A BILL to amend and reenact § 36-99 of the Code of Virginia, relating to the Uniform Statewide Building Code; amendments; energy efficiency and conservation.
HB377 amends § 36-99 of the Code of Virginia, which governs the Uniform Statewide Building Code. The bill’s stated purpose is to update the Code’s general provisions so that building regulations continue to protect public health, safety, and welfare while also reflecting recognized standards for energy conservation and water conservation. It retains the core framework requiring buildings and structures to be constructed, rehabilitated, and maintained at the least possible cost consistent with health, safety, energy, and water standards, and it continues to recognize accessibility-related provisions for individuals with physical disabilities and aged individuals.
The bill also preserves the Board’s authority to rely on nationally recognized model standards, including those from the International Code Council and the National Fire Protection Association. It keeps the existing exemption for farm buildings and structures from the Building Code, while maintaining the exception that farm buildings used as restaurants and certain farm structures in flood plains or mudslide-prone areas remain subject to code requirements. Based on the caption and the amendment language provided, the measure appears to be a technical/substantive update to building code policy rather than a wholesale rewrite of the code.
If enacted, HB377 would modify the statewide building code statute by explicitly reinforcing energy efficiency and water conservation as part of the standards used in construction, rehabilitation, and maintenance of buildings and structures. It would affect the State Board of Housing and Community Development’s code-making authority, local building departments that evaluate code modifications, and builders, property owners, and developers subject to the Uniform Statewide Building Code. The bill would not eliminate existing exemptions or accessibility provisions, but it would continue to shape how those standards are applied in practice.
The available legislative history suggests a neutral to mildly supportive posture, but with limited evidence of debate because no committee transcript or recorded votes are provided. The bill was continued to the next session in the House General Laws process by voice vote, which indicates it did not advance in the current session but also does not show recorded opposition. Overall, the measure appears to have been treated as a policy update with no documented floor-level controversy in the materials provided.
The main potential points of contention are the scope of energy-efficiency and conservation requirements in the building code, and how those standards might affect construction costs, local enforcement, and compliance burdens for builders and property owners. Another possible issue is the continued farm-building exemption, especially the carve-out for farm structures used as restaurants and for structures in flood-prone or mudslide-prone areas, which may raise questions about fairness, safety, and regulatory reach. However, the provided record does not include direct testimony or recorded objections identifying specific opponents or supporters.