NC will force cities to allow ADUs — and expressly leaves HOA bans intact
NC will force cities to allow ADUs — and expressly leaves HOA bans intact
2026-09-12 · North Carolina · Legislation
North Carolina has enacted a municipal accessory-dwelling-unit mandate and written an explicit carve-out for private covenants into it. From January 15, 2027, certain cities must permit ADUs — and an association whose declaration prohibits them may keep enforcing that prohibition.1
This is the clearest recent statement of a principle North Carolina owners get wrong constantly: a zoning permission is not a covenant permission, and a city cannot grant what a declaration forbids.
What the measure does
Section 44 of Session Law 2026-59 — the Regulatory Reform Act of 2026, ratified August 6 and approved August 11, 2026 — adds a new G.S. 160D-917 on accessory dwelling units.
Its reach is deliberately narrow. It applies to cities with a population of 50,000 or more located outside the coastal area, and it becomes effective January 15, 2027 for permit applications filed on or after that date. Smaller municipalities and coastal-area jurisdictions are untouched.
The provision that matters for community associations is subsection (e)(1), which states that the section does not affect
the validity or enforceability of private covenants or other contractual agreements among property owners related to dwelling type restrictions.
So the mandate runs against the city's zoning ordinance and stops at the recorded declaration.
The pattern this fits
This is the second time in the same biennium that the General Assembly has preempted municipal authority and expressly spared association authority in the same breath. The other is the Home-Based Business Fairness Act, S.L. 2026-51, which bars cities from prohibiting no-impact home-based businesses and then provides that the section does not apply where the business is prohibited by a deed, covenant, or the documents of a homeowners association.
Meanwhile House Bill 1212, which would have barred associations from limiting ADUs, never left House Rules.
The direction is consistent, and worth stating without editorial: in 2025–2026 the North Carolina General Assembly constrained what local governments may prohibit and declined to constrain what associations may prohibit.
What it changes for boards and managers
For most North Carolina associations, the correct answer is that nothing changes — and the work is in being able to say why, because owners will arrive with the opposite conclusion.
The sequence of questions an association will actually face from January 2027:
- “The city approved my ADU permit.” That establishes the city has no zoning objection. It establishes nothing about the declaration. G.S. 160D-917(e)(1) is explicit that the section does not affect covenant enforceability.
- “State law requires ADUs now.” State law requires certain cities to permit them. It imposes no obligation on a private association, and the statute sits in Chapter 160D, which governs local planning and development regulation — not in Chapter 47C or 47F.
- “Then what does the declaration say?” This is the only question that decides the matter, and it is frequently less clear than either side assumes.
On that third question, the carve-out's own language is worth noticing. It preserves covenants “related to dwelling type restrictions.” Most North Carolina declarations do not contain a clause headed “accessory dwelling units.” They contain single-family-residential-use clauses, occupancy limits, architectural approval requirements, outbuilding restrictions, and sometimes a bar on subdividing a lot or on separate leasing of part of a structure. Whether a given combination of those amounts to a dwelling-type restriction that prohibits an ADU is a question of covenant construction, and North Carolina construes restrictive covenants strictly in favour of the free use of land.
An association that wants to prohibit ADUs and is relying on a general single-family clause is in a weaker position than one with an express restriction — and that gap is where the disputes will be. The safe course is to know which of the two you have before January 2027, rather than after the first application.
Two things this does not do
It does not preempt architectural review. Even where a declaration permits an ADU in principle, an ARC's authority over design, siting, materials and screening is unaffected. Nothing in G.S. 160D-917 touches it.
It does not reach most of the state. The 50,000-population threshold and the coastal-area exclusion mean the mandate applies to a modest number of North Carolina cities. An association outside those cities sees no change in the municipal layer either.
What to watch next
Which cities are actually covered, and what their ordinances look like. Covered cities have to amend their development regulations ahead of the January 15, 2027 application date, and those amendments will define practical ADU standards — size, setbacks, parking, owner-occupancy — in each jurisdiction. An association's real-world exposure depends far more on what its city adopts than on the statute.
Whether the threshold moves. Population-keyed preemptions in North Carolina have a habit of expanding in later sessions, and the 2027 long session convenes January 13, 2027.
Whether anyone revisits the carve-out. HB 1212's ADU provision was the counterweight, and it did not get a hearing. If ADUs continue to be argued as housing supply rather than as owner rights, the carve-out is the obvious next target — and, unlike the 2026 bill, a narrowly drawn ADU-only measure would not have to carry solar and vegetable gardens with it.
Related North Carolina HOA Topics
Stay on top of North Carolina HOA law
Every week: new North Carolina legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.