Zoning; development and use of accessory dwelling units.
HB1832 would require local zoning ordinances for single-family residential districts to treat accessory dwelling units (ADUs) as a permitted accessory use, rather than requiring a special use permit. The bill defines an ADU as a dwelling unit on a residential lot that is accessory to, and within, attached to, or detached from, the primary single-family home. Localities would still be allowed to regulate certain aspects of ADUs, including limiting a lot to one ADU, requiring minimum lease terms of 30 days or more, imposing building-code and infrastructure compliance requirements, and setting limits on size, height, parking replacement, and distance from the primary dwelling.
The bill also creates a local permitting process for ADUs, allowing local governments to charge a permit fee of up to $500, plus other applicable inspection or building-related fees. A locality must issue the permit if the applicant meets the bill’s requirements and applicable local codes. The measure preserves private covenants and association rules, and it exempts existing ADU permits approved before July 1, 2026, as well as certain local ordinances already in place before January 1, 2025. The bill would take effect July 1, 2026.
HB1832 would amend the Code of Virginia by adding a new section, § 15.2-2292.3, to standardize how accessory dwelling units are treated in single-family residential zoning districts across the Commonwealth. It would limit local discretion by prohibiting special use permit requirements for ADUs and by restricting certain local conditions, while still preserving local authority over safety, infrastructure, historic-district, floodplain, and related land-use standards. The bill would affect local zoning ordinances, permitting practices, homeowners seeking to add ADUs, and property owners’ associations and other private covenants that may independently restrict ADU use.
No committee transcript or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate or roll-call evidence to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears designed to expand housing options and reduce zoning barriers for ADUs while preserving some local regulatory control, suggesting a policy approach that may appeal to housing advocates and local planning interests concerned with standards and neighborhood impacts.
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s preemption of local zoning discretion and the extent to which local governments may regulate ADUs. Supporters would likely favor the bill’s requirement that ADUs be permitted in single-family districts and its limits on special use permits, while opponents may object to reduced local control, the cap on permit fees, and restrictions on imposing parking, setback, or family-relationship requirements. Additional tension may arise over owner-occupancy rules, limits on ADU size and location, and the bill’s interaction with private covenants and homeowners’ association restrictions.