Subdivision Map Act

[Dylan Crawford, PLS]

Can a single final map be used to subdivide an area having 2 separate approved tentative maps as long as all the conditions of approval are met?

[mlm]

This sounds like a good question for D. Ryan! Where is he?

I don't see how it would be possible to combine more than one approved tentative on a single final map. since the final map would no longer be in substantial conformance with the approved tentative. In my neck of the woods, the County Surveyor's statement on the final map requires final map to be "substantially the same as it appeared on the tentative map".

I think there would be numerous other complications as well if the property within the approved tentatives you refer to are owned by different parties or are in unrelated developments with different approval conditions. Seems like in the very least, the approved tentatives would have to be under the same ownership, due to complications such as dedications and approvals that appear on the final map.

Planning approval conditions and other conditions/restrictions would also tend to lead to some confusion (more than normal!).

I'm sure we'll soon get the straight scoop on your question from some of our more experienced associates!

LS7702

Would this final map be considered a single phase subdivision with a common name?

[Dylan Crawford, PLS]

Thanks for the input.

The project that raised this issue has actually come and gone (client decided not to try to combine tentative maps) but I would like to know what the surveying community thinks if this ever comes up again.

For the sake of this dicussion let's say all of the land will be held by a single owner at the time the final map records and that it would be a single phase subdivision with a common name.

[Bob Hart]

Planning Commission or City Council Approval would allow this filing, in my humble opinion.
Bob Hart

[Larry Kelley]

Bob, does that mean you could have multiple owners for one Final/Parcel Map??

[Dylan Crawford, PLS]

I'm pretty sure you can have multiple owners on a parcel or final map as long as both sign. This creates an accounting nightmare for those involved but I don't think it violates the SMA.

[Gary O]

We have maps with multiple owners on a regular basis and it is really no more difficult than a single owner map. 66445(e) clearly states that all 'parties' (plural) have to sign the map. The title company has to do a little running around, though. (sometimes all over the country!).

As far as combining multiple tentatives under one filed map, we've never had that situation. I would be very uncomfortable signing as County Surveyor since it doesn't substantially agree with 'THE' tentative map (singular) 66442(a)(2). If the applicant wanted to change horses mid-stream I would want to see a revised tentative map on the project.

Gary O'Connor, L.S.

[Larry Kelley]

Gary O/group, a question for you. I work for a public utility. We have numerous parcels of land that were acquired over the years under the SMA public utility exemption 66426.5, basically what it says is the public utility is exempt from filing a Final Map/Parcel Map when acquiring land for right of ways etc. Some of these parcels are no longer needed and need to be disposed of. We have developers who would like to purchase the land from us to be included in a subdivision. Some of the local agencys/citys do not see these parcels as legal parcels. Here is my question. Is a certificate of compliance needed for these parcels before we can convey the property to the developer? Seems to me, we should be able to just quitclaim the parcel to the developer since the non-legal parcel is going to be absorbed in to a Final Map.
Any thoughts??

Larry

[Bob Hart]

The Cities that you refer to do not have clear understanding of the section of the SMA that provides the exemption. The Cities do not need to approve your sale as long as your title company will insure the title, you should have no legal problem. When local agencies fail to follow state law most applicants defer to their wishes rather than fight City Hall to avoid costly delays and alienating the staff for future applications.

Bob Hart

[Gary O]

Bob & Larry,
The understanding of 66428 in Sonoma County is that although a 'filed' map may be waived, it does not exempt the utility from the tentative map/local approval stage. If the parcel is for a tank site or well house or similar non-right of way use, we look at the zoning of the remaining parcel, access, ag impacts etc. before approval. After approval the parcel may be sold/granted to the utility without a map (by deed).

If the parcel is no longer needed it could probably be absorbed into an adjoining parcel without any action on the local jurisdiction's part. However, if the parcel was large enough to be developable and was sold as a separate parcel then I believe you would have to get a Conditional Certificate of Compliance on it.

Gary O'Connor, L.S.

[Bob Hart]

Exemption from the SMA does not require the processing of a tentative map or other approval, because YOU ARE EXEMPT (EMPHASIS NOT SHOUTING!). A tank or well site is still exempt, the right of way is not long and linear, but remains it is for utility purposes, and therefore exempt. It is not a waiver for a filed map it is an exemption.

Bob Hart

[Gary O]

Bob,

Sorry, but I disagree. If its exempt then why isn't it listed as one of the exemptions under 66412? These exemptions require no gov't processing....are you saying that the utility 'subdivisions' require some processing? If so, then what? Wouldn't you need a tentative map to do that processing?

The local agency decides in its ordinance whether a tentative map and its subsequent processing will be required (66428 b). Sonoma has decided that one is required.

Gary O'Connor, L.S.

[Gary O]

Bob,
I'm not sure what your second sentence means.....

[DOC LS]

Section 66426.5 covers the conveyance of land to a public utility or agency. It does not require a subdivision, provided it is used for rights–of-way. Transfer does not create any additional parcels. The utility/agency can dispose of the excess rights-of-way at anytime by deed. However, it may require a COC, merger, or tentative map by the developer before the land can be used for private development purposes.

[Bob Hart]

That is what I was attempting to say, the developer of this land is certainly required to perform any process that will make the local agency feel warm and fuzzy, but NOT the utility company because, they are EXEMPT! "Utility Subdivision" is not included in my copy of the SMA.
Bob Hart