This is somewhat tangent to my thesis I've begun working on, but the argument is that traditional, load bearing masonry can be cost competitive with modern systems even now, when the entire cost is factored in. I'm thinking in an urban context this could do a lot to offset the abysmal quality of most of the new plywood palace midrises going up.
I thought this could be a fun doacussion here, andbif im oucky you guys kight have aome fact checked sourcesnuo your sleve, although anocdotal evidence is fine too. I've just stumbled upon a few heavily biased sources to get the ball rolling:
First, the Masonry Contractors of NJ has this little pdf:
http://www.mcofnj.org/pdf/Traditional Masonry The Perfect Choice.pdf
Then there's Clay Chapman, who is determined to build a traditional masonry home for $80/PSF
http://www.placemakers.com/2012/04/02/structural-masonry-for-under-80-a-square-foot/
I thought this could be a fun doacussion here, andbif im oucky you guys kight have aome fact checked sourcesnuo your sleve, although anocdotal evidence is fine too. I've just stumbled upon a few heavily biased sources to get the ball rolling:
First, the Masonry Contractors of NJ has this little pdf:
http://www.mcofnj.org/pdf/Traditional Masonry The Perfect Choice.pdf
Then there's Clay Chapman, who is determined to build a traditional masonry home for $80/PSF
http://www.placemakers.com/2012/04/02/structural-masonry-for-under-80-a-square-foot/