^ I don't understand what you are saying. There are hundreds of concrete and steel condos on the market that people can buy.
Are you suggesting that we should make woodframe illegal?
They fill a valuable lower cost option to the market. If you want concrete then they are there for the purchase.
First - this discussin probably no longer belongs here, I would be ok if it got moved to whichever thread it would be better suited to.
Ok, I have thought long and hard about this.
My response is that sound/vibration and privacy within a building envelope is a livability issue since it has the potential to restrict who the residents in the building are are. I believe that a building, any building regardless of construction, ought to be able to be livable home to people in all stages of life concurrently (from an 80 who has trouble sleeping, the 4 year old that can't stop running and the 1 year old that screams non-stop).
Residents should have just as much right to adequate sound/vibration barriers within a dwelling unit as they should adequate ceiling height.
If sound/vibration issues in a wood frame building cannot be adressed to the satisfaction of the median tolerance of society then buildings should be only built of concrete. If the sound issues *can* be addressed, as Mike K suggests it can, then fine keep the wood frame but chrissakes build it right.
I believe that in the big picture, if a shift in culture can be acheived (buildings lose their stigma, people feel they can actually raise families in buildings), then it will have been worth it becuase there will likely be more willingness/openness to density and supply will keep up.