Modular Construction: Design Considerations and Opportunities

Vikrom Laovisutthichai 1*, Weisheng Lu 2, and Fan Xue 3

This is the authors’ pre-print version (before peer review) of the paper:
Laovisutthichai, V., Lu, W., & Xue, F. (2020). Modular construction: design
considerations and opportunities. Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on
Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate (CRIOCM2020), Springer,
in press. Outstanding Paper Award.

This file is shared for personal and academic use only, under the license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
(Non-Commercial, No Derivatives, and with an Attributed citation when you
use). The final published version of this paper can be found at:
[LINK_TO_SPRINGERLINK]. Any uses other than personal and academic purposes must
obtain appropriate permissions from Springer first.

Abstract: The realization of Modular Construction (MC) is impeded by several barriers, e.g.,
initial investment, logistics constraints, and negative perception. Design, a profoundly
creative process to alleviate difficulties in the built environment, is prospected to enhance this
construction method. Under this circumstance, many guidelines, recommendations, and
avoidances have been proposed to design. However, every coin has two sides. This research,
therefore, argues that MC also provides new design opportunities, which have not been yet
extensively investigated. It does so by comprehensive literature review and detailed archival
study of successful case studies. The result unveils that although MC, by nature, may impose
several design limitations, e.g., design simplification, standardization, and limited dimension,
it can also serve demands and construct an outstanding architectural design by, for example, a
composition of three-dimensional unit, mass customization, and product prototype. This
research creates a balanced view of MC in a design process, and highlights the new approach
for further design and research development in this discipline.

1*Laovisutthichai Vikrom
Corresponding author, Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
E-mail: Vikrom@hku.hk
2Weisheng Lu
Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
3Fan Xue
Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
 Keywords: Modular Construction; Architectural Design; Design for Excellence; Design for
Manufacturing and Assembly.

1 1 Introduction

2 Modular Construction (MC) is an innovative construction method, basically comprising the

3 room-sized free-standing integrated units manufacturing in a factory-like environment,
4 logistics, and installation to form an architecture [1, 2]. These units are preassembled with
5 finishes, fixtures, and fittings to minimize work in-situ [3]. If comparing this prefinished
6 volumetric unit to the other prefabricated products, MC is classified a high level of
7 prefabrication [4]. This construction method has been applied to many building types,
8 especially in cellular-type building, including hotels, student dormitory, governmental
9 building, and social housing [5].

10 MC is becoming more widely used, since it has offered numerous advantages to the
11 industry. They include quality improvement [6], construction time reduction [5, 7],
12 productivity enhancement [8], workforce safety [9], and waste minimization [5, 10]. In spite
13 of these various benefits, MC also experiences criticism. The method implementation in the
14 real-world cases is undermined by, for example, the significant investment on the production
15 line establishment [11], and transportation regulations and constraints [12]. In addition, this
16 modernized construction process and machinery need an experienced workforce and
17 technician for operation [13]. These shifts in the procedures also require more attempts from
18 stakeholders and alterations in construction practices [14]. Moreover, there is a somewhat
19 stereotypical perception in the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry, or
20 even the general public that architectural design is limited by the drawbacks of MC [15, 16].

21 Many efforts have already been made to support this innovative construction realization.
22 Design, as an initiation process shaping the following activities [17], is currently prospected
23 to be a new faith to alleviate MC difficulties. In such circumstance, organizations and
24 researchers worldwide provide MC design requirements, recommendations, lessons,
25 instructions, and practice examples for practitioners [18-20]. Nonetheless, everything has two
26 sides. While design considerations and avoidances for MC have been extensively studied,
27 the new design possibilities occurred from MC have not been widely debated in the previous
28 research.

29 This paper, therefore, aims to explore both benefits and limitations of MC to an

30 architectural design process. It is also expected to highlight new design opportunities, derived
31 from MC, for the further design and research development. This is achieved by reviewing
32 literature and revisiting successful case studies. The remainder of this paper consists of four
33 sections. Section 2 provides the background information of MC and architectural design. It is
34 followed by the research methods adopted. Section 4 displays the design considerations and
35 prospects, distinguished in this study. Finally, it reaches the discussion and conclusion parts.

