AB 2560: Density Bonus Law: California Coastal Act of 1976.
- Session Year: 2023-2024
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2024-07-01
Current Status:
Failed
(2024-08-15: In committee: Held under submission.)
Introduced
In Committee
First Chamber
In Committee
Second Chamber
Enacted
Existing law, referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development within the city or county with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct specified percentages of units for lower income households or very low income households, and meets other requirements. Existing law, the California Coastal Act of 1976 (act), regulates development, as defined, in the coastal zone, as defined, and requires a new development to comply with specified requirements. The Density Bonus Law provides that its provisions do not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the act, and requires that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the Density Bonus Law be permitted in a manner consistent with the act.
This bill would provide that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the Density Bonus Law be permitted notwithstanding the act if the development is not located on any of specified sites. instead provide that, in the coastal zone, the Density Bonus Law does not relieve a project from the requirement to obtain a coastal development permit, as specified. The bill would require any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled to be permitted in a manner that is consistent with the Density Bonus Law and does not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources and public coastal access, as specified.
Existing law, the California Coastal Act, requires each local government lying, in whole or in part, within the coastal zone to prepare a local coastal program, as specified. Existing law specifies that a local coastal program is not required to include housing policies and programs.
This bill would repeal that provision and instead require, on or by July 1, 2026, any local government in the coastal zone to submit an amendment to the local governments local coastal program that harmonizes the Density Bonus Law and the California Coastal Act, as specified. The bill would require this amendment to be processed as de minimis, as specified, if certain conditions are met. By requiring local governments to submit an amendment to its local coastal program, 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law, referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development within the city or county with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct specified percentages of units for lower income households or very low income households, and meets other requirements. Existing law, the California Coastal Act of 1976 (act), regulates development, as defined, in the coastal zone, as defined, and requires a new development to comply with specified requirements. The Density Bonus Law provides that its provisions do not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the act, and requires that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the Density Bonus Law be permitted in a manner consistent with the act.
This bill would provide that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the Density Bonus Law be permitted notwithstanding the act. act if the development is not located on any of specified sites.
Existing law, referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development within the city or county with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct specified percentages of units for lower income households or very low income households, and meets other requirements. Existing law, the California Coastal Act of 1976 (act), regulates development, as defined, in the coastal zone, as defined, and requires a new development to comply with specified requirements. The Density Bonus Law provides that its provisions do not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the act, and requires that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the Density Bonus Law be permitted in a manner consistent with the act.
This bill would provide that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the Density Bonus Law be permitted notwithstanding the act.
(a)(1)When an applicant seeks a density bonus for a housing development within, or for the donation of land for housing within, the jurisdiction of a city, county, or city and county, that local government shall comply with this section. A city, county, or city and county shall adopt an ordinance that specifies how compliance with this section will be implemented. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (s), failure to adopt an ordinance shall not relieve a city, county, or city and county from complying with this section.
(2)A local government shall not condition the submission, review, or approval of an application pursuant to this chapter on the preparation of an additional report or study that is not otherwise required by state law, including this section. This subdivision does not prohibit a local government from requiring an applicant to provide reasonable documentation to establish eligibility for a requested density bonus, as described in subdivision (b), and parking ratios, as described in subdivision (p).
(3)In order to provide for the expeditious processing of a density bonus application, the local government shall do all of the following:
(A)Adopt procedures and timelines for processing a density bonus application.
(B)Provide a list of all documents and information required to be submitted with the density bonus application in order for the density bonus application to be deemed complete. This list shall be consistent with this chapter.
(C)Notify the applicant for a density bonus whether the application is complete in a manner consistent with the timelines specified in Section 65943.
(D)(i)If the local government notifies the applicant that the application is deemed complete pursuant to subparagraph (C), provide the applicant with a determination as to the following matters:
(I)The amount of density bonus, calculated pursuant to subdivision (f), for which the applicant is eligible.
(II)If the applicant requests a parking ratio pursuant to subdivision (p), the parking ratio for which the applicant is eligible.
(III)If the applicant requests incentives or concessions pursuant to subdivision (d) or waivers or reductions of development standards pursuant to subdivision (e), whether the applicant has provided adequate information for the local government to make a determination as to those incentives, concessions, waivers, or reductions of development standards.
(ii)Any determination required by this subparagraph shall be based on the development project at the time the application is deemed complete. The local government shall adjust the amount of density bonus and parking ratios awarded pursuant to this section based on any changes to the project during the course of development.
(b)(1)A city, county, or city and county shall grant one density bonus, the amount of which shall be as specified in subdivision (f), and, if requested by the applicant and consistent with the applicable requirements of this section, incentives or concessions, as described in subdivision (d), waivers or reductions of development standards, as described in subdivision (e), and parking ratios, as described in subdivision (p), if an applicant for a housing development seeks and agrees to construct a housing development, excluding any units permitted by the density bonus awarded pursuant to this section, that will contain at least any one of the following:
(A)Ten percent of the total units of a housing development, including a shared housing building development, for rental or sale to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B)Five percent of the total units of a housing development, including a shared housing building development, for rental or sale to very low income households, as defined in Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code.
(C)A senior citizen housing development, as defined in Sections 51.3 and 51.12 of the Civil Code, or a mobilehome park that limits residency based on age requirements for housing for older persons pursuant to Section 798.76 or 799.5 of the Civil Code. For purposes of this subparagraph, development includes a shared housing building development.
(D)Ten percent of the total dwelling units of a housing development are sold to persons and families of moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code, provided that all units in the development are offered to the public for purchase.
(E)Ten percent of the total units of a housing development for transitional foster youth, as defined in Section 66025.9 of the Education Code, disabled veterans, as defined in Section 18541, or homeless persons, as defined in the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 11301 et seq.). The units described in this subparagraph are subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years and shall be provided at the same affordability level as very low income units.
(F)(i)Twenty percent of the total units for lower income students in a student housing development that meets the following requirements:
(I)All units in the student housing development shall be used exclusively for undergraduate, graduate, or professional students enrolled full time at an institution of higher education accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges or the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. In order to be eligible under this subclause, the developer shall, as a condition of receiving a certificate of occupancy, provide evidence to the city, county, or city and county that the developer has entered into an operating agreement or master lease with one or more institutions of higher education for the institution or institutions to occupy all units of the student housing development with students from that institution or institutions. An operating agreement or master lease entered into pursuant to this subclause is not violated or breached if, in any subsequent year, there are insufficient students enrolled in an institution of higher education to fill all units in the student housing development.
(II)The applicable 20-percent units shall be used for lower income students.
(III)The rent provided in the applicable units of the development for lower income students shall be calculated at 30 percent of 65 percent of the area median income for a single-room occupancy unit type.
(IV)The development shall provide priority for the applicable affordable units for lower income students experiencing homelessness. A homeless service provider, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (e) of Section 103577 of the Health and Safety Code, or institution of higher education that has knowledge of a persons homeless status may verify a persons status as homeless for purposes of this subclause.
(ii)For purposes of calculating a density bonus granted pursuant to this subparagraph, the term unit as used in this section means one rental bed and its pro rata share of associated common area facilities. The units described in this subparagraph are subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years.
(G)One hundred percent of all units in the development, including total units and density bonus units, but exclusive of a managers unit or units, are for lower income households, as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, except that up to 20 percent of the units in the development, including total units and density bonus units, may be for moderate-income households, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code. For purposes of this subparagraph, development includes a shared housing building development.
(2)For purposes of calculating the amount of the density bonus pursuant to subdivision (f), an applicant who requests a density bonus pursuant to this subdivision shall elect whether the bonus shall be awarded on the basis of subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), or (G) of paragraph (1).
(c)(1)(A)An applicant shall agree to, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure, the continued affordability of all very low and low-income rental units that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus for 55 years or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program.
(B)(i)Except as otherwise provided in clause (ii), rents for the lower income density bonus units shall be set at an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
(ii)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), rents for all units in the development, including both base density and density bonus units, shall be as follows:
(I)The rent for at least 20 percent of the units in the development shall be set at an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
(II)The rent for the remaining units in the development shall be set at an amount consistent with the maximum rent levels for lower income households, as those rents and incomes are determined by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee.
(2)(A)An applicant shall agree to ensure, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure, that a for-sale unit that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus meets one of the following conditions:
(i)The unit is initially sold to and occupied by a person or family of very low, low, or moderate income, as required, and it is offered at an affordable housing cost, as that cost is defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code and is subject to an equity sharing agreement.
(ii)If the unit is not purchased by an income-qualified person or family within 180 days after the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the unit is purchased by a qualified nonprofit housing corporation that meets all of the following requirements pursuant to a recorded contract that satisfies all of the requirements specified in paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code:
(I)The nonprofit corporation has a determination letter from the Internal Revenue Service affirming its tax-exempt status pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and is not a private foundation as that term is defined in Section 509 of the Internal Revenue Code.
(II)The nonprofit corporation is based in California.
(III)All of the board members of the nonprofit corporation have their primary residence in California.
(IV)The primary activity of the nonprofit corporation is the development and preservation of affordable home ownership housing in California that incorporates within their contracts for initial purchase a repurchase option that requires a subsequent purchaser of the property that desires to resell or convey the property to offer the qualified nonprofit corporation the right to repurchase the property prior to selling or conveying that property to any other purchaser pursuant to an equity sharing agreement or affordability restrictions on the sale and conveyance of the property that ensure that the property will be preserved for lower income housing for at least 45 years for owner-occupied housing units and will be sold or resold only to persons or families of very low, low, or moderate income, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B)For purposes of this paragraph, a qualified nonprofit housing corporation is a nonprofit housing corporation organized pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code that has received a welfare exemption under Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code for properties intended to be sold to low-income families who participate in a special no-interest loan program.
(C)The local government shall enforce an equity sharing agreement required pursuant to clause (i) or (ii) of subparagraph (A), unless it is in conflict with the requirements of another public funding source or law or may defer to the recapture provisions of the public funding source. The following apply to the equity sharing agreement:
(i)Upon resale, the seller of the unit shall retain the value of any improvements, the downpayment, and the sellers proportionate share of appreciation.
(ii)Except as provided in clause (v), the local government shall recapture any initial subsidy, as defined in clause (iii), and its proportionate share of appreciation, as defined in clause (iv), which amount shall be used within five years for any of the purposes described in subdivision (e) of Section 33334.2 of the Health and Safety Code that promote home ownership.
(iii)For purposes of this subdivision, the local governments initial subsidy shall be equal to the fair market value of the home at the time of initial sale minus the initial sale price to the moderate-income household, plus the amount of any downpayment assistance or mortgage assistance. If upon resale the market value is lower than the initial market value, then the value at the time of the resale shall be used as the initial market value.
(iv)For purposes of this subdivision, the local governments proportionate share of appreciation shall be equal to the ratio of the local governments initial subsidy to the fair market value of the home at the time of initial sale.
(v)If the unit is purchased or developed by a qualified nonprofit housing corporation pursuant to clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) the local government may enter into a contract with the qualified nonprofit housing corporation under which the qualified nonprofit housing corporation would recapture any initial subsidy and its proportionate share of appreciation if the qualified nonprofit housing corporation is required to use 100 percent of the proceeds to promote home ownership for lower income households as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code within the jurisdiction of the local government.
(3)(A)An applicant shall be ineligible for a density bonus or any other incentives or concessions under this section if the housing development is proposed on any property that includes a parcel or parcels on which rental dwelling units are located or, if the dwelling units have been vacated or demolished in the five-year period preceding the application, have been subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income; subject to any other form of rent or price control through a public entitys valid exercise of its police power; or occupied by lower or very low income households, unless the proposed housing development replaces those units, and either of the following applies:
(i)The proposed housing development, inclusive of the units replaced pursuant to this paragraph, contains affordable units at the percentages set forth in subdivision (b).
(ii)Each unit in the development, exclusive of a managers unit or units, is affordable to, and occupied by, either a lower or very low income household.
(B)For the purposes of this paragraph, replace shall mean either of the following:
(i)If any dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) are occupied on the date of application, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those households in occupancy. If the income category of the household in occupancy is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that lower income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of lower income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Developments Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. For unoccupied dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) in a development with occupied units, the proposed housing development shall provide units of equivalent size to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as the last household in occupancy. If the income category of the last household in occupancy is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that lower income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of lower income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Developments Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. All replacement calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(ii)If all dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) have been vacated or demolished within the five-year period preceding the application, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size as existed at the highpoint of those units in the five-year period preceding the application to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those persons and families in occupancy at that time, if known. If the incomes of the persons and families in occupancy at the highpoint is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that low-income and very low income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of low-income and very low income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Developments Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. All replacement calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(C)Notwithstanding subparagraph (B), for any dwelling unit described in subparagraph (A) that is or was, within the five-year period preceding the application, subject to a form of rent or price control through a local governments valid exercise of its police power and that is or was occupied by persons or families above lower income, the city, county, or city and county may do either of the following:
(i)Require that the replacement units be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, low-income persons or families. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(ii)Require that the units be replaced in compliance with the jurisdictions rent or price control ordinance, provided that each unit described in subparagraph (A) is replaced. Unless otherwise required by the jurisdictions rent or price control ordinance, these units shall not be subject to a recorded affordability restriction.
(D)For purposes of this paragraph, equivalent size means that the replacement units contain at least the same total number of bedrooms as the units being replaced.
(E)Subparagraph (A) does not apply to an applicant seeking a density bonus for a proposed housing development if the applicants application was submitted to, or processed by, a city, county, or city and county before January 1, 2015.
(d)(1)An applicant for a density bonus pursuant to subdivision (b) may submit to a city, county, or city and county a proposal for the specific incentives or concessions that the applicant requests pursuant to this section, and may request a meeting with the city, county, or city and county. The city, county, or city and county shall grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the city, county, or city and county makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following:
(A)The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, consistent with subdivision (k), to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(B)The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households.
(C)The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law.
(2)The applicant shall receive the following number of incentives or concessions:
(A)One incentive or concession for projects that include at least 10 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 5 percent for very low income households, or at least 10 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(B)Two incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 17 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 10 percent for very low income households, or at least 20 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(C)Three incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 24 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 15 percent for very low income households, or at least 30 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(D)Five incentives or concessions for a project meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b). If the project is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop or is located in a very low vehicle travel area in a designated county, the applicant shall also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet.
(E)One incentive or concession for projects that include at least 20 percent of the total units for lower income students in a student housing development.
(F)Four incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 16 percent of the units for very low income households or at least 45 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(3)The applicant may initiate judicial proceedings if the city, county, or city and county refuses to grant a requested density bonus, incentive, or concession. If a court finds that the refusal to grant a requested density bonus, incentive, or concession is in violation of this section, the court shall award the plaintiff reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to grant an incentive or concession that has a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to grant an incentive or concession that would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. The city, county, or city and county shall establish procedures for carrying out this section that shall include legislative body approval of the means of compliance with this section.
(4)The city, county, or city and county shall bear the burden of proof for the denial of a requested concession or incentive.
(e)(1)In no case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section. Subject to paragraph (3), an applicant may submit to a city, county, or city and county a proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted under this section, and may request a meeting with the city, county, or city and county. If a court finds that the refusal to grant a waiver or reduction of development standards is in violation of this section, the court shall award the plaintiff reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to waive or reduce development standards if the waiver or reduction would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to waive or reduce development standards that would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, or to grant any waiver or reduction that would be contrary to state or federal law.
(2)A proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards pursuant to this subdivision shall neither reduce nor increase the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to subdivision (d).
(3)A housing development that receives a waiver from any maximum controls on density pursuant to clause (ii) of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (f) shall only be eligible for a waiver or reduction of development standards as provided in subparagraph (D) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) and clause (ii) of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (f), unless the city, county, or city and county agrees to additional waivers or reductions of development standards.
(f)For the purposes of this chapter, density bonus means a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density as of the date of application by the applicant to the city, county, or city and county, or, if elected by the applicant, a lesser percentage of density increase, including, but not limited to, no increase in density. The amount of density increase to which the applicant is entitled shall vary according to the amount by which the percentage of affordable housing units exceeds the percentage established in subdivision (b).
(1)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
| Percentage Low-Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 10 | 20 |
| 11 | 21.5 |
| 12 | 23 |
| 13 | 24.5 |
| 14 | 26 |
| 15 | 27.5 |
| 16 | 29 |
| 17 | 30.5 |
| 18 | 32 |
| 19 | 33.5 |
| 20 | 35 |
| 21 | 38.75 |
| 22 | 42.5 |
| 23 | 46.25 |
| 24 | 50 |
(2)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
| Percentage Very Low Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 5 | 20 |
| 6 | 22.5 |
| 7 | 25 |
| 8 | 27.5 |
| 9 | 30 |
| 10 | 32.5 |
| 11 | 35 |
| 12 | 38.75 |
| 13 | 42.5 |
| 14 | 46.25 |
| 15 | 50 |
(3)(A)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be 20 percent of the number of senior housing units.
(B)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (E) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be 20 percent of the number of the type of units giving rise to a density bonus under that subparagraph.
(C)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (F) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be 35 percent of the student housing units.
(D)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the following shall apply:
(i)Except as otherwise provided in clauses (ii) and (iii), the density bonus shall be 80 percent of the number of units for lower income households.
(ii)If the housing development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, the city, county, or city and county shall not impose any maximum controls on density.
(iii)If the housing development is located in a very low vehicle travel area within a designated county, the city, county, or city and county shall not impose any maximum controls on density.
(4)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
| Percentage Moderate-Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 10 | 5 |
| 11 | 6 |
| 12 | 7 |
| 13 | 8 |
| 14 | 9 |
| 15 | 10 |
| 16 | 11 |
| 17 | 12 |
| 18 | 13 |
| 19 | 14 |
| 20 | 15 |
| 21 | 16 |
| 22 | 17 |
| 23 | 18 |
| 24 | 19 |
| 25 | 20 |
| 26 | 21 |
| 27 | 22 |
| 28 | 23 |
| 29 | 24 |
| 30 | 25 |
| 31 | 26 |
| 32 | 27 |
| 33 | 28 |
| 34 | 29 |
| 35 | 30 |
| 36 | 31 |
| 37 | 32 |
| 38 | 33 |
| 39 | 34 |
| 40 | 35 |
| 41 | 38.75 |
| 42 | 42.5 |
| 43 | 46.25 |
| 44 | 50 |
(5)All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. The granting of a density bonus shall not require, or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, or other discretionary approval.
(g)(1)When an applicant for a tentative subdivision map, parcel map, or other residential development approval donates land to a city, county, or city and county in accordance with this subdivision, the applicant shall be entitled to a 15-percent increase above the otherwise maximum allowable residential density for the entire development, as follows:
| Percentage Very Low Income | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 10 | 15 |
| 11 | 16 |
| 12 | 17 |
| 13 | 18 |
| 14 | 19 |
| 15 | 20 |
| 16 | 21 |
| 17 | 22 |
| 18 | 23 |
| 19 | 24 |
| 20 | 25 |
| 21 | 26 |
| 22 | 27 |
| 23 | 28 |
| 24 | 29 |
| 25 | 30 |
| 26 | 31 |
| 27 | 32 |
| 28 | 33 |
| 29 | 34 |
| 30 | 35 |
(2)This increase shall be in addition to any increase in density mandated by subdivision (b), up to a maximum combined mandated density increase of 35 percent if an applicant seeks an increase pursuant to both this subdivision and subdivision (b). All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to enlarge or diminish the authority of a city, county, or city and county to require a developer to donate land as a condition of development. An applicant shall be eligible for the increased density bonus described in this subdivision if all of the following conditions are met:
(A)The applicant donates and transfers the land no later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application.
(B)The developable acreage and zoning classification of the land being transferred are sufficient to permit construction of units affordable to very low income households in an amount not less than 10 percent of the number of residential units of the proposed development.
(C)The transferred land is at least one acre in size or of sufficient size to permit development of at least 40 units, has the appropriate general plan designation, is appropriately zoned with appropriate development standards for development at the density described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2, and is or will be served by adequate public facilities and infrastructure.
(D)The transferred land shall have all of the permits and approvals, other than building permits, necessary for the development of the very low income housing units on the transferred land, not later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application, except that the local government may subject the proposed development to subsequent design review to the extent authorized by subdivision (i) of Section 65583.2 if the design is not reviewed by the local government before the time of transfer.
(E)The transferred land and the affordable units shall be subject to a deed restriction ensuring continued affordability of the units consistent with paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (c), which shall be recorded on the property at the time of the transfer.
(F)The land is transferred to the local agency or to a housing developer approved by the local agency. The local agency may require the applicant to identify and transfer the land to the developer.
(G)The transferred land shall be within the boundary of the proposed development or, if the local agency agrees, within one-quarter mile of the boundary of the proposed development.
(H)A proposed source of funding for the very low income units shall be identified not later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application.
(h)(1)When an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that conforms to the requirements of subdivision (b) and includes a childcare facility that will be located on the premises of, as part of, or adjacent to, the project, the city, county, or city and county shall grant either of the following:
(A)An additional density bonus that is an amount of square feet of residential space that is equal to or greater than the amount of square feet in the childcare facility.
(B)An additional concession or incentive that contributes significantly to the economic feasibility of the construction of the childcare facility.
(2)The city, county, or city and county shall require, as a condition of approving the housing development, that the following occur:
(A)The childcare facility shall remain in operation for a period of time that is as long as or longer than the period of time during which the density bonus units are required to remain affordable pursuant to subdivision (c).
(B)Of the children who attend the childcare facility, the children of very low income households, lower income households, or families of moderate income shall equal a percentage that is equal to or greater than the percentage of dwelling units that are required for very low income households, lower income households, or families of moderate income pursuant to subdivision (b).
(3)Notwithstanding any requirement of this subdivision, a city, county, or city and county shall not be required to provide a density bonus or concession for a childcare facility if it finds, based upon substantial evidence, that the community has adequate childcare facilities.
(4)Childcare facility, as used in this section, means a child daycare facility other than a family daycare home, including, but not limited to, infant centers, preschools, extended daycare facilities, and schoolage childcare centers.
(i)Housing development, as used in this section, means a development project for five or more residential units, including mixed-use developments. For the purposes of this section, housing development also includes a subdivision or common interest development, as defined in Section 4100 of the Civil Code, approved by a city, county, or city and county and consists of residential units or unimproved residential lots and either a project to substantially rehabilitate and convert an existing commercial building to residential use or the substantial rehabilitation of an existing multifamily dwelling, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 65863.4, where the result of the rehabilitation would be a net increase in available residential units. For the purpose of calculating a density bonus, the residential units shall be on contiguous sites that are the subject of one development application, but do not have to be based upon individual subdivision maps or parcels. The density bonus shall be permitted in geographic areas of the housing development other than the areas where the units for the lower income households are located.
(j)(1)The granting of a concession or incentive shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval. For purposes of this subdivision, study does not include reasonable documentation to establish eligibility for the concession or incentive or to demonstrate that the incentive or concession meets the definition set forth in subdivision (k). This provision is declaratory of existing law.
(2)Except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e), the granting of a density bonus shall not require or be interpreted to require the waiver of a local ordinance or provisions of a local ordinance unrelated to development standards.
(k)For the purposes of this chapter, concession or incentive means any of the following:
(1)A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in identifiable and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(2)Approval of mixed-use zoning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and if the commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses are compatible with the housing project and the existing or planned development in the area where the proposed housing project will be located.
(3)Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the city, county, or city and county that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(l)Subdivision (k) does not limit or require the provision of direct financial incentives for the housing development, including the provision of publicly owned land, by the city, county, or city and county, or the waiver of fees or dedication requirements.
(m)Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted notwithstanding the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code) if the development is not located on a site that is any of the following:(1)An area of the coastal zone subject to paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 30603 of the Public Resources Code.(2)An area of the coastal zone that is not subject to a certified local coastal program.(3)An area of the coastal zone that is vulnerable to five feet of sea level rise, as determined by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Ocean Protection Council, the United States Geological Survey, the University of California, or a local governments coastal hazards vulnerability assessment.(4)In a parcel within the coastal zone that is not zoned for multifamily housing.(5)In a parcel in the coastal zone and located on either of the following:(A)On, or within a 100-foot radius of, a wetland, as defined in Section 30121 of the Public Resources Code.(B)On prime agricultural land, as defined in Sections 30113 and 30241 of the Public Resources Code.(m)In the coastal zone, this section does not relieve a project relying on the provisions of this section from the requirement to obtain a coastal development permit as required by Section 30600 of the Public Resources Code. Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with this section and does not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources and public coastal access pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 30200) of Division 20 of the Public Resources Code.
(n)If permitted by local ordinance, nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a city, county, or city and county from granting a density bonus greater than what is described in this section for a development that meets the requirements of this section or from granting a proportionately lower density bonus than what is required by this section for developments that do not meet the requirements of this section.
(o)For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(1)Designated county includes the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Marin, Napa, Orange, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma, and Ventura, and the City and County of San Francisco.
(2)Development standard includes a site or construction condition, including, but not limited to, a height limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open-space requirement, a minimum lot area per unit requirement, or a parking ratio that applies to a residential development pursuant to any ordinance, general plan element, specific plan, charter, or other local condition, law, policy, resolution, or regulation that is adopted by the local government or that is enacted by the local governments electorate exercising its local initiative or referendum power, whether that power is derived from the California Constitution, statute, or the charter or ordinances of the local government.
(3)Located within one-half mile of a major transit stop means that any point on a proposed development, for which an applicant seeks a density bonus, other incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, or a vehicular parking ratio pursuant to this section, is within one-half mile of any point on the property on which a major transit stop is located, including any parking lot owned by the transit authority or other local agency operating the major transit stop.
(4)Lower income student means a student who has a household income and asset level that does not exceed the level for Cal Grant A or Cal Grant B award recipients as set forth in paragraph (1) of subdivision (k) of Section 69432.7 of the Education Code. The eligibility of a student to occupy a unit for lower income students under this section shall be verified by an affidavit, award letter, or letter of eligibility provided by the institution of higher education in which the student is enrolled or by the California Student Aid Commission that the student receives or is eligible for financial aid, including an institutional grant or fee waiver from the college or university, the California Student Aid Commission, or the federal government.
(5)Major transit stop has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code.
(6)Maximum allowable residential density or base density means the greatest number of units allowed under the zoning ordinance, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan, or, if a range of density is permitted, means the greatest number of units allowed by the specific zoning range, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan applicable to the project. Density shall be determined using dwelling units per acre. However, if the applicable zoning ordinance, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan does not provide a dwelling-units-per-acre standard for density, then the local agency shall calculate the number of units by:
(A)Estimating the realistic development capacity of the site based on the objective development standards applicable to the project, including, but not limited to, floor area ratio, site coverage, maximum building height and number of stories, building setbacks and stepbacks, public and private open-space requirements, minimum percentage or square footage of any nonresidential component, and parking requirements, unless not required for the base project. Parking requirements shall include considerations regarding number of spaces, location, design, type, and circulation. A developer may provide a base density study and the local agency shall accept it, provided that it includes all applicable objective development standards.
(B)Maintaining the same average unit size and other project details relevant to the base density study, excepting those that may be modified by waiver or concession to accommodate the bonus units, in the proposed project as in the study.
