California Surveyors Forums

If a land owner has an active Tentative map on a parcel and submits a different Tentative map on the same parcel several years later, does the approval of the second Tentative map void the first Tentative map? Or could a new land owner exercise their right to utilize the first Tentative map?
The first Tentative map has not expired and the same owner has submitted both Tentative maps.
Now to further complicate the question. In between the time of the two Tentative maps, the land owners initiated an amendment to the Master Plan. The first Tentative map is not in compliance with the Amended Master Plan, however it was vested prior to the amendment.
There are two parcels and two different land owners within the bounds of the Master Plan/Amended Master Plan. Both parcels have the same situation. First Tentative map, Amended Master Plan and then Second Tentative map. The owners have not changed, yet.

Rich,

Great question. You bring up the fact that the first approved tentative map had 'vested' prior to the amendment of the General Plan.

Mike Durkee gives talks about this subject. An approved tentative map confers the right to proceed with development. However, the issuance of permits is another matter. They need to be in compliance with the Development ordinance in place at the time of application. This would normally be after a final map has been filed for record and lots sold.

It seems that only a formal Vesting Tentative Map freezes the conditions in place at time of approval.

The last seminar of Durkee's that I went to was attended by Planners and LAFCO staff. He tailored his presentation to these kind of zoning issues.

{edit}
I conjecture that the approval of the second tentative map did, in fact, supersede the first. It seems reasonable to conclude that, although I haven't found an explicit section of the SMA that addresses it. Did the issue come up during the public hearing, or in the newer conditions?

I don't have a code section, but my practical sense would think the 2nd TM is an Amendment to the 1st and the owner is requesting amended findings/conditions.

Warren
The issue has not come up, yet. We anticipate the owner will be selling paper lots. Therefore we are trying to be proactive to avoid an issue later. We have added a condition on the second Tentative Map that the owner agrees that the first Tentative Map expires with the approval of the second.

RICH FULTZ JR wrote:Warren
The issue has not come up, yet. We anticipate the owner will be selling paper lots. Therefore we are trying to be proactive to avoid an issue later. We have added a condition on the second Tentative Map that the owner agrees that the first Tentative Map expires with the approval of the second.

I wouldn't use the "expire" term. I don't think your agency has the right to overrule the requirements of the SMA and declare a tentative map expired. The SMA clearly spells out the time of expiration of a tentative map, with lots of automatic extensions now in play. Maybe use the term supercede, amend, or withdrawl by subdivider's request. The terminology you use would also be dependent on whether you consider this a brand new application that restarts the tentative map expiration clock, or if that clock is still ticking and this map is just considered an amendment to the original. I've found that maps approved years ago still have a longer life then ones approved today due to all the automatic extensions. Something to consider.

RICH FULTZ JR wrote:Warren
The issue has not come up, yet. We anticipate the owner will be selling paper lots. Therefore we are trying to be proactive to avoid an issue later. We have added a condition on the second Tentative Map that the owner agrees that the first Tentative Map expires with the approval of the second.

I just went to one of Durkee's seminars yesterday and this issue came up. He said that you can have multiple tentative maps on the same property and any condition requiring developer to withdraw his previous tentative map is illegal. As long as both tentative maps are active, developer can choose either one to proceed with to final. Kind of scary for a local agency when you are looking at master planning. Especially if an adjacent developer is coming in and you want to make sure the streets line up. I guess if I was ever faced with reviewing a second tentative map for the same property, I would at least make sure that the public improvements along the boundary of the subdivision match the previous tentative map.

He also said that the local agency cannot deny any requests for time extensions of a vesting tentative map within the time limits specified in the SMA unless it is a health and safety issue or a violation of state or federal law.