BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 116
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 1, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 116 (Bocanegra) - As Amended: March 20, 2013
Policy Committee: Local
GovernmentVote:9-0
Housing and Community Development 7-0
Urgency: Yes State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill is an urgency measure extending by 24 months the
expiration date for specified subdivision maps due to expire
prior to January 1, 2016, as specified. Specifically, this
bill:
1)Extends by 24 months the expiration date for a state agency
relating to a development project included in a map that is
extended, so long as the approval has not expired before the
bill becomes effective.
2)Provides that the determination on whether or not a
subdivision map expires before January 1, 2016 does not
include extensions because of litigation stays and development
moratoria.
3)Reduces from five years to three years the time during which a
city, county, or city and county cannot add additional
requirements on a building permit after a final map is
recorded for maps extended pursuant to this measure.
FISCAL EFFECT
No state costs. Local costs for extending expiration dates, if
any, would not be reimbursable because local agencies have
authority to levy fees and charges to cover their costs.
COMMENTS
AB 116
Page 2
1)Purpose . The author argues AB 116 will keep currently
approved construction projects and the jobs they create alive
during these difficult economic times. The author points to
previous efforts in 1993 and 1996, when the Legislature took
emergency action to extend tentative tract maps and, as a
result of those bills, homebuilding experienced a steady and
level recovery beginning in the latter 1990s. The author adds
homebuilders were able to return to their dormant subdivision
maps and move forward with their projects and avoid having to
begin anew an expensive, time consuming and complicated
entitlement process.
2)Background . The California Subdivision Map Act establishes a
statewide regulatory framework for controlling the subdividing
of land. As a first step toward development of the land, the
developer is required to receive approval by the city or
county of a tentative map. The tentative map generally expires
after a specified period of time.
In the early 1990s, many projects for which maps had been
approved were postponed due to the housing collapse and
generally weak economic conditions. As a result, many maps
were set to expire. In order to avoid the time and expense
associated with a new application process, the Legislature
enacted SB 428 (Thompson), Chapter 407/1993. The measure
provided a 24-month extension to all maps that had not expired
as of the bill's effective date.
3)Support if amended . The League of California Cities, the
California State Association of Counties and the American
Planning Association, California Chapter, all have a support
if amended position on AB 116. The three organizations have
requested that the two-year extension be automatic only for
maps that are 12 years or younger (tolling for any time spent
in litigation), and at the discretion of the local government
for any that are older than 12 years. While generally
supportive of keeping maps alive, local governments are
concerned that due to so many successive automatic extensions,
there are many maps that are simply too old and should not be
extended.
4)Previous legislation . The Legislature has approved seven such
map extension bills since SB 428, the most recent of which was
AB 208 (Fuentes), Chapter 88, Statutes of 2011. AB 208 was
similar to this bill. It extended the expiration date by 24
AB 116
Page 3
months for any tentative map, vesting tentative map, or parcel
map for which a tentative map or tentative vesting map
approved prior to January 1, 2014.
5)There is no registered opposition to this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Roger Dunstan / APPR. / (916) 319-2081