Date: Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:48 PM
Subject: Fwd: AB 1515 : Consistency with the General Plan Will be Determined by Developers
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.org>, David Brandt <davidb@cupertino.org>, "City of Cupertino Planning Dept." <planning@cupertino.org>
In
Cupertino's General Plan, are there some policies that could be open to
alternative interpretation by developers? Should we spend some time to
go over some essential policies to ensure that there aren't loopholes?
Would the state allow the cities time to revise the General Plan to tighten the language? Regardless, should Cupertino re-examine the General Plan as soon as possible? Even if it cannot be done by Jan. 1, 2018, the sooner the better.
Liang C
Cupertino Resident
Subject: Fwd: AB 1515 : Consistency with the General Plan Will be Determined by Developers
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.org>, David Brandt <davidb@cupertino.org>, "City of Cupertino Planning Dept." <planning@cupertino.org>
The adopted AB 1515 text would allow developers to take advantage of any loose language in the General Plan
because "AB 1515 will allow the applicant, rather than the local agency
or a judge, to determine consistency of a development with the General
Plan and zoning by allowing the applicant to provide contrary reasons
why the project is consistent." (quote from
"Local Government Positions on Housing Bills" report by American Planning Association, California Chapter, League of California Cities, Rural County Representatives of California, California State Association of Counties, Urban Counties of California: https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws
"Local Government Positions on Housing Bills" report by American Planning Association, California Chapter, League of California Cities, Rural County Representatives of California, California State Association of Counties, Urban Counties of California: https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws
When
Cupertino adopted the General Plan in December 2014, it was written
with the understanding that the City Council will have the final
decision power in interpreting these policies. But AB 1515 changed the rule and now the developers get to determine whether a project complies with the General Plan.
Would the state allow the cities time to revise the General Plan to tighten the language? Regardless, should Cupertino re-examine the General Plan as soon as possible? Even if it cannot be done by Jan. 1, 2018, the sooner the better.
Regards,
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Liang C
Date: Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:39 PM
Subject: AB 1515 : Consistency with the General Plan Will be Determined by Developers
To: "Chiu, Allen" <Allen.Chiu@asm.ca.gov>, "Holland, Tatum" <Tatum.Holland@asm.ca.gov>, "Ahrens, Patrick" <Patrick.Ahrens@asm.ca.gov>
Allen, Tatum and Patrick,
Thank you so much for taking the time to meet with us.
It was our first meeting with the staff of an Assembly Member. So, we are still learning how to be more effective in such meetings and also learning how to read these bills and related documents.Thank you for accommodating our diverse questions.
Where do I find a list of organizations supporting and opposing AB 1515?
I
see a list of organizations in the "09/08/17- Senate Floor Analyses",
but it doesn't seem to be complete since it doesn't include "American Planning Association, California Chapter, League of
California Cities, Rural County Representatives of California,
California State Association of Counties, Urban Counties of California".
Thanks.
From: Liang C
Date: Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:39 PM
Subject: AB 1515 : Consistency with the General Plan Will be Determined by Developers
To: "Chiu, Allen" <Allen.Chiu@asm.ca.gov>, "Holland, Tatum" <Tatum.Holland@asm.ca.gov>, "Ahrens, Patrick" <Patrick.Ahrens@asm.ca.gov>
Allen, Tatum and Patrick,
Thank you so much for taking the time to meet with us.
It was our first meeting with the staff of an Assembly Member. So, we are still learning how to be more effective in such meetings and also learning how to read these bills and related documents.Thank you for accommodating our diverse questions.
Thanks.
Here
is the analysis from "Local Government Positions on Housing Bills"
report by American Planning Association, California Chapter, League of
California Cities, Rural County Representatives of California,
California State Association of Counties, Urban Counties of California: https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws
The report, dated Aug. 1, 2017, opposes AB 1515 with the following reasons:
"This bill specifies that a housing development project or emergency shelter is “deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity”
with an applicable plan, ordinance, or other similar provision if there
is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to
conclude that the project is consistent, compliant, or in conformity. We
have no problem with the “reasonable person” portion of this new
standard. However, the “deemed consistent” automatic approval should
be deleted - it goes too far and upends the accountability for local
land use decision-making. Under current law, a city council or board of
supervisors weighs the evidence and reaches a decision based on
established principles of democratic decision-making -- local
governments are ultimately held accountable for their decisions by the
local electorate. AB 1515 would replace the judgment of local
elected officials with that of any "reasonable person," including the
project developer who has a fundamental economic interest in the
project. When fundamental land use decisions, like general plan
consistency, are made by developers rather than elected representatives,
local government accountability is compromised and the recourse
available to the electorate is taken away. AB 1515 will allow the
applicant, rather than the local agency or a judge, to determine
consistency of a development with the General Plan and zoning by
allowing the applicant to provide contrary reasons why the project is
consistent. As a result, the issue will be whether a “reasonable person”
could conclude that the project is consistent – not whether the city or
county had substantial evidence to back up its conclusion."
What do you think of the analysis in this report?
AB 1515 is approved in September 29, 2017. Here is the adopted bill text (https://leginfo.legislature.c
The adopted AB 1515 text would allow developers to take advantage of any loose language in the General Plan
because "AB 1515 will allow the applicant, rather than the local agency
or a judge, to determine consistency of a development with the General
Plan and zoning by allowing the applicant to provide contrary reasons
why the project is consistent."
When
Cupertino adopted the General Plan in December 2014, it was written
with the understanding that the City Council will have the final
decision power in interpreting these policies. But AB 1515 changed the rule and now the developers get to determine whether a project complies with the General Plan.
Would the state allow the cities time to revise the General Plan to tighten the language?
Thank you for your help in interpreting AB 1515.
Sincerely,
Liang C
Cupertino Resident
No comments:
Post a Comment