(7)(A)(i)Shared housing building means a residential or mixed-use structure, with five or more shared housing units and one or more common kitchens and dining areas designed for permanent residence of more than 30 days by its tenants. The kitchens and dining areas within the shared housing building shall be able to adequately accommodate all residents. If a local ordinance further restricts the attributes of a shared housing building beyond the requirements established in this section, the local definition shall apply to the extent that it does not conflict with the requirements of this section.
(ii)A shared housing building may include other dwelling units that are not shared housing units, provided that those dwelling units do not occupy more than 25 percent of the floor area of the shared housing building. A shared housing building may include 100 percent shared housing units.
(B)Shared housing unit means one or more habitable rooms, not within another dwelling unit, that includes a bathroom, sink, refrigerator, and microwave, is used for permanent residence, that meets the minimum room area specified in Section R304 of the California Residential Code (Part 2.5 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), and complies with the definition of guestroom in Section R202 of the California Residential Code. If a local ordinance further restricts the attributes of a shared housing building beyond the requirements established in this section, the local definition shall apply to the extent that it does not conflict with the requirements of this section.
(8)(A)Total units or total dwelling units means a calculation of the number of units that:
(i)Excludes a unit added by a density bonus awarded pursuant to this section or any local law granting a greater density bonus.
(ii)Includes a unit designated to satisfy an inclusionary zoning requirement of a city, county, or city and county.
(B)For purposes of calculating a density bonus granted pursuant to this section for a shared housing building, unit means one shared housing unit and its pro rata share of associated common area facilities.
(9)Very low vehicle travel area means an urbanized area, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, where the existing residential development generates vehicle miles traveled per capita that is below 85 percent of either regional vehicle miles traveled per capita or city vehicle miles traveled per capita. For purposes of this paragraph, area may include a travel analysis zone, hexagon, or grid. For the purposes of determining regional vehicle miles traveled per capita pursuant to this paragraph, a region is the entirety of incorporated and unincorporated areas governed by a multicounty or single-county metropolitan planning organization, or the entirety of the incorporated and unincorporated areas of an individual county that is not part of a metropolitan planning organization.
(p)(1)Except as provided in paragraphs (2), (3), and (4), upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not require a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, of a development meeting the criteria of subdivisions (b) and (c), that exceeds the following ratios:
(A)Zero to one bedroom: one onsite parking space.
(B)Two to three bedrooms: one and one-half onsite parking spaces.
(C)Four and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces.
(2)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development includes at least 20 percent low-income units for housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) or at least 11 percent very low income units for housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development, then, upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not impose a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, that exceeds 0.5 spaces per unit. Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development includes at least 40 percent moderate-income units for housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, and the residents of the development have unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development then, upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not impose a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, that exceeds 0.5 spaces per bedroom.
(B)For purposes of this subdivision, unobstructed access to the major transit stop means a resident is able to access the major transit stop without encountering natural or constructed impediments. For purposes of this subparagraph, natural or constructed impediments includes, but is not limited to, freeways, rivers, mountains, and bodies of water, but does not include residential structures, shopping centers, parking lots, or rails used for transit.
(3)Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development meets the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), then, upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not impose vehicular parking standards if the development meets any of the following criteria:
(A)The development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development.
(B)The development is a for-rent housing development for individuals who are 55 years of age or older that complies with Sections 51.2 and 51.3 of the Civil Code and the development has either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.
(C)The development is either a special needs housing development, as defined in Section 51312 of the Health and Safety Code, or a supportive housing development, as defined in Section 50675.14 of the Health and Safety Code. A development that is a special needs housing development shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.
(4)If the total number of parking spaces required for a development is other than a whole number, the number shall be rounded up to the next whole number. For purposes of this subdivision, a development may provide onsite parking through tandem parking or uncovered parking, but not through onstreet parking.
(5)This subdivision shall apply to a development that meets the requirements of subdivisions (b) and (c), but only at the request of the applicant. An applicant may request parking incentives or concessions beyond those provided in this subdivision pursuant to subdivision (d).
(6)This subdivision does not preclude a city, county, or city and county from reducing or eliminating a parking requirement for development projects of any type in any location.
(7)Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) and (3), if a city, county, city and county, or an independent consultant has conducted an areawide or jurisdictionwide parking study in the last seven years, then the city, county, or city and county may impose a higher vehicular parking ratio not to exceed the ratio described in paragraph (1), based upon substantial evidence found in the parking study, that includes, but is not limited to, an analysis of parking availability, differing levels of transit access, walkability access to transit services, the potential for shared parking, the effect of parking requirements on the cost of market-rate and subsidized developments, and the lower rates of car ownership for low-income and very low income individuals, including seniors and special needs individuals. The city, county, or city and county shall pay the costs of any new study. The city, county, or city and county shall make findings, based on a parking study completed in conformity with this paragraph, supporting the need for the higher parking ratio.
(8)A request pursuant to this subdivision shall neither reduce nor increase the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to subdivision (d).
(q)Each component of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional units shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number. The Legislature finds and declares that this provision is declaratory of existing law.
(r)This chapter shall be interpreted liberally in favor of producing the maximum number of total housing units.
(s)Notwithstanding any other law, if a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county has adopted an ordinance or a housing program, or both an ordinance and a housing program, that incentivizes the development of affordable housing that allows for density bonuses that exceed the density bonuses required by the version of this section effective through December 31, 2020, that city, county, or city and county is not required to amend or otherwise update its ordinance or corresponding affordable housing incentive program to comply with the amendments made to this section by the act adding this subdivision, and is exempt from complying with the incentive and concession calculation amendments made to this section by the act adding this subdivision as set forth in subdivision (d), particularly subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) of that subdivision, and the amendments made to the density tables under subdivision (f).
(t)When an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) that is a shared housing building, the city, county, or city and county shall not require any minimum unit size requirements or minimum bedroom requirements that are in conflict with paragraph (7) of subdivision (o).
(u)(1)The Legislature finds and declares that the intent behind the Density Bonus Law is to allow public entities to reduce or even eliminate subsidies for a particular project by allowing a developer to include more total units in a project than would otherwise be allowed by the local zoning ordinance in exchange for affordable units. It further reaffirms that the intent is to cover at least some of the financing gap of affordable housing with regulatory incentives, rather than additional public subsidy.
(2)It is therefore the intent of the Legislature to make modifications to the Density Bonus Law by the act adding this subdivision to further incentivize the construction of very low, low-, and moderate-income housing units. It is further the intent of the Legislature in making these modifications to the Density Bonus Law to ensure that any additional benefits conferred upon a developer are balanced with the receipt of a public benefit in the form of adequate levels of affordable housing. The Legislature further intends that these modifications will ensure that the Density Bonus Law creates incentives for the construction of more housing across all areas of the state.
(v)(1)Provided that the resulting housing development would not restrict more than 50 percent of the total units to moderate-income, lower income, or very low income households, a city, county, or city and county shall grant an additional density bonus calculated pursuant to paragraph (2) when an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that conforms to the requirements of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), agrees to include additional rental or for-sale units affordable to very low income households or moderate-income households, and meets any of the following requirements:
(A)The housing development conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and provides 24 percent of the total units to lower income households.
(B)The housing development conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and provides 15 percent of the total units to very low income households.
(C)The housing development conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and provides 44 percent of the total units to moderate-income households.
(2)A city, county, or city and county shall grant an additional density bonus for a housing development that meets the requirements of paragraph (1), calculated as follows:
| Percentage Very Low Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 5 | 20 |
| 6 | 23.75 |
| 7 | 27.5 |
| 8 | 31.25 |
| 9 | 35 |
| 10 | 38.75 |
| Percentage Moderate-Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 5 | 20 |
| 6 | 22.5 |
| 7 | 25 |
| 8 | 27.5 |
| 9 | 30 |
| 10 | 32.5 |
| 11 | 35 |
| 12 | 38.75 |
| 13 | 42.5 |
| 14 | 46.25 |
| 15 | 50 |
(3)The increase required by paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be in addition to any increase in density granted by subdivision (b).
(4)The additional density bonus required under this subdivision shall be calculated using the number of units excluding any density bonus awarded by this section.
SEC. 2.Section 30500.1 of the Public Resources Code is repealed.30500.1.No local coastal program shall be required to include housing policies and programs.SEC. 3.Section 30500.1 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read:30500.1.(a)It is the intent of the Legislature that this division and the Density Bonus Law in Section 65915 of the Government Code be harmonized so as to achieve the goal of increasing the supply of housing in the coastal zone while also protecting coastal resources and public coastal access.
(b)On or by July 1, 2026, any local government in the coastal zone that has not done so already shall submit to the commission for certification an amendment to the local governments local coastal program that harmonizes the applicable provisions of the density bonus law and this division pursuant to subdivision (m) of Section 65915 of the Government Code .
(c)If a local government submits to the commission for certification an amendment to the local governments local coastal program that would add a provision stating that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with the policies of the local coastal program to the greatest extent feasible and does not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources and public coastal access, and would make no other changes to the local coastal program, the amendment shall be processed as de minimis pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 30514.
SEC. 4.If the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
(a)(1)When an applicant seeks a density bonus for a housing development within, or for the donation of land for housing within, the jurisdiction of a city, county, or city and county, that local government shall comply with this section. A city, county, or city and county shall adopt an ordinance that specifies how compliance with this section will be implemented. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (s), failure to adopt an ordinance shall not relieve a city, county, or city and county from complying with this section.
(2)A local government shall not condition the submission, review, or approval of an application pursuant to this chapter on the preparation of an additional report or study that is not otherwise required by state law, including this section. This subdivision does not prohibit a local government from requiring an applicant to provide reasonable documentation to establish eligibility for a requested density bonus, as described in subdivision (b), and parking ratios, as described in subdivision (p).
(3)In order to provide for the expeditious processing of a density bonus application, the local government shall do all of the following:
(A)Adopt procedures and timelines for processing a density bonus application.
(B)Provide a list of all documents and information required to be submitted with the density bonus application in order for the density bonus application to be deemed complete. This list shall be consistent with this chapter.
(C)Notify the applicant for a density bonus whether the application is complete in a manner consistent with the timelines specified in Section 65943.
(D)(i)If the local government notifies the applicant that the application is deemed complete pursuant to subparagraph (C), provide the applicant with a determination as to the following matters:
(I)The amount of density bonus, calculated pursuant to subdivision (f), for which the applicant is eligible.
(II)If the applicant requests a parking ratio pursuant to subdivision (p), the parking ratio for which the applicant is eligible.
(III)If the applicant requests incentives or concessions pursuant to subdivision (d) or waivers or reductions of development standards pursuant to subdivision (e), whether the applicant has provided adequate information for the local government to make a determination as to those incentives, concessions, waivers, or reductions of development standards.
(ii)Any determination required by this subparagraph shall be based on the development project at the time the application is deemed complete. The local government shall adjust the amount of density bonus and parking ratios awarded pursuant to this section based on any changes to the project during the course of development.
(b)(1)A city, county, or city and county shall grant one density bonus, the amount of which shall be as specified in subdivision (f), and, if requested by the applicant and consistent with the applicable requirements of this section, incentives or concessions, as described in subdivision (d), waivers or reductions of development standards, as described in subdivision (e), and parking ratios, as described in subdivision (p), if an applicant for a housing development seeks and agrees to construct a housing development, excluding any units permitted by the density bonus awarded pursuant to this section, that will contain at least any one of the following:
(A)Ten percent of the total units of a housing development, including a shared housing building development, for rental or sale to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B)Five percent of the total units of a housing development, including a shared housing building development, for rental or sale to very low income households, as defined in Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code.
(C)A senior citizen housing development, as defined in Sections 51.3 and 51.12 of the Civil Code, or a mobilehome park that limits residency based on age requirements for housing for older persons pursuant to Section 798.76 or 799.5 of the Civil Code. For purposes of this subparagraph, development includes a shared housing building development.
(D)Ten percent of the total dwelling units of a housing development are sold to persons and families of moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code, provided that all units in the development are offered to the public for purchase.
(E)Ten percent of the total units of a housing development for transitional foster youth, as defined in Section 66025.9 of the Education Code, disabled veterans, as defined in Section 18541, or homeless persons, as defined in the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 11301 et seq.). The units described in this subparagraph are subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years and shall be provided at the same affordability level as very low income units.
(F)(i)Twenty percent of the total units for lower income students in a student housing development that meets the following requirements:
(I)All units in the student housing development shall be used exclusively for undergraduate, graduate, or professional students enrolled full time at an institution of higher education accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges or the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. In order to be eligible under this subclause, the developer shall, as a condition of receiving a certificate of occupancy, provide evidence to the city, county, or city and county that the developer has entered into an operating agreement or master lease with one or more institutions of higher education for the institution or institutions to occupy all units of the student housing development with students from that institution or institutions. An operating agreement or master lease entered into pursuant to this subclause is not violated or breached if, in any subsequent year, there are insufficient students enrolled in an institution of higher education to fill all units in the student housing development.
(II)The applicable 20-percent units shall be used for lower income students.
(III)The rent provided in the applicable units of the development for lower income students shall be calculated at 30 percent of 65 percent of the area median income for a single-room occupancy unit type.
(IV)The development shall provide priority for the applicable affordable units for lower income students experiencing homelessness. A homeless service provider, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (e) of Section 103577 of the Health and Safety Code, or institution of higher education that has knowledge of a persons homeless status may verify a persons status as homeless for purposes of this subclause.
(ii)For purposes of calculating a density bonus granted pursuant to this subparagraph, the term unit as used in this section means one rental bed and its pro rata share of associated common area facilities. The units described in this subparagraph are subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years.
(G)One hundred percent of all units in the development, including total units and density bonus units, but exclusive of a managers unit or units, are for lower income households, as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, except that up to 20 percent of the units in the development, including total units and density bonus units, may be for moderate-income households, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code. For purposes of this subparagraph, development includes a shared housing building development.
(2)For purposes of calculating the amount of the density bonus pursuant to subdivision (f), an applicant who requests a density bonus pursuant to this subdivision shall elect whether the bonus shall be awarded on the basis of subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), or (G) of paragraph (1).
(c)(1)(A)An applicant shall agree to, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure, the continued affordability of all very low and low-income rental units that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus for 55 years or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program.
(B)(i)Except as otherwise provided in clause (ii), rents for the lower income density bonus units shall be set at an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
(ii)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), rents for all units in the development, including both base density and density bonus units, shall be as follows:
(I)The rent for at least 20 percent of the units in the development shall be set at an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
(II)The rent for the remaining units in the development shall be set at an amount consistent with the maximum rent levels for lower income households, as those rents and incomes are determined by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee.
(2)(A)An applicant shall agree to ensure, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure, that a for-sale unit that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus meets one of the following conditions:
(i)The unit is initially sold to and occupied by a person or family of very low, low, or moderate income, as required, and it is offered at an affordable housing cost, as that cost is defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code and is subject to an equity sharing agreement.
(ii)If the unit is not purchased by an income-qualified person or family within 180 days after the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the unit is purchased by a qualified nonprofit housing corporation that meets all of the following requirements pursuant to a recorded contract that satisfies all of the requirements specified in paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code:
(I)The nonprofit corporation has a determination letter from the Internal Revenue Service affirming its tax-exempt status pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and is not a private foundation as that term is defined in Section 509 of the Internal Revenue Code.
(II)The nonprofit corporation is based in California.
(III)All of the board members of the nonprofit corporation have their primary residence in California.
(IV)The primary activity of the nonprofit corporation is the development and preservation of affordable home ownership housing in California that incorporates within their contracts for initial purchase a repurchase option that requires a subsequent purchaser of the property that desires to resell or convey the property to offer the qualified nonprofit corporation the right to repurchase the property prior to selling or conveying that property to any other purchaser pursuant to an equity sharing agreement or affordability restrictions on the sale and conveyance of the property that ensure that the property will be preserved for lower income housing for at least 45 years for owner-occupied housing units and will be sold or resold only to persons or families of very low, low, or moderate income, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B)For purposes of this paragraph, a qualified nonprofit housing corporation is a nonprofit housing corporation organized pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code that has received a welfare exemption under Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code for properties intended to be sold to low-income families who participate in a special no-interest loan program.
(C)The local government shall enforce an equity sharing agreement required pursuant to clause (i) or (ii) of subparagraph (A), unless it is in conflict with the requirements of another public funding source or law or may defer to the recapture provisions of the public funding source. The following apply to the equity sharing agreement:
(i)Upon resale, the seller of the unit shall retain the value of any improvements, the downpayment, and the sellers proportionate share of appreciation.
(ii)Except as provided in clause (v), the local government shall recapture any initial subsidy, as defined in clause (iii), and its proportionate share of appreciation, as defined in clause (iv), which amount shall be used within five years for any of the purposes described in subdivision (e) of Section 33334.2 of the Health and Safety Code that promote homeownership. home ownership.
(iii)For purposes of this subdivision, the local governments initial subsidy shall be equal to the fair market value of the home at the time of initial sale minus the initial sale price to the moderate-income household, plus the amount of any downpayment assistance or mortgage assistance. If upon resale the market value is lower than the initial market value, then the value at the time of the resale shall be used as the initial market value.
(iv)For purposes of this subdivision, the local governments proportionate share of appreciation shall be equal to the ratio of the local governments initial subsidy to the fair market value of the home at the time of initial sale.
(v)If the unit is purchased or developed by a qualified nonprofit housing corporation pursuant to clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) the local government may enter into a contract with the qualified nonprofit housing corporation under which the qualified nonprofit housing corporation would recapture any initial subsidy and its proportionate share of appreciation if the qualified nonprofit housing corporation is required to use 100 percent of the proceeds to promote homeownership home ownership for lower income households as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code within the jurisdiction of the local government.
(3)(A)An applicant shall be ineligible for a density bonus or any other incentives or concessions under this section if the housing development is proposed on any property that includes a parcel or parcels on which rental dwelling units are located or, if the dwelling units have been vacated or demolished in the five-year period preceding the application, have been subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income; subject to any other form of rent or price control through a public entitys valid exercise of its police power; or occupied by lower or very low income households, unless the proposed housing development replaces those units, and either of the following applies:
(i)The proposed housing development, inclusive of the units replaced pursuant to this paragraph, contains affordable units at the percentages set forth in subdivision (b).
(ii)Each unit in the development, exclusive of a managers unit or units, is affordable to, and occupied by, either a lower or very low income household.
(B)For the purposes of this paragraph, replace shall mean either of the following:
(i)If any dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) are occupied on the date of application, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those households in occupancy. If the income category of the household in occupancy is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that lower income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of lower income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Developments Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. For unoccupied dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) in a development with occupied units, the proposed housing development shall provide units of equivalent size to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as the last household in occupancy. If the income category of the last household in occupancy is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that lower income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of lower income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Developments Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. All replacement calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(ii)If all dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) have been vacated or demolished within the five-year period preceding the application, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size as existed at the highpoint of those units in the five-year period preceding the application to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those persons and families in occupancy at that time, if known. If the incomes of the persons and families in occupancy at the highpoint is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that low-income and very low income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of low-income and very low income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Developments Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. All replacement calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(C)Notwithstanding subparagraph (B), for any dwelling unit described in subparagraph (A) that is or was, within the five-year period preceding the application, subject to a form of rent or price control through a local governments valid exercise of its police power and that is or was occupied by persons or families above lower income, the city, county, or city and county may do either of the following:
(i)Require that the replacement units be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, low-income persons or families. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(ii)Require that the units be replaced in compliance with the jurisdictions rent or price control ordinance, provided that each unit described in subparagraph (A) is replaced. Unless otherwise required by the jurisdictions rent or price control ordinance, these units shall not be subject to a recorded affordability restriction.
(D)For purposes of this paragraph, equivalent size means that the replacement units contain at least the same total number of bedrooms as the units being replaced.
(E)Subparagraph (A) does not apply to an applicant seeking a density bonus for a proposed housing development if the applicants application was submitted to, or processed by, a city, county, or city and county before January 1, 2015.
(d)(1)An applicant for a density bonus pursuant to subdivision (b) may submit to a city, county, or city and county a proposal for the specific incentives or concessions that the applicant requests pursuant to this section, and may request a meeting with the city, county, or city and county. The city, county, or city and county shall grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the city, county, or city and county makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following:
(A)The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, consistent with subdivision (k), to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(B)The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households.
(C)The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law.
(2)The applicant shall receive the following number of incentives or concessions:
(A)One incentive or concession for projects that include at least 10 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 5 percent for very low income households, or at least 10 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(B)Two incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 17 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 10 percent for very low income households, or at least 20 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(C)Three incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 24 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 15 percent for very low income households, or at least 30 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(D)Five incentives or concessions for a project meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b). If the project is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop or is located in a very low vehicle travel area in a designated county, the applicant shall also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet.
(E)One incentive or concession for projects that include at least 20 percent of the total units for lower income students in a student housing development.
(F)Four incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 16 percent of the units for very low income households or at least 45 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(3)The applicant may initiate judicial proceedings if the city, county, or city and county refuses to grant a requested density bonus, incentive, or concession. If a court finds that the refusal to grant a requested density bonus, incentive, or concession is in violation of this section, the court shall award the plaintiff reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to grant an incentive or concession that has a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to grant an incentive or concession that would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. The city, county, or city and county shall establish procedures for carrying out this section that shall include legislative body approval of the means of compliance with this section.
(4)The city, county, or city and county shall bear the burden of proof for the denial of a requested concession or incentive.
(e)(1)In no case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section. Subject to paragraph (3), an applicant may submit to a city, county, or city and county a proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted under this section, and may request a meeting with the city, county, or city and county. If a court finds that the refusal to grant a waiver or reduction of development standards is in violation of this section, the court shall award the plaintiff reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to waive or reduce development standards if the waiver or reduction would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to waive or reduce development standards that would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, or to grant any waiver or reduction that would be contrary to state or federal law.
(2)A proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards pursuant to this subdivision shall neither reduce nor increase the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to subdivision (d).
(3)A housing development that receives a waiver from any maximum controls on density pursuant to clause (ii) of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (f) shall only be eligible for a waiver or reduction of development standards as provided in subparagraph (D) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) and clause (ii) of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (f), unless the city, county, or city and county agrees to additional waivers or reductions of development standards.
(f)For the purposes of this chapter, density bonus means a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density as of the date of application by the applicant to the city, county, or city and county, or, if elected by the applicant, a lesser percentage of density increase, including, but not limited to, no increase in density. The amount of density increase to which the applicant is entitled shall vary according to the amount by which the percentage of affordable housing units exceeds the percentage established in subdivision (b).
(1)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
| Percentage Low-Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 10 | 20 |
| 11 | 21.5 |
| 12 | 23 |
| 13 | 24.5 |
| 14 | 26 |
| 15 | 27.5 |
| 16 | 29 |
| 17 | 30.5 |
| 18 | 32 |
| 19 | 33.5 |
| 20 | 35 |
| 21 | 38.75 |
| 22 | 42.5 |
| 23 | 46.25 |
| 24 | 50 |
(2)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
| Percentage Very Low Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 5 | 20 |
| 6 | 22.5 |
| 7 | 25 |
| 8 | 27.5 |
| 9 | 30 |
| 10 | 32.5 |
| 11 | 35 |
| 12 | 38.75 |
| 13 | 42.5 |
| 14 | 46.25 |
| 15 | 50 |
(3)(A)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be 20 percent of the number of senior housing units.
(B)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (E) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be 20 percent of the number of the type of units giving rise to a density bonus under that subparagraph.
(C)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (F) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be 35 percent of the student housing units.
(D)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the following shall apply:
(i)Except as otherwise provided in clauses (ii) and (iii), the density bonus shall be 80 percent of the number of units for lower income households.
(ii)If the housing development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, the city, county, or city and county shall not impose any maximum controls on density.
(iii)If the housing development is located in a very low vehicle travel area within a designated county, the city, county, or city and county shall not impose any maximum controls on density.
(4)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
| Percentage Moderate-Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 10 | 5 |
| 11 | 6 |
| 12 | 7 |
| 13 | 8 |
| 14 | 9 |
| 15 | 10 |
| 16 | 11 |
| 17 | 12 |
| 18 | 13 |
| 19 | 14 |
| 20 | 15 |
| 21 | 16 |
| 22 | 17 |
| 23 | 18 |
| 24 | 19 |
| 25 | 20 |
| 26 | 21 |
| 27 | 22 |
| 28 | 23 |
| 29 | 24 |
| 30 | 25 |
| 31 | 26 |
| 32 | 27 |
| 33 | 28 |
| 34 | 29 |
| 35 | 30 |
| 36 | 31 |
| 37 | 32 |
| 38 | 33 |
| 39 | 34 |
| 40 | 35 |
| 41 | 38.75 |
| 42 | 42.5 |
| 43 | 46.25 |
| 44 | 50 |
(5)All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. The granting of a density bonus shall not require, or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, or other discretionary approval.
(g)(1)When an applicant for a tentative subdivision map, parcel map, or other residential development approval donates land to a city, county, or city and county in accordance with this subdivision, the applicant shall be entitled to a 15-percent increase above the otherwise maximum allowable residential density for the entire development, as follows:
| Percentage Very Low Income | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 10 | 15 |
| 11 | 16 |
| 12 | 17 |
| 13 | 18 |
| 14 | 19 |
| 15 | 20 |
| 16 | 21 |
| 17 | 22 |
| 18 | 23 |
| 19 | 24 |
| 20 | 25 |
| 21 | 26 |
| 22 | 27 |
| 23 | 28 |
| 24 | 29 |
| 25 | 30 |
| 26 | 31 |
| 27 | 32 |
| 28 | 33 |
| 29 | 34 |
| 30 | 35 |
(2)This increase shall be in addition to any increase in density mandated by subdivision (b), up to a maximum combined mandated density increase of 35 percent if an applicant seeks an increase pursuant to both this subdivision and subdivision (b). All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to enlarge or diminish the authority of a city, county, or city and county to require a developer to donate land as a condition of development. An applicant shall be eligible for the increased density bonus described in this subdivision if all of the following conditions are met:
(A)The applicant donates and transfers the land no later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application.
(B)The developable acreage and zoning classification of the land being transferred are sufficient to permit construction of units affordable to very low income households in an amount not less than 10 percent of the number of residential units of the proposed development.
(C)The transferred land is at least one acre in size or of sufficient size to permit development of at least 40 units, has the appropriate general plan designation, is appropriately zoned with appropriate development standards for development at the density described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2, and is or will be served by adequate public facilities and infrastructure.
(D)The transferred land shall have all of the permits and approvals, other than building permits, necessary for the development of the very low income housing units on the transferred land, not later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application, except that the local government may subject the proposed development to subsequent design review to the extent authorized by subdivision (i) of Section 65583.2 if the design is not reviewed by the local government before the time of transfer.
(E)The transferred land and the affordable units shall be subject to a deed restriction ensuring continued affordability of the units consistent with paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (c), which shall be recorded on the property at the time of the transfer.
(F)The land is transferred to the local agency or to a housing developer approved by the local agency. The local agency may require the applicant to identify and transfer the land to the developer.
