I recently attended a presentation made by Michele Kaufman in Tampa about archieving more sustainable housing through prefabrication. During her presentation I couldn't help but think that although she is developing a product which maybe customized to suite specific needs of clients, how is this any different than a whole neighborhood full of houses designed the same way with the same finishes, basically the same as an suburb with the same ford taurus and docker pants. Is it possible to get away from the connotation of generic architecture when using prefabrication? Would it be completely out of the question to suggest that there is no difference at all from tract housing, other than its a little more treehugger.
I honestly believe that regardless of what housing product is being supplied, that there will always be someone out there willing to purchase. So, my stance is that there is no difference.
i was at the same presentation... to a certain degree i agree with you... but i don't think that she was advocating creating neighborhoods of the identical house repeated over and over again... it would be more like a neighborhood with a few ford tauruses, a few honda accords, some toyota camrys, maybe a porsche or two... for instance each of her "product lines" (glidehouse, sunset breezehouse, mkSolaire) has a variety of floor plans available... in a way it is just like going to a typical single family residential developer and picking one of their 5 floor plans... however, i think that there is a much higher quality of design...
however, i was much more interested in how she is starting to use modular construction in urban multifamily projects...
We've been discussing this ad nauseaum in studio atm. My Opinion: Common Housing for Common People. (Note, i consider myself common, i.e. working class, there ain't nothing wrong with that). If you look back through history, the plebs have always lived in cookie-cutter style housing from roman apartments to McMansions, while the rich have enjoyed custom made homes. With current technology (alot of it relating to pre-fab), the working class has at its disposal the means to create more custom homes, yet we/they don't for the reason that human beings tend to organize themselves in groups. Your friend gets a McMansion, you want one too, etc. I think this is the reason why alot of these pre-fab prototypes i've been researching have been total commercial failures, whereas the standard double-wide performs very well from a commerical prospective.
That said, I feel mass customization can be easily realized through some form of pre-fab but going down that road looks mighty tricky if you want to make a business venture out of it.
here's the thing about prefab housing and housing for the common man in general. when you look at dwell or prefab proposals by architects you are not truly looking at prefab manufactured housing as the industry looks at it. ie the arci-dwell solutions usually include engineered structural beams etc. which the prefab industry wants to avoid.
it will be interesting to watch michelle kaufman over the next few years to see how successful she is with her "product line" homes... she must be doing OK so far since they just purchased their own production warehouse outside of seattle... either that or she has some serious money behind her from somewhere...
The concept of sustainable design is good, but how well can it work at the price point it's at? The Glidehouse is $185 - $250 per s.f. That just seems pricey for what you're getting.
To me, looking at the photos, visualizing it without their furnishings, it doesn't look much different than a mobile home. It's simply a drywall box with a wall of windows and a sloped roof. And the interior ceiling just looks cheap. Slap on some metal panels and a wood porch for effect, and there you go. That's one of the biggest problems here for me - it's forms just look too similar to a mobile homes. Granted, I'm sure this is built to a much higher standard.
It's such a simple and plain design, can it really be worth the $140 per s.f. factory cost plus the shipping cost (using their Vancouver to Seattle example, 2 containers at $3000 each = $6000 total.) You can still build on site rather efficiently, it just takes some preplanning. I bet there are plenty of contractors who could frame this house up a lot cheaper.
Modular is going to have to offer a lower cost differential over site built to make it work.
I am very interested to see if pre-fab housing can be developed such that it includes REAL progress towards sustainable building practices, not just in manufacturing. I.e., including renewable energy, etc.
Either way, I think this is a better option than the current tract housing because of all the usual reasons, but also because the construction quality of those buildings is so poor.
ProjectNorth, do you think one could build a custom site-built house with the aesthetic appearance of the Glidehouse for $200/sf? I certainly think it's possible but in my experience it would take a contractor willing to try something new and not charge out the wazoo for it!
Liberty Bell, I'm sure that one could the same for less than $200 s.f.
Part of my point though is that the house really isn't that "custom."
It's a wood framed box with a sloped ceiling, a metal panel skin, and lots of glass on one side. The interior is very basic - nothing out of the ordinary in there. There's nothing there that's complicated to build.
