How paradigms shift. As recently as 10 years ago, abandoned buildings and closed industrial plants were simply bulldozed to the ground and taken to a municipal landfill. This method of clearing a property for reuse was prevalent from the late 1970s, and was “just the way things were done.” In most cases the equipment was auctioned, columns and piping were scrapped, but little else. The demolition process was a net expense, and in some cases a large expense.

Today, the valuation of brownfields and underutilized industrial properties is much more sophisticated. The main value always remains in the property itself. However, the renewal of brownfield buildings has come into focus as a separate economic value proposition, largely through the lenses of sustainability. Factors forcing a more sophisticated approach include sensitivity to asset recovery, environmental condition resolution, health and safety protection, and bonding and insurance requirements.

There are four current scenarios in the brownfield building and infrastructure renewal paradigm:

• Structure rehabilitation: Rehabilitate structure interiors for reuse by similar occupants. This scenario is commonly used for abandoned strip malls and shopping centers (i.e., grayfields).
• Structure reuse: Conduct a reuse assessment of structures and infrastructure; evaluate asset recovery of interior materials; conduct a market survey to identify potential users; and engage a realtor who proactively seeks buyers.
• Demolition and redevelopment positioning: Demolish the buildings to grade; remove foundations to frost depth; recycle all materials possible; clean up residual soil and groundwater contamination to regulatory standards to achieve a No Further Remediation (NFR) declaration; conduct a market survey to identify potential users; and engage a realtor who proactively seeks buyers.
• Demolition and green weed approach: The old paradigm still has some supporters whereby you demolish the buildings to grade, put up a six-foot cyclone fence; attach a “for sale” sign on each of the four sides, and let the broker wait for a call, which comes infrequently.

The selection of any of these renewal scenarios is based on an interactive balance of needs and options between the owner, the end user, and the demolition/dismantling company. In many cases the optimum end-use decision is based on an assessment of:

• Scrap value (piping, columns, equipment, tanks)
• Reuse value of other materials (concrete, pavements, bricks)
• Cost to upgrade infrastructure (gas and electricity supply; assessment of heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC) equipment; structural conditions of roofs, walls, and floors; sewers; and stormwater management systems)
• Usability, historical status, or aesthetic value of buildings, (location, end user needs, neighborhood context), and
• Rehabilitation potential (ability to install computer conduit, reconfigure work spaces).

source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zappowbang/

Recycled material value
The value of recycled materials considers both the scrap revenue of high-value raw materials, as well as other recycled lower value materials. Scrap revenue includes items like piping, steel columns, wiring and other components for which a recycled market is well established. Though well established, the prices within the scrap market can vary significantly. In the years prior to the economic downturn, the scrap market was so good that many new firms entered the field. Today’s market is economically challenging and some of those same firms are leaving the market.

The value of other recycled materials is less economically viable. Concrete and asphalt pavements, concrete building foundations, bricks, and landscape materials (e.g., chipped trees, topsoil) all have value from a sustainability perspective. However, many times the highest value of these recycled materials if for on-site reuse, thus eliminating the cost for off-site transport and import of the same type of materials for new construction. Since transport and disposal are typically large costs for demolition and construction debris, the elimination of these costs can frequently off-set the cost of onsite crushing and sorting equipment, as well as the material processing.

“We look carefully at the salvage and recoverable elements within each project, and use the potential recovery and recycling values to offset the costs of our work to provide our clients with maximum recovery value. In many cases, salvage value can offset a major portion of the costs of the work,” according to Joseph Eichler, project manager and estimator for the Cleveland Wrecking Co., one of the nation’s largest demolition contractors. Eicher also noted the “extraction cost” is important. For example, the process and cost of extracting a tank from the third floor of a building, and the loss of scrap income from the tank materials, may offset the value received from resale of the tank.

Role of selective demolition
Today’s demolition projects frequently undertake a large amount of partial or selective demolition work to renovate and modernize older buildings and facilities. Interior gut-out projects, seismic retrofit, structural strengthening and modernization projects on existing structures are common.

High-profile selective structural and seismic strengthening projects, many in congested urban areas, highlight the need for selective demolition services, which requires careful scheduling, coordination and planning to make these intricate and labor-burdened projects effective.

In this effort, there must be sensitivity to contamination issues. The largest demolition and dismantling companies now have the capabilities to handle most toxic and environmental issues related to dismantling and demolition projects. The range of experience required in the removal, handling, and disposal of various contaminants, include asbestos, lead based paint, polychlorinated biphenyl’s (PCBs), and other universal wastes.

U.S. EPA has embraced selective demolition and construction materials recycling for brownfield projects. Construction and demolition (C&D) materials consist of the debris generated during the construction, renovation, and demolition of buildings, roads, and bridges. A number of guidelines have been generated in the last few years to encourage more sustainable demolition and building reuse.

“Reducing and recycling C&D materials conserves landfill space, reduces the environmental impact of producing new materials, creates jobs, and can reduce overall building project expenses through avoided purchase/disposal costs” according to the EPA web site: www.epa.gov/waste/conserve/rrr/imr/cdm/index.htm.

Ken Kastman is a V.P. and Sr. Principal Engineer in the URS Corp. Chicago office.