2 ms·
> it would be negligibly more expensive and technically demanding to have high ceilings (it's free to build up) Not true; standardized high-volume lumber dimen
by octoberfranklin 6y ago
> it would be negligibly more expensive and technically demanding to have high ceilings (it's free to build up)
Not true; standardized high-volume lumber dimensions make it much cheaper to build walls that are slighly less than 8 feet high. Hardware stores even sell pre-cut studs at 92 5/8" instead of 96".
The building code is another obstacle. It requires kiln-dried stamped+certified stud lumber for walls, and getting those in anything over 8 feet is a custom order (the 2x4x10s you see at your local hardware store are not certified for this). Above 11 foot ceilings the building code requires you to get an engineer to design the house and wet-stamp the plans.
- tuatoru 6y agoI think you have to add forestry to to the costs. Lumber tree cultivars grow at fairly predictable rates and varying the dimensions of the finished lumber would mean either much reduced yield or delayed harvesting - more costs per board foot, either way. And then the trucks that transport the logs would have to be modified, and/or loads decreased, sawmill kilns and timber yard storage racks modified... Ramifications ripple everywhere in an efficient ("optimised") system.