww

w.d

econ

stru

ctin

c.co

mD

econ

stru

ctio

nE

cker

t Wre

ckin

g In

c.R

hine

land

erD

econ

stru

ctio

nG

erov

ac W

reck

ing

Com

pany

Fran

klin

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Gle

nvill

e Ti

mbe

r Wrig

hts

Bar

aboo

ww

w.g

lenv

illet

imbe

rwrig

hts.

com

Dec

onst

ruct

ion/

Con

stru

ctio

nP

agen

kopf

SG

reen

Bay

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

Sca

rbor

o R

iver

Bar

n an

d Lu

mbe

rG

reen

Bay

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

SC

S o

f Wis

cons

in In

c.M

ilwau

kee

Dem

oliti

on/ S

elec

tive

Dis

man

tling

WisconsinSouth Dakota

102

APPENDIX C:

THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS

FOR THE TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES

103

Preservation

Masonry: “Replacing in kind extensively deteriorated or missing parts of masonry

features when there are surviving prototypes such as terra-cotta brackets or

stone balusters. The new work should match the old in material, design, color,

and texture; and be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and

treatment.”93

Wood: “Replacing in kind extensively deteriorated or missing parts of wood features

when there are surviving prototypes such as brackets, molding, or sections of

siding. New work should match the old in material, design, color, and texture;

and be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and treatment.”94

Metal: “Replacing in kind extensively deteriorated or missing parts of architectural

metal features when there are surviving prototypes such as porch balusters,

column capitals or bases, or porch cresting. The new work should match the

old in material, design, and texture; and be unobtrusively dated to guide future

research and treatment.”95

Roof: “Replacing in kind extensively deteriorated or missing parts of roof features or

roof coverings when there are surviving prototypes such as cupola louvers,

dentils, dormer roofing; or slates, tiles, or wood shingles on a main roof. The

new work should match the old in material, design, color, and texture; and be

unobtrusively dated to guide future research and treatment.”96

93 Weeks and Grimmer, 25. 94 Ibid, 28. 95 Ibid, 32. 96 Ibid, 34.

104

Windows: “Replacing in kind extensively deteriorated or missing parts of windows

when there are surviving prototypes such as frames, sash, sills, glazing, and

hoodmolds. The new work should match the old in material, design, color, and

texture; and be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and treatment.”97

Entrances & Porches: “Replacing in kind extensively deteriorated or missing parts

of repeated entrance and porch features when there are surviving prototypes

such as balustrades, cornices, entablatures, columns, sidelights, and stairs. The

new work should match the old in material, design, color, and texture; and be


Store Fronts: “Replacing in kind extensively deteriorated or missing parts of

storefronts where there are surviving prototypes such as transoms, kick plates,

pilasters, or signs. The new work should match the old in materials, design,

color, and texture; and be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and

treatment.”99

Structural Systems: “Replacing in kind those visible portions or features of the

structural system that are either extensively deteriorated or missing when there

are surviving prototypes such as cast iron columns and sections of loadbearing

walls. The new work should match the old in materials, design, color, and

texture; and be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and treatment.

Considering the use of substitute material for unexposed structural

replacements, such as roof rafters or trusses. Substitute material should, at a


105

minimum, have equal loadbearing capabilities, and be unobtrusively dated to

guide future research and treatment.”100

Interior Features: “Replacing in kind extensively deteriorated or missing parts of

repeated interior features when there are surviving prototypes such as stairs,

balustrades, wood paneling, columns; or decorative wall coverings or

ornamental tin or plaster ceilings. New work should match the old in material,

design, color, and texture; and be unobtrusively dated to guide future research

and treatment.”101

Mechanical Features: “Installing a new mechanical system if required, so that it

causes the least alteration possible to the building. Providing adequate

structural support for new mechanical equipment. Installing the vertical runs

of ducts, pipes, and cables in closets, service rooms, and wall cavities.

Installing air conditioning in such a manner that historic features are not

damaged or obscured and excessive moisture is not generated that will

accelerate deterioration of historic materials.”102

Exterior Features: “Replacing in kind extensively deteriorated or missing parts of

the building or site where there are surviving prototypes such as part of a

fountain, or portions of a walkway. New work should match the old in

materials, design, color, and texture; and be unobtrusively dated to guide

future research and treatment.”103


106

Restoration

Masonry: “Replacing in kind an entire masonry feature from the restoration period

that is too deteriorated to repair—if the overall form and detailing are still

evident—using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature.

Examples can include large sections of a wall, a cornice, balustrade, column,

or stairway. If using the same kind of material is not technically or

economically feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be

considered. The new work should be unobtrusively dated to guide future


Wood: “Replacing in kind an entire wood feature from the restoration period that is

too deteriorated to repair—if the overall form and detailing are still evident—

using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature. Examples of

wood features include a cornice, entablature or balustrade. If using the same

kind of material is not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible

substitute material may be considered. The new work should be unobtrusively

dated to guide future research and treatment.”105

Metal: “Replacing in kind an entire architectural metal feature from the restoration

period that is too deteriorated to repair—if the overall form and detailing are

still evident—using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature.

