California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB2341

Introduced
2/13/18  
Refer
3/1/18  
Refer
3/1/18  
Report Pass
4/12/18  
Report Pass
4/12/18  
Engrossed
4/23/18  
Refer
4/23/18  
Refer
4/23/18  
Refer
5/3/18  
Refer
5/3/18  
Report Pass
5/23/18  
Refer
5/23/18  
Refer
5/23/18  
Report Pass
6/14/18  
Report Pass
6/14/18  
Refer
6/14/18  
Refer
6/14/18  
Enrolled
8/20/18  
Enrolled
8/20/18  
Chaptered
9/7/18  
Chaptered
9/7/18  
Passed
9/7/18  

Caption

California Environmental Quality Act: aesthetic impacts.

Impact

The introduction of AB 2341 introduces notable changes to state law regarding the handling of aesthetic impacts in environmental assessments. By specifying conditions under which aesthetic effects are deemed non-significant, the bill facilitates faster processing of environmentally impactful projects that support housing development. However, it remains subject to local regulations, particularly if aesthetic concerns involve historical or scenic resources, thus preserving a degree of local control.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 2341 focuses on modifying the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to limit the evaluation of aesthetic impacts of certain projects. Specifically, the bill states that aesthetic effects are not considered significant if the project involves refurbishing, converting, repurposing, or replacing an existing dilapidated or vacant building, under specific conditions. The aim of this bill is to streamline the approval process for urban redevelopment projects that contribute to housing construction while minimizing bureaucratic delays caused by aesthetic reviews.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 2341 appears to be mixed. Proponents argue that the bill is essential for addressing California's housing crisis by promoting necessary urban revitalization efforts without unnecessary delays. Conversely, opponents express concerns that diminishing the consideration of aesthetic impacts could lead to undesirable changes in community character and overlook significant cultural and scenic values, suggesting a potential conflict between development needs and preservation efforts.

Contention

Key points of contention revolve around the balance between development and preservation. Critics argue that reducing the assessment of aesthetic impacts may undermine local jurisdictions' ability to manage urban identity and visual landscapes, especially in historically or culturally significant areas. This debate highlights a broader tension between the need for increased housing and the imperatives of conserving California's environmental and cultural heritage.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB356

California Environmental Quality Act: aesthetic impacts.

CA SB450

California Environmental Quality Act exemption: supportive and transitional housing: motel conversion.

CA AB1683

Transformative Climate Communities Program: report.

CA AB1554

California Environmental Quality Act: exemption: wildfire fuels reduction projects.

CA AB2267

California Environmental Quality Act: Sonoma County Renewal Enterprise District.

CA SB224

Personal rights: civil liability and enforcement.

CA SB797

California Environmental Quality Act: exemption: electric utility distribution and transmission system facilities: undergrounding and insulation.

CA AB3227

California Environmental Quality Act: exemption: stormwater facilities: routine maintenance.