36 2 Literature Review

37 2.1 Modular Construction

38 Modular Construction (MC), sometimes called volumetric prefabricated construction, refers

39 to a construction process of prefinished 3D unit assembly to be a part of or create the whole
40 building [1, 2]. In general, MC consists of three main stages. It begins with manufacturing in
41 a factory-like environment. This system borrows the concept of the production line, the
42 industrial workstation, and repetitive duties, to reduce the amount of work in-situ [21]. Then,
43 a wide range of such modules, from basic structure to fully furnished units, are transported to
44 construction sites for assembly. Finally, all modules are installed, and structural, mechanical,
45 electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems are connected to form buildings [2]. The method
46 current application includes student accommodations, hotels, hospitals, and governmental
47 buildings [5].

48 Gibb [4] provides a taxonomy of such units: Level 0 A system uses zero forms of
49 prefabricated units; Level 1 Component and sub-assembly (e.g., lintels); Level 2 Non-
50 volumetric assembly such as 2D precast concrete wall panels or tie beams without usage
51 space enclosed; Level 3 Volumetric assembly such as kitchen, bathroom, utility rooms with
52 usable space enclosed; and Level 4 Modular building like a living unit with full usable space
53 enclosed and some utilities installed. If sticking to the above definition, MC can be
54 considered in Levels 3 or 4 in Gibbs’ taxonomy, representing a higher level of sophistication
55 in terms of production, transportation, and assembly.

56 The characteristics of MC offers numerous advantages to the industry. For example,

57 product quality improvement is given by the factory-like environment in the production line
58 [6]. It makes a variety of actions in construction more repetitive, controllable, and reliable,
59 and contributes to an accurate monitoring system and immediate inspection. Secondly, the
60 settings of MC provide labourers with a safe working environment and reduce their risky
61 behaviours. The number of accidents can be decreased by 80% if adopting MC [5, 9]. Its
62 production line system also boosts the construction productivity by a process revitalization
63 and efficient project schedule [8]. Furthermore, construction waste management gains several
64 benefits from the natures of volumetric prefabrication. It is able to minimize waste from
65 timber formwork, plastering, and smoothening process. By using MC, solid landfill waste can
66 be decreased by 70% [5, 10]. Finally, as on-site and production line tasks can be done
67 simultaneously, it is estimated that the use of 3D unit prefabrication can decrease construction
68 time by 50% and saved 7% of the total project finance [5, 7]. For developers, the shortening
69 of time means a considerable reduction in interest charges and early return of investment
70 capital [22].

71 On the other hand, MC is also challenged by several drawbacks. Firstly, MC incurs an

72 increase of total construction cost, including the significant initial investment required for the
73 production line establishment and operational cost afterwards. Against the stereotypical view,
74 MC is more expensive than traditional cast-in-situ construction [11]. Moreover, the use of
75 machinery requires experienced technicians, labourers, and experts to handle the modernized
76 processes [13]. In addition, logistics becomes a fundamental concern in MC. One must
77 investigate transportation regulations, routes, and traffic before design, since the delivery
78 limitations directly affect the size, weight, and dimensions of modules [12]. A paradigm shift
79 in architectural design and construction professional practices is also required to implement
80 MC. Due to its restrictions, early coordination among stakeholders, and additional project
81 planning and design efforts are necessary to ensure the construction possibility, prevent the
82 risks, and facilitate the flow of the operations [14]. Finally, MC is suffering from a poor
83 image resulted from technical problems, poor workmanship, short material lifespan, and
84 building performance limitations during the first age of MC [15]. Some stakeholders rejected
85 the use of MC amid the anxieties of building aesthetics and the fear of monotony in an
86 architectural form [16].

