Housing Regulation - California Climate and Energy Collaborative

Barrier 1: Housing Regulation

Barrier Statement

Complex zoning laws, inconsistent CEQA requirements, lengthy permitting processes, and local opposition to new development have historically limited housing production and infill development.

Filterable Database

How communities are experiencing this barrier

View the details on what communities have shared with SLECC from across the state.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, Inland Deserts

Community resistance to housing development remains a major barrier (NIMBY Opposition). Local leaders noted that opposition—often framed as protecting neighborhood “green space” or preserving single-family character—can reflect deeper resistance to multifamily density and infill. Many residents still associate new housing with congestion or environmental harm rather than recognizing its potential to improve public health, cost efficiency, and climate outcomes.

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles

Time delays affecting compliance: “It takes a lot of time, and now cities are behind on their own zoning, and they’re going to start getting dinged by HCD”

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles

Unfunded mandates: For jurisdictions without resources or in debt, well intended state laws that aren’t paired with funding become unmanageable

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles

Inconsistent streamlining priorities: A football stadium may get streamlined, but city rezonings to accommodate the arena have to go through full CEQA.

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles

Mission creep: Layering of numerous small requirements (“weight of 1,000 pennies”) overwhelms staff and slows projects

Local Solution Opportunities

SLECC stakeholders have brainstormed the following solution opportunities that can be taken by local leaders. Existing examples of progress or pathways to make further progress are highlighted if known.

Local Solution

Launch coordinated, values-based pro-housing campaigns that engage trusted messengers and community partners to build support for infill and multifamily development. This includes organizing “say yes to housing” education efforts to counter NIMBY narratives; partnering with cultural, faith-based, and health organizations as trusted messengers; and framing well-planned housing as improving family stability, commute times, air quality, and community well-being.

Existing Examples of Progress:

1. The Inland Deserts Regional Assessment under the Fifth Climate Change Assessment is partnering with groups like Alianza Coachella to host art-based and health-focused engagement events, where storytelling and community art connect climate, housing, and social well-being. 2. Lift to Rise’s regional housing coalition in the Coachella Valley — cited as a model of collaborative storytelling and data-sharing that connects housing supply to health, cost, and climate benefits., resilient housing part of the region’s health and equity strategy

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, Inland Deserts

Local Solution

Reform and modernize local zoning codes to replace exclusionary single-family and separated-use patterns with infill-oriented, mixed-use, and higher-density districts in walkable, transit-served areas. Updates should allow a wider range of housing types—including modular, mobile, small multifamily, and mixed-use buildings—while reducing unnecessary minimum home size requirements to expand affordability, flexibility, and climate-aligned community design.

Existing Examples of Progress:

1. City of Glendale – Since the 2000s, Glendale permitted 6–7-story mixed-use/apartment buildings in its commercial core. This long-term approach “flooded the market” with housing, keeping rents “pretty reasonable” compared to surrounding Los Angeles. Glendale is now layering parks, pedestrian, and bike plans after this growth, showing how infrastructure can catch up to zoning-enabled supply. Why it matters: Large-scale production moderated rents relative to surrounding LA markets; an example of land-use enablement delivering supply at scale. 2. City of Seaside’s planning approach prioritizes mixed-use infill development—combining housing, small businesses, and civic spaces within walkable districts. This structure reduces vehicle miles traveled (VMT), a major contributor to regional greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while encouraging economic vibrancy and livability. The city has repurposed underused parcels into compact, transit-oriented neighborhoods that integrate energy-efficient buildings, pedestrian pathways, and public gathering areas. 3. In San Francisco, participants described cities where upzoning from single-family to three-story buildings with no CEQA enabled more housing, and highlighted how split residential/commercial zoning and very little mixed zoning prevent “integrated neighborhood” development.

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, Inland Deserts

Local Solution

Local governments should initiate early, consistent, relationship-based engagement with residents and community partners—beginning years before a project breaks ground—to build trust, align expectations, and minimize opposition. This engagement should go beyond one-off meetings and instead include community-based organizations (CBOs) as true co-design and peer-review partners throughout Housing Element updates, rezoning, and major development reviews, using models such as SB 1425’s environmental justice (EJ) engagement standards as a floor, not a ceiling. Meaningful long-term partnerships help communities understand benefits, shape decisions, and support infill, upzoning, and climate-resilient housing development.

Existing Examples of Progress:

City of Long Beach – CBO co-design of housing policy (inclusionary ordinance): Community-based organizations actively peer-reviewed and helped craft the city’s inclusionary housing ordinance and related policy, moving beyond one-off meetings. CBOs didn’t just “consult” but actually co-wrote and peer-reviewed housing elements and ordinances, ensuring that siting choices (e.g., where new housing would go) reflected environmental justice and anti-displacement priorities. The CBO role was described as a “mirror-holding” role, where CBOs pushed city staff to adjust policy drafts before adoption. This was seen as more effective than one-off workshops mandated by state law. Why it matters: Demonstrates a scalable model for true co-production of housing policy to improve equity and local legitimacy.

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles

State Solution Opportunities

SLECC stakeholders have brainstormed the following solution opportunities that can be taken by state leaders. Existing examples of progress or pathways to make further progress are highlighted if known.

State Solution

Expand and strengthen CEQA streamlining for housing-element rezonings and qualifying infill housing projects—moving beyond one-off project exemptions to support RHNA compliance—while ensuring reforms reduce delays and prevent misuse of CEQA to block infill or climate-aligned development.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles

State Solution

Enable RHNA credit trading / cap-and-trade-style RHNA to incentivize jurisdictions in the region to collaborate (with safeguards), rather than every city meeting targets alone.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): Los Angeles

State Solution

State enables or funds a regional pre-application process where multi-stakeholder boards identify priority housing projects aligned with regional goals.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area

Solution Spotlight

No results found.

Help us strengthen our knowledge base!

Help us to expand our database. Either share new ideas, best practices or general feedback via this form, or click on a particular item to share additional feedback, information, examples of progress on that particular item.

Feedback Form

Additional Resources

Please share any additional resources you would like to include by emailing eecoordinator@civicwell.org.