(G)The transferred land shall be within the boundary of the proposed development or, if the local agency agrees, within one-quarter mile of the boundary of the proposed development.
(H)A proposed source of funding for the very low income units shall be identified not later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application.
(h)(1)When an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that conforms to the requirements of subdivision (b) and includes a childcare facility that will be located on the premises of, as part of, or adjacent to, the project, the city, county, or city and county shall grant either of the following:
(A)An additional density bonus that is an amount of square feet of residential space that is equal to or greater than the amount of square feet in the childcare facility.
(B)An additional concession or incentive that contributes significantly to the economic feasibility of the construction of the childcare facility.
(2)The city, county, or city and county shall require, as a condition of approving the housing development, that the following occur:
(A)The childcare facility shall remain in operation for a period of time that is as long as or longer than the period of time during which the density bonus units are required to remain affordable pursuant to subdivision (c).
(B)Of the children who attend the childcare facility, the children of very low income households, lower income households, or families of moderate income shall equal a percentage that is equal to or greater than the percentage of dwelling units that are required for very low income households, lower income households, or families of moderate income pursuant to subdivision (b).
(3)Notwithstanding any requirement of this subdivision, a city, county, or city and county shall not be required to provide a density bonus or concession for a childcare facility if it finds, based upon substantial evidence, that the community has adequate childcare facilities.
(4)Childcare facility, as used in this section, means a child daycare facility other than a family daycare home, including, but not limited to, infant centers, preschools, extended daycare facilities, and schoolage childcare centers.
(i)Housing development, as used in this section, means a development project for five or more residential units, including mixed-use developments. For the purposes of this section, housing development also includes a subdivision or common interest development, as defined in Section 4100 of the Civil Code, approved by a city, county, or city and county and consists of residential units or unimproved residential lots and either a project to substantially rehabilitate and convert an existing commercial building to residential use or the substantial rehabilitation of an existing multifamily dwelling, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 65863.4, where the result of the rehabilitation would be a net increase in available residential units. For the purpose of calculating a density bonus, the residential units shall be on contiguous sites that are the subject of one development application, but do not have to be based upon individual subdivision maps or parcels. The density bonus shall be permitted in geographic areas of the housing development other than the areas where the units for the lower income households are located.
(j)(1)The granting of a concession or incentive shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval. For purposes of this subdivision, study does not include reasonable documentation to establish eligibility for the concession or incentive or to demonstrate that the incentive or concession meets the definition set forth in subdivision (k). This provision is declaratory of existing law.
(2)Except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e), the granting of a density bonus shall not require or be interpreted to require the waiver of a local ordinance or provisions of a local ordinance unrelated to development standards.
(k)For the purposes of this chapter, concession or incentive means any of the following:
(1)A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in identifiable and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(2)Approval of mixed-use zoning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and if the commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses are compatible with the housing project and the existing or planned development in the area where the proposed housing project will be located.
(3)Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the city, county, or city and county that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(l)Subdivision (k) does not limit or require the provision of direct financial incentives for the housing development, including the provision of publicly owned land, by the city, county, or city and county, or the waiver of fees or dedication requirements.
(m)Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted notwithstanding the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Code) if the development is not located on a site that is any of the following:
(1)An area of the coastal zone subject to paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 30603 of the Public Resources Code.
(2)An area of the coastal zone that is not subject to a certified local coastal program.
(3)An area of the coastal zone that is vulnerable to five feet of sea level rise, as determined by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Ocean Protection Council, the United States Geological Survey, the University of California, or a local governments coastal hazards vulnerability assessment.
(4)In a parcel within the coastal zone that is not zoned for multifamily housing.
(5)In a parcel in the coastal zone and located on either of the following:
(A)On, or within a 100-foot radius of, a wetland, as defined in Section 30121 of the Public Resources Code.
(B)On prime agricultural land, as defined in Sections 30113 and 30241 of the Public Resources Code.
(n)If permitted by local ordinance, nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a city, county, or city and county from granting a density bonus greater than what is described in this section for a development that meets the requirements of this section or from granting a proportionately lower density bonus than what is required by this section for developments that do not meet the requirements of this section.
(o)For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(1)Designated county includes the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Marin, Napa, Orange, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma, and Ventura, and the City and County of San Francisco.
(2)Development standard includes a site or construction condition, including, but not limited to, a height limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open-space requirement, a minimum lot area per unit requirement, or a parking ratio that applies to a residential development pursuant to any ordinance, general plan element, specific plan, charter, or other local condition, law, policy, resolution, or regulation that is adopted by the local government or that is enacted by the local governments electorate exercising its local initiative or referendum power, whether that power is derived from the California Constitution, statute, or the charter or ordinances of the local government.
(3)Located within one-half mile of a major transit stop means that any point on a proposed development, for which an applicant seeks a density bonus, other incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, or a vehicular parking ratio pursuant to this section, is within one-half mile of any point on the property on which a major transit stop is located, including any parking lot owned by the transit authority or other local agency operating the major transit stop.
(4)Lower income student means a student who has a household income and asset level that does not exceed the level for Cal Grant A or Cal Grant B award recipients as set forth in paragraph (1) of subdivision (k) of Section 69432.7 of the Education Code. The eligibility of a student to occupy a unit for lower income students under this section shall be verified by an affidavit, award letter, or letter of eligibility provided by the institution of higher education in which the student is enrolled or by the California Student Aid Commission that the student receives or is eligible for financial aid, including an institutional grant or fee waiver from the college or university, the California Student Aid Commission, or the federal government.
(5)Major transit stop has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code.
(6)Maximum allowable residential density or base density means the greatest number of units allowed under the zoning ordinance, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan, or, if a range of density is permitted, means the greatest number of units allowed by the specific zoning range, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan applicable to the project. Density shall be determined using dwelling units per acre. However, if the applicable zoning ordinance, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan does not provide a dwelling-units-per-acre standard for density, then the local agency shall calculate the number of units by:
(A)Estimating the realistic development capacity of the site based on the objective development standards applicable to the project, including, but not limited to, floor area ratio, site coverage, maximum building height and number of stories, building setbacks and stepbacks, public and private open-space requirements, minimum percentage or square footage of any nonresidential component, and parking requirements, unless not required for the base project. Parking requirements shall include considerations regarding number of spaces, location, design, type, and circulation. A developer may provide a base density study and the local agency shall accept it, provided that it includes all applicable objective development standards.
(B)Maintaining the same average unit size and other project details relevant to the base density study, excepting those that may be modified by waiver or concession to accommodate the bonus units, in the proposed project as in the study.
(7)(A)(i)Shared housing building means a residential or mixed-use structure, with five or more shared housing units and one or more common kitchens and dining areas designed for permanent residence of more than 30 days by its tenants. The kitchens and dining areas within the shared housing building shall be able to adequately accommodate all residents. If a local ordinance further restricts the attributes of a shared housing building beyond the requirements established in this section, the local definition shall apply to the extent that it does not conflict with the requirements of this section.
(ii)A shared housing building may include other dwelling units that are not shared housing units, provided that those dwelling units do not occupy more than 25 percent of the floor area of the shared housing building. A shared housing building may include 100 percent shared housing units.
(B)Shared housing unit means one or more habitable rooms, not within another dwelling unit, that includes a bathroom, sink, refrigerator, and microwave, is used for permanent residence, that meets the minimum room area specified in Section R304 of the California Residential Code (Part 2.5 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), and complies with the definition of guestroom in Section R202 of the California Residential Code. If a local ordinance further restricts the attributes of a shared housing building beyond the requirements established in this section, the local definition shall apply to the extent that it does not conflict with the requirements of this section.
(8)(A)Total units or total dwelling units means a calculation of the number of units that:
(i)Excludes a unit added by a density bonus awarded pursuant to this section or any local law granting a greater density bonus.
(ii)Includes a unit designated to satisfy an inclusionary zoning requirement of a city, county, or city and county.
(B)For purposes of calculating a density bonus granted pursuant to this section for a shared housing building, unit means one shared housing unit and its pro rata share of associated common area facilities.
(9)Very low vehicle travel area means an urbanized area, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, where the existing residential development generates vehicle miles traveled per capita that is below 85 percent of either regional vehicle miles traveled per capita or city vehicle miles traveled per capita. For purposes of this paragraph, area may include a travel analysis zone, hexagon, or grid. For the purposes of determining regional vehicle miles traveled per capita pursuant to this paragraph, a region is the entirety of incorporated and unincorporated areas governed by a multicounty or single-county metropolitan planning organization, or the entirety of the incorporated and unincorporated areas of an individual county that is not part of a metropolitan planning organization.
(p)(1)Except as provided in paragraphs (2), (3), and (4), upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not require a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, of a development meeting the criteria of subdivisions (b) and (c), that exceeds the following ratios:
(A)Zero to one bedroom: one onsite parking space.
(B)Two to three bedrooms: one and one-half onsite parking spaces.
(C)Four and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces.
(2)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development includes at least 20 percent low-income units for housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) or at least 11 percent very low income units for housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development, then, upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not impose a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, that exceeds 0.5 spaces per unit. Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development includes at least 40 percent moderate-income units for housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, and the residents of the development have unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development then, upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not impose a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, that exceeds 0.5 spaces per bedroom.
(B)For purposes of this subdivision, unobstructed access to the major transit stop means a resident is able to access the major transit stop without encountering natural or constructed impediments. For purposes of this subparagraph, natural or constructed impediments includes, but is not limited to, freeways, rivers, mountains, and bodies of water, but does not include residential structures, shopping centers, parking lots, or rails used for transit.
(3)Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development meets the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), then, upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not impose vehicular parking standards if the development meets any of the following criteria:
(A)The development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development.
(B)The development is a for-rent housing development for individuals who are 55 years of age or older that complies with Sections 51.2 and 51.3 of the Civil Code and the development has either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.
(C)The development is either a special needs housing development, as defined in Section 51312 of the Health and Safety Code, or a supportive housing development, as defined in Section 50675.14 of the Health and Safety Code. A development that is a special needs housing development shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.
(4)If the total number of parking spaces required for a development is other than a whole number, the number shall be rounded up to the next whole number. For purposes of this subdivision, a development may provide onsite parking through tandem parking or uncovered parking, but not through onstreet parking.
(5)This subdivision shall apply to a development that meets the requirements of subdivisions (b) and (c), but only at the request of the applicant. An applicant may request parking incentives or concessions beyond those provided in this subdivision pursuant to subdivision (d).
(6)This subdivision does not preclude a city, county, or city and county from reducing or eliminating a parking requirement for development projects of any type in any location.
(7)Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) and (3), if a city, county, city and county, or an independent consultant has conducted an areawide or jurisdictionwide parking study in the last seven years, then the city, county, or city and county may impose a higher vehicular parking ratio not to exceed the ratio described in paragraph (1), based upon substantial evidence found in the parking study, that includes, but is not limited to, an analysis of parking availability, differing levels of transit access, walkability access to transit services, the potential for shared parking, the effect of parking requirements on the cost of market-rate and subsidized developments, and the lower rates of car ownership for low-income and very low income individuals, including seniors and special needs individuals. The city, county, or city and county shall pay the costs of any new study. The city, county, or city and county shall make findings, based on a parking study completed in conformity with this paragraph, supporting the need for the higher parking ratio.
(8)A request pursuant to this subdivision shall neither reduce nor increase the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to subdivision (d).
(q)Each component of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional units shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number. The Legislature finds and declares that this provision is declaratory of existing law.
(r)This chapter shall be interpreted liberally in favor of producing the maximum number of total housing units.
(s)Notwithstanding any other law, if a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county has adopted an ordinance or a housing program, or both an ordinance and a housing program, that incentivizes the development of affordable housing that allows for density bonuses that exceed the density bonuses required by the version of this section effective through December 31, 2020, that city, county, or city and county is not required to amend or otherwise update its ordinance or corresponding affordable housing incentive program to comply with the amendments made to this section by the act adding this subdivision, and is exempt from complying with the incentive and concession calculation amendments made to this section by the act adding this subdivision as set forth in subdivision (d), particularly subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) of that subdivision, and the amendments made to the density tables under subdivision (f).
(t)When an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) that is a shared housing building, the city, county, or city and county shall not require any minimum unit size requirements or minimum bedroom requirements that are in conflict with paragraph (7) of subdivision (o).
(u)(1)The Legislature finds and declares that the intent behind the Density Bonus Law is to allow public entities to reduce or even eliminate subsidies for a particular project by allowing a developer to include more total units in a project than would otherwise be allowed by the local zoning ordinance in exchange for affordable units. It further reaffirms that the intent is to cover at least some of the financing gap of affordable housing with regulatory incentives, rather than additional public subsidy.
(2)It is therefore the intent of the Legislature to make modifications to the Density Bonus Law by the act adding this subdivision to further incentivize the construction of very low, low-, and moderate-income housing units. It is further the intent of the Legislature in making these modifications to the Density Bonus Law to ensure that any additional benefits conferred upon a developer are balanced with the receipt of a public benefit in the form of adequate levels of affordable housing. The Legislature further intends that these modifications will ensure that the Density Bonus Law creates incentives for the construction of more housing across all areas of the state.
(v)(1)Provided that the resulting housing development would not restrict more than 50 percent of the total units to moderate-income, lower income, or very low income households, a city, county, or city and county shall grant an additional density bonus calculated pursuant to paragraph (2) when an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that conforms to the requirements of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), agrees to include additional rental or for-sale units affordable to very low income households or moderate income moderate-income households, and meets any of the following requirements:
(A)The housing development conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and provides 24 percent of the total units to lower income households.
(B)The housing development conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and provides 15 percent of the total units to very low income households.
(C)The housing development conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and provides 44 percent of the total units to moderate-income households.
(2)A city, county, or city and county shall grant an additional density bonus for a housing development that meets the requirements of paragraph (1), calculated as follows:
| Percentage Very Low Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 5 | 20 |
| 6 | 23.75 |
| 7 | 27.5 |
| 8 | 31.25 |
| 9 | 35 |
| 10 | 38.75 |
| Percentage Moderate-Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 5 | 20 |
| 6 | 22.5 |
| 7 | 25 |
| 8 | 27.5 |
| 9 | 30 |
| 10 | 32.5 |
| 11 | 35 |
| 12 | 38.75 |
| 13 | 42.5 |
| 14 | 46.25 |
| 15 | 50 |
(3)The increase required by paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be in addition to any increase in density granted by subdivision (b).
(4)The additional density bonus required under this subdivision shall be calculated using the number of units excluding any density bonus awarded by this section.
(a)(1)When an applicant seeks a density bonus for a housing development within, or for the donation of land for housing within, the jurisdiction of a city, county, or city and county, that local government shall comply with this section. A city, county, or city and county shall adopt an ordinance that specifies how compliance with this section will be implemented. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (s), failure to adopt an ordinance shall not relieve a city, county, or city and county from complying with this section.
(2)A local government shall not condition the submission, review, or approval of an application pursuant to this chapter on the preparation of an additional report or study that is not otherwise required by state law, including this section. This subdivision does not prohibit a local government from requiring an applicant to provide reasonable documentation to establish eligibility for a requested density bonus, as described in subdivision (b), and parking ratios, as described in subdivision (p).
(3)In order to provide for the expeditious processing of a density bonus application, the local government shall do all of the following:
(A)Adopt procedures and timelines for processing a density bonus application.
(B)Provide a list of all documents and information required to be submitted with the density bonus application in order for the density bonus application to be deemed complete. This list shall be consistent with this chapter.
(C)Notify the applicant for a density bonus whether the application is complete in a manner consistent with the timelines specified in Section 65943.
(D)(i)If the local government notifies the applicant that the application is deemed complete pursuant to subparagraph (C), provide the applicant with a determination as to the following matters:
(I)The amount of density bonus, calculated pursuant to subdivision (f), for which the applicant is eligible.
(II)If the applicant requests a parking ratio pursuant to subdivision (p), the parking ratio for which the applicant is eligible.
(III)If the applicant requests incentives or concessions pursuant to subdivision (d) or waivers or reductions of development standards pursuant to subdivision (e), whether the applicant has provided adequate information for the local government to make a determination as to those incentives, concessions, waivers, or reductions of development standards.
(ii)Any determination required by this subparagraph shall be based on the development project at the time the application is deemed complete. The local government shall adjust the amount of density bonus and parking ratios awarded pursuant to this section based on any changes to the project during the course of development.
(b)(1)A city, county, or city and county shall grant one density bonus, the amount of which shall be as specified in subdivision (f), and, if requested by the applicant and consistent with the applicable requirements of this section, incentives or concessions, as described in subdivision (d), waivers or reductions of development standards, as described in subdivision (e), and parking ratios, as described in subdivision (p), if an applicant for a housing development seeks and agrees to construct a housing development, excluding any units permitted by the density bonus awarded pursuant to this section, that will contain at least any one of the following:
(A)Ten percent of the total units of a housing development, including a shared housing building development, for rental or sale to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B)Five percent of the total units of a housing development, including a shared housing building development, for rental or sale to very low income households, as defined in Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code.
(C)A senior citizen housing development, as defined in Sections 51.3 and 51.12 of the Civil Code, or a mobilehome park that limits residency based on age requirements for housing for older persons pursuant to Section 798.76 or 799.5 of the Civil Code. For purposes of this subparagraph, development includes a shared housing building development.
(D)Ten percent of the total dwelling units of a housing development are sold to persons and families of moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code, provided that all units in the development are offered to the public for purchase.
(E)Ten percent of the total units of a housing development for transitional foster youth, as defined in Section 66025.9 of the Education Code, disabled veterans, as defined in Section 18541, or homeless persons, as defined in the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 11301 et seq.). The units described in this subparagraph are subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years and shall be provided at the same affordability level as very low income units.
(F)(i)Twenty percent of the total units for lower income students in a student housing development that meets the following requirements:
(I)All units in the student housing development shall be used exclusively for undergraduate, graduate, or professional students enrolled full time at an institution of higher education accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges or the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. In order to be eligible under this subclause, the developer shall, as a condition of receiving a certificate of occupancy, provide evidence to the city, county, or city and county that the developer has entered into an operating agreement or master lease with one or more institutions of higher education for the institution or institutions to occupy all units of the student housing development with students from that institution or institutions. An operating agreement or master lease entered into pursuant to this subclause is not violated or breached if, in any subsequent year, there are insufficient students enrolled in an institution of higher education to fill all units in the student housing development.
(II)The applicable 20-percent units shall be used for lower income students.
(III)The rent provided in the applicable units of the development for lower income students shall be calculated at 30 percent of 65 percent of the area median income for a single-room occupancy unit type.
(IV)The development shall provide priority for the applicable affordable units for lower income students experiencing homelessness. A homeless service provider, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (e) of Section 103577 of the Health and Safety Code, or institution of higher education that has knowledge of a persons homeless status may verify a persons status as homeless for purposes of this subclause.
(ii)For purposes of calculating a density bonus granted pursuant to this subparagraph, the term unit as used in this section means one rental bed and its pro rata share of associated common area facilities. The units described in this subparagraph are subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years.
(G)One hundred percent of all units in the development, including total units and density bonus units, but exclusive of a managers unit or units, are for lower income households, as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, except that up to 20 percent of the units in the development, including total units and density bonus units, may be for moderate-income households, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code. For purposes of this subparagraph, development includes a shared housing building development.
(2)For purposes of calculating the amount of the density bonus pursuant to subdivision (f), an applicant who requests a density bonus pursuant to this subdivision shall elect whether the bonus shall be awarded on the basis of subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), or (G) of paragraph (1).
(c)(1)(A)An applicant shall agree to, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure, the continued affordability of all very low and low-income rental units that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus for 55 years or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program.
(B)(i)Except as otherwise provided in clause (ii), rents for the lower income density bonus units shall be set at an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
(ii)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), rents for all units in the development, including both base density and density bonus units, shall be as follows:
(I)The rent for at least 20 percent of the units in the development shall be set at an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
(II)The rent for the remaining units in the development shall be set at an amount consistent with the maximum rent levels for lower income households, as those rents and incomes are determined by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee.
(2)(A)An applicant shall agree to ensure, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure, that a for-sale unit that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus meets one of the following conditions:
(i)The unit is initially sold to and occupied by a person or family of very low, low, or moderate income, as required, and it is offered at an affordable housing cost, as that cost is defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code and is subject to an equity sharing agreement.
(ii)If the unit is not purchased by an income-qualified person or family within 180 days after the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the unit is purchased by a qualified nonprofit housing corporation that meets all of the following requirements pursuant to a recorded contract that satisfies all of the requirements specified in paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code:
(I)The nonprofit corporation has a determination letter from the Internal Revenue Service affirming its tax-exempt status pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and is not a private foundation as that term is defined in Section 509 of the Internal Revenue Code.
(II)The nonprofit corporation is based in California.
(III)All of the board members of the nonprofit corporation have their primary residence in California.
(IV)The primary activity of the nonprofit corporation is the development and preservation of affordable home ownership housing in California that incorporates within their contracts for initial purchase a repurchase option that requires a subsequent purchaser of the property that desires to resell or convey the property to offer the qualified nonprofit corporation the right to repurchase the property prior to selling or conveying that property to any other purchaser pursuant to an equity sharing agreement or affordability restrictions on the sale and conveyance of the property that ensure that the property will be preserved for lower income housing for at least 45 years for owner-occupied housing units and will be sold or resold only to persons or families of very low, low, or moderate income, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B)For purposes of this paragraph, a qualified nonprofit housing corporation is a nonprofit housing corporation organized pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code that has received a welfare exemption under Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code for properties intended to be sold to low-income families who participate in a special no-interest loan program.
(C)The local government shall enforce an equity sharing agreement required pursuant to clause (i) or (ii) of subparagraph (A), unless it is in conflict with the requirements of another public funding source or law or may defer to the recapture provisions of the public funding source. The following apply to the equity sharing agreement:
(i)Upon resale, the seller of the unit shall retain the value of any improvements, the downpayment, and the sellers proportionate share of appreciation.
(ii)Except as provided in clause (v), the local government shall recapture any initial subsidy, as defined in clause (iii), and its proportionate share of appreciation, as defined in clause (iv), which amount shall be used within five years for any of the purposes described in subdivision (e) of Section 33334.2 of the Health and Safety Code that promote homeownership.
(iii)For purposes of this subdivision, the local governments initial subsidy shall be equal to the fair market value of the home at the time of initial sale minus the initial sale price to the moderate-income household, plus the amount of any downpayment assistance or mortgage assistance. If upon resale the market value is lower than the initial market value, then the value at the time of the resale shall be used as the initial market value.
(iv)For purposes of this subdivision, the local governments proportionate share of appreciation shall be equal to the ratio of the local governments initial subsidy to the fair market value of the home at the time of initial sale.
(v)If the unit is purchased or developed by a qualified nonprofit housing corporation pursuant to clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) the local government may enter into a contract with the qualified nonprofit housing corporation under which the qualified nonprofit housing corporation would recapture any initial subsidy and its proportionate share of appreciation if the qualified nonprofit housing corporation is required to use 100 percent of the proceeds to promote homeownership for lower income households as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code within the jurisdiction of the local government.
(3)(A)An applicant shall be ineligible for a density bonus or any other incentives or concessions under this section if the housing development is proposed on any property that includes a parcel or parcels on which rental dwelling units are located or, if the dwelling units have been vacated or demolished in the five-year period preceding the application, have been subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income; subject to any other form of rent or price control through a public entitys valid exercise of its police power; or occupied by lower or very low income households, unless the proposed housing development replaces those units, and either of the following applies:
(i)The proposed housing development, inclusive of the units replaced pursuant to this paragraph, contains affordable units at the percentages set forth in subdivision (b).
(ii)Each unit in the development, exclusive of a managers unit or units, is affordable to, and occupied by, either a lower or very low income household.
(B)For the purposes of this paragraph, replace shall mean either of the following:
(i)If any dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) are occupied on the date of application, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those households in occupancy. If the income category of the household in occupancy is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that lower income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of lower income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Developments Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. For unoccupied dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) in a development with occupied units, the proposed housing development shall provide units of equivalent size to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as the last household in occupancy. If the income category of the last household in occupancy is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that lower income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of lower income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Developments Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. All replacement calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(ii)If all dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) have been vacated or demolished within the five-year period preceding the application, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size as existed at the highpoint of those units in the five-year period preceding the application to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those persons and families in occupancy at that time, if known. If the incomes of the persons and families in occupancy at the highpoint is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that low-income and very low income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of low-income and very low income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Developments Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. All replacement calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(C)Notwithstanding subparagraph (B), for any dwelling unit described in subparagraph (A) that is or was, within the five-year period preceding the application, subject to a form of rent or price control through a local governments valid exercise of its police power and that is or was occupied by persons or families above lower income, the city, county, or city and county may do either of the following:
(i)Require that the replacement units be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, low-income persons or families. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(ii)Require that the units be replaced in compliance with the jurisdictions rent or price control ordinance, provided that each unit described in subparagraph (A) is replaced. Unless otherwise required by the jurisdictions rent or price control ordinance, these units shall not be subject to a recorded affordability restriction.
(D)For purposes of this paragraph, equivalent size means that the replacement units contain at least the same total number of bedrooms as the units being replaced.
(E)Subparagraph (A) does not apply to an applicant seeking a density bonus for a proposed housing development if the applicants application was submitted to, or processed by, a city, county, or city and county before January 1, 2015.
(d)(1)An applicant for a density bonus pursuant to subdivision (b) may submit to a city, county, or city and county a proposal for the specific incentives or concessions that the applicant requests pursuant to this section, and may request a meeting with the city, county, or city and county. The city, county, or city and county shall grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the city, county, or city and county makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following:
(A)The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, consistent with subdivision (k), to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(B)The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households.
(C)The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law.
(2)The applicant shall receive the following number of incentives or concessions:
(A)One incentive or concession for projects that include at least 10 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 5 percent for very low income households, or at least 10 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(B)Two incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 17 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 10 percent for very low income households, or at least 20 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(C)Three incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 24 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 15 percent for very low income households, or at least 30 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(D)Five incentives or concessions for a project meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b). If the project is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop or is located in a very low vehicle travel area in a designated county, the applicant shall also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet.
(E)One incentive or concession for projects that include at least 20 percent of the total units for lower income students in a student housing development.
(F)Four incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 16 percent of the units for very low income households or at least 45 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale.
(3)The applicant may initiate judicial proceedings if the city, county, or city and county refuses to grant a requested density bonus, incentive, or concession. If a court finds that the refusal to grant a requested density bonus, incentive, or concession is in violation of this section, the court shall award the plaintiff reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to grant an incentive or concession that has a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to grant an incentive or concession that would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. The city, county, or city and county shall establish procedures for carrying out this section that shall include legislative body approval of the means of compliance with this section.
(4)The city, county, or city and county shall bear the burden of proof for the denial of a requested concession or incentive.
(e)(1)In no case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section. Subject to paragraph (3), an applicant may submit to a city, county, or city and county a proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted under this section, and may request a meeting with the city, county, or city and county. If a court finds that the refusal to grant a waiver or reduction of development standards is in violation of this section, the court shall award the plaintiff reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to waive or reduce development standards if the waiver or reduction would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. This subdivision shall not be interpreted to require a local government to waive or reduce development standards that would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, or to grant any waiver or reduction that would be contrary to state or federal law.
