CalHome Program: accessory dwelling units.
The passage of AB 671 is expected to significantly impact local housing laws, particularly in enhancing the capabilities for low and very low income households to secure housing. By facilitating the separate conveyance of ADUs, along with maintaining recorded covenants to ensure affordability, the bill aligns with broader state goals of increasing affordable housing stock. This change may also provide local governments with more flexibility in addressing housing shortages, while at the same time detailing requirements that ensure sustained low-income occupancy.
Assembly Bill No. 671, administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, seeks to amend Section 50650.3 of the Health and Safety Code with a focus on the CalHome Program. The bill emphasizes the support for homeownership among lower-income households by allowing the construction and conveyance of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units as part of homeownership development projects. It ensures that these units can be sold separately to various lower income households, promoting adaptability in housing solutions and potentially increasing overall housing availability in California.
Overall, sentiment around AB 671 is positive among proponents who view it as a proactive step towards improving housing access for lower income residents. Supporters argue that flexibility in developing ADUs addresses urgent housing shortages. However, there may be concerns regarding implementation details and local readiness to adapt to these guidelines. While legislators and stakeholders favor affordable housing initiatives, there remains cautious dialogue regarding potential unintended consequences for existing zoning and community character.
Notable points of contention may arise surrounding the governance and guideline adaptation process managed by the department. While the bill largely receives support, discussions about how local governments will adapt to these regulations and the associated long-term impacts on community structures and populations may surface. Furthermore, the stipulations regarding the resale restrictions could raise questions among various stakeholders regarding property values and long-term investment viability in affected areas.