The Permit Streamlining Act within the Planning and Zoning Law requires the lead agency that has the principal responsibility for approving a development project, as defined, to approve or disapprove the project within 180 days from the date of certification of an environmental impact report. Existing law requires approval or disapproval within 90 days from the date of certification if at least 49% of the units within the development project are affordable to very low or low-income households. Existing law also requires approval or disapproval within 60 days from the date of the adoption of a negative declaration, or the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.

This bill would require approval or disapproval within 120 days from the date of certification of an environmental impact report when the development project consists of either residential units only or mixed use development in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development, among other conditions.

The Planning and Zoning Law requires any public agency that is a responsible agency for a development project to approve or disapprove a development project that has been approved by the lead agency within the longer of 180 days from the date on which the lead agency has approved the project or within 180 days of the date on which the completed application for the development project has been accepted as complete by that responsible agency.

This bill would, for a public agency other than the California Coastal Commission, reduce each time period to within 90 days when the development project consists of either residential units only or mixed use development in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development and other conditions are met.

By increasing the duties of local officials, 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.

The Permit Streamlining Act within the Planning and Zoning Law requires the lead agency that has the principal responsibility for approving a development project, as defined, to approve or disapprove the project within 180 days from the date of certification of an environmental impact report. Existing law requires approval or disapproval within 90 days from the date of certification if at least 49% of the units within the development project are affordable to very low or low-income households. Existing law also requires approval or disapproval within 60 days from the date of the adoption of a negative declaration, or the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.

This bill would require approval or disapproval within 120 days from the date of certification of an environmental impact report when the development project consists of either residential units only or mixed use development in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development, among other conditions.

The Planning and Zoning Law requires any public agency that is a responsible agency for a development project to approve or disapprove a development project that has been approved by the lead agency within the longer of 180 days from the date on which the lead agency has approved the project or within 180 days of the date on which the completed application for the development project has been accepted as complete by that responsible agency.

This bill would, for a public agency other than the California Coastal Commission, reduce each time period to within 90 days when the development project consists of either residential units only or mixed use development in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development and other conditions are met.

By increasing the duties of local officials, 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.

The Permit Streamlining Act within the Planning and Zoning Law requires the lead agency that has the principal responsibility for approving a development project, as defined, to approve or disapprove the project within 180 days from the date of certification of an environmental impact report. Existing law requires approval or disapproval within 90 days from the date of certification if at least 49% of the units within the development project are affordable to very low or low-income households. Existing law also requires approval or disapproval within 60 days from the date of the adoption of a negative declaration, or the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.

This bill would require approval or disapproval within 120 days from the date of certification of an environmental impact report when the development project consists of either residential units only or mixed use development in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development, among other conditions.

The Planning and Zoning Law requires any public agency that is a responsible agency for a development project to approve or disapprove a development project that has been approved by the lead agency within the longer of 180 days from the date on which the lead agency has approved the project or within 180 days of the date on which the completed application for the development project has been accepted as complete by that responsible agency.

This bill would would, for a public agency other than the California Coastal Commission, reduce each time period to within 90 days when the development project consists of either residential units only or mixed use development in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development and other conditions are met.

By increasing the duties of local officials, 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 creates the Fair Employment and Housing Council within the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, and requires that the council be appointed by the Governor, as prescribed. Existing law authorizes and requires the council to issue reports to the Governor and the Legislature that, in its judgment will aid in effectuating the purposes of the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

This bill would require the council to issue a biennial report with its recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2180

Author:(Ting)

As Amended Ver:August 17, 2016

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: L. GOV.

SUMMARY: Expedites timelines for approval or disapproval by a public agency for certain types of development projects.

The Senate amendments exempt the California Coastal Commission, when acting as the responsible agency, from the accelerated deadlines for certain residential and mixed use development projects.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, unknown local costs to comply with accelerated project approval timelines. These costs are not state-reimbursable because local agencies can charge fees to offset any increased costs.

COMMENTS:

1. Bill Summary. This bill expedites, for a public agency, the review process for certain development projects, pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act, specifically those development projects that are either: a) residential units only; or, b) mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development and are limited to neighborhood commercial uses and to the first floor of buildings that are two or more stories.

