Osborne Group Holdings Limited – Written evidence (OMC0023)
Perceived advantages of offsite manufacture for construction
1.0 What are the opportunities offered by offsite manufacture for construction? What are the likely drawbacks? What factors are likely to influence clients, architects, design engineers, contractors and the supply chain in deciding whether to choose offsite manufacture?
1.1.1 In the general debate off-site is all too often considered in its most simplistic and holistic form and typically refers to volumetric or modular build solutions. These are primarily completed mini buildings (or specific completed pods such as plant rooms, ticket offices and bathrooms). Transported in their entirety and placed in position but typically associated with unimaginative or uninspiring living, working and educational environments. Off-site is the consequence of improving standardisation in approach to the design and build process. Consequently in addition to the above typically constrained solutions there is a whole spectrum of possible solutions using varying degrees of off-site/onsite manufacture.
1.1.2 Some wider alternatives adopt standardised kits of pre-manufactured and accredited components assembled on site (E.g. Component parts construction adopted for the Swiss railway station programme) that can often bring a drawback that they typically use pre-defined module/component sizes that can potentially inhibit the full optimisation of the available land.
1.1.3 Ultimately progressing to off-site manufacture opportunities that are able to capitalise on all the potential benefits of standardisation techniques outlined above and integrate those benefits into large format panelised solutions (for example SIP’s) adopting a project specific balance using a flexible mix of off-site manufacture with onsite assembly. This approach crucially enables those additional end user benefits possible using highly adaptable design for manufacture techniques to create inspiring living spaces and adaptable and complementary aesthetic finishes.
1.2 The benefits and drawbacks of offsite are therefore complex and need to consider the vast range of options outlined briefly above. There are two overarching issues that will significantly impact the value and quality considerations with offsite.
1.3 Opportunities
1.3.1 In our experience off-site is proven to shorten the duration of projects physically on site. Reducing both duration and the proportion of activities undertaken physically on site it automatically follows that potential disruption to the immediate community and local infrastructure reduces as a consequence. Removing the seasonal risks of inclement weather, local travel disruption and congestion in getting resources, plant and labour to and from site. Utilising factory controlled environments provides all parties increase cost and time certainty and in addition can remove significant on site hazards such as those associated with working at height.
1.3.2 A further benefit with off-site is in creating wider local economic growth away from London and the main congested conurbations. Noting that onsite construction resources do in themselves place large additional demand on the already limited availability of affordable accommodation within those conurbations.
2. It is often claimed that offsite manufacture can lead to:
What is the evidence for this?
2.1.1 Reigate Primary School (Completed 14 weeks early)
2.1.1.1 The main building structure took just 5 weeks to complete and the school was completed 14 weeks early by achieving the best combination between offsite and onsite assembly using a bespoke structural i-SIP System.
2.1.2 Kidwells Housing Estate (Offsite responding to specific site constraints)
2.2.2.1 One Housing Group needed to replace 84 homes and add a further 120 apartments. The new homes for existing tenants had to be built without them moving off site during construction. Minimising onsite disruption was important and several noise restrictions were imposed. An energy-efficient, convenient and cost-effective, offsite manufactured infill system was adopted for the concrete framed structures.
2.1.3 Heath Mount School (Off-site solution to harmonise with Grade 1 listed buildings).
2.1.3.1 The prestigious Heath Mount School required a new seven classroom teaching block and performing arts auditorium. Site access was restricted, designs needed to complement the existing Grade 1 listed buildings but make a statement of modern design, and disruption had to be minimal as the construction took place during term times.
2.1.4 Whitham Railway Station (A watertight ticket office in one week)
2.1.4.1 The new booking hall structure was created within one week, compared to the 8 weeks required for traditional techniques and the station superstructure was completed within a 3 week programme to reduce impact on railway commuters using the station.
Potential barriers to wider use of offsite manufacture
3. What are the drawbacks to offsite manufacture for construction?
3.1 In many cases off-site solutions are not as established and/or commonly understood methods for potential end use investors and mortgage providers. If the enormous potential economic value of off-site is to be realised for the UK economy a joined up industry approach is needed with underwriting specialists and government representatives to help demystify and remove the potential uncertainties around perceived risk.
