TIMBER · L2

pending approval

timber-14-80a114ea · seed timber-14 · LinkedIn: HOOK_CARD · Instagram: CAROUSEL

Instagram 1080×1350 · CAROUSEL · 5 frames

LinkedIn 1080×1080 · HOOK_CARD

Facebook 1080×1080

Uses the same 1080×1080 square visual as LinkedIn.

Status history

Generated · batch 80a114eaOct 5, 6:05 AM

LinkedIn caption

A GC who's never set a CLT panel is pricing a learning curve they haven't admitted to.

That number on the bid looks competitive.
It is not. It is an estimate built on optimism and YouTube.

Here is what an inexperienced timber crew actually gets wrong:

Connection sequencing. Tolerances that are tighter than conventional framing. Moisture protection during erection, which has to be active and planned, not reactive and improvised.

Get any one of those wrong and the rework eats the schedule.
Get all three wrong and your lender is asking questions you do not have answers to yet.

Mass timber is not a faster build. It is a faster build when the crew has done it before. That is the entire premise. An owner who buys the schedule promise without vetting the crew's actual erection history is not buying speed. They are buying someone else's on-the-job training.

The experience is not a line item you can read on a bid tab.
It lives in the crew lead's hands, in the superintendent's erection log from the last project, in whether the GC can name the fabricator they worked with and what the shop drawing cycle actually looked like.

Ask the GC to list every mass timber project they have erected, the square footage, the panel system, and who the fabricator was. If the answer is vague, the schedule is a fiction.

A GC who has read about timber and a GC who has built it will price the same job within a few percent of each other. So when two bids land close, what is the actual question an owner should be asking before they sign the contract?

#MassTimber #CLT #ConstructionRisk

Facebook captionInstagram caption

Regenerate

status: pending approval