87 During the past few decades, researchers have introduced several means to mitigate these
88 barriers, such as process supervision, computational technologies integration, construction
89 knowledge sharing, and materials and joints durability improvement [16]. Recently, the trend
90 has shifted the focus to design, as described in the following section.

91 2.2 Architectural Design

92 Design, in architecture, is generally a highly dynamic process, involving a number of

93 explorations, examinations, discussions, and determinations, to resolve difficulties in the built
94 environment [23, 24]. It handles with wide ranges of qualitative and quantitative
95 requirements, e.g., regulations, building codes, functionality, buildability, feasibility,
96 programs, sites, context, and human resources [25]. The Roman architect Vitruvius
97 articulated that the process outcome, an architecture, should be of “durability”, “utility”, and
98 “beauty”, if expressed in modern English [26]. Unlike painting or sculpture, this creative
99 process’s outcome has a huge impact, since it shapes the following activities, namely
100 manufacturing, logistics, construction, occupation, renovation, as well as demolition [17].

101 Due to the recognition of its significant, design is prospected to mitigate many
102 difficulties and enhance MC. Many recommendations are generated to encourage this
103 strategy. For instance, the Building and Construction Authority of Singapore (BCA) publishes
104 Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction (PPVC) guidebook to provide
105 fundamentals, requirements, and practical tips on how to design MC [18]. This report
106 introduces many design concerns, e.g., transportation constraints, module configuration,
107 machinery performance, and joints. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) supports
108 design for MC by giving practice examples and lessons discovered from the previous cases
109 [19]. In addition, the book, “Design in Modular Construction”, reviews the generic types of
110 modular construction, displays the application examples, and offers background information
111 for design [20]. Furthermore, previous research encourages an integrated design process and
112 early collaboration for effective design decision making [27]. Another study also highlights
113 the demand for MC design guidelines further development [28].

114 While many efforts have already been done to corroborate design suggestions and
115 avoidances, the new design opportunities, emerged from MC, have not been extensively
116 explored in the previous literature. Until now, there are many notable modular architectures
117 and successful case studies to be investigated. The new design prospects learned from these
118 cases are expected to be beneficial for designers, and finally, increase the MC adoption.

119 3 Research Methods

120 This research adopted a 3-step method to investigate both design constraints and
121 opportunities, emerged from MC, as shown in Figure 1. It started from a literature review of
122 MC definitions, advantages, and drawbacks, to understand its characteristics and current
123 circumstance. The process and significance of architectural design are also clarified in this
124 step. Then, the second step intended to explore design guidance, suggestions, limitations, as
125 well as new options, arisen from MC. This was achieved by a comprehensive literature
126 review related to architectural design and MC. At this stage, the archives of notable modular
127 architectures, e.g., records from designers, research papers, and drawings, are also revisited.
128 By using these methods, it is able to examine a complex dynamic of architectural design and
129 construction projects from a real-life context, provide an explanation, and identify the
130 causality [29]. Finally, this research analyzed the collected data, and highlighted both design
131 restrictions and possibilities, derived from MC.

132

133 Figure 1 Research Methods

134 In this paper, Nakagin Capsule Tower (NCT) and Habitat 67 were selected to be the case
135 studies. NCT, designed by Kisho Kurokawa, was studied, as it is the first successful high-rise
136 modular architecture for actual use in Japan in the early 1970s (see Figure 2) [30]. Located at
137 the centre of Tokyo, NCT is a residential building, which consists of two core structures and
138 140 fully furnished capsules. Described by the architect, NCT aims to create an architecture
139 in anticipation of a new age, achieve full mass production for living modules, and promote
140 industrialization technology in the industry [31]. Praised in the New York Times, the tower is
141 one of the notable magnificent architectures [32]. It has been recorded an architectural
142 heritage by Documentation and Conservation of Buildings, Sites, and Neighbourhoods of the
143 Modern Movement (DoCoMoMo) organization since 2006 [30].

