Under the Planning and Zoning Law, the legislative body of a county or city may adopt ordinances that, among other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land, as provided. The Subdivision Map Act vests the authority to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions in the legislative body of a local agency and sets forth procedures governing the local agency's processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval, and filing of tentative, final, and parcel maps. Existing law requires a local agency to consider ministerially a specified proposed housing development or to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split if the development or parcel meets specified requirements, including, that the development or parcel is not located within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources Inventory or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to city or county ordinance, as specified. Existing law authorizes a local agency to impose specified objective standards on the development or parcel created by an urban lot split, except as specified. With respect to ministerial review of a proposed housing development under the above-described provisions, this bill would, if the other specified requirements are met, instead require a local agency to consider ministerially the development that is not located in either a contributing structure within a historic district included on the State Historical Resources Inventory or within a historic property or district pursuant to city or county ordinance or in a parcel individually listed as a historical resource included in the State Historical Resources Inventory or within a property individually designated or listed as a city or county landmark under a city or county ordinance. The bill would also authorize a local agency to adopt objective standards for the purposes of maintaining the historical value of a historic district listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, as specified. With respect to an urban lot split under the above-described provisions, this bill would, if the other specified requirements are met, instead require a local agency to ministerially approve the urban lot split if the parcel is not located within a historic landmark property included on the State Historical Resources Inventory or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark pursuant to a city or county ordinance. The bill would additionally require that the proposed urban lot split not require demolition or alteration of specified structures. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022 (act) , until January 1, 2033, authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for an affordable housing development or a mixed-income housing development that meets specified objective standards and affordability and site criteria, including being located within a zone where office, retail, or parking are a principally permitted use. The act makes a development that meets those objective standards and affordability and site criteria a use by right and subject to one of 2 streamlined, ministerial review processes depending on, among other things, the affordability requirements applicable to the project. The act requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to undertake at least 2 studies, one completed on or before January 1, 2027, and one completed on or before January 1, 2031, on the outcomes of the act. This bill would provide that, for purposes of determining whether a property or site satisfies the criteria, objective development standards, or other requirements for receiving streamlined, ministerial review under the act, a local government's review of the property or site is limited to the area described as being physically disturbed by construction in the application for streamlined, ministerial review and does not include, unless expressly stated otherwise, other contiguous or noncontiguous areas even if under the ownership or control of the project proponent. The bill would provide that easements for public right-of-way, public or private utilities, or other public improvements in, under, or over the property shall not make the property ineligible to receive streamlined, ministerial review for either affordable or mixed-income housing developments. This bill would also expand the eligibility for the above-described streamlined, ministerial review for mixed-income housing developments to include developments located in a campus development zone, as defined, as long as the development meets certain affordability requirements and objective standards, as provided. The bill would require the outcomes of projects built under campus development zones to be reported in the January 1, 2031, outcomes report. The bill would also make related findings and declarations. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. By expanding the scope of projects eligible for streamlined, ministerial approval as described above, this bill would expand the scope of the exemption from CEQA for ministerial projects. Existing law includes certain setback requirements in the objective standards that a mixed-income development project must meet to be subject to the above-referenced streamlined, ministerial review process. In this regard, existing law requires all parking to be set back at least 25 feet. This bill would instead impose that setback requirement only on parking that is aboveground. By changing the criteria local agencies must follow for the approval of certain development projects, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other specified mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to determine whether the housing element is in substantial compliance with those provisions. Existing law requires the department to designate jurisdictions as prohousing pursuant to emergency regulations adopted by the department, as prescribed. Existing law requires that jurisdictions that are prohousing and that are in substantial compliance with specified provisions be awarded additional points or preference in the scoring of applications for specified state programs. Existing law defines "prohousing local policies" for these purposes and specifies a nonexhaustive list of examples of those policies, including local financial incentives for housing and adoption of zoning allowing for use by right for residential and mixed-use development. This bill would include in the definition of "prohousing local policies" policies that keep people housed, and would include additional examples of prohousing local policies under the above-described provisions, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.9 of the Government Code proposed by AB 36 to be operative only if this bill and AB 36 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law requires a city or county to prepare and adopt a general plan for its jurisdiction that contains certain mandatory elements, including a housing element. Existing law requires the housing element to identify adequate sites for housing, including rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, and emergency shelters, among other things. Existing law requires the housing element to contain an assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to the meeting of these needs, including by identifying one or more zoning designations that allow residential uses, including mixed uses, where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use or other discretionary permit and that are suitable for residential uses. Existing law requires an emergency shelter to include other interim interventions, including, but not limited to, a navigation center, bridge housing, and respite or recuperative care. This bill would additionally require an emergency shelter to include all services provided onsite, including the addition or expansion of services that are consistent with certain written, objective standards. By imposing a higher level of service on cities and counties in preparing and adopting a general plan, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to administer the Emergency Housing and Assistance Program. Under the program, moneys from the continuously appropriated Emergency Housing and Assistance Fund are available for the purposes of providing shelter, as specified, to homeless persons at as low of a cost and as quickly as possible, without compromising the health and safety of shelter occupants, to encourage the move of homeless persons from shelters to a self-supporting environment as soon as possible, to encourage provision of services for as many persons at risk of homelessness as possible, to encourage compatible and effective funding of homeless services, and to encourage coordination among public agencies that fund or provide services to homeless individuals, as well as agencies that discharge people from their institutions. Existing law defines "emergency shelter" to mean, in part, housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of 6 months or less by a homeless person. This bill would modify that definition to mean housing with supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of 6 months or less by a homeless person. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65583 of the Government Code proposed by AB 610 and AB 650, to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of postsecondary education in this state. Existing law establishes community college districts throughout the state and authorizes them to operate campuses and provide instruction to students. This bill would provide that a community college district is not required to comply with the zoning ordinances of a city, county, or city and county, for a university housing development project constructed on property owned or leased by a community college district if specific requirements are met. If the project includes units for faculty and staff, the bill would require the community college district to ensure that a portion of the units of the project are made available at affordable rents to extremely low income faculty and staff and lower income faculty and staff. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
Existing law, commonly referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development, as defined, within the city or county with a density bonus, other incentives or concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct specified units and meets other requirements. This bill would specify that a concession and incentive shall not result in a proposed project, as prescribed, with a specified commercial floor area ratio. The bill would also specify that certain provisions of the Density Bonus Law do not require a city, county, or city and county to approve, grant a concession or incentive requiring approval of, or waive or reduce development standards otherwise applicable to, transient lodging as part of a housing development, except as specified.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, which includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires, for the 4th and subsequent revisions of the housing element, the Department of Housing and Community Development, in consultation with each council of governments, where applicable, to determine the existing and projected need for housing for each region, as prescribed. Existing law requires, among other things, the department to meet and consult with the council of governments regarding the assumptions and methodology to be used by the department to determine the region's housing needs at least 26 months prior to the scheduled revision of the housing element and before developing the existing and projected housing need for a region. This bill would require the department to meet and consult with the council of governments, as described above, pursuant to prescribed deadlines. For the 7th revision of the housing element, the bill would require the department to meet and consult with each council of governments at least 38 months prior to the scheduled revision, except for specified councils of governments. For the 8th and subsequent revision of the housing element, the bill would require the department to meet and consult with each council of governments at least 38 months prior to the scheduled revision. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.01 of the Government Code proposed by SB 486 to be operative only if this bill and SB 486 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law provides that recorded covenants, conditions, restrictions, or private limits on the use of land contained in instruments affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in real property that, among other things, restrict the number, size, or location of the residences that may be built on the property, are not enforceable against the owner of an affordable housing development, as defined, if an approved restrictive covenant affordable housing modification document has been recorded in the public record, as provided. As part of this process, existing law requires the owner to submit to the county recorder a copy of the original restrictive covenant and any documents the owner believes necessary to establish that the property qualifies as an affordable housing development and requires the county counsel to determine, among other things, if the property qualifies as an affordable housing development and if a modification document may be recorded. Existing law provides that these provisions do not authorize any development that is not otherwise consistent with local general plans, zoning ordinances, and any applicable specific plan. This bill would extend those provisions to a housing development that is owned or controlled by an entity or individual that has submitted a development project application to redevelop an existing commercial property, and the development project includes residential uses permitted by state housing laws or local land use and zoning regulations and would make various conforming changes. The bill would additionally make these provisions applicable to covenants, conditions, restrictions, or private limits contained in a reciprocal easement agreement, as provided, and include instruments affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in real property that prohibits the number, size, or location of residences that may be built on the property or restricts or prohibits the residential uses of the property. The bill would further provide that these provisions do not authorize any development that is not otherwise consistent with state housing laws. By imposing additional duties on county officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law relating to housing development approval requires a local agency to compile a list of information needed to approve or deny a postentitlement phase permit, to post an example of a complete, approved application and an example of a complete set of postentitlement phase permits for at least 5 types of housing development projects in the jurisdiction, as specified, and to make those items available to all applicants for these permits no later than January 1, 2024. Existing law establishes time limits for completing reviews regarding whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit is complete and compliant and consequences for a local agency that fails to meet that timeline, as provided. Existing law defines "postentitlement phase permit" to, among other things, include a range of permits issued by a local agency. This bill would require a state agency to comply with the above-described provisions relating to postentitlement phase permits applicable to a local agency. The bill would require a state agency to make the information list, as described above, and the above-described examples of a complete, approved application and a complete set of postentitlement phase permits available on the agency's internet website by January 1, 2026. The bill would deem a postentitlement phase permit approved, and all related reviews complete, if a state agency fails to meet the time limits for review of an application for that permit. The bill would revise the definition of "postentitlement phase permit" for purposes of these provisions to, among other things, include permits issued by a state agency and any postentitlement review by a state agency that is necessary to begin construction of a development that is intended to be at least 23 residential, excluding certain discretionary and ministerial permits and reviews and subject to specified exceptions, and would define the term "state agency" for these purposes. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of certain lands outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. That law allows a development proponent to submit an application for a development that is subject to a specified streamlined, ministerial approval process not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies certain objective planning standards, including that the development is a multifamily housing development that contains two or more residential units. This bill would deem an adaptive reuse project a use by right in all zones, regardless of the zoning of the site, and subject to a streamlined, ministerial review process if the project meets specified requirements, subject to specified exceptions. In this regard, an adaptive reuse project, in order to qualify for the streamlined, ministerial review process, would be required to be proposed for an existing building or structure that is less than 50 years old or meets certain requirements regarding the preservation of historic resources, including the signing of an affidavit declaring that the project will comply with the United States Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for, among other things, the preservation of exterior facades of a building or structure that face a street, or receive federal or state historic rehabilitation tax credits, as specified. The bill would require an adaptive reuse project to meet specified affordability criteria. In this regard, the bill would require an adaptive reuse project for rental housing to include either 8% of the unit for very low income households and 5% of the units for extremely low income households or 15% of the units for lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project for owner-occupied housing, the bill would require the development to offer either 30% of the units at an affordable housing cost to moderate-income households or 15% of the units at an affordable housing cost to lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project including mixed uses, the bill would require at least one-half of the square footage of the adaptive reuse project to be dedicated to residential uses. The bill would prohibit an adaptive reuse project from being permitted in industrial zones that do not permit residential uses. The bill would provide, among other things relating to projects involving adaptive reuse, that parking is not required for the portion of a project consisting of a building subject to adaptive reuse that does not have existing onsite parking. The bill would authorize an adaptive reuse project subject to these provisions to include the development of new residential or mixed-use structures on undeveloped areas and parking areas located on the same parcel as the proposed repurposed building, or on the parcels adjacent to the proposed adaptive reuse project site if certain conditions are met. The bill would subject an adaptive reuse project approved by a local government pursuant to these provisions to specified labor standards, including certain labor prevailing wage, apprenticeship, skilled and training workforce, and health care expenditure requirements, and would require development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury. By requiring certain development proponents of an adaptive reuse project to sign an affidavit regarding the preservation of historic resources and requiring development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury, the bill would expand the crime of perjury and therefore impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a local government to adopt an ordinance, as specified, to, among other things, specify the process and requirements applicable to adaptive reuse projects, as specified, and would require an adaptive reuse project to comply with all objective planning standards found in the ordinance. The bill would specify that nothing in its provisions relating to adaptive reuse projects is intended to preempt the adoption and implementation of a local ordinance that provides alternative procedures and substantive requirements for adaptive reuse projects, provided that the local ordinance does not prohibit an applicant from electing to pursue an adaptive reuse project, as specified. The bill would require a local agency that has not adopted an above-described ordinance to ministerially without discretionary review approve or disapprove applications for a permit to create or serve an adaptive reuse project, as specified. The bill would, if a local government's planning director or equivalent position determines that the adaptive reuse project submitted pursuant to these provisions is consistent with the objective planning standards, require the local government to approve the adaptive reuse project within specified timeframes. The bill would require the local government staff or relevant local planning and permitting department, upon determining that the adaptive reuse project is in conflict with any of the objective planning standards, to provide the proponent written documentation of, among other things, which standard or standards the development conflicts with within specific timeframes. The bill would prohibit a local government from imposing any local development standard on any project that is an adaptive reuse that would require alteration of the existing building envelope, except as specified, whether or not the local government has adopted an ordinance. By requiring local governments to implement the streamlined, ministerial review process for adaptive reuse projects, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, except as specified, exempt an adaptive reuse project from all impact fees that are not reasonably related to the impacts resulting from the change of use of the site from nonresidential to residential or mixed use and would require any fees charged to be roughly proportional to the difference in impacts caused by the change of use. This bill would authorize a city or county, or city and county, commencing in the 2026–27 fiscal year, to establish an adaptive reuse investment incentive program to pay adaptive reuse investment incentive funds to the proponent of an adaptive reuse project approved pursuant to the streamlined, ministerial process described above for up to 30 consecutive fiscal years, as specified. The bill would define "adaptive reuse investment incentive funds" to mean an amount up to or equal to the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to the participating local agency from the taxation of that portion of the total assessed value of the real and personal property of an adaptive reuse project property that is in excess of the qualified adaptive reuse project property's valuation at the time of the proponent's initial request for funding. The bill would define various other terms for these purposes, and would make findings and declarations related to its provisions. The bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2026. (2) Existing law, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill, by establishing the streamlined, ministerial review process described above, would exempt the approval of adaptive reuse projects subject to those processes from CEQA. The bill would also exempt specified findings regarding industrial uses and ordinances adopted to implement specified provisions from CEQA. (3) Existing law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to notify a city, county, or city and county, and authorizes the department to notify the Attorney General, that a city, county, or city and county is in violation of state law if the department finds that the housing element or an amendment to that element, or any specified action or failure to act, does not substantially comply with the law as it pertains to housing elements or that any local government has taken an action in violation of certain housing laws. This bill would make corrections to a housing law cross-reference relating to the adaptive reuse project process established by the bill, thereby making a violation of that adaptive reuse project process by a city, county, or city and county subject to the above-described notification requirements. (4) The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65585 of the Government Code proposed by AB 650 to be operative only if this bill and AB 650 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
