The aging issue is fairly irrelevant to the framing material in modern construction. There's plenty of older CMU or concrete & stucco homes in Florida and the carribean that look like complete crap. Owner's maintenance and city enforcement loom far larger in the longevity of a building. Let's also not forget how bad Union Station got in the 80s & 90s.TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 3:31 pm Wood construction as high quality as medieval-style half timbering and CLT unfortunately isn't what's being used in these five-over-one apartment projects though. As far as I know, it's basically the same stick frame system used on suburban homes, hotel's ect. Structures not exactly famous for aging gracefully. They also have a not-insignificant record of burning while under construction because it's mostly the systems keeping the building fire safe as opposed to the construction of the building itself.
If we can't figure out better sustainable building techniques, however, then we should figure out how to improve the public face of these buildings. Again, we once had a reliable system for producing appealing urban architecture. It can be done.
Single-family homes also abide by a far less strict building code than multifamily or commercial development.
I don't disagree that modern design often suffers from tight budgets. A middling market like KC is going to especially struggle. That said, it's worth acknowledging that modern building budgets are pulled in a lot more directions than the buildings of 100 years ago.
You have:
- far higher labor costs
- Tighter lending standards from banks
- far more stringent construction safety standards
- robust fire supression systems & egress requirements
- comprehensive heating and cooling
- physical disability access mandates throughout the building
- building code required & local sustainability requirements
- financier required parking amounts
And those are just some of the biggest ones. There's plenty of other challenges.
