Jetson Green - Latest Comments in Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Michael — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:33:15 -0000

An opinion not fact. Storm hit areas in the south would prove you wrong with one exception in the studies. Single Wides. Just not enough cross bracing.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Coy Coleman — Mon, 15 Dec 2014 07:49:25 -0000

The more attractive ones are $180K to $380K. The rest are slapped together with staples. They look really nice but are of poor construction.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Proud Deplorable ☆ ᵀᴿᵁᴹᴾ — Fri, 05 Sep 2014 23:36:28 -0000

Regardless of his title, the article is factual. Comparing the cost of building your own car from parts as opposed to buying the complete car is misleading and irrelevant. That's NOT the same thing. Do some research and you'll find that MODERN prefab homes are VERY expensive per square foot. $300 - 400 psf is the norm. That's WAY more than a site-built home costs.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Proud Deplorable ☆ ᵀᴿᵁᴹᴾ — Fri, 05 Sep 2014 23:30:12 -0000

The author is talking about MODERN prefab architecture, not gussied-up sheds. Let us know when you find a prefeb company offering MODERN designs for that price.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Chris — Mon, 18 Nov 2013 19:24:28 -0000

About Method Homes being affordable... We went by the numbers on their site and it was doable. When we emailed them, they said it would be 225 pzSF. We emailed again to ask about the details that raised the cost and did not get a response. To bad, we were really enthused about their home. Our max budget was 550,000 for lot and everything. The home was around 2,000 square feet and totally undoable. We found the same results when contacting other prefab companies.
Another thing we noticed was that many companies had some pictures of only one or two homes they actually built. If volumes are low, then they need to make all their profits on the house they actually build.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

super_openid — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 22:34:14 -0000

Wood is a poor insulator compared to other common insulators: http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Fiberglass batting has about 3 times more insulating ability than soft wood. Hard wood is on par with snow, snow being a BETTER insulator than hard wood.

Snow. That's right: snow.

To compare, soft wood has an R-value of R-1.4, hard wood is R-0.7. Snow is about R-1, fiberglass batts about R-4, and a vacuum panel is R-30 - R-50, more than 25 times better than wood. Carboard is R-3.5.

Fiberglass numbers come from Johns Manville Insulation: http://www.jm.com
Wood numbers come from the U.S. Department of Energy.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Bud Wood — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:16:24 -0000

We just sold our residence so have been looking at PreFab. They seem rather "pricey" for what one gets. The hybrid homes sound interesting.
I self-contracted two homes. Each seemed to have taken several months but certainly not 12.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Mike — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 10:42:23 -0000

Well, in response to this article, these beautiful prefab homes come in around $155 p/SF. They are really nice, roomy and beautifully designed with very nice finishes. So, I guess this is one company that would prove this article totally invalid. http://methodhomes.net/cott...

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Preston — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:45:01 -0000

Izabela, keep in mind this article is nearly 4 years old. The world of prefab has evolved significantly in that time. I wouldn't necessarily foreclose the option of prefab these days with the proliferation of new companies and new options.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Izabela Wojcik — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 22:06:49 -0000

Hi Chad! Excellent review! I'm an ornamental metalwork and lighting designer in Dallas, and one of the builders I work with brought in a client today. We ended up chatting about pre-fab homes, because one of the latest homes he'd worked on was a pre-fab. He did mention that the cost is almost the same and I have had the idea of a contemporary pre-fab home for myself for quite a while now, so I thought I'd look into the matter. From what I've been finding, you're right on the money! I was sad, but what can I do... keep waiting till something better comes along I guess:)
Again, thanks for the excellent article.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

N_bakunda — Wed, 16 May 2012 21:30:15 -0000

I've always wanted to build my own home... there is something rather vulgar about living in a cookie cut subdivision, and while i know prefab is more or less the same thing - i mean there is someone out there with the exact same house- it appeals to me because of the other advantages, like common sense living areas (who needs 3 baths?) and the green factor! But they are exorbitant. I thought the point was to save on energy costs and waste, not make up for it in the cost of actually getting the thing. Its horrible. But only in the US. In China for instance, there are a number of companies that are selling prefab units about $100/sqft. They are functional, and meet the purpose of not spending $232,000 on a 1000sqft of house. Its embarrasing. green is supposed to the natural choice... not the luxury option! Good read...

