SB 35 vs AB 2011: Key Differences for Developers

SB 35 and AB 2011 are often discussed interchangeably, but they are different tools that fit different deals. Picking the wrong one (or assuming both work and discovering only one does) typically costs three to six months and a redesign cycle.

What each statute actually does

SB 35 (Government Code 65913.4, originally enacted in 2017 and amended by SB 423 in 2023) provides a ministerial approval pathway for qualifying residential and mixed-use projects in jurisdictions that have not met their RHNA targets or have not adopted a compliant housing element. SB 423 extended the sunset to 2036 and expanded the trigger to include housing-element non-compliance regardless of RHNA progress.

AB 2011 (the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022, codified at Government Code 65912.100 et seq.) creates a separate ministerial pathway specifically for residential projects on commercial corridors and in qualifying commercial zones.

Both bypass CEQA. Both require prevailing wage. They are not substitutes for each other.

Eligibility

SB 35 eligibility turns on the jurisdiction's RHNA performance (or housing-element status post-SB 423), the site's general plan and zoning designation, and an array of site exclusions: wetlands, hazardous waste, historic resources, prime farmland, very high fire severity zones, and others.

AB 2011 eligibility is site-typology driven. The 100% affordable track applies in a broader set of commercial zones. The mixed-income corridor track requires the site to front a right-of-way between 70 and 150 feet wide. The site must also clear AB 2011's exclusion list (substantially overlapping with SB 35) and comply with the statute's objective design standards. The corridor-width and use-history tests fail many sites that look eligible from the address.

Affordability requirements

SB 35 affordability is tiered by jurisdiction RHNA performance. In Los Angeles, the City is behind on its lower-income RHNA, which currently triggers the 50% affordable requirement at 80% AMI. That is a significant constraint for a market-rate sponsor.

AB 2011 offers two tracks. The 100% affordable track requires deed-restricted lower-income units. The mixed-income track requires a smaller affordability commitment (typically 8% very-low-income or 15% low-income, plus a moderate-income component on the corridor track) and is the path most market-rate sponsors actually use.

Labor standards

Both statutes carry prevailing wage requirements. AB 2011 layers in skilled-and-trained workforce and healthcare-benefit requirements at 50 or more units (Government Code 65912.131). These obligations need to be priced into the GMP before acquisition, not discovered during preconstruction.

Where each one fits

SB 35 fits where a sponsor has the affordability appetite for the 50% requirement (typically a tax-credit deal or a hybrid 4% LIHTC structure) and is operating in a jurisdiction with clear RHNA non-performance. AB 2011 fits where the site is on a qualifying corridor or in a qualifying commercial zone and the mixed-income table works for the deal.

On most Los Angeles infill sites, we model both pathways against a conventional Government Code 65915 density bonus path during the option period. The pathway with the cleanest objective-standards compliance, not the highest theoretical unit count, is usually the right one.

Need hands-on help on a live project? Our SB 35 and AB 2011 streamlining and entitlement strategy services cover this work end-to-end across Southern California.