The Mass Timber Carbon Gap No One Talks About

A cost-saving material that also demands precision? For many East Coast architects, developers, and builders, mass timber promises off-site efficiencies and schedule gains—yet one wrong move can unravel a project. Fees balloon. Inspectors panic. And entire teams ask, “Is it worth the hassle?”

That question looms larger where century-old codes and entrenched bureaucracies clash with nimble design teams. On the West Coast, small firms leap into mass timber, enjoying fewer fire-department hoops and a shorter permitting queue. Meanwhile on the East Coast, as one consultant puts it, “Well, what can we do just outside of the city…who might be more open?”

Why the detour? Because the highest stakes—cost, schedule, and brand reputation—hang on who adapts first and how soon these timber towers can finally rise.

For years, the idea of constructing mid- and high-rise residential and civic buildings out of wood seemed unthinkable—especially in America’s congested coastal cities. Yet mass timber has steadily drawn the interest of architects, forward-looking developers, and policy leaders seeking faster, more sustainable solutions. Real progress is visible, but so are the regional differences shaping how these structures actually get built. If you work in architecture, engineering, or construction and want to secure major timber projects, understanding the cultural and regulatory context across the country can determine whether your plans advance or stall.

‍

A Cross-Country Culture Clash: Where Timber Takes Root

Local mindsets can overshadow even the best design or cost advantage, especially when introducing an unconventional material in new territory. On the West Coast, mass timber has frequently been championed by small firms that make decisions quickly. “It was really in a very grassroots way,” recalls consultant and architect-developer Kristin Slavin with Conifer Advising, who worked at a tight-knit Portland office. Early success stories like Oregon’s Carbon12 came from teams wearing multiple hats—developer, architect, and GC—exploiting their agility to build some of the nation’s first mid-rise mass timber projects.

‍

Across the East Coast, however, older cities and deeper bureaucracies create additional friction.

“New York City in particular is huge and old and there’s a lot of bureaucracy,” Slavin says.

Strict code enforcement and conservative building cultures can mean lengthy negotiations with fire departments and approval boards, slowing down novel material applications. But local colleges and research organizations are turning heads with pilot initiatives, prodding private players to consider timber’s potential savings and marketing appeal. If you plan to build with wood in places like Boston or New York, Slavin advises starting on the urban periphery, where smaller authorities may be “more open to attracting a different type of development…that aligns maybe more with the state or international building codes rather than, you know, New York City-specific concerns.”

Bridging these local attitudes is only the first challenge—navigating city-specific codes can be just as formidable.

‍

The Code Conundrum: Cracking Big-City Fire Regulations

In dense cities, the chance to build tall with wood can dramatically cut schedules—but only if you overcome a labyrinth of code requirements and wary fire officials. While model codes now allow taller mass timber, each municipality applies them differently. “The biggest hurdle right now that we’re seeing in New York City is really with the building code and in particular with the fire department,” Slavin explains. Complex layers of authority demand extra design reviews, fire testing data, and demonstrated safety credentials.

Mastering this bureaucratic maze is essential for keeping high-profile projects on budget and on schedule. Most East Coast approvals hinge on early engagement with local fire marshals, thorough material testing, and proven case studies. West Coast agencies, more familiar with wood, have historically been more open to alternate paths of compliance. As more successful projects pass inspection in big cities, local skepticism begins to ease.

“As soon as there are some projects that have been successfully built…we’ll start to see that change here more rapidly,” Slavin notes.

These regulatory victories pave the way for more ambitious uses of timber, especially in the booming residential sector.

Housing on the Horizon: Why Residential Towers Are Next

As housing shortages intensify, mid- and high-rise multifamily developments are emerging as prime candidates for faster, leaner construction methods. With residential demand surging on both coasts, delivering units quickly becomes critical for developers juggling high land costs and fluctuating interest rates. “A lot of housing…is really well aligned for that” repeatable, modular approach, Slavin says.

