I have to be honest with you, I’m getting tired of prefab. It’s not that I want to destroy the rain forests or make you take more trips in your Hummer to get building supplies from Home Depot, but rather I’m fed up with hearing how pre-made housing is the way of the future. Everywhere you look it’s uber-stylish to the point of being excessive, which ultimately makes this environmental savior cost prohibitive for mass adoption by the general population. Let’s ponder a past project to gain some much needed perspective on the perilous path of prefab.
The Venturo CF-45 was a revolutionary prefab offering from 1971, “designed for pleasure” with a Finnish pine Sauna, modern Scandinavian furnishings and compact kitchenette. With all the trappings of prefab, architect Matti Suuronen described it as “a modular, easily transportable building system, designed for on site assembly.” The open concept main living space has wall to wall windows, which let’s occupants be at one with their surroundings.
Retailing for approximately $20,000 plus shipping and installation costs, the Venturo started the modern day trend of prefab being inherently more expensive than traditional housing. Combined with the 1973 oil crisis, which raised production costs of plastic too high to be profitable, and ultimately impaired Venturo’s viability. Present prices of simple pre-made options range from $60,000 for the m-ch to $200,000 for the TK iT House. Add on delivery, installation, service hookup, and a plot of land and you’re no further ahead financially. This begs the question, can today’s pre-fab alternatives offer savings to consumers while remaining profitable for manufacturers? Or are they destined to share the same fate as the Venturo?
