Allen Matkins
ProfessionalsIndustries & ServicesNews & InsightsCareers

  • Professionals
  • Industries & Services
  • News & Insights
  • Careers
  • Offices
  • About
Manage Subscriptions

News & Insights

Legal Alert

Older Subdivision Maps Under Attack Again

Court of Appeal Again Determines that the Lawful Recording of an Older Subdivision Map (1909) Alone Did Not Create the Parcels Shown on the Map

Environmental & Natural Resources

5.04.09

Under the modern-day Subdivision Map Act, a "parcel" is "created" when the map depicting the lot is recorded (Gov. Code § 66412.7). An issue bubbling for some time in the Map Act world was whether or not that modern-day rule applied to maps recorded in the late 1800s and early 1900s. As we discussed in previous Alerts, California courts first addressed this issue by ruling that any recorded maps before 1893 (the year the Map Act was first enacted) could not create parcels without a separate conveyance. (Gardner v. County of Sonoma, 29 Cal.4th 990 (2003).)

Next, the courts took up the issue of whether or not maps properly recorded between 1893 and 1929 could establish parcels by mere recordation of the map (as allowed by modern Section 66412.7). In August 2008, Division One of the First District Court of Appeal determined that a map recorded in 1915 did not itself (by mere recording) establish ("create") parcels. (Witt Home Ranch, Inc. v. County of Sonoma, 165 Cal.App.4th 543 (2008).)

On April 17, 2009, Division Five of the First District Court of Appeal came to the same conclusion in a case involving a map recorded in 1909. (Abernathy Valley, Inc. v. County of Solano, 09 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4684 (2009).) Relying primarily on the Witt Home decision, the Abernathy court determined that the Subdivision Map Act's grandfather clause (Gov. Code § 66499.30) did not apply to the 1909 map. The key issue in Witt Home and Abernathy was whether or not the laws in effect at the time the original maps were recorded (1909 and 1915) regulated the "design and improvement" of subdivisions.

Section 66499.30(d) provides that the modern rules of the Map Act "do not apply to any parcel or lots of a subdivision ... sold ... in compliance with or exempt from any law (including a local ordinance), regulating the design and improvement of subdivisions in effect at the time the subdivision was established." (Gov. Code § 66499.30(d) (emphasis added).) In other words, if we conclude that maps recorded between 1893 and 1929 were properly recorded pursuant to a law "regulating the design and improvement of subdivisions," then it necessarily follows that any parcels shown on those maps are legal parcels today and can be leased, sold or financed under the Map Act.

The courts in Witt Home and Abernathy concluded that the laws in effect in 1909 and 1915 regulated maps, but not the design and improvement of subdivisions. The authors of this Alert respectfully disagree. Section 66418 defines "design" as no more than street alignments, lot sizes, configuration and the like, while Section 66419 defines "improvement" as any street work and utilities to be installed, etc. Beginning in 1893, the Map Act required recorded maps to describe all land intended for avenues, streets, lanes, alleys, courts, commons, or other public uses and all lots intended for sale, either by number or letter, and their precise length and width, and that all land proposed for dedication as a public highway be shown. These requirements, as defined, are design and improvement requirements. The authors of this Alert therefore disagree with the rulings in Witt Home and Abernathy.

The authors of this Alert further believe that the "real fear" is not whether or not a parcel is recognized as legal, but rather the fear held by certain land use practitioners that the recognition of lots created by subdivision maps recorded prior to 1929 will lead to rampant unregulated development. However, such fears are unfounded. The reality is that local governments have numerous tools (beyond the Map Act) to regulate the development of property, regardless of whether or not older maps created legal lots. Local general plans, specific plans, zoning codes, and other local regulations control the use and development of lots. Cities and counties should rely on these planning tools, rather than misinterpretations of the Subdivision Map Act, to effectuate their policy goals.