Speed drives the appeal: hitting occupancy sooner means earlier revenue, which can make or break a deal in uncertain markets. Mass timber towers typically range from six to 18 stories, a sweet spot that aligns with current structural and fire code parameters. Although going taller is possible in jurisdictions that adopt progressive codes. Even if some central urban areas balk, sites just over city or county lines might offer smoother approval.

But to truly capitalize on that speed, manufacturers and builders are elevating off-site strategies that drive consistency and predictability.

‍

Meeting tight deadlines means shifting more work to controlled factory settings, a trend driving new forms of off-site construction. Mass timber is no longer limited to panelized kits; some teams now deliver partially finished volumetric modules.

“I was surprised by the amount of volumetric modular…I was seeing,” Slavin says, citing examples of European firms shipping nearly complete room pods. While North American projects are adopting similar ideas, wide geographic distances complicate logistics in ways Europe doesn’t face.

Flat-pack panelization currently offers enough standardization without locking architects into a strict box shape. At the same time, volumetric solutions can boost speed and reduce onsite labor for highly repetitive floorplans. Either approach shifts risk away from unpredictable jobsite conditions and reduces rework—an especially valuable prospect in cramped or congested metro areas.

Yet even the most advanced prefab strategy falls apart without early, unified planning among all stakeholders.

• For teams starting to explore prefab, understanding how design workflows shift is essential. Kristin Slavin ’s Prefab Design Process Guide breaks down what changes for architects, owners, GCs, and manufacturers — helping you avoid costly missteps before fabrication begins.

💡 Join our newsletter and get the Prefab Design Process Guide to see how prefab changes roles and responsibilities across the project team‍

Collaboration Over Competition: Uniting GCs, Designers, and Owners Early

Securing a smooth mass timber build demands a single shared approach, where every discipline aligns on geometry, MEP, and risk management from the early phases. Because panels arrive pre-engineered, last-minute on-site adjustments can void warranties and trigger design re-approvals. “Everybody needs to come to the table and be open…how do we get there?” Slavin says, stressing that coordinated decision-making unlocks real cost savings and schedule certainty.

Bringing the GC into initial schematics eliminates site conflicts. Designers who consult fabricators can detail connections to match real-world tolerances. Owners who engage early clarify financing, insurance, and program expectations, reducing the dreaded midstream pivot back to concrete or steel. One or two days of intense collaboration can avert weeks of rework.

That approach is more critical than ever as new fabrication centers, especially in the Rust Belt, reshape supply lines.

The guide outlines exactly how to align architects, owners, GCs, and manufacturers before design freeze — join our newsletter & download it here.

‍

Rust Belt Revival: The Great Lakes’ New Role in Mass Timber Fabrication

AEC professionals are increasingly looking to the Great Lakes region, where underused factories and skilled labor create opportunities for high-value mass timber components. While Northwest and Southeast states boast vast softwood resources, Rust Belt manufacturers see a niche in specialized cut shops and partial assembly. Slavin points to a recent symposium where Midwestern firms showcased how they could import large CLT “blanks” and refine them with advanced machinery.

This model delivers shorter lead times, reduces shipping costs, and energizes local economies. “They have a massive manufacturing base and…all of this infrastructure for manufacturing,” Slavin notes. The idea is to transform raw panels into precisely finished elements that can ship quickly to Midwest and East Coast grids—especially valuable for sites that can’t afford long waits or logistical hiccups.

As these industrial hubs expand capacity, developers face a pivotal choice—remain with traditional materials or lean into the rising potential of timber.

‍

The Developer’s Dilemma: Risk, Reward, and the Race for Differentiation

For owners eyeing green credentials and compressed project schedules, mass timber offers a clear edge—yet it requires confronting uncertainties around codes, insurance, and supply chains. “What’s the risk of not trying something new?” Slavin asks. Faster builds can dodge interest-rate spikes and attract tenants hungry for environmentally conscious design. Meanwhile, climate mandates and ESG targets push wood structures to the foreground. Still, cost premiums, unfamiliar insurance provisions, and uneven supply can deter the unprepared.

