California bills · 2025-2026 Regular Session
California AB 507
Adaptive reuse: streamlining: incentives.
- Introduced
- In committee
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became law
Sponsors
- Haney (Democratic)
Cosponsors (2)
- Mark González (Democratic)
- Stefani (Democratic)
Summary
Official abstract published by the California legislature· summary
(1) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of certain lands outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. That law allows a development proponent to submit an application for a development that is subject to a specified streamlined, ministerial approval process not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies certain objective planning standards, including that the development is a multifamily housing development that contains two or more residential units.
This bill would deem an adaptive reuse project a use by right in all zones, regardless of the zoning of the site, and subject to a streamlined, ministerial review process if the project meets specified requirements, subject to specified exceptions. In this regard, an adaptive reuse project, in order to qualify for the streamlined, ministerial review process, would be required to be proposed for an existing building or structure that is less than 50 years old or meets certain requirements regarding the preservation of historic resources, including the signing of an affidavit declaring that the project will comply with the United States Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for, among other things, the preservation of exterior facades of a building or structure that face a street, or receive federal or state historic rehabilitation tax credits, as specified. The bill would require an adaptive reuse project to meet specified affordability criteria. In this regard, the bill would require an adaptive reuse project for rental housing to include either 8% of the unit for very low income households and 5% of the units for extremely low income households or 15% of the units for lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project for owner-occupied housing, the bill would require the development to offer either 30% of the units at an affordable housing cost to moderate-income households or 15% of the units at an affordable housing cost to lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project including mixed uses, the bill would require at least one-half of the square footage of the adaptive reuse project to be dedicated to residential uses.
The bill would prohibit an adaptive reuse project from being permitted in industrial zones that do not permit residential uses. The bill would provide, among other things relating to projects involving adaptive reuse, that parking is not required for the portion of a project consisting of a building subject to adaptive reuse that does not have existing onsite parking. The bill would authorize an adaptive reuse project subject to these provisions to include the development of new residential or mixed-use structures on undeveloped areas and parking areas located on the same parcel as the proposed repurposed building, or on the parcels adjacent to the proposed adaptive reuse project site if certain conditions are met. The bill would subject an adaptive reuse project approved by a local government pursuant to these provisions to specified labor standards, including certain labor prevailing wage, apprenticeship, skilled and training workforce, and health care expenditure requirements, and would require development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury. By requiring certain development proponents of an adaptive reuse project to sign an affidavit regarding the preservation of historic resources and requiring development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury, the bill would expand the crime of perjury and therefore impose a state-mandated local program.
The bill would authorize a local government to adopt an ordinance, as specified, to, among other things, specify the process and requirements applicable to adaptive reuse projects, as specified, and would require an adaptive reuse project to comply with all objective planning standards found in the ordinance. The bill would specify that nothing in its provisions relating to adaptive reuse projects is intended to preempt the adoption and implementation of a local ordinance that provides alternative procedures and substantive requirements for adaptive reuse projects, provided that the local ordinance does not prohibit an applicant from electing to pursue an adaptive reuse project, as specified.
The bill would require a local agency that has not adopted an above-described ordinance to ministerially without discretionary review approve or disapprove applications for a permit to create or serve an adaptive reuse project, as specified. The bill would, if a local government's planning director or equivalent position determines that the adaptive reuse project submitted pursuant to these provisions is consistent with the objective planning standards, require the local government to approve the adaptive reuse project within specified timeframes. The bill would require the local government staff or relevant local planning and permitting department, upon determining that the adaptive reuse project is in conflict with any of the objective planning standards, to provide the proponent written documentation of, among other things, which standard or standards the development conflicts with within specific timeframes. The bill would prohibit a local government from imposing any local development standard on any project that is an adaptive reuse that would require alteration of the existing building envelope, except as specified, whether or not the local government has adopted an ordinance. By requiring local governments to implement the streamlined, ministerial review process for adaptive reuse projects, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
This bill would, except as specified, exempt an adaptive reuse project from all impact fees that are not reasonably related to the impacts resulting from the change of use of the site from nonresidential to residential or mixed use and would require any fees charged to be roughly proportional to the difference in impacts caused by the change of use.
