Nevada AB 396: The New Statewide Casita Law Explained (2026)

Nevada's A.B. 396 requires the state's largest counties and cities — Clark and Washoe Counties and the cities of Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, Reno, and Sparks — to allow accessory dwelling units, or "casitas," on single-family lots. The ADU provisions took effect July 1, 2026. Here is what the enrolled law actually says, and the popular claims it does not support.

---

AB 396 is being described across Nevada news coverage as the state's new "by-right casita law." The headline is roughly true — it is a real statewide mandate, and it is now in effect — but several of the specifics circulating online are not in the enrolled bill. The statute does not use the words "by-right" or "permitted use." It sets no minimum lot size and no square-footage cap. It does not require owner-occupancy, and it does not force your HOA to allow anything. Here is what A.B. 396 changed, what it left to your city, and what it left untouched.

AB 396 at a Glance

AB 396 fact	What the statute says	Source
Effective date (ADU provisions)	ADU sections effective July 1, 2026; bill approved June 6, 2025 (Chapter 365)	[1][2]
Governments covered	Counties 100,000+ (Clark, Washoe) and cities 60,000+ (Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, Reno, Sparks)	[1]
Core mandate	Each covered government must adopt an ordinance authorizing ADUs on single-family residential property	[1]
Default if no ordinance	If a covered government misses July 1, 2026, ADUs are authorized on any residentially zoned parcel without restriction	[1]
Parking	No more than one additional space — and none if existing plus street parking meet the need	[1]
Setbacks	Side/rear setbacks cannot be more restrictive than for the primary residence	[1]
Separate kitchen	Cities cannot prohibit separate kitchen facilities (sink, refrigerator, stove/range/oven)	[1]
Rental use	Cities cannot ban long-term rental of the casita, but may ban transient (short-term) lodging	[1]
Number of units	No more than two ADUs per residential property	[1]
Size / lot minimum	No statewide square-footage cap and no minimum lot size (set by local ordinance)	[1]
Owner-occupancy	Not addressed by the statute (neither required nor prohibited)	[1]
HOAs	Not overridden — AB 396 governs city/county zoning, not HOA CC&Rs	[1]
Tahoe carve-out	Does not apply in the interstate-compact regional planning area (Tahoe/TRPA) whose plan regulates housing	[1]

Bottom Line

Nevada A.B. 396 (2025 Session), sponsored by Assemblymember Shea Backus and enacted as Chapter 365, is a housing bill with two very different halves. Section 1 adds a new section to NRS Chapter 278 (planning and zoning) that requires Nevada's largest local governments to authorize accessory dwelling units. The back half of the bill (Sections 5–10) amends NRS Chapter 116, the common-interest-community statute, on unrelated topics — leasing restrictions, community termination votes, resale-package disclosures, and association fines. Those two halves matter, because a lot of the confusion about "casitas and HOAs" comes from assuming the Chapter 116 provisions are about ADUs. They are not [1].

The ADU mandate is straightforward. Each county whose population is 100,000 or more (currently Clark and Washoe) and each city whose population is 60,000 or more (currently Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, Reno, and Sparks) "shall adopt an ordinance that authorizes the development and use of an accessory dwelling unit on residential property" [1]. The bill then caps what that ordinance may require: no ban on separate kitchens, no more than one extra parking space, no side/rear setback stricter than the main house, and no prohibition on renting the unit. The Governor approved the bill June 6, 2025, but the ADU provisions did not take effect until July 1, 2026 [1][2].

The single most important — and most overlooked — provision is the default rule in Section 11. If a covered county or city fails to adopt a compliant ordinance by July 1, 2026, then "accessory dwelling units are authorized on any parcel zoned for residential use without restriction" [1]. That is the enforcement hammer: comply, or lose all your local ADU rules by operation of state law. It is also the source of a common misreading, addressed below.

