Buy American, Build Later? Affordable Housing Meets Another Roadblock

I have no problem with using American-made materials to build American homes. Supporting our manufacturers, keeping people employed, and strengthening domestic production are worthwhile goals. But when pursuing those goals slows the construction of housing people desperately need, I think we have earned the right to ask a few uncomfortable questions.

That is the dilemma surrounding Build America, Buy America, the domestic sourcing law Congress enacted in 2021. Its requirements apply to certain federally funded construction projects, including affordable housing. Developers have reported difficulty finding qualifying products and securing waivers, leading to delays and added costs. Associated Press reporting

For an industry already trying to make difficult projects financially possible, this adds another consideration before construction can move forward. Finding a product that meets the plans, satisfies the building code, and fits the budget may no longer finish the purchasing conversation. Someone also has to establish whether it meets the applicable domestic sourcing requirements. 

When the Starter Apartment Becomes a Bed and a Shared Kitchen

I keep looking at the housing offered to young adults and wondering how we arrived here. An individual bed or sleeping pod, shared bathrooms and showers, a communal kitchen, and a lounge where everyone works on laptops or watches television. For some Gen Z members trying to establish themselves in California and other expensive cities, that arrangement provides a foothold they can actually afford.

A New Name for Shared Living

Usually called co-living, this housing ranges from a bed in a shared sleeping room to a private bedroom with shared household facilities. Those are very different levels of privacy, even when the advertising uses the same label. In many ways, we are revisiting the boardinghouse idea, with Wi-Fi, shared workspaces, and a different marketing approach. 

Should Robots Join the Modular Line?

Fresh Eyes on Modular Construction By Jorie Wisnefski

Last week, Gary Fleisher wrote about humanoid robots entering the modular housing factory, and I thought about my own history with robotics and wanted to learn more.

So, I started investigating with Fresh Eyes.

A factory seems like the perfect application for robots. Unlike a jobsite, a factory is controlled. The work is repetitive. The materials are in one place. The process can be mapped out.

But the more I dug, the more I realized that "controlled" doesn't necessarily mean "predictable."

Take lumber variability as an example. 

Residential and Commercial Modular Factories Are No Longer Playing the Same Game

For years, we have talked about residential and commercial modular construction as though they were two departments within the same industry. Both build inside factories, both transport large components to job sites, and both depend on engineering, code approvals, skilled labor, transportation, cranes, and field completion. From the outside, the similarities appear greater than the differences.

Inside the industry, however, the distance between the two business models is growing.

Commercial modular construction is increasingly becoming an integrated project-delivery system. More advanced companies form relationships with developers, architects, general contractors, institutional owners, lenders, and major suppliers long before the first module enters production. Residential modular factories, meanwhile, often continue operating primarily as product manufacturers serving independent builders, dealers, and individual homebuyers.

That difference affects almost everything: sales, engineering, production scheduling, purchasing, financing, risk, transportation, field coordination, and even how factory capacity is valued.

What appears externally as a small niche within the larger construction industry is becoming a market in which project economics are being rewritten. Factory-controlled production can compress schedules that conventional field construction struggles to match. Supply-chain integration is becoming a competitive differentiator, not merely a purchasing function. Developers and contractors that secure dependable manufacturing relationships early can offer schedule and cost certainty their competitors may not match.

The factories that understand this shift are moving beyond selling modules. They are selling control over time, risk, labor, and project delivery.

We Keep Asking for Affordable Housing. Will We Make Room for It?

I keep coming back to a question that deserves more attention whenever housing affordability comes up: How serious are we about making room for the homes people can afford? We can encourage factory investment, improve production and promote better designs, but eventually every home needs an address. That is where the conversation moves from what the industry can build to what a community will accept.

A recent Governing article by Pew’s Dennis Su and Rachel Siegel examines how states can expand manufactured housing through changes to zoning, financing and other policies. Their argument deserves the attention of everyone in offsite construction: improving the home itself only goes so far when the rules around its placement and purchase remain obstacles. Read the Governing article.

For me, this raises a practical challenge for public officials. Before commissioning another housing study, take a proposed manufactured home through your own approval process. Find out where it can go, what the buyer must do, and how much uncertainty that buyer faces before anyone can schedule delivery.

Empty Apartments, Full Shelters: Who Are We Building Affordable Housing For?

I have to wonder what we are measuring when we celebrate another affordable housing development. Are we counting completed apartments, or asking whether the people who need them most can actually move in? An Associated Press report published by ABC15 describes more than 4,500 apartments classified as affordable sitting vacant in Austin while people with extremely limited incomes struggle to find shelter. That should make everyone involved in housing pause before announcing the next success story. 

