Why Prefab Failed... Again

As a concept, prefabricated housing seems to make so much sense that it's a wonder why all houses aren't built with prefab techniques and methods. I thought the prefab manufacturing methods had finally reached a level of efficiency that would enable mass customization, but it was brought to my attention just last week, that one of the most well-known players in the prefab housing industry was shuttering its doors. So what happened? By Ivy Chuang

By: Ivy Chuang, Published: Jun 16, 2009

Michelle Kaufmann's Glidehouse.

Ivy Chuang, Knoend.
Ivy Chuang, Knoend.

It was brought to my attention just last week, that one of the most well-known players in the prefab housing industry was shuttering its doors. After five years, Michell Kaufmann Designs was closing shop. I met Michelle Kaufmann once years ago at the Commonweatlth Club in San Francisco when she had just started her business and was showcasing her first projects as a speaker. At the time, prefab architecture firms were just beginning to sprout.


The Eames House.

As a concept, prefabricated housing seems to make so much sense that it's a wonder why all houses aren't built with prefab techniques and methods. The prime example of the prefabricated house that sticks out in my mind is the Eames House (above). As part of Art & Architecture magazine's Case Study House Program, The Eames House was originally designed in 1945 and built and completed 1948-1949. The rectangular steel-framed house was originally designed by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen but was later significantly modified during construction by Charles and Ray Eames for whom the house was studio and home. The house utilized prefabricated industrial materials including steel, glass, asbestos, and cemesto board.

In Eames Demetrios' An Eames Primer, Ray Eames summed up their intention of utilizing manufacturing technologies: "It was the idea of using materials in a different way, materials that could be brought from a catalog. So that there was a continuation of the idea of mass production, so that people would not have to build stick by stick, but with material that comes ready-made-off-the-shelf in that sense."

The Case Study House program ended in 1965, though each of the houses built were suppose to be affordable models of duplication, in the end, no two houses were alike, and none were massively replicated.

When I saw Michelle Kaufmann speak in 2005, I thought that the market was finally ready. I thought the prefab manufacturing methods had finally reached a level of efficiency that would enable the mass customization that Ray Eames had spoke of so many years ago. With the amount of prefab firms cropping up, I was sure the time was ripe, and for all the right reasons.

So what happened?

There were quite a few reasons Michelle Kaufmann was "on the ropes" according to TreeHugger.

But here's my add-on theory...

The percentage of people that will buy land, and design and build a house themselves is very small. Most people choose to buy existing houses because the majority of people do not want to wait or deal with the complications of design and construction of a home, and in addition, they are not that creative nor do they want to be. Present somebody with a blank canvas and they're not sure where to start, but show them an empty house and they can imagine living in it. It is much easier for people to visualize space when it is already built.

I was sure that prefab was the future a few years back, but now when I ask myself the question: if I had land and money to build a house, would I really choose prefab? The answer, despite my preferences for sustainability, is probably not. And why not? Somehow I feel restricted by the pre-designed concept, I feel as if I'd be ordering to build a house from Legos. It may be that I haven't educated myself thoroughly on the possibilities of prefab, but for the time being, this is my instinctual reaction.

So, too intimidating for the uncreative, too restrictive for the creative, couple that with a crappy economy, and there goes prefab. If the time and cost savings were truly what prefab claimed it could deliver, then maybe there was a chance. As it was, without economies of scale, these savings did not manifest, and when the credit crunch hit, the financing fell through and gave a final blow.

I think there are some other companies out there still fighting the fight; maybe another comeback is due down the line.

***

Ivy Chuang is the founder and design director of Knoend, a San Francisco-based studio with sustainability and innovation at its core. She is a nomad, surfer, cook and occasional artist.
4 Comments: By cypherzeros June 17th, 2009 10:50:15 am

I think cost also plays a factor. I love the idea of pre-fab, but I'm not sure if I would be willing to go that route. A home is an investment. And like any big investment, people don't like risk - real or perceived. If I was really wealthy and could afford to make a mistake, then I'd be willing to take the chance. Most people don't fall into that category. Whatever they buy/build is what they will have to live with for a long time.

But then I guess it's a catch-22 situation, because most really wealthy people that could afford to make a mistake probably prefer to design their own and dismiss pre-fab as cookie-cutter and impersonal.

It's a hard barrier to break.

By lillikatt June 17th, 2009 12:07:36 pm

Though I love modern prefab architecture, I realize that it is a niche market. In addition to what you've noted, I believe the majority of Americans do not find modern design aesthetically pleasing. They don't understand or value it's beauty. There is also a stigma attached to prefab architecture that will take a long time to overcome. False information about the quality of prefab architecture lingers, further tainting people's view.

For lovers of modern home design, there are not many affordable options. While a custom-designed stick built modern home can cost $400-500 per square foot, a custom-designed prefab house can be built for as little as $250 per square foot. For people with higher budgets, the efficiency of prefab architecture allows more money to be invested in high-end materials and environmentally friendly modifications.

We looked into building our own modern prefab home a couple years ago, and realized that most firms would not even build a home in the Midwest. Many modern prefab architecture firms are restricted by location. Michelle Kaufmann, for example, services only five states in the West.

The design options of many prefab architecture firms, like the Wee House and LV homes, were too limiting for us. Of the modern design prefab architecture firms that I researched, Resolution 4 Architecture was our favorite. The dozens of unique home designs are just a starting point for design. Each home is unique and custom. http://re4a.com/

We love modern architecture, but for us, modern prefab was still out of our price range. We still hope to someday build our own.

By ivychuang June 18th, 2009 05:27:42 pm

In writing this post I bumped around some of the links I included and found from 1908%u20131940, Sears, Roebuck and Co. sold about 70,000 - 75,000 homes through their mail-order Modern Homes program. And the styling of them weren't "modern" at all - have a look - http://www.searsarchives.com/homes/index.htm Well maybe, modern at the time.

The website doesn't tell us why the program was discontinued - we can only assume that it wasn't profitable enough. But if michelle kaufmann could have built and sold 100 homes in the time since she founded her company, she would still be going - in total, her company built 40 homes.

We're comparing apples to oranges here, but the Sears Archive is definitely an intriguing slice of history, definitely worth a visit.

By iamnatedavis July 24th, 2009 02:12:34 pm

Ivy,
I think your point about most people being uncomfortable with the prospect of designing their own home is very perceptive, and applies not only to the stillbirth of the prefab movement, but also (conversely) to the kudzu-like growth of prefab's bigger, dumber cousin, housing developments. Of course, to dovetail with what lillikatt pointed out, the prevalence of modern design in the prefab world also excludes many potential customers; while so many of these places look drool-worth in a glossy feature in dwell, how many of us can imagine living in places like that? I'd be curious, though, to learn if prefab homes are more common in Scandanavia, for example, where modern design seems more the rule than the exception.

Email a friend