I just don't see the value. At least in the Glidehouse. Some of the other work appears more promising, though.
the value, for architects anyway, is that it increases the possibility that people might have an architect-designed house instead of a builder/developer house. purely selfish, i know, but it'd be nice if architects were involved in more than, oh, what, 1.5% of house projects.
When you get to the crux of the problem, its not such an easy question to answer. The sole beauty of prefab is that its economic if you mass produce, however if you mass produce how is it any different than tract housing with the ford tauruses. For Architphil which appearantly was really impressed with Michelle Kaufman, her process isn't economic enough to be produced to mass public. Her clients are still the bad wagon sustainablites that can afford 180 or more per square foot. I do applaude her for her effort though.
I truly believe that in order for there to be enough housing prototypes to become affordable to average working joes with my income or similar, a prefab market needs to be address. On the other hand, to create the variety the market needs its too expensive to create so many different combinations of manufactured parts.
I think what hasn't been noted is the "Henry Ford Factor". Production efficiency is critical to the success and economic advantage of these homes, Most prefab plants won't even tool up there facilities unless you do a run of 20 homes min. that's where speed and economics hit a critical mass. Factory built at one off at a time will always be comparable to what a good site built home will cost and be comparable in quality. The quality goes up if you live in a region where building year round is problematic and you can avoid rain / snow / cold, certainly the control within a factory will tend to be a little better as well.
Quality is relative too, are you tlaking door hardware or framing techniques because quality hardware is simply an upgrade, but dry building conditions with reduced moisture content, fully dry framing materials that produce straight walls and reduced long term shrinkage in the framing would really be considered a quality aspect particularly when you see hoe most tract housing is produced.
I think what hasn't been noted is the "Henry Ford Factor". Production efficiency is critical to the success and economic advantage of these homes, Most prefab plants won't even tool up there facilities unless you do a run of 20 homes min. that's where speed and economics hit a critical mass. Factory built at one off at a time will always be comparable to what a good site built home will cost and be comparable in quality. The quality goes up if you live in a region where building year round is problematic and you can avoid rain / snow / cold, certainly the control within a factory will tend to be a little better as well.
Quality is relative too, are you tlaking door hardware or framing techniques because quality hardware is simply an upgrade, but dry building conditions with reduced moisture content, fully dry framing materials that produce straight walls and reduced long term shrinkage in the framing would really be considered a quality aspect particularly when you see hoe most tract housing is produced.
regarding the cost issue... part of her presentation included a comparison between her own glidehouse, which was site constructed, and a glidehouse built for a client, which was "modularized"... both were built at roughly the same time... the client was moved in before her house was complete and for cheaper too...
total construction time on the modular version took only 4 months, while total construction time on the site built version took 14 months... that's pretty impressive (assuming the numbers aren't distorted in some manner for marketing/sales purposes)...
non-site construction costs for modular were about 25% less than site built... again assuming that there is no marketing "funny business" going on, that's pretty impressive...
here's the link to the part of her website that discusses this case study...
also, i agree with ProjectNorth that the design of the glidehouse is certainly not anything earthshattering... but i have a difficult time believing that you could build anything nicer (with the same quality of finishes and attention to detail) for $200/SF with a typical site built contractor... but that really depends on what part of the country we're talking about... in CA, NY, or FL $200/SF is not really very much for a custom/semicustom home... michelle even admitted that it probably doesn't make much economic sense in the flyover states where construction costs are much lower and shipping costs would be inflated...
man, i sound like a MKD cheerleader... i'm done now...
I'm not trying to be/sound too pessimistic about the Glidehouse, and I'm not trying to say that I don't like the appearance of it, either. I do think it's pretty neat.
I do live in the midwest, where no doubt construction costs are less then the coastal states. We're able to design custom, high end contemporary homes here in the $200 s.f. range. And that's nicely detailed with high end finishes.
I just had a builder do my own house, a custom home, for $106 s.f.
Check out the Dwell mag article that features the Glidehouse, it outlines both the prefab and site built homes. I can't recall the details, but I remember being not surprised by the outcome, and didn't really think it was a fair comparison between the two.
If you're going to build a standard home over and over, I wonder what you could do to perfect it's process in the field. I would think after constructing a few, you could tweak the design to minimize waste, streamline the construction schedule, etc..
Prefabricated Residences & Generic Tract Housing
I recently attended a presentation made by Michele Kaufman in Tampa about archieving more sustainable housing through prefabrication. During her presentation I couldn't help but think that although she is developing a product which maybe customized to suite specific needs of clients, how is this any different than a whole neighborhood full of houses designed the same way with the same finishes, basically the same as an suburb with the same ford taurus and docker pants. Is it possible to get away from the connotation of generic architecture when using prefabrication? Would it be completely out of the question to suggest that there is no difference at all from tract housing, other than its a little more treehugger.
I honestly believe that regardless of what housing product is being supplied, that there will always be someone out there willing to purchase. So, my stance is that there is no difference.
i was at the same presentation... to a certain degree i agree with you... but i don't think that she was advocating creating neighborhoods of the identical house repeated over and over again... it would be more like a neighborhood with a few ford tauruses, a few honda accords, some toyota camrys, maybe a porsche or two... for instance each of her "product lines" (glidehouse, sunset breezehouse, mkSolaire) has a variety of floor plans available... in a way it is just like going to a typical single family residential developer and picking one of their 5 floor plans... however, i think that there is a much higher quality of design...
however, i was much more interested in how she is starting to use modular construction in urban multifamily projects...
by the way, for everyone else, here's her website
We've been discussing this ad nauseaum in studio atm. My Opinion: Common Housing for Common People. (Note, i consider myself common, i.e. working class, there ain't nothing wrong with that). If you look back through history, the plebs have always lived in cookie-cutter style housing from roman apartments to McMansions, while the rich have enjoyed custom made homes. With current technology (alot of it relating to pre-fab), the working class has at its disposal the means to create more custom homes, yet we/they don't for the reason that human beings tend to organize themselves in groups. Your friend gets a McMansion, you want one too, etc. I think this is the reason why alot of these pre-fab prototypes i've been researching have been total commercial failures, whereas the standard double-wide performs very well from a commerical prospective.
That said, I feel mass customization can be easily realized through some form of pre-fab but going down that road looks mighty tricky if you want to make a business venture out of it.
here's the thing about prefab housing and housing for the common man in general. when you look at dwell or prefab proposals by architects you are not truly looking at prefab manufactured housing as the industry looks at it. ie the arci-dwell solutions usually include engineered structural beams etc. which the prefab industry wants to avoid.
it will be interesting to watch michelle kaufman over the next few years to see how successful she is with her "product line" homes... she must be doing OK so far since they just purchased their own production warehouse outside of seattle... either that or she has some serious money behind her from somewhere...
The concept of sustainable design is good, but how well can it work at the price point it's at? The Glidehouse is $185 - $250 per s.f. That just seems pricey for what you're getting.
To me, looking at the photos, visualizing it without their furnishings, it doesn't look much different than a mobile home. It's simply a drywall box with a wall of windows and a sloped roof. And the interior ceiling just looks cheap. Slap on some metal panels and a wood porch for effect, and there you go. That's one of the biggest problems here for me - it's forms just look too similar to a mobile homes. Granted, I'm sure this is built to a much higher standard.
It's such a simple and plain design, can it really be worth the $140 per s.f. factory cost plus the shipping cost (using their Vancouver to Seattle example, 2 containers at $3000 each = $6000 total.) You can still build on site rather efficiently, it just takes some preplanning. I bet there are plenty of contractors who could frame this house up a lot cheaper.
Modular is going to have to offer a lower cost differential over site built to make it work.
What a good thread! I almost missed it.
I am very interested to see if pre-fab housing can be developed such that it includes REAL progress towards sustainable building practices, not just in manufacturing. I.e., including renewable energy, etc.
Either way, I think this is a better option than the current tract housing because of all the usual reasons, but also because the construction quality of those buildings is so poor.
ProjectNorth, do you think one could build a custom site-built house with the aesthetic appearance of the Glidehouse for $200/sf? I certainly think it's possible but in my experience it would take a contractor willing to try something new and not charge out the wazoo for it!
Liberty Bell, I'm sure that one could the same for less than $200 s.f.
Part of my point though is that the house really isn't that "custom."
It's a wood framed box with a sloped ceiling, a metal panel skin, and lots of glass on one side. The interior is very basic - nothing out of the ordinary in there. There's nothing there that's complicated to build.
I just don't see the value. At least in the Glidehouse. Some of the other work appears more promising, though.
the value, for architects anyway, is that it increases the possibility that people might have an architect-designed house instead of a builder/developer house. purely selfish, i know, but it'd be nice if architects were involved in more than, oh, what, 1.5% of house projects.
When you get to the crux of the problem, its not such an easy question to answer. The sole beauty of prefab is that its economic if you mass produce, however if you mass produce how is it any different than tract housing with the ford tauruses. For Architphil which appearantly was really impressed with Michelle Kaufman, her process isn't economic enough to be produced to mass public. Her clients are still the bad wagon sustainablites that can afford 180 or more per square foot. I do applaude her for her effort though.
I truly believe that in order for there to be enough housing prototypes to become affordable to average working joes with my income or similar, a prefab market needs to be address. On the other hand, to create the variety the market needs its too expensive to create so many different combinations of manufactured parts.
I think what hasn't been noted is the "Henry Ford Factor". Production efficiency is critical to the success and economic advantage of these homes, Most prefab plants won't even tool up there facilities unless you do a run of 20 homes min. that's where speed and economics hit a critical mass. Factory built at one off at a time will always be comparable to what a good site built home will cost and be comparable in quality. The quality goes up if you live in a region where building year round is problematic and you can avoid rain / snow / cold, certainly the control within a factory will tend to be a little better as well.
Quality is relative too, are you tlaking door hardware or framing techniques because quality hardware is simply an upgrade, but dry building conditions with reduced moisture content, fully dry framing materials that produce straight walls and reduced long term shrinkage in the framing would really be considered a quality aspect particularly when you see hoe most tract housing is produced.
I think what hasn't been noted is the "Henry Ford Factor". Production efficiency is critical to the success and economic advantage of these homes, Most prefab plants won't even tool up there facilities unless you do a run of 20 homes min. that's where speed and economics hit a critical mass. Factory built at one off at a time will always be comparable to what a good site built home will cost and be comparable in quality. The quality goes up if you live in a region where building year round is problematic and you can avoid rain / snow / cold, certainly the control within a factory will tend to be a little better as well.
Quality is relative too, are you tlaking door hardware or framing techniques because quality hardware is simply an upgrade, but dry building conditions with reduced moisture content, fully dry framing materials that produce straight walls and reduced long term shrinkage in the framing would really be considered a quality aspect particularly when you see hoe most tract housing is produced.
regarding the cost issue... part of her presentation included a comparison between her own glidehouse, which was site constructed, and a glidehouse built for a client, which was "modularized"... both were built at roughly the same time... the client was moved in before her house was complete and for cheaper too...
total construction time on the modular version took only 4 months, while total construction time on the site built version took 14 months... that's pretty impressive (assuming the numbers aren't distorted in some manner for marketing/sales purposes)...
non-site construction costs for modular were about 25% less than site built... again assuming that there is no marketing "funny business" going on, that's pretty impressive...
here's the link to the part of her website that discusses this case study...
also, i agree with ProjectNorth that the design of the glidehouse is certainly not anything earthshattering... but i have a difficult time believing that you could build anything nicer (with the same quality of finishes and attention to detail) for $200/SF with a typical site built contractor... but that really depends on what part of the country we're talking about... in CA, NY, or FL $200/SF is not really very much for a custom/semicustom home... michelle even admitted that it probably doesn't make much economic sense in the flyover states where construction costs are much lower and shipping costs would be inflated...
man, i sound like a MKD cheerleader... i'm done now...
I'm not trying to be/sound too pessimistic about the Glidehouse, and I'm not trying to say that I don't like the appearance of it, either. I do think it's pretty neat.
I do live in the midwest, where no doubt construction costs are less then the coastal states. We're able to design custom, high end contemporary homes here in the $200 s.f. range. And that's nicely detailed with high end finishes.
I just had a builder do my own house, a custom home, for $106 s.f.
Check out the Dwell mag article that features the Glidehouse, it outlines both the prefab and site built homes. I can't recall the details, but I remember being not surprised by the outcome, and didn't really think it was a fair comparison between the two.
If you're going to build a standard home over and over, I wonder what you could do to perfect it's process in the field. I would think after constructing a few, you could tweak the design to minimize waste, streamline the construction schedule, etc..
I am completely missing the appeal of prefab when they can't get the cost down below (low end) custom home prices...
What is the advantage??
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.