Home builders argue current codes offer enough protection and warn new rules will raise prices
The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) has voiced its concerns about the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) push to adopt the latest building codes to enhance disaster safety, arguing that such a move is unnecessary and could drive up housing costs.
Speaking before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, NAHB first vice chairman Buddy Hughes said that modern homes, built under building codes established since 2000, already provide a high level of protection against disasters like floods, wildfires, strong winds, and earthquakes.
“These homes are designed to withstand major disasters and already offer substantial protection against high seismic activity, strong winds, heavy snow, wildfires and flooding,” Hughes said. “This makes increasing code stringency on a tri-annual basis unnecessary.”
Hughes suggested that instead of constantly pushing for new building code updates every three years, there should be more focus on ensuring proper enforcement of current codes, which are already designed to protect homes from severe weather and natural disasters.
The NAHB’s stance is that resilience goes beyond just strengthening buildings – it requires making sure that all aspects of community infrastructure, such as energy systems, flood control, and communication networks, are prepared to withstand disasters.
Read next: Long-term prospects are bright for the US mortgage market, says exec
“Creating true resiliency requires a holistic approach that encompasses all community systems,” Hughes said. “FEMA’s emphasis on building codes can divert attention and resources from the necessary improvements in infrastructure, emergency services and existing buildings. A resilient building is of little value if the supporting infrastructure is lacking, and a resilient home offers little comfort if it remains unaffordable.”
Hughes also stressed the importance of allowing state and local governments to tailor building codes to their specific regional needs.
“A one-size-fits-all national code is rigid and does not account for regional differences,” said Hughes. “Such an approach would impose numerous unnecessary requirements on builders, ultimately resulting in higher costs for home buyers.”
In his testimony, Hughes pointed to the Promoting Resilient Buildings Act, which would give local governments more control over how they adopt hazard-resistant building codes. He urged the Senate to support the measure, saying it would prevent FEMA from only funding jurisdictions that adopt the latest building codes without considering local conditions.
“Homes built to modern building codes have consistently demonstrated their ability to perform well during natural disasters,” said Hughes. He called for a focus on retrofitting the nation’s older housing stock, noting that most of the country’s homes were built before 2010 and lack the resilience of more modern buildings.
“The best way to withstand and recover from future natural disasters is to focus on cost-effective, market-driven solutions that encourage greater resiliency in the nation’s housing stock, heed the input of state and local governments in the code adoption process to address local conditions, expand mitigation opportunities, and target upgrades to existing structures and housing stock,” Hughes said. “This will increase resiliency and preserve affordability for both new and existing homes.”
Stay updated with the freshest mortgage news. Get exclusive interviews, breaking news, and industry events in your inbox, and always be the first to know by subscribing to our FREE daily newsletter.
