California's next housing package moves from zoning to execution.

1. Accessory Dwelling Units

More room for ADUs, with lower fees on larger units.

SB 1117 would reduce impact fees on larger accessory dwelling units. Impact fees are one-time charges that local agencies impose on new development to help pay for services and infrastructure such as roads, parks, utilities, and public facilities.

For as many as two ADUs on a property, those fees would generally apply only to the portion of each unit exceeding 750 square feet. Junior ADUs measuring 500 square feet or less would remain exempt.

AB 956 would require cities to allow as many as two detached, newly constructed ADUs on a single-family lot. A city could generally limit each unit to 800 square feet and require four-foot side and rear setbacks.

Together, the bills could make qualifying single-family properties more productive and improve the economics of small infill projects.

2. Infrastructure Costs

Earlier answers could make development budgets more reliable.

SB 1014 would allow applicants to request a preliminary estimate of required infrastructure and site improvements. Cities and counties would generally have 30 business days to respond.

This is important because off-site improvements, utility work, sidewalks, drainage, street upgrades, and similar requirements can add substantial costs after a developer has already committed time and money to a project. Receiving a good-faith list and preliminary estimate earlier would help buyers and developers test feasibility, arrange financing, negotiate a purchase price, or revise a design before the budget becomes difficult to change.

Once a post-entitlement permit application is complete, the agency would also have 30 business days to provide an itemized list of its requirements. The bill would not cap those costs, but it could make them visible sooner.

3. Downtown Los Angeles

Transit districts could accommodate development at a different scale.

AB 2074 would require California's largest transit-oriented cities to establish high-density districts around major downtown transit hubs. Los Angeles would need to designate at least 1.5 square miles.

Within these districts, qualifying housing could receive streamlined approval. The bill establishes substantial zoning floors, including a minimum permitted height of 150 feet, with at least one-quarter of each district allowing buildings up to 450 feet. It also establishes minimum floor-area and residential-density standards.

For Downtown Los Angeles, the implications could be significant. Parcels currently improved with low-rise buildings or surface uses may attract attention as larger housing sites. Neighboring parcels could become more valuable as assemblages, while owners may reassess whether to sell, hold, or seek a development partner. Greater permitted scale could also bring more residents, retail demand, and long-term investment near transit, although affordability, labor, environmental, financing, and site-eligibility rules would continue to shape what is actually built.

4. Starter Homes

A broader path for smaller, individually owned homes.

SB 1116 would strengthen California's existing process for subdividing qualifying properties into smaller, individually owned home sites.

The bill clarifies that height limits should be measured in feet rather than stories, restricts certain setbacks, permits smaller lots under specified conditions, and directs agencies to interpret the law in favor of producing the maximum number of housing units allowed. Most changes would apply to applications received beginning January 1, 2027.

In Los Angeles, this may be most relevant to vacant or underused urban sites where smaller detached homes can offer an alternative to both traditional subdivisions and larger apartment projects.

5. Late-Stage Delays

Approved projects could face fewer procedural detours.

SB 677 would limit certain third-party appeals of qualifying tentative and final subdivision maps while preserving appeals by applicants, tenants, agencies, and specified public officials.

It would also allow the state treasurer to provide approvals needed for certain affordable rental housing bonds when a participating local government fails to act within the prescribed period.

Both provisions concern projects that have already traveled some distance through the approval process. The purpose is to keep a late procedural delay from undoing years of earlier work.