Not by Davis law (quite the opposite!), nor by loophole: this is explicit intent of California law passed in the 90s to try to stop NIMBYism and increase housin

Not by Davis law (quite the opposite!), nor by loophole: this is explicit intent of California law passed in the 90s to try to stop NIMBYism and increase housing production (though in the past it just gave NIMBYs a shield to hide behind by zoning things they knew would never get developed as high density so they could abide by the letter of the law and not the spirit, until it was revamped to take into account likelihood of redevelopment in high income areas in 2019). Davis's zoning is noncompliant with state housing allocations, and as punishment, they are legally required to accept any housing without regard to density or height limit that is 20% affordable _until they are compliant again_. Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Pasadena, Palo Alto, Cupertino, and (my favorite) Atherton, will also soon see their housing limits invalidated as noncompliant, based on their current (bad-faith) plans they're trying to squeak by, and in _those_ markets, I guarantee you someone _will_ try to take advantage of it. Maybe not as skyscrapers, but as fourplexes, 10-plexes, and missing middle housing this state so desperately needs in affluent areas. As an example: Beverly Hills is now required to zone 3096 net-new housing units that are likely to be re-developed in the next 10 years. Last year they zoned... 4. Good luck fudging that!) This is a return to market-based development, too, and not some government intervention: real estate developers still aren't going to build where it doesn't make sense to, but now they'll have some of the red tape artificially holding development back removed in places where it does make sense.