Mobilehome parks: additional lots: exemption from additional fees or charges.
AB 2387 seeks to streamline processes and reduce bureaucratic barriers associated with adding new lots to mobilehome parks. By limiting the enforcement agency's ability to impose conditional use permits or zoning variances for these additional lots, the bill intends to accelerate the growth of affordable housing within established mobilehome communities. Furthermore, the legislation specifies that these additional lots will be treated as new construction and will be exempt from certain regulations under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), enhancing predictability for developers and park owners.
Assembly Bill 2387, authored by Pellerin, proposes changes to the regulations governing mobilehome parks within California. Specifically, this legislation allows the owners of existing mobilehome parks to add additional lots for manufactured homes, allowing for a maximum increase of 10% based on the park's previously approved number of lots. This initiative aims to address housing shortages by facilitating the expansion of mobilehome parks without imposing additional business taxes or local registration fees on the new lots, thereby exempting them from various local and state charges typically associated with land use development.
The sentiment towards AB 2387 is generally supportive among stakeholders concerned with increasing housing flexibility and availability. Proponents argue that by easing restrictions, the bill creates a more favorable environment for mobilehome park expansions, which can help alleviate housing shortages in California. However, there are concerns raised by some local government officials who fear a loss of control over land use and zoning regulations, which may hinder local governance and historic preservation efforts.
Notable points of contention regarding AB 2387 include the implications of exempting new construction from CEQA. Critics argue that this could undermine environmental protections by bypassing necessary evaluations of potential impacts on local ecosystems and communities. Additionally, while the bill aims to alleviate housing costs, opponents argue it could lead to higher densities in existing parks, potentially straining local infrastructure and services. Local governments are particularly apprehensive about their reduced ability to regulate changes that affect neighborhood character and community needs.