Oregon Opens First Mass Timber Cancer Centre with 86 Glulam Beams

Why It Matters

The project demonstrates that mass timber can meet the rigorous structural and radiation‑shielding demands of oncology care while offering faster construction, lower carbon emissions, and modest cost premiums, signaling broader adoption in health‑care infrastructure.

Key Takeaways

• 86 glulam beams and 30 CLT panels form roof and second floor.
• Facility serves up to 300 patients daily with 36 exam rooms.
• Mass timber construction adds ~4% cost over steel‑concrete hospitals.
• 20 km of interior timber framing reduces carbon footprint.
• Radiation vault required 2.54 million kg concrete, 140 truckloads.

Pulse Analysis

Mass timber is reshaping the construction of high‑performance facilities, and the St. Charles Cancer Centre in Redmond, Oregon, is a flagship example. By integrating 86 glulam beams and 30 cross‑laminated timber panels, the project delivers a spacious, patient‑centric environment while meeting the stringent shielding requirements of a True Beam linear accelerator. The timber structure, covering more than 929 square metres of roof and second‑floor area, reduces reliance on steel and concrete, cutting embodied carbon and accelerating the build schedule compared with conventional methods.

Beyond sustainability, the centre’s design addresses operational efficiency and patient experience. With 36 exam rooms, 22 infusion bays and capacity for 300 daily patients, the facility expands access to oncology services across Central Oregon. The inclusion of semi‑private treatment spaces, floor‑to‑ceiling windows overlooking the Cascade Range, and ancillary wellness areas such as nutrition counseling, massage and acupuncture reflects a holistic care model that modern hospitals are increasingly adopting. The concrete vault—requiring 2.54 million kg of concrete and 140 truckloads—demonstrates that mass timber can coexist with heavy‑duty infrastructure where radiation protection is essential.

Economic analyses reinforce the viability of timber hospitals. A 2025 cost‑modelling study by KPMB Architects and the Provincial Health Services Authority found that a 200‑bed mass‑timber hospital costs only 4.1‑4.5 % more than a steel‑and‑concrete counterpart, a premium offset by lower lifecycle emissions and faster construction timelines. As health‑care providers seek resilient, cost‑effective, and environmentally responsible solutions, the Oregon cancer centre sets a precedent that could accelerate mass‑timber adoption in medical projects nationwide.