Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would bar local bans on cladding that meets state building code, spurring debate on cost and durability
Summary
Supporters said Senate Bill 5571 would reduce housing costs and give builders material choices by preventing local governments from excluding cladding materials that comply with the state building code; architects warned it could have unintended durability and maintenance consequences.
Senate Bill 5571 would prohibit cities and counties from requiring or excluding exterior cladding materials that meet the state building code, staff told the committee at a public hearing, though the bill would not affect homeowners associations or plat communities.
Proponents argued the bill would expand material choice and lower building costs. Bryce Aden of the Polymeric Exterior Products Association said some local jurisdictions impose extra design-review processes or de facto bans on materials such as fiber cement or vinyl even when those materials meet code, and that creates cost and delay: "We're hoping it saves cost and time, and offers choice for folks," he said. Andrea Smiley of the Building Industry Association of Washington said many local design standards add cost without structural benefit.
Opponents and cautious voices urged refinements. Tammy Souerio of the American Institute of Architects said local jurisdictions may have valid reasons to require or limit certain materials because of local climate, durability and maintenance concerns, and that a statewide prohibition could lead to higher long-term costs for homeowners and building owners. "The market incentives to minimize upfront costs often leads to material selections that don't account for long term durability, ease of maintenance, or necessary environmental resiliency," she said.
Staff briefing noted that the state building code establishes minimum performance standards and that cities and counties may amend the building code as applied locally but not below minimum performance standards. Witnesses proposed clarifying language so municipalities can still set reasonable conditions addressing durability, maintenance and community design objectives while avoiding discriminatory treatment of materials that meet code.
The bill's text exempts homeowners associations and plats from this limitation, a point that drew member questions. Committee members asked whether existing HOA design standards would remain enforceable; staff and proponents said the bill's drafters were working on clarifying language to preserve HOA standards and historic-designation processes where appropriate.
Ending: The committee heard testimony from building-industry representatives, material manufacturers and architects and no final committee action was recorded at the hearing.
