Housing advocates’ success in California Renters Legal Advocacy & Education Fund v. City of San Mateo shows that recent legislative efforts to strengthen pro-housing laws, especially the Housing Accountability Act (HAA), are improving the ability of developers and advocacy groups to force cities to allow housing development. California Renters remains the gold standard for interpreting the HAA with its strict “reasonable person” standard and pro-housing bias. It provides legal support to housing developers looking to build in the areas most likely to resist new projects, which are typically areas with the most neighbors and most regulations, and tend to be fairly dense, urban environments. California Renters also provides cover to agencies representing such locales and looking to justify their own pro-housing decisions against NIMBY opposition. When infill housing cannot be built within existing urban environments, developers and housing seekers often turn to lower density areas, including exurban or previously undeveloped areas like greenfield sites. Such developments can interfere with habitat and can also be more prone to natural disasters. Infill housing is crucial not just for the sake of meeting housing goals, but also for densifying the urban environment in a way that increases walkability, bikeability, and transit accessibility, thereby reducing the community’s vehicle miles traveled and carbon footprint.
However, it remains to be seen whether the HAA can stand up to the delays, cost overruns, and outright project denials caused by California’s environmental review process under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A recent San Francisco Superior Court order cautions that even fortified state housing laws remain vulnerable to the resource-extinguishing delays associated with CEQA compliance, leaving room for further reform.
