Various state housing bills are currently making their way through the California State Legislature that are expected to benefit mixed-income multifamily housing developers. The following summaries reflect the status of the pending legislation as of June 6, 2025. Future amendments are expected. Important upcoming dates in the legislative process include:

• September 12, 2025 – final date for the Legislature to pass bills.
• October 12, 2025 – final date for the Governor to sign or veto passed bills.
• January 1, 2026 – default effective date for approved bills (unless otherwise specified).

SENATE BILL 79: TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

SB 79 (Wiener) would provide for the approval of qualifying housing development projects within close proximity to a transit-oriented development (TOD) stop, provided that specified requirements are met.

TOD stop is defined to mean a major transit stop (as defined in Public Resources Code § 21155) served by heavy rail transit, very high frequency commuter rail, high frequency commuter rail, light rail transit, bus service (meeting the standards of Public Resources Code § 20160.2(a)(1)), frequent commuter rail service, or ferry service, or “otherwise so designated by the applicable authority” (as each is defined and specified).

Threshold Requirements

As currently proposed, SB 79 provides:

• The project site must be “zoned for residential, mixed, or commercial development.”
• If the project would propose more than 10 dwelling units, the project must provide lower-income units pursuant to the applicable local inclusionary zoning ordinance or local affordable housing fee. If there is no such ordinance or fee, the project must meet the requirements to qualify for a density bonus under the State Density Bonus Law pursuant to Gov. Code § 65915(b) (e.g., if lower-income units are provided, at least 10% of the total units must designated as affordable) or the local density bonus ordinance, which should be consistent with the State Density Bonus Law.
• The project must be within close proximity (as specified below) to a Tier 1, Tier 2 or Tier 3 TOD stop, which are defined as follows:
  • Tier 1: a TOD stop within an urban transit county (defined to mean a county with more than 15 rail transit stations) served by heavy rail transit (as defined) or very high frequency commuter rail (as defined).
    • According to the bill analysis, this is intended to apply to the following: BART, LA Metro B and D lines, and 25 commuter rail stations.
  • Tier 2: a TOD stop (that is not a Tier 1 TOD stop) within an urban transit county served by light rail transit (i.e., streetcar, trolley or tramway service), by high-frequency commuter rail (as defined), or by bus service meeting the requirements of Public Resources Code § 21060.2(a)(1).
    • According to the bill analysis, this is intended to apply to the following: SacRT Light Rail, SF Muni Metro, SF Muni streetcars, SF Van Ness BRT, VTA Light Rail, LA Metro A, C, E, G, J, and K lines, San Diego MTS Trolley, Santa Ana streetcar, 15 commuter rail stations and 13 additional light rail or BRT stations.
  • Tier 3: a TOD stop (that is not a Tier 1 or Tier 2 TOD stop): (i) within an urban transit county served by frequent commuter rail service (as defined) or by ferry service; or (ii) not within an urban transit county; or (iii) any major transit stop (as defined in Public Resources Code § 21155) “otherwise so designated by the applicable authority.” It is specified that the board of a transit agency may vote to designate a major transit stop served by the agency as a Tier 3 TOD stop.
    • According to the bill analysis, this is intended to apply to the following: 60 commuter rail stations and 10 ferry stations.
  • The project must comply with anti-displacement requirements under the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Gov. Code § 66300.6).

Development Standards

As currently proposed, SB 79 provides:

