So now, in addition to a posse of armchair urban planners, we have a posse of armchair structural engineers and architects?
Any particular reason you believe there are no engineers on this forum?
Would anyone here be willing to pay 25 or 50% more in rent for a concrete or steel structure? I didn't think so.
In my case the question is irrelevant since I have no desire to live in that type housing but I realize there are people who do. Some would choose to afford steel or concrete rents if they knew what the construction was. Others are not so lucky.
Would people here complain about how it was keeping lower income people out of downtown if the rents for these units were 50% higher? Most definitely, and probably the same people complaining about the perceived lack of quality right now. In fact, they will probably still complain about the rent being charged, when they know nothing about the economics of putting a project like this together. THere is a certain mix of rental rates, construction cost, and maintenance costs that they have to look at to figure out what will and won't work.
Wood is actually a fine structural material when properly used. There were a lot of wood bridges that lasted many years, especially the covered ones. There was a lot of wood used for heavy load bearing floors in buildings like the one McNellie's occupies. Depending on the design margin, even a few joints can be less than perfect and still have the overall structural integrity maintained. I still have reservations about supporting a floor with a few nails in shear.
I also have concerns about fire safety in a commercial building made of wood. It makes me think of the left over WWII barracks I lived in for a while at NAS Memphis in 1973. There was a 24 hour fire watch...every day.
Even modest quality new construction will probably never be "affordable". "Affordable" housing in older cities is generally the older housing considered less than desirable by those who can afford better. In any case, the rents are based on a purchase cost less than new construction.
Wood frame is allowed by the building code. It's not the BEST, but it works and makes a project like this viable. The project has to be designed by a licensed architect and a licensed structural engineer, who have both put their stamps on the line to say that this thing is going to stand up. I don't think there is anything to be so upset about, it's not like some of the low quality single family stuff you see where no licenses are required and builders can basically turn in a napkin sketch to get a permit. I'm just happy they're actually using brick and precast instead of fake stucco - and that they actually have a mock-up on site? That's almost impressive to me. Shows a commitment to a nice looking finished product.
Hopefully the engineers and architects on this project are familiar with wood construction of this magnitude and are not just using unfamiliar minimum acceptable guidelines.
Developers aren't going to take on projects when they can't make money. These types of endeavors are easy to preach about, but not so easy when it's your money on the line. I think some of you aren't used to seeing construction downtown, so you didn't know what to expect.
Of course developers want to make money, just like I want my paycheck on a regular basis. I am not about to say this building will be unsafe. Older wood construction was undoubtedly over designed which allows us to have our treasured historic buildings. Modern building techniques are not intended to last forever. Economics plays a huge part in design decisions. That's alright as long as the parties involved realize the design limitations.