This bill requires any public agency that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or disapprove the project within 120 days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the environmental impact report (EIR), if an EIR is prepared for that development project. The bill also requires a public agency that is a responsible agency for a development project that has been approved by the lead agency to approve or disapprove the development project within whichever of the following periods of time is longer:

• 1. Within 90 days from the date on which the lead agency has approved the project; or,
  2. Within 90 days of the date on which the completed application for the development project has been received and accepted as complete by that responsible agency.

This bill is sponsored by the California Apartment Association.

1. Author's Statement. According to the author, "California is in the midst of an unprecedented housing crisis caused by a severe lack of new housing construction, both market rate and affordable. In its most recent report on housing, the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) stressed that facilitating more private housing development was needed to make housing more affordable for low–income Californians. Unfortunately, the local and state approval processes for new housing construction are frequently slow and cumbersome.

"AB 2180 seeks to expedite the housing construction permit approval process by reducing the time for a lead agency to approve a housing project from 180 to 120 days. The bill still ensures that purely affordable housing projects continue to get the same 90 day approval process. In addition, AB 2180 reduces the approval process for any other responsible public agencies from 180 days to 90 days for all types of housing developments. AB 2180 will ensure that badly needed housing projects move through the building approval process faster. It will not only reduce the amount of time, but will also reduce costs and other delays that can be associated with a lengthy approval process. AB 2180 is a modest, yet important step towards addressing California's severe housing shortage."

1. Background. The Permit Streamlining Act applies to all public agencies, including charter cities, and was adopted to ensure that permit applicants for projects are not subjected to protracted and unjustified governmental delays in the processing of the applications for development projects. The Legislature, in enacting the Permit Streamlining Act, declared that "there is a statewide need to ensure clear understanding of the specific requirements which must be met in connection with the approval of development projects and to expedite decisions on such projects."

Submittal of a project application is the first step in the streamlined permitting process. Within 30 calendar days of receiving an application, a city is required to respond to the applicant in writing with the determination of whether the application is complete and accepted for filing. If the application is deemed complete, the city proceeds with the evaluation of the project, but if the application is incomplete, the city is required to indicate in detail the deficiencies in the application.

All deadlines under the Permit Streamlining Act begin from the day the application is accepted as complete or deemed complete. The completion date also starts the clock running on processing the application. If a city is acting as the lead agency for a project for which an EIR is prepared, then the city must approve or disapprove the project within 180 days from the date of the EIR's certification. The Act specifies other time lines for approval or disapproval by the public agency, in coordination with specific California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) actions, like whether a project is exempt from CEQA, the adoption of a negative declaration, or the certification of an EIR. The Act also contains timelines for approval of a development project for a responsible agency, once the project has been approved by the lead agency. "Development project" is defined as either a) residential units only; or, b) mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development and are limited to neighborhood commercial uses and to the first floor of buildings that are two or more stories.

If approval or disapproval of a project does not occur within these deadlines, the project shall be deemed approved provided the prescribed public notice requirements have been met.

1. Arguments in Support. Supporters argue that the bill will ensure that badly needed housing projects move through the building approval process faster, thus reducing costs and other delays that can be associated with a lengthy approval process.
2. Arguments in Opposition. None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0004409

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2180

Author:

: Senate

Vote:

SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 5-0, 6/22/16

AYES: Hertzberg, Nguyen, Beall, Hernandez, Moorlach

NO VOTE RECORDED: Lara, Pavley

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-0, 8/11/16

AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza

NO VOTE RECORDED: Bates, Nielsen

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 67-0, 5/27/16 (Consent) - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill shortens deadlines for approval or disapproval of certain residential and mixed use developments under the Permit Streamlining Act.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires every county and city to adopt a general plan that sets out the intensity (density) and location for planned uses in the area covered by the plan.
2. Requires, generally, cities’ and counties’ major land use decisions—including development permitting—to be consistent with their general plans.
3. Requires various permits and compliance with local laws and regulations in order to construct new housing.
4. Requires, under the Permit Streamlining Act, public agencies to act fairly and promptly on applications for development permits, including to:
   1. Compile lists of information that applicants must provide and explain the criteria they will use to review permit applications.
   2. Determine within 30 days whether applications for development projects are complete.
5. Provides that a public agency’s failure to act results in an application being "deemed complete."
6. Allows public agencies to request additional information, potentially extending the time before an application is deemed complete.
7. Defines public agencies to include state agencies, cities, charter cities, counties, special districts, and other political subdivisions of the state for the purposes of the Permit Streamlining Act.
8. Requires public agencies to act within a specific time period after completing any environmental review documents required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as follows:
   1. Local governments that serve as lead agencies under CEQA must act within:
      1. 60 days after completing a negative declaration or determining that a project is exempt from review, or
      2. 180 days after certifying an environmental impact report (EIR).
      3. 90 days of certifying an EIR for a residential or mixed use development that make at least 49% of the housing units affordable for low- or very low-income households and meet other specified conditions.
   2. Responsible agencies under CEQA must approve or disapprove the development project within 180 days of the date that either the lead agency approved the project or deemed the application complete, whichever is longer.
9. Allows the deadlines to be extended once for up to 90 days upon mutual agreement between the agency and the applicant.