Myth	Reality
"AB 396 makes casitas by-right across all of Nevada."	It binds only Clark/Washoe Counties and five large cities, and it never uses "permitted use" or "by-right" language — it mandates authorization and caps conditions. [1]
"AB 396 forces my HOA to allow a casita."	No. AB 396 limits city and county zoning, not private HOA rules. An HOA's CC&Rs can still restrict or block a casita. [1]
"I can run my new casita as an Airbnb."	Maybe not. Cities may prohibit using the ADU as transient lodging; only long-term rental is protected by the statute. [1]
"There's a minimum lot size, or a state size cap on the casita."	No. AB 396 sets no minimum lot size and no square-footage cap; those come from your local ordinance. [1]
"Since the law passed, ADUs are unrestricted everywhere now."	Only where a covered city missed the July 1, 2026 deadline. Where a city adopted an ordinance, that ordinance (within AB 396's limits) governs. [1]

What AB 396 Actually Does

Strip away the common-interest-community sections and the ADU core of A.B. 396 is one new statute in NRS Chapter 278 doing one job: forcing Nevada's big-metro local governments to say "yes" to accessory dwelling units in single-family zones, on terms the state has partly pre-set [1].

Here is the operative language. Each covered governing body "shall adopt an ordinance that authorizes the development and use of an accessory dwelling unit on residential property" [1]. "Residential property" is defined narrowly as property "located in an area of the county or city … zoned for single-family residential use" [1]. So the mandate lands squarely on ordinary single-family neighborhoods — the exact places where ADUs were historically hardest to get approved.

The bill defines an accessory dwelling unit broadly: "an independent living space that is built on the same lot as the primary residence on a residential property, regardless of whether the independent living space is attached, detached or built within the primary residence" [1]. That one sentence covers all three casita types at once — a detached backyard cottage, an attached addition, and an interior conversion such as a basement or garage unit. Unlike Utah's law, which created a separate detached-ADU statute, Nevada's definition sweeps in every configuration.

Then the statute constrains the ordinance. As a condition of approving an ADU, a covered city or county may not [1]:

• Prohibit separate kitchen facilities. The unit is allowed a full kitchen — the bill defines "kitchen facilities" to include "a sink, refrigerator and a significant cooking appliance such as a range, stove or oven" [1]. This is what makes it a true independent dwelling rather than a bedroom suite.
• Require more than one additional parking space — and even that single space is required only when "the existing parking for the primary residence and street parking" do not "satisfy the anticipated parking needs" for the ADU [1]. On many lots, that means zero required additional parking.
• Require any side or rear setback more restrictive than the requirements for the primary residence [1].
• Require improvements or repairs to a public street, unless the work is needed to fix a street disturbed during the ADU's construction or for public health and safety [1].
• Prohibit the owner from using the ADU as rental housing [1].

The statute also settles a building-code question that trips up a lot of backyard projects: an approved ADU "must meet all applicable building codes, housing codes" and health-and-safety codes, but "is not required to meet any building code or other code regulating the health and safety of commercial buildings, including, without limitation, any code that requires a fire sprinkler system in a commercial building" [1]. In plain terms, your casita is treated as residential, not commercial.

Two structural limits round out the section. Cities remain free to go further than the mandate — the bill expressly does not stop a local government from "implementing a process that sets forth more favorable conditions," including approving an ADU "by building permit in lieu of approval by the planning department" [1]. But it caps the mandate on the other end: nothing in the section authorizes "more than two accessory dwelling units on any residential property" [1].

Who's Covered: the Population Thresholds

AB 396 does not reach every Nevada jurisdiction. Its mandate is tied to two population triggers [1]:

• Counties whose population is 100,000 or more — currently Clark and Washoe [1].
• Cities whose population is 60,000 or more — currently Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, Reno, and Sparks [1].

Because Clark and Washoe Counties are both over 100,000, the unincorporated parts of those counties are covered too — that pulls in the large unincorporated Las Vegas-area communities (places like Paradise, Enterprise, Spring Valley, and Sunrise Manor) under Clark County's ordinance, and unincorporated Washoe County under its own. So in practical terms, the mandate blankets both the Las Vegas Valley and the Reno-Sparks metro. Rural Nevada counties and small cities below the thresholds are simply not bound; whether you can build a casita there is governed entirely by existing local code.

There is one carve-out inside the covered area. The ordinance "does not apply in a region … for which there has been created by interstate compact a regional planning agency and the regional plan … calls for the regulation of housing" [1]. That describes the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA), the bi-state body governing the Lake Tahoe Basin. So the Nevada-side Tahoe communities in Washoe County (such as Incline Village and Crystal Bay) fall outside AB 396's ADU mandate and remain under TRPA's regional rules [1].