That’s why many developers now hire mass timber consultants early to map out regulatory approvals, fabrication timelines, and ROI scenarios. Comprehensive coordination—owner, structural engineer, GC, code specialists—keeps the project on track and avoids scrapping months of design. Once built, these landmark timber projects become case studies, lowering barriers for future ventures.

These regional differences—from the West Coast’s flexible culture to the East Coast’s complex entanglements—highlight an inescapable truth: mass timber is no fleeting novelty but a strategic pivot for modern urban growth. For architecture, engineering, and construction teams, the time to master its intricacies is now, before the window of early adoption closes. The measure of success won’t hinge on empty slogans but on how well we align design intelligence, code compliance, and supply chain innovation. Those who achieve that alignment will define the next era of American building.

💡 Download the Prefab Design Process Guide by joining our newsletter — a practical framework for architects, developers, and builders ready to make prefab work.‍

‍

Most conversations about mass timber go sideways when it’s framed as product vs. product: timber vs. steel, timber vs. concrete. That’s not how real projects work.

Recently, I sat down with Scott Charney of Quality Buildings LLC on the Mass Timber Group podcast to dig into what really makes mass timber pencil. Scott has led projects from Baltimore to Princeton to the Pennsylvania State Police Academy — and in this interview he shared the field-tested lessons his crews have proven on real sites.

This article pulls out some of those lessons and pairs them with a field-tested checklist from Quality Buildings — a tool architects, engineers, and GCs can use to anticipate where mass timber adds value beyond just carbon.

‍

📥 Want the full checklist? Join our newsletter and get the Mass Timber Architect Checklist and Comparative Metrics Guide.

‍

Enjoy!

Brady Potts

‍

1. Foundation & Weight Savings

• Checklist Item: “Have you reviewed how timber’s lighter load impacts foundation design?”

On the Baltimore 40Ten project (built on a restored brownfield), multiple developers walked away because they assumed the soils would require a heavy (and expensive) foundation. One developer saw a different path: by building three stories of mass timber over a concrete podium, they cut foundation requirements, picked up the site at 75¢ on the dollar, and delivered a building that has since won five design awards.

Why it matters:

• Comparative metric: Mass timber foundations are considered the baseline cost. Steel typically adds +10–15%, and concrete adds +25–30%
• Developer insight: Lighter structures open doors for otherwise “unbuildable” sites, unlocking higher density on overbuilds, and reducing foundation costs.

‍

‍

2. Crew Size & Labor Efficiency

• Checklist Item: “What are the site logistics and labor requirements?”

On the Princeton project, architects stood on site and watched four Quality Buildings installers swing CLT panels into place. In the same timeframe, a 30-person stick-framing crew couldn’t have matched the output. Smaller crews don’t just save payroll either, they radically improve communication, reduce coordination errors, and lower jobsite risk.

Why it matters:

• Comparative metric: Typical mass timber install = 8–10 workers per floor vs. 15–18 for concrete
• Safety lens: Fewer people on site = fewer vehicles, fewer OSHA exposures, and fewer chances for an accident. As Scott likes to say, “Nobody wants to call OSHA.”
• PM Insight: A tight, specialized crew communicates like a high speed small Navy SEAL team, not a big platoon with 30 people. That means smoother morning meetings and clearer handoffs.

‍

3. Speed & Sequencing (The “Big Butt” Problem)

• Checklist Item: “Have you identified critical coordination points between trades?”

On the Pennsylvania State Police Academy project, Quality Buildings’ crew was installing CLT so quickly that the GC called to say, “You’re going too fast — our steel can’t catch up.” That’s the “big butt” problem: mass timber can accelerate schedules, but only if the rest of the trades are ready to move just as fast.

To avoid idle crews, cranes and bottlenecks, Quality Buildings now issues process sheets and sequencing playbooks up front so every stakeholder knows what happens when - and no crew gets left behind.