This bill:

1. Requires a lead agency to approve or disapprove an application for a residential or mixed use development that devotes at least half of its square footage to residential units and only includes small-scale commercial enterprises, within 120 days of certifying an EIR for the project.
2. Requires responsible agencies, other than the California Coastal Commission, to approve or disapprove those projects within 90 days of the date that either the lead agency approved the project or deemed the application complete, whichever is longer.

Background

Housing prices in many parts of California—particularly in cities along the coast—vastly outstrip prices in other states. While the causes of these high housing prices are complex, studies have shown that a major factor is the undersupply of housing. Local governments looking to preserve the character of their neighborhoods or keep home values high have found novel ways to slow, modify, or halt new development that might otherwise lower prices. These tactics include prohibiting the construction of second units, imposing low-density zoning, or implementing explicit policies that limit growth. In addition, local government revenue streams have been limited by constitutional amendments, leading them to incentivize commercial development that uses fewer services and produces sales tax revenue over residential development that needs more services but produces limited amounts of property tax revenue.

Some organizations want to expedite public agency decisions on residential and mixed use developments.

Comments

1. Purpose of the bill. California is in the midst of an unprecedented housing crisis caused by a severe lack of new housing construction, both market rate and affordable. Unfortunately, the local and state approval processes for new housing construction are frequently slow and cumbersome. AB 2180 takes a modest but important step towards speeding those approvals by encouraging public agencies to act more quickly on residential and neighborhood-scale mixed use developments, while preserving all public notice and appeals requirements in current law. AB 2180 will ensure that badly needed housing projects move through the building approval process faster, thus reducing costs and other delays that can be associated with a lengthy approval process.
2. Sure, but will it work? In practice, it can be hard to take advantage of the “deemed-approved” remedy in the Permit Streamlining Act. The Act doesn’t apply to general plan amendments or zoning ordinances that are prerequisites to permitting any sort of development. And creative local governments have continued to develop new ways to slow or block dense residential or mixed use development that they fear would reduce housing prices, such as providing vague lists of required information. AB 2180 may expedite some approvals in communities that are already favorably inclined towards development, but stronger intervention in local planning and zoning may be needed to truly accelerate the construction of new housing and address high housing costs.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, unknown local costs to comply with accelerated project approval timelines. These costs are not state-reimbursable because local agencies can charge fees to offset any increased costs. (local fee disclaimer)

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/16/16)

California Apartment Association

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/16/16)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 67-0, 5/27/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bonilla, Bonta, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Bloom, Brough, Brown, Chiu, Dodd, Eduardo Garcia, Grove, Hadley, Jones-Sawyer, Low, Melendez, O'Donnell, Ting

Prepared by:

8/17/16 16:02:20

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 2180 (Ting) - Land use: development project review

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on August 11, 2016

Bill Summary:

AB 2180 would accelerate the timeframes by which a public agency must approve or disapprove certain residential and mixed-use development projects under the Permit Streamlining Act.

Fiscal Impact:

• Unknown local costs to comply with accelerated project approval timelines. These costs are not state-reimbursable because local agencies can charge fees to offset any increased costs. (local fee disclaimer)

Committee Amendments:

Exempt the California Coastal Commission, when acting as the responsible agency, from the accelerated deadlines for certain residential and mixed use development projects.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 2180 (Ting) - Land use: development project review

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

AB 2180 would accelerate the timeframes by which a public agency must approve or disapprove certain residential and mixed-use development projects under the Permit Streamlining Act.