(2)A proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards pursuant to this subdivision shall neither reduce nor increase the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to subdivision (d).
(3)A housing development that receives a waiver from any maximum controls on density pursuant to clause (ii) of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (f) shall only be eligible for a waiver or reduction of development standards as provided in subparagraph (D) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) and clause (ii) of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (f), unless the city, county, or city and county agrees to additional waivers or reductions of development standards.
(f)For the purposes of this chapter, density bonus means a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density as of the date of application by the applicant to the city, county, or city and county, or, if elected by the applicant, a lesser percentage of density increase, including, but not limited to, no increase in density. The amount of density increase to which the applicant is entitled shall vary according to the amount by which the percentage of affordable housing units exceeds the percentage established in subdivision (b).
(1)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
| Percentage Low-Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 10 | 20 |
| 11 | 21.5 |
| 12 | 23 |
| 13 | 24.5 |
| 14 | 26 |
| 15 | 27.5 |
| 16 | 29 |
| 17 | 30.5 |
| 18 | 32 |
| 19 | 33.5 |
| 20 | 35 |
| 21 | 38.75 |
| 22 | 42.5 |
| 23 | 46.25 |
| 24 | 50 |
(2)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
| Percentage Very Low Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 5 | 20 |
| 6 | 22.5 |
| 7 | 25 |
| 8 | 27.5 |
| 9 | 30 |
| 10 | 32.5 |
| 11 | 35 |
| 12 | 38.75 |
| 13 | 42.5 |
| 14 | 46.25 |
| 15 | 50 |
(3)(A)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be 20 percent of the number of senior housing units.
(B)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (E) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be 20 percent of the number of the type of units giving rise to a density bonus under that subparagraph.
(C)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (F) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be 35 percent of the student housing units.
(D)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the following shall apply:
(i)Except as otherwise provided in clauses (ii) and (iii), the density bonus shall be 80 percent of the number of units for lower income households.
(ii)If the housing development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, the city, county, or city and county shall not impose any maximum controls on density.
(iii)If the housing development is located in a very low vehicle travel area within a designated county, the city, county, or city and county shall not impose any maximum controls on density.
(4)For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
| Percentage Moderate-Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 10 | 5 |
| 11 | 6 |
| 12 | 7 |
| 13 | 8 |
| 14 | 9 |
| 15 | 10 |
| 16 | 11 |
| 17 | 12 |
| 18 | 13 |
| 19 | 14 |
| 20 | 15 |
| 21 | 16 |
| 22 | 17 |
| 23 | 18 |
| 24 | 19 |
| 25 | 20 |
| 26 | 21 |
| 27 | 22 |
| 28 | 23 |
| 29 | 24 |
| 30 | 25 |
| 31 | 26 |
| 32 | 27 |
| 33 | 28 |
| 34 | 29 |
| 35 | 30 |
| 36 | 31 |
| 37 | 32 |
| 38 | 33 |
| 39 | 34 |
| 40 | 35 |
| 41 | 38.75 |
| 42 | 42.5 |
| 43 | 46.25 |
| 44 | 50 |
(5)All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. The granting of a density bonus shall not require, or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, or other discretionary approval.
(g)(1)When an applicant for a tentative subdivision map, parcel map, or other residential development approval donates land to a city, county, or city and county in accordance with this subdivision, the applicant shall be entitled to a 15-percent increase above the otherwise maximum allowable residential density for the entire development, as follows:
| Percentage Very Low Income | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 10 | 15 |
| 11 | 16 |
| 12 | 17 |
| 13 | 18 |
| 14 | 19 |
| 15 | 20 |
| 16 | 21 |
| 17 | 22 |
| 18 | 23 |
| 19 | 24 |
| 20 | 25 |
| 21 | 26 |
| 22 | 27 |
| 23 | 28 |
| 24 | 29 |
| 25 | 30 |
| 26 | 31 |
| 27 | 32 |
| 28 | 33 |
| 29 | 34 |
| 30 | 35 |
(2)This increase shall be in addition to any increase in density mandated by subdivision (b), up to a maximum combined mandated density increase of 35 percent if an applicant seeks an increase pursuant to both this subdivision and subdivision (b). All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to enlarge or diminish the authority of a city, county, or city and county to require a developer to donate land as a condition of development. An applicant shall be eligible for the increased density bonus described in this subdivision if all of the following conditions are met:
(A)The applicant donates and transfers the land no later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application.
(B)The developable acreage and zoning classification of the land being transferred are sufficient to permit construction of units affordable to very low income households in an amount not less than 10 percent of the number of residential units of the proposed development.
(C)The transferred land is at least one acre in size or of sufficient size to permit development of at least 40 units, has the appropriate general plan designation, is appropriately zoned with appropriate development standards for development at the density described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2, and is or will be served by adequate public facilities and infrastructure.
(D)The transferred land shall have all of the permits and approvals, other than building permits, necessary for the development of the very low income housing units on the transferred land, not later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application, except that the local government may subject the proposed development to subsequent design review to the extent authorized by subdivision (i) of Section 65583.2 if the design is not reviewed by the local government before the time of transfer.
(E)The transferred land and the affordable units shall be subject to a deed restriction ensuring continued affordability of the units consistent with paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (c), which shall be recorded on the property at the time of the transfer.
(F)The land is transferred to the local agency or to a housing developer approved by the local agency. The local agency may require the applicant to identify and transfer the land to the developer.
(G)The transferred land shall be within the boundary of the proposed development or, if the local agency agrees, within one-quarter mile of the boundary of the proposed development.
(H)A proposed source of funding for the very low income units shall be identified not later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application.
(h)(1)When an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that conforms to the requirements of subdivision (b) and includes a childcare facility that will be located on the premises of, as part of, or adjacent to, the project, the city, county, or city and county shall grant either of the following:
(A)An additional density bonus that is an amount of square feet of residential space that is equal to or greater than the amount of square feet in the childcare facility.
(B)An additional concession or incentive that contributes significantly to the economic feasibility of the construction of the childcare facility.
(2)The city, county, or city and county shall require, as a condition of approving the housing development, that the following occur:
(A)The childcare facility shall remain in operation for a period of time that is as long as or longer than the period of time during which the density bonus units are required to remain affordable pursuant to subdivision (c).
(B)Of the children who attend the childcare facility, the children of very low income households, lower income households, or families of moderate income shall equal a percentage that is equal to or greater than the percentage of dwelling units that are required for very low income households, lower income households, or families of moderate income pursuant to subdivision (b).
(3)Notwithstanding any requirement of this subdivision, a city, county, or city and county shall not be required to provide a density bonus or concession for a childcare facility if it finds, based upon substantial evidence, that the community has adequate childcare facilities.
(4)Childcare facility, as used in this section, means a child daycare facility other than a family daycare home, including, but not limited to, infant centers, preschools, extended daycare facilities, and schoolage childcare centers.
(i)Housing development, as used in this section, means a development project for five or more residential units, including mixed-use developments. For the purposes of this section, housing development also includes a subdivision or common interest development, as defined in Section 4100 of the Civil Code, approved by a city, county, or city and county and consists of residential units or unimproved residential lots and either a project to substantially rehabilitate and convert an existing commercial building to residential use or the substantial rehabilitation of an existing multifamily dwelling, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 65863.4, where the result of the rehabilitation would be a net increase in available residential units. For the purpose of calculating a density bonus, the residential units shall be on contiguous sites that are the subject of one development application, but do not have to be based upon individual subdivision maps or parcels. The density bonus shall be permitted in geographic areas of the housing development other than the areas where the units for the lower income households are located.
(j)(1)The granting of a concession or incentive shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval. For purposes of this subdivision, study does not include reasonable documentation to establish eligibility for the concession or incentive or to demonstrate that the incentive or concession meets the definition set forth in subdivision (k). This provision is declaratory of existing law.
(2)Except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e), the granting of a density bonus shall not require or be interpreted to require the waiver of a local ordinance or provisions of a local ordinance unrelated to development standards.
(k)For the purposes of this chapter, concession or incentive means any of the following:
(1)A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in identifiable and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(2)Approval of mixed-use zoning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and if the commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses are compatible with the housing project and the existing or planned development in the area where the proposed housing project will be located.
(3)Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the city, county, or city and county that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(l)Subdivision (k) does not limit or require the provision of direct financial incentives for the housing development, including the provision of publicly owned land, by the city, county, or city and county, or the waiver of fees or dedication requirements.
(m)This section does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the an applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with this section and Division notwithstanding the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code. Code).
(n)If permitted by local ordinance, nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a city, county, or city and county from granting a density bonus greater than what is described in this section for a development that meets the requirements of this section or from granting a proportionately lower density bonus than what is required by this section for developments that do not meet the requirements of this section.
(o)For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(1)Designated county includes the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Marin, Napa, Orange, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma, and Ventura, and the City and County of San Francisco.
(2)Development standard includes a site or construction condition, including, but not limited to, a height limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open-space requirement, a minimum lot area per unit requirement, or a parking ratio that applies to a residential development pursuant to any ordinance, general plan element, specific plan, charter, or other local condition, law, policy, resolution, or regulation that is adopted by the local government or that is enacted by the local governments electorate exercising its local initiative or referendum power, whether that power is derived from the California Constitution, statute, or the charter or ordinances of the local government.
(3)Located within one-half mile of a major transit stop means that any point on a proposed development, for which an applicant seeks a density bonus, other incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, or a vehicular parking ratio pursuant to this section, is within one-half mile of any point on the property on which a major transit stop is located, including any parking lot owned by the transit authority or other local agency operating the major transit stop.
(4)Lower income student means a student who has a household income and asset level that does not exceed the level for Cal Grant A or Cal Grant B award recipients as set forth in paragraph (1) of subdivision (k) of Section 69432.7 of the Education Code. The eligibility of a student to occupy a unit for lower income students under this section shall be verified by an affidavit, award letter, or letter of eligibility provided by the institution of higher education in which the student is enrolled or by the California Student Aid Commission that the student receives or is eligible for financial aid, including an institutional grant or fee waiver from the college or university, the California Student Aid Commission, or the federal government.
(5)Major transit stop has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code.
(6)Maximum allowable residential density or base density means the greatest number of units allowed under the zoning ordinance, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan, or, if a range of density is permitted, means the greatest number of units allowed by the specific zoning range, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan applicable to the project. Density shall be determined using dwelling units per acre. However, if the applicable zoning ordinance, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan does not provide a dwelling-units-per-acre standard for density, then the local agency shall calculate the number of units by:
(A)Estimating the realistic development capacity of the site based on the objective development standards applicable to the project, including, but not limited to, floor area ratio, site coverage, maximum building height and number of stories, building setbacks and stepbacks, public and private open-space requirements, minimum percentage or square footage of any nonresidential component, and parking requirements, unless not required for the base project. Parking requirements shall include considerations regarding number of spaces, location, design, type, and circulation. A developer may provide a base density study and the local agency shall accept it, provided that it includes all applicable objective development standards.
(B)Maintaining the same average unit size and other project details relevant to the base density study, excepting those that may be modified by waiver or concession to accommodate the bonus units, in the proposed project as in the study.
(7)(A)(i)Shared housing building means a residential or mixed-use structure, with five or more shared housing units and one or more common kitchens and dining areas designed for permanent residence of more than 30 days by its tenants. The kitchens and dining areas within the shared housing building shall be able to adequately accommodate all residents. If a local ordinance further restricts the attributes of a shared housing building beyond the requirements established in this section, the local definition shall apply to the extent that it does not conflict with the requirements of this section.
(ii)A shared housing building may include other dwelling units that are not shared housing units, provided that those dwelling units do not occupy more than 25 percent of the floor area of the shared housing building. A shared housing building may include 100 percent shared housing units.
(B)Shared housing unit means one or more habitable rooms, not within another dwelling unit, that includes a bathroom, sink, refrigerator, and microwave, is used for permanent residence, that meets the minimum room area specified in Section R304 of the California Residential Code (Part 2.5 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), and complies with the definition of guestroom in Section R202 of the California Residential Code. If a local ordinance further restricts the attributes of a shared housing building beyond the requirements established in this section, the local definition shall apply to the extent that it does not conflict with the requirements of this section.
(8)(A)Total units or total dwelling units means a calculation of the number of units that:
(i)Excludes a unit added by a density bonus awarded pursuant to this section or any local law granting a greater density bonus.
(ii)Includes a unit designated to satisfy an inclusionary zoning requirement of a city, county, or city and county.
(B)For purposes of calculating a density bonus granted pursuant to this section for a shared housing building, unit means one shared housing unit and its pro rata share of associated common area facilities.
(9)Very low vehicle travel area means an urbanized area, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, where the existing residential development generates vehicle miles traveled per capita that is below 85 percent of either regional vehicle miles traveled per capita or city vehicle miles traveled per capita. For purposes of this paragraph, area may include a travel analysis zone, hexagon, or grid. For the purposes of determining regional vehicle miles traveled per capita pursuant to this paragraph, a region is the entirety of incorporated and unincorporated areas governed by a multicounty or single-county metropolitan planning organization, or the entirety of the incorporated and unincorporated areas of an individual county that is not part of a metropolitan planning organization.
(p)(1)Except as provided in paragraphs (2), (3), and (4), upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not require a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, of a development meeting the criteria of subdivisions (b) and (c), that exceeds the following ratios:
(A)Zero to one bedroom: one onsite parking space.
(B)Two to three bedrooms: one and one-half onsite parking spaces.
(C)Four and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces.
(2)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development includes at least 20 percent low-income units for housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) or at least 11 percent very low income units for housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development, then, upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not impose a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, that exceeds 0.5 spaces per unit. Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development includes at least 40 percent moderate-income units for housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, and the residents of the development have unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development then, upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not impose a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, that exceeds 0.5 spaces per bedroom.
(B)For purposes of this subdivision, unobstructed access to the major transit stop means a resident is able to access the major transit stop without encountering natural or constructed impediments. For purposes of this subparagraph, natural or constructed impediments includes, but is not limited to, freeways, rivers, mountains, and bodies of water, but does not include residential structures, shopping centers, parking lots, or rails used for transit.
(3)Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development meets the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), then, upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not impose vehicular parking standards if the development meets any of the following criteria:
(A)The development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development.
(B)The development is a for-rent housing development for individuals who are 55 years of age or older that complies with Sections 51.2 and 51.3 of the Civil Code and the development has either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.
(C)The development is either a special needs housing development, as defined in Section 51312 of the Health and Safety Code, or a supportive housing development, as defined in Section 50675.14 of the Health and Safety Code. A development that is a special needs housing development shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.
(4)If the total number of parking spaces required for a development is other than a whole number, the number shall be rounded up to the next whole number. For purposes of this subdivision, a development may provide onsite parking through tandem parking or uncovered parking, but not through onstreet parking.
(5)This subdivision shall apply to a development that meets the requirements of subdivisions (b) and (c), but only at the request of the applicant. An applicant may request parking incentives or concessions beyond those provided in this subdivision pursuant to subdivision (d).
(6)This subdivision does not preclude a city, county, or city and county from reducing or eliminating a parking requirement for development projects of any type in any location.
(7)Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) and (3), if a city, county, city and county, or an independent consultant has conducted an areawide or jurisdictionwide parking study in the last seven years, then the city, county, or city and county may impose a higher vehicular parking ratio not to exceed the ratio described in paragraph (1), based upon substantial evidence found in the parking study, that includes, but is not limited to, an analysis of parking availability, differing levels of transit access, walkability access to transit services, the potential for shared parking, the effect of parking requirements on the cost of market-rate and subsidized developments, and the lower rates of car ownership for low-income and very low income individuals, including seniors and special needs individuals. The city, county, or city and county shall pay the costs of any new study. The city, county, or city and county shall make findings, based on a parking study completed in conformity with this paragraph, supporting the need for the higher parking ratio.
(8)A request pursuant to this subdivision shall neither reduce nor increase the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to subdivision (d).
(q)Each component of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional units shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number. The Legislature finds and declares that this provision is declaratory of existing law.
(r)This chapter shall be interpreted liberally in favor of producing the maximum number of total housing units.
(s)Notwithstanding any other law, if a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county has adopted an ordinance or a housing program, or both an ordinance and a housing program, that incentivizes the development of affordable housing that allows for density bonuses that exceed the density bonuses required by the version of this section effective through December 31, 2020, that city, county, or city and county is not required to amend or otherwise update its ordinance or corresponding affordable housing incentive program to comply with the amendments made to this section by the act adding this subdivision, and is exempt from complying with the incentive and concession calculation amendments made to this section by the act adding this subdivision as set forth in subdivision (d), particularly subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) of that subdivision, and the amendments made to the density tables under subdivision (f).
(t)When an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) that is a shared housing building, the city, county, or city and county shall not require any minimum unit size requirements or minimum bedroom requirements that are in conflict with paragraph (7) of subdivision (o).
(u)(1)The Legislature finds and declares that the intent behind the Density Bonus Law is to allow public entities to reduce or even eliminate subsidies for a particular project by allowing a developer to include more total units in a project than would otherwise be allowed by the local zoning ordinance in exchange for affordable units. It further reaffirms that the intent is to cover at least some of the financing gap of affordable housing with regulatory incentives, rather than additional public subsidy.
(2)It is therefore the intent of the Legislature to make modifications to the Density Bonus Law by the act adding this subdivision to further incentivize the construction of very low, low-, and moderate-income housing units. It is further the intent of the Legislature in making these modifications to the Density Bonus Law to ensure that any additional benefits conferred upon a developer are balanced with the receipt of a public benefit in the form of adequate levels of affordable housing. The Legislature further intends that these modifications will ensure that the Density Bonus Law creates incentives for the construction of more housing across all areas of the state.
(v)(1)Provided that the resulting housing development would not restrict more than 50 percent of the total units to moderate-income, lower income, or very low income households, a city, county, or city and county shall grant an additional density bonus calculated pursuant to paragraph (2) when an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that conforms to the requirements of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), agrees to include additional rental or for-sale units affordable to very low income households or moderate income households, and meets any of the following requirements:
(A)The housing development conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and provides 24 percent of the total units to lower income households.
(B)The housing development conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and provides 15 percent of the total units to very low income households.
(C)The housing development conforms to the requirements of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and provides 44 percent of the total units to moderate-income households.
(2)A city, county, or city and county shall grant an additional density bonus for a housing development that meets the requirements of paragraph (1), calculated as follows:
| Percentage Very Low Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 5 | 20 |
| 6 | 23.75 |
| 7 | 27.5 |
| 8 | 31.25 |
| 9 | 35 |
| 10 | 38.75 |
| Percentage Moderate-Income Units | Percentage Density Bonus |
| 5 | 20 |
| 6 | 22.5 |
| 7 | 25 |
| 8 | 27.5 |
| 9 | 30 |
| 10 | 32.5 |
| 11 | 35 |
| 12 | 38.75 |
| 13 | 42.5 |
| 14 | 46.25 |
| 15 | 50 |
(3)The increase required by paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be in addition to any increase in density granted by subdivision (b).
(4)The additional density bonus required under this subdivision shall be calculated using the number of units excluding any density bonus awarded by this section.
REVISIONS: HeadingLine 2.|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Aug 15, 2024 | In committee: Held under submission. |
| Aug 12, 2024 | In committee: Referred to APPR suspense file. |
| Jul 31, 2024 | In committee: Hearing postponed by committee. |
| Jul 1, 2024 | Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Jun 27, 2024 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (June 25). |
| Jun 19, 2024 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on N.R. & W. (Ayes 8. Noes 1.) (June 18). Re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W. |
| Jun 5, 2024 | Referred to Coms. on HOUSING, N.R. & W. and APPR. |
| May 21, 2024 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| May 20, 2024 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 55. Noes 6. Page 5298.) |
| Apr 25, 2024 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Apr 24, 2024 | Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading. |
| Apr 23, 2024 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 1.) (April 22). |
| Apr 11, 2024 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 10). Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES. |
| Apr 11, 2024 | Coauthors revised. |
| Mar 4, 2024 | Referred to Coms. on H. & C.D. and NAT. RES. |
| Feb 15, 2024 | From printer. May be heard in committee March 16. |
| Feb 14, 2024 | Read first time. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 12, 2024 | Placed on suspense file | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Jun 25, 2024 | Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Senate Standing Committee on Natural Resources and Water |
Passed |
|
| Jun 18, 2024 | Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Natural Resources and Water] | Senate Standing Committee on Housing |
Passed |
|
| May 20, 2024 | AB 2560 Alvarez Assembly Third Reading | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Apr 22, 2024 | Do pass as amended. | Assembly Standing Committee on Natural Resources |
Passed |
|
| Apr 10, 2024 | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Natural Resources] | Assembly Standing Committee on Housing and Community Development |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| AARP California | * Support | Jun 20, 2024 |
| Abundant Housing LA | ** Support | |
| American Planning Association | * Support | Apr 22, 2024 |
| Associated General Contractors | ** Support | |
| Azul | * Neutral | Jun 25, 2024 |
| Bay Area Council | * Support | Jun 25, 2024 |
| Biona Wetlands Institute | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| California Apartment Association | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| California Building Industry Association | ** Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| California Cities for Local Control | ** Against | |
| California Coast Keeper Alliance | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| California Coastal Commission | * Against | Jun 25, 2024 |
| California Coastal Commission | * Support | Jun 25, 2024 |
| California Coastal Protection Network | * Against | Jun 25, 2024 |
| California community builders | ** Support | |
| California Conference of Carpenters | * Support | Jun 25, 2024 |
| California Contract Cities Association | ** Against | |
| California Cultural Resources Protection Alliance Incorporated | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| California Environmental Voters | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| California Housing Partnership | * Support | Jun 25, 2024 |
| California Native Plant Society | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| California Native Plants Society | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| California River Watch | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation | * Support | Jun 20, 2024 |
| California School Employees Association | * Support | Jun 25, 2024 |
| California YIMBY | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Canyon Back Alliance | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Center for Biological Diversity | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Chiatri De Laguna Farm | ** Against | |
| Chiatri de Laguna Farm | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Circulate San Diego | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Citizens Preserving Venice | ** Against | |
| City of Carlsbad | * Against | Jun 26, 2024 |
| City of Elk Grove | * Against | Jun 18, 2024 |
| city of fairfield | * Against | Jun 18, 2024 |
| City Of Long Beach | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| City of Norwalk | * Against | Jun 18, 2024 |
| City of Palm Desert | * Against | Jun 18, 2024 |
| City of Rancho Palos Verdes | * Against | Jun 18, 2024 |
| City of Redondo Beach | * Against | Jun 26, 2024 |
| City Of San Diego | * Support | Jun 25, 2024 |
| City of Santa Clarita | * Against | Jun 18, 2024 |
| City of Solana Beach | * Against | Jun 26, 2024 |
| CivicWell | ** Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Cleanearth4kids.org | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Coastal Lands Action Network | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council | ** Against | |
| CoastWalk | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Committee for Green Foothills | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Construction Employers' Association | ** Support | |
| Defend Biona Wetlands | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Defenders Of Wildlife | * Indeterminate | Jun 26, 2024 |
| East Area Progressive Democrats | ** Against | |
| East Bay for Everyone | ** Support | |
| Endangered Habitats League | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Environment California | * Indeterminate | Jun 26, 2024 |
| Environmental Action Committee of West Marin | * Against | Jun 25, 2024 |
| Environmental California | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Environmental Center of San Diego | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Environmental Defense Center | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| FIELDSTEAD & CO. | * Neutral | Apr 10, 2024 |
| Forest Unlimited | ** Against | |
| Forest Unlimited | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Friends of Harbors, Beaches and Parks | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Gaviota Coast Conservancy | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Greenbelt Alliance | * Support | Jun 25, 2024 |
| Grow the Richmond | ** Support | |
| Housing Action Coalition | * Support | Jun 25, 2024 |
| Housing California | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County | ** Support | |
| How to ADU | ** Support | |
| Humboldt Waterkeeper | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Idle No More SoCal Venice | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Inner City Law Center | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| LeadingAge California | ** Support | |
| Livable Ventura, INC | ** Against | |
| Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust | ** Against | |
| Los Cerritos Wetlands Trust | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| MidPen Housing | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Mission Street Neighbors | ** Against | |
| Monterey Bay Economic Partnership | ** Support | |
| Napa-Solano for Everyone | ** Support | |
| National Housing Law Project | * Support | Jun 26, 2024 |
| Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) | * Neutral | Jun 25, 2024 |
| New Livable California | ** Against | |
| Newport Beach City Of | ** Against | |
| Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California | * Support | Apr 10, 2024 |
| North Coast Rivers Alliance | ** Against | |
| North Coast Rivers Alliance | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Northern Neighbors | ** Support | |
| Orange County Coast Keeper | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Orange County Coastkeeper | ** Against | |
| Our City SF | ** Against | |
| Our City SF | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Peninsula for Everyone | ** Support | |
| People For Housing Orange County | ** Support | |
| Physicians for Social Responsibility-San Francisco Bay Area Chapter | ** Against | |
| Planning And Conservation League | * Indeterminate | Jun 25, 2024 |
| Progress Noe Valley | ** Support | |
| Protect Biona Wetlands | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Public Interest Law Project | * Support | Jun 20, 2024 |
| Public Trust Alliance | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Puvunga Wetlands Protectors | ** Against | |
| Puvunga Wetlands Protectors | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Resource Renewal Institute | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| River Otter Ecology Project | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| San Diego Chamber of Commerce | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association | ** Support | |
| San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility | ** Against | |
| San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| San Francisco YIMBY | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Save Lafayette | ** Against | |
| Save Sonoma Coast | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Save the Sonoma Coast | ** Against | |
| Sierra Club California | * Indeterminate | Jun 26, 2024 |
| Smith River Alliance | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| SoCal 350 Climate Action | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| South Bay Cities Council of Governments | ** Against | |
| Southern California Watershed Alliance | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Southside Forward | ** Support | |
| SPUR | ** Support | |
| Streets for All | ** Support | |
| Streets for People | ** Support | |
| Student at UC Merced | * Indeterminate | Jun 25, 2024 |
| Surfrider Foundation | * Neutral | Jun 25, 2024 |
| The City of Thousand Oaks | * Against | Jun 18, 2024 |
| The Climate Center | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| UCLA student | * Indeterminate | Jun 25, 2024 |
| Urban Environmentalists | ** Support | |
| Watershed Alliance Of Marin | ** Against | |
| Watershed Alliance of Marin | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| West Sonoma County Alliance | ** Against | |
| West Sonoma County Alliance | * Against Unless Amend | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Western Center on Lawn Poverty | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
| Western Environmental Action Committee | * Against Unless Amend | Apr 22, 2024 |
| Yimby Action | * Support | Jun 18, 2024 |
SENATE COMMITTEE ON
Senator Anna Caballero, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular Session
AB 2560 (Alvarez) - Density Bonus Law: California Coastal Act of 1976
Version: | Policy Vote: |
Urgency: | Mandate: |
Hearing Date: | Consultant: |
Bill Summary:
AB 2560 would provide that any density bonus, concessions, or incentives that a development project applicant is entitled to under density bonus law (DBL) are permitted, to the extent that they do not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources and public coastal access. The bill would also require all local governments in the coastal zone to amend their respective local coastal programs (LCPs) to harmonize DBL and the California Coastal Act of 1976, as specified.