144

145 Figure 2 Nakagin Capsule Tower (NCT) [33]

146 Habitat 67, designed by Moshe Safdie, is a prototype project for fully mass-produced
147 construction system in Montreal, Canada (see Figure 3) [34]. As the Canadian Pavilion for
148 the World Exposition in 1967, this experiment intends to indicate the construction industry
149 shortcomings and pave the way towards the new direction. Composed of 354 precast concrete
150 modules for 158 living units, the building offered high-quality housing with a variety of
151 spaces for dwellers [35]. It was also able to avoid monotony form in the dense urban
152 environment. This case is currently recognized as iconic architecture, influencing the
153 architectural design throughout the past few decades [36].

154

155 Figure 3 Habitat 67 [37]

156 4 Results

157 4.1 Design Considerations

158 After a comprehensive review of previous literature and case studies, several concerns should
159 be pondered during design to encourage MC efficiency, as described below.
160 Collaboration: Collaboration means a professional practice, which involves
161 stakeholders to work together from the project initiation until the construction completion. It
162 is recommended, since the architectural design for the modular building requires various
163 information from different stakeholders for a precise determination [27]. Both research and
164 practice agree that this approach can improve MC efficiency, prevent redesign and rework,
165 ensure the project constructability, as well as minimize waste generated during construction
166 [38-40]. The early collaboration also provides designers with a clear idea of MC and
167 maximize flexibility in design options [19]. In NCT, designers collaborated with consultants,
168 manufacturer, and main contractor during design to ensure the manufacturability,
169 transportability, and feasibility of the project [31].
170 Design standardization: This suggestion refers to the repetitive use of industrial
171 components or modules in design [38]. Based on the characteristics of a manufacturing line,
172 MC requires a larger number of repetition in design for construction feasibility [34]. In NCT,
173 It was adopted to ensure the capsule manufacturability in the container factory and enable
174 mass production in construction [40]. The architect of Habitat 67 also realized this issue and
175 applied the repetition of single standardized three-dimensional precast modules to the design.
176 However, the architecture could still provide 15 different house types by combining one, two,
177 or three modules together [34].
178 Design simplification: It is generally a design method, which aims to reduce a complex
179 design to basic forms or elements. In the mass production system, the complexity of form
180 means additional tasks, efforts, and costs. In both cases, although several choices of interior
181 design and finishing were offered, all capsule’s structure and exterior were kept to be as
182 simple as possible to support the production flow [31, 34-35].
183 Logistics constraints: Unlike the traditional in-situ construction, MC requires the
184 transportation of a large module from a manufacturing line to a construction site.
185 Transportation-related concerns should be pondered carefully from the project initiation [19].
186 They may vary, depending on a project condition, transportation route, as well as production
187 location, which can be on-site, off-site, or even off-shore [41]. The case of NCT provided a
188 practice example related to module logistics. According to the architects, the factory and
189 construction locations, transportation route, legal restrictions, stopover point, on-site storage,
190 and delivery schedule, were studied from the project initiation. The module’s design, shape,
191 weight, and dimensions, followed these restrictions to ensure the module transportability [31,
192 42].
193 Connection: Apart from logistics, a joint or connection between modules is another
194 critical element in MC. While developing a design proposal, the design team is recommended
195 to consider the joint’s manufacturing, structural system, thermal performance, water
196 penetration rate, fire resistance, as well as aesthetics. Collaboration is also suggested to assist
197 in this detailed design [19-20].

198 4.2 Design Opportunities

199 Although the concerns above could be regarded as the agents of design restrictions and shifts
200 in architectural design practice, MC also offered new design potentials. This is realized by
201 detailed archival studies of previous cases, as follows.

