AB/SB

by

AB-3040 Local planning: regional housing need assessment

AB 3040 (by David Chiu):

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB3040

This bill would authorize a city or county to include in its inventory of land suitable for residential development specified sites that contain an existing single-family dwelling unit, but that the city or county has permitted, or is proposing to permit, to contain 4 dwelling units as a use by right. The bill would require these sites to be identified to satisfy either the moderate or the above-moderate income regional housing need income level. The bill would require a city or county identifying a site pursuant to these provisions to include in its housing element a description of the development standards that enable the identified sites to be redeveloped at a higher density, as specified. The bill would authorize a city or county, instead of listing sites individually in its inventory of land suitable for residential development, to include a summary of the credits received if the list of sites is included elsewhere in the housing element.

SATT NOTE: This bill would make void and unenforceable any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any deed, contract, security instrument, or other instrument affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in a planned development, and any provision of a governing document, that effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts the construction or use of up to 4 primary dwelling units on a lot zoned for at least 4 dwelling units, as specified.

by

AB-2345 Planning and zoning: density bonuses: annual report: affordable housing

Planning and zoning: density bonuses: annual report: affordable housing  AB-2345

Currently, the maximum density bonus for a mixed-income development is 35%, which can be achieved if a building is 20% low income housing. AB2345 increases the bonus scale, up to 50% for buildings that are 33% low income housing.

Existing law, known as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county city, county, or city and county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development within the jurisdictional boundaries of that city, county, or city and county with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units, or for the donation of land within the development, if the developer agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low income, low-income, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents and meets other requirements. Existing law provides for the calculation of the amount of density bonus for each type of housing development that qualifies under these provisions. Existing law specifies the number of incentives or concessions that an applicant can receive. Existing law requires that an applicant shall receive 3 incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 30% of the total units for lower income households, at least 15% for very low-income households, or at least 30% for persons or families of moderate income in a common interest development. Existing law specifies requires that an applicant shall receive 4 incentives or concessions for projects in which 100% of the total units are for lower income households, as specified.

SATT NOTE: This bill would authorize an applicant to receive three (3) incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 30% of the total units for lower-income households, at least 12% of the total units for very low-income households, or at least 30% for persons or families of moderate income in a common interest development. The bill would also authorize an applicant to receive 4 and 5 incentives or concessions, as applicable, for projects in which greater percentages of the total units are for lower-income households, very low-income households, or persons or families of moderate income in a common interest development, as specified. The bill would also authorize an applicant to receive 6 incentives or concessions for projects in which 100% of the total units are for lower-income households, as specified. Further, the bill allows developers to add 50% in “Density Bonus” size to a building if they agree to provide more affordable housing units than are now required under “Density Bonus.” and be allowed to deviate from height, open space such as courtyards, parking, design review, building setbacks, side yards, trees, sustainable materials, and other local standards.

Examples of Cases using AB 2345

  • ADM-2023-4121-DB-HCA-ED1
  • ADM-2023-4665-DB-HCA-ED1
  • PAR-2023-3817-AHRF-ED1
  • PAR-2023-4114-AHRF-ED1
  • PAR-2023-4204-AHRF-ED1
  • PAR-2023-4325-AHRF-ED1
  • PAR-2023-4236-ED1-VHCA
  • PAR-2023-3940-ED1-VHCA
  • PAR-2023-3952-AHRF-ED1
by

AB-1279 Planning and zoning: housing development: high-opportunity areas

AB 1279 (by Richard Bloom):

http://www.leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB1279

This bill would require the department to designate areas in this state as high-opportunity areas, as provided, by January 12022, in accordance with specified requirements and to update those designations within 6 months of the adoption of new Opportunity Maps by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. The bill would authorize a city or county to appeal the designation of an area within its jurisdiction as a high-opportunity area, as provided. In any area designated as high-opportunity area, the bill would require that a residential development project be a use by right, upon the request of a developer the project meets specified requirements, including specified affordability requirements. For certain residential development projects where the initial sales price or initial rent exceeds the affordable housing cost or affordable rent to households with incomes equal to or less than specified percentages of the area median income, the bill would require the applicant to agree to pay a , fee in an amount that would vary based on the size of the project and whether the units are ownership or rental units, as provided. The bill would require the city or county to deposit the fee into a separate fund reserved for the construction or preservation of housing with an affordable housing cost or affordable rent to households with a household income less than 50% of the area median income. The bill would provide that approval as a use by right of certain residential development projects under these provisions would expire after 2 years, unless the project receives a one-time, one-year extension, as provided.

