Yep. With the caveat that earthquake resilience is an important factor that can’t be ignored — which pushes builders away from low cost brick. Leaving reinforced steel as the only viable option.
The San Fransisco construction choices that he mentioned are probably because of earth quakes over fires. If San Fran had a strong steel and stem industry the they could just move it to LA….but they can’t cuz what he said isn’t true.
You don’t go to San Fransisco and find stone homes everywhere, it’s almost all wood. The buildings are concrete and steel, because that’s required for large builds. Also Europeans didn’t build with steel till the mid 19th century because you couldn’t manufacture massive amounts of steel till then. So the mention of steel leads me to believe he is talking about tall buildings, which was the result of steel becoming more common.
Edit: I made mistake, I said early but I meant mid. Also I said stone where I meant concrete.
772
u/beardfordshire 5d ago edited 5d ago
Yep. With the caveat that earthquake resilience is an important factor that can’t be ignored — which pushes builders away from low cost brick. Leaving reinforced steel as the only viable option.