|
Hyde
Housing
Association
has
just
built
a four-storey
apartment
block.
The
job
took
14 months
less
than
a traditional
bild
would
have,
and
was
£210,000
cheaper
than
a standard
prefabricated
solution.
Found
out
the
secret
of its
success.
On
monday
morning,
the
building
site
in south-west
London
was
bare.
Only
a few
concrete
strip
foundations
were
to be
seen.
By 4pm
on Thursday
afternoon,
a four-storey
block
of eight
flats
had
appeared,
complete
with
cladding
and
roofs,
fully
fitted
kitchens
and
bathrooms,
electric
circuits
and
plastered
walls.
Hyde
Housing
Association’s
Barling
Court
is exactly
what
John
Prescott
had
in mind
when
he called
for
the
use
of prefabrication
to speedily
tackle
the
shortage
of affordable
homes
for
key
workers
in the
South-east.
And
whereas
previous
projects
overshot
budgets
laid
down
by the
Housing
Corporation,
Hyde
may
have
just
found
a solution.
All
in all,
Hyde’s
volumetric
system
comes
with
the
well-rehearsed
advantages
of prefab.
The
erection
of Barling
Court,
from
groundworks
to the
final
services
connections
and
landscaping,
took
four
months,
14 fewer
than
usually
required.
In essene,
as Andrew
Ogorzalek
of PCKO
Architects,
readily
admits,
it is
no different
from
the
Peabody
Trust’s
two
Hackney
housing
schemes,
Murray
Grove
in 199
and
Raines
Dairy
earlier
this
year.
But
what
does
make
Barling
Court
different
–
and
less
costly
–
is the
less
costly
–
is the
location
of the
prefabrication
plant.
The
modules
were
made
in Krakow,
southern
poland,
where
technical
competence
is conveniently
combined
with
labour
costs
just
one-sixth
of UK
rates.
The
result
is that
Barling
Court’s
all-in
construction
costs,
including
full
fitting
out,
amount
to £700,000,
or £1260/m2.
Hyde
says
this
is “at
least
12%
lower
than
a traditional
new-build,
and
20-30%
less
than
equivalent
modular
systems”.
Little
wonder,
then,
that
the
housing
minister
Keith
Hill
turned
up enthusiastically
on cue
on Thursday
afternoon
to top
out
the
building.
The
low
costs
were
combined
with
the
type
of quality
control
that
can
only
be achived
in a
factory.
In fact,
the
modules
were
not
only
completely
clad
and
roofed
in the
factory,
but
fully
fitted-out
with
kitchens,
bathrooms,
plaster,
paint
and
flooring.
Even
the
communal
entrance
and
staircase
leading
to all
ight
flats
were
prefabricated
as four
modules,
one
for
each
floor.
One
other
distinct
advantage
of Hyde’s
system
is that
it has
been
so robustly
engineered
in wraparound
steel
frames
that
it is
truly
recyclable.
After
erection,
the
modules
can
be quickly
and
repeatedly
unbolted,
transported
to a
new
site
and
reassembled.
In fact,
the
prototype
created
in 2000
by the
prefabrication
contractor,
BUMA,
was
demounted
and
re-erected
no fewer
than
eight
times
as a
travelling
exhibition,
before
it settled
down
as a
permanent
family
home
outside
Krakow.
Ogorzalek
equates
the
flats’
demountability
with
what
he calls
urban
sustainability.
“Fast-changing
urban
life
requires
flexibility
of buildings
and
sites”,
he says.
“So
rather
than
blowing
up buildings
when
a new
use
is found
for
a site,
it is
much
better
to dismantle
and
re-erect
them
where
they
are
needed”.
The
benefits
of this
aspect
of the
system
are
not
lost
on Hyde.
Indeed,
it has
planned
its
two
sequel
developments
to Barling
Court
on short-lease
sites,
from
where
they
could
be easily
moved
on to
other
sites.
Other
yet
more
ambitious
British
projects
are
under
consideration.