Fiscal Impact:
- Unknown local costs for cities and counties in the coastal zone to submit an amended LCP to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for certification that harmonizes the DBL and the Coastal Act. These local costs may be reimbursable by the state, subject to a determination by the Commission on State Mandates. (General Fund)
- The CCC estimates that workload to review and certify amendments to local LCPs would likely be minor because approximately one-third of coastal local governments have already voluntarily amended their LCPs in a manner that is compliant with the bill. Furthermore, the bill specifies a pathway for the CCC to approve a DBL LCP amendment administratively, which would mitigate potential workload, to the extent local agencies submit amendments that qualify for the administrative process. (General Fund)
Background:
Existing law, the DBL, grants certain benefits and incentives, including increased density, to developers who build affordable units in order to encourage greater affordable housing production. Existing law requires a city or county to adopt an ordinance that specifies how it will implement state Density Bonus Law, which requires the granting of a specified density bonus when an applicant for a housing development of 5 or more units agrees to construct a project with a specified percentage of units dedicated to lower income households. Existing law requires a city or county to allow an increase in density of 20% - 50% on a sliding scale, depending on the percentage of units affordable to very low- and low-income households, over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the applicable zoning ordinance and land use element of the general plan. If a project is entirely comprised of affordable units, the DBL provides significantly enhanced benefits. 100 percent affordable housing projects (at least 80% affordable to lower income households, and up to 20% moderate-income) receive an additional incentive or concession, and an increase in allowable density that is 80 percent of the percentage of units affordable to lower-income households.
Allowing more total units in a project allows a developer to spread the subsidized cost of affordable units more broadly over the market-rate units, making affordable housing more financially feasible. In addition to the density bonus, existing law provides a sliding scale of incentives or concessions for projects that include specified percentages of affordable units. The DBL requires the developer to record 55-year covenants on the affordable units qualifying for the density bonus.
The Coastal Act outlines standards for development in the coastal zone including specific policies addressing shoreline public access, recreation, protection of habitats, development design, among other things. Local governments within the coastal zone can adopt an LCP that generally includes the rules for development and protection of coastal resources and basic planning tools used by the local government. Each LCP contains a land use plan and implementing measures, such as zoning and maps, some of which are subjective standards, such as requirements around design or community character, and some of which are objective standards. Existing law specifies that an LCP is not required to include housing policies and programs.
In order for the local government to have primary jurisdiction over development permitting in the coastal zone, however, the LCP must be approved by the Coastal Commission. Once the LCP is approved by the CCC, the local government assumes permitting authority over local developments, including housing, and the LCP is considered to be an extension of the Coastal Act. About 73% of local jurisdictions in the coastal zone have approved LCPs. In the remaining jurisdictions, coastal development permits (CDPs) are issued by the CCC directly. Additionally, permitting decisions made by a local government with an approved LCP can be appealed directly to the CCC under specified circumstances. In reviewing a permit application, the CCC must generally defer to those standards outlined in the LCP.
Proposed Law:
AB 2560 would do the following:
- Specify that the DBL does not relieve a project from the requirement to obtain a coastal development permit, as required by the Coastal Act.
- Require any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the DBL to be permitted in a manner that does not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources and public coastal access, as specified.
- Delete a provision that specifies that an LCP is not required to include housing policies and programs.
- Require any local government in the coastal zone to submit to the CCC for certification by July 1, 2026 an amendment to its LCP that harmonizes the applicable provisions of the DBL and the Coastal Act, as specified.
- Require the LCP amendment to be processed administratively if the amendment only includes a provision stating that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with the policies of the local coastal program to the greatest extent feasible and does not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources and public coastal access.
Related Legislation:
SB 1092 (Blakespear), which is currently pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, would require the CCC, on or before December 31, 2025, to provide a report to the Legislature regarding appeals to the Commission of local government decisions on coastal development permit (CDP) applications.
SB 1077 (Blakespear), which is currently pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, would require the CCC, in coordination with the Department of Housing and Community Development, to develop and provide guidance to local governments on preparing amendments to an LCP to clarify and simplify the permitting process for accessory dwelling units.
AB 2797 (Bloom), Chap. 904/2018, required any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers, or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled to under the DBL to be permitted in a manner that is consistent with DBL and the Coastal Act.
-- END --
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Dave Min, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular
Bill No: AB 2560 Hearing Date: June 25, 2024
Author: | Alvarez | ||
Version: | April 24, 2024 Amended | ||
Urgency: | No | Fiscal: | No |
Consultant: | Katharine Moore | ||
Subject: Density Bonus Law: California Coastal Act of 1976
SUMMARY
This bill would exempt certain developments utilizing Density Bonus Law in the coastal zone from being subject to the Coastal Act, as specified.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Californians value the coast. In an August 2019 survey, the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) reported that 77% of Californians agreed that the “condition of the ocean and beaches is very important to California’s future economy and quality of life.” A subsequent PPIC survey asking the same question reported in July 2023 found that “nearly all” Californians agreed with the same statement.
The California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission) was established by voter initiative in 1972. The Legislature later made the Coastal Commission permanent through the adoption of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Coastal Act) (Public Resources Code (PRC) §§30000 et seq.). The Coastal Commission plans for and regulates the use of land and water in the coastal zone (which excludes the San Francisco Bay).
The Coastal Commission is an independent, quasi-judicial state agency, and its mission statement states that it “is committed to protecting and enhancing California’s coast and ocean for present and future generations.” The Coastal Commission does so “through careful planning and regulation of environmentally sustainable development, rigorous use of science, strong public participation, education, and effective intergovernmental coordination.”
Development activities in the coastal zone generally require a coastal development permit (CDP) issued by the Coastal Commission or by a local government with a local coastal program (LCP) certified by the Coastal Commission. Coastal Act policies are the standards the Coastal Commission uses to determine the permissibility of proposed developments subject to its jurisdiction.
California is facing a severe housing crisis. Housing production has not kept pace with the state’s population growth. Home values and rents in California are among the highest in the nation and the state has one of the highest rates of homelessness. Housing affordability is a major concern. In a sustained effort to increase the supply and affordability of housing, the Legislature has passed and the Governor signed into law multiple bills seeking to spur housing construction, including affordable housing (SB 423 (Wiener, Chapter 778, Statutes of 2023), AB 2011 (Wicks, Chapter 647, Statutes of 2022), SB 9 (Atkins, Chapter 162, Statutes of 2021), AB 1485 (Wicks, Chapter 663, Statutes of 2019), AB 2162 (Chiu, Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018), SB 35 (Wiener, Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017), among others). High labor and construction costs, as well as the current (relatively) high interest rates that make project financing more expensive are among the factors adversely affecting new housing supply.
According to the Senate Housing Committee’s bill analysis, it is extremely difficult for the private market to provide housing units that are affordable to low- and even moderate-income households. Public subsidy is often required to fill the financial gap on affordable units. The state’s Density Bonus Law (DBL) allows public entities to reduce or even eliminate subsidies for a particular project by allowing a developer to include more total units in a project than would otherwise be allowed by the local zoning ordinance, in exchange for affordable units. Allowing more total units permits the developer to spread the cost of the affordable units more broadly over the market-rate units. The idea of DBL is to cover at least some of the financing gap of affordable housing with regulatory incentives, rather than additional subsidy.
Under existing law, if a developer proposes to construct a housing development with a specified percentage of affordable units, the city or county must provide all of the following benefits: a density bonus; incentives or concessions (hereafter referred to as incentives); waiver of any development standards that prevent the developer from utilizing the density bonus or incentives; and reduced parking standards. To qualify for benefits under DBL, a proposed housing development must contain a minimum percentage of affordable housing. If one of these options is met, a developer is entitled to a base increase in density for the project as a whole (referred to as a density bonus) and one regulatory incentive. Under DBL, a developer is entitled to a sliding scale of density bonuses, up to a maximum of 50% of the maximum zoning density and up to four incentives, as specified, depending on the percentage of affordable housing included in the project. At the low end, a developer receives 20% additional density for 5% very low-income units or 20% density for 10% low-income units. The maximum additional density permitted is 50%, in exchange for 15% very low-income units or 24% low-income units. Additionally, specified 100% affordable housing projects may receive up to an 80% density bonus. The developer also negotiates additional incentives, reduced parking, and design standard waivers, with the local government. This helps developers reduce costs while enabling a local government to determine what changes make the most sense for that site and community.
The state’s DBL is subject to the Coastal Act under existing law.
In 1977, the Coastal Act’s policy provisions included the protection of affordable housing. In implementing this policy, the Coastal Commission prohibited the demolition of low- and moderate-income housing for reasons other than health and safety. The Coastal Commission also included density bonuses and reduced parking requirements in their development guidelines to prioritize new affordable housing opportunities. The guidelines were revised in 1979 and 1981 to require in-lieu fees, land dedication, and housing credits in certain circumstances. In addition, the Coastal Commission required that specified percentages of proposed housing units be set aside for low- and moderate-income households. For the four years between 1977 and 1981, the Coastal Commission’s inclusionary housing program resulted in the approval of 5,000 affordable units. During that same time period, the Coastal Commission also prohibited the demolition of more than 1,100 existing affordable housing units, and collected approximately $2 million in in-lieu fees for affordable housing. In 1981, SB 626 (Mello, Chapter 1007, Statutes of 1981) repealed the Coastal Commission’s authority to protect and provide affordable housing.
Existing law, pursuant to the Coastal Act:
- Establishes the Coastal Commission in the California Natural Resources Agency.
- Includes legislative findings and declarations that:
- The coastal zone is a distinct and valuable natural resource of vital and enduring interest to all the people, the permanent protection of the state’s natural and scenic resources is a paramount concern to present and future residents, and existing uses and future developments are carefully planned and developed consistent with the Coastal Act are essential to the economic and social well-of the people of the state (PRC §30001).
- It is important for the Coastal Commission to encourage the protection of existing and the provision of new affordable housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income in the coastal zone. (PRC §30604)
- The basic goals of the state for the coastal zone include to:
- Protect, maintain, and, where feasible, enhance and restore the overall quality of the coastal zone environment and its natural and artificial resources,
- Ensure orderly, balanced utilization and conservation of coastal zone resources taking into account the social and economic needs of the people of the state, and
- Maximize public access to and along the coast and maximize public recreational opportunities in the coastal zone consistent with sound resources conservation principles and constitutionally protected rights of private property owners, among other things (PRC §30001.5).
- Provides for the planning and regulation of development within the coastal zone, as defined.
- A person planning to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone is required to obtain a CDP from the Coastal Commission or local government enforcing a certified LCP (PRC §30600).
- Development means, among other things, the placement or erection of any solid material or structure on land or in water. Structure means building, road, pipe, flume, conduit, and electrical power transmission and distribution lines, among other things (PRC §30106).
- The coastal zone means the coastal land and waters of California, and includes the lands that extend inland generally 1,000 yards from the mean high tide line, as specified, with various exceptions, including the San Francisco Bay (PRC §30103).
- A person planning to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone is required to obtain a CDP from the Coastal Commission or local government enforcing a certified LCP (PRC §30600).
- Requires a local government in the coastal zone to prepare a LCP. Requires the precise content of the LCP to be determined by the local government in full consultation with the Coastal Commission and with full public participation. (PRC §30500). Provides for LCPs to be amended by the local government, but the amendment does not take effect until certified by the Coastal Commission (PRC §30514).
- Prohibits the Coastal Commission from exercising its review authority over any new development within the area to which the certified LCP, or any portion thereof, applies (PRC §30519).
- Authorizes the appeal to the Coastal Commission of only certain developments approved by a local government with a certified LCP. (PRC §30603).
- Requires that the standard of review used by the Coastal Commission for the appeal of certain local jurisdiction-issued CDPs is the applicable certified LCP or public access policies, as provided (PRC §30603).
- Prohibits requiring a LCP from including housing policies and programs. (PRC §30500.1)
- Requires the Coastal Commission to encourage housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income. Does not authorize the Coastal Commission or a local jurisdiction to reduce residential densities below those sought by an applicant if the density sought is within the permitted density established by local zoning and the additional density permitted under DBL, as provided, unless there is a finding based on substantial evidence that the density cannot feasibly be accommodated in conformity with Coastal Act policies or the certified LCP. (PRC §30604)
Existing law further:
- Requires each city and county to adopt an ordinance that specifies how it will implement state DBL. Requires cities and counties to grant a density bonus when an applicant for a housing development --- defined as “five or more units” --- seeks and agrees to construct a project that will contain at least one of the following:
- 10% of the total units of a housing development for lower-income households;
- 5% of the total units of a housing development for very low-income households;
- A senior citizen housing development or mobile home park;
- 10% of the units in a common interest development (CID) for moderate-income households;
- 10% of the total units for transitional foster youth, veterans, or persons experiencing homelessness;
- 20% of the total units for lower-income students in a student housing development; or
- 100% of the units of a housing development for lower-income households, except that 20% of units may be for moderate-income households.
- Requires a city or county to allow an increase in density on a sliding scale from 20% to 80%, depending on the percentage of units affordable to low- and very low-income households, over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the applicable zoning ordinance and land use element of the general plan. Requires the increase in density on a sliding scale for moderate-income for-sale developments from 5% to 50% over the otherwise allowable residential density.
- Provides that the DBL does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the Coastal Act, and requires that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the DBL be permitted in a manner consistent with the Coastal Act.
- Pursuant to SB 35 (Wiener, Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017), allows for specified infill projects with specified percentages of units affordable to lower-income households to be developed in the Coastal Zone under the specified conditions.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would exempt certain developments utilizing Density Bonus Law in the coastal zone from being subject to the Coastal Act, as specified.
Specifically, this bill would:
- Delete the provision that states that nothing in DBL supersedes or in any way alters or lessens the application of the Coastal Act.
- Provide that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, or waivers of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under DBL are permitted, notwithstanding the Coastal Act, as long as the development is not located on a site in the coastal zone that is:
- Between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea, or within 300 feet of the inland extent of any beach or of the mean high tideline of the sea where there is no beach, whichever is the greater distance;
- On tidelands, submerged lands, public trust lands, within 100 feet of any wetland, estuary, or stream, or within 300 feet of the top of the seaward face of any coastal bluff;
- In a sensitive coastal resource area;
- Not subject to a certified LCP;
- Vulnerable to five feet of sea level rise;
- Not zoned for multifamily housing;
- On or within a 100-foot radius of a wetland; or
- On prime agricultural land.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, “The Coastal Zone is one of the most expensive housing markets in the country, rendering it unaffordable for the vast majority of Californians, including service workers who make the coastal economy possible. The ballooning housing costs is a direct result of not building enough housing to meet the demand.”
“As a state program that has proven successful in creating more market rate and affordable housing across the state, Density Bonus Law serves as an important tool to resolve the severe housing shortage in our coastal areas. Density Bonus Law only applies in areas already zoned residential and allows developers to build additional units above the zoned amount in exchange for a certain percentage of income-restricted units. This ensures areas already zoned for housing are building more units than they would have otherwise while also dedicating a portion of them for moderate, low, and very-low income earners. AB 2560 utilizes this important housing tool with additional exemptions for areas with sensitive natural or environmental resources to guarantee we balance the need to build more housing with protecting our coast as a valuable resource.”
Additional comments from supporters included that “years of delay” due to the Coastal Commission could offset potential cost-savings associated with use of the DBL, and that objective compliance standards are needed.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
The Natural Resources Defense Council writes that “the California Coastal Act protects public access to our iconic and public coastline. […] The Coastal Commission plays a critical role in evaluating projects in its jurisdiction and balancing economic development, housing needs, public access, natural resources protection, and the impacts of climate change happening along our coast.”
“AB 2560 would weaken the Coastal Act by exempting from its jurisdiction the application of the Density Bonus Law (“DBL”), and thus removing significant development activity authorized by the DBL from the purview of the California Coastal Commission. Among other impacts, for example, the legislation as currently drafted risks failure to appropriately consider important environmental harms related to sea-level rise and ecosystem preservation. This exemption is not only inconsistent with the Coastal Act, but unnecessary since existing law already requires consistency in the application of the Coastal Act and DBL.”
“A consistent harmonization process throughout the Coastal Zone […] that builds on lessons learned from successful harmonization efforts could reduce financing risks for affordable and mixed-income housing developers and minimize time burdens on the [Coastal] Commission and its staff.”
Santa Cruz County Supervisor Cummings notes that “The Coastal Act has not hindered DBL projects in the City of Santa Cruz, including the coastal zone, and the community will benefit from the low and very low income housing that will be produced as part of these projects. In fact, the Governor’s Department of Housing and Community Development designated Santa Cruz as a Pro Housing jurisdiction due to its high level of project approval.”
Supervisor Cummings continues that “adherence to Coastal Act policies enhances the sustainability and resilience of affordable housing projects by locating them in developed areas with adequate infrastructure and ensuring appropriate environmental and climate mitigations.”
COMMENTS
This bill is a double-referral. This bill was referred to both the Senate Housing Committee and this Committee. The Senate Housing Committee heard this bill on June 18, 2024 where it passed on an 8 – 1 (1 DNV) vote. Elements of the bill under the Senate Housing Committee’s jurisdiction were discussed before that Committee, and are included here for completeness and context only.
Exemption from the Coastal Act. This bill would provide an exemption from the Coastal Act for DBL developments meeting certain criteria. This approach dismisses entirely the important role that the Coastal Commission plays, while guided by its Chapter 3 policies, in ensuring the “orderly, balanced utilization and conservation of coastal zone resources taking into account the social and economic needs of the people of the state,” and maximizing public access to and public recreational opportunities in coastal areas. The criteria proposed do not ensure public access will be maintained or public recreational opportunities afforded in the locations affected. Many Coastal Act Chapter 3 policies could be readily violated despite the criteria. Implicit in the criteria proposed is that a “one size fits all” approach can be instituted in statute applicable to the entire coast line despite the significant variability in coastal resources across the state.
In fact, there is an existing procedure to take local variability into consideration when addressing development in the coastal zone – the LCP. The development of a jurisdiction’s LCP provides the opportunity for a local jurisdiction and the Coastal Commission to assess on as fine a scale as needed how to provide for needed development while also balancing the multiple priorities that the state’s voters endorsed with passage of the Coastal Act in 1972.
Some local jurisdictions – for example, the City of Long Beach and the City of Santa Cruz, have already amended their LCPs to incorporate DBL successfully. These local jurisdictions illustrate that it is possible to harmonize the Coastal Act with DBL as required. It is important to note that when a LCP amendment has been certified by the Coastal Commission, any appeal to the Coastal Commission of a local approval uses the certified LCP as the standard of review. That helps to provide certainty. In addition, the updated LCP can include objective standards that vary between locations within the jurisdiction.
Further, providing additional exemptions from the Coastal Act in the coastal zone sets the stage for additional exemptions in future years for other important state goals in addition to affordable housing. It is important to note that current law specifically prohibits the Coastal Commission from addressing housing in LCPs (as noted above).
In view of this, the Committee may wish to amend the bill as follows:
- Replace the proposed Coastal Act exemption and instead require a DBL development in the coastal zone to obtain a coastal development permit, and to be permitted in a manner consistent with the Coastal Act policies. [Amendment #1]
- Remove the Coastal Act prohibition on LCPs incorporating housing and require local governments to amend their LCPs to harmonize their LCPs with DBL and seek Coastal Commission certification of this amendment by July 1, 2026. Require the Coastal Commission to certify certain LCP amendments to harmonize DBL with the Coastal Act by its de minimis process, as specified. [Amendment #2]
These Committee amendments require local jurisdictions to update their LCPs incorporating DBL to help facilitate the approval of future developments utilizing DBL in the coastal zone, and reinstate Coastal Act jurisdiction over DBL. They also seek to ensure that the Coastal Act addresses housing, and DBL development does not get delayed because a local jurisdiction has not updated its LCP.
Affordable housing and lower cost visitor-serving accommodations in the coastal zone. The Coastal Commission supported AB 500 (Ward, 2021) which would have provided the Coastal Commission with jurisdiction over affordable housing in the coastal zone.
Although the Coastal Commission’s ability to implement affordable housing policies was removed in 1981, its ability to protect and provide lower cost visitor-serving accommodations was retained. Over the years, the Coastal Commission, while ensuring coastal development permits have conformed with the Coastal Act’s lower cost accommodation policies, has denied some coastal development permits that would have eliminated existing lower cost accommodations, and has, in other instances, required lower cost accommodation to be constructed in conjunction with new higher cost hotels.
In addition, through 2021 the Coastal Commission has collected over $24 million in in-lieu fees to mitigate for impacts to lower cost accommodations, and more than $10 million of those fees have been used to provide lower cost accommodations along the state’s coast. The Coastal Commission has collaborated with State Parks, the State Coastal Conservancy, regional agencies, local governments and non-profits on projects funded by the in-lieu fees. These projects include support for the Santa Monica Hostel, the restoration of the Crystal Cove Cottages in Orange County, and nearly 200 new campsites in State Parks. The Coastal Commission has undertaken an effort to document all past in-lieu fee requirements, and millions of dollars of these fees remain unspent.
RHNA compliance in the coastal zone. Data obtained from the Department of Housing and Community Development’s online portal regarding Housing Element compliance shows that 72% of local jurisdictions in the coastal zone are in compliance. This compares well with statewide compliance which is 66%.[1]
Recent Circulate San Diego report. On June 14, 2024, one of the sponsors of this bill released a report titled “A Better Coastal Commission.” The report argues that “the Coastal Commission has resisted, opposed, and delayed the construction of deed-restricted affordable homes that use programs like Density Bonus Law.” The report provides five examples of DBL projects that, in the author’s opinion, have been unreasonably delayed, among other charges.
In response, the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission released the following statement:
Circulate San Diego’s recent report significantly misrepresents the [Coastal Commission’s] track record on affordable housing. The agency has always been and continues to be deeply committed to equity, environmental justice and affordable housing in the coastal zone.”
“Without background or context, the report fails to provide credible evidence to support its conclusions. It cherry picks a handful of cases that omit significant facts to paint a dishonest picture that the Commission denies density bonus projects or doesn’t support affordable housing. The reality is very different. A wealth of data shows that density bonus projects are regularly approved in the coastal zone every year, and the Commission has been a bold leader in environmental justice.”
“The Coastal Commission has and will continue to proactively work with local governments, developers and community groups to find opportunities to increase the availability of affordable housing in the Coastal Zone, protect coastal resources, and ensure that the beach is accessible to all Californians. There priorities are not mutually exclusive.”
The Coastal Commission notes in its rebuttal that of the five DBL projects cited in the report, four were approved and one is pending on appeal. The Coastal Commission cites disruption in state government activities due to the COVID-19 pandemic, including staff turnover, and a failure by the project proponent to engage in tribal consultation, among other reasons for delays associated with appeals. The Coastal Commission also provided over 15 examples of DBL projects in the coastal zone that it approved.
Recent litigation and legislation affecting DBL in the coastal zone. According to the Senate Housing Committee, City of Los Angeles planning officials in 2013 approved a proposed residential development in the Venice area. The project would have involved tearing down a two-story, three-unit apartment building and replacing it with a 15-unit housing development including five duplexes and five single-family homes. Pursuant to DBL, the developer was allowed to exceed the normal density restrictions for that location because two of the units would have been designated for very low-income households. DBL also entitled the developer to other zoning concessions, including a height variance. The City approved the project’s vesting tentative tract map, including findings that the project complied with the City’s General Plan as well as the Venice Specific Plan, and also approved a CDP under the Act.
In September 2013, a neighborhood group appealed the planning department’s development approvals, including the CDP: Kalnel Gardens, LLC v. City of Los Angeles (3 Cal.App.5th 927 (2016)). The residents argued the project violated the Coastal Act because its height, density, setbacks, and other visual and physical characteristics were inconsistent with the existing neighborhood. The Planning Commission found that the development did not conform to the Coastal Act because its size, height, bulk, mass, and scale were incompatible with and harmful to the surrounding neighborhood and because the setbacks were too small. The developer appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council, which denied the appeal.
The developer then brought an administrative mandate action against the City, alleging that it had violated DBL (among others). The trial court found that the density bonus, height and setback variations initially approved for the project were proper under the housing density statutes and other City zoning plans and regulations, including the Commission-approved Venice Land Use Plan. However, the trial court found that the housing density statutes were subordinate to the Coastal Act and that substantial evidence supported the Planning Commission’s findings that the project violated the Coastal Act because it was visually out of step with the surrounding coastal community.
The developer appealed, and the appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that state DBL is subordinate to the Coastal Act and that a project that violates the Coastal Act as the result of a density bonus may be denied on that basis. The court noted that “the Legislature appears to have struck a balance” between the Coastal Act and DBL “by requiring local agencies to grant density bonuses unless doing so would violate the [Coastal Act].” (emphasis added)
In 2018, AB 2797 (Bloom, Chapter 904), further clarified the law in response to Kalnel Gardens, LLC to provide that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under density bonus law shall be accommodated, but in a manner that harmonizes DBL and the portions of the Coastal Act relating to Coastal Resources Planning and Management Policies.
Related legislation
SB 1092 (Blakespear, 2024) would provide for a study providing appeals data for multifamily housing in the coastal zone, as provided. (This bill is pending before the Assembly Local Government Committee.)
SB 1077 (Blakespear, 2024) would provide a CDP exemption from the Coastal Act for accessory dwelling units, as provided, among other things. (This bill is pending before the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee.)
SB 951 (Wiener, 2024) would modify existing rezoning standards to add the requirement that jurisdictions within the coastal zone identify any necessary local coastal program updates, among other provisions. (This bill is pending before the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee.)
SB 689 (Blakespear, 2023) would provide that an application by a local government to convert an existing motorized vehicle travel lane into a dedicated bicycle lane shall not require a traffic study for a CDP or an update to a LCP. This bill also requires that any amendment to a LCP to develop such a lane will be processed with a minimal review. (This bill is before the Assembly Transportation Committee.)
SB 704 (Min, Chapter 292, Statutes of 2023) authorizes the Coastal Commission to seek scientific advice on offshore wind, revises the coastal-dependent industrial use policies in the Coastal Act to bar new or expanded oil and gas development and new or expanded refineries or petrochemical facilities from being considered a coastal-dependent industrial use, and authorizes their permitting if all applicable Coastal Act provisions are complied with, among other things.
SB 272 (Laird, Chapter 384, Statutes of 2023) requires a local government in the coastal zone or within the San Francisco Bay to develop a sea level rise plan as part of either a LCP or a shoreline resiliency plan that includes certain information, including sea level rise adaptation strategies and recommended projects, requires local governments to comply by January 1, 2034, as specified, and prioritizes funding for implementation of sea level rise adaptation strategies in approved plans, among other things.
AB 1287 (Alvarez, Chapter 755, Statutes of 2023) requires a city, county, or city and county to grant additional density and concessions and incentives if an applicant agrees to include additional low or moderate income units on top of the maximum amount of units for lower-, very low-, or moderate-income units.
