News & Insights
2023 Land Use, Environmental, & Natural Resources Update
AB 2011 (Wicks) provides for “by right” streamlined ministerial (i.e., no CEQA) approval of qualifying mixed-income and affordable housing projects along commercial corridors in commercial zoning districts. This new law is expected to be a game-changer for multi-family housing developers providing on-site affordable housing. The new law will become operative on July 1, 2023 and will be in effect until at least January 1, 2033.
The following is a summary of the requirements that must be met under AB 2011 for mixed-income housing projects, along with a summary of the key differences between AB 2011 and SB 6 (Caballero), which also creates a pathway for the approval of qualifying housing projects in commercial zoning districts and will become operative on July 1, 2023. Please contact us for information about these bills, including applicable requirements for 100% affordable housing projects.
The following summary applies to housing projects that include a combination of affordable housing and market rate housing.
The project must be located on a site:
The project must not be located on a site:
SB 6 will also become operative on July 1, 2023 and will likely serve as a fallback for housing developers where more extensive site and project requirements under AB 2011 would not be met, or where SB 35 could be utilized in conjunction with SB 6. Similar to AB 2011, SB 6 allows for the approval of qualifying housing projects in commercial zoning districts where office, retail or parking are a principally permitted use (i.e., without requiring a rezoning). However, it does not by its own terms provide for “by right” streamlined ministerial approval of those projects.
Rather, SB 6 amends SB 35 to allow project sponsors to invoke that law where a housing project would not otherwise qualify due to inconsistency with the underlying commercial zoning and objective zoning and design standards, provided that specified requirements are met. As explained in our prior legal alert, SB 35 separately provides for a streamlined ministerial approval process for qualifying housing projects in local jurisdictions that have not made sufficient progress towards their state-mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), as determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
SB 6 also expressly allows project sponsors to invoke protections under the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) for qualifying housing projects notwithstanding inconsistency with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar local provision. As explained in our prior legal alert, the HAA can be used as a tool to prevent a local agency from (i) applying its design or development standards to qualifying housing projects in a way that is overly restrictive or in a manner that is not an objective application of what the standards explicitly say in writing and (ii) denying or reducing the dwelling unit density of a qualifying housing project
Other key differences under SB 6 include but are not limited to:
AB 2097 (Friedman), which took effect on January 1, 2023, is expected to benefit housing development (and other) projects. AB 2097 prohibits public agencies from imposing parking requirements on most development projects located within one-half mile of a major transit stop. A “major transit stop” is defined as: (1) an existing rail or bus rapid transit station; (2) a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service; or (3) the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.
AB 2097 establishes a “substantial hardship exception” that allows a public agency to impose parking requirements on an otherwise qualifying project if the public agency makes written findings, within 30 days of receipt of a completed application, that not enforcing parking requirements on the project would have a substantially negative impact, supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record, on any of the following: (1) the public agency’s ability to meet its share of the regional housing need for low and very low income households; (2) the public agency’s ability to meet any special housing needs for the elderly or persons with disabilities identified in the applicable Housing Element; or (3) existing residential or commercial parking within one-half mile of the housing development project. Notably, the aforementioned “preponderance of the evidence” requirement sets a high bar for a public agency attempting to impose the exception.
Furthermore, a housing development project is not subject to the above exception if it satisfies any of the following: (1) it dedicates a minimum of 20% of the total units to very low, low, or moderate income households, students, the elderly, or persons with disabilities; (2) it contains fewer than 20 housing units; or (3) it is subject to parking reductions based on the provisions of any other applicable law (e.g., the State Density Bonus Law).
AB 2097 includes the following exceptions:
If a project provides parking voluntarily, a public agency may require: (i) spaces for care share vehicles; (ii) that spaces are shared with the public; and/or (iii) that parking owners charge for parking. A public agency cannot require that voluntarily-provided parking is provided to residents free of charge.
Authors
Partner
Associate
RELATED SERVICES
News & Insights
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP. All Rights Reserved.
This publication is made available by Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP for educational purposes only to convey general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this website you acknowledge there is no attorney client relationship between you and Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP. This publication should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney applied to your circumstances. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Full Disclaimer