General Plan Should Set Specific Standards, by BC

From: Better Cupertino
Date: Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:16 AM
Subject: General Plan Guidelines - Require Specific Standards
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.org>, planning@cupertino.org

Dear City Manager, Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners,

   In order to make informed decisions, especially decisions that impact the future of our city, it is very important that the City Staff provide clear and non-misleading information to Councilmembers and and Planning Commissioners.

   The City Staff mentioned on more than one occasion that "General Plan Policies should be general," when the councilmembers and commissioners want to set a certain standard. In particular, on September 22, 2015, Commissioner Don Sun inquired a clarification on "Major Retail" in one policy, but the staff answered with "General Plan Policies should be general."

   However, the State of California General Plan Guidelines

Page 16 gave specific examples on what languages can be used in the General Plan:

Examples of standards:

♦ A minimally acceptable peak hour level of service
for an arterial street is level of service C.
♦ The minimum acreage required for a regional shopping
center is from 40 to 50 acres.
♦ High-density residential means 15 to 30 dwelling
units per acre and up to 42 dwelling units per acre
with a density bonus.
♦ The first floor of all new construction shall be at
least two feet above the base flood elevation.

Examples of implementation measures:

♦ The city shall use tax-increment financing to pay
the costs of replacing old sidewalks in the redevelopment
area.
♦ The city shall adopt a specific plan for the industrial
park.
♦ Areas designated by the land use element for agriculture
shall be placed in the agricultural zone.

And note that the "shall" is used instead of "should" so that the policies are enforceable by law.

In many cases, specific numbers and standards were removed from "Community Vision 2040" with the misleading information: "General Plan policies should be general." This is against the recommendations of the State of California General Plan Guidelines.

Specifically, the City of Cupertino has lost perhaps millions of dollars because "ground floor retail component" is not well-defined in the 2000-2020 General Plan. This policy has been abused again and again. It is time to put some specifics into the General Plan and fix these ambiguous policies to comply with the State General Plan Guidelines.

We would appreciate if the city manager and each Councilmember could acknowledge that you've read this note and example standards and measures quoted from State of California General Plan Guideline.

Sincerely,

BetterCupertino