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Applebad — Sun, 04 Mar 2012 19:41:30 -0000

wood is a poor insulator .....
lolz

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Joe — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 21:16:18 -0000

I am an architect, but I also have a builder license. I designed several custom modular homes and built a few of them.
a. The modular homes are affordable: They are cheaper to produce. The factories are selling the homes to third party builders and they are establishing their own prices to the costumers. But they can drop the price because the product is cheaper including the crane and the overhead.
b. They producing less waste: Yes they are. Visit a factory and compare it to a job site. Yes, they have to reinforce certain areas, compare it with lumber sizes calculated by lumberyards or guessed by builders.
c. Less time: Yes, much less time. They can build and set a 6,000 SF home in a month, the builder can finish it in five month. It is correct that the design and the pre-construction will take another six month, but this would be the same with a stick build project if you want a good design.
d. Less green: No difference. Each type of construction can be as green as you want them to be.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

lavardera — Wed, 18 May 2011 19:52:40 -0000

correction to Mr. Howes, Mr. Ludeman is not an architect, but rather a developer and builder.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

GregHowesBuilderFabricator — Mon, 16 May 2011 15:34:09 -0000

On May 11 McGraw-Hill released a very comprehensive study on Prefabrication and Modularization. The report is very comprehensive and based on surveys of people in the industry. It is also free.

http://construction.com/mar...

Also bear in mind that the majority of the wood-framed, high-performance (green based on actual performance metrics as opposed to a checklist) buildings certified as passive house (more than 30,000 buildings in total) were prefabricated. This data from the director of the Passive House Institute, Wolfgang Feist.

Also, the majority of the wood-framed buildings constructed to the strict Swiss Minergie standard (20,000+ buildings) are also prefabricated. Data from Reudi Kriesi, co-founder of the Minergie Union.

As a builder/fabricator with experience on more than 1,000 fabrication projects in 10 countries, our perspective is based on decades of experience. We are also so busy we can't begin to keep up with demand.

For more info read Ryan Smith's new book on "Prefab Architecture"
http://amzn.to/jM8nmq

or Colin Davies' classic, "The Prefabricated Home"
http://amzn.to/kCSbCb

An innovative idea: In any discussion of fabrication it would be good to include fabricators and not only architects.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Erica — Sun, 23 May 2010 19:25:13 -0000

I was seriously wondering about that statistic as well. I've been involved in several stick-building projects now and none of them have taken fewer than 12 months - which has been one of the singular attractions to me of prefabricated homes. The ease of working with a single group of people, rather than the mess that is typically a hired builder who subcontracts most of the time is well worth paying the same, or slightly more, than a house built from the ground up. The prefab homes that have attracted me though, are from www.bambooliving.com - houses constructed almost entirely out of bamboo - a highly sustainable resource.

Also, consider the cost of shipping a complete home, versus the cost of shipping all of the individual pieces of that home to the same location.

The article brings up some good points, but there are too many factors not accounted for.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Geoffrey — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 15:57:21 -0000

I disagree with the blanket statement that site built takes 4-5 months. The only houses I've ever seen go up that quickly are the lowest grade turn-and-burn builder houses with completely conventional systems typically seen in Philadelphia.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

poletrailersforsale — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:39:08 -0000

Interesting insight! Thanks for sharing!

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

alan scouten — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:42:47 -0000

Almost everything said here is untrue. I built my 4,000 square foot SIMPLE (Structural Insulated Metal Panel Living Environment) house in Charlottesville, VA (2002) for under $100 per square foot. It is presently appraised for $600,000 dollars. www.shelterusnow.com

A House is worth a thousand words....Check it out.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

EllieB — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 04:58:41 -0000

You realize that you made yourself look like an idiot and therefore caused yourself to lose all credibility in the fact that you compared apples and oranges. You said that they dont generate less waste because they use more raw materials and you can recycle 90% of the waste you produce. But, they create less waste on site, so they need more raw materials and because they recycle what they dont use, there is no "90%" its much closer to 100%. And it's also greener because there is less gas wasted lugging the materials to the site and lugging the remainder away.

