Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Performance Based Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Performance‑based code proposal (bill discussed as HB 2381) aims to expand low‑rise housing options with third‑party certification and raises safety and energy‑
Summary
Committee heard an SBCC briefing on a performance‑based code pathway for low‑rise residential buildings (discussed as House Bill 2381). The proposal would set performance criteria and allow certified materials, assemblies or third‑party certifications as a route to local approval; lawmakers asked about seismic safety, energy code interactions and how embodied carbon could be treated.
The committee shifted to a presentation on performance‑based building codes intended to expand options for low‑rise housing. Todd Byreuther described a performance approach that sets outcome criteria (fire, egress, structure, ventilation) and allows alternative solutions certified by a third‑party or state process as a pathway to local jurisdiction approval.
Byreuther said the bill under discussion was referenced during the session as House Bill 2346 in one exchange and then identified by Representative Doer as refiled as 2381 to avoid confusion with middle‑housing statutory titles. He characterized the bill as narrowly scoped to low‑rise residential typologies (1–24 units) below a 70‑foot threshold and said the performance pathway includes both the rules and an approval process that could accept pre‑certified systems, off‑site construction or third‑party certification agencies.
"We're trying to get that to the 1 yard line for the benefit of all," Byreuther said, describing the intent to pre‑certify materials, components, assemblies and systems so local predevelopment reviews reach permit readiness more predictably. He cited international examples—Project Breakthrough (U.S. history), Japan and Sweden—as precedents for performance approaches and said Sweden reportedly saw housing costs fall by about 20% and prefabrication increase significantly after adopting performance pathways.
Committee members raised safety and implementation questions. Representative Griffey, a career firefighter, asked whether the council is aggressively pursuing low‑cost occupant rescue options and how performance rules would account for limited local fire department capacities. Dustin said firefighter representatives proposed roll‑out window ladders and that the council had adopted a requirement for emergency escape and rescue openings on all levels as an additional egress option.
On energy interactions, Byreuther said the performance code would not change the state's energy code statute directly; the energy code (referred to in the hearing as RCW 19.27A) remains site‑based with legislature‑set glide path targets, but a performance pathway in the building code could encourage more integrated energy and embodied‑carbon design approaches and allow credit for lower‑carbon materials and systems where code allowances permit.
The presenters emphasized that certification, testing and an approval process are necessary components of a successful performance pathway; the SBCC framed the proposal as one way to increase design flexibility and scale prefabrication while maintaining safety through pre‑certified systems and third‑party review. The committee did not vote on the bill during the work session; presenters said rulemaking and public processes would follow any legislative direction.