Why it matters:

• Comparative metric: Mass timber = 5–7 days per 10,000 sq ft floor vs. 8–12 days for concrete
• GC Insight: Mass timber’s speed only pays off if sequencing is coordinated. Without tight planning, rapid installs can leave cranes idle, crews waiting, and schedules slipping.

‍

‍

4. Noise, Disruption & Neighbor Relations

• Checklist Item: “How will site logistics and environmental impact affect stakeholders?”

On Quality Buildings’ projects, one of the most consistent surprises for developers has been how little disruption mass timber creates compared to traditional methods. Instead of 30 trades crowding the site with trucks, a lean timber crew can lift entire floors with just a few vehicles on site and the quiet buzz of screw guns. Less noise, less dust, and fewer deliveries mean neighbors and stakeholders experience a shorter, cleaner construction window.

Why it matters:

• Comparative metric: Mass timber sites average 70–80 dB vs. 85–95 for steel and 90–100 for concrete…. That’s the difference between a dull hum and a disruptive racket.
• Community insight: On hospitals, schools, or urban infill sites, reduced noise and traffic = fewer complaints, faster approvals, and stronger goodwill.
• Developer insight: A quieter, faster install minimizes tenant disruption, accelerates revenue, and helps preserve long-term relationships with the surrounding community.

‍

‍

5. Clean Sites & Fewer Trades

• Checklist Item: “Which trades can be reduced or eliminated through prefabrication?”

On multiple Quality Buildings projects, GCs noted the only waste generated was the plastic wrap protecting the panels and beams. Compared to concrete pours or steel work, which generate formwork, cutoffs, and significant debris, mass timber sites stay remarkably clean. On the rework side, Scott recalls elevator shafts landing within 1/32 of an inch, virtually eliminating costly adjustments.

Why it matters:

• Comparative metric: Mass timber produces 5–10% waste vs. 15–20% for concrete and steel.
• GC Insight: Clean sites aren’t just safer — they save on dumpsters, hauling, and cleanup labor. And precision installs reduce rework orders, keeping budgets tight and schedules predictable.

‍

Have You Considered…

When you walk into your next developer or GC conversation about mass timber, don’t frame it solely in material prices. Instead, start with questions like:

• What would a lighter structure unlock for your site or foundation budget?
• How does a smaller crew change your risk, safety, and coordination profile?
• What if your project could be delivered faster and with less disruption to neighbors?
• Could tenants stay in place during construction instead of being forced to relocate?

‍

Mass timber isn’t a just another material. It’s a system-level strategy that Quality Buildings has proven across office, education, civic projects and more. Asking the right checklist questions up front is the difference between mass timber looking like a premium and mass timber becoming the smartest move.

‍

📥 Want the full checklist guide? Join our newsletter and get the Mass Timber Architect Checklist and Comparative Metrics Guide.

‍

‍

Imagine a construction site where the rhythm of progress is dictated not by weather delays or labor bottlenecks, but by the precision of a manufacturing line. “Manufacturing is like a bullet through a gun. You can take a year to line that shot up, but once you pull the trigger, it’s going all the way through,” Fouad Khalil observes. This analogy is more than poetic—it challenges the status quo of how buildings come together and calls for a fundamental rethink of project delivery.

Industrialized construction (IC) is not about swapping materials or adding software; it is a wholesale reconfiguration of process, responsibility, and risk. As Khalil and Potts discuss, adopting manufacturing principles—lean planning, modular assemblies, and digital coordination—offers a rare opportunity: to replace chronic unpredictability with measurable reliability. But this shift requires more than technical upgrades; it demands a new discipline that rewards foresight, integration, and a willingness to question every inherited assumption about how buildings are made.

Revolutionizing Construction: The Industrialized Approach  

A sector long defined by fragmented workflows now faces a turning point as industrialized construction transforms project delivery. IC represents a systematic adoption of manufacturing principles—lean construction, pull planning, and modular assemblies—that deliver measurable gains in productivity and predictability.

