Groundspeak Portal

According to the Sears Archives about 70,000 to 75,000 of these homes were ordered through the Sears Catalog between 1908-1940.

This website Sears Homes.org says:  "Sears Homes came in 370 different designs and they sold about 75,000 of them, throughout the United States.
Today, about 90-95% of these homes remain standing. Sadly, when Sears closed their Modern Homes department, all sales records were destroyed, so no one knows the location of these homes. Finding them and documenting their location is a slow, laborious (but FUN) process."

Sears Homes were actually ordered through the Sears Catalog and came with instructions and all the basic materials. One way to determine if a home might be a Sears Home is to look for a letter and number stamped into the wood frames. Each piece went together like a puzzle.

If you live in an older home look in your attic or basement for these numbers. You might be living in a Sears Home if so the above websites would be interested in the information.

What do you think? Is this a possible category?

I forgot to mention to the Barns Category they also sold barns!

My concern is that unless you live in Libertyville how are you going to find them?  If I submit a home that looks like one of the models and say - here you go, here's a Sears home, but I don't have any web documentation or a picture from inside the house how are we going to know I'm right or not?

The problem you will find is being able to identify whether a Sears Home or not.  The Lustron homes are very distinctive in their appearance, the Sears homes are more vernacular.  Often it is impossible to determine if a home is a Sears (or other kit home for that matter) unless you can gain access to the attic to see the markings on exposed rafters etc.

Hmmm, this definitely isn't a 'point and shoot' category but I personally think it has merit.   Probably would require some serious homework (see http://cdm.digitalpast.org/cdm4/exhibits/MailOrderHouses/Documentation.html for ideas to find out if a home is a Sears Home) but 100,000 definitely fits the 'prevalance' criteria, even if many of them are long gone.    A well-written category description and requirements might make  documenting these homes a valuable contribution to our community.  

You are both correct, Sears Homes are listed under the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation Guidelines, but I have been unable to find a list of such homes known. It would be nice to have a list of homes such as The Historic United Methodist Church category has, that makes it easy to confirm and make reference to.

Perhaps someone could come up with a way to make a category like this possible. It's worth a shot here in the forums anyway!

Thanks, David

fishingwishing:

Hmmm, this definitely isn't a 'point and shoot' category but I personally think it has merit.   Probably would require some serious homework (see http://cdm.digitalpast.org/cdm4/exhibits/MailOrderHouses/Documentation.html for ideas to find out if a home is a Sears Home) but 100,000 definitely fits the 'prevalance' criteria, even if many of them are long gone.    A well-written category description and requirements might make  documenting these homes a valuable contribution to our community.  

Yes, but a way to confirm a waymark is indeed a Sears Home is the problem to be solved.

a photo of whatever is found that id's it - a stamp on a beam or property records or receipt by owner?  if it's word of mouth, well, I am not sure how you would go about that, but if someone says it's a Sears home, maybe then a search of the property records would validate that?  Too much work for a WM?  You're right, there is a big challenge in designing such a category!

Overs the years, I have seen references to houses being a Sears House in newspaper articles.

wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sears_house

I don't think that it would be without precident to have a category that didn't require strict "proof" for a posting. My underground railway submissions came from originally word of mouth references.

I have always found the Sears Houses to be interesting. It would be interesting to have be a reference point for people interested in them.

Here are a couple local to me:

http://www.chadwiebesick.com/blog/2008/11/20/2504-hawks-road-ann-arbor.html (just a few blocks from here)

http://www.aadl.org/ypsigleanings/15024

http://blog.mlive.com/lcn/2008/10/kit_homes_survive_in_livingsto.html

http://realestate.aol.com/resale-homes/302__Koch_Ave-Ann_Arbor-MI-48103/1.miaaabor-b_2901043

 

http://annarbor.craigslist.org/reb/986878990.html

 

 

globetrotters.us:

Overs the years, I have seen references to houses being a Sears House in newspaper articles.

wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sears_house

I don't think that it would be without precident to have a category that didn't require strict "proof" for a posting. My underground railway submissions came from originally word of mouth references.

I disagree, this is one category where I think proof of some sort is needed.  Why have a category which is for Sears homes and then have just any home of that age submitted.

I, too, did a search and found - among other sites - the Wiki reference (see http://www.wikihow.com/Identify-a-Sears-Kit-Home ) .   More helpful hints on how to tell if you have a Sears Kit Home.   Bruce, not to start an argument, but wouldn't one or some of these, combined maybe with real estate records or articles like the ones globetrotters cites, be sufficient proof in this instance? 

fishingwishing:

I, too, did a search and found - among other sites - the Wiki reference (see http://www.wikihow.com/Identify-a-Sears-Kit-Home ) .   More helpful hints on how to tell if you have a Sears Kit Home.   Bruce, not to start an argument, but wouldn't one or some of these, combined maybe with real estate records or articles like the ones globetrotters cites, be sufficient proof in this instance? 

