# Build prefabricated houses



## Purple (11 Sep 2017)

letitroll said:


> The other pre-budget consideration I feel is the complete removal of VAT on new homes -


That would be a disgraceful subsidy of an industry which concentrates on political lobbying rather than just being good at doing its job.
The solution is for the State to buy in factory built homes from major European supplier and have them erect those homes. That would avoid the labour supply constraints on the private sector which would otherwise be caused by a massive State house building program.  We'd also end up with a superior quality product.
Have a look at this site for what can be achieved using 21st century building methods (or even 1970's building methods as opposed to the 1870's methods we use).
Look at that site and ask yourself what it would cost if the State was buying 60,000 units based on five or 6 base designs.


----------



## Purple (11 Sep 2017)

letitroll said:


> How do you increase the supply? Conscript people to enter into the construction industry, force developers to build, unfortunately you can't have ala carte capitalism. People / economic actors have free will.


I've already offered a solution; the State buys houses from Eu suppliers and has those EU suppliers assemble them here. If there aren't enough EU suppliers then use American suppliers. That way we don't put demand pressure, and therefore price pressure, on local labour but rather increase the supply by importing it. That sould depress demand and so reduce local labour costs. We need to be able to build a fully finished 1400 Square food house for well under €60,000. Site costs, taxes, levies etc go on top of that but the construction cost should be less than half what it is at the moment.


----------



## letitroll (11 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> I've already offered a solution; the State buys houses from Eu suppliers and has those EU suppliers assemble them here. If there aren't enough EU suppliers then use American suppliers. That way we don't put demand pressure, and therefore price pressure, on local labour but rather increase the supply by importing it. That sould depress demand and so reduce local labour costs. We need to be able to build a fully finished 1400 Square food house for well under €60,000. Site costs, taxes, levies etc go on top of that but the construction cost should be less than half what it is at the moment.



Purple see your wedded to this pre-fab EU supplier housing as THE solution. Sounds great as I said, an amazing innovation in house building & supply and I look forward to seeing them all over Ireland in the future because even in the EU where your EU suppliers are they aren't that common, which suggests something about the solution or peoples willingness to live inside the solution, perhaps now or in the future it could supply a few 1000's houses we unfortunately need by some estimates 50,000 per year. Unfortunately we don't live in the future and the focus should be supplying houses in the way we've done so safely and consistently for 100's of years - building them on site while welcoming every innovation we can into the process. As I said I'm not wedded to one solution - VAT removal is an important one but one of many - planning / zoning another, infrastructure spending another, higher density units, increased public transport etc. etc.

*Side note and in jest - Germany makes our cars, lets not have them make our houses too. I like Irish suppliers, Irish labour, Irish profits.....and if not Irish happy for our Eastern European neighbors to come back here in droves and help us solve this problem


----------



## fidelcastro (11 Sep 2017)

In some countries particularly the Nordics, houses are assembled in a factory before assembly on site. These houses are far far superior to on site construction techniques found here in terms of quality using modern materials and production control. Its easier to control a right angle using a laser controlled saw than an Irish builder on a Friday morning.

They are not called modular or pre fab. Just called a house.

Fidel


----------



## letitroll (11 Sep 2017)

fidelcastro said:


> In some countries particularly the Nordics, houses are assembled in a factory before assembly on site. These houses are far far superior to on site construction techniques found here in terms of quality using modern materials and production control. Its easier to control a right angle using a laser controlled saw than an Irish builder on a Friday morning.
> 
> They are not called modular or pre fab. Just called a house.
> 
> Fidel



Sounds good - like i said sign me up to factory assembled homes. I love cheaper, quicker, better quality things. Just not seeing it providing 50k homes in 2019/2020 and I guess before it turned into a housing construction methodology thread we were discussing how to meet the demand, through policy, for the 50,000 homes per year Ireland needs from the 5,000 -10,000 housing run rate we have now. Housing production innovation, lets call it that, I'm all for it and more of it.

The oldest trick in the book, however, incentivizing someone to provide housing through the profit motive has proven to work very well indeed over time and that profit motive will work just fine for housing assemblers as well as traditional developers.