3.2 There is an enormous degree of flexibility in the range and extent of components, products and composites systems used in offsite solutions. This increases the complexity for Architects, Structural Engineers and Consultants when creating specifications and subsequently in their due diligence approvals of the many bespoke offsite solutions being put forward. This fragmented approach further impacts on those organisations seeking and providing adequate and economical PI insurances. Therefore greater standardisation in designs and pre-designed system approvals will make it easier for all parties to provide assurances to the customers and end users of the buildings constructed.
4. What re-skilling of the construction workforce is required to facilitate a change to more off-site manufacture for construction?
4.1 Re-skilling required can be considered for both the technical and management workforce and the skilled trades and operative’s workforce.
4.2 The technical personnel will need greater integration skills at a higher level in technical planning and development of the solutions. Increasing numbers of people with the specialist skills will be required to operate manufacturing facilities. Currently the largest off-site housing factory in the UK is capable of circa 3000 units per annum, an insignificant output compared to the number of new homes required to meet growing demand and subsequently create many more affordable homes.
4.3 For skilled trades and operatives, depending on the mix of off-site and onsite assembly the skills are wholly transferable. A plumber for example can work in a factory producing completed bathroom pods or onsite using traditional plumbing techniques. The opportunity also exists for multi-skill trades to carry our multiple specific tasks in offsite assembly.
5. Can the benefits of standardisation and factory manufacture be realised without hampering architectural ambition? If so, how?
5.1 There is a case that can be made that off-site restricts the potential for creativity in design for Architects. This is certainly the case in boxy volumetric offsite. However, by adopting a complementary mix of onsite and off-site elements using a bespoke design and manufacture large panel SIPS option contemporary and aesthetically creative spaces and finishes are easily and cost effectively achievable over traditional construction. This enables the efficiencies of a standardised process with the bespoke and unique product.
5.2 In terms of creative design off-site requires a significant change in mind-set to customary design practice. Architectural and structural designs have to be completed and signed off much earlier in the project development process. Once the design is fixed the off-site element makes it far more difficult to change during the project implementation and delivery phases. There is still substantial opportunity for creative design it simply needs to be done at the outset and not drip fed and continually amended through the building phase.
6. What R&D is needed, and by whom, to realise fully the potential benefits of off-site manufacture?
6.1 The disparate and wide range of potential off-site components, products and composite solutions will make it essential for greater interoperability between products to be possible. This will be driven through the greater need for standardisation in design approaches. Investigating how greater automation can play its part also warrants industry and specialist investment.
6.2 Given the fragmentation of the off-site manufacture industry and the fragmentation of the investment into research and development to date, it is vitally important to capture industry best practice, as in reality this has not yet been established.
6.3 The intellectual property for off-site falls in its entirety within individual specialist off-site suppliers and organisations. A wider industry and government approach is necessary to drive regulation and increase collective industry learning following the lead shown in the IT and aviation industries.
Government actions
7. (If published) does the construction sector deal correctly identify the issues faced by the construction industry and the actions that the Government and other stakeholders need to take to address them? What should it contain/what is missing?
7.1 We have no specific issues above those identified in the construction sector deal to add at this point.
7.2 We would emphasise that off-site has a key role to play in meeting the construction sector deal objectives in reducing capital and whole life costs, reducing the end to end duration of the project lifecycle and driving down greenhouse gas emissions.
7.3 However, it is essential that off-site is not seen as an all or nothing solution. The most important consideration is identifying the most appropriate and cost effective balance between off-site and onsite assembly activities. In doing so capitalising on standardise processes that create bespoke products and spaces using pre-approved designs that provide the essential assurances and confidence of outturn quality and product resilience for all stakeholders.
8. What changes could be made to public procurement processes to encourage more economically and environmentally sustainable practises in the construction industry and facilitate off-site manufacture?
8.1 Certainty and transparency in the flow of work is essential for all aspects of the construction and engineering industry. However, it is becomes even more critical for off-site manufacture due to the extremely high initial investment in factory/manufacturing space, specialist plant and equipment, automation controls and design integration and the relatively high levels of raw material stocks required.
8.2 A further concern is that traditional standard forms of contract do not protect the main contractor where a large proportion of the contract sum is placed with a single service provider (as is the case for off-site). This presents a significant risk with any specialist off-site supplier who may not be able to deliver and for which there may not easily procured alternative.
Submitted of behalf of Osborne Group Holdings Limited owner of Innovaré Systems
25 April 2018