A provision of the California Building Standards Law specifies that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, published in the California Building Standards Code, applies only to an application for a building permit submitted after the effective date of the ordinance and to plans and specifications for, and the construction performed under, that permit, unless, among other reasons, the permit is subsequently deemed expired because the building or work authorized by the permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of the permit, or the permittee has suspended or abandoned the work authorized by the permit at any time after the work is commenced.

This bill would instead provide that a permit would remain valid for purposes of the California Building Standards Law if the work on the site authorized by that permit is commenced within 12 months after its issuance, unless the permittee has abandoned the work authorized by the permit. The bill would also authorize a permittee to request and the building official to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of time for periods of not more than 180 days per extension. The bill would require that the permittee request the extension in writing and demonstrate justifiable cause for the extension. The bill would also make conforming changes to the above-described provisions.

A provision of the California Building Standards Law specifies that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, published in the California Building Standards Code, applies only to an application for a building permit submitted after the effective date of the ordinance and to plans and specifications for, and the construction performed under, that permit, unless, among other reasons, the permit is subsequently deemed expired because the building or work authorized by the permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of the permit, or the permittee has suspended or abandoned the work authorized by the permit at any time after the work is commenced.

This bill would instead provide that a permit would remain valid for purposes of the California Building Standards Law if the work on the site authorized by that permit is commenced within 12 months after its issuance, unless the permittee has abandoned the work authorized by the permit. The bill would also authorize a permittee to request and the building official to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of time for periods of not more than 180 days per extension. The bill would require that the permittee request the extension in writing and demonstrate justifiable cause for the extension. The bill would also make conforming changes to the above-described provisions.

A provision of the California Building Standards Law specifies that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, published in the California Building Standards Code, applies only to an application for a building permit submitted after the effective date of the ordinance and to plans and specifications for, and the construction performed under, that permit, unless, among other reasons, the permit is subsequently deemed expired because the building or work authorized by the permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of the permit, or the permittee has suspended or abandoned the work authorized by the permit at any time after the work is commenced.

This bill would instead provide that a permit would remain valid for purposes of the California Building Standards Law if the work on the site authorized by that permit is commenced within 12 months after its issuance, unless the permittee has abandoned the work authorized by the permit. The bill would also authorize a permittee to request and the building official to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of time for periods of not more than 180 days per extension upon a written request by the permittee that demonstrates extension. The bill would require that the permittee request the extension in writing and demonstrate justifiable cause for the extension. The bill would also make conforming changes to the above-described provisions.

A provision of the California Building Standards Law specifies that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, published in the California Building Standards Code, applies only to an application for a building permit submitted after the effective date of the ordinance and to plans and specifications for, and the construction performed under, that permit, unless, among other reasons, the permit is subsequently deemed expired because the building or work authorized by the permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of the permit, or the permittee has suspended or abandoned the work authorized by the permit at any time after the work is commenced.

This bill would instead provide that a permit would remain valid for purposes of the California Building Standards Law if the work on the site authorized by that permit is commenced within 12 months after its issuance. issuance, unless the permittee has abandoned the work authorized by the permit. The bill would also authorize the building official to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of time for periods of not more than 180 days per extension upon a written request by the permittee that demonstrates justifiable cause for the extension. The bill would also make conforming changes to the above-described provisions.

A provision of the California Building Standards Law specifies that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, published in the California Building Standards Code, applies only to an application for a building permit submitted after the effective date of the ordinance and to plans and specifications for, and the construction performed under, that permit, unless, among other reasons, the permit is subsequently deemed expired because the building or work authorized by the permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of the permit, or the permittee has suspended or abandoned the work authorized by the permit at any time after the work is commenced.

This bill, until January 1, 2024, bill would instead provide that a permit would remain valid for purposes of the California Building Standards Law if the work on the site authorized by that permit is commenced within 3 years 12 months after its issuance. The bill, until January 1, 2024, bill would also authorize the building official to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of time for periods of not more than 180 days per extension upon a written request by the permittee that demonstrates justifiable cause for the extension. The bill would also make conforming changes to the above-described provisions.

A provision of the California Building Standards Law specifies that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, published in the California Building Standards Code, applies only to an application for a building permit submitted after the effective date of the ordinance and to plans and specifications for, and the construction performed under, that permit, unless, among other reasons, the permit is subsequently deemed expired because the building or work authorized by the permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of the permit, or the permittee has suspended or abandoned the work authorized by the permit at any time after the work is commenced.

This bill bill, until January 1, 2024, would instead provide that a permit would remain valid for purposes of the California Building Standards Law if the work on the site authorized by that permit is commenced within 3 years after its issuance, or if the work authorized on the site by the permit is suspended or abandoned for a period of up to 3 years after the time the work is commenced. issuance. The bill bill, until January 1, 2024, would authorize the building official to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of time for periods of not more than 180 days per extension upon a written request by the permittee that demonstrates justifiable cause for the extension. The bill would also make conforming changes to the above-described provisions.

A provision of the California Building Standards Law specifies that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, published in the California Building Standards Code, applies only to an application for a building permit submitted after the effective date of the ordinance and to plans and specifications for, and the construction performed under, that permit, unless, among other reasons, the permit is subsequently deemed expired because the building or work authorized by the permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of the permit, or the permittee has suspended or abandoned the work authorized by the permit at any time after the work is commenced.

This bill would provide that a permit would remain valid if the work on the site authorized by that permit is commenced within 3 years after its issuance, or if the work authorized on the site by the permit is suspended or abandoned for a period of up to 3 years after the time the work is commenced. The bill would authorize the building official to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of time for periods of not more than 180 days per extension upon a written request by the permittee that demonstrates justifiable cause for the extension. The bill would also make conforming changes to the above-described provisions.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2913

Author:(Wood)

As Amended Ver:August 21, 2018

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: H. & C.D.

