Developer proposes 13-story Southbank apartment tower

[Kerry]

I don't know what everyone hates on wood for these midrise buildings.  Do you want them to build it out of concrete just because?  Wood is a great choice in many applications.  Inexpensive, strong, environmentally friendly, easily worked, etc.

I think a lot of the concern/dislike for wood is that it isn't built for permanence.  From what I have been able to read about 40 years is the max.  A concrete building will last forever.  Then there is the noise level difference and energy efficiency as well.

40 years huh?  Better tell that to everyone in Avondale, Riverside, Springfield, should we keep going?

There are 40+ year old multistory apartments in Riverside/Avondale/Springfield?

[thelakelander]

There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

[Steve]

There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

I've been in a couple and had a girlfriend rent one. To lakelander's point, they were either wood inside and out, or brick outside, but structurally wood.

Now, they likely had a rehab or two over the years but likely not a full rebuild (save for a termite infestation).

Think about it this way - the White House is structurally a wood building, and while significantly rebuilt after the war of 1812, many of the beams used were actually part of the building built in the 1790s (probably a bad idea but they were). Further, as technology advanced (remember, the White House didn't have indoor plumbing  originally) and they retrofitted/expanded the building, they chopped through structural parts of the building (this was proven during the inspection and rebuild in the 1940s). They also didn't adjust the foundations when they added the third floor.

With all of that structural damage that was (purposefully and ignorantly) done, the thing still stood for about 150 years.

I think it's safe to say when properly built a wood building is just fine for a century plus.

[Adam White]

There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

I've been in a couple and had a girlfriend rent one. To lakelander's point, they were either wood inside and out, or brick outside, but structurally wood.

Now, they likely had a rehab or two over the years but likely not a full rebuild (save for a termite infestation).

Think about it this way - the White House is structurally a wood building, and while significantly rebuilt after the war of 1812, many of the beams used were actually part of the building built in the 1790s (probably a bad idea but they were). Further, as technology advanced (remember, the White House didn't have indoor plumbing  originally) and they retrofitted/expanded the building, they chopped through structural parts of the building (this was proven during the inspection and rebuild in the 1940s). They also didn't adjust the foundations when they added the third floor.

With all of that structural damage that was (purposefully and ignorantly) done, the thing still stood for about 150 years.

I think it's safe to say when properly built a wood building is just fine for a century plus.

What kind of wood was used in the White House? Was it pine?

[acme54321]

There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

I've been in a couple and had a girlfriend rent one. To lakelander's point, they were either wood inside and out, or brick outside, but structurally wood.

Now, they likely had a rehab or two over the years but likely not a full rebuild (save for a termite infestation).

Think about it this way - the White House is structurally a wood building, and while significantly rebuilt after the war of 1812, many of the beams used were actually part of the building built in the 1790s (probably a bad idea but they were). Further, as technology advanced (remember, the White House didn't have indoor plumbing  originally) and they retrofitted/expanded the building, they chopped through structural parts of the building (this was proven during the inspection and rebuild in the 1940s). They also didn't adjust the foundations when they added the third floor.

With all of that structural damage that was (purposefully and ignorantly) done, the thing still stood for about 150 years.

I think it's safe to say when properly built a wood building is just fine for a century plus.

What kind of wood was used in the White House? Was it pine?

Probably not considering the era when it was built. 

Long story short is that a properly designed, built, and maintained wood (or any other material) structure can last a very very long time. 

[Adam White]

There are 2-4 story frame buildings in Springfield, Riverside, etc. However most are probably brick veneer.

I've been in a couple and had a girlfriend rent one. To lakelander's point, they were either wood inside and out, or brick outside, but structurally wood.

Now, they likely had a rehab or two over the years but likely not a full rebuild (save for a termite infestation).

Think about it this way - the White House is structurally a wood building, and while significantly rebuilt after the war of 1812, many of the beams used were actually part of the building built in the 1790s (probably a bad idea but they were). Further, as technology advanced (remember, the White House didn't have indoor plumbing  originally) and they retrofitted/expanded the building, they chopped through structural parts of the building (this was proven during the inspection and rebuild in the 1940s). They also didn't adjust the foundations when they added the third floor.

With all of that structural damage that was (purposefully and ignorantly) done, the thing still stood for about 150 years.

I think it's safe to say when properly built a wood building is just fine for a century plus.

What kind of wood was used in the White House? Was it pine?

Probably not considering the era when it was built. 

Long story short is that a properly designed, built, and maintained wood (or any other material) structure can last a very very long time.

