Most modular housing in the US is double- and triple-wide houses that look exactly like what they are. Boring, simple layouts, ugly roof lines, clearly going for efficiency over any kind of style. And the construction quality isn't magic, despite them being put together on an assembly line. They're subject to the same cost-cutting as every other mass produced item.
I think manufactured homes would be more palatable if they stick-built certain parts of them. The big one being the roof. Instead of the low overhang, low slope design that works well for transport, ship them as roofless boxes and then do the roof on-site.
Of course, the problem with that is that a manufactured home isn't -that- much cheaper when you're done, so any kind of manual labor to make it prettier will close that gap quickly.
All McMansions are ultimately delivered on a bunch of trailers. It's just a matter of how much of it is pre-assembled. But I understand what you are saying, it looks more impressive to have it built onsite instead of having a handful of large pieces trucked in and dropped in place.
There are also HOA regulations that empower the HOA board to reject builds. These boards tend to be conservative with building types. Many of these regulations are in place to keep the value of surrounding homes.
they are deeply conservative but saying that regulations are in place for the purpose of keeping home values is reaching. In my experience, there are a lot of HOA directors who are just control freaks who just want to lock everything down to prevent change.
> they are deeply conservative but saying that regulations are in place for the purpose of keeping home values is reaching.
That is a common stated goal by HOA officers used when I inquired about building alternative structures in a HOA when looking for land. Also preserving uniformity is a common reason.
I agree that there are underlying motivations, but I'm not sure what they are. It could be driven by some sort of underlying social contract that was established with the HOA or some fear of the neighborhood getting out of hand or diminishing in prestige if someone puts up a Yurt, Geodesic Dome, or a Tiny Home. A common constraint is forbidding habitation within a RV & minimum livable square footage & footprint. Contractors benefit from these rules as a minimum square footage is more expensive to build. It would be interesting to see some research into the underlying rationale of these administrators.
The modular housing industry isn't doing anything to solve that stigma. They are cheaper, they also cut a lot of corners that regular site built houses do not.
I think manufactured homes would be more palatable if they stick-built certain parts of them. The big one being the roof. Instead of the low overhang, low slope design that works well for transport, ship them as roofless boxes and then do the roof on-site.
Of course, the problem with that is that a manufactured home isn't -that- much cheaper when you're done, so any kind of manual labor to make it prettier will close that gap quickly.