This bill would authorize a city or county, or city and county, commencing in the 2026–27 fiscal year, to establish an adaptive reuse investment incentive program to pay adaptive reuse investment incentive funds to the proponent of an adaptive reuse project approved pursuant to the streamlined, ministerial process described above for up to 30 consecutive fiscal years, as specified. The bill would define "adaptive reuse investment incentive funds" to mean an amount up to or equal to the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to the participating local agency from the taxation of that portion of the total assessed value of the real and personal property of an adaptive reuse project property that is in excess of the qualified adaptive reuse project property's valuation at the time of the proponent's initial request for funding.
The bill would define various other terms for these purposes, and would make findings and declarations related to its provisions. The bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2026.
(2) Existing law, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects.
This bill, by establishing the streamlined, ministerial review process described above, would exempt the approval of adaptive reuse projects subject to those processes from CEQA. The bill would also exempt specified findings regarding industrial uses and ordinances adopted to implement specified provisions from CEQA.
(3) Existing law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to notify a city, county, or city and county, and authorizes the department to notify the Attorney General, that a city, county, or city and county is in violation of state law if the department finds that the housing element or an amendment to that element, or any specified action or failure to act, does not substantially comply with the law as it pertains to housing elements or that any local government has taken an action in violation of certain housing laws.
This bill would make corrections to a housing law cross-reference relating to the adaptive reuse project process established by the bill, thereby making a violation of that adaptive reuse project process by a city, county, or city and county subject to the above-described notification requirements.
(4) The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
(5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65585 of the Government Code proposed by AB 650 to be operative only if this bill and AB 650 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(6) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
Text versions
- 10/10/25 - Chaptered· Oct 10, 2025
- 09/15/25 - Enrolled· Sep 15, 2025
- 09/05/25 - Amended Senate· Sep 5, 2025
- 08/29/25 - Amended Senate· Aug 29, 2025
- 07/03/25 - Amended Senate· Jul 3, 2025
- 02/10/25 - Introduced· Feb 10, 2025
- AB507
Roll-call votes
State vote data last updated Oct 15, 2026, 8:04 PM.
| Date | Vote | Result | Your legislators |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 11, 2025 House | AB 507 Haney Concurrence in Senate Amendments | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Sep 10, 2025 Senate | 3rd Reading AB507 Haney et al. By Wiener | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Aug 29, 2025 Senate | Do pass as amended | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Aug 18, 2025 Senate | Placed on suspense file | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Jul 15, 2025 Senate | Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Jul 2, 2025 Senate | Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Housing] | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| May 23, 2025 House | AB 507 Haney Assembly Third Reading | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| May 14, 2025 House | Do pass. | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Apr 30, 2025 House | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | pass | Set your home in California to see |
| Apr 24, 2025 House | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Local Government] | pass | Set your home in California to see |
Actions
- Oct 10, 2025 · Legislature
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 493, Statutes of 2025. - Oct 10, 2025 · Legislature
Approved by the Governor. - Sep 23, 2025 · Legislature
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m. - Sep 11, 2025 · House
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 70. Noes 4. Page 3293.). - Sep 10, 2025 · House
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. - Sep 10, 2025 · Senate
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 30. Noes 9. Page 2816.). - Sep 8, 2025 · Senate
Read second time. Ordered to third reading. - Sep 5, 2025 · Senate
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading. - Sep 2, 2025 · Senate
Read second time. Ordered to third reading. - Aug 29, 2025 · Senate
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading. - Aug 29, 2025 · Senate
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (August 29). - Aug 18, 2025 · Senate
In committee: Referred to suspense file. - Jul 16, 2025 · Senate
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2.) (July 15). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. - Jul 3, 2025 · Senate
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HOUSING. - Jul 2, 2025 · Senate
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on HOUSING. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (July 2). - Jun 4, 2025 · Senate
Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and HOUSING. - May 23, 2025 · Senate
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. - May 23, 2025 · House
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 64. Noes 1. Page 1651.) - May 15, 2025 · House
Read second time. Ordered to third reading. - May 14, 2025 · House
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (May 14). - May 1, 2025 · House
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (April 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. - May 1, 2025 · House
Coauthors revised. - Apr 28, 2025 · House
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (April 24). Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV. - Apr 24, 2025 · House
(Pending re-refer to Com. on L. GOV.) - Apr 24, 2025 · House
Assembly Rule 56 suspended. (Page 1265.) - Feb 24, 2025 · House
Referred to Coms. on H. & C.D. and L. GOV. - Feb 11, 2025 · House
From printer. May be heard in committee March 13. - Feb 10, 2025 · House
Read first time. To print.