I have no problem if there is some documentary proof, I just don't like the idea of someone posting a house and saying it is a Sears home based on nothing but speculation or purely self identification.  I live in area area where there are hundreds of them, including couple of communities built by Standard Oil using Sears homes.  For me getting documentary proof is easy as one of the nation's experts on Sears homes lives in my area and has documented many. (she is the person on the video clip on your link, which is from the local pbs station)

BruceS:

I have no problem if there is some documentary proof, I just don't like the idea of someone posting a house and saying it is a Sears home based on nothing but speculation or purely self identification.  I live in area area where there are hundreds of them, including couple of communities built by Standard Oil using Sears homes.  For me getting documentary proof is easy as one of the nation's experts on Sears homes lives in my area and has documented many. (she is the person on the video clip on your link, which is from the local pbs station)

I would propose that houses that didn't have any formal documentation, just 'word of mouth' and a photo that matched one with formal documentation be allowed, with a disclaimer that said how it was derived. This way, there would be a starting point for someone with a real interest to do more research. It's easier to archive a waymark that proved to be wrong than to find something that only has an oral history.

Don't read my comments that I am against this type of category... just look at my waymarks... most are some type of historic building.  Most based on some type of documentation.  If the category is well constructed I will submit a couple hundred to it.  I just want to make sure that the category be a reference source rather than an a source based on speculation.

Part of the reason I read the forums is to get another perspecive on the subjects. There are many shades of grey in this pallette, and I might not consider them without seeing them from another angle. In addition, somtimes my own thoughts are based on vague feelings, and saying it out loud also helps to give the vague images form.

I know of a few to submit.  My parents even have one of the original catalogs.

I don't have a problem with there being strict documentation requirements.  A few "hard" categories would be good for us.  My one concern is actually that they'd be *too* prevalent in an area.  That is, where there's one, there are a bunch in a small area.

dinoprophet:

I know of a few to submit.  My parents even have one of the original catalogs.

I don't have a problem with there being strict documentation requirements.  A few "hard" categories would be good for us.  My one concern is actually that they'd be *too* prevalent in an area.  That is, where there's one, there are a bunch in a small area.

I think the highest concentration in one neighborhood is 152, there were 156 built in that neighborhood, 3 burned and one was moved.

Some good discussion here. Reading on the page fishingwishing linked to it states:

"More than 80% of the people who think they have a Sears Home are wrong. There are many reasons for this, but put simply, there were several other companies selling kit homes on a national level, such as Gordon Van Tine, Aladdin, Lewis Homes, Harris Brothers, Sterling Homes and more. It's likely that the name "Sears kit home" has become a generic label for "kit homes."

If this is the case even homeowners themselves have a hard time trying to distinguish between a Sears Homes and other kit manufacturers.

I'm beginning to think that if there even were to be a category it would almost have to be for kit homes in general and not just Sears.
The category might only allow those that have been identified and have a link to a site with the information, a sign or plaque, or whatever proof there is.

The number of submissions without proof of some sorts could make a difficult category to manage and you would almost have to accept every single home that looked old enough. On what grounds could you deny one?

Making the category open to all kit homes (with proof) might make for a better category in this case.

I'm always up for more ideas though!

Thanks for all the replies!

globetrotters.us:

I would propose that houses that didn't have any formal documentation, just 'word of mouth' and a photo that matched one with formal documentation be allowed, with a disclaimer that said how it was derived. This way, there would be a starting point for someone with a real interest to do more research. It's easier to archive a waymark that proved to be wrong than to find something that only has an oral history.

I suppose there could be a variable for this, given enough evidence to make the waymark plausible to accept. The problem would be in order to view the variable for a waymark you have to open each one to see it. The undocumented homes would far outweigh those that have documentation and they would get lost in the mix. A sister category perhaps?

Here's some more discussion on this topic from these very forums:
http://portal.groundspeak.com/forums/thread/7717.aspx

I see they faced the same problems! I tried to see if a group had been started and could not find one so I guess it just came to an end at that time.

Would anyone be interested in joining a "Kit Homes & Buildings" group and maybe see if we could come up with something?

Thanks

I'm up for the challenge - let's give it a go, David!  

You should check out this site. Antique Home

It looks like it has a lot of possible resources.

Old House Journal also has a page dedicated to the homes.

And another forum thread about kit homes that has some good info as well. 

fishingwishing:

I'm up for the challenge - let's give it a go, David!  

A lot to think about here and excellent input. TheBeanTeam posted some really nice links! You can even browse some of the catalogs online.

I think I'll start a group but I'm not sure what the focus will be, so I think a generic group name is in order until we can narrow down to include all kit homes (so many!) or just Sears (still a lot!). How would a group called "Mail Order Structures" or "Catalog Homes & Buildings" sound?

Sounds fine.  I liked (and bookmarked) your resources, too, TBT!   Now that I think about it, the group name won't be as important as the category name when trying to define the focus of the category.   Do you want to consider 'vintage' or 'house' v 'structure' (all structures? barns? etc) and the fact that I think you might still be able to buy/order house or other structure plans online or through the mail.   Yes, there's lots to mull over and wade through and...  I'm still happy to help :-)

SearchN:

fishingwishing:

I'm up for the challenge - let's give it a go, David!  

A lot to think about here and excellent input. TheBeanTeam posted some really nice links! You can even browse some of the catalogs online.

I think I'll start a group but I'm not sure what the focus will be, so I think a generic group name is in order until we can narrow down to include all kit homes (so many!) or just Sears (still a lot!). How would a group called "Mail Order Structures" or "Catalog Homes & Buildings" sound?

Construct On Delivery?