Dan J. Harkey

Master Educator | Business & Finance Consultant | Mentor

AB-893: Expanding Streamlined Housing Development to Campus Zones

by Dan J. Harkey

Share This Article

Summary:

California’s housing shortage has prompted legislative efforts to accelerate development while maintaining affordability and equity.  Assembly Bill 893 (AB-893), authored by Assemblymember Mike Fong, builds on the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022 (AB 2011) by extending streamlined approval processes to campus development zones, creating new opportunities for housing near higher education institutions.

Legislative Context

Under the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022, developers can submit applications for affordable or mixed-income housing projects that meet objective standards and site criteria.  These projects are treated as “use by right” and are eligible for streamlined, ministerial review, bypassing lengthy discretionary approvals and specific CEQA requirements.  However, AB-893 stands out by extending these benefits to campus development zones, a unique and significant feature of this legislation.

AB-893 expands this framework to include campus development zones, defined as areas within ½ mile of a main campus of the University of California (UC), California State University (CSU), or California Community Colleges (CCC).

Key Provisions of AB-893

1.       Campus Development Zone Definition

o   Includes parcels wholly or partially within ½ mile of a UC, CSU, or CCC main campus.

2.       Affordability Requirements

o   For rental housing in campus zones:

§  Option 1:

§  5% of units for extremely low-income households, faculty/staff, or students experiencing homelessness.

§  8% for very low-income households, faculty/staff, or students.

§  Option 2:

§  15% of units for lower-income households, students, or faculty/staff.

3.       Objective Standards

o   Local review is limited to the area physically disturbed by construction, excluding adjacent parcels under the same ownership unless explicitly stated.

o   Easements for public utilities or rights-of-way do not disqualify eligibility for streamlined review.

4.       Reporting Requirement

o   The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) must include outcomes of campus zone projects in its 1 January 2031 report.

Policy Rationale

AB-893 addresses two critical issues:

  • Housing for Students and Faculty: Rising Rents Near Campuses Exacerbate Housing Insecurity for Students and Staff.
  • Land Use Efficiency: Leveraging underutilized campus-adjacent land for housing aligns with state goals for infill development and reduced vehicle miles traveled.

Implications for Developers and Institutions

  • Developers gain access to streamlined approvals for projects near campuses, reducing costs and timelines.
  • Universities and Colleges can partner with developers to provide affordable housing for students and staff.
  • Local Governments must adapt planning processes to comply with objective standards and avoid discretionary delays.

Challenges

  • Infrastructure Capacity: Increased housing near campuses may strain local utilities and transportation systems.
  • Community Pushback: Concerns about density and neighborhood character could lead to political resistance.
  • Funding for Affordability: Meeting income-based requirements may require subsidies or creative financing.

Real-World Campus Housing Examples

1.  San Francisco State University – Progressive Design-Build

Facing urgent demand, San Francisco State University (SFSU) delivered 700 new beds in just 17 months, the fastest housing project in CSU History.  Using Progressive Design-Build, the university engaged architects, builders, and trade teams early, enabling real-time cost evaluation and accelerated procurement.  This collaborative model is now a benchmark for campus housing delivery.

2.  California Community Colleges – Affordable Housing Grants

Through the Affordable Student Housing Grant Program, California invested $546.7 million for 11 community college housing projects and one intersegmental project with CSU.  These projects will provide 2,270 beds for low-income students and include wraparound services like childcare, tutoring, and wellness centers.  Examples include:

  • Fresno City College: $34M for 350 beds.
  • Ventura College: $62.9M for 320 beds.
  • Compton College: $80.3M for 250 beds.

3.  CSU Systemwide Expansion

Between 2014 and 2024, California State University (CSU) added 17,000 new beds, with an additional 5,600 under construction.  Projects like West Grove Commons at SFSU and new dorms at Sacramento State reflect CSU’s shift toward residential campuses.  A systemwide plan aims to add 12,600 more beds by 2030, addressing housing insecurity for thousands of students.

Challenges

  • Infrastructure Strain: Increased housing near campuses may require utility upgrades.
  • Community Pushback: Concerns about density and traffic persist.
  • Funding for Affordability: Meeting income-based requirements often needs subsidies.

Policy Implications

AB-893 aligns with California’s goals for infill development, housing equity, and reduced vehicle miles traveled.  Real-world examples demonstrate that streamlined approvals, combined with innovative delivery models, can significantly accelerate housing production for the inclusion of students and staff.

AB-893 is more than a zoning adjustment—it’s a strategic intervention to address student housing insecurity.  By leveraging campus-adjacent land and enforcing affordability standards, California is setting a precedent for integrating housing policy with educational access.

✅ AB-893 Compliance Checklist

For Developers

  • Confirm project site is within ½ mile of a UC, CSU, or CCC main campus (Campus Development Zone).
  • Select affordability option:
    • Option 1:
      • 5% units for extremely low-income households, faculty/staff, or students experiencing homelessness.
      • 8% units for very low-income households, faculty/staff, or students.
    • Option 2:
      • 15% units for lower-income households, faculty/staff, or students.
  • Ensure compliance with objective standards:
    • The review is limited to the construction footprint.
    • Easements for utilities or rights-of-way do not disqualify eligibility.
  • Prepare documentation for ministerial approval under a streamlined process.
  • Include affordability covenants and monitoring plans.

For Local Agencies

  • Update zoning maps to identify Campus Development Zones.
  • Apply objective standards only; avoid discretionary review.
  • Train staff on the requirements of AB-893 and streamline approval timelines.
  • Coordinate with HCD for reporting and compliance tracking.
  • Ensure infrastructure capacity planning for campus-adjacent housing.

Reporting & Oversight

  • Submit project data to HCD for inclusion in the 1 January 2031 report.
  • Maintain public transparency on approvals and affordability compliance.

Conclusion

AB-893 is more than a zoning adjustment—it’s a strategic intervention to address student housing insecurity.  By leveraging campus-adjacent land and enforcing affordability standards, California is setting a precedent for integrating housing policy with educational access.

AB-893 represents a strategic expansion of California’s housing reform agenda, targeting campus-adjacent areas to address student and workforce housing shortages.  By combining objective standards, streamlined approvals, and affordability mandates, the bill seeks to accelerate development while promoting equity and sustainability.