SUMMARY: Makes changes to the California Building Standards Law. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies do not apply to a permit that is subsequently deemed expired because construction has not commenced within 12 months of the date of issuance or the permittee has abandoned the work authorized by the permit.
2. Authorizes a local building official to grant one or more extensions of up to 180 days each, provided the extension is requested in writing and demonstrates justifiable cause.

The Senate amendments:

1. Remove the five year sunset.
2. Reduce the length of time a permit is valid from three years to 12 months if work authorized by the permit has not commenced from the date a permit is issued, unless the permittee requests an extension.

FISCAL EFFECT: None

COMMENTS:

Background: California's building codes are published in their entirety every three years. Intervening code adoption cycles produce supplement pages half-way (18 months) into each triennial period. Amendments to California's building standards are subject to a lengthy and transparent public participation process throughout each code adoption cycle. There are a few exemptions, which allow a local governing body, city, or county to modify state building standards. A local governing body, city, or county can adopt an ordinance or a resolution in a public meeting that finds that a local building standard must be modified from the state building standard because of local climatic, geological or topographical conditions, and must file that ordinance with the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). The CBSC reviews the findings of the ordinance to determine if the local governing body followed the correct procedure.

A developer is subject to the state's building standards and any local changes made through an ordinance to the state's building standards at the time the permit is issued. Building permits are deemed expired six months (180 days) after issuance if the work has not begun or if the permittee has suspended or abandoned work any time after the permit is issued. A subsequent building permit is subject to building standards in place at the time the permit is issued. Under existing building officials have discretion to extend a permit for up to six months.

For purposes of complying with the building standards, this bill would extend the length of time a permit is valid from 180 days to 12 months from the date that the permit is issued. The bill authorizes a building official to extend the permit for 180 days multiple times upon the request of a developer. The developer could apply multiple six month extensions in writing and must provide justification for the need for the extension.

The California Energy Commission recently approved a requirement for solar panels on new homes starting in 2020. The commission estimates they would add an average $10,500 in construction costs for a single-family home but generate about $16,000 in energy savings. The measure now moves toward final approval later this year by the state's CBSC. The measure now moves toward final approval later this year by the state's Building Standards Commission.

Purpose of this bill: According to the author, "at the present time, traditional site-built residential construction must comply with the building standards which are in effect on the date the permit application is submitted to the local building department (H&S 18938.5) Current law requires that once a building permit is issued, construction work must begin on the site within 6 months. While local jurisdictions are authorized to extend these permits, this is usually done on a case-by-case basis which can add uncertainty to the local administrative process. In addition, some jurisdictions have taken specific action to prohibit the extension of building permits. Permits for manufactured housing remain valid for 36 months (CCR Title 25, Division 1, Chapter 3, Subchapter 1, Article 3, Section 3048). The longstanding reason for this is to promote housing affordability, recognizing that going to the end of the local permit line can create delays and added costs. This is a perplexing difference as manufactured housing is much easier to build than site-built construction, yet the permit for manufactured housing is valid for a period which is six times longer than that for site-built construction. This bill extends those permit timelines currently enjoyed by manufactured housing to site built construction."

Analysis Prepared by: Lisa Engel / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085 FN: 0004939

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2913

Author:

: 8/21/18 in Senate

Vote:

SENATE TRANS. & HOUSING COMMITTEE: 13-0, 7/3/18

AYES: Beall, Cannella, Allen, Dodd, Gaines, Galgiani, McGuire, Morrell, Roth, Skinner, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wiener

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 74-0, 5/21/18 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Building standards: building permits: expiration

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill authorizes building permit extensions under certain circumstances and provides that the permit is subject to the building standards in effect on the date of original issuance.

Senate Floor Amendments of 8/21/18 clarify that a building permit is valid beyond 12 months only if work is commenced within the initial 12 months and the permittee does not abandon construction.

Senate Floor Amendments of 8/9/18 provide that a building permit shall remain valid unless the permittee has abandoned construction.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides that the building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) that are in effect at the time a building permit application is submitted shall apply to construction covered by that permit.
2. Provides that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, as published in the California Building Standards Code, shall apply to construction under a building permit application submitted after the ordinance takes effect, with the following exemptions:
   1. A city or county that has been subject to a state emergency declaration.
   2. A permit that is subsequently deemed expired because construction has not commenced within 180 days, or work has been suspended or abandoned.
   3. A permit that is subsequently suspended or revoked by a building official due to it being issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information.
   4. No model code made applicable to any additional occupancy shall apply to any project that has been submitted for a building permit prior to the effective date of that model code.

This bill:

1. Provides that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies shall not apply to a permit that is subsequently deemed expired because construction has not commenced within 12 months of the date of issuance or the permittee has abandoned the work authorized by the permit.
2. Authorizes a local building official to grant one or more extensions of up to 180 days each, provided the extension is requested in writing and demonstrates justifiable cause.