Fiscal Impact:

• Unknown significant Coastal Commission costs, potentially in excess of $1 million, to expedite approval of projects in the coastal zone for which the Commission is the responsible agency. In order to comply with the accelerated timelines for project approval, the Commission would require an unknown number of additional staff. The magnitude of additional costs and staffing needs would depend upon the number and complexity of projects requiring a coastal development permit. (General Fund)
  
• Unknown local costs to comply with accelerated project approval timelines. These costs are not state-reimbursable because local agencies can charge fees to offset any increased costs. (local fee disclaimer)

Background:

The Planning and Zoning Law requires every county and city to adopt a general plan that sets out the intensity (density) and location for planned uses in the area covered by the plan. Local zoning laws and building codes specify where housing may be built, as well as its density, quality, and style. Housing developers must obtain building permits from city and county planning departments and typically must gain approval from local planning commissions and city councils or county boards of supervisors.

The 1977 Permit Streamlining Act requires public agencies to act fairly and promptly on applications for development permits. Public agencies generally have 30 days to determine whether applications for development projects are complete and accepted for filing; failure to act results in an application being "deemed complete." If additional information is required, there could be time extensions before an application is deemed complete. Once a complete application has been submitted, the Act requires public officials to act within a specific time period after completing any environmental review documents required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Specifically, local governments that serve as lead agencies under CEQA must act within: (1) 60 days after completing a negative declaration or determining that a project is exempt from review, or (2) 180 days after certifying an environmental impact report (EIR).

However, shorter deadlines apply to certain affordable housing developments. A lead agency must decide within 90 days of certifying an EIR for a residential or mixed use development that meets specified conditions, including: residential units make up at least half of the overall square footage, commercial space is reserved for specified small businesses that serve local residents, and at least 49% of units are available to low- or very low-income households.

The Permit Streamlining Act also sets deadlines for responsible agencies that are not the lead agency under CEQA, but have a role in approving a permit or other authorization for some aspect of the proposed project. Responsible agencies rely on the lead agency’s CEQA documentation to issue permits and make decisions. The Permit Streamlining Act requires responsible agencies to approve or disapprove the development project within 180 days of the date that either the lead agency approved the project or deemed the application complete, whichever is longer. If the public agency fails to approve or disapprove the application in the relevant time period, the application is deemed approved and the applicant may sue to order the local government to issue the permit. Upon mutual agreement between the government and the applicant, the deadlines may be extended once for up to 90 days.

Existing law, the Coastal Act, calls for the protection and enhancement of public access and recreation, marine resources, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, marine water quality, agriculture, and scenic resources, and makes provisions for coastal-dependent industrial and energy development. New development in the coastal zone requires a coastal development permit either from a local government or the Coastal Commission. Local governments are required to prepare a local coastal plan (LCP) for the coastal zone portion of their jurisdiction. After an LCP has been reviewed and approved by the Coastal Commission as being consistent with the Coastal Act, the Commission’s regulatory authority over most types of new development is delegated to the local government, subject to limited appeals to the Commission. Approximately 83 percent of the state’s coastal geographic area is covered by LCPs, but there are currently 27 jurisdictions that do not have a certified LCP in place. As noted above, any permits for new development in these jurisdictions requires approval by the Coastal Commission.

Proposed Law:

AB 2180 would expedite the Permit Streamlining Act deadlines for a public agency to approve or disapprove certain types of development projects. Specifically, AB 2180 would do the following:

• Require a lead agency to approve or disapprove an application for a residential or mixed use development within 120 days of certifying the EIR (rather than 180 days), if the project devotes at least half of its square footage to residential units and only includes small-scale commercial enterprises.
• Require a responsible agency to approve or disapprove those projects within 90 days (rather than 180 days) of the date that either the lead agency approved the project or deemed the application complete, whichever is longer.

Staff Comments:

This bill would impose a state-mandated local program on local agencies by increasing the duties of local officials. Since local agencies have the authority to charge fees to recover any increased costs associated with the bill, they are not eligible for state-reimbursement of those costs.

The Coastal Commission indicates that the bill’s accelerated timelines for development project approvals would hinder its ability to properly review, analyze, revise, and agendize residential projects in the coastal zone for which the Commission is the responsible agency. In those jurisdictional segments of the coastal zone that are not covered by an approved LCP, the Commission must analyze a project for Coastal Act consistency, including public access, public viewsheds, sea level rise, and sensitive habitats. Although many projects are non-controversial and have minimal impacts, some are exceedingly complex and require extensive analysis and revisions to a project’s scope. The Commission estimates that it would likely require significant additional staff resources in order to comply with the accelerated timelines. In addition, the Commission meets at different locations in the coastal zone each month, and acceleration of timelines will make it difficult to agendize significant permit actions in places that are near the proposed development site.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE

Senator Robert M. Hertzberg, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Land use: development project review

Shortens deadlines for approval or disapproval of certain residential and mixed use developments under the Permit Streamlining Act.