And about your insulation bit, most companies you structural insulation. This is a foam product that fits in each panel and does NOT move. It also has a higher r-factor than other products.

As far as your cost comparisons, I challenge you to show me proof of the exact houses being completed at 150$ with the same materials being used. It doesnt count if you can build it cheaper with cheaper products. The average cost of materials for an average home is 200-250$ per square foot. And that's IF everything is made properly and it's all on time. If it's not it can easily jump to 300-400$ per square foot.

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Matthew K — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:13:19 -0000

Are you all kidding me!? This guy is a builder, hence the PreFab industry gives him NO work. He builds stick houses! So you mean to tell me that I can take a manufactured car and buy it from a dealer for more than I can buy all of the separate parts and components and build it myself? NO. And also what he's saying with "Hybrid" so now you don't only have the overhead of the factory for prefab, which is absolutely expected, but you have the overhead of his pockets, the panels you buy company, shippers, installers, carpenters, catch my drift? Whereas the prefab is all upfront and know the cost.. If your going to let this change your mind on PreFab go ahead and be influenced by someone who is completely biased. Look at his job title! I'm still going to prefab

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Joseph Guerrero — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 14:54:14 -0000

Hello Chad,
I have found your article very informative, particularly in pointing out the differences between the MODULAR, PRE-FAB & HYBRID.
As a fan of CLASSIC MODERN ARCHITECTURE I am not concerned about the "regular/average" homes, but my focus is strictly with the (ECOHOMES)modernist pre-fab designers such as MARMOL RADZINER, FREEGREEN (the view box greenhome), LIVINGHOMES (RK1, RK2, RK4, RK5). & ROCIO ROMERO.
My intention is to do projects here in Arizona with such products and/or use an architect builder such as MICHAEL P. JOHNSON for the larger custom homes.
I appreciate your take on the pre-fab/modular homes, and you are certainly more experienced on the topic than I, would it be possible to get your oppinion on the above builders of said products? you are more knowledgable than I on this topic and it would help me tremendously.
I am in Real estate, in land aquisition and development (put sub-divisions together) and with a group of investors want to build CLASSIC MODERN HOMES (GREEN), for both, the more affluent that will downsize and for the lower brackets a simpler affordable highly efficient dwelling (GREEN).
Please advice,
I thank you in advance.
Joseph Guerrero RE/MAX EXCALIBUR Scottsdale Az. 602 740-1132
I am also an artist; Joseph Breton

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

Norman Solomon — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:38:57 -0000

Wow, this was by far (Chad Ludemen's article) the most informative (and accurate) assessment of so-called modular or pre-fab homes. I just completed extensive research on modulars and can vouch for virtually every item mentioned.I am not a builder or architect, rather, a potential buyer looking for an innovative approach to building a small house. 25 years ago we built a "hybrid" house in Switzerland which utilized incredibly advanced SIP type panels. I suspect that the SIP panels readily available today could make very useful "building blocks" in designing a home especially in Vermont.
Norman Solomon, Brookline, Vermont

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

John W. — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 09:52:40 -0000

I'm sorry, the proper title of the book is "Modular Architecture Manual".

Re: Prefab is Not the Answer to Affordable, Modern, and Green Homes

John W. — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 09:50:44 -0000

Avi,

You're the only one here that 'gets it'. If the current interest in prefab constructions goes the way of all those in the past, so fascinatingly chronicled in the MoMA show (6th floor travelling exhibit gallery), you'll have blogs such as this, Dwell magazine, Metropolis magazine, Residential Architect magazine, Architect magazine, etc. to blame- and they'll absolutely BE to blame. Prefabrication is about P R O C E S S, and not about product. Any method will result in product, but if you're really interested in prefabrication and what it has to offer not only the housing industry but all occupyable structure history, you'll have to understand this critical distinction. Kullman clearly understands this, and its work demonstrates this repeatedly. In their excellent 2003 book, "refabricating Architecture", Kieren and Timberlake slam this point home over and over again, and if those who gush over glossy pictures of a Marmol Radnizer or Jennifer Siegal project would try, in earnest, to understand this, then perhaps prefabrication will survive the stupidity and ignorance that has killed all the past iterations chronicled at the MoMA show that ended in October.