Subscribe
I recently had the opportunity to visit the 200,000 square foot manufacturing facility of H+ME Technology here in Toronto.
Here’s a photo of myself and Nick Zicaro:
H+ME (originally called Brockport Home Systems Ltd.) is a division of developer Great Gulf, but they were never intended to be just an in-house provider and much of their business is now with outside clients.
What H+ME Technology does is manufacture and assemble factory-built wood panels for both low-rise and mid-rise new construction homes. That is, instead of the walls and floors being framed outside on the construction site, they are fabricated ahead of time in a controlled facility (see below) and then delivered to site. This allows for a single-family home to be framed in as little as 2 days on the job site.
What’s interesting about all of this is that architects have long been obsessed with the idea of shifting construction away from the actual job site. A great book on this topic is Refabricating Architecture by Stephen Kieran and James Timberlake. In it they talk about how inefficient our construction processes are and how we ought to move towards a fully integrated approach that brings together technology, materials, and production methods.
And in 2006 they put their money where their mouth is and built a fully prefabricated house on Taylors Island in Maryland. Here’s an snippet from their website:
“Most houses are built from thousands of parts, which are transported separately to the construction site and pieced together by hand—a process of extraordinary duration, cost, and environmental impact. With Loblolly House, by contrast, we wanted to use integrated assemblies of those parts, fabricated off site, to build a house in an entirely different way.”
The big advantage of this entirely different way is that you’re able to dramatically improve efficiencies, quality, and performance by fabricating the components in a controlled environment, as opposed to on-site by hand.
Despite all this, the industry has been incredibly slow to change and most houses are indeed not built this way. But H+ME is working to change that, which is why I was keen to check out their facility and learn about their business.
So here’s how it works:
H+ME starts by modeling out the entire home in 3D CAD according to the project drawings. This allows them to catch any design coordination errors before they happen on-site. And it’s why their slogan is “Twice built. Assembled once.” They are literally building the entire house in 3D ahead of time.
Once the house has been modeled, they then send the designs for the walls and floors to their factory and begin production. During this process, all of the rough-ins for electrical, plumbing, and so on, are provided, which makes it super easy for the trades on-site later on.
Here’s what that looks like in the factory:
A video posted by Home Technology (@twicebuilt) on Sep 25, 2015 at 10:56am PDT
//platform.instagram.com/en_US/embeds.js
And here’s what the scene looks like on-site when the panels get delivered:
A video posted by Home Technology (@twicebuilt) on Oct 30, 2015 at 8:32am PDT
//platform.instagram.com/en_US/embeds.js
Ultimately, their vision is to be able to deliver fully closed walls to site. This would mean that all the plumbing, electrical, insulation, and so, would already be in the walls and be ready to get connected/assembled. All of this is a significant step forward.
Because as Stephen Kieran and James Timberlake argued in their book, this is where the industry is headed. We are headed towards much closer integration across design, technology, materials, and production methods.
And in the end this is a great thing for both the industry and for consumers. It will translate into less coordination errors. Less construction waste. Less environmental impact. Greater construction efficiency. And much higher quality homes. I can’t wait to see more of this.
A big thanks to the folks at H+ME Technology for taking the time to speak with me and tour me around their facility. If you’re interested in this space, they will be hosting a Q&A session on Twitter this Wednesday, November 25th at 8pm eastern time. You can join here or using the hashtag #TalkHomeTech. I’ll be tuning in.
Yesterday evening I moderated a panel on innovation in real estate at the Rotman School. The panelists included Subhi Alsayed (Innovation Manager at Tridel); Michael Lio (President of buildABILITY Corporation); Alison Minato (VP of Sustainability at The Minto Group); and Tad Putyra (President and COO, Low Rise Development at Great Gulf).
Though the general consensus was that the real estate industry is terrible at innovation, it was comforting to hear that a number of both low-rise and high-rise developers are working on and/or towards building “net zero” homes. A net zero home is a home with no net energy consumption. What this means is that the home produces as much as energy as it consumes.
