The 2026 California legislative season lacked the blockbuster land use legislation that made headlines in 2025, but still delivered a number of meaningful changes for housing developers. This post focuses on key bills signed by the Governor affecting entitlement, permitting, financing, and subdivision of residential and mixed-use projects in California, in four general categories:
- Reducing uncertainty in project approvals and post-entitlement processing
- New streamlined development pathways
- Density Bonus Law limitations and expansions
- Extending the lives of subdivision maps, and reducing appeals
Reducing Uncertainty in Project Approvals and Post-entitlement Processing
SB 1014 (Grayson) [Earlier Disclosure of Required Improvements]
SB 1014 will provide housing developers with earlier information regarding potential improvement requirements and limit imposition of new requirements at the post-entitlement stage.
An applicant for a housing development project may request a preliminary estimate of required onsite and offsite improvements with an SB 330 preliminary application or, if no preliminary application is submitted, with the development application. Within 30 business days, the local agency must provide: (1) a good faith list of the types of improvements that may be required; and (2) for improvements the agency would construct or install, a good faith estimate of the cost. The estimate is informational and nonbinding and need not include improvements required under CEQA or by another public agency or utility. An applicant may also request a list of potential improvements from another public agency or utility within 30 days of submitting its application; that agency or utility must respond within 30 business days.
At the post-entitlement stage, within 30 business days after deeming a permit application complete, the permitting jurisdiction must provide a list of all onsite and offsite improvements required in connection with that permit and generally may not later require an improvement omitted from the list. Exceptions apply where the improvement is necessary to address a specific adverse health or safety impact supported by substantial evidence, is reasonably related to a requested change in the permitted work, or is required under CEQA for a discretionary post-entitlement permit.
AB 1621 (Wilson) [Post-entitlement Phase Permit Processing]
AB 1621 strengthens the statutory protections governing post-entitlement permitting for housing development projects by limiting repeated building permit review, restricting when review deadlines may be tolled, constraining changes to approved plans during building inspection, and expanding applicants’ remedies for agency noncompliance.
The bill also provides that a local agency’s violation of specified post-entitlement permitting requirements constitutes a disapproval under the Housing Accountability Act (HAA), meaning that a developer could pursue HAA remedies against the agency, while a state agency violation would result in the permit being deemed approved and related reviews deemed complete. Key changes include:
- A local or state agency may not require or request more than two plan check and specification reviews in connection with a building permit application. After two reviews, the agency may deny an application that does not comply with applicable permit standards, and the applicant may make additional submittals. The two-review limitation does not apply to other post-entitlement phase permits.
- Statutory review deadlines will be tolled only where federal or state law requires review by another independent public agency before the permitting agency may act, and the agency must notify the applicant within three business days after tolling begins and after the deadline resumes.
- An agency may not require or request a deviation from an approved building plan during building inspection unless it makes written findings, supported by substantial evidence, that either a reasonable person could not interpret the approved plan as compliant with the applicable building permit standards, or the deviation is necessary to address a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety.
- If the applicant appeals an incomplete determination, a noncompliance determination, or a denial, the deadline for the agency’s final written determination on appeal is shortened from 60 to 30 business days for projects with 25 units or fewer, and from 90 to 45 business days for projects with 26 units or more. If an appeal is denied, a decision is not made within the applicable deadline, or the required appeal process is not provided, the applicant may seek a writ of mandate to compel approval.
New Streamlined Development Pathways
AB 1751 (Quirk-Silva, Wicks) [Missing Middle Townhome Ownership Act]
AB 1751 creates a ministerial approval and subdivision process for qualifying townhome development projects, including projects on certain underutilized sites zoned for single-family use, and limits application of local objective standards that would physically preclude a project from meeting the law’s density threshold.
A qualifying “townhome development project” must:
- consist entirely of townhomes (single-family units of no more than three stories that either share a common wall on one or two sides or are separated from neighboring units by no more than the minimum fire separation distance);
- contain no more than 150 units;
- have an average townhome size of no more than 1,750 net habitable square feet; and
- achieve at least 75% of the applicable density specified in Housing Element Law, which varies depending on location and ranges from 10 to 30 units per acre.
For projects with 11 or more units, at least 10% of the units must be affordable to lower income households for at least 45 years, unless a higher local inclusionary requirement applies.
The new law also requires ministerial approval of tentative and final maps for qualifying townhome projects. The subdivision pathway is limited to sites zoned for multifamily residential use or underutilized sites zoned exclusively for single-family residential development (generally, sites with no permanent residential structure other than one that is abandoned and uninhabitable). Anti-displacement, environmental, historic-resource, infrastructure, and other site restrictions apply to this pathway. Newly created parcels generally must be at least 600 square feet and must be served by an existing community water system and municipal sewer system.
Local agencies may continue to apply objective general plan, zoning, subdivision, and design standards that do not conflict with the statute, but may not apply standards that physically preclude a project meeting the statute’s density threshold, impose requirements solely because a project uses the new process, or require enclosed or covered parking. A local agency may disapprove a qualifying project or deny its map only on written findings, based on a preponderance of the evidence, of a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety that cannot feasibly be mitigated. Approvals are not subject to CEQA.
Local agencies also may not require formation of a homeowners’ association except as required by the Davis-Stirling Act. Unless the local agency authorizes otherwise by ordinance or map condition, lots created under the new law generally may not be sold, leased, or financed separately until they contain a completed residential unit.
The new law does not apply in San Francisco.
AB 2074 (Haney) [Regional Transit Hub Districts and Downtown Housing]
AB 2074 establishes minimum height, FAR, and density standards for qualifying projects in regional transit hub districts, together with a ministerial approval pathway and the ability to layer applicable Density Bonus Law (DBL) benefits onto those standards.
