AB 1740 establishes a narrowly framed “urban multimodal community” designation and, for qualifying areas, removes the requirement to obtain coastal development permits for a defined set of local actions — from parking rule changes and roadway reconfigurations to certain housing projects and bicycle facility installation. The bill sets a local designation process, a 30‑day completeness review by the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, and a five‑year recertification cycle.
The practical effect is to transfer permit authority for many multimodal and mobility-oriented changes from the California Coastal Commission to the local jurisdiction (in this text, explicitly the City of Santa Monica), while carving limits designed to protect shoreline access, habitat, and statewide coastal protections. Professionals in city planning, transportation, coastal compliance, and project development need to track the specific exemptions, recertification obligations, and the bill’s built‑in safeguards and limits (event days, footprint caps, proximity exclusions, and a statutory sunset).
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates an 'urban multimodal community' designation and exempts specified activities from Coastal Act permitting within qualifying local coastal program segments. It authorizes local approval of parking rule changes, public-right-of-way multimodal improvements, certain housing projects, temporary events, and bicycle facility installation on state highway rights-of-way, subject to proximity and access safeguards.
Who It Affects
Primarily the City of Santa Monica (the bill defines 'city' as Santa Monica) along with local planners, transportation agencies, housing developers, event organizers, and coastal regulators who currently review coastal development permits. Cyclists and transit users are direct beneficiaries of streamlined infrastructure changes.
Why It Matters
Shifts authority for a narrow but consequential set of multimodal and land‑use actions from the Coastal Commission to a local government, creating a testing ground for faster active‑transportation and parking policy changes near the shoreline while attempting to preserve public coastal access and habitat protections.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill sets a three-part gateway before local projects can proceed without coastal development permits. First, a jurisdiction must qualify as an 'urban multimodal community' by meeting four conditions: having a high-quality transit corridor or transit priority area with stops in the coastal access zone; adopted climate and local road safety plans with relevant targets; and maintained Class I/II/IV bicycle facilities as defined in the DOT Highway Design Manual.
Second, the city must submit documentation to the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, post that documentation publicly, and notify the Coastal Commission. The Office has 30 days to check submissions for completeness; if it does not respond the designation is deemed approved.
Third, the city must recertify every five years.
Once a local coastal program segment has that status, the bill lists specific activities that local authorities may approve without a coastal development permit. Those activities include broad parking policy changes (rates, ratios, time limits), right-of-way multimodal improvements that might remove parking (bike lanes, bus lanes, curb extensions, vision-zero features), installation of ADA-accessible walkways, pay stations, signage and EV chargers, temporary events meeting specified distance and duration limits, and certain interior/exterior renovations and housing projects meeting footprint and proximity constraints.
In several cases the bill preserves a local written-finding requirement: for changes that could reduce shoreline access, the city must make a written finding, supported by substantial evidence, that public access will not be reduced.A notable carve-out allows installation of Class I/II/IV bicycle facilities within a state highway right-of-way without a coastal permit so long as existing public coastal accessways are not eliminated. The provision leans on Chapter 1000 (7th edition) of the Highway Design Manual for standards.
The bill also defines 'coastal access zone' expansively (coastal zone plus a one-quarter mile buffer) and sets exclusions for projects too close to shorelines, wetlands, or environmentally sensitive habitat areas. Finally, the statute includes a repeal date: the whole section sunsets on January 1, 2037, limiting its long-term effect and making it a medium-term experiment in local authority over multimodal coastal interventions.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation has 30 days to review a city's designation submission for completeness; if it fails to respond the city’s designation is deemed approved.
A city must recertify its 'urban multimodal community' status every five years by updating and resubmitting the required documentation.
Temporary events that occur between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea are capped at 10 days per event and 10 event-days per month for that area.
Parking rates may be increased by the city up to $10 per day (indexed annually); any increase beyond that is limited to the annual CPI change.
The bill explicitly defines 'city' as the City of Santa Monica and includes a statutory sunset: the section expires January 1, 2037.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Qualification criteria and five‑year recertification
These paragraphs set the threshold requirements for an 'urban multimodal community'—transit presence in the coastal access zone, adopted greenhouse‑gas and road‑safety targets, and existing Class I/II/IV bicycle facilities per the DOT Highway Design Manual. They also create a designation route: a city self‑designates by submitting proof to the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, posting it publicly, and notifying the Coastal Commission. The five‑year recertification requirement creates an ongoing compliance and reporting burden and gives the Office and Coastal Commission regular checkpoints.
30‑day completeness review and deemed approval
The Office reviews submittals solely for completeness and consistency with the statutory criteria within a 30‑day window and must identify specific deficiencies if the packet is incomplete. Crucially, silence within 30 days results in deemed approval—an administrative shortcut that favors local momentum for projects but raises questions about whether the Office will have adequate time or resources for substantive checks.