• For projects within one-quarter mile of a Tier 1 TOD stop: (i) the maximum building height will be 75 feet or the applicable local height limit, whichever is greater; (ii) the local agency cannot impose any maximum density of less than 120 dwelling units per acre, which may be increased pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law; (iii) the local agency cannot enforce any other local development standard (or combination of standards) that would prevent a FAR of 3.5; and (iv) three additional incentives/concessions must be granted for projects that are eligible for a density bonus under the State Density Bonus Law.
• For projects within one-half mile of a Tier 1 TOD stop or one-quarter mile of a Tier 2 TOD stop: (i) the maximum building height will be 65 feet or the applicable local height limit, whichever is greater; (ii) the local agency cannot impose any maximum density of less than 100 dwelling units per acre, which may be increased pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law; (iii) the local agency cannot enforce any other local development standard (or combination of standards) that would prevent a FAR of 3.0; and (iv) two additional incentives/concessions must be granted for projects that are eligible for a density bonus under the State Density Bonus Law.
• For projects within one-half mile of a Tier 2 TOD stop or one-quarter mile of a Tier 3 TOD stop: (i) the maximum building height will be 55 feet or the applicable local height limit, whichever is greater; (ii) the local agency cannot impose any maximum density of less than 80 dwelling units per acre, which may be increased pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law; (iii) the local agency cannot enforce any other local development standard (or combination of standards) that would prevent a FAR of 2.5; and (iv) one additional incentive/concession must be granted for projects that are eligible for a density bonus under the State Density Bonus Law.
• For projects within one-half mile of a Tier 3 TOD stop: (i) and within an urban transit county, the maximum building height will be 45 feet or the applicable local height limit, whichever is greater (otherwise, the maximum building height will be the applicable local height limit); (ii) the local agency cannot impose any maximum density of less than 60 dwelling units per acre, which may be increased pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law; and (iii) the local agency cannot enforce any other local development standard (or combination of standards) that would prevent a FAR of 2.0.
• Notwithstanding the foregoing, an “adjacency intensifier” would be available for residential developments immediately adjacent to a Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3 TOD stop (i.e., sharing a property line with the transit station or transit stop, including any parcels that serve a related parking or circulation purpose) to increase the height limit by an additional 20 feet, the maximum density standard by an additional 40 dwelling units per acre, and available FAR by an additional0.
• If the project proposes a building height in excess of the local height limit pursuant to the provisions above, then the local government shall not be required to grant a waiver, incentive, or concession under the State Density Bonus Law for additional height beyond that specified above. There is an exception for 100% affordable housing projects that qualify for an automatic height increase under the State Density Bonus Law, as specified in Gov. Code § 65915(d)(2)(D).
• The local government “may still enact and enforce standards, including an inclusionary zoning requirement that applies generally within the jurisdiction, that do not, alone or in concert, prevent achieving the [foregoing] applicable development standards.” The omission of the word “objective” in this provision may have been inadvertent. SB 79 separately provides that “any local zoning standard” conflicting with SB 79 requirements shall not apply and that a local TOD ordinance (see below) may include “any applicable objective design standards” for TOD developments.
• A transit agency may adopt objective standards for projects proposed on land owned by the transit agency (or on which the transit agency has a permanent operating easement), so long as the land is within ½ mile of a TOD stop and the objective standards allow for the same or greater development intensity as that allowed by local standards or applicable state law.

Project Approval Process

As currently proposed, SB 79 provides:

• SB 79 projects shall be eligible for streamlined ministerial (i.e., no CEQA) review and approval under SB 35/SB 423 (Gov. Code § 65913.4) in accordance with the following:
  •  
    • To qualify for streamlined ministerial approval, the project shall comply with most SB 35/SB 423 requirements, including that specified labor requirements must be met.
    • Among other requirements, the project site must meet the SB 35 siting criteria under Gov. Code § 65913.4(a)(6) (except as specified below). Recall that SB 35 siting criteria prohibits projects within environmentally sensitive areas, including certain coastal zone areas, habitat for protected species, wetlands, very high fire hazard severity zones, hazardous waste sites, delineated earthquake fault zones, special flood hazard areas, regulatory floodways, and land dedicated for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan or conservation easement (as defined and specified and subject to certain exceptions).
    • However, the project shall be exempt from specified requirements under Gov. Code § 65913.4(a), meaning that a SB 79 project (i) does not need to be located in a jurisdiction that is otherwise subject to SB 35/423 streamlining (due to insufficient RHNA progress); (ii) does not have to be consistent with local objective standards (but see above); and (iii) can be located on a parcel within the coastal zone (where applicable) that is not zoned for multifamily housing. (Gov. Code § 65913.4(a)(4)(A), (a)(5), (a)(6)(A)(iv).)
    • The project shall comply with the affordability requirements under Gov. Code § 65913.4(a)(4)(B)(i)(I)-(III). For example, for-rent projects must dedicate at least 10% of the total number of units (prior to calculating any density bonus) to very low-income households (below 50% AMI), unless the local ordinance requires a greater percentage of very low-income units or the project is located in the nine-county Bay Area, in which case there is an alternate option for compliance (as specified). Please recall that threshold affordable housing requirements would need to be met to qualify as a SB 79 project in the first instance (see above).
    • Please recall that if the project site is zoned for commercial or light industrial uses, the requirements of SB 35/423 necessitate that the applicable general plan or zoning designation also allows residential or residential mixed-uses (or the project must separately qualify under SB 6: the Middle-Class Housing Act of 2022).
• SB 79 “shall not require a ministerial approval process” (unless the project otherwise qualifies for ministerial approval). Therefore, if the SB 79 project does not qualify for streamlined ministerial approval under SB 35/SB 423, the project “shall be reviewed according to the jurisdiction’s development review process” and the Housing Accountability Act (Gov. Code § 65589.5) (HAA), except that any local zoning standard conflicting with SB 79 requirements shall not apply. See also the new CEQA exemption proposed by SB 79.
• SB 79 projects will qualify for the protections under the HAA, including but not limited to Gov. Code § 65589.5(j) (i.e., limits on a local agency’s ability to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density), because the SB 79 project “shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision” for purposes of the HAA.
• If the local agency denies a qualifying SB 79 housing development project that is located in a “high-resource area” (as defined) the local agency will be presumed to be in violation of the HAA (and liable for penalties under the HAA) unless the local agency provides substantial evidence to demonstrate that there is “a health, life, or safety reason for denying the project.”

Local TOD Alternative Plan

As currently proposed, SB 79 would allow a local government to enact a local TOD alternative plan as an amendment to the housing element and land use element of its general plan, subject to review by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), as specified.

The TOD alternative plan may include amendments to the local zoning ordinance, which, among other things, may reduce the SB 79 residential density for any individual TOD site by up to 50%. However, the TOD alternative plan must maintain at least an equal feasible development capacity (total units and residential floor area) as the baseline established under SB 79 across all TOD zones (i.e., eligible areas around qualifying TOD stops) within the jurisdiction.

The TOD alternative plan may also designate any other major transit stop or stop along a high-quality transit corridor that is not already identified as a Tier 3 TOD stop.

New CEQA Exemption for Projects on Transit Agency Land

As currently proposed, SB 79 would create a new CEQA exemption for a private project or public project (i.e., a project ultimately operated by a public agency) that proposes residential, commercial or mixed-uses and meets specified requirements. Please see our separate article titled “Pending State Housing Laws: New CEQA Exemptions & Expanded Opportunities for Streamlined Ministerial Approval” for more information about the new CEQA exemption proposed under SB 79.

Implications

As explained by Senator Wiener: “California needs to build millions of new homes in sustainable locations to meet state housing goals, slash climate emissions, and reduce the cost of living, but overly restrictive zoning codes make building such homes illegal” and accordingly, “SB 79 allows building more homes near transit to lower costs for families while bolstering public transit use and supporting cash-strapped agencies.” SB 79 would effectively eliminate single-family zoning districts within ½ mile of any qualifying TOD stop by imposing state-mandated minimum density requirements.

Please note that SB 79 includes provisions that allow for some local flexibility, including the ability to enact an ordinance to revise applicable zoning requirements on individual sites within a TOD zone, which could result in up to a 50% reduction in permitted residential density. Other properties in a TOD zone could benefit from up to a 200% increase in permitted residential density to compensate for any such reductions.

SB 79 was passed by the Senate Appropriations Committee on June 3, 2025, and has been ordered to the Assembly.