Component Opportunities in High Density Housing

Back to Library

Issue #09202 - May 2016 | Page #20
By Joe Kannapell

The growing attraction of owning attached, close-in housing is a winning trend for componentization. Higher densities shift the labor equation in our favor, both in-plant and out on jobsites. Maximizing the “cube” of structures via open webbed floor and attic room trusses leverages our strengths. “Walking through” the floor, roof and wall components in a single 3D structural model demonstrates our value to builders and developers.

Housing near town centers appeals to nearly all age groups. Recent college grads want to emulate their experience living in modern, well located, amenity-filled university rentals. Millennials living in apartments want to own their own home, and their best value may be a townhome near public transit. And finally, even seniors have been trading their suburban homes for less complicated lifestyles in the cities; closer to restaurants, medical services, and entertainment. And not stranded far away in the suburbs. Optional elevators remove the challenge of multi-level living for the aged.

Affordability compels higher densities – up to 20 townhomes, and even more condos per acre. This dictates minimal building footprints and maximal land use; 4-5 story structures with units that may be as narrow as 18 feet. Garages underneath, decks on top, and balconies throughout, to provide outdoor living space with little or no yard space. In some locations two-two story townhouses may be stacked, known as “two over two” townhomes.

Determining the optimal layout of components requires significant design effort; spanning open floor plans, accommodating large stair and window openings, and framing a myriad of options. Compounding the task is the maze of mechanicals from zoned HVAC units, fire places, roof drains, and kitchen and bathroom exhaust fans. Both the structural and mechanical challenges encourage a consultative, value-added design approach.

Shoehorning units onto irregular lots maximizes the payback of a project, and demonstrates the flexibility of components. City planners favor the “massing” of housing close to transportation and services. They often discourage detached housing for its inefficient land use. To gain approval of many projects, developers often must provide a certain number of affordable and special-use units, further complicating the design task, but also insuring the uniqueness of each infill project, and mitigating against unqualified bidders.

Fortunately we have “whole structure” design tools to visually collaborate with all trades and demonstrate that only plated truss components can take maximum advantage of space, time, and economic constraints. And the larger scale of infill projects provides a steadier flow of production work, in perhaps a less competitive environment.

Next Month:

High Density Housing Design Challenges

You're reading an article from the May 2016 issue.

External links

Search By Keyword

Issues

Book icon Issuu Bookshelf