202 A composition of three-dimensional units: Unlike the focus on the composition of

203 planar elements in conventional construction, MC allows designers to form an architecture by
204 locating standardized volumetric modules together to create various architectural forms and
205 combinations [20]. The way to arrange these modules during design resembles the action of
206 installing prefabricated components together in construction. This is ratified by both cases. In
207 NCT, the architect recognized this opportunity, and introduced “a sum of parts” to make a
208 distinctive architectural form by the composition of the manufactured living cells [31, 38].
209 While, the form of Habitat 67 was clustered from the grouping of elements [34]. This
210 innovative design technique, together with MC, was able to meet demands and avoid
211 monotony architectural form, while the capsule’s price was still reasonable [31, 34].

212 Mass customization: Mass customization refers to “the ability to provide individually
213 designed products and services to every customer through high process flexibility and
214 integration” [43]. It is utilized as both manufacturing and business competitive strategies. In
215 construction, MC, together with this concept, can serve a variety of space required and enable
216 variations in design. In NCT, it provided eight options of interior design [44]. It allowed users
217 to express themselves by selecting or altering several standardized parts like a vehicle, e.g.,
218 interior finishing materials, colour, and alternative equipment [31]. This strategy can be
219 adopted to design outstanding architecture and increase client satisfaction.

220 Product prototyping: One of the advantages of MC is an exemplary product model from
221 original materials and structure. The capsule prototype can also be considered as a reliable
222 method to demonstrate the design ideas and engineering system to buyers. In the case of
223 NCT, the actual capsule was placed on the ground in front of the sales office to make clients
224 have more explicit ideas about the product before purchasing [31].

225 Product mobility: Architects have proposed many ideas about architecture as a living
226 organism, which needs to be grown, renovated, and renewed during the building life cycle.
227 MC moves this rhetoric closer to reality by producing mobile modules, which can be
228 transported, attached, detached, and relocated. In NCT, the capsules were attached to the
229 main structure by high-tension bolts, allowing the module detachment or replacement without
230 affecting others. This responded to the architect’s belief that architecture can metabolize [45].

231 5 Discussion and Conclusion

232 5.1 Discussion

233 Grounded on the comprehensive literature review and successful case studies revisit, the above
234 section substantiates that MC, by its nature, may establish several additional criteria to
235 architectural design, i.e., collaboration, standardization, simplification, logistics constraints,
236 and connection. However, it also enables several design techniques, i.e., a composition of three-
237 dimensional units, mass customization, product prototyping, and product mobility.

238 This research creates a balanced view between design limitations and possibilities, when
239 adopting MC. Both of them can be utilized as a guide for design proposal development. It also
240 initiates the discourse about the new design possibilities emerged from MC, which have not
241 been extensively debated. In addition, the outputs from this study support the ongoing
242 development of Design for Manufacturing and Construction (DfMA) in construction. The
243 recent study raises a critical issue that currently, many DfMA suggestions in construction
244 emerges from manufacturing industry background without considering the differences between
245 two industries [46]. The key terms and explanations, identified from the construction cases in
246 this study, can be regarded as a part to support construction-oriented DfMA principles.

247 On the other hands, this research also has its constraints. First, it is structured based on the
248 literature review and detailed archival study. More investigations from real-life practice and
249 feedback from implementation are necessary. Moreover, this is merely a preliminary study of
250 design considerations and opportunities emerged from MC. The application may include, but
251 not limited to, these design directions. Future research is recommended to focus on both sides
252 to expand the knowledge in this discipline.

253 5.2 Conclusion

254 Although Modular Construction (MC) has brought various benefits to the construction sector,
255 it still experiences several barriers. From the project initiation point, design is prospected to
256 mitigate difficulties hindering MC implementation. To support this promising strategy, a
257 plethora of design principles, guidelines, and avoidance are generated; on the contrary, the new
258 design possibilities acquired from MC have not yet been expanded. This research, therefore,
259 reviews previous literature and revisits successful case studies to explore both sides.
260 Eventually, five design considerations and fours opportunities are identified. The outcome
261 corroborates that MC, liked every construction method, may impose several additional
262 concerns to design, but also provides new design prospects.

