Housing Affordability Institute Executive Director Nick Erickson recently discussed the role of building codes in housing reform with state lawmakers at CSG Midwest’s Economic Development and Infrastructure Committee session. The conversation focused on where building codes fit within the broader housing affordability debate and what states can do to improve the way codes are developed and adopted.
Housing reform discussions across the country have rightly focused on land use and zoning. If communities do not allow enough homes to be built, changes elsewhere in the housing system can only accomplish so much.
But as more states begin tackling zoning barriers, another part of the housing equation deserves greater attention: building codes.
Land use reform should remain the first priority. Zoning determines what can be built and where it can be built. Minimum lot sizes, density restrictions, setbacks and other local requirements can prevent housing from being developed before a builder ever reaches the permitting stage.
Building codes answer a different question: how that housing must be built.
That distinction matters. Once a project moves forward, building codes establish the minimum construction standard and, in turn, part of the minimum cost of producing a new home. Their impact begins with the permit application and continues through the certificate of occupancy.
For states that have already made meaningful progress on land use reform, building codes are a logical next place to look.
The issue is not whether states should have strong building codes. They should. Good codes protect life and safety, improve durability and establish clear expectations for construction. The question is whether the process used to develop and adopt those requirements gives enough consideration to evidence, cost and real-world performance.
Today, model building codes generally operate on a three-year development cycle. States and local governments then undertake their own processes to review and adopt those codes. That system can create several challenges, particularly when adoption timelines overlap with the next model code cycle.
Individual code changes may also appear relatively modest when considered on their own. Over time, however, incremental requirements can compound. Examining each proposal separately can make it difficult for policymakers to understand the cumulative effect of multiple code changes on the final cost of a home.
There is also a broader question about how proposed mandates are evaluated before becoming minimum construction requirements.
Earlier this year, Housing Affordability Institute has called for a heightened scrutiny framework for building codes. Before adopting a new mandate, policymakers should ask basic questions: What problem is being addressed? What evidence demonstrates that the problem exists? Does the proposed requirement actually solve it? What will it cost? Are there legal conflicts or better alternatives? And will the requirement work across different housing types, climates and markets?
The principle is simple: evidence first, mandates second.
States have several tools available to bring greater scrutiny to the process. They can require individual review of code changes rather than assuming an entire model code should be adopted as written. They can require cost disclosures, examine multiple construction codes together to identify cumulative impacts and establish affordability guardrails as part of the adoption process. In states where local governments adopt their own codes, lawmakers can also consider whether a more uniform statewide system would improve predictability.
None of this diminishes the importance of safety. In fact, a more rigorous process should strengthen building codes by ensuring requirements are tied to measurable evidence and actual performance.
Housing affordability will not be solved by any single reform. States first need to make sure enough housing can legally be built. Once they do, the next question becomes whether the rules governing how those homes are constructed are achieving their intended purpose at a reasonable cost.
For states moving beyond the first generation of housing reform, that conversation is increasingly important.
Interested in bringing Housing Affordability Institute to your next conference, policy meeting or industry event? Our team is available to speak on housing affordability, land use reform, building codes and other policies affecting housing production and homeownership.
To request a speaker, contact us at info@housingaffordabilityinstitute.org.