When Does AB 396 Take Effect?

The effective-date structure is the second most error-prone part of the bill, after the HOA question. Here is the sequence [1][2]:

Date	What happens
June 6, 2025	Governor approves A.B. 396 (Chapter 365). Sections 13 and 14 take effect immediately. [2]
June 6, 2025 – July 1, 2026	Sections 1–12 are in effect only "for the purpose of adopting any regulations and performing any other preparatory administrative tasks." Cities draft and pass their ADU ordinances during this window. [1]
July 1, 2026	The ADU provisions take effect "for all other purposes." Covered ordinances must be in place. [1]
After July 1, 2026	Any covered government without a compliant ordinance must allow ADUs on residentially zoned parcels without restriction until it adopts one. [1]

The gap between approval and effect was deliberate: the Legislature gave local governments a full year to write ordinances before the mandate — and its no-ordinance default — switched on [1]. By the July 1, 2026 deadline, Nevada's major cities had moved to comply. Reno adopted an ADU ordinance in October 2025, well ahead of the deadline, and the other large cities followed with their own ordinances around the July 1, 2026 effective date [3][4]. That timing has a practical consequence most summaries miss, covered in the next section.

Does "Without Restriction" Mean My City Has No Rules?

This is the most misunderstood line in the bill. The phrase "authorized on any parcel zoned for residential use without restriction" appears only in the default rule of Section 11 — the penalty a covered government suffers if it fails to adopt an ordinance by July 1, 2026 [1].

It does not describe the normal state of affairs. Where a covered city or county did adopt a compliant ordinance — which the large Nevada cities did by the deadline [3][4] — that local ordinance governs your casita, subject to AB 396's caps. You still follow your city's rules on size, height, front setbacks, design, lot coverage, and permitting; the state just guarantees a floor (separate kitchen allowed, parking capped, rental protected, and so on). So if someone tells you casitas are now "completely unrestricted" in Las Vegas or Reno, they are describing the failure scenario, not the actual one. Check your city's adopted ADU ordinance for the details that AB 396 leaves to local choice [1].

What Cities Can Still Require

AB 396 is a floor, not a deregulation of everything. Because the statute only enumerates a short list of conditions cities cannot impose, everything else remains a local decision. Once your city's ordinance is in force, it can still [1]:

• Set a maximum size for the ADU. The statute imposes no square-footage cap, so any size limit comes from local code.
• Impose front-yard setbacks and height limits. Only side and rear setbacks are capped (they cannot exceed the main house's); front setbacks and height are untouched by the statute.
• Apply design, lot-coverage, and building-code standards, including the residential building, housing, and health-and-safety codes the ADU must meet [1].
• Prohibit short-term rental. The bill expressly allows the ordinance to "prohibit the owner … from using the accessory dwelling unit as transient lodging" [1].
• Charge permit and impact fees. AB 396's ADU section says nothing about fees, so standard local permitting and impact fees are not capped by the statute.
• Require up to one additional parking space where existing and street parking are inadequate [1].

What the statute is silent on is as important as what it caps. It does not address owner-occupancy at all — it neither requires you to live on the property nor forbids a city from asking. It sets no minimum lot size, unlike Utah's 11,000-square-foot threshold. And it does not cap the ADU's size. Those gaps are all filled by your city's ordinance, which is why the honest advice for any Nevada casita project is: read your city's adopted ADU ordinance, not just the state law.

Is a Casita Really "By-Right" Under AB 396?

Short answer: the effect is strongly pro-casita, but "by-right" is journalism, not statutory text. This distinction is exactly the kind of nuance that trips up homeowners planning a project.

Utah's comparable 2026 law, SB 284, uses precise land-use language: it makes a detached ADU a "permitted use" and bars cities from requiring a conditional-use permit in residential zones. Nevada's AB 396 does none of that. It never says "permitted use," "by-right," or "ministerial." What it says is that covered governments "shall adopt an ordinance that authorizes" ADUs, and it then forbids a specific list of conditions [1]. It does not expressly prohibit a discretionary or conditional-use review process, and it does not guarantee that your permit will be approved over a counter without a hearing.

In practice, the difference may be small, because the statute lets cities allow ADU approval "by building permit in lieu of approval by the planning department" [1], and Nevada's big cities have generally moved toward streamlined, administrative approval. But legally, the guarantee AB 396 gives you is narrower than a true statewide by-right mandate: your city must allow casitas and cannot impose the banned conditions, but the exact approval pathway — administrative versus discretionary — is set by each city's ordinance, not by the state. If a smooth, hearing-free process matters to your timeline, confirm how your specific city handles it [1].

Can My HOA Block a Casita?

This is the question with the biggest gap between what people assume and what the law says. The honest answer: AB 396 does not require your HOA to allow a casita, and in most cases your HOA can still block one.

Here is why. Section 1 of AB 396 — the ADU mandate — regulates "the governing body of a county" and "the governing body of a city," i.e., government zoning [1]. It says nothing about common-interest communities (HOAs) or their governing documents. The bill does amend the HOA statute, NRS Chapter 116, in Sections 5 through 10 — but those amendments deal with amending declarations, terminating communities, leasing restrictions, resale packages, and association fines. None of them requires an HOA to permit accessory dwelling units [1]. If anything, the Chapter 116 changes cut the other way: Section 5 newly authorizes an association to amend its declaration to restrict leasing where "reasonably designed to meet … underwriting requirements" of lenders or insurers [1].

So if your property sits in an HOA — as a large share of newer Las Vegas Valley and Reno-area homes do — your association's CC&Rs, architectural guidelines, and design-review committee can still restrict or prohibit a casita, and AB 396 gives you no statewide override. State law removed the zoning barrier; it left the private covenant barrier fully intact. Anyone marketing casitas as "now allowed everywhere in Nevada" is skipping the HOA question, and for many suburban homeowners the HOA is the binding constraint. Read your CC&Rs and ask your association before you assume the state law clears the way.

Can I Rent Out My Casita?

Yes for long-term rental, and maybe not for short-term. AB 396 bars a covered city from adopting an ordinance that would "prohibit the owner of the residential property from using the accessory dwelling unit as rental housing" [1]. That protects the classic use case: build a casita, rent it to a long-term tenant, family member, or roommate.

The very next clause carves out short-term rental: "The ordinance may prohibit the owner of the residential property from using the accessory dwelling unit as transient lodging" [1]. "Transient lodging" is the nightly/vacation-rental category. So a city is free to let you rent your casita by the month or year while forbidding you from listing it on Airbnb or VRBO. If your financial plan depends on nightly rates, that assumption may not survive your city's ordinance — and separately, if you are in an HOA, the association may also restrict rentals under the Chapter 116 provisions discussed above [1]. Confirm both layers before you underwrite rental income.

How Nevada Compares to Utah and the Western ADU Wave

AB 396 is part of a broader 2025–2026 pattern of Western states overriding local resistance to backyard housing — but each state does it with different mechanics, and the differences matter for your project.

Utah passed a similar statewide law, SB 284, in 2026. Both states force their larger local governments to allow accessory units, but the tools differ sharply. Our companion guide on Utah's SB 284 detached-ADU rules walks through a law that is, in some ways, the mirror image of Nevada's: Utah uses explicit "permitted use" language and bars conditional-use hearings, but limits its mandate to detached units on lots 11,000 square feet or larger and expressly lets cities keep owner-occupancy and a 90-day minimum-rental rule. Nevada's AB 396 is broader on scope (all ADU types, no lot-size minimum) but softer on process (no "by-right" language) and silent on owner-occupancy [1].

The common thread across the two states — and across parallel efforts in Washington, Oregon, and Virginia — is state preemption of blanket local denial. The differences are in the details that decide real projects: whether the state guarantees ministerial approval, whether it sets a lot-size floor, whether it protects short-term rental, and whether it touches HOAs. On that last point, both Nevada and Utah leave private HOA covenants standing, which is why the covenant layer deserves as much attention as the statute.