Background

Planning and Zoning Law. The California Constitution allows a city to "make and enforce within its limits, all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws, known as the police power of cities." It is from this fundamental power that local governments derive their authority to regulate land through planning, zoning, and building ordinances, thereby protecting public health, safety and welfare.

The Planning and Zoning Law requires every county and city to adopt a general plan that sets out the intensity (density) and location for planned uses in the area covered by the plan. Cities’ and counties’ major land use decisions—including development permitting—must be consistent with their general plans. Local zoning laws and building codes specify where housing may be built, as well as its density, quality, and style. Housing developers must obtain building permits from city and county planning departments and typically must gain approval from local planning commissions and city councils or county boards of supervisors.

Permit Streamlining Act. The 1977 Permit Streamlining Act requires public agencies to act fairly and promptly on applications for development permits. It covers state agencies, cities, charter cities, counties, special districts, and other political subdivisions of the state. The act requires public agencies to compile lists of information that applicants must provide and explain the criteria they will use to review permit applications. Public agencies have 30 days to determine whether applications for development projects are complete; failure to act results in an application being "deemed complete." However, local governments may continue to request additional information, potentially extending the time before an application is deemed complete.

Once a complete application for a development project has been submitted, the act requires public officials to act within a specific time period after completing any environmental review documents required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Specifically, local governments that serve as lead agencies under CEQA must act within: (1) 60 days after completing a negative declaration or determining that a project is exempt from review, or (2) 180 days after certifying an environmental impact report (EIR).

However, shorter deadlines apply to certain affordable housing developments. A lead agency must decide within 90 days of certifying an EIR for a residential or mixed use development that meets all of the following conditions:

• Residential units make up at least half of the square footage;
• Any commercial space is reserved for small-scale businesses that primarily serve local residents and are located on the first floor of a building;
• At least 49% of the units are affordable to low- or very low-income households; and
• The developer has applied for tax credits or other financial assistance that is necessary to build the unit and has provided confirmation of the application before the EIR is certified.

The Permit Streamlining Act also sets deadlines for responsible agencies, as defined by CEQA, to act. These agencies are public agencies that are not the lead agency but have a role in approving a permit or other authorization for some aspect of the proposed project. For example, local agency formation commissions are often responsible agencies on new development projects because they must approve necessary boundary changes. Responsible agencies rely on the lead agency’s CEQA documentation to issue permits and make decisions. The Permit Streamlining Act requires responsible agencies to approve or disapprove the development project within 180 days of the date that either the lead agency approved the project or deemed the application complete, whichever is longer.

If the public agency fails to approve or disapprove the application in the relevant time period, the application is deemed approved and the applicant may sue to order the local government to issue the permit. Upon mutual agreement between the government and the applicant, the deadlines may be extended once for up to 90 days.

Housing Costs and Needs. Housing prices in many parts of California—particularly in cities along the coast—vastly outstrip prices in other states. While the causes of these high housing prices are complex, studies have shown that a major factor is the undersupply of housing. Local governments looking to preserve the character of their neighborhoods or keep home values high have found novel ways to slow, modify, or halt new development that might otherwise lower prices. These tactics include prohibiting the construction of second units, imposing low-density zoning, or implementing explicit policies that limit growth. In addition, local government revenue streams have been limited by constitutional amendments, leading them to incentivize commercial development that uses fewer services and produces sales tax revenue over residential development that needs more services but produces limited amounts of property tax revenue.

Some organizations want to expedite public agency decisions on residential and mixed use developments.

Proposed Law

Assembly Bill 2180 shortens timelines under the Permit Streamlining Act for a public agency to approve or disapprove certain types of development projects. Specifically, AB 2180 requires a lead agency to approve or disapprove an application for a residential or mixed use development that devotes at least half of its square footage to residential units and only includes small-scale commercial enterprises, within 120 days of certifying an EIR for the project. AB 2180 also requires responsible agencies to approve or disapprove those projects within 90 days of the date that either the lead agency approved the project or deemed the application complete, whichever is longer.

