Framework for Long-Term Public Housing Supply Plan Focusing on Small-Scale Offsite Construction in Seoul

Abstract

The public housing demand in Seoul has been continuously increasing, but the available land for housing is insufficient. To meet the demand, the Seoul government is planning to develop small-scale housing in urban areas through various methods. Construction activities for increasing housing capacity cause negative environmental impacts, and this inevitably leads to an increase in the number of civil complaints. The complaints can be mitigated by using offsite construction (OSC) for fabricating components. However, OSC remains underdeveloped in Korea owing to concerns over high project costs. To promote OSC, the government must develop a long-term plan to secure demand for OSC. For such a plan, the number and feasibility of applicable sites in Seoul must be estimated. This study suggests a two-stage research framework: (1) estimate the number of applicable sites in Seoul using GIS and (2) conduct feasibility analyses of these sites through architectural planning. The estimated number of sites was equal to the expected supply of small-scale housing units in Seoul for 8 years, and the selected case sites were identified to be feasible. Therefore, the use of OSC for developing small-scale housing units in Seoul is reasonable. This research differs from previous studies in that the previous use of qualitative studies to promote modular construction was replaced with a quantitative analysis that included the entire Seoul area. Using the research framework, the Seoul government can develop a specific long-term plan based on the quantitative research analysis. Furthermore, manufacturers can develop plans based on the government plan and deliver returns on the higher initial costs. The contractors can reduce the higher project cost and doing so is expected to mitigate the negative perception and to promote modular construction in Korea.

A Systematic Review of the Business Contingencies Influencing Broader Adoption: Modern Methods of Construction (MMC)

“…Moreover, convenience is reported to expand to MMC project stakeholders through more minor requirements for storage spaces, fewer errors, and enhanced safety [95]. Similarly, the greater the utilisation of MMC, the less requirement for onsite labour, achieving minor inconveniences for all stakeholders [17,96]. Hence, this value means that construction would not jeopardise clients' relationships with the surroundings but also achieve considerable convenience for everyone directly and indirectly involved.…”

“…Moreover, studies focus on having the onsite experience to complete work beyond factories. Despite that MMC is associated with fewer major onsite activities, the knowledge of onsite methods may be required, and this potential may aid the contractor's competency [17]. The knowledge and interpretation of site conditions such as accesses, manoeuvring space, and logistics are significant considerations for a successful MMC project [83].…”

“…Hedgren [21] shared that the decision to adopt MMC by a client was due to its costeffectiveness. The lack of an adequate and fair comparison that includes MMC benefits within the reduction gained due to their challenging quantifiable nature [17]. Such comparison enables traditional contractors to offer solutions with considerable cost savings, driving the industry away from MMC [7].…”

“…As the current widespread adoption is not enough to support core revenues, a change is required in business models for better diversification [17]. MMC businesses may not be able to conquer the whole market, but they can indeed support enhancing the postcompletion phase of MMC developments.…”

“…The literature herewith emphasises the importance of improving currently utilised models, yet the needed improvements remain uncaptured. Knowing that MMC uptake is low in the public sector [15,16], public clients attain characteristics that can be argued to drive innovation adoption in the whole construction industry due to their unique nature and demand [16,17]. In the construction context, these clients have been described as the 'gatekeepers' in promoting innovation across the industry [18].…”