Nc Lawmakers Revive Housing Reform Agenda, Taking On Its Cities

North Carolina lawmakers once again will try to pass statewide housing reform in a Tar Heel State push to catch up with several of its own cities.​

An effort last year fell short largely due to a budget stalemate. That impasse rolls into the reconvened state legislative session that began this week.​

Several bills on the agenda this session prioritize housing affordability. They would preempt local control on parking, housing types, and permitting timelines. The measures would apply to all of North Carolina’s districts the same types of reforms that cities such as Raleigh and Durham have already codified.

North Carolina’s stalled housing reform mirrors a national struggle in statehouses nationwide. Lawmakers are taking aggressive steps to boost housing supply and address worsening affordability.​

From Raleigh to Tallahassee to Sacramento, efforts to ease zoning and permit more homes often run headlong into resistance. Local governments, whose electorates tend to be dominated by property owners intent on protecting the value of their most prized financial asset, have been steadfast in efforts to retain control over development rules.​

States such as Florida, Texas, Colorado, California, and Montana have passed statewide housing reforms. Nevertheless, they too face pushback and lawsuits from local governments.​

For now, local government opposition has kept North Carolina’s attempts at statewide reform at bay. Individual cities, however, stepped into the void.​

Parking mandates would follow Raleigh and Durham lead

Ending parking mandates has become a popular solution to eliminating a costly part of urban housing construction. They have also been blamed for creating vast empty spaces in urban neighborhoods.

In a LinkedIn post, Aaron Lubeck, a Durham developer, equated current parking provisions and their accompanying car culture to “urbicide.”

California, Colorado, Illinois, Washington, and Oregon are among the states whose legislators enacted laws upending minimum parking requirements statewide. Additionally, many cities have taken the step or are considering it.

House Bill 369, the Parking Lot Reform and Modernization Act, would eliminate local minimum parking requirements statewide. It would end the default assumption that every building must sit amidst a sea of asphalt.​

For cities that have already moved, the bill is less a revolution than an endorsement. Raleigh scrapped parking minimums in 2022, and Durham followed in 2024. Both shifted toward either no minimums or parking maximums in some areas. ​​

To date, Charlotte has eased parking mandates in some places, but has repeatedly stopped short of eliminating minimums citywide. Leaders cite political caution, car-dependent travel patterns, and concern about spillover parking into single-family neighborhoods.​

Raleigh and Durham, though, serve as case studies in how local experimentation can set the stage for a statewide measure. Cities at the vanguard of this reform now prove that ending mandates does not cause chaos. Their experience may provide lawmakers with political capital to standardize the rule statewide and extend it to jurisdictions that resist. ​​

North Carolina House legislators unanimously backed the bill last year, and it now needs Senate approval. If it passes, North Carolina will join several other states that ended parking mandates.​

Middle housing and ADUs

Regarding housing typologies, the state package aims to make middle housing and accessory dwelling units by-right residential development types. Such a measure would pivot ADUs from their current standing as an optional local experiment. Senate Bill 495 would require local governments to allow at least one ADU on most single‑family lots. It also sharply limits owner‑occupancy restrictions, parking minimums, and bespoke design controls that block them.​

Senate Bill 497 goes further. It mandates that all “middle housing” types — duplexes up to six‑unit housing in some drafts — be allowed in residential zones served by water and sewer. The bill would preempt single‑family‑only zoning where infrastructure already exists. ​​

Again, state proposals build on a local track record. Cities such as Raleigh have eased ADU rules and allowed more gentle density in established neighborhoods. Lingering design standards and procedural friction remain.​

Creating zoning and permitting guardrails

Several bills sketch out a new guardrail model for land‑use and permitting. Shot clocks are moving from sports metaphor to policy tool across the country.​

Instead of imposing a single zoning code from the state capital, the bills would set deadlines, incentives, and a common baseline. Local government officials could choose from a menu of pro‑housing reforms.​

One measure assembles more than a dozen development‑regulation changes. It would curb dimensional and aesthetic rules and trim some parking mandates. The bill also imposes a 90‑day clock on key land‑use permits to prevent applications from languishing indefinitely. The goal is to smooth out the current patchwork that allows one city to embrace compact growth while the next walls it off. ​​

A companion bill tries to do for permitting what the first bills do for zoning. It integrates private‑sector urgency into public review. The bill would set strict timelines for local review of development applications. It would allow both municipalities and builders to bring in third‑party professionals to review and approve plans when in‑house staff are overwhelmed.​

If agencies blow statutory deadlines, approvals will default to “yes.” The change would turn delay into a liability rather than a neutral outcome. ​​

Versions of this approach are already visible nationwide. Texas adopted a “shot clock” law that requires cities and counties to act on many plat and site‑plan applications within 30 days. Applications receive automatic approvals if officials miss the window.​

California’s accessory‑dwelling‑unit laws require local governments to act on ADU permits within 60 to 120 days. A newer law establishes a 10‑business‑day clock for final inspections on small residential projects. Other states, from Kansas to Washington to Georgia, are exploring similar timelines for housing permits. They are betting that clear deadlines and external reviewers can reduce red tape without compromising safety.​

Funding by‑right approvals ​

Senate Bill 736 would tie state dollars to by‑right approvals for qualifying affordable developments. The measure would support projects with income‑restricted units while limiting the discretionary hearings and rezonings that often kill them.​

This bill also echoes efforts in a few cities to fast‑track affordable housing. Some waive certain requirements when deep affordability is on the table. ​​

What the future holds for the bills

Governor Josh Stein has made improving housing affordability a linchpin of his agenda.​

“Our state is growing, and people need a safe and affordable place to live,” Stein said in a statement in June 2025.​

Taken together, the bills are less a top‑down revolution than an attempt to spread the best local ideas statewide. Supporters want action before the housing crisis worsens.​

As tends to happen, the varying bills may be blended. None may pass. One or two may end up on the governor’s desk. Groups such as the North Carolina League of Municipalities will oppose efforts to strip local governments of control.​

Raleigh, Durham, and a handful of peers have already shown that ending parking minimums, legalizing ADUs, and embracing middle housing are administratively feasible and politically survivable.​

The question now is whether lawmakers muster the political will to extend those experiments to the rest of the state. They could also leave them as isolated pockets of reform in a landscape still throttled by outdated rules.