BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 710
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 18, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 710 (Skinner) - As Amended: April, 25, 2011
Policy Committee: Local
GovernmentVote:8-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill establishes minimum parking standards for new
transit-oriented development. Specifically, this bill:
1)Prohibits a local government from requiring a minimum parking
standard greater than one parking space per thousand square
feet of nonresidential improvements and one parking space per
unit of residential improvements for any new development
project, including changes that incorporate existing building
improvements in transit intensive areas.
2)Allows jurisdictions to require higher minimum standards for
new development with written findings, as specified, based
upon substantial evidence in the record, including a parking
utilization study conducted within the last 24 months.
FISCAL EFFECT
Negligible state costs.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose. According to the author, AB 710 creates parking
standards appropriate for small lot/infill developments in
established transit corridors.
Supporters contend AB 710 provides a significant incentive to
housing and commercial developers to pursue needed infill and
TOD projects. According to the supporters, increases in
public transportation options and the development of
neighborhoods less dependent on the automobile reduce the
AB 710
Page 2
demand for parking. Relaxing minimum parking requirements
allows developers to be more creative and efficient in
supplying housing, especially in inner city areas.
2)Background. SB 375 (Steinberg, Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008)
aims to help California achieve its greenhouse gas reduction
objectives by promoting more efficient land use and
development patterns. SB 375 lays out ambitious goals for the
state, but it is widely acknowledged that achieving those
goals will require policy changes at the state, regional and
local levels.
AB 710 addresses one impediment to achieving the goals of SB
375 by requiring low minimum parking requirements-one space
per housing unit or one space per 1,000 square feet of
commercial development-in transit-intensive areas that are
slated for high-density development. According to the sponsor,
the California Infill Builders Association, excessive minimum
parking requirements can add significantly to the cost of
projects in existing developed areas by 10 to 20 %, making
projects financially infeasible.
3)Opposition. Opponents, the Cities of Lakewood, Concord and
Encinitas, argue that AB 710's one-size-fits-all approach
impedes local discretion in land use decision-making and
ignores the fact that every community is different and has
different needs. Opponents feel that decisions about parking
are best left to the discretion of local governments, who are
in a much better position to determine how much parking their
community requires.
4)Concerns . Western Center on Law & Poverty and the California
Rural Legal Assistance Foundation have expressed concern that
AB 710 may have serious unintended consequences for affordable
housing, but have not taken a position on the bill. They
point out that the bill may undercut provisions of the state's
density bonus law, which provides incentives to developers of
market-rate housing to include affordable units in their
projects. The two organizations note that they have long been
proponents of smart growth and improved access to public
transit for their low-income clients, but believe that AB 710
addresses one part of the problem out of context with a whole
host of other concerns, including environmental justice
issues.
AB 710
Page 3
Analysis Prepared by : Roger Dunstan / APPR. / (916) 319-2081