Splitting multifamily dwelling units: streamlined ministerial approval.
The bill imposes restrictions on local governments, explicitly prohibiting them from imposing minimum or maximum size requirements or density limits on developments applying for this expedited approval. Additionally, it eliminates parking standards for projects located near public transport or within historically significant districts, which could simplify the development process for many projects and encourage higher density housing in urban areas. By framing these changes as a statewide concern, AB 2470 seeks to unify housing policies across charter and non-charter cities alike.
Assembly Bill 2470, introduced by Assembly Member Kamlager, aims to facilitate the development of multifamily housing by allowing a streamlined ministerial approval process for splitting existing dwelling units into smaller units. Specifically, it permits developers to create smaller dwelling units such as efficiency units and coliving spaces from current multifamily developments, provided that at least 10% of the new units are designated for low or moderate-income families. This approach intends to address the ongoing housing crisis by increasing the availability of affordable housing within existing frameworks.
The sentiment surrounding AB 2470 is largely supportive from housing advocates who see it as a necessary measure to combat the housing crisis and promote urban density. However, there are concerns from some local officials and community organizations about the bill’s potential to undermine local planning authority and tailor-made housing strategies. Critics argue that the restrictions could remove essential community input and lead to developments that do not align with local needs.
Notable contention arises from the bill's preemption of local government authority over land use and planning decisions. Detractors highlight the balance between state-imposed uniformity and the tailored approaches necessary to address local housing challenges effectively. Additionally, the requirement for local approval to be granted within a specific timeframe—and the presumption of compliance if no response is provided—may lead to rushed developments that do not fully consider environmental impacts or community preferences.