Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Supply And Modular Construction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planners and developers push modular construction and code fixes to speed housing production
Summary
Regional planners and the commercial real-estate industry urged the Joint Committee on Housing to pursue modular/off-site production, sales-tax relief on construction materials, and regulatory updates (including wetlands/title 5 alignment) to accelerate housing supply and lower per-unit costs.
Speakers from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) and the commercial real-estate association NAIOP described supply-side constraints and policy recommendations to help Massachusetts increase housing production.
Mark Draisen, executive director of MAPC, emphasized that supply alone will not quickly solve the Commonwealth’s housing shortfall — MAPC and the governor’s housing plan estimate 222,000 additional units are needed over the next decade — but that production must increase. Draisen highlighted modular or off-site construction as a strategy to reduce per‑unit costs and build capacity locally rather than importing finished modules: "We're working to figure out ways of producing more of that housing here, developing the jobs to produce it, and hook it up."
Tamara Small of NAIOP described the Unlocking Housing Production Commission’s recommendations and urged the committee to review the commission’s report. NAIOP and the commission recommended a range of reforms across four themes: economic incentives and workforce development, updating land use and zoning, streamlining regulations and permitting, and better state–local coordination. NAIOP drew attention to two proposals in the Senate budget: feasibility work on sales‑tax relief for building materials and third‑party inspection regimes for modular construction. NAIOP estimated a sales‑tax exemption for materials could reduce total project cost by up to 5% for some projects and argued the exemption would primarily forgo revenue that may not otherwise be collected if the projects were not built.
Witnesses also urged attention to regulatory conflicts that constrain development — MAPC recommended aligning local rules with DEP science for wetlands and Title 5 changes so local add-ons do not unintentionally block housing production.