One
is a
bid
to the
Housing
Corporation
to build
2000
key-worker
dwellings
on 12
sites
across
London,
for
which
Hyde
has
been
shortlisted
in a
consortium
containing
three
other
housing
associations
and
led
by Countryside
Properties.
Another
idea
that
appeals
to Charlie
Adams,
Hyde’s
chief
executive,
is to
build
200
dwellings
in Crawley,
west
Sussex,
on land
currently
blighted
by a
propsed
second
runway
for
Gatwick
Airport.
“If
the
runway
eventually
goes
ahead,
we could
just
dismantle
the
units
and
build
them
somewhere
else”,
he says.
Yet
the
brave
new
world
of prefabricatedhousing
comes
with
a downside.
How
can
Hyde’s
new
system
shake
off
the
stigma
of the
mean,
poky,
repetitive,
flimsy
“prefabs”
that
has
persisted
over
the
past
half-century?
The
answer
lies
in the
substantial
and
attractive
appearance
of the
dwellings,
which
are
designed
for
a 60-year
life,
regardless
of how
many
times
they
are
dismantled
and
re-erected.
The
flats
are
made
up of
two
modules,
each
measuring
50 m2
for
a one-bedroom
flat
and
65 m2
for
a two-bedroom
flat.
With
their
sense
of space,
high-quality
fittings,
smooth
plaster
finishes
and
solid
floors,
nothing
about
the
interiors
of the
assembled
modules
suggests
prefabrication.
The
flats’
prefabricated
origin
is more
explicit
in their
external
appearance,
particulary
as the
cladding
and
roofing
were
also
prefabrication
process
and
not
added
on site
as a
modesty
screen
of faux-traditional
brick
and
tiles.
PCKO
has
not
shied
away
from
honestly
expressing
the
building’s
prefabricated
nature,
although
the
aluminium
cladding
panels
and
render
are
high
quality
and
neatly
detailed,
and
an external
screen
of balconies
and
sliding
sunscreens
of slatted
timber
has
been
added
to soften
the
building’s
repetitive,
slightly
commercial
appearance.
BUMA
hopes
that
its
volumetric
housing
system
will
lead
to a
stream
of British
contracts.
Jacek
Michalski,
the
company’s
chief
executive,
is anticipating
the
next
stage
of industrialisation
and
talks
eagerly
about
building
a “completely
new
plant
for
modular
construction”.
It could
be that
in the
years
ahead
a fair
few
more
British
houses
will
come
stamped
“Made
in Poland”.
On
site:
Barling
Court Prefabrication
of the
20 volumetric
modules
for
the
eight
flats
starts
at BUMA’s
plant.
Mild-steel
200
mm deep
channes
are
bolted
together
to form
a rigid
floorplate
for
each
module.
The
floorplates
are
sent
off
for
galvanizing.
When
they
return,
the
frames
for
the
modules’
enclosing
walls,
lids
and
internal
partitions
are
built
up out
galvinised
mild-steel
channels.
May,
Krakow. Lightweight
screed
floors
are
laid.
“It
makes
the
house
seem
solidly
constructed”,
explains
Jazek
Michalski,
BUMA’s
chief
executive.
“Before,
we had
panelled
floors,
and
they
gave
the
impression
of living
in a
container”.
23
May
–
12 July,
London. The
building
site
is cleared
of single-storey
garages
by Rok/Llewellyn,
the
main
contractor.
Concrete
strip
foundations
are
laid
to a
depth
of 1,5
m. Six
plastic
pipes
are
cast
into
the
foundations
as sleeves
for
services
and
utilities.
June,
Krakow. Walls
and
lids
are
lined
externally
in anodised
aluminium
panels
and
render
on orientated
strand
board
and
mineral-wool
insulation
and
internally
in plasterboard.
June,
Krakow. Kitchens
and
bathrooms
are
fitted
out
using
off-the-peg
Ikea
kitchen
fittings.
Electrics
and
plumbing
are
installed.
Walls
and
ceilings
are
finished
off
with
a 2
mm skim
coat
of plaster
and
painted.
5-19
July,
Krakow
to London. 23
lorry
loads
containing
20 modules,
balconies
and
equipment
travel
from
Krakow
to the
London
site.