For a more detailed discussion of the controversy over maps recorded between 1893 and 1929, please click on this link. Also, please feel free to contact the of authors of this Alert directly; they will be happy to discuss this further with you and arrange to provide you with the assistance you need.

SUBSCRIBE

Author

David H. Blackwell

Partner

San FranciscoT(415) 273-7463dblackwell@allenmatkins.com
Email David H. Blackwell
Download David H. Blackwell Vcard
David H. Blackwell LinkedIn

RELATED SERVICES

  • Land Use

  • Environmental & Natural Resources

News & Insights

Manage Subscriptions

Press, Media, & Articles

2025 Land Use, Environmental & Natural Resources Update

6.18.25

Legal Alert

Beyond Sackett: California’s Expanding Role in Wetlands Permitting and the Future of “Waters of the State”

6.18.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Legal Alert

Birds, Trees, and Bees – Oh My! Practical Guidance for Addressing Candidate Species in CEQA Analysis

6.18.25

Legal Alert

California Battery Energy Storage Update

6.18.25

Newsletter

Special Water Supply Edition: California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.25.25

Press, Media, & Articles

Allen Matkins Secures Major Federal Court Victory in High-Stakes Land Dispute

7.23.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Event

CEQA Reform Legislation and the Impact of AB 130 and SB 131

7.23.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.18.25

Legal Alert

Project Applicants Can Now Pay for Expedited Federal Environmental Review Under NEPA

7.16.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.11.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Press, Media, & Articles

Builder’s remedy could help address housing crisis in Oregon

7.03.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.03.25

Press, Media, & Articles

How CEQA Reforms Address California's Housing Squeeze

7.03.25

Legal Alert

Effective Immediately: CEQA Reform Legislation

7.02.25

Corporate Conference room with black chairs

Press, Media, & Articles

Allen Matkins Elects Eight Lawyers to Partnership

7.01.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

6.27.25

Press, Media, & Articles

2025 Land Use, Environmental & Natural Resources Update

6.18.25

Legal Alert

Beyond Sackett: California’s Expanding Role in Wetlands Permitting and the Future of “Waters of the State”

6.18.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Legal Alert

Birds, Trees, and Bees – Oh My! Practical Guidance for Addressing Candidate Species in CEQA Analysis

6.18.25

Legal Alert

California Battery Energy Storage Update

6.18.25

Newsletter

Special Water Supply Edition: California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.25.25

Press, Media, & Articles

Allen Matkins Secures Major Federal Court Victory in High-Stakes Land Dispute

7.23.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Event

CEQA Reform Legislation and the Impact of AB 130 and SB 131

7.23.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.18.25

Legal Alert

Project Applicants Can Now Pay for Expedited Federal Environmental Review Under NEPA

7.16.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.11.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Press, Media, & Articles

Builder’s remedy could help address housing crisis in Oregon

7.03.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.03.25

Press, Media, & Articles

How CEQA Reforms Address California's Housing Squeeze

7.03.25

Legal Alert

Effective Immediately: CEQA Reform Legislation

7.02.25

Corporate Conference room with black chairs

Press, Media, & Articles

Allen Matkins Elects Eight Lawyers to Partnership

7.01.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

6.27.25

Press, Media, & Articles

2025 Land Use, Environmental & Natural Resources Update

6.18.25

Legal Alert

Beyond Sackett: California’s Expanding Role in Wetlands Permitting and the Future of “Waters of the State”

6.18.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Legal Alert

Birds, Trees, and Bees – Oh My! Practical Guidance for Addressing Candidate Species in CEQA Analysis

6.18.25

Legal Alert

California Battery Energy Storage Update

6.18.25

View All
  • Contact Us
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Request Personal Data Information

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP. All Rights Reserved.

Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
Instagram

This publication is made available by Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP for educational purposes only to convey general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this website you acknowledge there is no attorney client relationship between you and Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP. This publication should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney applied to your circumstances. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Full Disclaimer