----------



## fidelcastro (11 Sep 2017)

I think modern mass production facilities can easily gear up to meet demand, much much faster than the Irish building sector can. As well as supplying top quality rather than poor quality housing stock, it addresses the bottlenecks of speed, affordability,  lack of tradesmen and so forth.
Oops I forgot, the vested interests!! concrete is better built! And local objections from the snobs, scared from their years schooling in sub standard classrooms.
Purple's idea is a fine one. It therefore doesn't stand a chance.
Fidel.


----------



## T McGibney (12 Sep 2017)

Hard to imagine these 'factory assembled homes' lasting several generations as conventional housing should.


----------



## Purple (12 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> Hard to imagine these 'factory assembled homes' lasting several generations as conventional housing should.


Why?
They should last 100 years or so.


----------



## Leo (12 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> Hard to imagine these 'factory assembled homes' lasting several generations as conventional housing should.



Done right, they can outlast them while all the time significantly out-performing them in thermal efficiency and air quality.


----------



## T McGibney (12 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> Why?
> They should last 100 years or so.





Leo said:


> Done right, they can outlast them while all the time significantly out-performing them in thermal efficiency and air quality.



Hmmm. When we built our house 20-odd years ago, we swallowed similar spin about a "revolutionary" new way to have the house plastered. Expensive lesson. 

More generally, durability is the first thing you need in a house.  The 'built-to-last' prefabrications of earlier decades are, in general, aging rather badly.


----------



## Purple (12 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> More generally, durability is the first thing you need in a house. The 'built-to-last' prefabrications of earlier decades are, in general, aging rather badly.


They've been building them in Germany since the 1940's and in the USA for around the same length of time.

Unless we find a way of increasing supply any cuts to VAT or any other incentive will just push up prices. This is what happens when a sector is driven by crony capitalism and self interest groups and is not open to the market forces which cause incremental improvements in efficiency.


----------



## T McGibney (12 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> They've been building them in Germany since the 1940's and in the USA for around the same length of time.



You mean East Germany and Detroit? 



Purple said:


> Unless we find a way of increasing supply any cuts to VAT or any other incentive will just push up prices. This is what happens when a sector is driven by crony capitalism and self interest groups and is not open to the market forces which cause incremental improvements in efficiency.



The building sector is only currently driven by crony capitalism and self interest groups because government over-regulation has forced so many independent builders out of the market.

And I don't see how cuts in VAT can push up prices?  If they make some currently more marginal projects viable, this should increase supply.


----------



## Purple (12 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> You mean East Germany and Detroit?


My experience of seeing these homes in the USA was in Rockport, Massachusetts, Houston, Texas and Atlanta, Georgia.  
I've aslo seen them all over Germany. 



T McGibney said:


> The building sector is only currently driven by crony capitalism and self interest groups because government over-regulation has forced so many independent builders out of the market.


 Right, Section 23, Section 27 and all that stuff, the CIF and an ex-PD minister don't spend their time looking for tax breaks instead of just building things better and cheaper. 



T McGibney said:


> And I don't see how cuts in VAT can push up prices? If they make some currently more marginal projects viable, this should increase supply.


 Ok, but they won't reduce prices.


----------



## T McGibney (12 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> My experience of seeing these homes in the USA was in Rockport, Massachusetts, Houston, Texas and Atlanta, Georgia.
> I've aslo seen them all over Germany.



Were these properties all circa 70 years old?



Purple said:


> Right, Section 23, Section 27 and all that stuff



All things of the distant past.



Purple said:


> the CIF and an ex-PD minister don't spend their time looking for tax breaks instead of just building things better and cheaper.



Which is why I said "_The building sector is only currently driven by crony capitalism and self interest groups because government over-regulation has forced so many independent builders out of the market."_



> Ok, but they won't reduce prices.


Thanks for confirming that they won't actually increase prices.


----------



## Purple (12 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> Were these properties all circa 70 years old?


No. What's your point?
The house I live in now is about 50 years old and it's falling apart. It was built the old fashioned way; crappy Irish builders using some materials that last hundreds of years and others that rot in a few decades. Like most Irish houses it's over built and under engineering.  



T McGibney said:


> All things of the distant past.


 All things that have led up to a point where we have a dysfunctional sector failing the country. 



T McGibney said:


> Which is why I said "_The building sector is only currently driven by crony capitalism and self interest groups because government over-regulation has forced so many independent builders out of the market."_


 I think that's nonsense as, like most things in life, a snap shot tells us very little about the why of a situation.



