HB 1029
In CommitteeHouse
3D-printed buildings
Concerning 3D-printed building construction.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill adds state-level rules allowing 3D-printed homes and buildings by adopting national safety standards for this construction method. It starts with temporary inclusion in an appendix and later moves the rules into the main building code.
- Requires the State Building Code Council to adopt the 2024 International Residential Code Appendix BM—which covers 3D-printed building construction—into the 2024 Washington State Residential Code during its regular adoption cycle.
- Plans to move 3D-printed building requirements from an appendix to the main body of the code by the 2027 Washington State Residential Code adoption cycle, signaling full integration into standard residential construction rules.
- Authorizes the use of 3D-printed construction for residential buildings, including single-family homes and townhouses, under state-approved standards.
- Aligns Washington’s code with national standards developed by the International Code Council (ICC) to ensure consistency and safety.
Who is affected
- Homebuilders and developers — Homebuilders and developers who use or plan to use 3D-printing technology for residential construction will be able to follow standardized, state-approved procedures for permitting and inspection.
- Local building inspectors and code enforcement staff — Local building inspectors and code enforcement staff will need to be trained on new 3D-printed construction standards and may face increased demand for inspections of novel building types.
- Homebuyers and future homeowners — Homebuyers may benefit from faster, lower-cost construction methods and potentially more affordable housing options, though they should expect new types of homes built with emerging technology.
- Architects and engineers — Architects and engineers may need to update their practices and training to incorporate 3D-printed construction methods and materials.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (3)
By formally adopting standardized 3D-printed construction, the bill enables faster, more scalable housing production—potentially lowering costs per unit and increasing supply, especially in high-demand areas—though the magnitude depends on local adoption and labor availability.
HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1), Sec. 1(2)Adopting the ICC’s 2024 Appendix BM—developed through consensus and peer-reviewed engineering—ensures minimum safety, structural, and fire-resistance standards for 3D-printed homes, protecting occupants from untested or substandard builds.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)The bill creates a pathway for new construction methods and supply chains (e.g., robotic extrusion, specialized polymers, composite materials), potentially generating skilled jobs in tech-enabled trades and supporting local innovation ecosystems—if training and transition support follow.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(1), Sec. 1(2)
Potential Concerns (3)
Local governments will need to invest in training, equipment, and staffing to inspect and enforce new 3D-printed construction standards, which may strain already limited municipal building department resources—especially in smaller jurisdictions without dedicated code enforcement staff.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(1)Moving 3D-printed construction from an appendix to the main code body before full industry maturation (e.g., long-term durability data, material consistency, fire performance) could increase risk of structural failures if standards outpace real-world validation—though the ICC-developed standards provide a baseline.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 1(2)Small contractors and local material suppliers may lack the technical capacity or capital to adopt 3D-printing technology, potentially widening the gap between large, well-resourced builders and smaller firms—unless additional support (e.g., grants, technical assistance) is provided, which this bill does not include.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 1(1)
Who Is Most Affected
Large, capital-rich developers with R&D capacity may quickly adopt 3D-printing to reduce labor and time costs—potentially increasing their market share. Smaller builders may struggle with upfront tech investment and training, risking competitive disadvantage.
Local building departments in urban areas may absorb the cost with relative ease, but rural or underfunded jurisdictions may face staffing and training gaps—delaying permitting or increasing backlogs until state support arrives.
First-time and low-to-moderate-income homebuyers stand to benefit most from lower construction costs and faster project timelines—if 3D-printed homes are actually priced affordably and accessible in high-need areas (not just luxury pilot projects).
Architects and engineers may need to upskill or partner with tech firms to design for additive manufacturing; this could increase project complexity early on but may open new design freedoms and efficiency gains over time.
Existing material suppliers (e.g., concrete, polymer producers) may expand into construction-grade feedstocks for 3D printers, while new startups may emerge to supply robotic extrusion systems—potentially reshaping local supply chains.