On July 11, 2026, the 21^st Century ROAD to Housing Act (the “Act”) became law without the President’s signature following a 396–13 vote in the House of Representatives and an 85–5 vote in the Senate. While public statements that it is the most important housing bill in generations might be hyperbolic, it is a huge bill that will impact builders and state and local governments for years to come.

One of the major goals of the Act is increasing housing supply. Permitting is frequently cited as a main driver of cost and uncertainty, and is a particular thrust of Sections 107, 205, 206, 209, 501 and other places throughout the Act. While reform to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process is surely welcome, permitting principally takes place at the state and local level. States adopt enabling legislation, and localities adopt local ordinances that customize the general framework of the state enabling legislation to their unique circumstances.

Section 107 is particularly important to state and local governments, developers of affordable housing, and homebuilders. In substance, it calls for development of new model state enabling acts and ordinances designed to increase housing availability. It is up to state and local governments to adopt them (or not), and the Act prohibits the federal government from taking adverse actions against states and local governments that do not or cannot do so. However, political pressure to do something may be significant.

Enabling statutes and local ordinances in Virginia and West Virginia are the lineal descendants of models developed by the U.S. Department of Commerce in the 1920s. A century down the road, it is probably ripe for revisiting. However, the devil will be in the details. The Act directs the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to convene a workgroup within two years to develop new models to further housing availability, and to release them for an administrative process including public comments within three years. We anticipate that Spilman clients will be well-advised to submit comments, participate in lobbying efforts in statehouses, and make reforms to local ordinances in coming years. Spilman stands ready to help with experienced attorneys in these practice areas.

Whether this becomes more like the model zoning enabling acts and ordinances from the 1920s that spread like wildfire due to their quality, becomes an effort with much work done but little effect, or ultimately evolves to be more like zoning for wireless communication facilities where federal regulations and federal courts play an outsized role (and in the case of federal courts, a role they do not usually want) remains to be seen. But the lobbying efforts will be important.

Perhaps the biggest problem is simple timelines. The timeline from conceptual plan, through capital allocations and permitting, to actual built homes is long—three to five years is very fast. This is probably part of why builders have not seemed particularly sensitive to the price signals being sent as home prices skyrocket. Shortening the permitting timelines would probably help, but it only loosens one bottleneck among many. For example, a stick-built home simply cannot be built in most of the United States for less than $200,000 exclusive of land purchase costs and financing costs, and often much more. This is always going to place a floor on where the first rung of the homeownership ladder can be.

Other important reforms are loosening the regulations on manufactured homes and limiting the impact of large firms that buy up large amounts of housing stock speculatively or in order to rent it. How these manufactured home changes play out will be interesting, particularly as 2026 Virginia Acts ch. 19 dealing with differential treatment of manufactured homes. While manufactured homes can be built more cheaply than stick-built homes, they do present serious difficulties with the National Flood Insurance Program, which requires that local zoning ordinances treat manufactured homes differently from stick-built homes.

In summary, it is likely that the changes to Virginia law in the 2026 General Assembly Session and beyond will make more difference than the federal changes will. Land use controls remain primarily a local affair, and to the extent they are federalized, it is more often a byproduct of the provisions of the Clean Water Act than due to NEPA. Provisions such as minimizing off-street parking, forcing auxiliary dwelling units to be by-right in residential districts, and opening up the options available for local governments to promote affordable housing and ensure that it is kept affordable for the long-term will have a bigger and more positive impact than new model enabling acts and ordinances.

Spilman attorneys have experience and stand ready to assist in all phases of local governments’ and developers’ efforts in these arenas. Our experience with local zoning, subdivision, and stormwater issues, major infrastructure issues such as water, sewer and transportation, drafting of local ordinances, lobbying in statehouses, and working on issues around low-income housing tax credits and both private financing and affordable housing bonds to assist in development places us in an excellent position to help both localities and developers.