Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Modular builders tell House panel they can cut costs and complete homes faster
Loading...
Summary
Modular-construction firms and their academic allies told a House subcommittee that off-site, factory-built housing can reduce waste, lower per-unit costs and dramatically shorten construction timelines, but face permitting, code harmonization and financing barriers.
Modular and off-site construction proponents told the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance that factory-built housing can lower costs and deliver homes faster than traditional site-built construction — if federal and state governments help clear regulatory and financing hurdles.
Eric Schafer, chief business development officer at Fading West, described off-site modular construction as a system that builds roughly 90% of a home in a factory, then ships and assembles modules on site. Schafer said the approach reduces on-site waste from about 30% to less than 5% and can cut total build time to under 40 days from start to finish, compared with more than nine months for conventional construction. “We can build homes 10 to 20% less expensive by reducing waste from 30% to less than 5%,” Schafer said, and he cited projects including 80 homes built for Maui recovery and a 16-home partnership with Vail Valley Habitat for Humanity.
Schafer told the committee that scaling modular construction requires three primary actions: harmonizing regional building codes to reduce the number of different code regimes; investing in research and development to support modular design and materials; and using federal grants and low-interest loans to build modular factories rather than only subsidizing demand-side programs.
Academic witnesses and state examples reinforced the point. Dr. Andrew P. McCoy of Virginia Tech highlighted Virginia Housing Development Authority efforts to award scoring points for innovation in tax-credit projects and community innovation grants up to $500,000 that derisk new technologies. He also cited Danville, Virginia’s zoning changes to allow modular and manufactured units and a state effort that cut building-code variants from hundreds to a handful in one example.
Panel members repeatedly asked about financing and local barriers. Witnesses said access to financing from the GSEs and FHA, plus streamlined permitting and regional code models, are critical to bringing modular solutions to more markets, including urban infill. No legislative action was taken at the hearing; witnesses were asked to submit written responses by June 20, 2025.
Schafer and McCoy both said modular construction is not a silver bullet but a scalable tool that can reduce cost, increase quality and speed up delivery when paired with supportive financing, code harmonization and workforce development.
