Well executed prefab is indistinguishable or better than traditional construction. When coupled with a repeatable development process and aligned financing costs can be lower.
When integrated into the development process they can offer savings. When treated as a cheaper alternative to traditional construction on a project by project basis they don’t. That’s the point.
Again - when viewed through the project by project lens prefab has little room for cost savings. When integrated into a development process there can be significant cost savings. When further supported by programmatic land banking, finance structures, and regulatory reform the system can change.
When treated as an input to construction cost savings on a per project basis are nearly impossible to achieve. When viewed as a repeatable part of a development process there are real opportunities for cost savings.
Starter home can mean first home and forever home. Or anything in between. The first purchase. Very difficult to achieve right now and equity creation is important hence the importance of seeking solutions.
Your critique is rambling and incoherent. I’ll do my best to offer a comprehensive response but there’s very little logic to follow. More importantly, what solutions are you offering?
[BILL ALERT] AB 1308, which establishes a statewide 10 day shot clock for inspecting small residential projects, has passed the Assembly and is now on the Governor’s desk! cayimby.org/legislation/...