Examples could include cast iron porch steps or roof cresting. If using the

same kind of material is not technically or economically feasible, then a

104 Weeks and Grimmer, 126. 105 Ibid, 129.

107

compatible substitute material may be considered. The new work should be


Roof: “Replacing in kind an entire roof feature from the restoration period that is too

deteriorated to repair—if the overall form and detailing are still evident—

using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature. Examples can

include a large section of roofing, or a dormer or chimney. If using the same

kind of material is not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible

substitute material may be considered. The new work should be unobtrusively

dated to guide future research and treatment.”107

Windows: “Replacing in kind a window feature from the restoration period that is

too deteriorated to repair using the same sash and pane configuration and

other design details. If using the same kind of material is not technically or

economically feasible when replacing windows deteriorated beyond repair,

then a compatible substitute material may be considered. The new work

should be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and treatment.”108

Entrances & Porches: “Replacing in kind an entire entrance or porch from the

restoration period that is too deteriorated to repair—if the form and detailing

are still evident—using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the

feature. If using the same kind of material is not technically or economically


108

feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. The new

work should be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and treatment.”109

Store Fronts: “Replacing in kind a storefront from the restoration period that is too


using the physical evidence as a model. If using the same material is not

technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may

be considered. The new work should be unobtrusively dated to guide future


Structural Systems: “Replacing in kind—or with substitute material—those portions

or features of the structural system that are either extensively deteriorated or

are missing when there are surviving prototypes such as cast iron columns,

roof rafters or trusses, or sections of load-bearing walls. Substitute material

should convey the same form, design, and overall visual appearance as the

historic feature; and, at a minimum, be equal to its load-bearing capabilities.

The new work should be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and

treatment.”111

Interior Features: “Replacing in kind an entire interior feature or finish from the

restoration period that is too deteriorated to repair—if the overall form and

detailing are still evident—using the physical evidence as a model for

reproduction. Examples could include wainscoting, a tin ceiling, or interior

stairs. If using the same kind of material is not technically or economically


109

feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. The new

work should be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and treatment.”112

Mechanical Systems: “Replacing in kind—or with compatible substitute material—

those visible features of restoration period mechanical systems that are either

extensively deteriorated or are prototypes such as ceiling fans, switch plates,

radiators, grilles, or plumbing fixtures.”113

Exterior Features: “Replacing in kind an entire restoration period feature of the

building or site that is too deteriorated to repair if the overall form and

detailing are still evident. Physical evidence from the deteriorated feature

should be used as a model to guide the new work. This could include an

entrance or porch, walkway, or fountain. If using the same kind of material is

not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible substitute material

may be considered. The new work should be unobtrusively dated to guide

future research and treatment.”114

Rehabilitation

Masonry: “Replacing in kind an entire masonry feature that is too deteriorated to

repair—if the overall form and detailing are still evident— using the physical

evidence as a model to reproduce the feature. Examples can include large

sections of a wall, a cornice, balustrade, column, or stairway. If using the

same kind of material is not technically or economically feasible, then a

compatible substitute material may be considered. Designing and installing a


110

new masonry feature such as steps or a door pediment when the historic

feature is completely missing. It may be an accurate restoration using

historical, pictorial, and physical documentation; or be a new design that is

compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building.”115

Wood: “Replacing in kind an entire wood feature that is too deteriorated to repair—if

the overall form and detailing are still evident— using the physical evidence

as a model to reproduce the feature. Examples of wood features include a

cornice, entablature or balustrade. If using the same kind of material is not

technically or economically feasible, then a compatible substitute material

may be considered.”116 “Designing and installing a new wood feature such as

a cornice or doorway when the historic feature is completely missing. It may

be an accurate restoration using historical, pictorial, and physical

documentation; or be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale,

material, and color of the historic building.”117

Metal: “Replacing in kind an entire architectural metal feature that is too deteriorated

to repair—if the overall form and detailing are still evident—using the

physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature. Examples could

include cast iron porch steps or steel sash windows. If using the same kind of

material is not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible

substitute material may be considered. Designing and installing a new

architectural metal feature such as a metal cornice or cast iron capital when


111

the historic feature is completely missing. It may be an accurate restoration

using historical, pictorial, and physical documentation; or be a new design that

is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic

building.”118

Roof: “Replacing in kind an entire feature of the roof that is too deteriorated to

