BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    

                                                                  SB 1319
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  June 30, 2010

                                Cameron Smyth, Chair
                     SB 1319 (Pavley) - As Amended:  June 3, 2010

           SENATE VOTE  :  29-2
          SUBJECT  :  Subdivisions: parcel merger: renewable energy  

           SUMMARY  :  Provides that specified provisions of the Subdivision  
          Map Act (Act) do not prohibit a landowner, local agency, or  
          renewable energy corporation from seeking financial assistance  
          from the state to help defray the costs of merging parcels.   
          Specifically,  this bill  :

          1)Provides that nothing in the merger or reversion provisions of  
            the Act prohibits a landowner, local agency, or renewable  
            energy corporation authorized to conduct business in this  
            state from seeking financial assistance from eligible state  
            funding sources to defray either of the following costs.

          2)The costs of merging parcels, including, but not limited to,  
            escrow costs, on private or public lands.

          3)The costs of establishing or administering a joint powers  
            authority established or authorized to merge parcels on  
            private or public lands, including, but not limited to, all  
            eligible costs, for the purpose of siting renewable energy  

          4)Specifies that this measure does not authorize the use of  
            state funds for the acquisition of real property for which a  
            parcel merger will be initiated.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Authorizes, under the Act, a reversion of a parcel to acreage  
            which entirely eliminates a subdivision. 

          2)Requires, for a reversion, city approval after public hearing,  
            with findings that (a) the dedications to be vacated are  
            unnecessary, and (b) the owners have consented, or that no  
            improvements have been made, or that no lots have been sold.


                                                                  SB 1319
                                                                  Page  2

          3)Authorizes, under certain circumstances, contiguous legal  
            parcels owned by the same person to be combined into one  
            parcel - merger.

          4)Authorizes a local agency to, by ordinance which conforms to  
            and implements the procedures prescribed by the Act, provide  
            for the merger of a parcel or unit with a contiguous parcel or  
            unit held by the same owner if any one of the contiguous  
            parcels or units held by the same owner does not conform to  
            standards for minimum parcel size, under the zoning ordinance  
            of the local agency applicable to the parcels or units of land  
            and if all of the following requirements are satisfied:

             a)   At least one of the affected parcels is undeveloped by  
               any structure for which a building permit was issued or for  
               which a building permit was not required at the time of  
               construction, or is developed only with an accessory  
               structure or accessory structures, or is developed with a  
               single structure, other than an accessory structure, that  
               is also partially sited on a contiguous parcel or unit;  

             b)   With respect to any affected parcel, one or more of the  
               following conditions exists:

               i)     Comprises less than 5,000 square feet in area at the  
                 time of the determination of merger;

               ii)    Was not created in compliance with applicable laws  
                 and ordinances in effect at the time of its creation;

               iii)   Does not meet current standards for sewage disposal  
                 and domestic water supply;

               iv)    Does not meet slope stability standards;

               v)     Has no legal access which is adequate for vehicular  
                 and safety equipment access and maneuverability;


                                                                  SB 1319
                                                                  Page  3

               vi)    Its development would create health or safety  
                 hazards; or, 

               vii)   Is inconsistent with the applicable general plan and  
                 any applicable specific plan, other than minimum lot size  
                 or density standards.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  None

           COMMENTS  :

          1)According to the author there has been an increase of  
            development of renewable energy facilities in California.   
            Most of this development has occurred on public lands, mainly  
            in the desert.  There is an effort now to try to locate some  
            of these renewable energy facilities on private lands where  
            mitigation costs for developers could be less, since these  
            lands are often disturbed and of lesser habitat value.  Moving  
            the siting to private lands would help in locating projects in  
            areas closer to existing job centers and communities.

           2)Support Arguments  :  SB 1319 is a small step down the path of  
            moving renewable energy facilities closer to more developed  
            areas.  It would allow renewable energy companies, private  
            landowners, or local governments to start using state funding  
            source to help defray some of the costs associated with  
            merging parcels on private lands.

             Opposition Arguments  :  None at this time.


           Support                             Opposition 
          The Nature Conservancy [SPONSOR]None on file

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Katie Kolitsos / L. GOV. / (916)