19
July,
London. BUMA
staff
check
the
setting
out
of the
galvanized-steel
fixing
plates
to tolerances
of +-2
mm.
The
first
module
is craned
into
position,
but
all
six
plastic
services
sleeves
are
found
to be
misplaced
by 200
mm and
have
to be
drilled
out
and
repositioned.
19-22
June,
London. All
20 modules
are
craned
and
fixed
into
position
by means
of 845
bolts
by 4pm
on the
fourth
day.
The
external
rendered
plinth
is installed
by Rok.
25
July-27
August,
London. Internal
service
connections
and
finishing
touches
are
carried
out
by Rok.
Services
distribution
and
connections
confined
to riser
ducts
in communal
stair
block
so as
to avoid
tradesmen
tramping
through
fully
finished
kitchens.
31
August,
London. Building
handed
over
ready
for
first
tenants
to move
in.
How
Hyde
of London
met
BUMA
of Krakow Hyde
Housing
Association’s
venture
into
volumetric
prefabrication
began
in early
2002
as a
response
to a
plea
from
the
Housing
Corporation.
Hyde’s
chief
executive,
Charlie
Adams,
volunteered
to tackle
London’s
acute
shortage
of affordable
homes
for
key
workers
by using
prefabricated
systems
to rapidly
develop
the
city’s
abundance
of smaller
infill
sites.
Shortly
afterwards,
Andrew
Ogorzalek,
the
Polish-born
director
of London-based
PCKO
Architects,
came
across
the
BUMA
housebuilding
group
in Poland
just
as it
was
extending
its
prefabricated
panellised
system
of housing
into
a 3D
volumetric
system.
With
a commission
from
Hyde
and
a special
£175,000
grant
from
the
Housing
Corporation,
PCKO
and
a group
of London-based
consultants
set
about
adapting
BUMA’s
system
for
the
British
market.
Ogorzalek
says:
“It
took
six
months
to design
because
the
system
contains
800
catalogued
components,
and
every
little
detail
had
to be
worked
out
before
it went
into
production”.
When
it came
to the
design
of the
steel
frames,
structural
engineer
Alan
Conisbee
&
Associates
worked
through
a comprehensive
pack
of calculations
to check
for
compliance
with
British
Building
Regulations.
Yet
Conisbee’s
design
was
anything
but
radical.
“We
based
our
design
on BUMA’s
system
of steel
sections”,
says
Isaac
Hudson,
the
project
engineer.
To be
on the
safe
side,
Conisbee
increased
the
thickness
of the
steel
sections
from
1,75
to 2
mm,
but
after
physical
testing
at Krakow
University,
this
was
found
to be
redundant.
Two
more
problems
remained.
The
first
was
that
the
Building
Regulations
demanded
physical
tests
to prove
compliance
with
revised
standards
of sound
insulation
between
dwellings.
The
second
was
that
it took
seven
months
to gain
planning
permission
from
the
London
Borough
of Lambeth
–
and,
even
then,
this
was
granted
for
a four-storey
rather
than
a three-sorey
block.
Meanwhile,
production
of the
modules
was
already
under
wayat
BUMA’s
plant
in Krakow.
Fortunately,
BUMA
offered
to hang
on to
the
modules
and
erect
them
at one
of its
own
housebuilding
sites.
This
turned
out
to be
convenient
for
BUMA
as it
could
do the
erection
as soon
as they
were
ready
in February,
when
conventional
construction
shuts
down
in the
face
of the
eastern
European
winter.
For
Hyde,
it meant
the
sound
insulation
could
be checked
with
no financial
risk.
Agnieska
Muc,
with
her
husband
and
two
toddlers,
was
among
the
first
owner-occupiers
to move
into
the
prototype
block
in May.
So why
did
she
risk
a choosing
a revolutionary
prefabricated
home
rather
than
the
traditional
brick
one
under
construction
next
door?
“We
bought
it because
it went
up faster
than
the
others,
and
I’m
sure
it’s
built
just
as well”,
was
her
instant
response.
|