What To Do Now

A practical sequence for a Nevada homeowner in a covered county or city considering a casita:

1. Confirm you're in a covered jurisdiction. Clark or Washoe County (including their unincorporated areas), or the cities of Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, Reno, or Sparks. If you're outside those and not in a large county, AB 396's mandate does not apply and local code controls [1].
2. Read your city or county's adopted ADU ordinance, not just the state law. AB 396 leaves size, height, front setbacks, design, fees, and the approval process to local choice — that is where your real constraints live [1].
3. Check your HOA first if you're in one. AB 396 does not override CC&Rs. Your association's declaration and architectural rules can still block a casita, so clear that layer before you design anything [1].
4. Decide your rental plan early. Long-term rental is protected, but your city may prohibit short-term/transient rental, and an HOA may restrict leasing further [1].
5. Plan around what's still local: unit size, front setback, height, lot coverage, design consistency, and permit/impact fees. Remember AB 396 allows up to two ADUs per lot but does not require your city to permit two [1].
6. Run the feasibility numbers before committing. If you want to pressure-test whether a casita pencils on your specific lot and setbacks, ADU Pilot can help you model it.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is AB 396 in effect now? Yes. The bill was approved June 6, 2025, and its accessory-dwelling-unit provisions took effect July 1, 2026. Covered counties and cities were required to have compliant ordinances by that date; any that did not must allow ADUs on residentially zoned parcels without restriction until they adopt one [1][2].

Which Nevada cities and counties does it cover? Counties over 100,000 people (currently Clark and Washoe, including their unincorporated areas) and cities over 60,000 (currently Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, Reno, and Sparks). Smaller cities and rural counties are not bound by the state mandate [1].

Does AB 396 set a minimum lot size or a maximum casita size? No. Unlike Utah's SB 284, AB 396 sets no minimum lot size and no square-footage cap. Any size limit, along with height and front-setback rules, comes from your city's or county's adopted ordinance, not the state statute [1].

Can my HOA still stop me from building a casita? In most cases, yes. AB 396's ADU mandate applies to city and county zoning, not private HOA governing documents. Nothing in the enrolled bill requires a common-interest community to allow accessory dwelling units, so your CC&Rs and architectural rules can still restrict or block one [1].

Can I use my casita as a short-term rental? Maybe not. AB 396 bars cities from prohibiting long-term rental of a casita, but it expressly permits a city to prohibit using the unit as transient lodging — the nightly/vacation-rental category. Check your local ordinance, and your HOA rules, before counting on short-term rental income [1].

How many casitas can I have on one lot? AB 396 does not authorize more than two accessory dwelling units on any single residential property. Whether your city actually permits two, and at what sizes, is set by its local ordinance within that two-unit ceiling [1].

References

1. [1] Nevada Legislature, "A.B. 396 (2025) — Enrolled bill text (Chapter 365)." Primary source for every statutory claim in this article: the new NRS Chapter 278 section (Section 1) requiring counties of 100,000+ and cities of 60,000+ to adopt an ADU-authorizing ordinance; the "residential property," "accessory dwelling unit," and "kitchen facilities" definitions; the conditions an ordinance may not impose (separate-kitchen ban, one-space parking cap, side/rear setback cap, public-street-improvement limits, rental-housing protection with a transient-lodging carve-out); the two-ADU-per-lot ceiling; the Tahoe/interstate-compact carve-out; the July 1, 2026 default rule in Section 11 authorizing unrestricted ADUs where no ordinance is adopted; and the effective-date structure in Section 14 (approved June 6, 2025; ADU provisions effective July 1, 2026). https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/83rd2025/Bill/12561/Text
2. [2] Nevada Legislature, "A.B. 396 (2025) — Overview and status." Bill sponsor (Assemblymember Shea Backus), Chapter 365 designation, Governor's approval date of June 6, 2025, and legislative history. https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/83rd2025/Bill/12561/Overview
3. [3] Nevada Current, "Reno advances measure to allow 'accessory dwelling units'" (Sept. 11, 2025). Context only: coverage of Reno moving to adopt an ADU ordinance under AB 396 ahead of the July 1, 2026 deadline. https://nevadacurrent.com/2025/09/11/reno-advances-measure-to-allow-accessory-dwelling-units/
4. [4] KTNV Las Vegas, "New casita law takes effect July 1." Context only: local coverage of AB 396's July 1, 2026 effective date and cities updating their codes. https://www.ktnv.com/news/could-one-housing-supply-solution-be-right-in-your-own-backyard-new-casita-law-takes-effect-july-1

---