If passed, AB2580 would require that at least 15% of the housing units in a converted development be reserved for lower-income households and 5% for extremely low-income households, which could significantly impact the availability of affordable housing in California. Furthermore, the bill stipulates that the structure must be vacant for at least six months prior to application submission, although this requirement could be waived under certain conditions regarding affordability. Local governments would have limited authority over the conversions, particularly concerning parking standards and unit sizes, effectively centralizing control at the state level.
Summary
Assembly Bill 2580, introduced by Assembly Member Eggman, focuses on the conversion of motels and hotels into multifamily housing units. The bill aims to streamline the development process for converting these types of structures by allowing developers to submit applications that will undergo a ministerial approval process, thereby avoiding the more lengthy conditional use permit procedure. According to existing law, this process is currently available for multifamily housing developments until January 1, 2026, but AB2580 extends these provisions specifically to hotel and motel conversions, which are particularly relevant in California’s tight housing market.
Sentiment
The sentiment regarding AB2580 is mixed. Proponents argue that the bill addresses the critical housing crisis by simplifying the conversion process for underutilized motels and hotels into much-needed housing units. They believe this will lead to an increase in available housing stock and promote affordability. Opponents, however, express concerns that the bill undermines local control by removing certain regulatory powers from municipalities, potentially leading to unsuitable developments that do not align with community needs or standards.
Contention
Key points of contention include the balance of local vs. state control in housing developments and the implications of rapid approval processes on community planning. Critics highlight that while the bill may facilitate faster housing solutions, it could result in developments that lack the necessary oversight for community compatibility and sustainability. Additionally, the bill's implications for local parking and density standards have raised eyebrows among city planners who fear it might lead to increased congestion and reduced quality of local services.