T McGibney said:


> Thanks for confirming that they won't actually increase prices.


It may not. It will just increase profits and yet again stunt the development of the sector as they will be protected from real open market forces. It will just be more crony capitalism driven by self interest groups. 
Here's an idea for the construction sector; stop moaning and crying like a bunch of little girls and get better at doing your job!


----------



## T McGibney (12 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> No. What's your point?
> The house I live in now is about 50 years old and it's falling apart. It was built the old fashioned way; crappy Irish builders using some materials that last hundreds of years and others that rot in a few decades. Like most Irish houses it's over built and under engineering.


If the walls and roof were built of durable materials, it should be ok. Everything else is maintenance.



Purple said:


> All things that have led up to a point where we have a dysfunctional sector failing the country.
> 
> I think that's nonsense as, like most things in life, a snap shot tells us very little about the why of a situation.



These two statements seem to contradict each other. The choking of Irish house building by over-regulation and punitive tax policy has persisted for the past decade and can hardly be dismissed as a snapshot. Neither can the resulting endemic dysfunction.



Purple said:


> It will just increase profits


The horror.



Purple said:


> Here's an idea for the construction sector; stop moaning and crying like a bunch of little girls and get better at doing your job!


Good idea. Do nothing and hope that the problem solves itself before, as Keynes said, we are all dead.


----------



## Purple (12 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> If the walls and roof were built of durable materials, it should be ok. Everything else is maintenance.


 The roof is made of wood, just like factory built homes. There is no technical or engineering reason not to make houses that way. They are superior quality and last for decades.



T McGibney said:


> These two statements seem to contradict each other. The choking of Irish house building by over-regulation and punitive tax policy has persisted for the past decade and can hardly be dismissed as a snapshot. Neither can the resulting endemic dysfunction.


Over regulation? Are you serious? Self certification for fire standards etc can hardly be called over regulation. Decades of tax breaks followed by the same tax environment enjoyed by/ foisted upon, every other business in the country can hardly be called punitive.



T McGibney said:


> The horror.


 No, just not the reason the industry lobby puts forward when pushing for this special treatment.



T McGibney said:


> Good idea. Do nothing and hope that the problem solves itself before, as Keynes said, we are all dead.


 How is becoming more efficient and embracing manufacturing techniques from the latter half of the Twentieth Century be regarded as doing nothing?
Crony Capitalism and political lobbying has rendered the industry bloated and inefficient and not fit for purpose. The result is homelessness and a stagnated sector. We have the choice of stuffing more money down the necks of Irish builders of using a cheaper option which is of superior quality and can deliver faster. I think we should go with the latter option.


----------



## odyssey06 (12 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> Over regulation? Are you serious? Self certification for fire standards etc can hardly be called over regulation. Decades of tax breaks followed by the same tax environment enjoyed by/ foisted upon, every other business in the country can hardly be called punitive.



We've actually had a situation where the government relaxed building regulations... and gave the Minister for Environment the power to overrule councils... an open admission that the earlier standards were unrealistic.
I think certain Dublin councils used the ridiculously high standards as a deliberate way of discouraging building on their massive land banks.

So yes, there is over-regulation in terms of what is on paper.
An honest builder trying to build to that standard, well of course it is going to jack up the price.
And there is under-regulation in terms of what was actually built.
So a builder cutting corners can get away with Priory Hall situations, declare bankruptcy and leave the state picking up the tab and residents left in a dreadful situation.

I'd be perfectly happy in a building that actually meets 1990 standards.
I don't want to be in a building that on paper has some of the highest standards in the world... and is actually a fire trap.


----------



## fidelcastro (12 Sep 2017)

Which is why I said "_The building sector is only currently driven by crony capitalism and self interest groups because government over-regulation has forced so many independent builders out of the market."

I think you'll find, and you should know, the reason for so called builders going bust is the Irish  Financial crash starting in 2007.  Only certain ex Taoisigh would assert "over  regulation" as being a cause, whether that applies to building regulations or the financial sector. Phrases such as "sustainable development is development which can be sustained" come to mind.

It may be true, the housing stock in the GDR was of poor quality, brought on by a corrupt inefficient system. Sounds familiar?
If your fortunate to live or visit cities like Berlin or indeed Dresden, you'll find they, unlike ourselves have excellent, modern house's with high comfort levels.
At least they are not gifting their wealth to our " friends" in Riyadh, when you pay your winter gas, electric bills due a housing stock which has the prize of by far, the worst thermal efficiency in kWh/m2 than any, of the north  & western European countries, Britain included.

