BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2299|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2299
Author: Bloom (D)
Amended: 8/19/16 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE TRANS. & HOUSING COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/14/16
AYES: Beall, Galgiani, Leyva, McGuire, Mendoza, Roth,
Wieckowski
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cannella, Allen, Bates, Gaines
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 4-0, 6/29/16
AYES: Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara
NO VOTE RECORDED: Nguyen, Moorlach, Pavley
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 51-24, 6/2/16 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Land use: housing: 2nd units
SOURCE: California Apartment Association
DIGEST: This bill requires, rather than permits, a local
government to adopt an ordinance for the creation of second
units in single-family and multifamily residential zones.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/19/16 change "second units" to
"accessory dwelling units" or ADUs and reorganize the structure
of the statute to be clearer. These amendments also state that
if a local jurisdiction adopts an ADU ordinance, the increased
floor area of an ADU shall not exceed 50% of the existing living
area, up from 30%.
AB 2299
Page 2
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Requires local governments to consider applications for a
second unit ministerially, without discretionary review or
hearing, regardless of any local ordinance regulating the
issuance of special-use permits.
2)Provides that a local government may by ordinance provide for
the creation of second units in single-family and multi-family
zones.
3)Provides that a local ordinance for second units may do all of
the following:
a) Designate areas where second units may be permitted
based on criteria that may include the adequacy of water
and sewer services and the impact on traffic flow.
b) Impose parking, height, setback, lot coverage,
architectural review, maximum unit size and standards that
prevent adverse impacts on any property listed in the
California Register of Historic Places.
c) Provide that second units do not exceed the allowable
density for the lot on which it is located and that second
units are a residential use that is consistent with the
existing general plan and zoning designation on a lot.
This bill:
1)Permits a local government to provide for the creation of ADUs
AB 2299
Page 3
in single-family and multifamily residential zones.
2)Provides that when a local agency that has not adopted an ADU
ordinance receives its first application, the local agency
shall accept the application and approve or disapprove the
application ministerially without discretionary review within
120 days after receiving the application.
3)Provides that the increased floor area of an ADU shall not
exceed 50% of the existing floor area, up from 30%.
4)Prohibits a local government from requiring a passageway in
conjunction with the construction of an ADU. Defines
"passageway" as a pathway that is unobstructed clear to the
sky and extends from a street to one entrance of the ADU.
5)Prohibits a local government from requiring a setback more
than five feet from the side and rear lot line for a second
unit constructed above a garage. No setback shall be required
for an existing garage that is converted into an ADU.
6)Requires ADUs to apply local building code requirements that
apply to detached dwellings.
7)Requires approval by the local health officer where a private
sewage disposal system is being used.
8)Prohibits parking requirements for ADUs from exceeding one
parking space per unit or per bedroom. These spaces may be
provided as tandem parking on an existing driveway. Offstreet
parking shall be permitted in setback areas in locations
determined by the local agency or through tandem parking,
unless specific findings are made that parking in setback
areas or tandem is not feasible based upon specific
conditions.
9)Provides that when a garage, carport, or covered parking
structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction
of an ADU, and the local government requires that those
off-street parking spaces be replaced, the replacement spaces
may be located in any configuration on the same lot as the
ADU, including, but not limited to, as covered spaces,
AB 2299
Page 4
uncovered spaces, or tandem spaces, or by the use of
mechanical automobile parking lifts.
Comments
1)Purpose. According to the author, many local governments have
not adopted a local ADU law or have made their laws so
stringent that homeowners are unable to add an ADU. Given
California's current housing deficiency, this bill is intended
to help California bring more housing online. This bill
permits local governments to adopt an ADU ordinance and adds
specifications for what is required in an ADU ordinance,
including relaxing parking restrictions, prohibiting the need
for a passageway, and increasing the permissible size of the
units.
2)What are second units? ADUs, also known as accessory
apartments, accessory dwellings, mother-in-law units, or
granny flats, are additional living spaces on single-family
lots that have a separate kitchen, bathroom, and exterior
access independent of the primary residence. These spaces can
either be attached to or detached from the primary residence.
3)Relaxing second-unit requirements. According to a UC Berkeley
study, Yes in My Backyard: Mobilizing the Market for Secondary
Units, ADUs are a means to accommodate future growth and
encourage infill development in developed neighborhoods.
Despite existing state law, which requires each city in the
state to have a ministerial process for approving ADUs, the
study found that local regulations often impede development.
Easing these burdens to permit more ADUs could permit a family
to rent out the unit (about 49% of the units) or provide
housing for a family member (about 51% of the units). In
fact, the study found that the average ADU was advertised at a
rental rate that makes it affordable to a household earning
62% of the area median income. About 30% were affordable to
households in the very low-income category, and 49% were in
the low-income category. The study, which evaluated five
AB 2299
Page 5
adjacent cities in the East Bay, concluded that there is a
substantial market of interested homeowners; cities could
reduce parking requirements without contributing to parking
issues; second units could accommodate future growth and
affordable housing; and that scaling up second-unit strategy
could mean economic and fiscal benefits for cities.
4)Opposition. According to the opposition, which refers to a
prior version of the bill, this bill departs from current law
by requiring local governments to adopt an ADU ordinance,
which is a costly mandate. This will prohibit cities from
imposing parking standards in certain circumstances, which
could lead to unintended consequences, including community
opposition to ADUs. Existing law already provides authority
to local governments to adopt an ADU ordinance and does not
account for the realities of many suburban and rural
communities.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: Yes
SUPPORT: (Verified8/19/16)
California Apartment Association (source)
American Planning Association, California Chapter
Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles
California Association of Realtors
California Council for Affordable Housing
City of Los Angeles, City Councilmember Gil Cedillo
City of Los Angeles, Mayor Eric Garcetti
Santa Barbara Rental Property Association
West Hollywood Chamber of Commerce
OPPOSITION: (Verified8/19/16)
AB 2299
Page 6
California State Association of Counties
City of Camarillo
City of Lakewood
City of Morgan Hill
City of San Dimas
City of San Marcos
Ventura Council of Governments
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 51-24, 6/2/16
AYES: Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown,
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh,
Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia,
Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gray, Hadley, Roger Hernández,
Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, McCarty,
Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone,
Thurmond, Weber, Williams, Wood, Rendon
NOES: Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Brough, Chang, Chávez,
Dahle, Gallagher, Grove, Harper, Irwin, Jones, Kim, Lackey,
Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, Melendez, Obernolte, Olsen,
Steinorth, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bigelow, Burke, Beth Gaines, Gordon, Ting
Prepared by:Alison Dinmore / T. & H. / (916) 651-4121
8/22/16 23:01:11
**** END ****