Comments

1. Purpose. The author states that the marketability of home construction within a region can change rapidly, prompting projects to temporarily slow down or cease operation for extended periods of time. There are a number of reasons for these delays — local market conditions, community reactions, and availability of building materials and labor. The author states that although these factors are exacerbated in areas impacted by natural disasters, such as his district, this is an issue of statewide concern. Additionally, according to the author, some jurisdictions have taken specific action to prohibit the extension of building permits, instead requiring them to re-start the application process and pay additional fees. This bill provides that a permit remains valid if work on the site commences within one year after the permit was issued.
2. State and local building codes. The California Building Standards Code (Title 24) serves as the basis for the design and construction of buildings in the state. California’s building codes are published in their entirety every three years. Amendments to the building standards are subject to a lengthy and transparent public participation process throughout each code adoption cycle. Intervening code adoption cycles produce supplement pages halfway (18 months) into each triennial period. There are a few exemptions, which allow a local governing body, city, or county to modify the state building standards. Such a modification must be adopted by ordinance or resolution in a public meeting that finds that a local building standard must be modified from the state standard because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions, and must be filed with the CBSC.
3. Building code requirements on permits. A developer is subject to the state Building Standards Code, as well as to any local changes made to the code, that are in effect at the time the permit is issued. Under existing law, a building permit expires six months (180 days) after issuance if work has not begun or if the permittee has suspended or abandoned work any time after the permit is issued. A subsequent building permit is subject to the building standards in place at the time the subsequent permit is issued. Under existing law, officials have discretion to extend a permit for up to six months. The author states that while well intended, ongoing changes in the building code can create administrative hurdles for a project that designs to one set of codes, then experiences a slight construction delay for whatever reason, only to find it must go back and redesign to incorporate mandated changes.

This bill effectively gives a developer 12 months to start construction, by providing that the permit is not deemed expired unless construction has not been started within that period, or is abandoned during that period. If a permit does expire, the developer must obtain approval from the local building official for one or more six-month extensions. Either way, a permit is grandfathered back to the date of issuance. For example, the California Energy Commission (CEC) recently approved a requirement for solar panels on new homes beginning in 2020; the measure now moves forward toward final approval later this year by the CBSC. Under this bill, any permit issued prior to CBSC adoption of the solar roofs requirement would not be subject to the requirement, even if the permit were extended well beyond its adoption.

1. California’s housing crisis. California is currently experiencing a serious housing crisis. According to the Department of Housing and Community Development, California needs to produce, on average, 180,000 units per year to keep up with population growth. Unfortunately, the state has under-produced since the 1980’s; even in the 2000’s, when there was more production, California never hit the 180,000 mark. The Legislature has passed numerous bills in the last couple of years – in response to developer requests – to speed up the permit process. This bill, however, extends from six to 12 months, the amount of time a developer could take to commence construction. The author states that labor shortages often delay work.
2. New Floor amendments remove opposition. After this bill passed out of policy committee, an error was brought to the committee’s attention. Specifically, a provision deeming a permit expired if construction is suspended or abandoned within 12 months had been inadvertently deleted in a prior version. The author partially reinstated the provision on August 9th; however, due in part to the confusing structure of the code section, the new version of this bill effectively provided that if construction was abandoned after the initial 12-month period, the permit would nevertheless remain valid.

The author worked with opponents to reach agreement on new language. The August 21st version clarifies that a permit is valid beyond 12 months only if work is commenced within the initial 12 months and the permittee does not abandon construction. The amendments remove all opposition to this bill.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 3147 (Caballero, 2018) freezes the impact and development charged on developments at the time an application is deemed complete for two years. The bill was held on suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/21/18)

Building Owners and Managers of Association of California

California Apartment Association

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

California Credit Union League

California Professional Association of Specialty Contractors

International Council of Shopping Centers

NAIOP of California, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association

National Federation of Independent Business

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/21/18)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Supporters state that this bill will be particularly helpful in fire-ravaged areas, where the need to rebuild is great but construction delays are common due to labor shortages and other issues.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 74-0, 5/21/18

AYES: Acosta, Aguiar-Curry, Travis Allen, Arambula, Baker, Berman, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Caballero, Calderon, Carrillo, Cervantes, Chau, Chávez, Chen, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Dahle, Daly, Flora, Fong, Frazier, Friedman, Gallagher, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez Fletcher, Grayson, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kamlager-Dove, Kiley, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Rodriguez, Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Voepel, Waldron, Weber, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Eggman, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gray

Prepared by:

8/22/18 14:36:44

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2913

Author:

: 8/9/18 in Senate

Vote:

SENATE TRANS. & HOUSING COMMITTEE: 13-0, 7/3/18

AYES: Beall, Cannella, Allen, Dodd, Gaines, Galgiani, McGuire, Morrell, Roth, Skinner, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wiener

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 74-0, 5/21/18 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Building standards: building permits: expiration

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill authorizes building permit extensions under certain circumstances and provides that the permit is subject to the building standards in effect on the date of original issuance.

Senate Floor Amendments of 8/9/18 provide that a building permit shall remain valid unless the permittee has abandoned construction.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides that the building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) that are in effect at the time a building permit application is submitted shall apply to construction covered by that permit.
2. Provides that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, as published in the California Building Standards Code, shall apply to construction under a building permit application submitted after the ordinance takes effect, with the following exemptions:
   1. A city or county that has been subject to a state emergency declaration.
   2. A permit that is subsequently deemed expired because construction has not commenced within 180 days, or work has been suspended or abandoned.
   3. A permit that is subsequently suspended or revoked by a building official due to it being issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information.
   4. No model code made applicable to any additional occupancy shall apply to any project that has been submitted for a building permit prior to the effective date of that model code.

This bill:

1. Provides that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies shall not apply to a permit that is subsequently deemed expired because construction has not commenced within 12 months of the date of issuance, unless the permittee has abandoned the work authorized by the permit.
2. Authorizes a local building official to grant one or more extensions of up to 180 days each, provided the extension is requested in writing and demonstrates justifiable cause.

