Winnipeg Construction X

[BAKGUY]

Originally Posted by hello

Surprised Paragon is wanting to go with a 7 storey building there. I would think that makes little sense. They would be better off sticking with 6 storey wood frame

Not everyone wants to live in a Matchbox, which they undisputedly are.
How many of them go up in flames in a few minutes.
So dangerous no matter what it said, they are timber boxes.
I know I hear the materials are improved but still high risk in a city where fires are happening hourly.
I would rather live in a closet but in concrete structure than in a Glue & sawdust constructed edifice..

[OTA in Winnipeg]

^Exactly.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by BAKGUY

Not everyone wants to live in a Matchbox, which they undisputedly are.
How many of them go up in flames in a few minutes.
So dangerous no matter what it said, they are timber boxes.
I know I hear the materials are improved but still high risk in a city where fires are happening hourly.
I would rather live in a closet but in concrete structure than in a Glue & sawdust constructed edifice..

Completely false. No modern wood frame building goes up in flames and they are just as safe as any other construction type. They are required to meet the same fire ratings as non-combustible buildings and they have sprinkler systems that quickly prevent spread.

If all the old timber buildings that meth heads are lighting on fire had sprinkler systems there would be no problem

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

Pretty high traffic area, I imagine wood would be pretty loud. I personally wonder why they went with 7 and not 9 as was an alternative in their planning. You'd think more units = more money. I guess the lending was too expensive.

The exterior walls of Concrete buildings are light steel studs. Acoustics would be no different.

The reason why they would be building seven stories is likely because they can keep it below 80 feet in height, which is the definition of high-rise construction in the building code. This triggers a bunch of requirements that can add significant cost.

Also the zoning on the site wouldn’t allow the density of a nine storey and it’s likely the planners wouldn’t give them that amount.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by drew

^ if they were so inclined, the 2020 NBCC allows for up to 12 stories of wood frame construction.

Using cross laminated timber which is more expensive than concrete.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by WinCitySparky

The line in the article where the coalition demands the developer set rent based off a person’s income, “whatever that may be”, really made me laugh out loud. It’s as though they don’t know the difference between a developer and a social housing agency. Truly ignorant.

Like what world do these people live in? How do they see this working? Every rent is set by the paycheque of the tenants? How could the developer ever get financing from a bank or work out a budget for the project if rents depend on tenant income levels? Wouldn’t the developer just wait for a higher income tenant? Why would they ever rent to a low income tenant? Ludicrous.

If we want social or deeply affordable housing we need to pay for it publicly. Developers can’t afford to build it. These developments barely work as it is. The only reason all these developments have affordable suites is because it’s part of the requirement to get CMHC financing. It is subsidized by the government. They all have to meet energy requirements too.

The federal government doesn’t get the credit it deserves. Every housing development is now low energy and includes affordable units because of CMHC programs. If these programs are cancelled by the next government it will end housing development.

[BAKGUY]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Completely false. No modern wood frame building goes up in flames and they are just as safe as any other construction type. They are required to meet the same fire ratings as non-combustible buildings and they have sprinkler systems that quickly prevent spread.

If all the old timber buildings that meth heads are lighting on fire had sprinkler systems there would be no problem

I was speaking to concrete. In general, wooden structures are not as safe as concrete buildings. Wood is vulnerable to external threats like fire, wind, insects, moisture, and mold—all of which can result in structural damage and safety risks. While concrete is a durable and strong material, it also presents some safety risks.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by trueviking

The exterior walls of Concrete buildings are light steel studs. Acoustics would be no different.

The reason why they would be building seven stories is likely because they can keep it below 80 feet in height, which is the definition of high-rise construction in the building code. This triggers a bunch of requirements that can add significant cost.

Also the zoning on the site wouldn’t allow the density of a nine storey and it’s likely the planners wouldn’t give them that amount.

Ah! I wasn't aware! Thanks for the heads up on that. All in all, seems like another homerun project by Paragon and I look forward to take pictures for you guys since I live in the neighbourhood right to the East of this.

[hello]

Originally Posted by trueviking

The exterior walls of Concrete buildings are light steel studs. Acoustics would be no different.

The reason why they would be building seven stories is likely because they can keep it below 80 feet in height, which is the definition of high-rise construction in the building code. This triggers a bunch of requirements that can add significant cost.

Also the zoning on the site wouldn’t allow the density of a nine storey and it’s likely the planners wouldn’t give them that amount.

Thanks Vike. Wouldn't they need to change the structure from typical wood frame to another system like light steel or concrete to get to 7 stories? Do you know the rough per sf cost implications of making that change?

[trueviking]

^ they would yes. Anything above six storeys needs to be non-combustible construction. The cost difference varies, but in my experience it's something like 10 to 15% more..doesn't sound like a lot but when the margins are tight to begin with, it's often a deal breaker. If your wood frame building costs $200 per square foot, it's a real challenge to find places to cut $30 per square foot to make up for the higher cost of a different structural system.

In this instance, its likely the more units is better for the proforma than the less expensive structural system.....the increase is averaged out across more units.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by BAKGUY

I was speaking to concrete. In general, wooden structures are not as safe as concrete buildings. Wood is vulnerable to external threats like fire, wind, insects, moisture, and mold—all of which can result in structural damage and safety risks. While concrete is a durable and strong material, it also presents some safety risks.

if you have water infiltration, even concrete buildings will have problems.