263 This research illustrates a balanced view of MC in an architectural design process, and
264 paves the new way for future research development to concentrate on the new design
265 possibilities, occurred from MC. Both identified limitations and opportunities can be utilized
266 to achieve a higher level of stakeholders’ satisfaction. The findings also support the current
267 application of DfMA concept in construction. However, the design directions, identified in this
268 study, are merely examples of thousands. More studies and real-life case studies are demanded
269 to develop this sector further.

270

271 References

272 [1] Construction Industry Council (CIC). (2020). About MiC. Retrieved from
273 https://bit.ly/35XSgYS

274 [2] Gibb, A. G. (1999). Off-site fabrication: prefabrication, pre-assembly and

275 modularisation. John Wiley & Sons.

276 [3] Building and Construction Authority (BCA). (2020). Prefabricated Prefinished
277 Volumetric Construction (PPVC). Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2EpepEa

278 [4] Gibb, A. G. (2001). Pre-assembly in Construction (CRISP).

279 [5] Lawson, R. M., Ogden, R. G., & Bergin, R. (2012). Application of modular construction
280 in high-rise buildings. Journal of architectural engineering, 18(2), 148-154.

281 [6] Haas, C. T., & Fagerlund, W. R. (2002). Preliminary research on prefabrication, pre-
282 assembly, modularization and off-site fabrication in construction: Construction Industry
283 Institute.

284 [7] Rogan, A., Lawson, R., & Bates-Brkljac, N. (2000). Value and benefits assessment of
285 modular construction. Steel Construction Institute, Ascot, UK.

286 [8] Cameron, P. J., & Di Carlo, N. G. (2007). Piecing together modular: understanding the
287 benefits and limitations of modular construction methods for multifamily development.
288 Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

289 [9] McGraw-Hill Construction. (2011). Prefabrication and modularization: Increasing

290 productivity in the construction industry. In: McGraw-Hill Construction, Bedford, MA.

291 [10] Lu, W., & Yuan, H. (2013). Investigating waste reduction potential in the upstream
292 processes of offshore prefabrication construction. Renewable and sustainable energy
293 reviews, 28, 804-811.

294 [11] Jaillon, L., & Poon, C.S. (2008). Sustainable construction aspects of using prefabrication
295 in dense urban environment: a Hong Kong case study. Construction management and
296 Economics, 26(9), 953-966.

297 [12] O’Connor, J. T., O’Brien, W. J., & Choi, J. O. (2016). Industrial project execution
298 planning: Modularization versus stick-built. Practice periodical on structural design and
299 construction, 21(1), 04015014.

300 [13] Jiang, Y., Zhao, D., Wang, D., & Xing, Y. (2019). Sustainable Performance of Buildings
301 through Modular Prefabrication in the Construction Phase: A Comparative Study.
302 Sustainability, 11(20), 5658.

303 [14] Hwang, B.-G., Shan, M., & Looi, K.-Y. (2018). Key constraints and mitigation strategies
304 for prefabricated prefinished volumetric construction. Journal of Cleaner Production,
305 183, 183-193.

306 [15] Wuni, I. Y., & Shen, G. Q. (2020). Barriers to the adoption of modular integrated
307 construction: Systematic review and meta-analysis, integrated conceptual framework,
308 and strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 249, 119347.

309 [16] Steinhardt, D. A., & Manley, K. (2016). Exploring the beliefs of Australian prefabricated
310 house builders. Construction Economics and Building, 16(2), 27-41.

311 [17] Rasmussen, S. E. (1964). Experiencing architecture (Vol. 2): MIT press.

312 [18] Building and Construction Authority (BCA). (2017). Design for Manufacturing and
313 Assembly (DfMA): Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction.

314 [19] The American Institute of Architects (AIA). Design for Modular Construction: An
315 Introduction for Architects.
316 [20] Lawson, M., Ogden, R., & Goodier, C. (2014). Design in modular construction. CRC
317 Press.