Purple its time to give up. Your idea is a good one to overcoming the local impediments. The reaction here only validates the statement "it doesn't stand a chance".

19 months is time quoted by Dublin city manager on RTE interview to build a "modular" house in Dublin. You must be having a laugh.

Fidel._


----------



## T McGibney (13 Sep 2017)

fidelcastro said:


> Which is why I said "_The building sector is only currently driven by crony capitalism and self interest groups because government over-regulation has forced so many independent builders out of the market."
> 
> I think you'll find, and you should know, the reason for so called builders going bust is the Irish  Financial crash starting in 2007.  Only certain ex Taoisigh would assert "over  regulation" as being a cause, whether that applies to building regulations or the financial sector. Phrases such as "sustainable development is development which can be sustained" come to mind._


I'm not talking about the builders who went bust. I'm talking about the ones who did well from the boom (remember while there were losers, there were many winners too) but who have since wound down their housebuilding operations or transferred them abroad as a response to government measures post-crash to effectively stamp out both new housebuilding and residential property investment.



fidelcastro said:


> _Only certain ex Taoisigh would assert "over  regulation" as being a cause, whether that applies to building regulations or the financial sector. _



Not true. I have made that assertion. And I'm not an ex-Taoiseach.


ps Please don't write in italics. Nobody else does so around here and it makes your post more difficult to read.


----------



## T McGibney (13 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> They are superior quality and last for decades.



Houses that "last for decades". Wow, what will they manage next? 



Purple said:


> Over regulation? Are you serious? Self certification for fire standards etc can hardly be called over regulation.


If the regulations under which self-certification is made are themselves onerous of course it can.




> by the same tax environment enjoyed by/ foisted upon, every other business in the country can hardly be called punitive.


Except every other business in the country isn't subject to RCT.


----------



## Purple (13 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> Except every other business in the country isn't subject to RCT.


 If the contractor shows they are fully tax compliant the rate is zero. Meat processors and others are also subject to RCT. 



T McGibney said:


> A house that "lasts for decades". Wow, what will they manage next?


 They will last 100 years plus. It's just a wood framed house which is built in a factory rather than on site.


----------



## T McGibney (13 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> Meat processors and others are also subject to RCT.



Yeah but you talked about "every other business in the country".



> They will last 100 years plus.


Again you talked about "decades".


----------



## Purple (13 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> Yeah but you talked about "every other business in the country".


and you said no other business so   They all pay the same amount of tax, that's the bottom line.




T McGibney said:


> Again you mentioned "decades" a short time back.


 My bad. (Trump voice) "Many many decades."


----------



## T McGibney (13 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> and you said no other business so


I didn't. You're dreaming.


----------



## Purple (13 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> I didn't. You're dreaming.



Sorry, my mistake... 



T McGibney said:


> Except every other business in the country isn't subject to RCT.


----------



## T McGibney (13 Sep 2017)

No. I never said that "no other business" apart from construction is affected by RCT. Stop twisting my words.


----------



## Purple (13 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> No. I never said that "no other business" apart from construction is affected by RCT. Stop twisting my words.


Yea, 'cause "every other business isn't subject to RCT" and "No other business is subject to it" are completely different things...


----------



## T McGibney (13 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> Yea, 'cause "every other business isn't subject to RCT" and "No other business is subject to it" are completely different things...


Twisting words again.

Let's recap. 

You said, in reference to the construction sector, that "the same tax environment enjoyed by/ foisted upon, every other business in the country can hardly be called punitive". 

I pointed out that construction doesn't enjoy the same tax environment as every other business in the country, and cited RCT.

You then claimed I said something else altogether on the grounds that RCT also affects forestry operators and meat processors. 

You're still claiming that.

Enjoy your Wednesday.


----------



## Purple (13 Sep 2017)

Doctors have tax withheld by the HSE. Plenty of businesses have different tax treatments. At the end of the year they all pay the same taxes. RTC is a red herring.


----------



## Purple (13 Sep 2017)

gives more info on Modular and Panel Built Homes. One in every 4 homes in the USA is built this way.