Khalil frames IC as an “umbrella term” encompassing a spectrum of manufacturing-derived practices. “These practices range everything from lean construction and pull planning to panelized volumetric and modular assemblies.” The objective is not simply to introduce new tools, but to restructure the entire construction process for greater reliability and efficiency. This shift requires a fundamental rethinking of roles, workflows, and expectations across the project lifecycle.

Mass Timber: Precision as Process  

Few materials illustrate the potential of industrialized construction as clearly as mass timber, whose engineered consistency is reshaping both design and delivery. Unlike conventional lumber, mass timber’s dimensional accuracy enables direct integration of features during fabrication, reducing the need for on-site modification.

“Mass timber is a processed material. It’s highly engineered and dimensionally very accurate,” Khalil notes. This precision translates into faster assembly, reduced waste, and lower labor costs—outcomes that align directly with IC’s core goals. The material’s performance characteristics, from fire resistance to structural capacity, further reinforce its suitability for projects seeking both speed and sustainability. As mass timber adoption grows, it demonstrates how material innovation and process optimization can reinforce one another.

Labor Shortages: A Catalyst for Change  

Rising project demand and a shrinking skilled workforce have accelerated the adoption of industrialized methods. The demographic shift—exacerbated by the post-2008 contraction—has left a persistent gap in available labor, particularly among experienced trades.

“We’re still in the post-2008 era where we saw a reduction in the amount of available labor,” Khalil observes. Rather than stalling progress, this constraint is driving a reallocation of labor: skilled workers focus on high-value fabrication in controlled environments, while installation on-site becomes more standardized and less dependent on specialized expertise. Centralizing the production of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing assemblies addresses labor shortages while improving quality control and project timelines.

Planning for Success: The Pre-Construction Imperative  

A single misstep in early planning can unravel the efficiencies promised by industrialized construction. The need for rigorous pre-construction coordination is heightened when working with prefabricated systems and just-in-time delivery models.

“If you’re in mass timber, by definition you’re working with industrialized construction,” Khalil asserts, underscoring the necessity of advanced planning. Building Information Modeling (BIM) becomes indispensable—not just for design, but for orchestrating scheduling, staging, and logistics. Overlooking details such as crane access or delivery sequencing can quickly erode the gains of off-site fabrication. The pre-construction phase is not a box to check but a critical determinant of project success.

Navigating the On-Site Transition: Key Strategies  

The transition from factory floor to jobsite introduces a new set of challenges, where coordination and timing are paramount. Even the most precisely fabricated components can falter without synchronized execution among all trades.

“You’ve got to have all of the affected trades together at the table working in an integrated way,” Khalil advises. Pre-construction conferences and clear delineation of responsibilities are essential to prevent miscommunication and rework. Moisture mitigation, site logistics, and real-time problem-solving require a level of collaboration that traditional project delivery often lacks. The success of industrialized construction on-site depends on this integrated approach, where every participant understands both the sequence and the stakes.

The Future of Industrialized Construction: Opportunities Ahead  

As industrialized construction gains traction, the competitive landscape is shifting toward those who can internalize and scale these new processes. The firms best positioned to benefit are those willing to invest in both technology and workforce development.

“Companies that self-perform any of these key activities on-site will be the biggest beneficiaries,” Khalil predicts. Specialized trades are beginning to develop their own industrialized divisions, blurring the lines between design, fabrication, and installation. This evolution is not merely about efficiency; it is about creating new business models that deliver greater value and resilience in a volatile market. The next phase will likely see deeper integration between digital design and physical production, with early adopters setting the pace.

A Holistic Vision: Bridging Gaps in Knowledge  

The complexity of industrialized construction demands a workforce fluent in both the language of design and the realities of manufacturing. Khalil’s forthcoming book aims to address this gap, offering a comprehensive overview for those entering the field.