The general strategy with these homes is to design the building so that it’s as energy efficient as possible (as in R-40 walls and triple-pane glazing) and then use renewable energy sources (such as solar) to fulfill any remaining energy needs. Of course, the next step would be homes that actually produce more energy than they consume so that they become net contributors to a city’s energy grid. But let’s not put the cart before the horse.
There are a number of challenges to achieving this goal—one of which is on the consumer side. Many of the panelists mentioned that consumers simply don’t care enough about building performance and energy efficiency. Instead of worrying about air tightness, they’re worried about cosmetic things, like granite countertops and hardwood floors. That’s not to say that these pieces aren’t important, but they’re only one aspect of a home.
So what’s the solution? Do developers and home builders need to get better at consumer education? Or should utility companies be the ones shouldering this responsibility? After all, improving energy performance means lower utility costs.
One thought that came to mind (and I’m testing this for the first time with the Architect This City community), is that maybe homes need to become more of a product. Today, developers often market projects and communities ahead of themselves. But maybe that’s not the best way to drive innovation within the real estate industry.
For example, think about how car brands segment the market. When you buy a Mercedes, you expect a certain level of performance and quality. You probably don’t know about every little technological innovation in the car, but you assume that they’re pretty damn good.
With a new home on the other hand, you’re buying (insert generic name) on the Park or the Residences of (something regal sounding). The developer’s brand is secondary. And maybe that’s the wrong approach. Maybe it’s making consumers believe that the only thing that matters is whether you’re getting stainless steel appliances and granite countertops.
Maybe consumers need to know whether or not they’re buying from the Mercedes developer or from the Ford Pinto developer. After all, consumers make decisions based on heuristics. They need to be able to say to themselves:
"This home is $50,000 more, but it’s from the Mercedes developer so I can justify it. I’ll have less problems in the future, I’m sure."
Instead, consumers are saying to themselves:
"This home is $50,000 more. Why is that? They both have stainless steel appliances and granite countertops. I’ll just go for the cheaper one."
I refuse to believe that the real estate industry can’t be as innovative as other industries. There’s always a way. We just need to figure it out.
What are your thoughts?
I recently had the opportunity to visit the 200,000 square foot manufacturing facility of H+ME Technology here in Toronto.
Here’s a photo of myself and Nick Zicaro:
H+ME (originally called Brockport Home Systems Ltd.) is a division of developer Great Gulf, but they were never intended to be just an in-house provider and much of their business is now with outside clients.
What H+ME Technology does is manufacture and assemble factory-built wood panels for both low-rise and mid-rise new construction homes. That is, instead of the walls and floors being framed outside on the construction site, they are fabricated ahead of time in a controlled facility (see below) and then delivered to site. This allows for a single-family home to be framed in as little as 2 days on the job site.
What’s interesting about all of this is that architects have long been obsessed with the idea of shifting construction away from the actual job site. A great book on this topic is Refabricating Architecture by Stephen Kieran and James Timberlake. In it they talk about how inefficient our construction processes are and how we ought to move towards a fully integrated approach that brings together technology, materials, and production methods.
And in 2006 they put their money where their mouth is and built a fully prefabricated house on Taylors Island in Maryland. Here’s an snippet from their website:
“Most houses are built from thousands of parts, which are transported separately to the construction site and pieced together by hand—a process of extraordinary duration, cost, and environmental impact. With Loblolly House, by contrast, we wanted to use integrated assemblies of those parts, fabricated off site, to build a house in an entirely different way.”
The big advantage of this entirely different way is that you’re able to dramatically improve efficiencies, quality, and performance by fabricating the components in a controlled environment, as opposed to on-site by hand.
Despite all this, the industry has been incredibly slow to change and most houses are indeed not built this way. But H+ME is working to change that, which is why I was keen to check out their facility and learn about their business.
So here’s how it works:
H+ME starts by modeling out the entire home in 3D CAD according to the project drawings. This allows them to catch any design coordination errors before they happen on-site. And it’s why their slogan is “Twice built. Assembled once.” They are literally building the entire house in 3D ahead of time.
