House Bill 856 would revise North Carolina’s law governing deed restrictions and similar covenants that affect solar collectors on residential property. The bill keeps the general rule that restrictions cannot prohibit the installation of solar collectors used for water heating, space heating and cooling, or electricity generation, but it clarifies and narrows how that protection works. It defines “residential property,” excludes certain multi-story condominiums from the statute’s coverage, and specifies that associations may regulate the location or screening of solar equipment so long as those rules do not reduce the system’s operating efficiency by more than 10 percent.
The bill also adds detailed provisions for homeowners’ associations and similar entities. It allows covenants to assign responsibility for damage caused by installation, existence, or removal of solar collectors to the property owner, and it permits indemnification provisions and limits association maintenance obligations unless a written, recorded agreement says otherwise. At the same time, it preserves some restrictions for solar collectors visible from public or common areas, including on certain facades and roof surfaces, and it authorizes courts to award costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party in civil actions under the statute.
HB856 would amend G.S. 22B-20, the state statute that limits deed restrictions on solar collectors, by clarifying what types of residential properties are protected, what kinds of aesthetic or placement rules are still allowed, and how disputes over solar installations are handled. The bill would affect homeowners, property owners’ associations, condominium regimes, developers, and purchasers of residential property by making the enforceability of solar-related covenants more specific. Its effective-date provision applies the changes to deed restrictions and similar agreements recorded on or after the date the act becomes law.
The available context shows no committee debate or recorded votes, so there is no documented opposition or support beyond the bill’s introduction and referral. Based on the text, the bill appears to be framed as a consumer- and solar-friendly clarification measure that preserves solar access while giving associations clearer authority over placement, screening, and maintenance responsibilities. The overall tone is regulatory and technical rather than controversial in the materials provided.
The main points of potential contention are the balance between solar access and private covenant control, and the extent to which homeowners’ associations and condominium communities may regulate visible solar installations. Property owners and solar advocates may favor the bill’s protection of solar collectors and its 10 percent efficiency threshold, while associations, condominium boards, or developers may be concerned about limits on architectural control, liability for damage, and maintenance obligations. The exclusion of certain multi-story condominiums and the allowance for restrictions on visible installations could also be debated as either necessary exceptions or overly broad carveouts.