California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: In Committee

AB 2470 — Splitting multifamily dwelling units: streamlined ministerial approval.

Last action — Re-referred to Com. on H. & C.D.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law, until January 1, 2026, authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development containing 2 or more residential units, which satisfies specified objective planning standards, that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit. Existing law requires a local government to notify the development proponent in writing if the local government determines that the development conflicts with any of those objective standards by a specified time; otherwise, the development is deemed to comply with those standards. This bill would, in addition, authorize a development proponent to submit an application for a development to split one or more dwelling units within a multifamily housing development to create additional smaller dwelling units to be subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process. The bill would require a local government to notify the development proponent in writing if the local government determines that the development conflicts with any of those objective standards within 30 days of a completed application being submitted; otherwise, the development is deemed to comply with those standards. This bill would restrict a local government's authority to impose automobile parking standards for a development subject to these provisions and would prohibit imposition of parking standards for a project that is located within specified areas. The bill would prohibit a local government from imposing any standard requiring a minimum or maximum unit size or any density restriction on a development subject to these provisions. By imposing new duties upon local agencies with respect to the streamlined approval process described above, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. The approval process established by this bill is ministerial in nature, thereby exempting the approval of development projects subject to that approval process from CEQA. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Re-referred to Com. on H. & C.D.

  2. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on H. & C.D. Read second time and amended.

  3. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  4. Referred to Coms. on H. & C.D. and L. GOV.

  5. From printer. May be heard in committee March 21.

  6. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Kamlager · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Kamlager

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

public-safety housing labor
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 2470 do?
Existing law, until January 1, 2026, authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development containing 2 or more residential units, which satisfies specified objective planning standards, that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit. Existing law requires a local government to notify the development proponent in writing if the local government determines that the development conflicts with any of those objective standards by a specified time; otherwise, the development is deemed to comply with those standards. This bill would, in addition, authorize a development proponent to submit an application for a development to split one or more dwelling units within a multifamily housing development to create additional smaller dwelling units to be subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process. The bill would require a local government to notify the development proponent in writing if the local government determines that the development conflicts with any of those objective standards within 30 days of a completed application being submitted; otherwise, the development is deemed to comply with those standards. This bill would restrict a local government's authority to impose automobile parking standards for a development subject to these provisions and would prohibit imposition of parking standards for a project that is located within specified areas. The bill would prohibit a local government from imposing any standard requiring a minimum or maximum unit size or any density restriction on a development subject to these provisions. By imposing new duties upon local agencies with respect to the streamlined approval process described above, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. The approval process established by this bill is ministerial in nature, thereby exempting the approval of development projects subject to that approval process from CEQA. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 2470?
AB 2470 is sponsored by Kamlager.
What is the current status of AB 2470?
This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 2470?
Track AB 2470 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2470

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 2470

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →