It is now almost 80 years since the Housing (Temporary Accommodation) Act enabled the construction of the post-war prefab, but controversies and concerns about building a home in a factory have run deep ever since. While practically every other item we buy rolls off a production line, housebuilding’s transition to the factory remains, for many reasons, problematic. — RIBA Journal
With the rise of automation and advances in building manufacturing, architects have considered if machines can replace the profession. However, makes the job so rewarding is thinking of new and creative ways to execute ideas. This level of creativity and design distinction is something architects argue towards replacement by automation alone. However, in the UK, architects are learning to reassess their relationships with manufacturers and understand the silver lining in mass standardization. In 1944 the Housing (Temporary Accommodation) Act was passed by the British Parliament as a response to providing families with homes after World War II. Several decades later, the housing market is forcing architects to acquire new perspectives when it comes to manufacturing and how new relationships could foster better results.
According to Josephine Smit of the RIBA Journal, "with a skills shortage, a push from government and impetus from the build to rent sector, manufacturers and offsite schemes are growing and a few housebuilders, like Berkeley Group, are setting up their own modular factories." Throughout her piece Smit continues by adding, "that offsite opportunity is evolving as the market develops, with designer-maker alliances forming to deliver serial projects or branded house concepts. These new relationships can change the way architects work."
No Comments
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.