Comments

1. Purpose. The author states that the marketability of home construction within a region can change rapidly, prompting projects to temporarily slow down or cease operation for extended periods of time. There are a number of reasons for these delays — local market conditions, community reactions, and availability of building materials and labor. The author states that although these factors are exacerbated in areas impacted by natural disasters, such as his district, this is an issue of statewide concern. Additionally, according to the author, some jurisdictions have taken specific action to prohibit the extension of building permits, instead requiring them to re-start the application process and pay additional fees. This bill provides that a permit remains valid if work on the site commences within one year after the permit was issued.
2. State and local building codes. The California Building Standards Code (Title 24) serves as the basis for the design and construction of buildings in the state. California’s building codes are published in their entirety every three years. Amendments to the building standards are subject to a lengthy and transparent public participation process throughout each code adoption cycle. Intervening code adoption cycles produce supplement pages halfway (18 months) into each triennial period. There are a few exemptions, which allow a local governing body, city, or county to modify the state building standards. Such a modification must be adopted by ordinance or resolution in a public meeting that finds that a local building standard must be modified from the state standard because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions, and must be filed with the CBSC.
3. Building code requirements on permits. A developer is subject to the state Building Standards Code, as well as to any local changes made to the code, that are in effect at the time the permit is issued. Under existing law, a building permit expires six months (180 days) after issuance if work has not begun or if the permittee has suspended or abandoned work any time after the permit is issued. A subsequent building permit is subject to the building standards in place at the time the subsequent permit is issued. Under existing law, officials have discretion to extend a permit for up to six months. The author states that while well intended, ongoing changes in the building code can create administrative hurdles for a project that designs to one set of codes, then experiences a slight construction delay for whatever reason, only to find it must go back and redesign to incorporate mandated changes.

This bill effectively gives a developer 12 months to start construction, by providing that the permit is not deemed expired unless construction has not been started within that period, or is abandoned during that period. If a permit does expire, the developer must obtain approval from the local building official for one or more six-month extensions. Either way, a permit is grandfathered back to the date of issuance. This means a project would avoid potentially major building code changes for a number of years. For example, the California Energy Commission (CEC) recently approved a requirement for solar panels on new homes beginning in 2020. The CEC estimates they would add an average $10,500 in construction costs for a single-family home but would generate about $16,000 in energy savings. The measure now moves forward toward final approval later this year by the CBSC. Under this bill, any permit issued prior to CBSC adoption of the solar roofs requirement would not be subject to the requirement, even if the permit were extended well beyond its adoption.

1. California’s housing crisis. California is currently experiencing a serious housing crisis. According to the Department of Housing and Community Development, California needs to produce, on average, 180,000 units per year to keep up with population growth. Unfortunately, the state has under-produced since the 1980’s; even in the 2000’s, when there was more production, California never hit the 180,000 mark. This bill could potentially extend the life of a building permit by several years. This would seem to be in direct conflict with numerous bills the Legislature has passed in the last couple of years – in response to developer requests – to speed up the permit process. The author states that developers are often forced to pay exorbitant fees to get a new permit when the original expires due construction delays.
2. Floor amendments. After this bill passed out of policy committee, an error in the bill was brought to the committee’s attention. Specifically, the provision deeming a permit expired if construction is suspended or abandoned within 12 months had been inadvertently deleted in a prior version of this bill. The committee asked the author to amend this provision back in on the Senate Floor, but the author only agreed to the “abandoned” portion. Therefore, this bill now provides that a permit only expires after 12 months if construction is abandoned – not if it is suspended. Neither “suspended” or “abandoned” is defined in this bill.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 3147 (Caballero, 2018) freezes the impact and development charged on developments at the time an application is deemed complete for two years. The bill was held on suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/14/18)

Building Owners and Managers of Association of California

California Apartment Association

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

California Credit Union League

California Professional Association of Specialty Contractors

International Council of Shopping Centers

NAIOP of California, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association

National Federation of Independent Business

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/14/18)

American Planning Association, California Chapter

California Building Officials

California State Association of Counties

League of California Cities

Rural County Representatives of California

Urban Counties of California

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Supporters state that this bill will be particularly helpful in fire-ravaged areas, where the need to rebuild is great but construction delays are common.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Opponents state that if a developer, after “commencing a project,” suspends construction for an indefinite period of time —even years — the permit would continue with no extensions needed and no new building code requirements applied. The state should encourage housing projects to be built as soon as possible after the permit is pulled.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 74-0, 5/21/18

AYES: Acosta, Aguiar-Curry, Travis Allen, Arambula, Baker, Berman, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Caballero, Calderon, Carrillo, Cervantes, Chau, Chávez, Chen, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Dahle, Daly, Flora, Fong, Frazier, Friedman, Gallagher, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez Fletcher, Grayson, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kamlager-Dove, Kiley, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Rodriguez, Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Voepel, Waldron, Weber, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Eggman, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gray

Prepared by:

8/14/18 15:23:14

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2913

Author:

: 8/6/18 in Senate

Vote:

SENATE TRANS. & HOUSING COMMITTEE: 13-0, 7/3/18

AYES: Beall, Cannella, Allen, Dodd, Gaines, Galgiani, McGuire, Morrell, Roth, Skinner, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wiener

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 74-0, 5/21/18 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill authorizes building permit extensions under certain circumstances and provides that the permit is subject to the building standards in effect on the date of original issuance.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides that the building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) that are in effect at the time a building permit application is submitted shall apply to construction covered by that permit.
2. Provides that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, as published in the California Building Standards Code, shall apply to construction under a building permit application submitted after the ordinance takes effect, with the following exemptions:
   1. A city or county that has been subject to a state emergency declaration.
   2. A permit that is subsequently deemed expired because construction has not commenced within 180 days, or work has been suspended or abandoned.
   3. A permit that is subsequently suspended or revoked by a building official due to it being issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information.
   4. No model code made applicable to any additional occupancy shall apply to any project that has been submitted for a building permit prior to the effective date of that model code.