SB 867 (Laird, 2022) would have required a local government in the coastal zone or within the San Francisco Bay to develop a sea level rise plan as part of either a LCP or a shoreline resiliency plan that includes certain information, including sea level rise adaptation strategies and recommended projects, among other things. (This bill was vetoed by Governor Newsom.)
AB 2593 (Boerner, 2022) would have authorized the Coastal Commission to approve blue carbon projects, as defined. (This bill was held on suspense in the Senate Appropriations Committee.)
AB 500 (Ward, 2021) would have reinstated the Coastal Commission’s affordable housing policies and provided for streamlined permitting for accessory dwelling units by the Coastal Commission, among other things. (This bill died on the inactive file on the Senate floor.)
AB 2797 (Bloom, Chapter 904, Statutes of 2019) requires that density bonus or similar be permitted in a manner that is consistent with DBL and the Coastal Act, as provided.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
AMENDMENT 1
Replace GOV 65915 (m) with the following:
In the coastal zone, this section does not relieve a project relying on the provisions of this section from the requirement to obtain a coastal development permit as required by Section 30600 of the Public Resources Code. Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with this section and does not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources and public coastal access pursuant to Chapter 3 of Division 20 (commencing with Section 30200) of the Public Resources Code.
AMENDMENT 2
Add and amend Public Resources Code 30500.1 to read:
30500.1. No local coastal program shall be required to include housing policies and programs.
(a) It is the intent of the Legislature that this division and state density bonus law (Government Code section 65915) be harmonized so as to achieve the goal of increasing the supply of housing in the coastal zone while also protecting coastal resources and public coastal access.
(b) On or by July 1, 2026, any local government in the coastal zone that has not done so already shall submit to the commission for certification an amendment to the local government’s local coastal program that harmonizes the applicable provisions of the density bonus law and this division pursuant to subdivision (m) of Government Code section 65915.
(c) If a local government submits to the commission for certification an amendment to the local government’s local coastal program that would add a provision stating that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with the policies of the local coastal program to the greatest extent feasible and does not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources and public coastal access, and would make no other changes to the local coastal program, the amendment shall be processed as de minimis pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 30514.
SUPPORT
Circulate San Diego (sponsor)
SPUR (sponsor)
AARP
Abundant Housing LA
American Planning Association, California Chapter
Associated General Contractors
California Apartment Association
California Building Industry Association
California Community Builders
California Housing Partnership
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
California School Employees Association
California YIMBY
City of Long Beach
City of San Diego
CivicWell
Construction Employers’ Association
East Bay YIMBY
East Bay for Everyone
Eden Housing
Greenbelt Alliance
Grow the Richmond
Housing Action Coalition
Housing California
Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County
How to ADU
Inner City Law Center
LeadingAge California
Monterey Bay Economic Partnership
Mountain View YIMBY
Napa-Solano for Everyone
Northern Neighbors
Peninsula for Everyone
People for Housing Orange County
Progress Noe Valley
Public Interest Law Project
San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce
San Francisco YIMBY
Santa Cruz YIMBY
Santa Rosa YIMBY
SLOCo YIMBY
South Bay YIMBY
South Side Forward
Streets For All
Streets for People
Urban Environmentalists
Ventura County YIMBY
Western Center on Law & Poverty
YIMBY Action
YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County
OPPOSITION
Albany Neighbors United
Azul (unless amended)
Ballona Wetlands Institute (unless amended)
California Cities for Local Control
California Coastal Commission
California Coastal Protection Network (unless amended)
California Coastkeeper Alliance (unless amended)
California Contract Cities Association
California Cultural Resources Preservation Alliance, Inc. (unless amended)
California Environmental Voters (unless amended)
California River Watch (unless amended)
California Native Plant Society (unless amended)
Canyon Back Alliance (unless amended)
Center for Biological Diversity (unless amended)
Chiatri de Laguna Farm (unless amended)
Citizens Preserving Venice
City of Carlsbad
City of Coronado
City of Del Mar
City of Hermosa Beach
City of Manhattan Beach
City of Newport Beach
City of Oceanside
City of Port Hueneme
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
City of Redondo Beach
City of Solana Beach
City of Torrance
CleanEarth4Kids.org (unless amended)
Coalition for a Beautiful Los Angeles
Coastal Lands Action Network (unless amended)
Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council
Defend Ballona Wetlands (unless amended)
Defenders of Wildlife (unless amended)
East Area Progressive Democrats
Endangered Habitats League (unless amended)
Environment California (unless amended)
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin (unless amended)
Environmental Center of San Diego (unless amended)
Environmental Defense Center (unless amended)
Forest Unlimited (unless amended)
Friends of Harbors, Beaches, and Parks (unless amended)
Gaviota Coast Conservancy (unless amended)
Green Foothills (unless amended)
Humboldt Waterkeeper (unless amended)
Idle No More SoCal/Venice (unless amended)
Livable California
Livable Ventura (unless amended)
Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust (unless amended)
Mission Street Neighbors
Natural Resources Defense Council (unless amended)
North Coast Rivers Alliance (unless amended)
Orange County Coastkeeper (unless amended)
Our City SF (unless amended)
Pacific Palisades Community Council
Planning and Conservation League (unless amended)
Physicians for Social Responsibility, San Francisco Bay Chapter (unless amended)
Protect Ballona Wetlands (unless amended)
Public Trust Alliance (unless amended)
Puvunga Wetlands Protectors (unless amended)
Resource Renewal Institute (unless amended)
River Otter Ecology Project (unless amended)
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society (unless amended)
Save Lafayette
Save the Sonoma Coast (unless amended)
Sierra Club California (unless amended)
Smith River Alliance (unless amended)
SoCal 350 Climate Action (unless amended)
South Bay Cities Council of Governments
Southern California Watershed Alliance (unless amended)
Surfrider Foundation (unless amended)
The Climate Center (unless amended)
The Honorable Justin Cummings, Ph.D., Supervisor, County of Santa Cruz
Watershed Alliance of Marin (unless amended)
West Sonoma County Alliance (unless amended)
-- END --
Data obtained on June 17, 2024. Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Element Review and Compliance Report. ↑
SENATE COMMITTEE ON HOUSING
Senator Nancy Skinner, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular
Bill No: AB 2560 Hearing Date: 6/18/2024
Author: | Alvarez | ||
Version: | 4/24/2024 | ||
Urgency: | No | Fiscal: | No |
Consultant: | Alison Hughes | ||
SUBJECT: Density Bonus Law: California Coastal Act of 1976
DIGEST: This bill provides that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, or waivers of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under density bonus law (DBL) are permitted, notwithstanding the Coastal Act, as long as the development is not located on specified environmentally sensitive sites in the coastal zone.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- Establishes the California Coastal Commission (CCC) in the California Natural Resources Agency.
- Provides for the planning and regulation of development within the coastal zone.
- A person planning to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone is required to obtain a coastal development permit from the CCC or local government enforcing a local coastal program (LCP) certified by the CCC.
- A LCP cannot be required to include housing programs and policies.
- The coastal zone means the coastal land and waters of California, and includes the lands that extend inland generally 1,000 yards from the mean high tide line, as specified, with various exceptions including the San Francisco Bay.
- Development means, among other things, the placement or erection of any solid material or structure on land or in water.
- Provides that after certification of a local coastal program, an action taken by a local government on a coastal development permit application may be appealed to the CCC only for the following types of developments:
- Developments approved by the local government within a specified distance of the sea.
- Developments approved by the local government in specified tidelands submerged lands, public trust lands, and within 100 feet of a wetland, estuary, or stream, or within 300 feet of the top of the seaward face of a coastal bluff.
- Developments approved by the local government located in a sensitive coastal resource area.
- Any development approved by a coastal county not designated as the principal permitted use under the zoning ordinance or zoning district map.
- A development which constitutes a major public works project or a major energy facility.
- Defines “sensitive coastal resource area” as means those identifiable and geographically bounded land and water areas within the coastal zone of vital interest and sensitivity. “Sensitive coastal resource areas” include the following:
- Special marine and land habitat areas, wetlands, lagoons, and estuaries as mapped and designated in Part 4 of the coastal plan.
- Areas possessing significant recreational value.
- Highly scenic areas.
- Archaeological sites referenced in the California Coastline and Recreation Plan or as designated by the State Historic Preservation Officer.
- Special communities or neighborhoods, which are significant visitor destination areas.
- Areas that provide existing coastal housing or recreational opportunities for low- and moderate-income persons.
- Areas where divisions of land could substantially impair or restrict coastal access.
- Requires each city and county to adopt an ordinance that specifies how it will implement state DBL. Requires cities and counties to grant a density bonus when an applicant for a housing development --- defined as “five or more units” --- seeks and agrees to construct a project that will contain at least one of the following:
- 10% of the total units of a housing development for lower-income households;
- 5% of the total units of a housing development for very low-income households;
- A senior citizen housing development or mobile home park;
- 10% of the units in a common interest development (CID) for moderate-income households;
- 10% of the total units for transitional foster youth, veterans, or persons experiencing homelessness;
- 20% of the total units for lower-income students in a student housing development; or
- 100% of the units of a housing development for lower-income households, except that 20% of units may be for moderate-income households.
- Requires a city or county to allow an increase in density on a sliding scale from 20% to 80%, depending on the percentage of units affordable to low- and very low-income households, over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the applicable zoning ordinance and land use element of the general plan. Requires the increase in density on a sliding scale for moderate-income for-sale developments from 5% to 50% over the otherwise allowable residential density.
- Provides that the DBL does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the Coastal Act, and requires that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the DBL be permitted in a manner consistent with the Coastal Act.
- Pursuant to SB 35 (Wiener, Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017), allows for specified infill projects with specified percentages of units affordable to lower-income households to be developed in the Coastal Zone under the specified conditions.
This bill:
- Deletes the provision that states that nothing in DBL supersedes or in any way alters or lessens the application of the Coastal Act of 1976 (the Coastal Act) and instead applies DBL in the coastal zone.
- Provides that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, or waivers of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under DBL are permitted, notwithstanding the Coastal Act, as long as the development is not located on a site in the Coastal Zone that is:
- Between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea, or within 300 feet of the inland extent of any beach or of the mean high tideline of the sea where there is no beach, whichever is the greater distance;
- On tidelands, submerged lands, public trust lands, within 100 feet of any wetland, estuary, or stream, or within 300 feet of the top of the seaward face of any coastal bluff;
- In a sensitive coastal resource area;
- Not subject to a certified local coastal program;
- Vulnerable to five feet of sea level rise;
- Not zoned for multifamily housing;
- On or within a 100-foot radius of a wetland; or
- On prime agricultural land.
COMMENTS:
- Author’s statement. “The Coastal Zone is one of the most expensive housing markets in the country, rendering it unaffordable for the vast majority of Californians, including service workers who make the coastal economy possible. The ballooning housing costs is a direct result of not building enough housing to meet the demand. As a state program that has proven successful in creating more market rate and affordable housing across the state, Density Bonus Law serves as an important tool to resolve the severe housing shortage in our coastal areas. Density Bonus Law only applies in areas already zoned residential and allows developers to build additional units above the zoned amount in exchange for a certain percentage of income-restricted units. This ensures areas already zoned for housing are building more units than they would have otherwise while also dedicating a portion of them for moderate, low, and very-low income earners. AB 2560 utilizes this important housing tool with additional exemptions for areas with sensitive natural or environmental resources to guarantee we balance the need to build more housing with protecting our coast as a valuable resource.”
- California’s housing and homelessness crisis. California has the largest concentration of severely unaffordable housing markets in the nation; the typical home value in California reached $747,400 in September 2023, a one percent decrease from the same month last year, but still far exceeding the national typical home value of $349,500. The lack of supply is the primary factor underlying California’s housing crunch. The state Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) estimates that California needs to build 220,000 new homes a year to keep up with current population growth.
To keep up with demand, HCD estimates that California must plan for the development of more than 2.5 million homes over the next eight years, and no less than one million of those homes must meet the needs of lower-income households (more than 640,000 very low-income and 385,000 low-income units are needed). Additionally, the lack of affordable housing is the single biggest contributor to homelessness. This is because as housing costs continue to rise, rent becomes less affordable for lower-income households, who are forced to live beyond their means (paying more than 30% of income on housing costs) or are pushed out of their homes, leading to rapid increases in homelessness.
- Housing permitting generally. Cities and counties enact zoning ordinances to implement their general plans. Zoning determines the type of housing that can be built throughout a jurisdiction. Before building new housing, housing developers must obtain one or more permits from local planning departments and must also obtain approval from local planning commissions, city councils, and/or county board of supervisors. Most housing projects that require discretionary review and approval are subject to review under CEQA, while projects permitted ministerially generally are not. Development opponents can appeal many individual decisions related to the CEQA review to the planning commission and to the city council or board of supervisors. Finally, litigation over approvals is also common. The building industry points to environmental reviews and other permitting hurdles as a hindrance to housing development. They argue that the high cost of building and delays in the approval process reduce builders’ incentives to develop housing.
- Developing in the coastal zone. The Coastal Act outlines standards for development in the coastal zone including specific policies addressing shoreline public access, recreation, protection of habitats, development design, among other things. Local governments within the coastal zone can adopt a local coastal plan (LCP). LCPs generally contain the rules for development and protection of coastal resources and basic planning tools used by the local government. Each LCP contains a land use plan and implementing measures (such as zoning and maps), some of which are subjective standards (such as requirements around design or community character), some of which are objective standards.
In order for the local government to have primary jurisdiction over development permitting in the coastal zone, however, the LCP must be approved by the California Coastal Commission (CCC). Once the LCP is approved by the CCC, the local government assumes permitting authority over local developments, including housing, and the LCP is considered to be an extension of the Coastal Act. About 73% of local jurisdictions in the coastal zone have approved LCPs. In the remaining jurisdictions (i.e., those that do not have an approved LCP), coastal development permits (CDPs) are issued by the CCC directly. Additionally, permitting decisions made by a local government with an approved LCP can be appealed directly to the CCC under specified circumstances. In reviewing the permit, CCC generally must defer to those standards outlined in the LCP.
- DBL: An affordable housing creator without subsidies. Given California’s high land and construction costs for housing, it is extremely difficult for the private market to provide housing units that are affordable to low- and even moderate-income households. Public subsidy is often required to fill the financial gap on affordable units. DBL allows public entities to reduce or even eliminate subsidies for a particular project by allowing a developer to include more total units in a project than would otherwise be allowed by the local zoning ordinance, in exchange for affordable units. Allowing more total units permits the developer to spread the cost of the affordable units more broadly over the market-rate units. The idea of DBL is to cover at least some of the financing gap of affordable housing with regulatory incentives, rather than additional subsidy.
Under existing law, if a developer proposes to construct a housing development with a specified percentage of affordable units, the city or county must provide all of the following benefits: a density bonus; incentives or concessions (hereafter referred to as incentives); waiver of any development standards that prevent the developer from utilizing the density bonus or incentives; and reduced parking standards. To qualify for benefits under DBL, a proposed housing development must contain a minimum percentage of affordable housing. If one of these options is met, a developer is entitled to a base increase in density for the project as a whole (referred to as a density bonus) and one regulatory incentive. Under DBL, a developer is entitled to a sliding scale of density bonuses, up to a maximum of 50% of the maximum zoning density and up to four incentives, as specified, depending on the percentage of affordable housing included in the project. At the low end, a developer receives 20% additional density for 5% very low-income units or 20% density for 10% low-income units. The maximum additional density permitted is 50%, in exchange for 15% very low-income units or 24% low-income units. Additionally, specified 100% affordable housing projects may receive up to an 80% density bonus. The developer also negotiates additional incentives, reduced parking, and design standard waivers, with the local government. This helps developers reduce costs while enabling a local government to determine what changes make the most sense for that site and community.
According to supporters of this bill, DBL policies in jurisdictions who have embraced its provisions have found substantial use by housing developers, and lead to the production of many deed-restricted affordable homes. DBL also tends to be used in high opportunity areas and near public transit, which helps reverse racist land use practices and further the states climate goals.
- History of DBL in the Coastal Zone. Two key pieces of legislation passed in the early 2000s informed more recent interactions between DBL and the Coastal Act.
- AB 1866 (Wright, Chapter 1062, Statutes of 2002), made numerous changes to state DBL and state law relating to second units. One of the provisions of DBL added by AB 1866 is that the granting of a concession or incentive shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require an LCP amendment. It also added the section of law this bill seeks to amend—Government Code Section 65915(m) —providing that DBL does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the Act.
AB 1866 was opposed by the Commission until August 6, 2002, shortly after amendments taken in the Senate added, among other provisions, what is now Government Code Section 65915(m). Prior to that amendment, in the Commission's opposition letter to the Senate Housing Committee, it stated “…[t]he Commission has historically taken the position that housing density bonus ordinances need to be consistent with other LCP and Coastal Act policies, and therefore should be formally amended into any applicable LCP.” The Commission's August 7, 2002 letter to the author of AB 1866 states that the Commission voted to remove its opposition and take a neutral position on the bill because “the most recent amendments clarify that nothing in the bill is meant to supersede or lessen the application of the Coastal Act policies…” The Assembly Concurrence in Senate Amendments analysis, which appears to be the only legislative analysis of AB 1866 that directly addresses this amendment, describes the amendment as "[p]rovid[ing] that the requirements of the California Coastal Act shall not be superseded by any of the provisions in this measure.”
- SB 619 (Ducheny, Chapter 793, Statutes of 2003), made several changes to laws relating to the development of affordable housing, including requiring the Commission to encourage housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households. It also provided that the Commission may not take measures that reduce the density of a housing project below the level allowed by local zoning ordinances and state DBL unless the Commission makes a finding that there is no feasible method to accommodate the density without creating a significant adverse impact on coastal resources. This Committee's analysis noted that the “author asserts that in spite of overwhelming need, many communities continue to resist new housing development, especially multifamily housing and higher density housing.” According to the Senate Natural Resources Committee analysis, “California coast cities, with the current rate of growth, will have to support more housing. From an environmental perspective, coastal areas should consider increasing housing density and affordability…Affordable housing projects developed in coastal areas, as long as they are consistent with LCPs, are an environmental bonus, not a detriment.”
- Recent litigation and legislation affecting DBL in the coastal zone. In 2013, City of Los Angeles planning officials approved a proposed residential development in the Venice area. The project would have involved tearing down a two-story, three-unit apartment building and replacing it with a 15-unit housing development including five duplexes and five single-family homes. Pursuant to DBL, the developer was allowed to exceed the normal density restrictions for that location because two of the units would have been designated for very low-income households. DBL also entitled the developer to other zoning concessions, including a height variance. The City approved the project’s vesting tentative tract map, including findings that the project complied with the City’s General Plan as well as the Venice Specific Plan, and also approved a CDP under the Act.
In September 2013, a neighborhood group appealed the planning department’s development approvals, including the CDP: Kalnel Gardens, LLC v. City of Los Angeles (3 Cal.App.5th 927 (2016)). The residents argued the project violated the Act because its height, density, setbacks, and other visual and physical characteristics were inconsistent with the existing neighborhood. The Planning Commission found that the development did not conform to the Act because its size, height, bulk, mass, and scale were incompatible with and harmful to the surrounding neighborhood and because the setbacks were too small. The developer appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council, which denied the appeal.
The developer then brought an administrative mandate action against the City, alleging that it had violated DBL (among others). The trial court found that the density bonus, height and setback variations initially approved for the project were proper under the housing density statutes and other City zoning plans and regulations, including the Commission-approved Venice Land Use Plan. However, the trial court found that the housing density statutes were subordinate to the Act and that substantial evidence supported the Planning Commission’s findings that the project violated the Act because it was visually out of step with the surrounding coastal community.
The developer appealed, and the appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that that state DBL is subordinate to the Act and that a project that violates the Act as the result of a density bonus may be denied on that basis. The court noted that “the Legislature appears to have struck a balance” between the Act and DBL “by requiring local agencies to grant density bonuses unless doing so would violate the [Act].” (emphasis added)
In 2018, AB 2797 (Bloom, Chapter 904), further clarified the law in response to Kalnel Gardens, LLC to provide that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under density bonus law shall be accommodated, but in a manner that harmonizes DBL and the portions of the Act relating to Coastal Resources Planning and Management Policies.
- Recent land use reforms that facilitate more housing supply. A variety of causes have contributed to the lack of housing production, including: (a) restrictive zoning ordinances such as single family zoning and restrictions on development intensity, (b) local permitting processes that provide multiple avenues to stop a project, and (c) fiscal incentives associated with development decisions. These issues pose challenges to constructing multifamily market-rate and affordable housing developments alike. Given the complexities of developing housing in California, and in particular multifamily housing, the Legislature and Governor have passed over 150 bills since 2016 in an effort to facilitate more housing production. One such set of reforms have included expediting and simplifying the approval process at the pre-entitlement, entitlement, and post-entitlement phases, including creating multiple pathways for by-right approvals for multifamily housing developments.
Clear timelines for affordable housing permitting is particularly critical as affordable developers often require between eight and 12 different sources of funding to make an affordable housing development pencil financially, and any delays risk the loss of available public funds.
- Impacts of land use decisions on affordable housing in the coastal zone. California’s high—and rising—land costs necessitate dense housing construction for a project to be financially viable and for the housing to ultimately be affordable to lower-income households. However, a 2016 Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) analysis found that the housing density of a typical neighborhood in California’s coastal metropolitan areas increased only by four percent during the 2000s. The LAO also compared California’s coastal areas to similar metropolitan areas across the country and found that new housing constructed during the 2000s in California’s coastal cities was nearly 30% less dense on average than new housing in other comparable cities—10 units/acre in California compared to 14 units/acre in the other metropolitan areas.
The consequence of these land use restrictions is that housing production has not kept up with the increase in population in many parts of California, and especially in the coastal zone. Land use restrictions that limit density also have various negative consequences, such as increased displacement and segregation, as well as lower economic growth. These impacts are seen directly through the demographics of those living in the coastal zone, as California coastal communities are on average wealthier and less diverse than the state as a whole. Within 1km of coastal access, there are roughly 25% more white people, while at the same time there are 52% fewer Hispanic or Latino people, 60% fewer Black or African American people, 57% fewer American Indians, and 18% fewer households below the poverty line as compared to their population predicted by a proportionate distribution. Coastal residents earn on average 20% more than the state average income, and on average, people from low-income communities and communities of color must travel further to access the social, economic, scenic, and health benefits of the coast.
Given this correlation, increasing housing equity – i.e., housing density – in the coastal zone is essential to fulfilling the Coastal Act’s goal of maximizing public access to and along the coast, as well as the State’s goal of advancing environmental justice and equality.
- What’s the bottom line? As noted above in Comment 5, DBL was created and recently reformed as a means to provide regulatory flexibility to market rate developers to encourage the construction of below market rate units without government subsidies. However, presently, in the coastal zone – an area disproportionately impacted by the housing crisis and prone to exclusionary land use decisions that limit multifamily housing developments – developers continue to struggle to utilize the benefits of density bonus to deliver critically needed housing units.
According to the author, the benefits of DBL have been significantly reduced due to the California Coastal Commission’s interpretation of the “harmonization” between DBL and the Act. For example, one project was challenged to the Coastal Commission for using incentives to exceed local height requirements. Staff determined the project to be “not consistent with the community character of the surrounding area” because the project was 41 feet, which was “significantly larger than the surrounding residences,” which did not exceed 30 feet. One project faced “substantial issue” based on eligibility for reductions in parking to meet coastal access requirements under the Act.
Given the high costs of developing in the coastal zone and zoning limitations that are prevalent in the coastal zone, the limiting the utility of DBL in the coastal zone is a lost opportunity to facilitate the construction of mixed income projects by reducing costs through parking maximums and modest height increases.
This bill would amend DBL to instead apply DBL in the Coastal Zone notwithstanding the Coastal Act. Instead, a developer would be entitled to the benefits of density bonus law, including concessions and incentives, density bonuses, and parking limitations unless the development is located on a site that is with a certain distance of the sea; within specified environmentally sensitive areas or sensitive coastal resource areas; an area not subject to a certified local coastal program; vulnerable to five feet of sea level rise. Additionally, the project must be on a site zoned for multifamily housing (i.e., not single family).
There is precedent for allowing multifamily housing projects on specified sites in the coastal zone, as these provisions are substantially similar to language signed into law on January 1, 2024 by SB 423 (Wiener, Chapter 778, Statutes of 2024); that bill expanded SB 35 (Wiener) by allowing for by-right development on sites in the coastal zone that local jurisdictions have identified, through their zoning, as appropriate for housing. Key differences between the application of SB 423 in the coastal zone and this bill are that this bill also does not apply in areas designated by a local government to be a sensitive coastal resource area nor does it apply to areas with just a certified land use plan, rather than a local coastal plan.
As noted above, certainty in the permitting process can be the key to success for a housing developer, and in particular for affordable housing development. Conversely, an uncertain timeline or risk of delays can mean increased costs or even the loss of state funding for affordable housing projects. In other words, delays – or even threats of delays – can kill projects entirely. According to the author and sponsors, uncertainty in this process has presented challenges for developers seeking to build denser, multifamily housing projects in the coastal zone. The committee has heard from over a dozen housing developers – both for and non-profits alike – expressing longstanding challenges developing in the coastal zone. Some of the reasons include high land costs, few sites zoned for multifamily development, local opposition, and challenges with local approval processes; others, however, include the mere risk of project appeals to the CCC, delays in appellate review at the CCC, or in circumstances in which the CCC hold primary jurisdiction, the need to obtain an initial coastal development permit. As noted above, developers of 100% affordable housing projects are particularly risk adverse given the myriad of funding sources and regulatory processes they have to navigate to make a project “pencil-out.” Several affordable housing developers have communicated to the Committee that they do not even attempt to develop in the coastal zone given the uncertainty in timelines for development approvals and application of DBL.
- Let’s be clear. The intent of the author and the text of the bill provide that density bonuses, concessions, etc., “shall be permitted” notwithstanding the Coastal Act. In other words, the bill does not eliminate the permitting process. This is because a density bonus project in the coastal zone would still require a coastal development permit (CDP) so long as a permit is consistent with what the applicant is entitled to under DBL. Additionally, LCP requirements that are outside the scope of the requested density bonus, concessions, etc. could still be enforced. The CCC and many environmental groups who oppose this bill, however, state that the bill text allows for density bonus projects in the coastal zone to be exempt from the CDP process. Moving forward, the author may wish to clarify the intent of the bill, which is to require a CDP for density bonus projects in the coastal zone pursuant to the parameters under this bill, so long as the authorization of the permit does not deny or reduce any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions or development standards, or parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under this section.
- If at first you don’t succeed. In 2023, AB 1287 (Alvarez, Chapter 755), was approved by the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee with language that would apply DBL to the Coastal Act without limitation. AB 1287 was subsequently amended in the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources to remove that provision. The bill was signed into law without that provision.
