Arkitektúr og skipulag - 01.12.1992, Síða 48

ENGLISH SUM MARY
This issue of ARKITEKTÚR OG
SKIPULAG(Architecture and Planning)
focuses on the question of construction
costs, which are generally felt to be very
high in Iceland. Can Icelanders build more
cheaply, making the acquisition of a roof
over one’s head less of a life’s work?
PAGE 10. ARE CONSTRUCTION
COSTS HIGH IN ICELAND?
Ingvar A Guðmundsson, chairman of the
Association of Master Builders and Building
Contractors, does not accept the assertion
that construction costs are higher in Iceland
than in neighbouring countries, due to the
more exacting standards set for building in
Iceland.
He discusses the composition of the costs of
construction, explained through diagrams,
etc., and mentions the effects of new
building regulations, which require better
insulation, stronger concrete, more
reinforcement, etc. Taxes and other public
costs, too, play a part in the cost of
construction.
PAGE 13
LOWER CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Designer Einar Þorsteinn discusses some of
the factors in the cost of housing, such as
the fact that the market “expects” a certain
kind of house. Financial costs, rather than
real buildings costs, are a major factor in
home building. Fashion can also make a
house that was cheap to build expensive on
the market, and vice versa. A house which
is expensive to build may be “cheaper” in
the long run if maintenance costs are low.
Einar Þorsteinn describes his own contri-
bution to inexpensive housing, the house-
within-a-house. Within a quickly and
cheaply built weather-resistant dome, a
fully-insulated house is built, taking as long
as is necessary, and hence minimising
finance costs.
PAGE 18. CONSTRUCTION
INDUSTRY AT THE CROSS-ROADS
Engineer Stefán Ingólfsson discusses the
way in which costs have risen in the
construction industry, with reference to
various historical factors, such as Iceland’s
long period of high ínflation which
precluded any sense of a “fair” price, and
loans with interest rates below the rate of
inflation. He states that the construction
industry has had no motivation to bring
down costs, although massive mechan-
isation ought to yield more economic
methods. Architects and other designers
are in no direct contact with construction
work, and have not been motivated to
design economical or efficient space.
Increased standardisation would also help
to achieve lower costs. Concrete is
universal, but methods which are used
abroad could be introduced, e.g. brick, steel.
Management factors within construction
companies also need scrutiny, if production
costs are to be cut.
PAGE 22. HOUSING LOANS AND
BUILDING COSTS
Grétar J. Guðmundsson of the State
Housing Fund discusses the role of the
Fund in influencing construction costs. It
has direct influence on construction costs
in the so-called “social housing” system,
which undertakes to finance low-cost
housing for the lower-paid. Loans are not
granted for such projects until factors such
as cost, quality, unit size. etc., have been
approved. In the general housing-loan
system influence is indirect: since the
introduction of Housing Bonds building
cannot commence until the buyer has
produced a full financial schedule for the
building project. This indirectly motivates
the buyer to a more economical approach.
The Housing Fund is also able to make
grants or loans towards technical
innovations and other improvements in
the building industry. This could yield
economies in the future.
PAGE 24. TO BUILD , AND BUILD ,
AND BUILD
Helgi Hafliðason takes a somewhat cynical
view of the Icelanders’ penchant for
building, and building. He considers the
tension between conformism and
exhibitionism, the overriding need to build
something saleable, and the apparent
irrelevance of designing well-used space.
He makes the point that people sometimes
convince themselves they are “saving”
money, for instance by attempting to adapt
entirely unsuitable accommodation to some
particular function, rather than building
from scratch. Not enough interest is shown
in design, and buildings are simply started
without adequate thought, because we are
“men of action.” If we took more account of
human factors and concentrated less on
speed and “saving” money, homes would be
not only more pleasant to live in, but also
cheaper.
PAGE 26. LOWER PROPERTY
PRICES
Sigríður A Asgrímsdóttir of the Consumers’
Association discusses the relationship of
quality to costs, which varies. She lists the
factors which comprise total construction
costs, which she emphasises should be
considered as a whole. Some factors can be
influenced by the home-builders, while
others are fixed (by the authorities, e.g.).
Cutting design costs may not prove
economical in the long run, and dealing on
the “grey” market means that the buyer has
no recourse if work or material is faulty.
Offering projects for tender may produce
economies. New building regulations are
likely to lead to higher costs in supervision
and manage-ment, but this factor (i.e.
management) has been inadequate, so
better management ought to yield savings
in other areas. The financial side of building
has always been problematical, but in these
times of greater financial stability it makes
sense to put money into research and
planning, and to work on informing the
consumer on quality and price, and the
relationship between them.
PAGE28. STANDING UP STRAIGHT
Architect and Editor Gestur Olafsson writes
about the interesting subject of ceiling
height, which is in Iceland invariably 2.4
metres. He wonders why this height,
prescribed as the minimum ceiling height,
should also in practice be a maximum. He
suggests that higher ceilings offer the
opportunity to “stand up straight” and
breathe more freely. Public fees charged to
home-builders, however, are based upon
cubic metrage (not floor space) and would
hence penalise those who built with high
ceilings. This needs to be changed to a
different form of valuation.
PAGE 29. THOUGHTS ON
CONSTRUDTION COSTS
Benedikt Jónsson of the Building Research
Institute points out that no real comparison
of construction costs has been made with
other countries, taking into account
differing requirements. The author’s
informal assessment, however, is that
Icelandic buildings are not more expensive
in construction than similar buildings in
Norway and Sweden. Although other
things are more expensive in Iceland
(leaving less money for home-building),
one could hardly expect lower building
costs than elsewhere. A reasonable amount
of competition should help to create fair
pricing, while if the buyer has some idea of
buildings costs, he is better equipped to
deal with the market. Building costs canbe
cut, by simpler and more efficient design,
tendering, etc., but cheaper buildings are
inevitably plainer, less impressive, and this
is not necessarily what the buyer wants.
T oo little money is spent on design, which
can prove cost-saving when building begins.
TTe “lifetime-cost” of a building is what
matters: what is expensive to build can be
cheap to maintain.
PAGE 31. STEEL-FRAME BUILD-
INGS-AN UNDERRATED OPTION
Steel-frame buildings enjoy growing
popularity in other countries, e.g. in Britain
where they were 33% of buildings of two or
more storeys in 1980, and 58% today. This
is largely due to the lower costs, but also to
interesting possibilities (e.g. steel/glass,
various kinds of siding) and also short
construction time, leading to lower finance
46