318 [21] Shaked, O., & Warszawski, A. (1992). CONSCHED: expert system for scheduling of
319 modular construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
320 118(3), 488-506.

321 [22] KPMG. (2016). Smart construction: how offsite manufacturing can transform our
322 industry.

323 [23] DeKay, M., & Brown, G. Z. (2013). Sun, wind, and light: architectural design
324 strategies. John Wiley & Sons.

325 [24] Broadbent, G. (1973). Design in architecture: architecture and the human sciences. New
326 York: John Wiley & Sons.

327 [25] Plowright, P. D. (2014). Revealing architectural design: methods, frameworks and tools:
328 Routledge.

329 [26] Vitruvius, M. P. (1960). The ten books on architecture, translated by Morris Hicky
330 Morgan.

331 [27] Hyun, H., Kim, H., Lee, H. S., Park, M., & Lee, J. (2020). Integrated Design Process for
332 Modular Construction Projects to Reduce Rework. Sustainability, 12(2), 530.

333 [28] Ferdous, W., Bai, Y., Ngo, T. D., Manalo, A., & Mendis, P. (2019). New advancements,
334 challenges and opportunities of multi-storey modular buildings–A state-of-the-art review.
335 Engineering Structures, 183, 883-893.

336 [29] Groat, L. N., & Wang, D. (2013). Architectural research methods: John Wiley & Sons.

337 [30] Lin, Z. (2011). Nakagin Capsule Tower and The Metabolist Movement Revisited.
338 Architectural Education, 65, 13-32.

339 [31] Kurokawa, K. (1977). Metabolism in architecture. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.

340 [32] Ouroussoff, N. (2009). Future vision banished to the past. New York Times.

341 [33] Meow, J. (2013). The Nakagin Capsule Tower. Retrieved from
342 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakagin_Capsule_Tower

343 [34] Safdie, M. (1967). Habitat ‘67-Towards the Development of a Building System. PCI
344 Journal, 12(1), 60-66.

345 [35] Komocki, J. (1967). Structural Design of Habitat'67. PCI JOURNAL, 12, 67-70.

346 [36] Merin, G. (2013). AD Classics: Habitat 67/Safdie Architects. ArchDaily.

347 [37] Wladyslaw. (2008). Montreal: Habitat 67. Retrieved from

348 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_67

349 [38] Kurokawa, K. (1986). Kisho Kurokawa: recent works and projects. Tokyo: Process
350 Architecture Pub. Co.

351 [39] Hyun, H., Kim, H., Lee, H. S., Park, M., & Lee, J. (2020). Integrated Design Process for
352 Modular Construction Projects to Reduce Rework. Sustainability, 12(2), 530.

353 [40] Kurokawa, K. (2005). Kisho Kurokawa : metabolism and symbiosis. Berlin: Jovis.

354 [41] Lu, W., Chen, K., Xue, F., & Pan, W. (2018). Searching for an optimal level of
355 prefabrication in construction: An analytical framework. Journal of Cleaner Production,
356 201, 236-245.

357 [42] Sveiven, M. (2011). Nakagin Capsule Tower/ Kisho Kurokawa. In: ArchDaily.

358 [43] Da Silveira, G., Borenstein, D., & Fogliatto, F. S. (2001). Mass customization: Literature
359 review and research directions. International journal of production economics, 72(1), 1-
360 13.

361 [44] Ishida, A. (2015). Paradox of a Landmark that is not: the life of the Nakagin Capsule
362 Tower. Paper presented at the International Conference on East Asian Architectural
363 Culture, Gwangju.

364 [45] Kurokawa, K. (1994). The philosophy of symbiosis. London: Academy Editions.

365 [46] Tan, T., Lu, W., Tan, G., Xue, F., Chen, K., Xu, J., Wang, J. & Gao, S. (2020).
366 Construction-Oriented Design for Manufacture and Assembly Guidelines. Journal of
367 Construction Engineering and Management, 146(8), 04020085.