- Opposition. In addition to the concerns noted above in Comment 11, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) and local governments are opposed to the bill, stating that environmentally sensitive habitat areas do not receive adequate protections under the bill. The CCC provides that the solution to the housing crisis is to “incorporate affirmative policies into LCPs designed to facilitate housing production.” They allege that this bill “could be used to build in coastal areas projected to experience significant sea level rise, as well as in locations containing sensitive habitat, public coastal accessways, or other resources that would otherwise be addressed through Coastal Act compliance.” A coalition of state and national environmental groups are opposed unless amended for similar reasons to the CCC, but in discussions with the committee, note they would rather this bill seek an alternative method of encouraging housing.
- Double referral. This bill was also referred to the Natural Resources and Water Committee.
Related Legislation:
SB 423 (Wiener, Chapter, Statutes of 2023) — expanded upon SB 35 (Wiener) by allowing for by-right development in certain portions the coastal zone on sites that local jurisdictions have identified, through their zoning, as appropriate for housing.
AB 1287 (Alvarez, Chapter 755, Statutes of 2023) — Required a city, county, or city and county to grant additional density and concessions and incentives if an applicant agrees to include additional low or moderate income units on top of the maximum amount of units for lower-, very low-, or moderate-income units.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on Wednesday,
June 12, 2024.)
SUPPORT:
California Housing Partnership Corporation
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, INC.
California School Employees Association
East Bay YIMBY
Grow the Richmond
Housing Action Coalition
Housing California
How to ADU
Mountain View YIMBY
Napa-Solano for Everyone
Northern Neighbors
Peninsula for Everyone
People for Housing Orange County
Progress Noe Valley
Public Interest Law Project
San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce
San Francisco YIMBY
San Luis Obispo YIMBY
Santa Cruz YIMBY
Santa Rosa YIMBY
South Bay YIMBY
Southside Forward
Streets for People
Urban Environmentalists
Ventura County YIMBY
Western Center on Law and Poverty
YIMBY Action
OPPOSITION:
Azul
California Coastal Commission
California Coastal Protection Network
California Coastkeeper Alliance
California Contract Cities Association
California Cultural Resources Preservation Alliance, INC.
California Environmental Voters
California Native Plant Society
California River Watch
Canyon Back Alliance
Center for Biological Diversity
Chiatri De Laguna Farm
City of Carlsbad
City of Del Mar
City of Hermosa Beach
City of Manhattan Beach
City of Oceanside
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
City of Redondo Beach
City of Solana Beach
City of Torrance
Cleanearth4kids.org
Defenders of Wildlife
Endangered Habitats League
Environment California
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin (EAC)
Environmental Center of San Diego
Environmental Defense Center
Forest Unlimited
Friends of Harbors, Beaches and Parks
Gaviota Coast Conservancy
Green Foothills
Humboldt Waterkeeper
Idle No More SoCal
Livable California
Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust
Natural Resources Defense Council
North Coast Rivers Alliance
Orange County Coastkeeper
Our City SF
Pacific Palisades Community Council
Planning and Conservation League
Protect Ballona Wetlands
Puvunga Wetlands Protectors
Resource Renewal Institute
San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
Save Lafayette
Save the Sonoma Coast
Smith River Alliance
SoCal 350 Climate Action
Southern California Watershed Alliance
Surfrider Foundation
The Climate Center
Watershed Alliance of Marin
West Sonoma County Alliance
-- END --
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 2560
Author:(Alvarez)
As Amended April 22, 2024
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Applies Density Bonus Law (DBL) to the Coastal Zone.
Major Provisions
- Deletes the provision that states that nothing in DBL supersedes or in any way alters or lessens the application of the Coastal Act of 1976 (the Coastal Act).
- Provides that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, or waivers of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under DBL are permitted, notwithstanding the Coastal Act, as long as the development is not located on a site in the Coastal Zone that is:
- Between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea, or within 300 feet of the inland extent of any beach or of the mean high tideline of the sea where there is no beach, whichever is the greater distance;
- On tidelands, submerged lands, public trust lands, within 100 feet of any wetland, estuary, or stream, or within 300 feet of the top of the seaward face of any coastal bluff;
- In a sensitive coastal resource area;
- Not subject to a certified local coastal program;
- Vulnerable to five feet of sea level rise;
- Not zoned for multifamily housing;
- On or within a 100-foot radius of a wetland; or
- On prime agricultural land.
COMMENTS
Density Bonus Law: Density Bonus Law (DBL) was originally enacted in 1979 as an incentive to encourage housing developers to produce affordable units at below market rates. In return for including a certain percentage of deed-restricted affordable units, housing developers receive the ability to add additional units for their project above the jurisdiction's allowable zoned density for the site (thus the term "density bonus").
Additionally, DBL specifies concessions and incentives around development standards (e.g., architectural, height, setback requirements) and reductions in vehicle parking requirements that projects can receive to offset the cost of building affordable units. Both mixed-income and 100% affordable housing projects can use these provisions. While all local governments are required to adopt a density bonus ordinance, the failure to do so does not exempt a local government from complying with DBL. DBL is a critical tool when it comes to reducing the price of affordable housing development and incentivizing the construction of high density housing.
Development in the Coastal Zone: In 1976, the Legislature enacted the Coastal Act (Act), mandating that coastal counties manage the conservation and development of coastal resources through a comprehensive planning and regulatory program. The area that constitutes the Coastal Zone is defined by California's Public Resources Code. In significant coastal estuarine, habitat, and recreational areas, the Coastal Zone extends inland to the first major ridgeline paralleling the sea or five miles from the mean high tide line of the sea, whichever is less. In developed urban areas, the Coastal Zone generally extends inland less than 1,000 yards. The Coastal Zone does not include the area of jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, nor any area contiguous thereto, including any river, stream, tributary, creek, or flood control or drainage channel flowing into such area.
In partnership with coastal cities and counties, the California Coastal Commission (Commission) plans and regulates the use of land and water in the Coastal Zone. Development activities in the Coastal Zone generally require a special Coastal Development Permit (CDP) from either the Commission or the local government with a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP). 85% of the Coastal Zone is currently governed by LCPs drafted by cities and counties, and certified by the Commission. In these certified jurisdictions, local governments issue CDPs with detailed planning and design standards. There are 14 jurisdictions without LCPs – also known as "uncertified" jurisdictions – where the Commission is still the permitting authority for CDPs. One exception to this is the City of Los Angeles, which implements the Act directly by issuing CDPs. However, every city-issued CDP can be appealed to the Commission.
California's coast is a vital natural resource and delicately balanced ecosystem, as well as an important economic and social resource for the state. However, not all of the Coastal Zone consists of natural resources; much of it encompasses developed urban areas, including affluent, high-opportunity coastal communities. SB 423 (Wiener), Chapter 778, Statutes of 2023 allowed for by-right development in the Coastal Zone on sites identified by local governments as appropriate for housing. The sites still need to meet all of the objective environmental criteria in SB 423, including that the site cannot be within a wetland, flood hazard area, protected habitat, or conservation easement.
Costs Associated with Coastal Development: It is expensive to build housing in California, but even more so to build housing in the Coastal Zone. The added layers of review when developing in the Coastal Zone adds both time and cost to a project. According to a 2015 analysis by the Legislative Analyst's Office, "far less housing has been built in California's coastal areas than people demand. As a result, households bid up the cost of housing in coastal regions. In addition, some of the unmet demand to live in coastal areas spills over into inland California, driving up prices there too. Second, land in California's coastal areas is expensive. Homebuilders typically respond to high land costs by building more housing units on each plot of land they develop, effectively spreading the high land costs among more units. In California's coastal metros, however, this response has been limited, meaning higher land costs have translated more directly into higher housing costs. Finally, builders' costs—for labor, required building materials, and government fees—are higher in California than in other states. While these higher building costs contribute to higher prices throughout the state, building costs appear to play a smaller role in explaining high housing costs in coastal areas."
The Department on Housing and Community Development (HCD) affirms that the affordable housing shortfall is more acute in the Coastal Zone. HCD finds that homes in coastal areas cost 30% more than homes that are not, and those living in the Coastal Zone face higher cost burden due to lack of affordable housing. Cost-burdened Californians must make hard decisions about paying for housing at the expense of other daily needs. According to HCD, the Coastal Act raises the price and rental cost of multifamily housing in the Coastal Zone by 13-21%.
Kalnel Gardens, LLC v. City of Los Angeles (3 Cal.App.5th 927 (2016)): In 2013, City of Los Angeles planning officials approved a proposed 15-unit residential development in the Venice area. Pursuant to DBL, the developer was allowed to exceed the typical density restrictions for that location, and benefitted from other zoning concessions. The local planning department approved the project's vesting tentative tract map, and also approved a CDP under the Act.
A neighborhood group appealed the planning department's development approvals, including the CDP. The residents argued the project violated the Act because its height, density, setbacks, and other visual and physical characteristics were inconsistent with the existing neighborhood. The Planning Commission found that the development did not conform to the Act because its size, height, bulk, mass, and scale were incompatible with and harmful to the surrounding neighborhood and because the setbacks were too small. The developer appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council, which denied the appeal.
The developer then brought an administrative mandate action against the City, alleging that it had violated, among other state laws, DBL. The trial court found that the housing density statutes were subordinate to the Act and that substantial evidence supported the Planning Commission's findings that the project violated the Act because it was visually out of step with the surrounding coastal community. The developer appealed, and the appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that that DBL is subordinate to the Act and that a project that violates the Act as the result of density bonus may be denied on that basis.
Related Legislation:
AB 1287 (Alvarez), Chapter 755, Statutes of 2023, was approved by the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee with language that would apply DBL to the Coastal Act without limitation. AB 1287 was subsequently amended in the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources to remove that provision.
SB 423 (Wiener), Chapter 778, Statutes of 2023 expanded upon SB 35 (Wiener), Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017, by allowing for by-right development in certain portions the Coastal Zone on sites that local jurisdictions have identified, through their zoning, as appropriate for housing.
AB 2797 (Bloom), Chapter 904, Statutes of 2018, clarified the law in response to Kalnel Gardens, LLC to provide that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under DBL shall be accommodated in a manner that harmonizes DBL and the portions of the Act relating to Coastal Resources Planning and Management Policies.
SB 619 (Ducheny), Chapter 793, Statutes of 2003, required, among other provisions, the Coastal Commission to encourage housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households. It also provided that the Commission may not take measures that reduce the density of a housing project below the level allowed by local zoning ordinances and DBL unless the Commission makes a finding that there is no feasible method to accommodate the density without creating a significant adverse impact on coastal resources.
AB 1866 (Wright), Chapter 1062, Statutes of 2002, made numerous changes to DBL and state law relating to second units. One of the provisions of DBL added by AB 1866 is that the granting of a concession or incentive shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require an LCP amendment.
According to the Author
"The Coastal Zone is one of the most expensive housing markets in the country, rendering it unaffordable for the vast majority of Californians, including service workers who make the coastal economy possible. The ballooning housing costs is a direct result of not building enough housing to meet the demand.
As a state program that has proven successful in creating more market rate and affordable housing across the state, Density Bonus Law serves as an important tool to resolve the severe housing shortage in our coastal areas. Density Bonus Law only applies in areas already zoned residential and allows developers to build additional units above the zoned amount in exchange for a certain percentage of income-restricted units. This ensures areas already zoned for housing are building more units than they would have otherwise while also dedicating a portion of them for moderate, low, and very-low income earners."
Arguments in Support
According to the California Home Building Alliance, which includes SPUR – one of the bill's co-sponsors, [this bill] "is a matter of fundamental fairness and equity. Over the past several years, the State Legislature has passed many measures to address our housing affordability and availability crisis by facilitating housing production. Unfortunately, most of these laws have exempted the Coastal Zone altogether. There is now a growing consensus in the Legislature and among advocates that this is not equitable as these coastal communities are some of the most expensive, exclusive and segregated in the state and the local workforce is suffering greatly.
It is important to note that the Coastal Zone includes large swaths of urbanized and already developed interior areas far inland from the coastline and beaches where new housing is needed and would be appropriate including in San Diego, Santa Monica, Los Angeles, Santa Cruz, San Francisco, Arcata and Eureka, among others. State density bonus law was first enacted by the Legislature several decades ago to ensure that affordable and mixed-income housing developments are feasible even in the highest-cost areas of our state. Furthermore, these bonuses are only available on sites that have already been zoned for residential use by the local jurisdiction. The legislation in no way endangers coastal resources but rather will provide greater access to much-needed housing in the coastal area."
Arguments in Opposition
According to the California Cities for Local Control, "[This bill] significantly weakens the environmental protections heretofore provided by the coastal act. The Legislature's burgeoning assault on coastal zone protections, especially in an era when sea level rise is inevitable, defies reason."
FISCAL COMMENTS
None.
VOTES
ASM HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: 8-0-1
YES: Ward, Joe Patterson, Grayson, Kalra, Lee, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Wilson
ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez
ASM NATURAL RESOURCES: 7-1-3
YES: Bryan, Flora, Friedman, Hoover, Joe Patterson, Wicks, Wood
NO: Muratsuchi
ABS, ABST OR NV: Bauer-Kahan, Kalra, Pellerin
UPDATED
VERSION: April 22, 2024
CONSULTANT: Dori Ganetsos / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085 FN: 0002779
Date of Hearing: April 22, 2024
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Isaac G. Bryan, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2560 (
Author:Alvarez) – As Introduced Ver:February 14, 2024
SUBJECT: Density Bonus Law: California Coastal Act of 1976
SUMMARY: Provides that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the Density Bonus Law (DBL) be permitted notwithstanding the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Coastal Act).
EXISTING LAW:
- States the intent of the Legislature to address the holding and dicta in Kalnel Gardens, LLC v. City of Los Angeles (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 927 regarding the relationship between the DBL and the Coastal Act of 1976. The Legislature’s intent is that the two statutes be harmonized so as to achieve the goal of increasing the supply of affordable housing in the coastal zone while also protecting coastal resources and coastal access.
- Pursuant to the DBL:
- Requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development within the city or county with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct specified percentages of units for lower income households or very low income households, and meets other requirements. (Government Code (Gov Code) 65915 (b)(1))
- Provides that the DBL does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the Coastal Act, and requires that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the DBL be permitted in a manner consistent with the Coastal Act. (Gov Code 65915 (m))
- Requires the review of a housing element for jurisdictions located within a coastal zone to provide an additional analysis of units constructed, demolished and replaced within three miles of a coastal zone to ensure the affordable housing stock with the coastal zone is being protected and provided. (Gov Code 65588 (d))
- Pursuant to the Coastal Act:
- Regulates development in the coastal zone and requires a new development to comply with specified requirements. (Public Resources Code (PRC) 30000)
- Requires any person wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, in addition to obtaining any other permit required by law from any local government or from any state, regional, or local agency, to obtain a coastal development permit. (PRC 30600)
- Defines “development” to mean, among other things, the placement or erection of any solid material or structure on land or in water. “Structure” includes, but is not limited to, any building, road, pipe, flume, conduit, siphon, aqueduct, telephone line, and electrical power transmission and distribution line. (PRC 30106)
- Provides that the scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas must be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. Permitted development must be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, to minimize the alteration of natural land forms, to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas. New development in highly scenic areas such as those designated in the California Coastline Preservation and Recreation Plan prepared by the Department of Parks and Recreation and by local government must be subordinate to the character of its setting. (PRC 30251)
- Requires all new development to minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard; assure stability and structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding area or in any way require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs; be consistent with requirements imposed by an air pollution control district or the State Air Resources Board as to each particular development; minimize energy consumption and vehicle miles traveled; and, where appropriate, protect special communities and neighborhoods that, because of their unique characteristics, are popular visitor destination points for recreational uses. (PRC 30253 (f))
- Provides that the Legislature finds and declares that it is important for the California Coastal Commission (Commission) to encourage the protection of existing and the provision of new affordable housing opportunities for persons of low- and moderate-income in the coastal zone. (PRC 30604 (g))
FISCAL EFFECT: Non-fiscal
COMMENTS:
- Author’s statement:
The Coastal Zone is one of the most expensive housing markets in the country, rendering it unaffordable for the vast majority of Californians, including service workers who make the coastal economy possible. The ballooning housing costs is a direct result of not building enough housing to meet the demand.
As a state program that has proven successful in creating more market rate and affordable housing across the state, Density Bonus Law serves as an important tool to resolve the severe housing shortage in our coastal areas. Density Bonus Law only applies in areas already zoned residential and allows developers to build additional units above the zoned amount in exchange for a certain percentage of income-restricted units. This ensures areas already zoned for housing are building more units than they would have otherwise while also dedicating a portion of them for moderate, low, and very-low income earners.
- Density Bonus Law. California, like much of the country, is in the midst of a housing crisis that continues to exacerbate existing inequities. The median price for a single-family home in California in 2021 was $786,750, which less than a quarter of households could afford to purchase. Options for affordable rentals are similarly limited. California ranks in the top seven states in the country for inadequate affordable housing stock, and more than half of the state’s renter households were cost burdened in 2019, meaning that they spent more than 30% of their household income on rent.
California state law recognizes that local governments play a vital role in developing affordable housing and requires each community’s fair share of housing to be determined through a mandated regional housing needs allocation. In 1969, the state mandated that all California cities, towns, and counties to plan for the housing needs of its residents, regardless of income. California’s DBL was enacted in 1979 to provide housing developers tools to encourage the development of much needed affordable and senior housing. The DBL achieves this objective by allowing developers to exceed the normal density restrictions when they meet certain criteria. Cities and counties are required to grant a “density bonus,” which is an exceedance of the otherwise allowable project density, if a housing project would include affordable units for one or more of these demographics. The amount of the density bonus is codified as a sliding scale based on the percentage of affordable units provided and the demographics targeted. The law also allows for a 100% density bonus for residential developments that are 100% affordable. The Legislature continues to refine the DBL, providing additional flexibility to developers in meeting requirements for a density bonus.
According to the Commission, many local jurisdictions in the coastal zone have already adopted inclusionary housing ordinances separate from DBL. Inclusionary housing ordinances generally require that any new multi-unit residential project include a certain percentage of affordable units, with no density bonus or other development standard exception granted in return. Such requirements frequently range from 15% to 20%, and are typically framed in terms of providing such units on-site, contributing a fee to allow for the construction of such units off-site, or some combination thereof. Inclusionary housing ordinances are not insulated from DBL. In jurisdictions where an inclusionary housing ordinance has stronger requirements than the DBL, a developer is not required to propose any additional affordable units in order to receive the multitude of exceptions afforded by the DBL.
The policies of the Coastal Act establish development standards intended to protect coastal resources. Where the DBL allows development projects to exceed these development standards, the Coastal Act and DBL conflict with one another, potentially significantly. Current law in the DBL (Gov. Code 65915 (m)) seeks to avoid these conflicts and harmonize the two laws by stating that the DBL does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the Coastal Act, and requires that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the DBL be permitted in a manner consistent with the Coastal Act.
AB 2560 proposes to repeal that provision and instead require any density bonus, concession, incentive, waiver or reduction of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under the DBL to be permitted regardless of compliance with the Coastal Act.
- Housing development in the coastal zone. The Commission administers the Coastal Act and regulates proposed development along the coast and in nearby areas. Generally, any development activity in the coastal zone requires a coastal development permit (CDP) from the Commission or local government with a certified local coastal plan (LCP). Eighty-five percent of the coastal zone is currently governed by LCPs drafted by cities and counties, and certified by the Commission. In these certified jurisdictions, local governments issue CDPs with detailed planning and design standards. There are 14 jurisdictions without LCPs – also known as “uncertified” jurisdictions – where the Commission is still the permitting authority for CDPs. The width of the coastal zone varies, but it extends three miles seaward, including offshore islands. The inland boundary varies depending on land uses and habitat values, but generally extends inland 1,000 yards from the mean high tide line of the sea, but is wider in areas with significant estuarine, habitat, and recreational values, and narrower in developed urban areas.
The original Coastal Act of 1976 included PRC 30213 of the Coastal Act, which stated:
Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities and housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income shall be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided.
The definition of low- and moderate-income households was anyone earning up to 120% of the median income, which included about 2/3 of California households at the time. In the first five years of the Coastal Act, the Commission successfully required the construction of more than 5,000 affordable, deed-restricted, owner-occupancy and rental units in high-priced areas such as Laguna Nigel, San Clemente, and Dana Point. It also collected about $2 million in in-lieu fees for additional housing opportunities throughout the state.
Over time, however, many local governments objected to the loss of local control and stated that the Coastal Act’s housing policies were preventing them from preparing LCPs. Subsequently, in 1981, the Legislature adopted the Mello Act [SB 626 (Mello) Chapter 1007, Statutes of 1981] to remove the housing polices out of the Coastal Act and by providing that “No local coastal program shall be required to include housing policies and programs.” (PRC 30500.1) That legislation allowed any developer who had not yet completed a coastal housing project to require the Commission to remove the affordable requirements from the permit and prohibited the Commission from requiring local governments to include affordable housing in their LCPs. As a result, affordable housing development waned in the coastal zone.
Despite this, the Commission has maintained its mandate to protect the coast and, as of 2019, had approved more than 90% of all development applications. The Coastal Act requires the Commission to encourage housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income. It further prohibits, in reviewing residential development applications for low- and moderate-income housing, the issuing local agency, or the Commission on appeal, from requiring measures that reduce residential densities below the density sought by an applicant if the density sought is within the permitted density or range of density established by local zoning plus the additional permitted density.
The Commission states that it has never denied a single affordable housing project in its history. Furthermore, permit review doesn’t appear to be a roadblock to development. In terms of affordable housing project application turnaround times, permits are subject to the Permit Streamlining Act, thus the Commission must comply with those deadlines. The Commission also finds ‘No Substantial Issue’ on most of the appeals received, and turns permit applications around in 49 days.
- So, what is the problem? In 2013, City of Los Angeles planning officials approved a residential development in the Venice area that was ultimately challenged in court over the proposed height, density, setbacks, and other visual and physical characteristics and the compatibility with the Coastal Act. The Court found that a proposed project in the coastal zone must be consistent with the Coastal Act and any applicable LCP adopted pursuant to the Coastal Act before proceeding with development entitlements. The court noted that "the Legislature appears to have struck a balance" between the Act and DBL "by requiring local agencies to grant density bonuses unless doing so would violate the [Coastal Act]."[Kalnel Gardens, LLC v. City of Los Angeles (3 Cal.App.5th 927 (2016))]
Subsection (m) of Section 65915—the focus of this bill—requires the DBL and the Coastal Act to coexist without the DBL superseding the Coastal Act. The Legislature affirmed this requirement in AB 2797 (Bloom) Chapter 904, Statutes of 2018. Under subsection (m), a developer is entitled to all the incentives provided by DBL (e.g., the density bonus, various designs incentives/concessions), but the developer must integrate the incentives into the project design in a way that is also consistent with the Coastal Act. In this context, consistency with the Coastal Act means, in most instances, meeting the standards in a local government’s LCP, since local governments are doing the vast majority of the permitting.
There is nothing about the Coastal Act that preempts or stymies developers designing their project to avoid or, if necessary, minimize inconsistencies between DBL and the requirements of an LCP. That said, there is a subset of density bonus projects where harmonization can be tough, sometimes due to an unavoidable inconsistency between a certain DBL incentive and an LCP standard. Lack of objective standards can create confusion and delays.
Some coastal jurisdictions have prepared for these situations by adding a harmonization provision to their LCP. This provision basically brings the concept of subsection (m) into the LCP and says projects should harmonize the two statutes, and if there are unavoidable inconsistencies, they should be minimized. As an example, the City of Santa Cruz’s LCP reads:
1. State DBL provides that it shall not be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976.
2. For development within the coastal zone, the requested density bonus and any requested incentive, concession, waiver, modification, modified parking standard, or commercial development bonus shall be consistent with state density bonus criteria. All applicable requirements of the certified Santa Cruz local coastal program shall be met (including but not limited to sensitive habitat, agriculture, public viewshed, public recreational access, and open space), with the exception of the numeric standards changed through state density bonus provisions.
In jurisdictions that don’t have a harmonization provision in their LCP, density bonus projects run a greater risk of being denied locally and appealed to the Commission because the local government may identify an unavoidable inconsistency and deny the project, or project opponents may use the inconsistency to appeal the project. In actuality, appeals of local projects to the Commission are relatively few—just 6% of local permits in 2023. If all local governments in the coastal zone were required to have a harmonization provision in their LCP, the number of density bonus projects that get appealed to the Commission could be potentially be substantially minimized.
- Costs associated with coastal development. The Coastal Act guides how the land along the coast of California is developed, or protected from development, and it emphasizes the importance of public access to the coast, and the preservation of sensitive coastal and marine habitat and biodiversity. Development is limited to preserve open space and coastal agricultural lands. The law calls for orderly, balanced development, consistent with state coastal priorities and taking into account the rights of property owners. The coastal zone represents only 1% of California’s landmass. The Coastal Act exists to provide additional protections for this resource because it is unique, irreplaceable, relied on by various sources of income, and utilized for myriad recreational activities.
The added layers of review when developing in the coastal zone does add both time and cost to a project. According to the Department on Housing and Community Development (HCD), statewide affordable housing shortfall is more acute in the Coastal Zone. HCD notes that coastal areas cost 30% more, and housing in the coastal zone has higher cost burden as a result of lack of affordable housing. The HCD sets housing need at the state level based on population growth and pent-up demand based on vacancy rates, high cost burden (percentage of income spent on housing), lack of affordability, and homelessness. High cost burden creates lack of home ownership (i.e., it’s too expensive to save for a down payment) and makes it harder to experience economic shocks (i.e., medical expenses, car breaking down, etc.). HCD finds that the Coastal Act raises the price and rental income of multifamily housing units located within the Coastal Zone. The total effect of regulation on prices, an increase of 13–21%, results from local benefits generated from restrictions on immediate neighbors and from amenities operating at a larger spatial scale.
It is worth noting that there are financial benefits to developers that result from the regulation of properties within the Coastal Zone. For example, development restrictions that reduce congestion and loss of open space provide benefits to all property owners within the Coastal Zone and increases property values. Andrew Planting, a Bren School professor of natural resource economics and policy, decided to investigate how the Coastal Act has impacted property values in the coastal zone by comparing them to nearby properties just outside the designated areas. Using price and rental income data for apartments and condominiums in Southern California, Planting’s team found that the regulation increased the value of properties within the coastal zone by 18 to 25%.
- Developing in the Coastal Zone does work. At the Commission’s March 15 meeting, the Commission unanimously approved the City of Morro Bay’s complete update of its LCP Implementation Plan (IP). The IP specifies the protocols to provide for density bonuses and alternative dwelling unit (ADU) lot splits, including encouraging such housing types while also ensuring that, for example, they are located outside of sensitive habitat areas or coastal hazard areas.
