Just a cursory glance at one chapter, Liang spoted that some nice policies and strategies that aim to reduce traffic congestion in Cupertino were removed in the 2040 General Plan. It is unsettling how many more changes are there that impact our daily life.
Liang gave a reference to a GPA document from Palo Alto which starts with a summary of changes and then ends with several pages of detailed changes for each policy.
Liang requests the city to prepare a similar document to show the differences between the new General Plan and the previous 2000-2020 General Plan.
-------------------------------------
From: Liang C
Date: Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:19 AM
Subject: List of the differences between "2000-2020 General Plan" and "Community Vision 2040"
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.org>, David Brandt <davidb@cupertino.org>, Aarti Shrivastava <AartiS@cupertino.org>, City Clerk CityClerk@cupertino.org
I found the following strategies and policies are removed from the general plan. Many more seem to be removed or replaced.
I think the residents should be informed clearly of such change in our general plan.
Deleted Strategy (Page 5) Strategy 2. Jobs–Housing Balance.
Minimize regional traffic impacts on Cupertino by supporting regional planning programs to manage the jobs-housing balance throughout Santa Clara County and the Silicon Valley.
Deleted Policy (Page 12) Policy 4-6: Traffic Service and Land Use Development
Maintain a minimum LOS D for major intersections during the morning and afternoon peak traffic hours. Achieve this standard by imposing reasonable limits on land use to ensure that principal thoroughfares are not unduly impacted by locally generated traffic at peak traffic hour.
Deleted Strategy (Page 13) Strategy 3. Allocation of Non-residential Development.
In order to maintain a desired level of transportation system capacity, the city’s remaining non-residential development potential shall be pooled and reallocated according to the city’s development priority tables as shown in the Land Use Element of this Plan.
Date: Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:19 AM
Subject: List of the differences between "2000-2020 General Plan" and "Community Vision 2040"
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.org>, David Brandt <davidb@cupertino.org>, Aarti Shrivastava <AartiS@cupertino.org>, City Clerk CityClerk@cupertino.org
I
would like to request that the city staff provide a document that
spells out the difference between "2000-2020 General Plan", approved on
2005 and "Community Vision 2040," approved on Dec. 2014.
Here is a draft of Palo Alto's Comprehensive Plan Update (Amendment):
http://www.paloaltocompplan.
It lists very clearly, which policy remains the same, which one is edited and which one is new. See Page 3 for Highlights of Changes.
That's a great summary of changes.
Then, in the end from Page 23, there is a Disposition table that details all of the policies in the previous general plan and what happened to it.
This is what an 'amendment' should be like. Not a total re-write as Cupertino does and no information is provided on how the new general plan relates to the previous general plan.
I gave a cursory
look at the Section 4 "Circulation" in "2000-2020 General Plan" to
compare with Chapter 5 "Mobility Element" in "Community Vision 2040".Here is a draft of Palo Alto's Comprehensive Plan Update (Amendment):
http://www.paloaltocompplan.
It lists very clearly, which policy remains the same, which one is edited and which one is new. See Page 3 for Highlights of Changes.
That's a great summary of changes.
Then, in the end from Page 23, there is a Disposition table that details all of the policies in the previous general plan and what happened to it.
This is what an 'amendment' should be like. Not a total re-write as Cupertino does and no information is provided on how the new general plan relates to the previous general plan.
Deleted Strategy (Page 5) Strategy 2. Jobs–Housing Balance.
Minimize regional traffic impacts on Cupertino by supporting regional planning programs to manage the jobs-housing balance throughout Santa Clara County and the Silicon Valley.
Deleted Policy (Page 12) Policy 4-6: Traffic Service and Land Use Development
Maintain a minimum LOS D for major intersections during the morning and afternoon peak traffic hours. Achieve this standard by imposing reasonable limits on land use to ensure that principal thoroughfares are not unduly impacted by locally generated traffic at peak traffic hour.
Deleted Strategy (Page 13) Strategy 3. Allocation of Non-residential Development.
In order to maintain a desired level of transportation system capacity, the city’s remaining non-residential development potential shall be pooled and reallocated according to the city’s development priority tables as shown in the Land Use Element of this Plan.
I would like to request that the staff provide a list of differences between different sections of the two general plans.
In the very least, a list of policies, strategies removed, edited and replaced. And a list of new policies.
Thanks.
Liang
No comments:
Post a Comment