This bill:

1. Provides that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies shall not apply to a permit that is subsequently deemed expired because construction has not commenced within 12 months of the date of issuance, unless the permittee obtains an extension pursuant to this bill.
2. Provides that a permit shall remain valid if the work on the site authorized by the permit commences within 12 months after the permit is issued, unless the permittee has obtained an extension pursuant to this bill.
3. Authorizes the building official to grant one or more extensions of up to 180 days each, provided the extension is requested in writing and demonstrates justifiable cause.

Comments

1. Purpose. The author states that the marketability of home construction within a region can change rapidly, prompting projects to temporarily slow down or cease operation for extended periods of time. There are a number of reasons for these delays — local market conditions, community reactions, and availability of building materials and labor. The author states that although these factors are exacerbated in areas impacted by natural disasters, such as his district, this is an issue of statewide concern. Additionally, according to the author, some jurisdictions have taken specific action to prohibit the extension of building permits, instead requiring them to re-start the application process and pay additional fees. This bill provides that a permit remains valid if work on the site commences within one year after the permit was issued.
2. State and local building codes. The California Building Standards Code (Title 24) serves as the basis for the design and construction of buildings in the state. California’s building codes are published in their entirety every three years. Amendments to the building standards are subject to a lengthy and transparent public participation process throughout each code adoption cycle. Intervening code adoption cycles produce supplement pages halfway (18 months) into each triennial period. There are a few exemptions, which allow a local governing body, city, or county to modify the state building standards. Such a modification must be adopted by ordinance or resolution in a public meeting that finds that a local building standard must be modified from the state standard because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions, and must be filed with the CBSC.
3. Building code requirements on permits. A developer is subject to the state Building Standards Code, as well as to any local changes made to the code, that are in effect at the time the permit is issued. Under existing law, a building permit expires six months (180 days) after issuance if work has not begun or if the permittee has suspended or abandoned work any time after the permit is issued. A subsequent building permit is subject to the building standards in place at the time the subsequent permit is issued. Under existing law, officials have discretion to extend a permit for up to six months. The author states that while well intended, ongoing changes in the building code can create administrative hurdles for a project that designs to one set of codes, then experiences a slight construction delay for whatever reason, only to find it must go back and redesign to incorporate mandated changes.

This bill extends the initial permit from six months to one year, after which a developer must obtain approval from a local building official for one or more six-month extensions. Extensions would grandfather the permit back to the date of issuance. This means a project would avoid potentially major building code changes for a number of years. For example, the California Energy Commission (CEC) recently approved a requirement for solar panels on new homes beginning in 2020. The CEC estimates they would add an average $10,500 in construction costs for a single-family home but would generate about $16,000 in energy savings. The measure now moves forward toward final approval later this year by the CBSC. Under this bill, any permit issued prior to CBSC adoption of the solar roofs requirement would not be subject to the requirement, even if the permit were extended well beyond its adoption.

1. California’s housing crisis. California is currently experiencing a serious housing crisis. According to the Department of Housing and Community Development, California needs to produce, on average, 180,000 units per year to keep up with population growth. Unfortunately, the state has under-produced since the 1980’s; even in the 2000’s, when there was more production, California never hit the 180,000 mark. This bill could potentially extend the life of a building permit by several years. This would seem to be in direct conflict with numerous bills the Legislature has passed in the last couple of years – in response to developer requests – to speed up the permit process. The author states that developers are often forced to pay exorbitant fees to get a new permit when the original expires due construction delays.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 3147 (Caballero, 2018) freezes the impact and development charged on developments at the time an application is deemed complete for two years. The bill was held on suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/6/18)

Building Owners and Managers of Association of California

California Apartment Association

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

California Credit Union League

California Professional Association of Specialty Contractors

International Council of Shopping Centers

NAIOP of California, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association

National Federation of Independent Business

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/6/18)

American Planning Association, California Chapter

California Building Officials

California State Association of Counties

League of California Cities

Rural County Representatives of California

Urban Counties of California

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Supporters state that this bill will be particularly helpful in fire-ravaged areas, where the need to rebuild is great but construction delays are common.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Opponents state that this bill should be limited to disaster areas.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 74-0, 5/21/18

AYES: Acosta, Aguiar-Curry, Travis Allen, Arambula, Baker, Berman, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Caballero, Calderon, Carrillo, Cervantes, Chau, Chávez, Chen, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Dahle, Daly, Flora, Fong, Frazier, Friedman, Gallagher, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez Fletcher, Grayson, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kamlager-Dove, Kiley, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Rodriguez, Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Voepel, Waldron, Weber, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Eggman, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gray

Prepared by:

8/7/18 17:33:07

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING

Senator Jim Beall, Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular

Bill No: Hearing Date: 7/3/2018

SUBJECT:

DIGEST: This bill extends building permits up to five years and provides that they are subject to building standards in effect on the date of original issuance.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides that the building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) that are in effect at the time a building permit application is submitted shall apply to construction covered by that permit.
2. Provides that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies, as published in the California Building Standards Code, shall apply to construction under a building permit application submitted after the ordinance takes effect, with the following exemptions:
   1. A city or county that has been subject to a state emergency declaration.
   2. A permit that is subsequently deemed expired because construction has not commenced within 180 days, or work has been suspended or abandoned.
   3. A permit that is subsequently suspended or revoked by a building official due to it being issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information.
   4. No model code made applicable to any additional occupancy shall apply to any project that has been submitted for a building permit prior to the effective date of that model code.

This bill:

1. Provides that a local ordinance adding or modifying building standards for residential occupancies shall not apply to a permit that is subsequently deemed expired because construction has not commenced within three years of the date of issuance, unless the permittee obtains an extension under (3) below.
2. Provides that every permit shall remain valid if the work on the site authorized by the permit commences within three years after the permit is issued, unless the permittee has obtained an extension pursuant to this bill.
3. Authorizes the building official to grant one or more extensions of up to 180 days each.
4. Sunsets these provisions on January 1, 2024.

