BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 208
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 23, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
AB 208 (Fuentes) - As Introduced: January 31, 2011
SUBJECT : Land use: subdivision maps: expiration dates.
SUMMARY : Extends the expiration date by 24 months for specified
subdivision maps that will expire on or before January 1, 2014,
and for any legislative, administrative or other approval by a
state agency relating to a development project in the
subdivision. Specifically, this bill :
1)Extends the expiration date by 24 months for any tentative
map, vesting tentative map, or parcel map for which a
tentative map or tentative vesting map has been approved, and
does not expire on or before January 1, 2014.
2)Extends the expiration date by 24 months for any legislative,
administrative or other approval by a state agency relating to
a development project in a subdivision affected by this bill.
3)Provides that determination for extension to subdivisions maps
take into account previous discretionary extensions, but not
include extensions because of litigation and moratoria.
4)Reduces the time limits that a city, county, or city and
county cannot add additional requirements on a building permit
after a final map is recorded, from five years to three years
after the recordation, if the map is extended under using the
provisions of this measure.
5)Specifies that maps extended under the provisions of this
measure are not prohibited from having a city, county, or city
and county impose a condition that requires the payment of a
fee upon the issuance of a building permit or after the
issuance, including fees related to the Mitigation Fee Act.
6)Contains an urgency clause.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (Map Act), a
statewide regulatory framework for controlling the subdividing
AB 208
Page 2
of land, which generally requires a subdivider to submit, and
have approved by the city, county, or city and county in which
the land is situated, a tentative map.
2)Provides for the expiration of tentative maps after specified
periods of time.
3)Authorizes cities and counties to grant discretionary map
extensions for up to six years.
4)Extends by 24 months the expiration date of any tentative map
or parcel map for which a tentative map has been approved that
had not expired on September 13, 1993.
5)Extends by 12 months the expiration date of any tentative map
or parcel map for which a tentative map has been approved that
had not expired on May 14, 1996.
6)Extends by 12 months the expiration date of any tentative map
or parcel map for which a tentative map has been approved that
had not expired on January 1, 2011.
7)Extends the expiration date by 24 months for specified
subdivision maps that will expire before January 1, 2012.
8)Prohibits, during the five-year period following the
recordation of the final or parcel map for the subdivision of
single-or multiply family residential units, a city, county,
or city and county, from requiring as a condition to issuance
of any building permit or equivalent permit, conformance with
or the performance of any conditions that the city or county
could have lawfully imposed as a condition to the previously
approved tentative or parcel map.
9)Reduces the time limits that a city, county, or city and
county cannot add additional requirements on a building permit
after a final map is recorded, from five years to three years
after the recordation, if the map is extended using the
provisions of Government Code Section 66452.22.
10)Specifies that maps extended using the provisions of
Government Code 66452.22 are not prohibited from having a
city, county, or city and county impose a condition that
requires the payment of a fee upon the issuance of a building
permit or after the issuance, including fees related to the
AB 208
Page 3
Mitigation Fee Act.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)"This measure is very critical to the economic recovery of
California. The housing industry is mired in a deep
recessionary trough. Because of the difficulty of securing
financing, many projects for which maps have already been
approved will soon expire in the next few years, thereby,
requiring developers to go through the entitlement process
again. The housing industry wants to be in a position to take
full advantage of any economic resurgence. This bill would
allow a one-time, 24-month extension of existing maps and not
future subdivision maps."
The above paragraph is not a statement from the author and
supporters of this bill. It is taken from the Senate Floor
Analysis of SB 428 (Thompson), Chapter 407, Statutes of 1993.
At that time, the state was mired in economic misery, the
responses to which included, among other unpleasantness, the
creation of the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF).
SB 428, another of the responses to that crisis, granted a
one-time 24-month extension for tentative and parcel maps that
had not expired as of the enacting legislation's chaptering
date of September 13, 1993. A further response to the
slowdown came with AB 771 (Aguiar), Chapter 46, Statutes of
1996, which created a 12-month extension for maps that had not
expired as of May 14, 1996. Even though any map that might
have been affected by SB 428 or AB 771 passed into history
years ago, the bills' provisions have remained in the Map Act.
Then, just two years ago, the Legislature passed SB 1185
(Lowenthal), Chapter 1284, Statutes of 2008, which granted an
additional one-time 12-month extension for tentative and
parcel maps that had not expired as of the enacting
legislation's chaptering date of July 15, 2008. In addition,
SB 1185 let local officials grant an additional year, at their
discretion.
In addition, in 2009 the Legislature passed AB 333 (Fuentes),
Chapter 18, Statutes of 2009, to allow for an additional
two-year extension on maps that had not expired before July
15, 2009.
2)Two years later, the housing industry continues to be severely
AB 208
Page 4
depressed. Once again real estate developers face the
prospect of having their tentative and parcel maps expire
before they can obtain financing or have their projects make
any sort of economic sense to build. Given the continuing
economic crisis that California and the nation are facing, the
author believes that it is crucial that the Legislature
provide yet another extension in order to sustain the life of
a map, thereby allowing those projects to be kept alive during
these difficult times. According to the California Building
Industry Association (CBIA) there are an estimated 2,500
tentative tract maps representing approximately 325,750
housing units that would be affected by the provisions of AB
208. This measure would allow all of these maps to extend
their life by 24 months.
3)Support Arguments: CBIA argues that without the provisions of
AB 208, "the construction projects and jobs associated with
the active maps could be lost, stalling the significant
economic investments made to date and forcing the project
proponent to begin the costly entitlement process anew."
Opposition Arguments: Opposition could argue that it might
not be fruitful to continuously extend maps for projects that
may have made sense at the time they were adopted, but now,
after many years and many economic shifts, the projects once
planned for these sites no longer fit the needs of the
community.
4)This bill is double-referred to the Committee on Housing and
Community Development.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support Opposition
American Council of Engineering Companies CANone on file
CA Apartment Association
CA Association of Realtors
CA Building Industry Association
CA Business Properties Association
CA Chamber of Commerce
CA Chapter of the American Fence Association
CA Fence Contractors' Association
Engineering Contractors' Association
Flasher Barricade Association
AB 208
Page 5
Marin Builder's Association
Analysis Prepared by : Katie Kolitsos / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958