State Revenue Impact

No estimate.

Comments

1. Purpose of the bill. California is in the midst of an unprecedented housing crisis caused by a severe lack of new housing construction, both market rate and affordable. Unfortunately, the local and state approval processes for new housing construction are frequently slow and cumbersome. AB 2180 takes a modest but important step towards speeding those approvals by encouraging public agencies to act more quickly on residential and neighborhood-scale mixed use developments, while preserving all public notice and appeals requirements in current law. AB 2180 will ensure that badly needed housing projects move through the building approval process faster, thus reducing costs and other delays that can be associated with a lengthy approval process.

2. Sure, but will it work? In practice, it can be hard to take advantage of the “deemed-approved” remedy in the Permit Streamlining Act. The Act doesn’t apply to general plan amendments or zoning ordinances that are prerequisites to permitting any sort of development. And creative local governments have continued to develop new ways to slow or block dense residential or mixed use development that they fear would reduce housing prices, such as providing vague lists of required information. AB 2180 may expedite some approvals in communities that are already favorably inclined towards development, but stronger intervention in local planning and zoning may be needed to truly accelerate the construction of new housing and address high housing costs.

3. Newer isn’t always better. Scholars agree that building more housing will, over time, reduce housing costs. But new housing does not necessarily mean more housing. While the state’s “no-net-loss zoning” statute makes it more difficult for local governments to reduce the density of housing development, it by no means ensures high density development. Furthermore, there is significant disagreement over the effects of new market-rate housing on low-income residents. A March 2016 study by UC Berkeley researchers found that affordable housing units did significantly more to protect low-income households at the regional level and found that at the neighborhood level market-rate housing may simply encourage wealthier individuals to move into newly attractive neighborhoods. AB 2180 expedites reviews for residential and mixed use developments without regard to density or affordability. Should the Legislature be encouraging all new development, or is a more targeted approach necessary to ensure that help goes to those Californians that struggle to pay their rents?

4. Coastal Act. The California Coastal Act prohibits development in the “coastal zone” along California’s coast without a coastal development permit from the Commission or a Commission-certified local agency. Permitting is performed by local agencies in the vast majority (87%) of the coastal zone. But in the remaining 13% of the coastal zone, the Commission issues permits in the remaining area, making it a responsible agency. Commission staff argue that the deadlines in the bill for responsible agencies will make it difficult for them to perform thorough work and provide adequate public notice for project approvals. Should they be subject to different timelines for approval than other public agencies?

5. Mandate. The California Constitution generally requires the state to reimburse local agencies for their costs when the state imposes new programs or additional duties on them. According to the Legislative Counsel’s Office, AB 2180 creates a new state-mandated local program because it increases the duties of local officials. AB 2180 disclaims this liability by stating that no reimbursement is required under the Constitution because local agencies have the authority to levy fees sufficient to cover the cost of the increased services.

Assembly Actions

Assembly Local Government Committee: 9-0

Assembly Appropriations Committee: 20-0

Assembly Floor: 67-0

Support and Opposition

(6/16/16)

Support: California Apartment Association; California Association of Realtors; California Building Industry Association; California Business Properties Association; California Chamber of Commerce.

Opposition: Unknown.

-- END --

Date of Hearing: May 18, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2180

Author:(Ting) – As Amended Ver:March 31, 2016

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY: This bill expedites, pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act, the timelines for review of a development project by a public agency. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires a public agency that is a responsible agency for a development project that has been approved by the lead agency to approve or disapprove the development project within whichever of the following periods of time is longer:
2. Within 90 days from the date on which the lead agency has approved the project; or,
3. Within 90 days of the date on which the completed application for the development project has been received and accepted as complete by that responsible agency.

Requires any public agency that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or disapprove the project within 120 days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the environmental impact report (EIR), if an EIR is prepared for a development project, and specified conditions are met.

FISCAL EFFECT:

No state fiscal impact. Local agencies have the authority to levy fees for related costs and thus, any local costs are not reimbursable.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. This bill seeks to ensure that housing projects move through the building approval process faster. According to the author, “California is in the midst of an unprecedented housing crisis caused by a severe lack of new housing construction, both market rate and affordable. Unfortunately, the local and state approval processes for new housing construction are frequently slow and cumbersome. This bill seeks to expedite the housing construction permit approval process by reducing the time for a lead agency to approve a housing project from 180 to 120 days. The bill still ensures that purely affordable housing projects continue to get the same 90 day approval process. In addition, this bill reduces the approval process for any other responsible public agencies from 180 days to 90 days for all types of housing developments."
2. Background. The Permit Streamlining Act applies to all public agencies, including charter cities, and was adopted to ensure that permit applicants for projects are not subjected to protracted and unjustified governmental delays in the processing of the applications for development projects.