“I want to give an overview of the universe that I see and how I see it working holistically,” he explains. By demystifying the interconnected processes of design, fabrication, and assembly, Khalil hopes to equip the next generation with the tools to ask more incisive questions and drive meaningful innovation. This educational effort is not about simplifying the field, but about making its complexity accessible and actionable.

Conclusion: Integration as Imperative  

Industrialized construction is not about novelty—it’s about discipline, foresight, and integration. As Fouad Khalil emphasizes, success comes when digital planning, precision manufacturing, and on-site execution operate as one system. Mass timber demonstrates what’s possible when materials and methods align: faster builds, fewer labor constraints, and more reliable outcomes. For AEC and developer teams, the takeaway is clear—industrialized construction isn’t the future, it’s the new standard.

📥 Download the Industrialized Construction Housing Series to dive deeper into frameworks, case studies, and practical tools you can apply to your own projects

‍

If you were told that a building material could be manufactured at the pace of a car assembly line—one structural panel every 65 seconds—would you believe it?

For decades, the construction industry has accepted the slow churn of concrete pours and steel fabrication as the cost of doing business. Yet, a quiet revolution is underway, challenging not just what we build with, but how we conceive of the entire construction process.

This is not a story about novelty or greenwashing. It’s about a fundamental rethinking of supply chains, project delivery, and the relationship between forests and cities. As Michaela Harms puts it, “We can always be meeting the demand. We have high capacity.” The rise of mass timber, and the modular, productized approach behind it, is forcing architects, engineers, and builders to reconsider what’s possible when efficiency, sustainability, and scale are engineered into the DNA of a material from the forest floor to the jobsite.

The Rise of Mass Timber: A New Era in Construction

Few materials have disrupted the construction landscape as rapidly as mass timber, yet its ascent is rooted in more than environmental ambition or visual appeal. The adoption of engineered wood signals a fundamental rethinking of how buildings are conceived, assembled, and valued.

Michaela Harms , VP of Mass Timber at Sterling Structural , embodies this shift—her trajectory from sustainable building research in Finland to overseeing the world’s largest cross-laminated timber (CLT) operation illustrates the material’s global momentum.

“I really focused on sustainable building... and really a lot of focus on wood,” Michaela recalls, reflecting on her formative years in Finland, a country with a deep tradition of mass timber innovation. This foundation has informed her leadership at Sterling Structural, where she has guided the company’s rapid expansion to meet surging demand. Mass timber’s rise is not just a matter of substituting materials; it is reshaping the industry’s operational and cultural DNA.

Action Step: If you’re new to mass timber, treat it not as a boutique material but as a mainstream building system. Look for partners who can show both successful projects and domestic production capacity.

‍

Efficiency Meets Demand: The CLT Approach

While construction projects are often plagued by delays and inefficiencies, Sterling Structural’s CLT production model has upended expectations for speed and precision. The facility’s ability to produce a CLT panel every 65 seconds is not a marketing boast but a logistical reality, achieved through tightly integrated manufacturing processes.

“We can always be meeting the demand. We have high capacity.” — Michaela Harms

This production efficiency enables not only rapid project delivery but also significant reductions in material waste and labor hours. By standardizing repeatable elements, Sterling has made mass timber a practical choice for projects with aggressive schedules—an achievement that directly addresses one of the industry’s most persistent pain points.

Action Steps:

• Developers → Ask manufacturers about throughput capacity and delivery reliability.
• Engineers → Design repeatable modules/grids to reduce CNC/fabrication time.
• GCs → Don’t assume smaller panels mean slower installs—installers report the opposite once rhythm sets in.

‍

Overcoming Skepticism: The Case for High Volume Production

Doubts about the feasibility of high-speed, high-volume CLT production were widespread when Sterling Structural first proposed its manufacturing targets. Industry partners, including equipment suppliers, questioned the rationale for such capacity.

Michaela recounts, “When we contacted Minda about making our presses... they were like, ‘Why? No one would ever need that much CLT.’”