The biggest issue for wood frame buildings is that they are susceptible to arson during construction....once they are complete with sprinklers, fire ratings and separations, they are no less safe than any other building type....it's a lingering urban legend.....if anything, steel is less safe in a fire.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by trueviking

.....if anything, steel is less safe in a fire.

Due to warping and heat damage?

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

Due to warping and heat damage?

it's a funny thing about steel....once it reaches its melting point it collapses instantly.....it basically goes from 100% load bearing capacity to 0% in a second (see world trade centre)....wood slowly degrades in a fire and maintains much of its strength as it burns....its why steel buildings need to be fire protected in the same way wood ones do....all the structure needs to be inside a drywall wall or protected with spray foam....you can't have an exposed steel column in a building that is required to be non-combustible...it must be wrapped in a drywall enclosure.

Concrete structure doesn't need to be fire protected.....its a big cost advantage of concrete.

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by trueviking

it's a funny thing about steel....once it reaches its melting point it collapses instantly.....it basically goes from 100% load bearing capacity to 0% in a second (see world trade centre)....wood slowly degrades in a fire and maintains much of its strength as it burns....its why steel buildings need to be fire protected in the same way wood ones do....all the structure needs to be inside a drywall wall or protected with spray foam....you can't have an exposed steel column in a building that is required to be non-combustible...it must be wrapped in a drywall enclosure.

Concrete structure doesn't need to be fire protected.....its a big cost advantage of concrete.

still boggles my mind people think wtc was blown up to make it colaps the fires had the right updrafts feeding them with air to get going. saw it that morning predicted at 810 if they cant get those fired under controll by 10am they will colaps freaked me out how right i was when they came down. kept saying in history class watch they will come down befor class is over no one beleaved me till they fell. being they were worlds tallest pushing the tech to its limits at the time like the police hq former post office dt it makes sens why it failed but no one seems to think about these things or understand.

as for concreate it can screw it up the newer it is or if its -30 and ur blasting it with water like how brick buildings get screwed up in the winter

[Biff]

Isn't this all a moot point. Paragon builds all of their buildings using ICF (Insulated Concrete Forms).

[drew]

Originally Posted by BAKGUY

Not everyone wants to live in a Matchbox, which they undisputedly are.
How many of them go up in flames in a few minutes.
So dangerous no matter what it said, they are timber boxes.
I know I hear the materials are improved but still high risk in a city where fires are happening hourly.
I would rather live in a closet but in concrete structure than in a Glue & sawdust constructed edifice..

Just to pile on a bit...

Every building requires a certain fire resistance rating (1hr, 1.5hr, 2hr, etc.). This doesn't change if it is allowed to be built out of wood, steel or concrete.

These fire resistance ratings are there just to ensure that occupants have a certain amount of time to escape the building. Beyond that, the Building Code really doesn't care. And either way, in a large fire it won't matter whether or not your building survives from a structural standpoint - you aren't going to be living there for a very long time. Case in point that newer building at 221 Stradbrook. It is a full pre-cast concrete building. Yet it had a fire on the roof and top floor, and everyone who lived there is still out of a home - for at least 12 months.

Typical wood stud construction is only really vulnerable when it's under construction, before the floor and walls have been sheathed in drywall.

[drew]

Originally Posted by Biff

Isn't this all a moot point. Paragon builds all of their buildings using ICF (Insulated Concrete Forms).

ICF is great and all - but you need to have trust in your concrete contractor as no forms are ever stripped, so there is no way to know for sure how well the concrete was placed, if there are voids, etc.

Also - since we are on the topic, that ICF insulation is extremely flammable with toxic smoke.

Honestly, we are all better off living in a house like mine. Sawdust (or no) insulation, horse hair reinforced plaster and old growth timber. It will burn down slowly while you roast marshmallows.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by OTA in Winnipeg

I'd never live in a 6 story wood framed multi unit dwelling. I drove by some today while driving out North Main. That's what I thought while driving by.

Also bought a pair of kick ass army issue binoculars at the antique store on the way back for only $30! This was a good deal. I think they came from South Korea but it has Korea stamped in the leather case so it was likely manufactured during the war. How cool is that?

I like that antique shop.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by drew

ICF is great and all - but you need to have trust in your concrete contractor as no forms are ever stripped, so there is no way to know for sure how well the concrete was placed, if there are voids, etc.

Also - since we are on the topic, that ICF insulation is extremely flammable with toxic smoke.

I not arguing pro's and con's. Just clarifying that it won't be stick frame like some people on here assume everything 6 storeys and under has to be.

I appreciate all the previous info presented to inform people that wood frame is no more or less dangerous in a fire when completed.

[pegster]

Originally Posted by Biff

Isn't this all a moot point. Paragon builds all of their buildings using ICF (Insulated Concrete Forms).

I'm not so sure of that, I've been watching their new buildings going up in the Village, on Scott and Wardlaw for example, and those have been wood frame, I believe.

If you go back a couple of pages in the Osborne & Corydon thread, you'll seem some shots of their building at 339 Wardlaw.