Summary
The Dr Zhivago effect is taking hold: Super-high density development designed around 1/2 mile of bus stops.
Summary:
SB-79 is an abomination, allowing super high-density development within otherwise tranquil residential neighborhoods. This Law was passed at the same time as AB-130, a similar abomination.
AB-130’s nullification of CC&Rs has stripped homeowners’ associations and individual property owners of their power. They are now unable to object to various types of development, including ADUs and surplus land purchases, aimed at expanding land parcels for affordable residential housing. Property protections, such as the right to quiet enjoyment, limitations on street parking, and view corridors, are no longer assured. The authority over development has been shifted to a state-level bureaucracy, leaving only ministerial approval rights for local agencies.
This is a forced high-density development imposed on homeowners, with no room for objection. In the author’s view, this situation resembles a Marxist political experiment, where the rights of individual property owners are disregarded in favor of a collective housing strategy.
Article:
This political experiment will turn every quiet and peaceful neighborhood into a transient nightmare of stack-and-pack high-density apartments, under-parked, and ripe for disruption.
Hypothetical example:
No longer will you come home to a lovely home with a white picket fence, two dogs, two cats in the yard, and peaceful tranquility. Many people will gather in front of the building because there is no space available in the lot. A 65-foot-tall monstrosity of a box will shade your home and yard, so you and the kids will get little sun. The streets will be lined with cars. The neighborhood will resemble a sawtooth backdrop, featuring a 20-foot-high home, followed by a 65-foot apartment, and then another 20-foot-high home, and so on.
Under the new laws, property values of single-family homes are set to diminish. Comparable single-family home sales will no longer be considered for valuation purposes. Only the residual valuation per unit is calculated based on the number of units that can be packed into your lot. This could force owners to sell, as the quality of life becomes increasingly tenuous. The potential negative impacts of these laws are alarming, including decreased property values and a tenuous quality of life.
Children's well-being is also at risk. The forced high-density development could lead to problems at school, as apartment dwellers may resent the perceived wealth of homeowners. This is reverse gentrification in action, systematically degrading neighborhoods into a lower socioeconomic and culturally transient area. Homeowners who object may face state and federal lawsuits for discrimination and be compelled to submit.
The 'Dr Zhivago effect', California style, is taking hold:
You come home one day and find that the proletariat has taken over your neighborhood with the assurances of government force to make sure you comply. Most of the tenants' monthly rent is paid for through government transfer payments, such as Section 8. A minority of tenants pay rent from their wages. When a tenant gets kicked out for non-payment of the rent, they could show up and occupy your home as a squatter while you are at work to earn a living. In recent years, Squatters have gained a bundle of legal rights, allowing them to live in your house for up to two years without paying rent. It's a great plan to diminish property rights and collapse capitalism.
You and your family are thrown out on the street, with none of your possessions accessible, including the dogs, cats, family picture albums, and the prized pearls you bought your wife for her 20th anniversary. The Law is on the side of the squatters. Few, if any, are looking out for you.
End of hypothetical.
What is occurring is that California has dictated that public policy agendas, driven by political motivations, supersede the Constitution and contractual agreements.
AB-130:Bill Text
Section1. Section 714.3 of the Civil Code is amended to read:
Bill Text: CA AB130 | 2025-2026 | Regular Session | Chaptered | LegiScan
Subject: ADUs and JADs.
(a) Any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any deed, contract, security instrument, or other instrument affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in real property that either effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts the construction or use of anaccessory dwellingunit or junior accessory dwelling unit on a lot zoned for single-family residential use that meets the requirements of Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314) of Chapter 13 or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333) of Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code is void and unenforceable.
Subject: Surplus Land.
(E) Surplus land that is a former street, right-of-way, or easement, and is conveyed to an owner of an adjacent property.
(F)(i) Surplus land that is to be developed for a housing development, which may have ancillary commercial ground floor uses, that restricts 100 percent of the residential units to persons and families of low or moderate income, with at least 75 percent of the residential units restricted to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, with an affordable sales price or an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50052.5 or 50053 of the Health and Safety Code, for 55 years for rental housing, 45 years for ownership housing, and 50 years for rental or ownership housing located on tribal trust lands, unless a local ordinance or a federal, state, or local grant, tax credit, or other project financing requires a more extended period of affordability, and in no event shall the maximum affordable sales price or rent level be higher than 20 percent below the median market rents or sales prices for the neighborhood in which the site is located.