Sterling’s results have since provided a clear answer. By demonstrating that mass timber can be produced at industrial scale, the company has lowered barriers to entry for developers and contractors, driving down costs and expanding the material’s reach.

Action Step: Ask suppliers about their production capacity and delivery reliability—how many panels they can produce in a given time and how they ensure trucks arrive on schedule.

‍

The Power of Partnerships: Building a Collaborative Ecosystem

The complexity of mass timber projects demands a level of coordination that extends beyond the factory floor. Success hinges on early and sustained partnerships among general contractors, material suppliers, and design teams.

“Partnerships are really what I’m learning are everything in this industry.” — Michaela Harms

Sterling Structural’s collaborative model has enabled faster decision-making and more agile problem-solving, reducing friction across the supply chain. By aligning stakeholders from the outset, the company has created a feedback loop that accelerates innovation and ensures constructability.

Action Steps:

• Involve installers when evaluating panel sizes and crane logistics—their experience confirms smaller, repeatable panels can speed up schedules.
• Confirm glulam and connector lead times before finalizing schedules.
• Favor turnkey approaches when possible—GCs respond better to bundled solutions.

‍

Designing for the Future: Embracing Hybrid Structures

As mass timber gains traction, project teams are increasingly exploring hybrid systems that combine timber with steel to optimize performance and cost.

“If we’re really talking about optimization... sometimes mass timber doesn’t make sense in certain spots.” — Michaela Harms

Hybrid structures allow designers to leverage the strengths of each material, tailoring solutions to the unique demands of each project. This flexibility broadens the applicability of mass timber, making it viable for a wider range of building types and performance criteria.

Action Steps:

• Use CLT where speed and repeatability matter most (e.g., decking).
• Where wide-flange steel outperforms glulam on cost or span, pair steel with CLT instead of forcing an all-timber solution.
• Treat hybridization as a mainstream strategy, not a fallback.

‍

A Sustainable Future: Connecting Forests to Markets

The viability of mass timber is inseparable from the health of the forests and economies that produce it.

“Markets are what incentivize the management of forests.” — Michaela Harms

For Michaela, that means pushing designers beyond a single-species mindset. “Spruce Pine Fir South and Eastern Hemlock may have lower design values, but all of them work if you design for them,” she explains. “If you design your entire building for Douglas Fir panels, you’re locking out other regions—and their mills—from participation.”

The implications are both environmental and economic. Without demand, local sawmills close—even in the middle of a timber boom. By specifying for abundant regional species, architects and engineers can not only reduce procurement risk but also keep forest economies alive. “Maybe you need to design your grid for a spruce pine south panel first,” Michaela notes. “You can optimize later, but start with what’s available in your region.”

Action Steps:

• Ask suppliers which species and sawmills they source from.
• Design grids that accommodate multiple species (SPF-S, eastern hemlock, SYP).
• Treat regional sourcing as both a sustainability practice and a way to strengthen local economies while reducing supply risk.

‍

Conclusion

The conversation with Michaela Harms makes one thing clear: mass timber’s future isn’t about chasing novelty—it’s about scaling smarter. From Sterling’s ability to roll out a panel every 65 seconds, to installers discovering that smaller, repeatable panels actually speed schedules, to the industry’s embrace of hybrids and regionally sourced species, the throughline is optimization. Efficiency, collaboration, and local markets aren’t side notes—they’re the foundation of making timber mainstream.

Michaela’s perspective bridges the forest, the factory, and the jobsite. She shows that capacity matters as much as design, partnerships matter as much as product, and sourcing decisions ripple far beyond procurement. For architects, engineers, and developers, the lesson is simple: the more we align design choices with manufacturing realities and forest health, the faster mass timber can scale into everyday construction.

‍

👉 If you want to go deeper, we pulled Michaela’s top 10 lessons into a quick-reference tool for AEC and developer teams.

‍Download The Mass Timber Decision Guide to see the proven strategies Sterling Structural and Michaela use to deliver faster, smarter projects.