WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

AB 2390

Streamlined housing approvals: objective standards: review and modifications.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Pilar Schiavo

AB 2390 tightens streamlined multifamily approvals by enforcing objective standards, limiting site review to disturbed areas, and extending modification timelines with stronger lab

Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
#streamlinedhousingapprovals #objectivestandards #reviewandmodifications
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · AB 2390

Summary of AB 2390 (2025-2026) — Streamlined housing approvals: objective standards: review and modifications

Note: This summary interprets the bill as introduced and amended through March–April 2026. It focuses on purpose, key provisions, who is affected, and timelines.

1) Purpose and intent

  • The bill aims to adjust and extend California’s streamlined, ministerial housing approval framework for multifamily developments, making modifications to how sites are evaluated, how modifications are reviewed, and how timelines operate.
  • It emphasizes objective standards (zoning, subdivision, and design review) and tightens the scope of site review to the physically disturbed area during streamlined processing.
  • It expands protections around tribal consultations and enforcement timing, and aligns modification reviews with standards that were in effect when the original application was submitted.
  • It includes statewide applicability (including charter cities) and adds state-mandated-local-program considerations.

2) Key provisions and changes

A. Location criteria review (site evaluation)

  • When determining if a site meets location criteria for streamlined approval, local review is limited to the area described as physically disturbed by construction in the application.
  • Excludes other contiguous or noncontiguous areas under ownership/control unless expressly stated.

B. Modifications to an approved development

  • Local governments must evaluate modifications against objective standards (zoning, subdivision, and design). These are the standards in effect when the original application was first submitted.
  • Subsequent modifications must be evaluated using the same assumptions and methods as the original or as used in a prior modification.
  • This replaces the prior rule that modifications only needed to be consistent with the objective planning standards at the time of the original submission.

C. Timing for modification reviews and expiration extensions

  • If a modification is requested, the approval period is extended by the number of days from submittal to final approval plus 180 days to obtain a building permit (and extended during litigation).
  • The extension applies not only to the first modification request, but to subsequent litigation, and is not limited to the first modification request.

D. Findings and retroactivity

  • The bill adds findings that changes address a statewide concern and are applicable to all cities, including charter cities.
  • Some amendments are retroactive to developments approved prior to January 1, 2022.

E. Scope of applicability and cost-shifting

  • States that the act imposes duties on local officials (state-mandated local program) but specifies that no general reimbursement is required in certain contexts.

F. Design and construction standards

  • Requires objective design review to be completed in a defined timeframe (e.g., 90 days for 150 or fewer units; 180 days for more than 150 units).
  • Allows application of California Building Standards Code (Title 24) objective building standards to modifications, with retroactive application where applicable.
  • Exempts modifications from re-opening prior determinations not affected by the modification.

G. Subdivision Map Act and environmental review

  • Subdivision approvals associated with streamlined projects may be exempt from CEQA if consistent with specified standards and local subdivision requirements.
  • Emphasizes public oversight timelines tied to objective standards.

H. Parking and other development standards

  • Auto parking requirements for streamlined projects are limited: no more than one space per unit except in specific transit or historic-district contexts, or if car-share options are present.

I. Labor standards and project labor agreements

  • For projects over 85 feet in height, the bill reinforces labor standards, including prevailing wages, apprenticeship participation, health care expenditures for workers, monthly compliance reporting, and penalties for noncompliance.
  • Clarifies enforcement mechanisms and penalties (civil wage assessments, daily penalties, and penalties deposited to enforcement funds).

J. Tribal consultation and scoping

  • Introduces a formal scoping consultation with California Native American tribes affiliated with the project area.
  • Requires formal notices within defined timeframes, sets response windows, and allows for enforceable agreements on tribal cultural resource treatment.
  • Establishes confidentiality and CEQA treatment provisions for scoping.

K. Expiration and post-entitlement permits

  • If a project is approved under streamlined review but fails to meet affordability thresholds, the approval remains valid for three years, with a one-time extension possible for significant progress.
  • Subsequent permits must be issued without undue delay and follow objective standards in effect at the time of original submission unless the proponent agrees to changes.

3) Who and what is affected

  • Local governments (planning departments, planning commissions) administering streamlined multifamily approvals.
  • Development proponents (developers) seeking ministerial streamlined approvals and modifications.
  • California Native American tribes involved in mandatory scoping consultations.
  • Labor standards enforcement agencies and construction contractors/subcontractors subject to prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements for higher-rise projects.
  • Cities and counties, including charter cities, given statewide applicability.

4) Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Documentation: Local staff must provide written determinations within defined windows (60 days for 150 units or fewer; 90 days for larger projects) when evaluating modifications.
  • Design review and timelines: Objective design review timelines are set (90/180 days depending on unit count).
  • Modifications: Evaluation uses original assumptions; retroactive provisions may apply to earlier projects.
  • Public oversight: Monthly compliance reporting for labor provisions; penalties for noncompliance.
  • Tribal scoping: Structured timelines for notice, response, and scoping consultations; CEQA exemption for scoping processes.

Overall, AB 2390 strengthens the use of objective standards in streamlined housing approvals, tightens the review and modification processes, expands tribal consultation, and enhances labor and affordable-housing requirements for larger projects. It seeks to balance speed in approvals with clearer standards and stronger enforcement.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.