repair—if the overall form and detailing are still evident—using the physical

evidence as a model to reproduce the feature. Examples can include a large

section of roofing, or a dormer or chimney. If using the same kind of material

is not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible substitute

material may be considered.”119 “Designing and constructing a new feature

when the historic feature is completely missing, such as chimney or cupola. It

may be an accurate restoration using historical, pictorial, and physical

documentation; or be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale,

material, and color of the historic building.”120

Windows: “Replacing in kind an entire window that is too deteriorated to repair

using the same sash and pane configuration and other design details. If using

the same kind of material is not technically or economically feasible when

replacing windows deteriorated beyond repair, then a compatible substitute

material may be considered.”121 “Designing and installing new windows when

the historic windows (frames, sash and glazing) are completely missing. The

replacement windows may be an accurate restoration using historical,


112

pictorial, and physical documentation; or be a new design that is compatible

with the window openings and the historic character of the building.”122

Entrances & Porches: “Replacing in kind an entire entrance or porch that is too

deteriorated to repair—if the form and detailing are still evident— using the

physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature. If using the same kind

of material is not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible

substitute material may be considered. Designing and constructing a new

entrance or porch when the historic entrance or porch is completely missing. It

may be a restoration based on historical, pictorial, and physical

documentation; or be a new design that is compatible with the historic

character building.”123

Store Fronts: “Replacing in kind an entire storefront that is too deteriorated to

repair—if the overall form and detailing are still evident—using the physical

evidence as a model. If using the same material is not technically or

economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be

considered. Designing and constructing a new storefront when the historic

storefront is completely missing. It may be an accurate restoration using

historical, pictorial, and physical documentation; or be a new design that is

compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building.”124

Structural System: “Replacing in kind—or with substitute material—those portions

or features of the structural system that are either extensively deteriorated or


113

are missing when there are surviving prototypes such as cast iron columns,

roof rafters or trusses, or sections of load-bearing walls. Substitute material

should convey the same form, design, and overall visual appearance as the

historic feature; and, at a minimum, be equal to its load-bearing

capabilities.”125

Interior Features: “Replacing in kind an entire interior feature or finish that is too


using the physical evidence as a model for reproduction. Examples could

include wainscoting, a tin ceiling, or interior stairs. If using the same kind of

material is not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible

substitute material may be considered.”126 “Designing and installing a new

interior feature or finish if the historic feature or finish is completely missing.

This could include missing partitions, stairs, elevators, lighting fixtures, and

wall coverings; or even entire rooms if all historic spaces, features, and

finishes are missing or have been destroyed by inappropriate “renovations.”

The design may be a restoration based on historical, pictorial, and physical

documentation; or be a new design that is compatible with the historic

character of the building, district, or neighborhood.”127

Mechanical Systems: “Replacing in kind—or with compatible substitute material—

those visible features of mechanical systems that are either extensively


114

deteriorated or are prototypes such as ceiling fans, switch plates, radiators,

grilles, or plumbing fixtures.”128

Exterior Features: “Replacing in kind an entire feature of the building or site that is

too deteriorated to repair if the overall form and detailing are still evident.

Physical evidence from the deteriorated feature should be used as a model to

guide the new work. This could include an entrance or porch, walkway, or

fountain. If using the same kind of material is not technically or economically

feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. Replacing

deteriorated or damaged landscape features in kind.”129 “Designing and

constructing a new feature of a building or site when the historic feature is

completely missing, such as an outbuilding, terrace, or driveway. It may be

based on historical, pictorial, and physical documentation; or be a new design

that is compatible with the historic character of the building and site.”130


115

APPENDIX D:

ARCHITECTURAL SALVAGE SURVEY

116

Question 1: Company demographics including: company name, address, city, state, postal code, country, email address, and phone number. This information can be found in Appendices A & B.

Other: demolition auctions, manufacture garden elements from salvaged materials, lighting restorer, woodworking shop (products made from salvaged lumber), and recycle materials into unique items (i.e. tables).

Other: bid on & deconstruct only items that can be reused, manufacture wood products and reuse.

117

Other: unique items (i.e. any architectural item that can be integrated into a new environment), Ironwork, gates, garden elements, stonework, stained glass, and cast iron radiators.

118

Other: unique architectural items, ironwork, gates, garden elements, stonework, paint, cast iron radiators, HVAC units, transformers, value-added wood products.

119

Other: demolition, construction companies warehouse, trade-ins, customer purchases, and Amish communities.

120

Other: cost involving the removal, transportation, display, and rarity of the materials, professional opinion, price at 1/3 below retail (non-profit), and ½ of retail.

121

Other: radiators, furnaces, boilers, hot water heaters, terra cotta items, ironwork, garden elements, and stonework.

122

Other: ironwork, garden elements, stonework, paint, bars, furnaces, transformers, fencing, radiators, and stained glass windows.

123

Other: sell items at junk markets if they do not sell in store, no more than one month, and custom ordered merchandise is never left over.

124

Other: style or period of design, condition, and size.

Question 16: If you maintain a website, what is your web address? All web addresses are listed in Appendices A & B.

125

Other: personal website, radio, display booth, chamber of commerce, billboard, email newsletters, local neighborhood newsletters, yellow pages, and magazines (bi-monthly).

Other: TV and movie companies; and landlords/ house flippers also frequent their stores.

126

architectural salvage: its use and validity within the

Documents