The report identifies a mismatch between the incomes many subsidized developments serve and what the poorest renters can pay. It also describes developers whose mortgage and operating costs make deeper rent reductions difficult without additional assistance. Those two realities deserve to be considered together. Blaming a developer does little good if the property cannot cover its expenses, but calling an apartment affordable offers little comfort to someone whose monthly income cannot cover the rent.

For those of us in offsite construction, this raises a question I believe belongs in every discussion about housing innovation: affordable for whom? Before we debate factory capacity, production speed, or the next building system, I want to know the intended resident’s income and the monthly housing payment the project must achieve. That gives the construction team a meaningful target. Otherwise, we risk congratulating ourselves for solving a production problem while leaving the affordability question unanswered.

I would like every affordable housing announcement to explain who can realistically live there, what residents will pay, and what assistance is needed to make those payments possible. Those questions should shape the project from the beginning. A ribbon cutting marks an accomplishment, but I believe the more meaningful test comes afterward, when a resident receives the keys and can afford to keep them.

CLICK HERE to read the entire ABC15 article

Gary’s Observation

I remain convinced that offsite construction has an important role in the housing conversation, but we should be precise about what we promise. A better way to build deserves serious consideration; it also needs a financial plan that connects the finished home to the intended resident. My question for the next affordable housing panel is simple: show me how the person with the smallest paycheck gets through the front door. If we can answer that clearly, we have something worth celebrating.

Bring Your Questions to the East Coast Factory Innovation Roundtable

Gary Fleisher, the Modcoach, and Jorie Wisnefski invite you to the East Coast Factory Innovation Roundtable on October 28, from 8:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. at the Inn at Lewisburg, Pennsylvania. Sponsored by Uni-Frame and 4WardSolutions, this one-day event includes breakfast and lunch.

This will be more than another meeting where speakers simply tell you what they can do for your company. Attendees will have more opportunities than ever to ask questions, challenge ideas, and discuss the real issues facing offsite construction.

Companies may bring up to four people, with management, engineering, production, and sales professionals strongly encouraged to attend. Builders, developers, factory teams, suppliers, and people from across the offsite construction community are invited to join the conversation.

Register for the October 28 Roundtable

China Isn’t Just Exporting Products Anymore—It’s Exporting Houses

For years, the words “Made in China” brought to mind electronics, appliances, furniture, and countless consumer products shipped worldwide. Today, that same manufacturing reach is moving into housing, as Chinese companies increasingly promote prefabricated and modular homes to international buyers seeking faster construction, lower labor requirements, and more predictable pricing. What was once viewed as a niche export is becoming part of a much larger global housing conversation.

Chinese manufacturers seem to understand something many American offsite companies still struggle to accept: the international market does not always want another factory—it wants a finished building system that can be purchased, shipped, and assembled. By combining standardized designs, industrial-scale production and established export networks, these companies can offer homes, classrooms, offices, worker accommodations and emergency housing to buyers thousands of miles from the factory. A single production line can turn out 50 housing modules a day.

That does not mean every imported modular house will meet the building codes, climate demands, financing requirements, or consumer expectations of every country. 

Buyers must still examine structural standards, fire resistance, energy performance, transportation costs, foundations, utility connections, installation responsibilities, and long-term service. An attractive factory price can quickly lose its appeal when the building reaches a port, and everyone begins asking who will obtain approvals, complete the site work, and stand behind the warranty.

Even with those challenges, China’s growing presence in the global prefabricated-housing market should attract the attention of every American modular and offsite manufacturer. Chinese producers are not waiting for the world to discover them. They are displaying their products internationally, refining standardized designs and presenting factory-built housing as an exportable consumer product rather than a regional construction service. Whether they ultimately succeed in every market is less important than the fact that they are willing to compete in them.

Gary’s Observation

The greatest lesson may not be that China can manufacture modular houses more cheaply. It may be that Chinese companies think globally, while much of the American modular industry still thinks within a comfortable delivery radius of its factories. 

American manufacturers have tremendous strengths in engineering, code compliance, quality, and regional market knowledge, but those advantages will not protect them indefinitely from international competitors that improve their products with every shipment. 

We should not dismiss these homes simply because they arrive in containers or because some early examples may fail to meet our standards. We should study how they are designed, marketed, sold, and delivered, because the company that learns how to turn a building into a repeatable global product may help determine the next chapter of offsite construction.