COMMENTS

1. Purpose. The author states that the marketability of home construction within a region can change rapidly, prompting projects to temporarily slow down or cease operation for extended periods of time. There are a number of reasons for these delays — local market conditions, community reactions, and availability of building materials and labor. The author states that although these factors are exacerbated in areas impacted by natural disasters, such as his district, this is an issue of statewide concern. Additionally, according to the author, some jurisdictions have taken specific action to prohibit the extension of building permits, instead requiring them to re-start the application process and pay additional fees. This bill would provide that a permit remains valid if work on the site commences within three years after the permit was issued.
2. State and local building codes. The California Building Standards Code (Title 24) serves as the basis for the design and construction of buildings in the state. California’s building codes are published in their entirety every three years. Amendments to the building standards are subject to a lengthy and transparent public participation process throughout each code adoption cycle. Intervening code adoption cycles produce supplement pages halfway (18 months) into each triennial period. There are a few exemptions, which allow a local governing body, city, or county to modify the state building standards. Such a modification must be adopted by ordinance or resolution in a public meeting that finds that a local building standard must be modified from the state standard because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions, and must be filed with the CBSC.
3. Building code requirements on permits. A developer is subject to the state Building Standards Code, as well as to any local changes made to the code, that are in effect at the time the permit is issued. Building permits expire six months (180 days) after issuance if work has not begun or if the permittee has suspended or abandoned work any time after the permit is issued. A subsequent building permit is subject to the building standards in place at the time the subsequent permit is issued. Under existing law, officials have discretion to extend a permit for up to six months. This bill, however, would extend the validity of a permit from six months to three years from the date that the permit is issued. In addition, this bill authorizes a building official to issue additional six-month extensions. The three-year permit, as well as the extensions, would only be subject to building code requirements in place on the date the original permit was issued. The author states that while well intended, ongoing changes in the building code can create administrative hurdles for a project that designs to one set of codes, then experiences a slight construction delay for whatever reason, only to find it must go back and redesign to incorporate mandated changes.

Under this bill, grandfathering a permit back to date of issuance means that a project would avoid potentially major building code changes for a number of years. For example, the California Energy Commission (CEC) recently approved a requirement for solar panels on new homes beginning in 2020. The CEC estimates they would add an average $10,500 in construction costs for a single-family home but would generate about $16,000 in energy savings. The measure now moves forward toward final approval later this year by the CBSC. Under this bill, a permit issued next year would not be subject to the solar panel requirement in 2020.

1. California’s housing crisis. California is currently experiencing a serious housing crisis. According to HCD, California needs to produce, on average, 180,000 units per year to keep up with population growth. Unfortunately, the state has under-produced since the 1980’s; even in the 2000’s, when there was more production, California never hit the 180,000 mark. This bill extends the life of a building permit from six months to three years, and then allows for unlimited six-month extensions until 2024 — meaning that a permit pulled on January 1, 2019 could potentially drag out construction for a full five years before it expires. In a time where construction of housing is so desperately needed, it is unclear why the Legislature should support such significant delays. Indeed, the Legislature has passed several bills in the past couple of years to speed permitting processes, in response to developer requests.

The author states that this bill merely aligns building permits with manufactured housing permits, which are valid for three years. However, manufactured homes tend to be permitted on a one-by-one basis, as opposed to a subdivision with a large number of sites; dragging out a permit for a single manufactured home would not have nearly as big an impact on the housing supply.

1. Opposition concerns. The American Planning Association California Chapter, League of California Cities, and Rural County Representatives of California, writing in opposition, suggest that this bill should be limited to disaster areas. The Assembly Housing Committee analysis also made this suggestion. In addition, almost every single support letter the committee received on this bill states that it would be particularly helpful in fire areas. The author states, however, that although these factors that can delay projects are exacerbated in areas impacted by natural disasters, this is an issue of statewide concern and therefore the bill should not be narrowed. The author also states that developers are often forced to pay exorbitant fees to get a new permit when the original expires due construction delays. The author’s office did not provide the committee with examples of such situations.
2. Alternatives. The committee may wish to consider one of the following alternatives to this bill:
   1. Limit to fire areas. The committee recognizes that a lack of labor and building materials has slowed construction in parts of the state that have suffered massive wildfires. Rather than significantly extending building permits statewide, the committee may wish to consider amending this bill to limit it to areas of the state where the Governor has declared a state of emergency.
   2. Extend permits by a shorter amount. The committee recognizes that some projects experience slowdowns due to unforeseen circumstances; however, extending permits for up to five years contradicts the state’s goal to quickly address the serious housing shortage. As a compromise, the committee may wish to consider extending building permits from the current six months, to 18 months (rather than three years), and removing the six-month extension if work is abandoned or suspended.
   3. Explicitly authorize locals to extend permits. The California Building Code currently includes a provision (Chapter 1, Section 105.5) authorizing a local building official to grant one or more extensions, of six months each, if the extension is requested in writing and demonstrates justifiable cause. The committee may wish to consider amending this bill to delete the current contents and instead codify this authorization in statute.

Related Legislation:

AB 3147 (Caballero, 2018) — would freeze the impact and development charged on developments at the time an application is deemed complete for two years. This bill was held on suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Assembly Votes:

Floor: 74-0

H&CD: 7-0

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No

POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on Wednesday,

June 27, 2018.)

SUPPORT:

Building Owners and Managers of Association of California

California Apartment Association

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

California Professional Association of Specialty Contractors

California Credit Union League

International Council of Shopping Centers

NAIOP of California, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association

National Federation of Independent Business

OPPOSITION:

American Planning Association, California Chapter

California Building Officials

California State Association of Counties

League of California Cities

Rural County Representatives of California

Urban Counties of California

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2913

Author:(Wood)

As Amended Ver:May 15, 2018

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Makes changes to the California Building Standards Law. Specifically, this bill:

1. Extends the amount of time that a permit is not subject to locally adopted building standards from 180 days to three years if work authorized by the permit has not commenced from the date a permit is issued, unless the permittee has obtained an extension.
2. Provides that every permit shall remain valid if the work on a site authorized by the permit is commenced within three years after the permit is issued, unless the permittee has obtained an extension.
3. Authorizes a building official to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of not more than 180 days per extension.
4. Requires a permittee to request an extension in writing and provide justifiable cause for the extension.
5. Includes a five year sunset.

FISCAL EFFECT: None

COMMENTS:

Background: California's building codes are published in their entirety every three years. Intervening code adoption cycles produce supplement pages half-way (18 months) into each triennial period. Amendments to California's building standards are subject to a lengthy and transparent public participation process throughout each code adoption cycle. There are a few exemptions, which allow a local governing body, city, or county to modify state building standards. A local governing body, city, or county can adopt an ordinance or a resolution in a public meeting that finds that a local building standard must be modified from the state building standard because of local climatic, geological or topographical conditions, and must file that ordinance with the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). The CBSC reviews the findings of the ordinance to determine if the local governing body followed the correct procedure.

A developer is subject to the state's building standards and any local changes made through an ordinance to the state's building standards at the time the permit is issued. Building permits are deemed expired six months (180 days) after issuance if the work has not begun or if the permittee has suspended or abandoned work any time after the permit is issued. A subsequent building permit is subject to building standards in place at the time the permit is issued. Under existing building standards, officials have discretion to extend a permit for up to six months.

For purposes of complying with the building standards, this bill would extend the length of time a permit is valid from 180 days to three years from the date that the permit is issued. The bill authorizes a building official to extend the permit for 180 days multiple times upon the request of a developer. The developer could apply multiple six month extensions in writing and must provide justification for the need for the extension.

The California Energy Commission recently approved a requirement for solar panels on new homes starting in 2020. The commission estimates they would add an average $10,500 in construction costs for a single-family home but generate about $16,000 in energy savings. The measure now moves toward final approval later this year by the state's CBSC. The measure now moves toward final approval later this year by the state's Building Standards Commission. If this bill is signed into law and a permit is issued next year, it would not be subject to that requirement in 2020.

Purpose of this bill: According to the author, "at the present time, traditional site-built residential construction must comply with the building standards which are in effect on the date the permit application is submitted to the local building department (Health and Safety Code Section 18938.5). Current law requires that once a building permit is issued, construction work must begin on the site within 6 months. While local jurisdictions are authorized to extend these permits, this is usually done on a case-by-case basis which can add uncertainty to the local administrative process. In addition, some jurisdictions have taken specific action to prohibit the extension of building permits. Permits for manufactured housing remain valid for 36 months (California Code of Regulations Title 25, Division 1, Chapter 3, Subchapter 1, Article 3, Section 3048). The longstanding reason for this is to promote housing affordability, recognizing that going to the end of the local permit line can create delays and added costs. This is a perplexing difference as manufactured housing is much easier to build than site-built construction, yet the permit for manufactured housing is valid for a period which is six times longer than that for site-built construction. This bill extends those permit timelines currently enjoyed by manufactured housing to site built construction."

Related legislation:

AB 3147 (Caballero) of the current legislative session would freeze the impact and development fees charged on developments at the time an application is deemed complete for two years. This bill passed out of the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee 7-0 and is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Analysis Prepared by: Lisa Engel / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085 FN: 0002953

Date of Hearing: May 9, 2018

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

David Chiu, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2913 (

Author:Wood) – As Introduced Ver:February 16, 2018

SUBJECT: Building standards: building permits: expiration

SUMMARY: Makes changes to the California Building Standards Law. Specifically, this bill:

1. Extends the amount of time that a permit is not subject to locally adopted building standards from 180 days to three years if work authorized by the permit has not commenced from the date a permit is issued or for three years at any time after work is commenced if the permittee suspense or abandons work authorized by the permit, unless the permittee has obtained an extension.
2. Provides that every permit shall remain valid if the work on a site authorized by the permit is commenced within three years after the permit is issued or if the work authorized on the site by the permit is suspended or abandoned for a period of up to three years after the time the work is started, unless the permittee has obtained an extension.
3. Authorizes a building official to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of not more than 180 days per extension.
4. Requires a permittee to request an extension in writing and provide justifiable cause for the extension.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides that only those building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) and that are effective at the local level at the time an application for a building permit is submitted shall apply to a building permit.
2. Provides that a local ordinance that adds to or modifies building standards published by the CBSC shall only apply to an application for a building permit submitted after the effective date of the ordinance except in the following instances:
3. When a city or county has been subject to a Governor declared state of emergency;
4. A permit that is deemed expired because the work authorized has not been completed with 180 days from the date of the permit or the permittee has suspended or abandoned work authorized by the permit at any time after the work began; or
5. A permit that is deemed suspended or revoked because the building official has in writing suspended or revoked the permit because it was issued in error or based on incorrect information.
6. Authorizes the CBSC to approve and adopt building standards. Every three years, CBSC undertakes building standards rulemaking to revise and update the California Building Standards Code.
7. Requires proposed building standards that are submitted to CBSC for consideration to be accompanied by an analysis, completed by the appropriate state agency, that justifies approval based on the following criteria:
8. The building standard does not conflict with, overlap, or duplicate other building standards;
9. The proposed standard is within the parameters of the agency's jurisdiction;
10. The public interest requires the adoption of the building standard;
11. The standard is not unreasonable, arbitrary, unfair, or capricious;
12. The cost to the public is reasonable, based on the overall benefit to be derived from the building standard;
13. The standard is not unnecessarily ambiguous or vague; and
14. The applicable national specifications, published standards, and model codes have been appropriately incorporated into the standard.
15. Requires CBSC to receive proposed building standards from a state agency for consideration in the triennial code adoption cycle. Requires CBSC to adopt regulations governing the procedures for the triennial adoption cycle, which must include adequate provision of the following:
16. Public participation in the development of standards;
17. Notice in written form to the public of the proposed building standards with justifications;
18. Technical review of the proposed building standards and accompanying justification by advisory boards of CBSC; and
19. Time for review of recommendations by the advisory boards prior to CBSC taking action.