Within 30 calendar days of receiving an application, a city is required to respond to the applicant in writing with the determination of whether the application is complete and accepted for filing. If the application is deemed complete, the city proceeds with the evaluation of the project, but if the application is incomplete, the city is required to indicate in detail the deficiencies in the application.

All deadlines under the Permit Streamlining Act begin from the day the application is accepted as complete or deemed complete. The completion date also starts the clock running on processing the application. If a city is acting as the lead agency for a project for which an EIR is prepared, then the city must approve or disapprove the project within 180 days from the date of the EIR’s certification. The Act specifies other time lines for approval or disapproval by the public agency, in coordination with specific CEQA actions, like whether a project is exempt from CEQA, the adoption of a negative declaration, or the certification of an EIR. The Act also contains timelines for approval of a development project for a responsible agency, once the project has been approved by the lead agency. “Development project” is defined as either a) residential units only; or, b) mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development and are limited to neighborhood commercial uses and to the first floor of buildings that are two or more stories.

If approval or disapproval of a project does not occur within these deadlines, the project is deemed approved provided the prescribed public notice requirements have been met.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 20, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Susan Talamantes Eggman, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2180 (

Author:Ting) – As Amended Ver:March 31, 2016

SUBJECT: Land use: development project review.

SUMMARY: Expedites timelines for approval or disapproval by a public agency for certain types of development projects. Specifically, this bill:

1. Expedites, pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act, the timelines for review of a development project by a public agency, as follows:
   1. Requires a public agency that is a responsible agency for a development project that has been approved by the lead agency to approve or disapprove the development project within whichever of the following periods of time is longer:
      1. Within 90 days from the date on which the lead agency has approved the project; or,
      2. Within 90 days of the date on which the completed application for the development project has been received and accepted as complete by that responsible agency.
   2. Requires any public agency that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or disapprove the project within 120 days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the environmental impact report (EIR), if an EIR is prepared for a development project, and specified conditions are met.
2. Makes other minor and technical changes.
3. Declares that no reimbursement is necessary because a local agency has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service, as specified.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Defines, pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act, the term “development project” to mean a use consisting of either of the following:
   1. Residential units only; or,
   2. Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development and are limited to neighborhood commercial uses and to the first floor of buildings that are two or more stories. As used in this paragraph, “neighborhood commercial” means small-scale general or specialty stores that furnish goods or services primarily to residents of the neighborhood.
2. Requires, pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act, any public agency that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or disapprove the project within whichever of the following periods is applicable:
   1. 180 days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the EIR, if an EIR is prepared, pursuant to existing law for the development project;
   2. 90 days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the EIR, if an EIR is prepared, pursuant to existing law for the development project, and all of the following conditions are met:
      1. At least 49% of the units in the development project are affordable to very low- or low-income households, as defined. Rents for the lower-income units shall be set at an affordable rent, as specified, for at least 30 years. Owner-occupied units shall be available at an affordable housing cost, as specified;
      2. Prior to the application being deemed complete for the development project, as specified, the lead agency received written notice from the project applicant that an application has been made or will be made for an allocation or commitment of financing, tax credits, bond authority, or other financial assistance from a public agency or federal agency, and the notice specifies the financial assistance that has been applied for or will be applied for and the deadline for application for that assistance, the requirement that one of the approvals of the development project by the lead agency is a prerequisite to the application for or approval of the application for financial assistance, and that the financial assistance is necessary for the project
         to be affordable as required, pursuant to i), above; and,
      3. There is confirmation that the application has been made to the public agency or federal agency prior to certification of the EIR.
   3. 60 days from the date of the adoption by the lead agency of the negative declaration if a negative declaration is completed and adopted for the development project; or,
   4. 60 days from the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality act (CEQA) if the project is exempt from CEQA.
3. States that 2), above, does not preclude a project applicant and a public agency from mutually agreeing in writing to an extension of any time limited provided by existing law, as specified.
4. Requires any public agency which is a responsible agency for a development project that has been approved by the lead agency to approve or disapprove the development project within whichever of the following periods of time is longer:
   1. Within 180 days from the date on which the lead agency has approved the project; or,
   2. Within 180 days of the date on which the completed application for the development project has been received and accepted as complete by that responsible agency.
5. Provides that at the time a decision by a lead agency to disapprove a development project becomes final, applications for that project which are filed with responsible agencies, shall be deemed withdrawn.

