What is the difference between relocatable and permanent modular?

The two get grouped together because both are manufactured off site and delivered by road. That is where the similarity ends.

Relocatable

Designed to be moved again, and usually more than once.

Which drives everything about it. It sits on a temporary or semi-permanent footing so it can be lifted off. It is built to survive repeated transport, which affects the finishes and the connections. It is often leased rather than owned. And it is frequently treated as a temporary structure under the planning approval.

It is the correct answer for a genuinely temporary need: a site office, a decant while a building is refurbished, a classroom covering a few years of enrolment, accommodation on a project with an end date.

The trade is that a building designed to be moved is not optimised for the thirty years it might sit still. Thermal performance, acoustics and finish level are usually specified to a lower standard, because the brief is temporary.

Permanent modular

A permanent building that was manufactured somewhere else.

It goes onto permanent [foundations](/blog/groundworks-and-foundations-for-modular). It is designed for the full service life of a conventional building. It is assessed, approved, certified and valued as a permanent building, because that is what it is.

The manufacturing location is a construction method, not a building category. Once installed, a permanent modular dwelling is subject to the same code, the same certification and the same expectations as one built in place.

That is the category Made works in, and the [hybrid method](/blog/what-is-hybrid-volumetric-modular) goes further, marrying manufactured volumetric structure to conventional construction on site so the result is a single permanent building rather than a set of delivered units.

Where the difference shows up

**Approval.** A temporary structure and a permanent dwelling follow different planning pathways, carry different conditions, and sometimes have a time limit attached.

**Finance and valuation.** A permanent building on permanent foundations is assessed as real property. A relocatable on temporary footings is frequently treated as a chattel, which changes how it can be financed and how it is valued.

**Certification.** A permanent building goes through the full certification process to an occupation certificate.

**Service life and warranty.** Different design intentions produce different expectations, and the warranty position follows.

**Resale and disposal.** A permanent dwelling is part of the property. A relocatable is an asset that can be removed, which is an advantage or a liability depending on the plan.

Why the confusion causes real problems

Because the word modular is used for both, people carry assumptions from one into the other.

A financier who has only seen relocatable buildings may price permanent modular as a chattel. A planner may apply temporary-structure conditions to a permanent dwelling. A client may assume the finish level of a site office.

Answering the question early, in the documentation and in the conversation, removes most of it. It is one of the items that reduces perceived risk on a project, alongside the points in [what de-risks a modular project for a financier](/blog/what-de-risks-a-modular-project-for-a-financier).

Which one a project needs

If the need genuinely ends on a date, relocatable is the honest answer and it is cheaper.

If the building is staying, permanent modular is the answer, and the relevant comparison is against conventional construction rather than against a relocatable.

Choosing relocatable for a permanent need is the expensive mistake, because the building is replaced or upgraded far earlier than a permanent one would be, and the [whole-of-life cost](/blog/maintenance-and-whole-of-life-costs) lands well above what the initial saving suggested.

Talk to us about which one your project needs.

MADEmodular / MADEbetter.