The new law requires each “major transit city”—a city with at least 400,000 residents and at least two transit-oriented development stops—to designate at least one regional transit hub district by July 1, 2027. The total required district area depends on city population, ranging from 0.5 to1.5 square miles. Each district must be a contiguous area of at least 0.25 square miles and contain at least one transit-oriented development stop. If a major transit city does not comply, an equivalent area in a uniform radius around the city’s highest-ridership transit-oriented development stop will be deemed a regional transit hub district.
Within a regional transit hub district, a city must make a “downtown housing development” an allowable use and:
- may not set a maximum height below 150 feet, an FAR below 6, or a maximum density below 200 units/acre;
- must allow a maximum height of at least 450 feet, an FAR of at least 12, and no maximum density limit, each on at least 25% of the total aggregate district area; and
- may apply other objective zoning, subdivision, and design review standards consistent with those requirements.
A “downtown housing development” must meet specified requirements, including a minimum density of 60 units/acre, affordability, labor and site-eligibility requirements, restrictions on demolition of individually landmarked property, and an average unit-size cap of 1,750 net habitable square feet. Such projects would be eligible for streamlined ministerial approval under SB 35/SB 423 (while being exempt from many of that legislation’s requirements), and may qualify for DBL benefits using the bill’s requirements as the base density.
Designating a district is not a “project” under CEQA, and other cities may opt in by designating their own regional transit hub districts. The new law is enforceable by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, which may refer violations to the Attorney General. It also directs the California Housing Finance Agency to study a potential state construction loan program and report to the Legislature by March 1, 2028.
Density Bonus Law Limitations and Expansions
SB 1383 (Arreguín) [Density Bonus Concessions and Local Labor Standards]
Adopted in response to developers in Berkeley using DBL to obtain concessions for relief from locally adopted labor requirements, SB 1383 will prevent the use of DBL incentives or concessions to modify certain local labor standards. The DBL defines an incentive or concession to include specified reductions in site development standards or modifications of zoning or architectural requirements, as well as other regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, and developers are entitled to a certain number of incentives or concessions depending on the percentage and level of below-market rate units included in a project.
For a building over 85 feet in height above grade, SB 1383 provides that a reduction, modification, or other regulatory incentive or concession may not include or relate to a “labor standard,” as defined in Labor Code section 1205, adopted by the local government. For purposes of this restriction, the applicable labor standards are those that do not exceed the requirements of SB 35/SB 423 (Government Code section 65913.4(a)(8)), as those requirements existed on December 31, 2025. Generally, these provisions require payment of prevailing wages and compliance with skilled and trained workforce requirements.
AB 2433 (Alvarez) [Density Bonus Law Amendments]
AB 2433 makes several changes to the DBL, including changes to when local agencies must apply the law, how a density bonus may be calculated, and how qualifying projects may use DBL benefits. Among the principal changes:
- A local agency would be required to comply with DBL when an applicant submits an application for a housing development that the local agency determines meets at least one of the statutory eligibility criteria, rather than only when an applicant affirmatively seeks a density bonus. When a density bonus application is deemed complete, the local agency must also determine that the project is eligible for a density bonus, in addition to determining the amount of the bonus and the other matters already required under DBL.
- An applicant may elect to provide a base density study, which the local agency must accept if it includes all applicable objective development standards, and may elect to receive the density bonus as a percentage increase in maximum floor area ratio (FAR) rather than an increase in residential density.
- A project that includes for-sale affordable units would receive two additional incentives or concessions.
- DBL benefits may be applied throughout a housing development. Density bonus units may be provided outside the areas containing the lower income units, and incentives, concessions, waivers, and reductions of development standards may be applied outside the areas containing housing units, subject to specified requirements.
- For the additional “super” density bonus made available by AB 1287, the bill removes the existing limitation that the resulting housing development not restrict more than 50% of the total units to moderate, lower, or very low income households. It also allows more deeply affordable units to be substituted for less deeply affordable units (e.g., substituting very low income units for moderate units) to satisfy the applicable unit percentage.
- The bill expands on existing language stating that a grant of a density bonus, incentive, or concession does not require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, or other discretionary approval. It clarifies that any of these DBL-related actions, or the grant of a waiver or reduction in development standards, is not itself discretionary and does not independently require environmental review under CEQA.
Subdivision Map Act Protections
SB 1169 (Grayson) [Longer Tentative Map Terms]
Under existing law, an approved or conditionally approved tentative map generally expires 24 months after approval or conditional approval, subject to an additional period prescribed by local ordinance of up to 24 months. SB 1169 extends those periods to 48 months and up to an additional 36 months, respectively. These timelines also apply to any approved or conditionally approved tentative map that has not expired as of December 31, 2026. The new law does not change the other extension provisions in Government Code section 66452.6, including extensions associated with certain phased final maps and extensions granted upon application of the subdivider.
SB 677 (Wiener) [Limits on Third-Party Subdivision Appeals]
SB 677 limits administrative appeals of specified subdivision decisions for qualifying housing development projects. An interested person may not file an appeal under specified provisions of the Subdivision Map Act or a local subdivision ordinance if the decision relates to a map that is part of a housing development project and the project site is located in a qualifying urban area, meets specified infill criteria, will be served by a public water system and municipal sewer system, and is not located on specified sensitive lands. The restriction would not apply to appeals filed by an applicant or subdivider, certain tenants in residential conversion projects, an advisory agency otherwise authorized to appeal, or a public agency or public official acting within the course and scope of their employment.
The Coblentz Real Estate Team has extensive experience with the state’s latest housing laws and can help to navigate the laws’ complexities and opportunities. Please contact us for additional information and any questions related to the impact of these bills on land use and real estate development.