SATT NOTE:  This bill would require that an applicant agrees to, and the city and county ensure, the continued affordability of rental units affordable to lower income and very low-income households for 55 years and that the affordability of ownership units to the initial occupant of those units, as provided. The bill would provide that a residential development project is ineligible as a use by right under these provisions if, among other things, it is proposed to be located on a site that has rental housing that is currently occupied by tenants, or had rental housing occupied by tenants within the past 10 years, or is located in certain areas. The bill would include findings that the 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.

by

AB-725 General plans: housing element: moderate-income and above moderate-income housing: suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions

AB 725: (by Buffy Wicks and Scott Wiener)

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB725

The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for its jurisdiction that contains certain mandatory elements, including a housing element. That law requires that the housing element include, among other things, an inventory of land suitable for residential development, to be used to identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period and that are sufficient to provide for the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need determined pursuant to specified law.

This bill would require that at least 25% of a metropolitan jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need for moderate-income housing be allocated to sites with zoning that allows at least 2 units of housing, but no more than 35 units per acre of housing. The bill would require that at least 25% of a metropolitan jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need for above moderate-income housing be allocated to sites with zoning that allows at least 2 units of housing, but no more than 35 units per acre of housing. The bill would exclude unincorporated areas from this prohibition and would include related legislative findings. By imposing additional requirements on the manner in which a city or county may satisfy its regional housing need, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

SATT NOTE: Impact may be on more than 300 cities that have not attracted enough housing to hit state-ordered growth targets known  as “RHNA.” AB 725 (Regional Housing Needs Allocation)

by

SB-1085 Density Bonus Law: qualifications for incentives or concessions: student housing for lower income students: moderate-income persons and families: local government constraints

Density Bonus Law: qualifications for incentives or concessions: student housing for lower income students: moderate-income persons and families: local government constraints.    SB-1085  Died (Inactive) 11.30.2020

Density bonus qualifications for incentives or concessions: student housing for lower income students: moderate-income persons and families: local government constraints. (Skinner)

Currently, a project needs to have at least 5 homes before it can use the Density Bonus. SB1085 eliminates this requirement, allowing small buildings such as duplexes get an extra unit in exchange for some affordable housing. It also creates more options for moderate income housing (where rents are affordable to people making 80–120% of area median income) and student housing to use the Density Bonus.

This bill would require a unit designated to satisfy the inclusionary zoning requirements of a city or county to be included in the total number of units on which a density bonus and the number of incentives or concessions are based. This bill would require a city or county to grant a density bonus and certain incentives or concessions if the developer agrees to construct a housing development that will contain a specified percentage of units for households of low or moderate incomes and for which the rent is 30% below the market rate for that city or county. The bill would require a city or county to grant one incentive or concession for a project that will contain a specified percentage of units for lower income students in a student housing development. The bill would make various changes to the above-referenced formula, including, among others, increasing the percentage density bonus to 40% for housing developments that have 11% of its units for very low-income households.

SATT NOTE:  Currently, developers are rewarded a 35% increase in apartment building size — a “Density Bonus” — if 40% of the units in the building are affordable to moderate-income households. SB 1085 slashes to just 20% the required moderate income units, allowing huge buildings but CUTTING IN HALF the legislature’s commitment to affordable housing

by

SB-995 Environmental quality: Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2011: housing projects

SB 995 (by Wiener and Atkins):

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVersionsCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB995

This bill would additionally include housing projects meeting certain conditions as projects eligible for certification. The bill would extend the authority of the Governor to certify a project to January 1, 2024. The bill would revise and recast the labor-related requirements for projects undertaken by public agencies and for projects undertaken by private entities. The bill would instead specify that the time period for the final resolution of any judicial action is 270 business days after the filing of the record of proceedings with the court. The bill would provide that the certification expires and is no longer valid if the lead agency fails to approve a certified project before January 1, 2025. The bill would instead repeal the leadership act on January 1, 2025. Because the bill would extend the obligation of the lead agency to prepare concurrently the record of proceedings, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

SATT NOTE: Slashes the number of affordable units’ developers must build to qualify for large “fast-track” apartment complexes that get around the environmental protection law, CEQA. Currently, a “fast-track” building can ignore CEQA only if a developer offers 49% of units as affordable.

by

SB-902 Planning and zoning: housing development: density.