----------



## fidelcastro (13 Sep 2017)

Pray tell us, what over regulation drove these "developers", out of business, the winners who control extensive land banks around the urban areas, who are over taxed and over regulated?

There was no building due to the financial mess brought on by the cosy relationship between politics, builders and financial con men.

Something to do with 400,000 job losses, bust banks, 17% unemployment,massive public & private sector debt and an MF bailout might have been the reason for them to stop building, since the Irish public had well and truly been ridden bareback.

As for examples of pre fabricated housing, use google to educate yourself.

Fidel


----------



## T McGibney (14 Sep 2017)

fidelcastro said:


> Pray tell us, what over regulation drove these "developers", out of business, the winners who control extensive land banks around the urban areas, who are over taxed and over regulated?
> 
> There was no building due to the financial mess brought on by the cosy relationship between politics, builders and financial con men.
> 
> ...



If all this was inevitable, why did the then government, with support from all sides of our narrow political spectrum, introduce a range of measures in 2009 and later - long after the bailout and bust - to discourage and penalise investment in housing - at a time when the population was rising?


----------



## Purple (14 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> If all this was inevitable, why did the then government, with support from all sides of our narrow political spectrum, introduce a range of measures in 2009 and later - long after the bailout and bust - to discourage and penalise investment in housing - at a time when the population was rising?


What measures were they?


----------



## T McGibney (14 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> What measures were they?



Among the tax measures alone were:

25% addback on mortgage interest tax deductions for buy-to-lets
NPPR
Property Tax 
PRSI and USC on rental income, the latter on income before capital allowances.
The attempted guillotining in 2011 of Section 23 tax relief on rented residential property in tax-designated areas.


----------



## Purple (14 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> Among the tax measures alone were:
> 
> 25% addback on mortgage interest tax deductions for buy-to-lets
> NPPR
> ...


They are all measures designed to hit landlords and which pushed up rent. It pushed up rents but it didn't cost developers anything. There was and is still excessive demand and little supply in the sector as a whole and prices are as high as ever so it didn't dampen prices. 
High property prices are a bad thing in an economy as it sucks investment capital away from wealth creating activities and increases costs generally. The only sustainable solution to the problem we have now is to find a way of building houses more cost effectively. There is no reason that should mean lower standards.


----------



## T McGibney (14 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> They are all measures designed to hit landlords and which pushed up rent. It pushed up rents but it didn't cost developers anything.



I'm not bothered about developers. The measures clearly disincentivised new investment in construction and refurbishment of residential properties. 

They actually triggered a mini-boom in commercial property investment which accidentally helped to ameliorate supply issues in that sector. The supply issues in the residential sector were ignored. Why offices and industrial units mattered more than homes for people to live in is a question for policymakers to answer.

There is clearly more than one sustainable solution to the housing supply crisis. Pretending otherwise is a fantasy.


----------



## Purple (14 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> I'm not bothered about developers. The measures clearly disincentivised new investment in construction and refurbishment of residential properties.
> 
> They actually triggered a mini-boom in commercial property investment which accidentally helped to ameliorate supply issues in that sector. The supply issues in the residential sector were ignored. Why offices and industrial units mattered more than homes for people to live in is a question for policymakers to answer.
> 
> There is clearly more than one sustainable solution to the housing supply crisis. Pretending otherwise is a fantasy.


I agree that the tax situation for both residential units and commercial units should be the same, or net out the same, so i take your point on that issue. The treatment of the landlords of residential units in this country is disgraceful.


----------



## Purple (15 Sep 2017)

From this article;
_ “Against a backdrop of rising costs, contractors and clients need to look to new technologies and methods, as well as better use of data and programme management techniques, to unlock savings.”_


----------



## fidelcastro (19 Sep 2017)

T McGibney said:


> If all this was inevitable, why did the then government, with support from all sides of our narrow political spectrum, introduce a range of measures in 2009 and later - long after the bailout and bust - to discourage and penalise investment in housing - at a time when the population was rising?



Simple. Answer. The State was bust.


T McGibney said:


> Among the tax measures alone were:
> 
> 25% addback on mortgage interest tax deductions for buy-to-lets
> NPPR
> ...


Simple. The State was on life support and still requires a drip feed of extremely low interest rates thanks to ECB  survive.

