To ease California\u2019s linked homelessness and housing crises, it\u2019s heartening to see government, construction and labor working toward encouraging modular or prefabricated housing. <\/p>\n
Most of the parts for such houses are assembled in a factory, like a car, then hauled to the property and put together. That contrasts with traditional bespoke or site-built houses, put up mostly on the property.<\/p>\n
A study<\/a> by ADL Ventures found prefabs can reduce construction costs by 20%, yet make up only 5% of U.S. new homes. By contrast, in Japan it\u2019s 15% and in Sweden 84%.<\/p>\n Part of the problem in California is regulatory. Local building codes, as in California\u2019s 58 counties<\/a> and 483 municipalities, complicate the uniformity needed for mass production. It\u2019s difficult raising capital for factories in a cyclical business with periodic crashes, such as the 2007-10 subprime mortgage meltdown<\/a>. Simplifying building codes, then, is part of the solution.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Changing this dynamic requires support from labor unions, which often perceive this way of housing construction as a threat.\u00a0Fortunately, union leaders expressed interest at a Jan. 14 hearing<\/a> of the Assembly Select Committee on Housing Construction Innovation, chaired by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland. <\/p>\n Jeremy Smith, chief of staff for the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, told the committee his union prefers \u201cthe model that predominates now.\u201d Naturally. But the idea of prefab housing \u201cintrigues\u201d them because it could mean \u201cactually building more housing for people of all income levels.\u201d That\u2019s a step in the right direction.\u00a0<\/p>\n Smith said a model incorporating all trade union concerns works at Fullstack Modular in Carson, for example, where workers benefit from, among other things, being able to work at one location rather than ever-changing construction sites.\u00a0<\/p>\n Fullstack President Roger Krulak said the key to making this work at scale is long-term commitment to continuous construction to avoid cyclical crashes. \u201cHaving a lot of factories is a good idea, but having a lot of empty factories is just a cost to somebody,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n A positive model for California could be Colorado\u2019s new Senate Bill 25-002,<\/a> which sets statewide prefab home standards, which must not be stricter than for other new homes. That lowers some regulatory barriers. In another action, in 2024 Gov. Jared Polis announced<\/a> funds from Proposition 123<\/a>, which dedicates 0.1% of state income tax revenues to affordable housing, would prioritize prefabs. We oppose such \u201cballot-box budgeting,\u201d but dedicating existing state housing spending to more prefabs makes sense.\u00a0<\/p>\n For example, voters approved California\u2019s Proposition 1<\/a> in 2024. It\u2019s a $6.38 billion bond for services for veterans and the homeless, including new housing. The state should look into using it to pay for prefab construction. Its steady revenue could achieve industry\u2019s need for long-term commitments.<\/p>\n