SB 1116 requires local agencies to consider parcel maps and tentative/final maps for qualifying housing development projects on a ministerial basis — that is, without discretionary review or public hearing — provided the project meets a set of objective thresholds for unit count, parcel count, lot size, zoning, density, and site suitability. The bill allows up to 10 new parcels and 10 residential units (with a limited remainder-parcel exception), prescribes minimum parcel sizes (with lot-size averaging options), and ties density outcomes to the jurisdiction’s adopted housing element or a 66%-of-density fallback.
This measure accelerates small-scale subdivision approvals while preserving narrowly drawn site exclusions for farmland, wetlands, hazardous sites, high fire/seismic/flood areas, protected habitat, and conservation easements. It also creates a 60-day approval clock (with deemed approval if missed), restricts separate sale of undeveloped parcels, and gives the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) authority to review local implementing ordinances and void noncompliant ones.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill mandates ministerial consideration (no discretionary review/hearing) of parcel, tentative, and final maps for housing projects that create 10 or fewer parcels and 10 or fewer residential units and that meet objective zoning, parcel size, density, and site-suitability rules. It establishes specific minimum parcel sizes, allows parcel-size averaging, and sets a 60-day review deadline after which an application is deemed approved.
Who It Affects
Small-market multifamily and small-lot developers, community land trusts and limited-equity cooperatives, city and county planning departments, and jurisdictions responsible for implementing housing elements and utility service for newly created parcels. It applies in incorporated cities and certain urbanized areas in larger counties.
Why It Matters
SB 1116 shifts approvals from discretionary to ministerial for many small subdivisions, materially shortening timelines and constraining local review. That creates faster production pathways for small-scale housing while raising questions about infrastructure readiness, environmental and safety trade-offs, and state oversight of local implementation.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB 1116 creates a narrow, objective pathway for subdividing residential lots into small-lot housing developments by removing discretionary review and public hearings for qualifying projects. To use the pathway, a project must produce no more than 10 parcels and no more than 10 residential units on the lot being subdivided; a separately defined remainder parcel that keeps existing uses or structures and contains no new units may be excluded from the parcel count.
The bill explicitly covers fee-simple lots, common interest developments, cooperatives, community land trust parcels, and tenancy-in-common arrangements.
The statute imposes spatial and zoning constraints. Multifamily-zoned lots must be no larger than five acres and meet the “qualified urban use” and “substantially surrounded” tests referenced to existing Public Resources Code definitions; vacant single-family–zoned lots are capped at one and one-half acres.
Minimum new-parcel sizes are set (600 sq ft typically; 1,200 sq ft in single-family zones), but the measure allows lot-size averaging to create smaller parcels (down to 480 sq ft in multifamily zones or 960 sq ft in single-family zones) so long as averages meet the larger minima and no new parcel exceeds 50% of the original parcel when averaging is used.On density and affordability, the bill links outcomes to the jurisdiction’s housing element. If the parcel is identified in a compliant housing element, the project must deliver at least the number and type of units projected there — including any low- or very-low-income units, which must be protected by recorded affordability restrictions for at least 45 years.
If the parcel is not in the housing element, the project still must reach at least 66% of the applicable maximum residential density, using the greater of local zoning or state density metrics.Procedurally, local agencies have 60 days to approve or deny a completed application; failing to act in that period results in deemed approval. Projects must meet applicable objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards that are not inconsistent with the statute.
A local agency can deny only where there is a documented specific, adverse public-health-or-safety impact that cannot be feasibly mitigated. The bill also bars the separate sale, lease, or financing of undeveloped parcels created under this authority unless each parcel contains a completed code-compliant dwelling or otherwise meets enumerated exceptions, and it lets local governments adopt implementing ordinances subject to HCD review and potential nullification if those ordinances fail to comply with the statute.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The statute limits the ministerial subdivision pathway to projects that create no more than 10 parcels and 10 residential units on the lot being subdivided; a designated remainder parcel that retains existing uses is excluded from that count.
Minimum new-parcel sizes are 600 sq ft generally and 1,200 sq ft in single-family zones, but lot-size averaging allows parcels as small as 480 sq ft (multifamily) or 960 sq ft (single-family) provided the average meets the higher minimum and no new parcel exceeds 50% of the original parcel when averaging is used.
If a parcel is listed in a jurisdiction’s compliant housing element, the project must yield at least the number and income-designated units projected for that parcel, and low- or very-low-income units created under that clause require recorded affordability covenants of at least 45 years.
A local agency must approve or deny a completed map application within 60 days; if it does not, the application is deemed approved, and denials must be based on a finding of a specific, adverse public-health-or-safety impact that cannot be feasibly mitigated.
Parcels created under the statute generally cannot be sold, leased, or financed separately until each contains a code-compliant dwelling or meets specified exceptions; local agencies can adopt ordinances to allow otherwise, but HCD can review and void ordinances that do not conform to the law.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Eligibility thresholds and minimum parcel sizes
These paragraphs set the gate: to qualify for ministerial treatment a project must create no more than 10 parcels and 10 units on the subdivided lot, with a narrow remainder-parcel exclusion. They also lock in minimum parcel dimensions and permit lot-size averaging with explicit floor sizes (480/600/960/1200 sq ft tiers) and a cap that no new parcel created through averaging exceed half the size of the original parcel. Practically, this standard enables small-lot 'tiny' ownership patterns while preventing extreme fragmentation of large parcels.