This talk of a mass exit from the rented sector due to over regulation over taxation was nicely summed up by a certain John MacCartney head of research at Savills in Fiona Reddans article in today's Irish Times in one word.

"Crap"

Fidel.


----------



## T McGibney (20 Sep 2017)

fidelcastro said:


> Simple. Answer. The State was bust.



But the tax raised by those measures was infinitesimally small in terms of the then budgetary deficit and post-bailout debt. They were clearly driven by ideology.


----------



## fidelcastro (20 Sep 2017)

In years 2007 to 2013 there was no shortage of supply, quite the opposite. How come prices plummeted 54% otherwise. I think that is covered in economics basics, page 1, you'll find.

Rents also dropped in price when these measures taxation measures were brought in this time frame.

I recall the Blind persons allowance was cut around then. The amount saved was even smaller. I hope it too wasn't driven by ideology??

Investment fell through the floor not based on 0.18% charge per 1000 euro LPT  charge. 
It fell because of severe financial distress which removed hyper capital appreciation of houses from investors , who were previously looked after by the toxic combination of politicans, gombeen men and financial conmen.
Investors simply looked elsewhere for capital appreciation, and returned with the assistance, once again , with assistance from the State, much to the detriment of "citizens".
Fidel.


----------



## Purple (22 Sep 2017)

High property prices are bad for the economy. They cause wage inflation, they cause insurance inflation, they reduce labour mobility, they cause a transfer of wealth from the young to the old (even though the old hold most of the wealth anyway) and they funnel capital into a non-wealth generating sector (construction) from real wealth generating sectors (internationally traded goods and services).
It is in that context that the government can and should do whatever it can to keep prices low. The Central Bank lending limits are a really good thing, though they should not have been relaxed. Property tax is also a good way of limiting prices. Tax relief on mortgages should also be removed. That deals with the demand side. 

Now what to do on the supply side. The problem is that our construction sector is fat and structurally inefficient after decades of massive margins and cronyism which feathered the nest of everyone in the sector. They are like a fat couch potato being told they have to play 80 minutes at a final in Croke Park. Try as they might it just isn't going to happen any time soon. We need a ringer; we need someone else's construction sector to play the match while fatty tried to do star jumps on the sideline.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (3 Jan 2019)

Hi Purple 

There is a programme on BBC Radio 4 tonight on this topic. It will be available to listen back after it's broadcast. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0001vll

*Home Truths*
In Business
Does the house building industry need to change? Manuela Saragosa meets the disruptors, the companies trying to transform how the vast majority of residential property is built. Across the country new factories are springing up - in a bid to manufacture our homes in much the same way as we do our cars. The risks are huge.

Significant investment is required to get things moving and demand for these new homes has yet to be tested. But the disruptors claim that the house building industry must modernise or die. Productivity is falling and traditional skills are in short supply - something that is likely to get worse as immigration reduces. Other countries, too, already build huge numbers of homes off-site, claiming that this results in quicker and cheaper construction. So, just how many of the hundreds of thousands of homes that we need to build might end up being factory produced?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (31 Oct 2019)

Purple 

Your message is gradually getting out there









						Are inefficient builders the reason we don’t have enough houses?
					

Smart Money: technology and training are acknowledged as key areas




					www.irishtimes.com
				




_And clearly the fragmented nature of the sector is also an issue – as is the way houses and apartments are designed, generally on a bespoke basis for a particular project as opposed to any kind of modular approach which could allow more efficiency.

The McKinsey study pointed to areas such as design and engineering processes, supply chain management, management on site and the use of digital technologies, advanced materials, and construction automation as offering opportunities for the sector internationally.

Much of this relates to how houses are planned, the availability of standard templates and the use of digital technology in planning and delivery.

Here , the conundrum of how to built and fund multi-unit developments in city centres efficiently and affordably must be solved – and the construction industry will have a big role here , drawing on what has happened internationally._


----------



## Purple (26 Nov 2019)

More good news today in this area from Jones Group in Carlow.


----------



## Buddyboy (26 Nov 2019)

That's good news.  
I missed this thread originally, but I agree with the idea of modular houses. Huffhouse in Germany, Deltec in US etc.  
I remember being in Australia and my brother brought me to a house construction company. They had a showhouse of each type of house they built. You choose the one you wanted, specified the details, e.g. plug points etc. They built it and shipped it to site.

Does seem like a good way to go.


----------