Once the house has been modeled, they then send the designs for the walls and floors to their factory and begin production. During this process, all of the rough-ins for electrical, plumbing, and so on, are provided, which makes it super easy for the trades on-site later on.
Here’s what that looks like in the factory:
A video posted by Home Technology (@twicebuilt) on Sep 25, 2015 at 10:56am PDT
//platform.instagram.com/en_US/embeds.js
And here’s what the scene looks like on-site when the panels get delivered:
A video posted by Home Technology (@twicebuilt) on Oct 30, 2015 at 8:32am PDT
//platform.instagram.com/en_US/embeds.js
Ultimately, their vision is to be able to deliver fully closed walls to site. This would mean that all the plumbing, electrical, insulation, and so, would already be in the walls and be ready to get connected/assembled. All of this is a significant step forward.
Because as Stephen Kieran and James Timberlake argued in their book, this is where the industry is headed. We are headed towards much closer integration across design, technology, materials, and production methods.
And in the end this is a great thing for both the industry and for consumers. It will translate into less coordination errors. Less construction waste. Less environmental impact. Greater construction efficiency. And much higher quality homes. I can’t wait to see more of this.
A big thanks to the folks at H+ME Technology for taking the time to speak with me and tour me around their facility. If you’re interested in this space, they will be hosting a Q&A session on Twitter this Wednesday, November 25th at 8pm eastern time. You can join here or using the hashtag #TalkHomeTech. I’ll be tuning in.
Yesterday evening I moderated a panel on innovation in real estate at the Rotman School. The panelists included Subhi Alsayed (Innovation Manager at Tridel); Michael Lio (President of buildABILITY Corporation); Alison Minato (VP of Sustainability at The Minto Group); and Tad Putyra (President and COO, Low Rise Development at Great Gulf).
Though the general consensus was that the real estate industry is terrible at innovation, it was comforting to hear that a number of both low-rise and high-rise developers are working on and/or towards building “net zero” homes. A net zero home is a home with no net energy consumption. What this means is that the home produces as much as energy as it consumes.
The general strategy with these homes is to design the building so that it’s as energy efficient as possible (as in R-40 walls and triple-pane glazing) and then use renewable energy sources (such as solar) to fulfill any remaining energy needs. Of course, the next step would be homes that actually produce more energy than they consume so that they become net contributors to a city’s energy grid. But let’s not put the cart before the horse.
There are a number of challenges to achieving this goal—one of which is on the consumer side. Many of the panelists mentioned that consumers simply don’t care enough about building performance and energy efficiency. Instead of worrying about air tightness, they’re worried about cosmetic things, like granite countertops and hardwood floors. That’s not to say that these pieces aren’t important, but they’re only one aspect of a home.
So what’s the solution? Do developers and home builders need to get better at consumer education? Or should utility companies be the ones shouldering this responsibility? After all, improving energy performance means lower utility costs.
One thought that came to mind (and I’m testing this for the first time with the Architect This City community), is that maybe homes need to become more of a product. Today, developers often market projects and communities ahead of themselves. But maybe that’s not the best way to drive innovation within the real estate industry.
For example, think about how car brands segment the market. When you buy a Mercedes, you expect a certain level of performance and quality. You probably don’t know about every little technological innovation in the car, but you assume that they’re pretty damn good.
With a new home on the other hand, you’re buying (insert generic name) on the Park or the Residences of (something regal sounding). The developer’s brand is secondary. And maybe that’s the wrong approach. Maybe it’s making consumers believe that the only thing that matters is whether you’re getting stainless steel appliances and granite countertops.
Maybe consumers need to know whether or not they’re buying from the Mercedes developer or from the Ford Pinto developer. After all, consumers make decisions based on heuristics. They need to be able to say to themselves:
"This home is $50,000 more, but it’s from the Mercedes developer so I can justify it. I’ll have less problems in the future, I’m sure."
Instead, consumers are saying to themselves:
"This home is $50,000 more. Why is that? They both have stainless steel appliances and granite countertops. I’ll just go for the cheaper one."
I refuse to believe that the real estate industry can’t be as innovative as other industries. There’s always a way. We just need to figure it out.
What are your thoughts?
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog