BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2013-2014 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: AB 1259 HEARING DATE: June 25, 2013
AUTHOR: Olsen URGENCY: No
VERSION: March 21, 2013 CONSULTANT: Dennis O'Connor
DUAL REFERRAL: Governance & FinanceFISCAL: No
SUBJECT: Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Under current law, by July 2, 2015, each city and county within
the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley must update its general plan
to include the following:
Data and analysis contained in the Central Valley Flood
Protection Plan, including, but not limited to, the locations
of the facilities of the State Plan of Flood Control and the
locations of the real property protected by those facilities.
The locations of flood hazard zones, including locations
mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood
Insurance Rate Map or the Flood Hazard Boundary Map, locations
that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program,
locations of undetermined risk areas, and locations mapped by
a local flood agency or flood district.
Goals, policies, and objectives for the protection of lives
and property that will reduce the risk of flood damage.
Feasible implementation measures designed to carry out those
goals, policies, and objectives.
Within 12 months of updating its general plan, each city and
county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley must then amend
its zoning ordinance consistent with its updated general plan.
Once a city or county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley
has updated its general plan and zoning ordinance to reflect the
new flood information, the city or county is prohibited from:
Approving a discretionary permit or other discretionary
entitlement, or a ministerial permit that would result in the
construction of a new residence, for a project that is located
within a flood hazard zone; or
Approving of a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a
1
tentative map was not required, for a subdivision that is
located within a flood hazard zone;
Unless the city or county finds, based on substantial evidence
in the record, one of the following:
The facilities of the State Plan of Flood Control or other
flood management facilities protect the project or subdivision
to the urban level of flood protection in urban and urbanizing
areas or the national FEMA standard of flood protection in
nonurbanized areas.
The city or county has imposed conditions on the permit,
discretionary entitlement, or subdivsion that will protect the
project to the urban level of flood protection in urban and
urbanizing areas or the national FEMA standard of flood
protection in nonurbanized areas.
The local flood management agency has made adequate progress
on the construction of a flood protection system which will
result in flood protection equal to or greater than the urban
level of flood protection in urban or urbanizing areas or the
FEMA standard of flood protection in nonurbanized areas for
property located within a flood hazard zone.
An "undetermined risk area" is "an urban or urbanizing area
within a moderate flood hazard zone, as delineated on an
official flood insurance rate map issued by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, which has not been determined to
have an urban level of protection."
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would allow a city or county within the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Valley that has updated its general plan and zoning
ordinance to reflect the new flood information, to approve:
A discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement, or
a ministerial permit that would result in the construction of
a new residence, for a project that is located within a flood
hazard zone; or
A tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was
not required, for a subdivision that is located within a flood
hazard zone;
If the city or county finds, based on substantial evidence in
the record, that the property in an undetermined risk area has
met the urban level of flood protection.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the California State Association of Counties, "Last
year, two bills SB 1278 (Wolk, Chapter 553) and AB 1965 (Pan,
Chapter 554) were enacted to address outstanding issues
concerning the implementation of SB 5 (Machado, Chapter 364) --
2
one of the six-bill 2007 flood protection package.
Unfortunately, a couple of sections were inadvertently left out
of SB 1278 and AB 1965."
"AB 1259 would correct these inadvertent omissions by making
conforming changes to Government Code Sections 65962
(discretionary and ministerial permits) and 65474.5 (tentative
maps) to mirror the "undetermined risk area" provision of
subsection (4) of Section 65865.5 (development agreements)."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: None
COMMENTS
Clarifies existing law. Existing law already allows cities and
counties in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley to approve
projects and subdivisions if they have imposed conditions on the
permit or discretionary entitlement or subdivision that will
protect the project to the urban level of flood protection in
urban and urbanizing areas or the national FEMA standard of
flood protection in nonurbanized areas. What if the project
doesn't need any conditions to meet the appropriate level of
flood protection? This bill clarifies that the city or county
may approve the project as long as they make such a finding
based on substantial evidence.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS: None
SUPPORT
San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors (Sponsor)
California Association of Realtors
California State Association of Counties
City of Sacramento
Rural County Representatives of California
OPPOSITION: None Received
3