Talk:Modular building/Archive 1

This page is written in the style of an advertisement for modular homes.

It should be re-written to correct errors of tone.
 * Yeah, thats why I added the NPOV flag. Ok, thats my reason so now Im adding the flag. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jgcarter (talk • contribs) 04:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC).


 * It's also highly US-centric, as I noted a way back. Unfortunately I don't really know enough to correct this, I just take pics in this case. Tarquin Binary 19:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Stronger then masonry ?
site-built means the traditional brick built house right ? if it does, its HIGHLY unlikely that a cardboard box will be stronger then brick would be.. Tyriel 18:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Modular homes can be masonry including brick.

Absolutely correct, you have to keep in mind that modular homes must make it to their destination on trailers of 18 wheelers... often times on the highway at speeds up to 70 miles per hour. The modular homes in the Southeast are buillt to survive a category 4 hurricane and the are currently getting certified for a category 5 hurricane (despite being made of wood). PLUS... Keep in mind that just becuase most of it was built at the factory, it doesn't mean it can't be "finished" on site. Bricks and stone work can and often ARE added to the exterior for looks and further fortification.

To the above comments
Site-built does not mean the "traditional brick-built house". To begin with, the great majority of houses are built from wood. Even when houses appear to be built from brick, it is usually just brick covering a wooden frame. But to get back to the point, site-built means any house built from scratch on that site. Modular homes are built in sections (modules) in a factory off-site and then transported to the building site to be joined. What the article is saying (and I'm not the author) is that a modular home will be stronger than a comparable site-built home. That is true. They are constructed in a controlled environment and they are designed to survive being transported on the highway for in some cases hundreds of miles.

I have no idea what the cardboard box thing means, so I won't worry about that.

As for the article sounding like an advertisement, that is only so because the author doesn't list the disadvantages of a modular home versus a site-built home. I own a modular home, and I exhaustingly researched these homes before I purchased one. As far as I could find out, the only disadvantage a modular has is that there are some limitations with what the contractors can do around the marriage walls, which is where the different sections of the house join. That's it. They are less expensive because you pay for only the material used and because they are constructed in controlled conditions by specialists who only perform labor on one part of the house. (i.e. framing, electrical, plumbing, etc.) They are stronger like the article says. If anyone else knows of another disadvantage please change the article, but don't just complain that it sounds like and advertisement but give no reasons why you think that.

As for it being US-centric, what do you mean by "I only take pics in this case"?

Primium mobile 04:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * This is an interesting topic, and I know that many modular home buyers are very happy with the results of their decision. The article itself though is not very good at this time.  I've made some small improvements today that help it read less like an advertisement.  In fact, the first paragraph that I removed had been copied word for word from the webpage of a manufacturer.  But I'm not an expert on this topic and my changes are just a small start to making this a better article.  It needs to be more neutral and balanced (WP:NPOV), to address the legal, financial and construction challenges of this type of housing, as well as the benefits.  Certainly there are plenty of possible benefits to individuals and communities if better housing can be made at lower cost.  But if the article makes those claims, then sourced references are needed.
 * Since you have already researched this, and have mentioned some of the disadvantages in your comment above, please be bold and improve the page by adding your knowledge! Parzival418 02:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree that the article is not very good; I just have a problem with people posting that it is not but then not giving suggestions to improve it. I may eventually edit the article with my own research, but I'm too busy for that right now. But I do want to comment on something... I noticed there was a section added that dealt, albeit briefly, with the difficulties in obtaining financing on these homes. It is true that a traditional construction loan will not work for these homes. With a construction loan, the bank releases parts of the loan at different times to the general contractor upon completion of different phases of construction. (foundation, framing, etc.) With a modular home, one is generally dealing with a general contractor and the factory where the home itself is built. The contractor is responsible for landscaping, digging and pouring the foundation, etc. In my own experience, the contractor put in the foundation, the basement, and also built the garage and all the add-ons to the home. (mud room, decks, dormers, etc.) The problem is that the contracter is purchasing the home from the factory, and must pay for that home before delivery will be made. That requires a modified disbursing schedule from the lending institution. As few as five years ago, there were only a handful of banks that would finance construction on a modular home because of this. (banks don't like to give money for something that isn't there yet!!) Even in the past few years, that has changed dramatically and now nearly any bank will finance modular home construction. A disadvantage is that since the money is being paid at an accelerated rate, the borrower must begin paying interest on that money sooner than what would be with a traditional construction loan. In most cases, the lower cost of the modular home more than makes up for that.


 * As for zoning problems, a meeting with the zoning committee will usually end in favor of the prospective builder.


 * I will edit this article, but I need to gather my sources. I've spent a lot of time on Wikipedia, but I am new to editing articles. But thanks for the advice. Primium mobile 17:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Changed to meet Wiki guidelines
Firstly this is a well written & informative article. Well done.

Changes made to include information about modular homes outside of the US and add external links for non US countries. My expertise in for Modular homes in Australia with limited experience for modular homes in the UK so please make relevant changes for other countries.

Changes made:

"The modules are assembled into a single residential building using either a crane or trucks." In Australia truck delivery and assmebly can be used instead of cranes. Cranes are still used for larger jobs or multistory modular homes. Can't find a reference to back this up however I know it from personal experience. Can someone else please find a reference or is this considered common knowlege?

"Typically, modular dwellings are built to local state or council code" In Australia & UK Council gives regulations regarding useage and state legislation covers size, transportation etc. Reference added.

"*Ability to service remote locations. Particularly in countries such as Australia there can be much higher costs to build a site-built in a remote area or an area experiencing a construction boom such as mining towns.  Modular homes can be built in major towns and sold to regional areas." in advantages section.

"In Australia Manufactured Home Parks are governed by additional legislation that does not cover permanent modular homes." I believe Australian Manufactured home parks are similar to the US mobile home parks in this regard.

Added entire disadvantages section & references for Australian legislation and finance.

Ottod 05:48, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I would like to add a comment regarding the orginal point of the NPOV, should “modular buildings” be merged with “modular home”. In the US the issues of a modular home are different than other modular structures. In some regions, modular classrooms have been used extensively with modular homes being quite rare. Such classrooms can be temporary (i.e. the common portable) or permanent in nature with at-grade entry with concrete floors and foundations. The permanent variety is indistinguishable from site built classrooms and can be multistory so most people do not realize they are modular. The issues facing modular education building center on durability, cost efficiency and speed of construction. In campus additions, minimal site disruption is critical to reduce dangerous construction traffic as well as unauthorized site personnel. Schools are funded through bond issues or developer fees which are different the residential funding issues previously discussed.

The bottom line is I believe the residential modular market is too different to combine with commercial, education and healthcare markets. Clearly the industry does as well as the Modular Building Institute covers everything but residential and the separate National Modular Housing Council focuses on only residential.

User:Modbob 11:46, 20 March 2008 (PST)

I agree with Modbob, the two markets are too different to be merged into one article. 17:54, 2 December 2008 User:Mmrenv5700