Exemptions from coastal development permits—parking and right‑of‑way rules
This core subsection enumerates the activities that the local government (in the operative definition, Santa Monica) may approve without Coastal Commission review. It covers broad parking policy authority (rates, zoning ratios, on‑ and off‑street rules), and explicitly allows roadway and right‑of‑way reconfigurations to advance pedestrian, bicycle, and transit projects—while requiring a written, evidence‑based finding that shoreline public access is not reduced where that risk exists. It also contains a shoreline exclusion zone where certain parking rule changes remain subject to coastal permit requirements.
Other permit exemptions: accessibility, EV chargers, events, renovations, housing
The bill allows local approval of ADA-compliant walkways, pay stations, signage, EV chargers, and outdoor dining without coastal permits, subject to limits near shoreline and habitat areas. Temporary events are allowed with proximity and duration limits (10 days maximum if within the immediate sea-to-road area, and a 10 days/month cap for that area). Renovations may expand footprints by up to 50% outside the immediate shore area but not within it; projects must avoid wetlands and ESHA. Housing developments that meet state definitions and local code allowances are exempt if they are not sited in excluded shoreline or habitat zones.
Bicycle facilities on state highway right‑of‑way and local approval authority
The statute removes the coastal development permit requirement for installation of Class I/II/IV bicycle facilities within a state highway right‑of‑way when the work does not eliminate existing public coastal accessways. It also clarifies that activities exempted under the section are subject to local approval and applicable state and local laws, not Coastal Commission review—effectively shifting permitting, environmental, and design oversight to the local level.
Segmented application, definitions, and sunset
The bill explains how multiple certified local coastal program (LCP) segments are treated: each segment must meet criteria individually; only qualifying segments can use the exemptions. It defines 'coastal access zone' as the coastal zone plus a quarter‑mile buffer and, unusually, narrows 'city' in the definitions to the City of Santa Monica. The section also includes a repeal date—January 1, 2037—so the exemptions are temporary and geographically circumscribed.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- City of Santa Monica — Gains local control to implement parking, multimodal right‑of‑way changes, and certain housing approvals without coastal development permits, speeding project delivery and reducing Coastal Commission review.
- Cyclists and transit riders — Stand to benefit from faster installation of Class I/II/IV bike facilities, bus lanes, and other transit priority infrastructure when projects are approved locally.
- Housing developers building qualifying multiunit projects — May obtain local permits and approvals without an added layer of Coastal Act permitting for projects sited outside the immediate shoreline exclusion zones.
- Restaurants and cultural event organizers — Receive clearer rules for temporary outdoor events and outdoor dining, with explicit allowances (subject to duration and location limits) that can expand programming opportunities.
- Local transportation and public-works departments — Can reconfigure rights‑of‑way and pilot vision‑zero improvements with fewer state-level permitting hurdles, enabling quicker tactical urbanism and street redesigns.
Who Bears the Cost
- California Coastal Commission — Loses permit review authority over a set of activities within qualifying segments, potentially reducing its ability to apply uniform coastal access protections.
- Beachgoers and shoreline users — Face the risk that locally approved parking reductions or events, even with written findings, could cumulatively affect access or the user experience along the shoreline.
- Drivers and businesses reliant on curbside parking — May see reduced parking supply and higher parking rates (up to the indexed $10/day cap) as cities reallocate space for bike lanes or transit priority.
- Local governments (administration and legal exposure) — Must produce substantial‑evidence findings when impacts to shoreline access are possible, manage five‑year recertifications, and may face litigation if findings are challenged.
- Environmental advocates and resource agencies — Will need to scrutinize exemptions near wetlands and ESHAs to ensure habitat protections are not undermined by locally approved projects.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill sets up a trade‑off: accelerate multimodal, climate‑oriented and safety improvements near the coast by shifting approval to local governments, versus preserving uniform, statewide oversight to protect public coastal access and sensitive habitats; that balance depends heavily on how faithfully local findings and proximity rules are applied and whether administrative shortcuts (like deemed approval) and the limited geographic scope produce net public benefit.
The bill threads an uneasy needle between local agility and statewide coastal protections. It delegates review authority for substantive categories of activity to the city level while inserting written‑finding and proximity constraints intended to protect public access and habitat.
Those safeguards hinge on local written findings supported by 'substantial evidence'—a legal standard that invites litigation when community groups or the Coastal Commission disagree about whether an action will reduce access. The 30‑day completeness review and deemed‑approval mechanism expedites local designation, but it also creates a cliff where administrative inaction converts into affirmative authority.
Operationally, the definition that the 'city' means the City of Santa Monica narrows the bill’s geography and raises questions about whether the rest of the statutory language (which reads more generally) was intended to be broader. The sunset date (January 1, 2037) frames this as an experimental policy but complicates long‑term infrastructure financing and private development that typically relies on longer horizons.
The statute also leaves unresolved how these local approvals interplay with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and other state laws—while it removes Coastal Act permitting, it does not exempt projects from CEQA or from other state and federal obligations, which could blunt the intended speed gains or shift review burdens.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.