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed fiscal.

COMMENTS:

1. Bill Summary. This bill expedites, for a public agency, the review process for certain development projects, pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act, specifically those development projects that are either: a) residential units only; or, b) mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development and are limited to neighborhood commercial uses and to the first floor of buildings that are two or more stories.

The bill requires any public agency that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or disapprove the project within 120 days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the EIR, if an EIR is prepared for that development project. The bill also requires a public agency that is a responsible agency for a development project that has been approved by the lead agency to approve or disapprove the development project within whichever of the following periods of time is longer:

• 1. Within 90 days from the date on which the lead agency has approved the project; or,
  2. Within 90 days of the date on which the completed application for the development project has been received and accepted as complete by that responsible agency.

This bill is sponsored by the California Apartment Association.

1. Author’s Statement. According to the author, “California is in the midst of an unprecedented housing crisis caused by a severe lack of new housing construction, both market rate and affordable. In its most recent report on housing, the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) stressed that facilitating more private housing development was needed to make housing more affordable for low–income Californians.

“Unfortunately, the local and state approval processes for new housing construction are frequently slow and cumbersome. In its March 2015 report on “California’s High Housing Costs: Causes and Consequences”, the LAO concluded:

Cities and counties often require housing projects to go through multiple layers of review prior to approval. For example, a project may require independent review by a building department, health department, fire department, planning commission, and city council. Each layer of review can increase project approval time. Additional complexity in review processes also creates avenues for concerned residents to slow building or reduce its size and scope…

“AB 2180 seeks to expedite the housing construction permit approval process by reducing the time for a lead agency to approve a housing project from 180 to 120 days. The bill still ensures that purely affordable housing projects continue to get the same 90 day approval process. In addition, AB 2180 reduces the approval process for any other responsible public agencies from 180 days to 90 days for all types of housing developments.

“AB 2180 will ensure that badly needed housing projects move through the building approval process faster. It will not only reduce the amount of time, but will also reduce costs and other delays that can be associated with a lengthy approval process. AB 2180 is a modest, yet important step towards addressing California’s severe housing shortage.”

1. Background. The Permit Streamlining Act applies to all public agencies, including charter cities, and was adopted to ensure that permit applicants for projects are not subjected to protracted and unjustified governmental delays in the processing of the applications for development projects. The Legislature, in enacting the Permit Streamlining Act, declared that “there is a statewide need to ensure clear understanding of the specific requirements which must be met in connection with the approval of development projects and to expedite decisions on such projects.”

Submittal of a project application is the first step in the streamlined permitting process. Within 30 calendar days of receiving an application, a city is required to respond to the applicant in writing with the determination of whether the application is complete and accepted for filing. If the application is deemed complete, the city proceeds with the evaluation of the project, but if the application is incomplete, the city is required to indicate in detail the deficiencies in the application.

All deadlines under the Permit Streamlining Act begin from the day the application is accepted as complete or deemed complete. The completion date also starts the clock running on processing the application. If a city is acting as the lead agency for a project for which an EIR is prepared, then the city must approve or disapprove the project within 180 days from the date of the EIR’s certification. The Act specifies other time lines for approval or disapproval by the public agency, in coordination with specific CEQA actions, like whether a project is exempt from CEQA, the adoption of a negative declaration, or the certification of an EIR. The Act also contains timelines for approval of a development project for a responsible agency, once the project has been approved by the lead agency. “Development project” is defined as either a) residential units only; or, b) mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50% of the total square footage of the development and are limited to neighborhood commercial uses and to the first floor of buildings that are two or more stories.

If approval or disapproval of a project does not occur within these deadlines, the project shall be deemed approved provided the prescribed public notice requirements have been met.

1. Arguments in Support. Supporters argue that the bill will ensure that badly needed housing projects move through the building approval process faster, thus reducing costs and other delays that can be associated with a lengthy approval process.
2. Arguments in Opposition. None on file.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Apartment Association [SPONSOR]

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958