DECONSTRUCTION a success?

[Youngstownshrimp]

So now we are at the end of the deconstruction community debate and Novotny has to clean out his desk.  Although I have had my rounds with this young man, I have to honestly say he is learning and may have become enlightened to the madness of current Youngstown politics.  It is all about keeping the pork government jobs and Novotny seems to have rocked the boat and elevated himself by challenging the City rulers, I salute you.  I bet you listened a little to my outcry and questioned, where has all the collected demolition private payments went?  In a nutshell, demolition funding comes from the Fed and State, when the city garnishes and bills property owners for the cost of demolition, why have they placed the money in the general fund for decades and not returned the money to the State or Fed?  Struthers right now as it spent its parlayed demo funds has mandated that they will not collect demolition cost from the property owners but defer to the State or Fed for collection.  I think the local Attorney General office should investigate this whole demolition business.

Oh, here is another thing Novotny may have learned, instead of having your back, I bet D'Avignon threw you under the bus like he is known to do.  Also, I didn't notice Defend Youngstown swinging the sword of righteousness?  Oh, and the YNDC and MVOC did they rally behind you even though you got them money to follow my lead in aquaculture?  No, now you are like the rest of us whistle blowers, you may have risen and come out from the dark side.  You do have chutzpah and spunk, I admire that at your age telling the City off, I hope you find your way into the free enterprise system you will do well.

[Youngstownshrimp]

We could have seen the charade when D'Avignon claims most of the recycled lumber was used for mulch.  Also, one of our forum member's tried to buy deconstructed lumber and couldn't get a response.

I applauded D'Avignon when he came up with Deconstruction, but pulled my support when I discovered the waste of tax dollars.  As we keep hearing, government cannot run any business right, it is a panacea.

[Youngstownshrimp]

Well, like I was always told when I listened to my elders, "the truth always comes out in the end."

Despite all of our challenges for the Deconstruction project to show us the "real " numbers, Novotny as a public servant simply ignored our request for info. , only showing us the "rewards" and "salutations" that were bestowed upon him and the CDA which masked the unprofitability of Deconstruction.  One only has to read past post to see here how many public servants are not qualified to spend our money but they do wantonly and recklessly.

And D'Avignon's remark that this was a pilot project, what a joke, if one house deconstructed was negative, a prudent person would have stopped the reckless spending on the succeeding eight.

[Youngstownshrimp]

Wow! a lot of good dialogue without the mudslinging, we are evolving.

[stewie]

I need some 12" reveal cedar siding.  Is that something that is available?  If so who would I contact?

[ForumManager]

I was using a 2x4 as an example only.

Understood.   Sorry to butt in with all the possible salvage opportunities.

[northside lurker]

I was using a 2x4 as an example only.

Sorry, I didn't mean to make a big deal about the 2x4s.  I didn't see that you had made 2 replies between shrimp's post and ForumManager's post.  I was replying to FM, and didn't realize she was responding to your 2x4 example.

[iwasthere]

there is a project in talking stages as we speak to reuse all materials from the torn down homes to use in this construction project.

[Rick Rowlands]

I was using a 2x4 as an example only.

[northside lurker]

At a deconstruction lecture, held at the Ohio One building a couple years ago, they said that no one is really interested in the 2x4s found in walls.  They are usually too hacked up for piping/wiring, etc.  So, they just bring walls down in one piece to save time.  Where lumber is concerned, they are more interested in floor joists and rafters.  In some cases, if the house was built with quality hard woods from trees found on the site, the lumber would probably be used to make furniture, or other high-end items.

As far as items that are stolen, I think you would be surprised at what remains in some of these houses.  For example, this house at Allan's website: http://allthingsyoungstown.net/836_pennsylvania/index.html had plenty of original, unpainted woodwork.  For the most part, the scrappers only seem interested in metal, fireplace mantles, and leaded/stained glass.

[ForumManager]

Reusing the 2 by 4s is a good idea, however they would not be the material that would keep  the enterprise afloat.  Items that are commonly stolen and could bring in a profit are  trim boards, old built in cabinets and shelving, aluminum siding, pipes,  doors (interior and exterior), leaded glass windows, staircases, antique hardware, claw foot tubs, cast sinks, pedestal sinks, Other profitable items would be hardwood floors, fireplaces, larger rafter boards and beams, wood siding, outdoor fascia and ornate trims, landscaping timbers, flagstone, bricks.  Even abandoned appliances, tools and  furniture could be included if you had a place to store and a means to sell.

[Rick Rowlands]

Thinking more on this subject...

A 2x4x8 sells new for roughly $2.00 each.  For a deconstructed 2x4 to be seriously considered by a lumber purchaser it would have to sell at a steep discount, perhaps $1.00 each.  Out of that buck the labor to remove, strip, stack and process has to be paid as well as a little bit of profit margin for the contractor and the retailer.  It is plain to see that on a purely economic standpoint, selling deconstructed lumber would probably not make sense unless there was a high volume.

If the lumber were subsidized to some extent that would put enough money in the mix to make it profitable to sell.  But to me that is clearly not something the government should be engaging in, especially in an era when basic government services are being curtailed.   Perhaps the key is in riding the current "green" fad, and instead of trying to sell on the cheaper price point, rather promote it as an environmentally friendly alternative.  We all know that some people will pay more for a "green" product.

Again, this is nothing that Steve probably hasn't already thought about.

[Rick Rowlands]

The key is in getting the wood buying public to think of deconstructed lumber as a viable building material.  This will take some time to do but if a few local lumber yards would agree to carry deconstructed lumber in their stock then maybe it will catch on.  The idea of calling a contractor, making special arrangements to visit his selection, possibly haggling over price etc. is not very appealing the to public.  I would rather just go to a lumberyard during regular business hours, load up what I need and drive away.

But to get to the point at which a lumberyard would agree to devote space and resources to sell deconstructed lumber, there has to be a demand for it.  But to create a demand it has to be readily available.  Catch 22!   Steve, I am sure you have already addressed this issue.  Ace Lumber seems to be very community oriented, and they are in a good location and have a weekend WKBN show in which to tout deconstructed lumber.  You and Herb should be working on this, if you aren't already.

[Youngstownshrimp]

Great!  now we are getting some information and feedback to recycle material which otherwise would be sent to the landfill.

US Green Building Materials deconstructed 8 houses and has 9 contracts with the City.  US Green employs Youth Build trainees.  Employing people is a good thing and contracts for US green keeps this upstart running.  If the material recycled is sold on the open market, revenue can be reinvested in US Green. 

Reading between the (Vindy) lines, the cost of deconstruction is substantially greater than outright demolition.  And, the majority of contracts are from the local government, if not all.  It is good that Youth build gets employed despite the funnel of funding coming straight from the State.

For Deconstruction to be a true Enterprise the business must be completely on the same level as private business.  Majority of demolition albeit subsidized, has salvage rights.  How much more material can be salvaged by deconstruction and what is that value?  Any businessman will tell us that the key here is finding the demand for the material en masse wherein a market will truly materialize.  The timber industry is a large market , I would think one should move on competing with this behemoth.  Of course throughout the history of global trade, government has always been criticized when subsidy exist on the books.

The big question here is exactly how one councilman put it "now is not the time to get fancy."  The essence of this statement IMO is can we not accomplish the same thing thru demolition if the material is salvaged and a SOLID market is cultivated?  If the answer is yes, deconstruction is just a costly fancy government program.

[Rick Rowlands]

Some interesting reading on deconstruction:

http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/pdf2002/falk02a.pdf
http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplrp/fpl_rp650.pdf
http://www.ilsr.org/recycling/decon/selectedprojects.html