Shuster, W D; Burkman, C E; Grosshans, J; Dadio, S and Losco, R (2015) Green residential demolitions: Case study of vacant land reuse in storm water management in cleveland. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(3), ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The demolition process impacts how vacant land might be reused for storm water management. For five residential demolition sites (Cleveland, Ohio), an enhanced green demolition process was observed in 2012, and soil physical and hydrologic characteristics were measured predemolition and postdemolition (including within the excavation). Measurements were taken again in 2013 after backfill and topsoil had settled for 1 year. In their predemolition condition, the sites were found to be underlain with sandy loam soils, with three of the parcels containing close to 100% impervious area. The subgrade excavated surface was compacted by excavator activity and had overall moderate permeability. This pilot feasibility study indicates that the green specifications suggested were partially successful in producing vacant lots that were useful for storm water management. Although coarser sandy loam soils were specified, the actual placement of fine-textured fill soils with lower permeability led to higher runoff potential. In each of the five demolitions, the specification for complete debris removal was apparently effective, with less measured buried debris than for traditional demolitions. Contractors need better guidance on soil selection and placement to yield vacant land that is flexible and usable for green infrastructure and other redevelopment options.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | fill soil; green infrastructure; infiltration; project planning and design; residential demolition; storm water management |
| Index terms: | water management, option, placement, feasibility study, specification, redevelopment, infiltration, green infrastructure, excavation, project planning, case study, land, permeability |
| Subjects: | management, design stages, control systems, environmental science, environmental resource management, real estate economics, construction operations, infrastructure and transport systems, sustainability and resilience, material properties and characteristics, decision analysis, contractual condition, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Risk Management, Construction Materials, Design Practice, Sustainability, Project Management, Human Resources, Contract Administration, Urban Studies, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here