3 ms·
Having lived in both places - Italy and the US - I think it's a natural question. The answer I've heard that makes sense, is that if you do this in US building
by davidw 3y ago
Having lived in both places - Italy and the US - I think it's a natural question.
The answer I've heard that makes sense, is that if you do this in US buildings you need decent fire suppression systems even if those bump the price.
But it's well worth doing in terms of making more types of nice buildings viable.
- eru 3y agoYou could just add that as an option to the housing regulation: Either build in the traditional American style out of wood, or (new option) build out of stone and add a robust fire suppression system, but in return we let you get away with a single staircase and other features that increase density.
- davidw 3y agoConcrete is probably not a great thing in much of the US for lower-rise buildings. Definitely not here in Oregon. And the fire suppression stuff is mandatory in multifamily housing anyway.
- ajmurmann 3y agoWhy is concrete bad in Oregon? Autoclaved, aerated concrete is common in Germany which has a slightly harsher version of our Oregon climate.
- davidw 3y agoIt outputs a lot of CO2, and there are a lot of trees to construct low-rise apartments with.
- thatfrenchguy 3y agoEarthquakes
- eru 3y agoAllowing non-wooden construction (and then a different fire safety regime for it) is not the same as mandating it. Developers in Oregon would presumably stick to wood, then. No harm done.