Perhaps. But I don't have a lot of faith in these cheap buildings made out of pine sticks and plasterboard.

My house was built in 1905 and has a wooden (oak, I believe) frame (brick walls). It's still standing today and yeah - I'd agree that wood is something that can last a long time. But I wouldn't equate that proposed monstrosity with the White House or my house (also the 'White house" in its own right).

[acme54321]

Perhaps. But I don't have a lot of faith in these cheap buildings made out of pine sticks and plasterboard.

My house was built in 1905 and has a wooden (oak, I believe) frame (brick walls). It's still standing today and yeah - I'd agree that wood is something that can last a long time. But I wouldn't equate that proposed monstrosity with the White House or my house (also the 'White house" in its own right).

I wouldn't compare it to the White House either.  The WH wasn't compeltely wood, it's masonry exterior walls were load bearing.  The wooden interior buildout was probably heavy hardwood timber too.  Apples and oranges.

If you're in a 1905 house in Jax it is almost certainly yellow pine, as are most other historic wood builings of that age.  It might be old growth though which is better than the plantation grown lumber in use today.

Time will only tell how these newer, heavily engineered structures hold up.  I think they'll do fine, and I imagine the guys shelling out $40M to build it agree.  We walked past the Broadstone Riverhouse almost daily as it was being built and that is next level compared to any traditional residential framing I've ever seen, but it has to be at 4 stories.

[Steve]

I mean, the type of material and the quality of construction aren't the same thing.

I likely wouldn't buy a unit in this building for many reasons (construction aside). But, since they're apartments it's a non-issue. Besides, maybe in 50 years someone will want to redevelop the entire area over there, including the OneCall building.

[Steve]

I wouldn't compare it to the White House either.  The WH wasn't compeltely wood, it's masonry exterior walls were load bearing.

While yes the exterior walls were masonry and provided some structural support, the wood was absolutely load bearing which is why it nearly collapsed in the late 1940s. Today it's structurally steel.

[Adam White]

Perhaps. But I don't have a lot of faith in these cheap buildings made out of pine sticks and plasterboard.

My house was built in 1905 and has a wooden (oak, I believe) frame (brick walls). It's still standing today and yeah - I'd agree that wood is something that can last a long time. But I wouldn't equate that proposed monstrosity with the White House or my house (also the 'White house" in its own right).

I wouldn't compare it to the White House either.  The WH wasn't compeltely wood, it's masonry exterior walls were load bearing.  The wooden interior buildout was probably heavy hardwood timber too.  Apples and oranges.

If you're in a 1905 house in Jax it is almost certainly yellow pine, as are most other historic wood builings of that age.  It might be old growth though which is better than the plantation grown lumber in use today.

Time will only tell how these newer, heavily engineered structures hold up.  I think they'll do fine, and I imagine the guys shelling out $40M to build it agree.  We walked past the Broadstone Riverhouse almost daily as it was being built and that is next level compared to any traditional residential framing I've ever seen, but it has to be at 4 stories.

My house is in London (though it was located in Essex when it was built). It's a mid-terrace workers' cottage - the walls are brick and are load-bearing.

Funny story - it's a very small house. The prior owner tore down the wall between the two downstairs rooms. Apparently, she didn't have a steel joist installed and made it look like there was one (so it didn't get picked up on the survey). Anyway, we figured it out and had to get one installed. The entire upstairs of the house was being held up by a 5x4 timber dating back to Victorian/Edwardian times. It would've snapped eventualy, but still...

[Kerry]

A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

[Adam White]

A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

You don't say?

[Kerry]

A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

You don't say?

Well - we were talking about how a multi-story apartment would hold up over time with wood framing, then someone suggested single family homes do it as if they were equivalent.  Eventually the White House came into the discussion.

[acme54321]

A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

You don't say?

Well - we were talking about how a multi-story apartment would hold up over time with wood framing, then someone suggested single family homes do it as if they were equivalent.  Eventually the White House came into the discussion.

What does the size of the structure have anything to do with how long it's going to last?  It's pretty clear you have something against this type of construction "just because".

[Adam White]

A 2 story single family home is not a 7 story 150 unit apartment building.

You don't say?

Well - we were talking about how a multi-story apartment would hold up over time with wood framing, then someone suggested single family homes do it as if they were equivalent.  Eventually the White House came into the discussion.

Look through all my posts and tell me if you still think I am arguing in favour of a multi-story apartment building made out of sticks of pine and sheetrock.