For density bonuses, the IP provides for a deviation from specific LCP provisions for projects that encourage housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income when there will be no significant adverse coastal resource impact due to the approved project. To facilitate such housing and mixed-use, infill development opportunities, the IP includes a series of complementary multimodal transportation provision, including flexible parking standards. That includes specifying parking standards, and provisions to be flexible with such requirements. The IP’s encouragement of various types of housing, including affordable housing, ADUs, two-home development, and multi-family units while ensuring that such housing is carried out in a manner protective of coastal resources, including away from eroding bluffs and sensitive habitats. The IP includes procedures to implement density bonuses for affordable housing so as to harmonize the State’s density bonus law with the Coastal Act. The IP requires an application that seeks a density bonus in exchange for affordable housing to compare the LCP-consistent project to a project in which the size, scale, density, and other bonuses have been applied, with the goal of allowing the public and decisionmakers a clear understanding of any coastal resource and affordable housing costs and benefits. The City’s proposed density bonus provisions are similar to other such provisions certified in recent LCPs, including in Santa Cruz County.
- Protecting the coastal zone. A central tenet of the Commission and foundational pillar of the Coastal Act is equitable access to coastal resources. The Coastal Act, through CDPs, provides unique protections to the coastal zone that are separate and distinct from the California Environmental Quality Act. The Coastal Act includes consideration of the prevention of sprawling development, protection of views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, and maintenance and enhancement of public access to the coast. Further, all new development is required to minimize risk to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard; assure geologic stability; minimize energy consumption and vehicle miles travelled, and, where appropriate, protect special communities and neighborhoods that, because of their unique characteristics, are popular visitor destination points for recreational uses.
As Mary Shallenberger, Coastal Commissioner from 2004-2017, wrote in 2019:
Relaxing development controls in the coastal zone isn’t the answer because over-regulation was never the problem. The problem is there is little market-based incentive to build this type of housing to begin with, compounded by the fact that the Legislature stripped the regulatory authority from the agency that was doing more than any other to provide actual affordable units.
The Commission’s January 2022 report, Report on the Historical Roots of Housing Inequity and Impacts on Coastal Zone Demographic Patterns, explains that one thing that makes tackling the affordable housing shortage difficult are the myriad overlapping jurisdictional authorities and housing policies that apply to one particular area. Commission staff and other housing advocates would benefit from research on the various housing policies applicable to the coastal zone and how they interact with each other and the Coastal Act. These include the Mello Act of 1981 and subsequent Mello Act Ordinances, the DBL, the Housing Accountability Act, Coastal Act and LCP policies on accessory dwelling units, the California H.O.M.E. Act, inclusionary zoning initiatives, and others. Understanding this ecosystem of policy and legislation is an important part of designing effective policy solutions that are compliant with existing law.
The author may wish to consider this recommendation, which could inform future legislation on this subject.
- This bill. AB 2560 would provide the Coastal Act doesn’t apply for permitting density bonuses, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios. By including the language “notwithstanding the Coastal Act,” the bill null and voids coastal protections afforded to housing development in the coastal zone.
Last year, this committee heard AB 1287 (Alvarez), which proposed the same amendment to exempt the Coastal Act from the DBL. The committee approved the bill, with a vote of 10-0, with an amendment striking the amendments to subdivision (m) to maintain that provision of current law as it stands.
- Committee amendments. The Committee may wish to consider amending the bill as follows:
(m) Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted notwithstanding the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code) if the development is not located on a site that is any of the following:
(1) An area of the coastal zone subject to paragraph (1), (2) or (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 30603 of the Public Resources Code.
(2) An area of the coastal zone that is not subject to a certified local coastal program.
(3) An area of the coastal zone that is vulnerable to five feet of sea level rise, as determined by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Ocean Protection Council, the United States Geological Survey, the University of California, or a local government’s coastal hazards vulnerability assessment.
(4) In a parcel within the coastal zone that is not zoned for multifamily housing.
(5) In a parcel in the coastal zone and located on either of the following:
(A) On, or within a 100-foot radius of, a wetland, as defined in Section 30121 of the Public Resources Code.
(B) On prime agricultural land, as defined in Sections 30113 and 30241 of the Public Resources Code.
- Double referral. This bill was heard in the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee on April 10 and approved by a vote of 8-0.
- Relevant legislation:
AB 2430 (Alvarez) amends the same code of law under the DBL to prohibit a city, county, or city and county from charging a monitoring fee, as defined, on specified types of housing developments if certain conditions are met. This bill was pulled by the author in the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee.
SB 951 (Weiner) makes changes to the California Coastal Act and clarifies that LCP updates, for local governments in the coastal zone, shall be completed in the same timeframes as required in the housing element. This bill is referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee.
SB 1077 (Blakespear) requires, by an unspecified date, the Commission to develop and provide guidance for local governments to facilitate the preparation of amendments to an LCP to clarify and simplify the permitting process for accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units within the coastal zone. This bill is referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee.
SB 1092 (Blakespear) requires the Commission to perform a study on appeals of multifamily housing projects, as provided. This bill is referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
AARP
Abundant Housing LA
American Planning Association, California Chapter
Associated General Contractors
California Apartment Association
California Building Industry Association
California Community Builders
California Housing Partnership Corporation
California Yimby
Circulate San Diego
City of San Diego
Civicwell
Construction Employers' Association
East Bay for Everyone
East Bay Yimby
Greenbelt Alliance
Grow the Richmond
Housing Action Coalition
Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County
How to Adu
Leadingage California
Monterey Bay Economic Partnership
Mountain View Yimby
Napa-Solano for Everyone
Northern Neighbors
Peninsula for Everyone
People for Housing - Orange County
Progress Noe Valley
San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association (SPUR)
San Francisco Yimby
San Luis Obispo Yimby
Santa Cruz Yimby
Santa Rosa Yimby
South Bay Yimby
Southside Forward
Spur
Streets for All
Streets for People
Urban Environmentalists
Ventura County Yimby
Yimby Action
Opposition
Azul
California Cities for Local Control
California Coastal Commission
California Coastal Protection Network
California Coastkeeper Alliance
California Contract Cities Association
California Native Plant Society
California River Watch
Canyon Back Alliance
Center for Biological Diversity
Chiatri De Laguna Farm
Citizens Preserving Venice
Cleanearth4kids.org
Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council
Defenders of Wildlife
East Area Progressive Democrats
Endangered Habitats League
Environmental Defense Center
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin (EAC)
Environmental Center of San Diego
Environmental Defense Center
Forest Unlimited
Green Foothills
Livable Ventura, INC
Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust
Mission Street Neighbors
New Livable California
Newport Beach; City of
North Coast Rivers Alliance
Orange County Coastkeeper
Our City SF
Physicians for Social Responsibility - San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
Puvunga Wetlands Protectors
Resource Renewal Institute
San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
Save the Sonoma Coast
Sierra Club California
Smith River Alliance
Save Lafayette
Socal 350 Climate Action
South Bay Cities Council of Governments
Surfrider Foundation
Watershed Alliance of Marin
West Sonoma County Alliance
Analysis Prepared by: Paige Brokaw / NAT. RES. /
Date of Hearing: April 10, 2024
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Christopher M. Ward, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2560 (
Author:Alvarez) – As Introduced Ver:February 14, 2024
SUBJECT: Density Bonus Law: California Coastal Act of 1976
SUMMARY: Applies Density Bonus Law (DBL) to the Coastal Act without limitation. Specifically, this bill:
- Deletes the provision that states that nothing in DBL supersedes or in any way alters or lessens the application of the Coastal Act of 1976 (the Coastal Act).
- Provides that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, or waivers of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under DBL are permitted, notwithstanding the Coastal Act.
EXISTING LAW:
- States that nothing in Density Bonus Law supersedes or in any way alters or lessens the application of the Coastal Act. (Government Code (GOV) Section 65915)
- Provides that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or waivers of development standards, and parking ratios to which an applicant is entitled under density bonus law shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with the Coastal Act. (GOV 65915)
- Defines “concession or incentive” as:
- A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required, that results in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs or for rents for the targeted units;
- Approval of specified compatible mixed-use zoning in conjunction with the housing project that will reduce the cost of development; and
- Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the local government that results in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing. (GOV 65915)
- Requires a city, county, or city and county to grant a concession or incentive requested by an applicant unless the city, county, or city and county makes a written finding based upon substantial evidence of any of the following:
- The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions necessary to support the affordable housing costs or rents for the affordable housing units required;
- The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households; or,
- The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law.
- Requires cities and counties to grant a density bonus, based on a specified formula, when an applicant for a housing development of at least five units seeks and agrees to construct a project that will contain at least one of the following:
- Ten percent of the total units of a housing development for lower-income households;
- Five percent of the total units of a housing development for very low-income households;
- A senior citizen housing development or age-restricted mobilehome park;
- Ten percent of the units in a common interest development (CID) for moderate-income households, provided the units are available for public purchase;
- Ten percent of the total units for transitional foster youth, disabled veterans, or homeless persons;
- Twenty percent of the total units for lower-income students in a student housing development, as specified; or,
- One hundred percent of all units in the development are for lower-income households, except that up to 20 percent of the units may be for moderate-income households. (GOV 65915)
- Specifies that applicants for a density bonus can receive the following number of incentives or concessions:
- One incentive or concession for projects that include:
- At least 10 percent of the total units for lower-income households;
- At least five percent for very low-income households;
- At least 10 percent for moderate-income persons and families in a development in which units are for sale; or
- At least 20 percent of the units for lower-income students in a student housing development.
- Two incentives or concessions for projects that include:
- At least 17 percent of the total units for lower-income households;
- At least 10 percent for very low-income households; or
- At least 20 percent for moderate-income persons and families in a development in which units are for sale;
- Three incentives or concessions for projects that include:
- At least 24 percent of the total units for lower-income households;
- At least 15 percent for very low-income households; or
- At least 30 percent for moderate-income persons and families in CIDs; and
- Four incentives or concessions for a project that include:
- At least 16 percent of the total units for very low-income households; or
- At least 45 percent for moderate-income persons and families in CIDs; and
- Five incentives or concessions for projects in which one hundred percent of all units are for lower-income households, except that up to 20 percent of the units may be for moderate-income households.
- If the project is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop or is located in a very low vehicle travel area in a designated county, the applicant shall also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet. (GOV 65915)
- One incentive or concession for projects that include:
- Establishes the Coastal Commission (Commission) in the Natural Resources Agency and requires the Commission to consist of 15 members (3 non-voting and 12 voting). (Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 31004)
- Requires a person planning to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone to obtain a coastal development permit (CDP) from the Commission or local government enforcing a local coastal program (LCP). (PRC 30600)
- Defines “development” to mean, among other things, the placement or erection of any solid material or structure on land or in water. “Structure” includes, but is not limited to, any building, road, pipe, flume, conduit, siphon, aqueduct, telephone line, and electrical power transmission and distribution line. (PRC 30106)
- Defines the “coastal zone” as the land and water area of the State of California from the Oregon border to the border of the Republic of Mexico, extending seaward to the state's outer limit of jurisdiction, including all offshore islands, and extending inland generally 1,000 yards from the mean high tide line of the sea. In significant coastal estuarine, habitat, and recreational areas, the coastal zone extends inland to the first major ridgeline paralleling the sea or five miles from the mean high tide line of the sea, whichever is less. In developed urban areas, the zone generally extends inland less than 1,000 yards. The coastal zone does not include the area of jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, nor any area contiguous thereto, including any river, stream, tributary, creek, or flood control or drainage channel flowing into such area. (PRC 30103)
- Provides that nothing in the Coastal Act exempts local governments from meeting the requirements of state and federal law with respect to providing low- and moderate-income housing, replacement housing, relocation benefits, or any other obligation related to housing imposed by existing law or any law hereafter enacted. (PRC 30007)
- Provides that the Legislature finds and declares that it is important for the Commission to encourage the protection of existing and the provision of new affordable housing opportunities for persons of low- and moderate-income in the coastal zone. (PRC 30604)
- Requires the Commission to encourage housing opportunities for low-and moderate-income households. Provides that the Commission may not take measures that reduce the density of a housing project below the level allowed by local zoning ordinances and state density bonus law unless the Commission makes a finding that there is no feasible method to accommodate the density without creating a significant adverse impact on coastal resources. (PRC 30604)
- Provides that the scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas must be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. Permitted development must be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, to minimize the alteration of natural land forms, to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas. New development in highly scenic areas such as those designated in the California Coastline Preservation and Recreation Plan prepared by the Department of Parks and Recreation and by local government must be subordinate to the character of its setting. (PRC 30251)
- Establishes a process for the streamlined approval of multifamily housing developments in certain instances and areas, including the streamlined approval of multifamily housing developments in the coastal zone, so long as the development is not on:
- An area of the coastal zone between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea or within 300 feet of the inland extent of any beach or the mean high tideline of the sea when there is no beach, whichever distance is greater;
- Areas not included in (a) that are on tidelands, submerged lands, public trust lands, within 100 feet of any wetland, estuary, or stream, or within 300 feet of the top of the seaward face of any coastal bluff;
- An area of the coastal zone that is not subject to a certified local coastal program or certified land use plan;
- An area of the coastal zone that is vulnerable to five feet of sea level rise;
- A parcel in the coastal zone not zoned for multifamily housing; or,
- On, or within a 100 foot radius of wetland, or on prime agricultural land. (GOV 65913.4)
FISCAL EFFECT: None.
COMMENTS:
Author’s Statement: According to the author, “The Coastal Zone is one of the most expensive housing markets in the country, rendering it unaffordable for the vast majority of Californians, including service workers who make the coastal economy possible. The ballooning housing costs is a direct result of not building enough housing to meet the demand.
As a state program that has proven successful in creating more market rate and affordable housing across the state, Density Bonus Law serves as an important tool to resolve the severe housing shortage in our coastal areas. Density Bonus Law only applies in areas already zoned residential and allows developers to build additional units above the zoned amount in exchange for a certain percentage of income-restricted units. This ensures areas already zoned for housing are building more units than they would have otherwise while also dedicating a portion of them for moderate, low, and very-low income earners.”
Statewide Housing Needs: According to the Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD’s) 2022 Statewide Housing Plan Update,[1] California’s housing crisis is a half century in the making. After decades of underproduction, supply is far behind need and housing and rental costs are soaring. As a result, millions of Californians must make hard decisions about paying for housing at the expense of food, health care, child care, and transportation, directly impacting quality of life in the state. One in three households in the state doesn’t earn enough money to meet their basic needs. In 2023, over 181,000 Californians experienced homelessness on a given night, with a sharp increase in the number of people who became experienced homelessness for the first time.[2]
To meet this housing need, HCD determined that California must plan for more than 2.5 million new homes, and no less than one million of those homes must be affordable to lower-income households, in the 6th Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). This represents more than double the housing needed in the 5th RHNA cycle. By contrast, housing production in the past decade has been under 100,000 units per year – including less than 10,000 units of affordable housing per year.[3] As of April 5, 2024, in the 6th RHNA cycle, jurisdictions across the state have permitted the following:
- 2.1 percent of the very low-income RHNA
- 4.8 percent of the low-income RHNA
- 4.8 percent of the moderate-income RHNA
- 12.7 percent of the above moderate-income RHNA
Density Bonus Law: Density Bonus Law (DBL) was originally enacted in 1979 as an incentive to encourage housing developers to produce affordable units at below market rates. In return for including a certain percentage of affordable units, housing developers receive the ability to add additional units for their project above the jurisdiction’s allowable zoned density for the site (thus the term “density bonus”).
The affordability units built using density bonus must be deed restricted for 55 years. Additionally, DBL specifies concessions and incentives around development standards (e.g., architectural, height, setback requirements) and reductions in vehicle parking requirements that projects can receive to offset the cost of building affordable units. Both market rate and 100 percent affordable housing projects can use these provisions and all local governments are required to adopt a density bonus ordinance. However, failure to adopt an ordinance does not exempt a local government from complying with the requirements of DBL. DBL is a critical tool in the state’s toolkit when it comes to reducing the price of affordable housing development, and incentivizing the construction of high density housing.
Development in the Coastal Zone: In 1976, the Legislature enacted the Coastal Act, mandating that coastal counties manage the conservation and development of coastal resources through a comprehensive planning and regulatory program. The area that constitutes the coastal zone is defined by California’s Public Resources Code. In significant coastal estuarine, habitat, and recreational areas, the coastal zone extends inland to the first major ridgeline paralleling the sea or five miles from the mean high tide line of the sea, whichever is less. In developed urban areas, the zone generally extends inland less than 1,000 yards. The coastal zone does not include the area of jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, nor any area contiguous thereto, including any river, stream, tributary, creek, or flood control or drainage channel flowing into such area.
In partnership with coastal cities and counties, the Commission plans and regulates the use of land and water in the coastal zone. Development activities, which are broadly defined by the Coastal Act to include construction of buildings, divisions of land, and activities that change the intensity of use of land or public access to coastal waters, generally require a special permit (CDP) from either the Commission or the local government with a certified LCP.
Eighty-five percent of the coastal zone is currently governed by LCPs drafted by cities and counties, and certified by the Commission. In these certified jurisdictions, local governments issue CDPs with detailed planning and design standards. There are 14 jurisdictions without LCPs – also known as “uncertified” jurisdictions – where the Commission is still the permitting authority for CDPs. One exception to this is the City of Los Angeles, which implements the Act directly by issuing CDPs. However, every city-issued CDP can be appealed to the Commission.
According to a 2015 analysis by the Legislative Analyst’s Office, “a collection of factors drive California’s high cost of housing. First and foremost, far less housing has been built in California’s coastal areas than people demand. As a result, households bid up the cost of housing in coastal regions. In addition, some of the unmet demand to live in coastal areas spills over into inland California, driving up prices there too. Second, land in California’s coastal areas is expensive. Homebuilders typically respond to high land costs by building more housing units on each plot of land they develop, effectively spreading the high land costs among more units. In California’s coastal metros, however, this response has been limited, meaning higher land costs have translated more directly into higher housing costs. Finally, builders’ costs—for labor, required building materials, and government fees—are higher in California than in other states. While these higher building costs contribute to higher prices throughout the state, building costs appear to play a smaller role in explaining high housing costs in coastal areas.”
California’s coast is a vital natural resource and delicately balanced ecosystem, as well as an important economic and social resource for the state. However, not all of the coastal area is a natural resource, and much of it is developed urban areas – including extremely wealthy coastal communities. SB 423 (Wiener), Chapter 778, Statutes of 2023 expanded upon SB 35 (Wiener), Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017, by allowing for by-right development in the coastal zone on sites that local jurisdictions have identified, through their zoning, as appropriate for housing. The sites still need to meet all of the objective environmental criteria in SB 423, including that the site cannot be within a wetland, flood hazard area, protected habitat, or conservation easement.
Kalnel Gardens, LLC v. City of Los Angeles (3 Cal.App.5th 927 (2016)): In 2013, City of Los Angeles planning officials approved a proposed residential development in the Venice area. The project would have involved tearing down a two-story, three-unit apartment building and replacing it with a 15-unit housing development including five duplexes and five single-family homes. Pursuant to DBL, the developer was allowed to exceed the normal density restrictions for that location because two of the units would have been designated for very low-income households. DBL also entitled the developer to other zoning concessions, including a height variance. The City approved the project’s vesting tentative tract map, including findings that the project complied with the City’s General Plan as well as the Venice Specific Plan, and also approved a CDP under the Act.
In September 2013, a neighborhood group appealed the planning department’s development approvals, including the CDP. The residents argued the project violated the Act because its height, density, setbacks, and other visual and physical characteristics were inconsistent with the existing neighborhood. The Planning Commission found that the development did not conform to the Act because its size, height, bulk, mass, and scale were incompatible with and harmful to the surrounding neighborhood and because the setbacks were too small. The developer appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council, which denied the appeal.
The developer then brought an administrative mandate action against the City, alleging that it had violated the Housing Accountability Act, the Density Bonus Act, and the Mello Act. For the purpose of this analysis, the focus will be on the court's decision as it relates to state DBL and the Act. The trial court found that the density bonus, height and setback variations initially approved for the project were proper under the housing density statutes and other City zoning plans and regulations, including the Commission-approved Venice Land Use Plan. However, the trial court found that the housing density statutes were subordinate to the Act and that substantial evidence supported the Planning Commission’s findings that the project violated the Act because it was visually out of step with the surrounding coastal community.
The developer appealed, and the appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that that state DBL is subordinate to the Act and that a project that violates the Act as the result of a density bonus may be denied on that basis. The court noted that “the Legislature appears to have struck a balance” between the Act and DBL “by requiring local agencies to grant density bonuses unless doing so would violate the [Act].”
It is worthwhile to examine the legislative history behind two bills relating to state density bonus law and the Act, both of which enacted laws referenced in the Kalnel Gardens, LLC case. AB 1866 (Wright), Chapter 1062, Statutes of 2002, made numerous changes to state DBL and state law relating to second units. According to this Committee's analysis of that bill, the sponsors contended that “there are many reasons for California's housing crisis, but one very important reason are the many constraints and obstacles imposed on housing by local governments.” One of the provisions of DBL added by AB 1866 is that the granting of a concession or incentive shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require an LCP amendment. It also added the section of law this bill seeks to amend—Government Code Section 65915(m), providing that DBL does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the Act.
AB 1866 was opposed by the Commission until August 6, 2002, shortly after amendments taken in the Senate added, among other provisions, what is now Government Code Section 65915(m). Prior to that amendment, in the Commission's opposition letter to the Senate Housing Committee, it stated “…[t]he Commission has historically taken the position that housing density bonus ordinances need to be consistent with other LCP and Coastal Act policies, and therefore should be formally amended into any applicable LCP.” The Commission's August 7, 2002 letter to the author of AB 1866 states that the Commission voted to remove its opposition and take a neutral position on the bill because “the most recent amendments clarify that nothing in the bill is meant to supersede or lessen the application of the Coastal Act policies…” The Assembly Concurrence in Senate Amendments analysis, which appears to be the only legislative analysis of AB 1866 that directly addresses this amendment, describes the amendment as "[p]rovid[ing] that the requirements of the California Coastal Act shall not be superseded by any of the provisions in this measure.”
One year later, SB 619 (Ducheny), Chapter 793, Statutes of 2003, made several changes to laws relating to the development of affordable housing, including requiring the Commission to encourage housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households. It also provided that the Commission may not take measures that reduce the density of a housing project below the level allowed by local zoning ordinances and state DBL unless the Commission makes a finding that there is no feasible method to accommodate the density without creating a significant adverse impact on coastal resources. This Committee's analysis noted that the “author asserts that in spite of overwhelming need, many communities continue to resist new housing development, especially multifamily housing and higher density housing.” According to the Senate Natural Resources Committee analysis, “California coast cities, with the current rate of growth, will have to support more housing. From an environmental perspective, coastal areas should consider increasing housing density and affordability…Affordable housing projects developed in coastal areas, as long as they are consistent with LCPs, are an environmental bonus, not a detriment.”
In 2018, AB 2797 (Bloom), Chapter 904, further clarified the law in response to Kalnel Gardens, LLC to provide that any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under density bonus law shall be accommodated, but in a manner that harmonizes DBL and the portions of the Act relating to Coastal Resources Planning and Management Policies. This bill would remove that requirement and apply DBL in the Coastal Zone notwithstanding the Coastal Act. As a result, the Commission or a local agency implementing the Act would be required to approve a developer’s request for density, concessions and incentives, and parking reductions regardless of a conflict with the LCP.
In 2023, AB 1287 (Alvarez), Chapter 755, was approved by the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee with language that would apply DBL to the Coastal Act without limitation. AB 1287 was subsequently amended in the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources to remove that provision.
In 2023, SB 423 (Wiener), Chapter 778, expanded upon SB 35 (Wiener), Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017, by allowing for by-right development in certain portions the coastal zone on sites that local jurisdictions have identified, through their zoning, as appropriate for housing.
Arguments in Support: According to the California Home Building Alliance, which includes SPUR – one of the bill’s co-sponsors, AB 2560 “is a matter of fundamental fairness and equity.
Over the past several years, the State Legislature has passed many measures to address our housing affordability and availability crisis by facilitating housing production. Unfortunately, most of these laws have exempted the Coastal Zone altogether. There is now a growing consensus in the Legislature and among advocates that this is not equitable as these coastal communities are some of the most expensive, exclusive and segregated in the state and the local workforce is suffering greatly.
It is important to note that the Coastal Zone includes large swaths of urbanized and already developed interior areas far inland from the coastline and beaches where new housing is needed and would be appropriate including in San Diego, Santa Monica, Los Angeles, Santa Cruz, San Francisco, Arcata and Eureka, among others. State density bonus law was first enacted by the Legislature several decades ago to ensure that affordable and mixed-income housing developments are feasible even in the highest-cost areas of our state. Furthermore, these bonuses are only available on sites that have already been zoned for residential use by the local jurisdiction. The legislation in no way endangers coastal resources but rather will provide greater access to much-needed housing in the coastal area.”
Arguments in Opposition: According to the California Cities for Local Control, “AB 2560 significantly weakens the environmental protections heretofore provided by the coastal act. The Legislature’s burgeoning assault on coastal zone protections, especially in an era when sea level rise is inevitable, defies reason.”
Double Referred: This bill was also referred to the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources, where it will be heard should it pass out of this committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Bay Area Council (Sponsor)
Circulate San Diego (Sponsor)
San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association (Sponsor)
AARP
Abundant Housing LA
American Planning Association, California Chapter
Associated General Contractors
California Apartment Association
California Building Industry Association
California Community Builders
California Community Builders
California Housing Partnership Corporation
California Yimby
City of Sn Diego
CivicWell
East Bay Yimby
Greenbelt Alliance
Grow the Richmond
Housing Action Coalition
Housing Action Coalition
How to ADU
LeadingAge California
Monterey Bay Economic Partnership
Mountain View Yimby
Napa-Solano for Everyone
Northern Neighbors
Peninsula for Everyone
People for Housing - Orange County
People for Housing Orange County
Progress Noe Valley
San Francisco YIMBY
San Luis Obispo YIMBY
Santa Cruz YIMBY
Santa Rosa YIMBY
South Bay YIMBY
Southside Forward
Streets for All
Streets for People
Urban Environmentalists
Ventura County Yimby
YIMBY Action
Opposition
California Cities for Local Control
California Contract Cities Association
Livable Ventura, INC
Mission Street Neighbors
New Livable California Dba Livable California
Newport Beach; City of
Save Lafayette
Oppose Unless Amended
Azul
California Coastal Protection Network
Center for Biological Diversity
Defenders of Wildlife
Endangered Habitats League
Environmental Defense Center
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin (EAC)
Environmental Center of San Diego
Orange County Coastkeeper
Physicians for Social Responsibility - San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
Puvunga Wetlands Protectors
Sierra Club of California
SoCal 350 Climate Action
The Surfrider Foundation
Analysis Prepared by: Dori Ganetsos / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085
California Department of Housing and Community Development, A Home for Every Californian: 2022 Statewide Housing Plan. March 2022, https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/94729ab1648d43b1811c1698a748c136 ↑
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Point in Time Counts. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/ahar/2023-ahar-part-1-pit-estimates-of-homelessness-in-the-us.html ↑
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/policy-research/housing-challenges.shtml ↑
Discussed in Hearing
1MIN
Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations
39MIN
Senate Standing Committee on Natural Resources and Water
36MIN
Senate Standing Committee on Housing
35MIN
Assembly Floor
49MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Natural Resources
25MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Housing and Community Development
Bill Author
