Written By: Alex Gray, Sightline Building Solutions
Date: Nov 24, 2024
Modular construction, a modern building approach that holds significant promise, has encountered a few stumbling blocks in its path to widespread adoption. Although it’s increasingly recognized as a solution to pressing housing needs, modular construction lacks a unified definition, which hinders its growth and acceptance in the marketplace. Having recently founded a construction company specializing in modular projects, I’ve seen firsthand how this definitional confusion impacts industry professionals and clients alike. Here’s why a clear definition matters—and how the industry can move forward.
The Importance of a Unified Definition
In any industry, a clear, cohesive definition lays the groundwork for mutual understanding, consumer confidence, and regulatory clarity. For modular construction, however, definitions are surprisingly scattered. As I network with other professionals, I’ve noticed that modular construction often has two schools of thought, each with its own understanding of what the term entails. This lack of alignment complicates discussions and contributes to a sense of confusion around what modular construction actually involves.
Without a unified definition, promoting modular construction’s benefits becomes difficult. Moreover, potential clients and regulatory agencies become hesitant to embrace the method, often defaulting to traditional approaches simply because modular construction seems complicated or uncertain. For the industry to truly grow, modular construction needs a strong, standardized foundation—a clear and shared definition that can help promote its benefits and garner the trust it needs to thrive.
What is Modular Construction?
So, what exactly is modular construction? The Oxford Dictionary defines “modular” as a system of standardized parts or units that can be combined to create a larger, more complex structure. While this concept is simple enough, it doesn’t fully capture the specifics of modular building. When we refer to modular construction, we’re generally talking about prefabricated structures built in a factory and then assembled on-site.
However, even within prefabrication, there’s a spectrum of modular approaches, which can be roughly divided into two types: panelized and volumetric modular construction. Let’s explore these methods, as each represents a different degree of prefabrication.
Panelized Modular Construction
On one end of the prefabrication spectrum, we have panelized modular construction. This method involves prefabricating individual building components—such as walls, floors, and ceilings—in a factory. These sections are typically made from materials like wood, steel, or other composites, and they vary in size, generally between 8 to 10 feet wide and 4 to 40 feet long.
In panelized construction, these sections are transported to the construction site, where they’re assembled. While this approach still offers a degree of efficiency compared to traditional construction, it requires more time for on-site assembly. The less-complete prefabrication also means that finishing tasks and customization often take longer than with volumetric modular construction.
Volumetric Modular Construction
At the opposite end of the spectrum, volumetric modular construction offers the highest level of prefabrication. This method involves building fully-formed, three-dimensional units in a factory, with interiors often up to 99% complete and exteriors approximately 80% finished. These units resemble large Lego blocks that can be stacked and connected on-site. As a result, volumetric modular construction typically allows for significantly faster project timelines, often cutting construction time by nearly half compared to traditional methods.
The greater degree of prefabrication in volumetric construction also allows for more consistent quality control and reduced on-site labor, making it an appealing choice for developers and contractors. However, the high level of prefabrication does require specialized transportation and installation equipment, which may not be suitable for all project sites.
Differing Views on Modular Terminology
While many industry professionals, myself included, use “modular construction” as an umbrella term encompassing both panelized and volumetric methods, there is an alternative perspective that views these two approaches as entirely separate. According to this view, modular construction is synonymous with volumetric construction, while panelized construction is considered a distinct method.
From my perspective, modular construction is a continuum that includes both volumetric and panelized approaches, with varying degrees of prefabrication depending on project needs, site conditions, and financial considerations. For example, a project with limited access might call for panelized construction, while a site with ample space and budget could accommodate volumetric modular units. A unified understanding of modular construction as a spectrum allows for flexibility and adaptability in design and implementation—qualities that are essential for the industry’s growth.
The Terminology Challenge at the Micro Level
Confusion in modular construction terminology doesn’t end at the macro level. Even at the micro level, inconsistent naming conventions add to the complexity. Across Canada, for instance, municipalities are increasingly encouraging homeowners to build Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to address housing shortages. However, these units go by an overwhelming array of names, including Accessory Residential Units (ARUs), Additional Dwelling Units, backyard homes, tiny homes, micro homes, garden suites, granny suites, in-law suites, mother-in-law suites, secondary suites, and more.
This terminology overload can make it difficult for homeowners, developers, municipalities, insurance providers to communicate effectively, resulting in confusion around policy incentives and regulatory requirements. If the modular industry aspires to simplify and speed up the construction process, it must first simplify its own language.
Why a Unified Definition Matters
The lack of consistent terminology creates the impression that modular construction is a fragmented, overly complex industry, which may deter consumers and regulatory agencies from embracing this promising approach. Consumers remain uncertain about what modular construction truly entails, while building departments, traditionally risk-averse, may hesitate to approve unfamiliar methods.
In my experience, modular construction is far simpler and faster than traditional construction methods. With a unified definition and clear language, the industry can promote this reality, transforming perceptions and encouraging adoption. In a country like Canada, where the housing crisis calls for immediate solutions, modular construction could be a game-changer—but only if the industry presents a cohesive message.
Moving Forward
For modular construction to reach its full potential, the industry must adopt a standardized definition that unites professionals, consumers, and regulatory bodies. By clarifying the range of modular construction options and using consistent terminology, we can make modular construction easier to understand, promote its unique advantages, and ultimately transform how housing is delivered in Canada and beyond.
The benefits of modular construction—speed, efficiency, and quality—speak for themselves. But to truly advocate for this innovative approach, the industry must rally around a shared vision, pushing modular construction forward as a reliable, mainstream alternative in building and development.