Planning and zoning: housing development: density SB-902  Died (Inactive) 11.30.20

Allows the following statewide, except in very high fire hazard zones. In unincorporated areas and cities under 10,000 people: Two homes per lot. In cities of 10,000–50,000 people: Three homes per lot. In cities of over 50,000 people: Four homes per lot. Also makes it easier for cities to rezone land for up to 10 homes per lot, if near transit, near jobs, or on a urban infill site.

This bill would authorize a local government to pass an ordinance, notwithstanding any local restrictions on adopting zoning ordinances, to zone any parcel for up to 10 units of residential density per parcel, at a height specified by the local government in the ordinance, if the parcel is located in a transit-rich area, a jobs-rich area, or an urban infill site, as those terms are defined. In this regard, the bill would require the Department of Housing and Community Development, in consultation with the Office of Planning and Research, to determine jobs-rich areas and publish a map of those areas every 5 years, commencing January 1, 2022, based on specified criteria. The bill would specify that an ordinance adopted under these provisions is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act.

by

SB-1120 Subdivisions: tentative maps

SB 1120: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB1120

Requires local governments to magisterially permit one accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit per single family parcel, subject to certain size limitations.

SATT NOTE: Theoretically allows 4 market-rate homes where a single home now stands (theoretically it allows 8 units, if cities have local “granny flat” laws). Requires NO affordable units.

by

AB-168 Planning and zoning: annual report: housing development: streamlined approvals

Read:  AB 168    09/25/2020

Read:  AB 168 Closes the loophole of SB 35

Requires a pre-consultation process with a California Native American tribe prior to the submission of an SB 35 (Wiener), Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017, permit, which entitles a developer to a streamlined housing approval process, in order to identify and protect tribal cultural resources (TCRs).

(Shellmound, 09/22/2020)

AB 168 ensures that any project site that contains a tribal cultural resource listed on a national, state, tribal, or local historic register—such as the West Berkeley Shellmound—will be automatically disqualified for SB 35 fast-tracked approval.

Furthermore, under AB 168, developers are now required to conduct a consultation process with a California Native American tribe prior to submitting any application for SB 35 fast-tracked approval. That consultation process will identify whether there are any significant tribal cultural resources or tribal sacred landscapes that could be impacted by the proposed project. If cultural resources could be affected by a proposed development, a mutually agreeable and enforceable agreement between the developer and the tribe must be documented that avoids or addresses impacts to tribal cultural resources. If such an agreement cannot be reached, the project is not eligible for SB 35 fast-tracking.

Thus, AB 168 actually exceeds the standards put in place for tribal consultation under AB 52, California’s landmark law requiring consultations with tribes in regard to tribal cultural resources. It goes further by requiring the consent and approval of tribes in regard to the treatment of cultural resources and sacred sites, before a project is eligible for a permit under SB 35.

As the Senate Committee on Housing’s analysis states, “this delegation of decision-making power would be unprecedented and would grant California Native American tribes municipal decision-making power over housing projects.” The California Building Industry Association, California Business Properties Association, California Association of Realtors and other industry groups also cited this delegation of power to tribes as the principle reason that they lobbied against the passage of AB 168, demanding it be amended so that tribes are not allowed “an unchallengeable veto over whether a housing project is eligible for SB 35’s entitlement process.”

In our view, AB 168 represents a vitally important step in the direction of affirming the rights of California tribes to protect their sacred sites and cultural resources, recognizing that the tribes should be lead decision makers in regard to their sacred sites. The value of tribal consultation processes as prescribed by AB 52 is very limited if tribes have no ability to say “no” to a project that threatens an unacceptable level of impact to cultural resources. The sponsor of AB 168, Assemblywoman Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, wrote in a statement recommending passage of the bill:

“Without this bill, tribal cultural resources may be subject to avoidable destruction and desecration. We have lost much of our State’s Native history, and once a religious or cultural artifact, site, or burial ground is lost, it cannot be replaced. To honor California’s history and diversity, it is important that we continue to honor the consultation process with Native American tribes and protect tribal cultural resources. Early identification and consultation with California tribes will ensure that generations of Californians will play a role in honoring the culture and sovereignty of Native American tribes and communities, and facilitate necessary housing development by avoiding litigation.”