Zoning, lot-area caps, and urban-context tests
The bill limits eligible multifamily lots to five acres and vacant single-family lots to 1.5 acres and requires the site be in an incorporated city or specified urbanized area/cluster. Rather than creating new definitions, it imports the Public Resources Code’s 'qualified urban use' and 'substantially surrounded' tests, steering eligibility toward built urban contexts and away from peri‑urban or rural lands. That design channels the ministerial pathway to denser, already urbanized locations and shields agricultural and certain open‑space geographies.
Allowed ownership forms, unit-size cap, and housing-element linkage
SB 1116 expressly covers fee-simple lots, common interest developments, cooperatives, community land trust parcels, and tenancies in common, accommodating a range of ownership models commonly used for small-lot housing. It caps average unit size at 1,750 net habitable sq ft and ties project density to the jurisdiction’s housing element: identified parcels must meet projected unit counts (and any low-income unit obligations), while non-identified parcels must achieve at least 66% of applicable maximum density. This creates an explicit compliance path for jurisdictions with robust housing elements and a fallback density test elsewhere.
Site exclusions, objective standard compliance, and 60‑day review
The bill lists site exclusions — prime farmland, wetlands, high/very-high fire hazard zones, listed hazardous sites (with narrow remediation-based exceptions), earthquake fault zones subject to code compliance, FEMA 100‑year flood areas absent qualifying federal measures, regulatory floodways without no-rise certification, conserved lands, and protected habitat. It requires conformance with applicable objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards not inconsistent with the statute, and mandates a 60‑day clock for local action: approve, deny, or be deemed approved. If the agency denies, it must return a full written list of defects and remedies within the same 60‑day window.
Restrictions on separate sale and limited grounds for denial
The statute bars separate sale, lease, or financing of undeveloped parcels from the subdivision unless each parcel already contains a code-compliant dwelling or meets specific enumerated exceptions (e.g., reserved open space or the last undeveloped parcel). Violations are treated as unlawful subdivision sales subject to existing penalties. A local agency may still deny maps, but only after making a written finding, supported by a preponderance of the evidence, that the project would cause a specific, adverse public-health-or-safety impact for which there is no feasible mitigation.
ADU/urban-lot-split exceptions and local ordinance/HCD oversight
Local agencies are not required to allow accessory dwelling units or junior ADUs, nor urban lot splits, on parcels created via this authority; if a local government opts in to permit ADUs on those parcels, ADUs do not count toward the 10-unit cap. The bill permits local implementing ordinances but conditions them on HCD review: agencies must file their ordinance with HCD within 60 days, HCD may issue noncompliance findings and allow up to 45 days for response, and failure to amend a noncompliant ordinance renders it null and void and may prompt Attorney General notification.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Housing across all five countries.
Explore Housing 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
- Small‑scale multifamily and small‑lot developers: They gain a faster, predictable ministerial path for subdividing urban lots and can rely on objective parcel-size and density rules to avoid discretionary hearings and associated delays.
- Community land trusts and limited‑equity cooperatives: The statute explicitly accommodates community land trust ownership and cooperative forms, enabling these organizations to use the streamlined subdivision process to produce permanently affordable units.
- Jurisdictions seeking housing element fulfillment: Cities and counties with compliant housing elements can lock expected unit yields for designated parcels into ministerial approvals, helping meet regional housing needs with fewer procedural obstacles.
Who Bears the Cost
- Local planning departments and permitting staff: The 60‑day deemed‑approval deadline shifts administrative burden onto staff to process complete applications quickly and could require new checklists, intake procedures, and staffing to avoid unintended deemed approvals.
- Municipal utilities and public works providers: New parcels must be served by public water and sewer, so water, sewer, and stormwater agencies may face accelerated demand and need to ensure capacity, permitting, and hook‑up schedules align with faster subdivision approvals.
- Neighborhood groups and homeowners: The removal of discretionary hearings narrows opportunities for community input and challenge, reducing local influence over small‑lot subdivision siting and design decisions.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
SB 1116 pits the state’s interest in quickly delivering small‑scale housing through predictable, ministerial approvals against local discretion to evaluate site‑specific hazards, infrastructure readiness, and community impacts — a trade‑off between accelerating housing supply and preserving local authority to guard against public‑health, safety, and environmental risks.
The bill’s heavy reliance on objective standards and a short ministerial timeline trades case‑by‑case discretion for predictability, but it leaves several operational questions unanswered. Local agencies must calibrate intake procedures, define what constitutes a "completed application," and coordinate with utilities to ensure service availability within the 60‑day window; failure to do so creates a real risk of deemed approvals for sites that lack readiness for occupancy.
The mechanism for enforcing 45‑year affordability covenants tied to housing‑element parcels also raises monitoring issues: which agency tracks compliance over decades, and what remedies apply if covenants lapse or are breached?
Environmental and safety exclusions are precise but depend on external maps and agency determinations (CalFIRE fire maps, FEMA flood maps, State Geologist fault maps, DTSC hazardous site listings). Litigation or map updates could shift a site in or out of eligibility mid‑process, and the bill’s rule that federal qualifying criteria can satisfy flood exclusions creates a procedural complexity requiring applicants to secure federal letters or certifications.
Finally, while HCD review of local ordinances creates a statewide backstop, the consequences of voiding an ordinance (and reverting a jurisdiction to the statute’s defaults) could produce operational confusion and local‑state friction if timelines, notice, and legal standards for nullification are contested.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.