How we’re delivering with Building Better – Raven

What are your development targets?

At Raven, we have an ambitious programme to build 1,250 new homes over the next five years and our aim is to deliver over half of these using modern methods of construction (MMC). Three quarters will be delivered as affordable housing through a variety of tenures including first homes, affordable/social rent, and shared ownership, with the remaining 25% delivered as outright sale homes.

What type of MMC homes are you developing?

Depending on the housing need for the area, we generally look to develop a mixture of houses and low rise flats. It’s important to us that we build homes that are energy efficient, so we aim, where possible, to develop homes that are net zero carbon or low-carbon.

We initially considered a Passivhaus model, using traditional building methods, which is a great model, however there are some challenges around costs of labour, materials and the embodied carbon which impacted on the scale of development. We have not discounted this method of construction as it may be suitable for some of our sites. Then we looked at a range of MMC product categories that best suited our sites, as not all would be suitable for volumetric MMC.

What’s it been like to work with manufacturers through the framework?

We knew that a MMC volumetric construction method was the way forward for Raven, but we also knew it would be a struggle to obtain the volumes required to take advantage of this method of build and procurement. That’s when Raven’s development director introduced us to the newly set up Building Better framework.

We were aware, from talking to partners on the MMC framework, that early engagement was key, so we approached Building Better through Procurement for Housing and they introduced us to TopHat and Ilke who are on the Category 1 framework.

We were keen to engage early with the manufacturers on each of these sites, so we set up project start up meetings with manufacturers to discuss key items such as logistics, house types, capacity and costs which allowed us to quickly select the manufacturer that was better suited to the site.

With selected sites we were able to move onto the next stage, where the manufacturer sent over their DWG (drawing files) of house types, including floor plans which we selected from their catalogue. Our architects then used these to obtain the optimum site layout and confirmed this with the manufacturer, so they were on board with the design.

What schemes are you developing through the framework?

Our current MMC scheme is a former library site in Surrey with 14 two and three-bed houses. The site has now been submitted for planning and we’re hoping to get a determination by the end of 2022. We’ll then begin more in-depth discussions with manufacturers, getting contracts warmed up. That’s the best bit about using the Building Better MMC Category 1 framework. We can call off from it and it saves so much time around procurement as most of the work is already done.

We are in the early stages but have another 20-unit MMC site in Oxted, Surrey, where we’ve engaged with the manufacturer early and we have already put some indictive design proposals together using the same house type as the library site project. We are in the process of also undertaking surveys which may influence the design and we aim to get into planning by the end of January 2023.

How has Building Better helped with the procurement process?

Procurement is a fundamental part of a housing association’s governance, so it is essential to get the process right, and this framework ensures we adhere to all the rules with a clear audit trail. We have seen many benefits being a member of Building Better, for example:

• Early engagement with manufacturers
• Set prices on house types selected – including specifications
• Set house types – conformity with building regulations
• Indicative costs provided for a full turnkey solution
• Direct call off from framework
  
  

If the Building Better framework hadn’t been in place then the above benefits would not be achievable or if we were going down a traditional route, we would have had to cover ourselves on procurement, running our own tenders which can be painful and long-winded. Using the Building Better framework saves on resource, and it provides speed and security because it is fully compliant.

What costs have you had back and what efficiencies have been generated?

Each of the manufacturers were able to provide a build cost estimate quite quickly, which was helpful to ensure that, financially, the project appraisal met the required hurdle rates. However, as you would expect, these costs were indicative as costs underneath the ground – things like sub-structures and landscaping – are unknown at early stages of the project, especially in today’s cost-fluctuating market.

Based on a site of between 15 – 50 houses (without any abnormalities) in the Surrey and Sussex area, we are looking at an approximate build cost in today’s environment of £2,750- £3,000 per square metre. This is roughly the same as the cost of traditional build.

What about the uplift to net zero?

It’s been easy to liaise with the manufacturer on any uplifts in cost. We said to the manufacturer that we wanted to get to operational net zero standards, and they were quick in responding and said that the extra cost would be roughly £5,000 per unit.