(ii) The requirements of clause (i) shall be contained in a covenant or restriction recorded against the surplus land at the time of sale that shall run with the land and be enforceable against any owner who violates the covenant or restriction and each successor in interest who continues the violation.
SB-79:
Bill Text - SB-79 Housing development: transit-oriented development.
CC&Rs in single-family neighborhoods are unable to prohibit the 65-foot height limit or stop the creation of tiny lots through parcel subdivision, leading to increased density. There are legal questions that interested parties may litigate. The potential for legal challenges adds a layer of uncertainty to the situation.
Addressing the 65-foot and 75-foot height limits in SB-79:
China has 60-90 million vacant residential units from overbuilding, where the demand is not there.
China's condition is caused by oversupply, speculative buying, unfinished projects, and a shrinking population due to the one-child per family policy.
Where China goes, so goes California.
This Law is arguably the most damaging new Law in recent history
The adverse effects are always buried in the small print. Please take a look below at how the bus stop is a tiny segment in the definition.
Tiers are based on transit-oriented development stops. Note that this includes public bus service stops.
Transit-oriented development stop means a major transit stop, as defined by Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, served by heavy rail transit, very high frequency commuter rail, high frequency commuter rail, light rail transit, bus service meeting the standards of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21060.2 of the Public Resources Code, frequent commuter rail service, or ferry service, or otherwise so designated by the applicable authority.
I wanted to let you know that interested parties should review their local bus stop system maps to locate stops and the density of stops.
How many bus stops are there in California?
The California State Geoportal (.gov) contains records for California Transit stops, showing 160,433 in its database.
The general rule of thumb is that there is a bus stop every two blocks.
These bus stops are serviced with money-losing transportation and controlled by public employee labor union members.
Public bus transport is a money loser and requires subsidies from the general fund.
California subsidies provided for money-losing projects are paid for by the taxpayers, not the government that created them.
California could provide for a nominal fee Uber and Lyft rides upon demand, and save billions of dollars per year, but that would represent an efficient use of money and cost thousands of minimally productive labor union jobs.
California is not about saving money but rather expanding the bureaucratic infrastructure driven by monopoly public employee unions.
There are 12,003 bus stops in Los Angeles County. Ca.
There are over 5,483 bus stops in Orange County, CA.
Around every bus stop are high-density residential properties, where occupants have a 5-minute walk to access the bus.
Establishes different rules for what is referred to as tier 1, tier 2, and tier 3 projects.
Affects density transit-oriented development projects on any site zoned for residential, mixed, or commercial use
Establishes project height limits, density, and floor area ratios
Impose up to 10 units on a single-family residential lot
Impose up to 120 high-density units per acre.
Interested parties should carefully read SB-79 to fully understand the provisions.
California has modeled its development controls after the past president Obama's Affirmative Furthering Fair Housing.
Federal Level: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing:
https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/FHEO/documents/AFFH%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/fair-housing-planning/
The AFFH regulation, initiated by President Obama, profoundly impacted the suburban landscape. Its objective was to foster the development of progressive urban mini-cities and transition them into suburban areas. This entails suburbs absorbed by larger cities, subject to federal zoning and development control mandates.
The AFFH regulation focused on eliminating single-family zoning and promoting the construction of medium- to high-density low-income housing, reshaping suburban areas into mini-urban, downtown-style communities. This effort shifted low-income people and those considered less desirable to the suburbs.
AFFH works by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD’s Community Development), holding hostage the issuance of Block Grants. Suburbs are prohibited from receiving millions of dollars in HUD grants unless they eliminate single-family zoning, install low and moderate-cost housing, and agree to consolidate and densify commercial and residential districts like stack-and-pack neighborhoods in urban areas.
Non-compliance will lead to Highway funds being withheld. Any objections by local municipalities could get municipal leaders of the suburbs sued for discrimination by civil rights groups or the federal government.
Then, with President Trump in 2016, the process was put on hold. However, when President Biden took office, it was reactivated and accelerated. Nevertheless, the California legislature is controlled by socialists/Marxists with a vision of redistribution and bureaucratic dominance. This vision is that public employee labor unions, which possess a monopoly status, will control everything.