FISCAL EFFECT: None

COMMENTS:

Background: California’s building codes are published in their entirety every three years.  Intervening code adoption cycles produce supplement pages half-way (18 months) into each triennial period.  Amendments to California’s building standards are subject to a lengthy and transparent public participation process throughout each code adoption cycle. There are a few exemptions, which allow a local governing body, city, or county to modify state building standards. A local governing body, city, or county can adopt an ordinance or a resolution in a public meeting that finds that a local building standard must be modified from the state building standard because of local climatic, geological or topographical conditions, and must file that ordinance with the CBSC. The CBSC reviews the findings of the ordinance to determine if the local governing body followed the correct procedure.

A developer is subject to the state's building standards and any local changes made through an ordinance to the state's building standards at the time the permit is issued. Building permits are deemed expired six months (180 days) after issuance if the work has not begun or if the permittee has suspended or abandoned work any time after the permit is issued. A subsequent building permit is subject to building standards in place at the time the permit is issued. Under existing building officials have discretion to extend a permit for up to six months.

For purposes of complying with the building standards, this bill would extend the length of time a permit is valid from 180 days to three years from the date that the permit is issued. If work on a site is abandoned or suspended then the permit would be valid three years from the date the construction began. The bill authorizes a building official to extend the permit for 180 days multiple times upon the request of a developer. The developer could apply multiple six month extensions in writing and must provide justification for the need for the extension.

Purpose of this bill: According to the author, "at the present time, traditional site-built residential construction must comply with the building standards which are in effect on the date the permit application is submitted to the local building department (H&S 18938.5) Current law requires that once a building permit is issued, construction work must begin on the site within 6 months. While local jurisdictions are authorized to extend these permits, this is usually done on a case-by-case basis which can add uncertainty to the local administrative process. In addition, some jurisdictions have taken specific action to prohibit the extension of building permits. Permits for manufactured housing remain valid for 36 months (CCR Title 25, Division 1, Chapter 3, Subchapter 1, Article 3, Section 3048). The longstanding reason for this is to promote housing affordability, recognizing that going to the end of the local permit line can create delays and added costs. This is a perplexing difference as manufactured housing is much easier to build than site-built construction, yet the permit for manufactured housing is valid for a period which is six times longer than that for site-built construction. This bill extends those permit timelines currently enjoyed by manufactured housing to site built construction."

Arguments in support: According to the California Building Industry Association (BIA) this bill "will make the permitting process less cumbersome by recognizing that state and local economic conditions may have changed which have the effect of slowing down some projects and California state and local building codes change every 18 months and that small changes in the building code should not force a previously approved project to have to go back to the end of the line and resubmit (expensive) compliance document and pay a new set of fees for homes that were previously approved for construction. "

Arguments in opposition: According to the California Building Officials (CALBO), "leaving work zones and construction sites abandoned for extended periods of time can lead to security concerns for property owners, and individuals in the surrounding community by turning these areas into makeshift shelters for vagrants and delinquents. With a lack of proper plumbing and ventilation these sites can quickly become health and safety hazards. This bill would also be problematic in that the California Building Code is updated on a triennial cycle. If project were allowed to remain inactive for up to three years, new codes and procedures would be in place making suspended projects and plan outdated."

Policy concerns:

Building standards: Developers are required to comply with the building standards in place at the time a permit is issued. Generally, permits are valid for 6 months and building officials can extend permits on a case by case basis. Locals can modify state building standards and development sites are only required to comply with the local standards in place at the time a permit is issued. This bill would extend the life of a permit for purposes of complying with local adopted building standards from 6 months to 3 years. For all building standards, it would provide that a permit is valid for three years from the date the permit is issued, and provide for another three years if the site is abandoned or work is suspended. As a result, a permit could be valid through two cycles of updated building standards. If a developer does not being construction until the end of the three year expiration date, and then has another three years before the permit expires, potentially five years could elapse. The committee may wish to ask the author if that is the intent of the bill.

State of emergency: Some have argued that a lack of labor and building materials is slowing construction in parts of the state that have seen massive wildfires. This bill would apply statewide in areas not impacted by those conditions. The committee may wish to consider limiting this bill to areas where the Governor has declared a state of emergency.

Committee amendments:

The committee may wish to narrow the provisions of this bill as follows:

• Limit the bill to areas of the state where the Governor has declared a state of emergency.
• Allow a permit to remain valid for 18 months from the date it is issued, and not allow for an extension if work is abandoned or suspended.
• Add a three year sunset to evaluate the impact of this change.

Technical amendments:

Page 2, line 17, change "8850" to "8550".

Related legislation:

AB 3147 (Caballero) would freeze the impact and development fees charged on developments at the time an application is deemed complete for two years. This bill passed out of this committee 7-0 and is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Building Owners And Managers Association of California
California Apartment Association
California Association of REALTORS
California Building Industry Association
California Business Properties Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Credit Union League
California Professional Association of Specialty Contractors
International Council of Shopping Centers
NAIOP of California, The Commercial Real Estate Development Association
National Federation of Independent Business
Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California (NPH)

Opposition

California Building Officials

Analysis Prepared by: Lisa Engel / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085