General plans: housing element: moderate-income and above moderate-income housing: suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions.
AB725 implements a structural change in how local governments must plan for housing, effectively mandating a local program to meet state objectives. By influencing zoning laws, the bill aims to facilitate the development of multifamily housing units and increase the overall housing stock. It recognizes that local agencies are required to accommodate various income levels within housing policies while also navigating state law. Notably, it excludes unincorporated areas from these requirements, highlighting the complexity of housing distribution based on governance levels.
Assembly Bill No. 725, also known as AB725, addresses the allocation of housing for moderate and above moderate-income levels in urban and suburban areas. The bill mandates that, starting January 1, 2022, at least 25% of the regional housing need for these income categories must be directed to locations with existing zoning that permits at least four housing units per site. This requirement aims to promote higher density development to combat housing shortages in metropolitan jurisdictions while allowing cities and counties to manage their housing inventories effectively.
The sentiment regarding AB725 appears mixed among stakeholders, with support primarily from housing advocates who emphasize the necessity of action to resolve ongoing housing shortages. Proponents argue that the bill will enhance affordability and accessibility. In contrast, some local agencies and advocates for local control express concern that state mandates could undermine local governance and unique community needs, exacerbating tensions over planning priorities and development practices.
Notable points of contention revolve around the extent to which local governments will retain authority over housing decisions. While the bill's intent is to streamline housing development for moderate and above-moderate income households, critics argue that it may lead to overdevelopment in certain communities without adequate infrastructure. Furthermore, there is apprehension regarding financial implications for local governments, particularly since the bill states no reimbursements for costs incurred by local agencies will be mandated under certain conditions, potentially challenging local budgets.