Designing the Future – Part Three – Building Codes: The Good, The Bad, andTthe Ugly

By: Frank Came

Part One of the Designing the Future Series outlined the enormous potential of Passive Survivability. Part Two explored the complex web of real-world constraints that limit the transition to a more resilient future.

In Part Three, we examine the Good. The Bad. And sometimes the Ugly realities of Building Codes, which are the signposts of the future.

In many jurisdictions, 2026 has ushered in a new era of building codes that transition from prescriptive (telling you what to build) to performance-based (demanding specific outcomes).

These new codes focus on ensuring a building can survive even when the grid fails—a concept now legally defined in many jurisdictions as Passive Survivability.

The “Step Code” Model: Incentivizing Resilience

Rather than a single “pass/fail” bar, regions like British Columbia and parts of the EU have fully implemented Tiered Step Codes.

• How it works: Builders who hit higher tiers (e.g., Step 4 or 5) receive expedited permitting and tax credits, effectively neutralizing the “first-cost” hurdle.

• Impact: It shifts the financial model so that building a highly resilient, zero-carbon structure is actually cheaper and faster than building a traditional one when considering the total development cycle.

Mandatory Cooling & “Safe-Zone” Requirements

New codes are moving away from just keeping people warm to ensuring they don’t overheat during grid-down heatwaves.

• The 26°C Limit: Recent 2025/2026 updates in several regions now mandate that all new residential units must have at least one “thermal refuge” space capable of staying below 26°C (79°F) without active power.

• Passive Requirements: This forces architects to use high-performance windows, external shading, and “high-thermal-mass” materials that absorb heat during the day and release it at night.

Embodied Carbon & Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA)

For the first time, major codes like California’s Title 24 (2025/2026 update) and the EU’s EPBD are regulating the “hidden” carbon in materials.

• The “Polluter Pays” Shift: Architects must now perform a Whole-Building Life-Cycle Assessment (WBLCA). If a building uses high-carbon materials (like traditional steel and concrete), it may face “carbon impact fees.”

• Salvage Rights: New codes are beginning to require “Design for Deconstruction,” ensuring that when a building reaches its end of life, its parts can be reused, creating a circular economy that lowers long-term infrastructure costs.

“Islandable” Power Standards

Resilience now means a building must be its own lifeboat.

• Solar + Storage Mandates: Codes now frequently require new multi-family buildings to be “Solar Ready” or include minimum battery storage.

• Microgrid Interoperability: New standards require buildings to have an “Automatic Transfer Switch” (ATS), allowing them to safely disconnect from a failing grid and run on internal power—keeping elevators and water pumps running during disasters.

Out with the Old, In with the New

Here are examples of the differences between traditional approaches Furure-Peoof Codes.

• Flood Design: The old approach is based on 100-year historical data. The Future-Proof Code is based on 50-year forward-looking projections.

• Energy Use: At present, focused only on monthly bills, will be based on Peak Demand and Grid Support.

• Materials:     Currentlu any safe material is allowed. In the future, materials must meet maximum Embodied Carbon limits.

• Grid Failure: Currently, there is no habitability requirement; a change to an A requirement to maintain “Safe-Zone” temperatures for 72+ hours.

Summing up, it is clear that Building Codes are a major determinant of the success or failure of homes, offices, industrial plants and basic infrastructure to withstand the impacts of extreme weather events or other natural disasters

Ultimately, it all boils down to the issue of costs, that is, costs avoided or costs incurred. A major factor affecting the costs of resilient design and construction is insurance, and the next article in the Defining the Future Series will examine the important role insurance companies can play in helping to create a more resilient future.

________________________________

Frank Came is the Communications  Director for the Pacific Northwest Building Resilience Coalition. He can be reached at franktcame@gmail.com