Meeting notices and staff reports repeatedly stated that "the majority of the General Plan’s content will remain the same." We were told that the new General Plan, Community Vision 2040 (CV2040) contains only "updates to address recent State Law requirements" and some cleanup to be consistent.
However, we found that some important policies were removed when the state laws cited do not remotely require the removal of those policies. Policies meant to control development or put a condition on the approval of development proposals were removed. The Land Use chapter sees drastic changes, not required by the state laws. Since the Council was only able to focus on the Housing Element during the Dec. 2nd & 3rd meeting only, these important policy changes were never reviewed, deliberated by the Council. The public were never given a chance to comment on them since there were never explicit put on any Council Meeting agenda.
These policy changes open the door to uncontrolled development in Cupertino.
Please provide your input and written comments by 4:30 p.m. on Friday, July 31, 2015 at http://www.cupertinogpa.org/
These are just some of the hidden changes identified with the limited time we have to study and summarize them. Many more issues will be published on the BetterCupertino.blogspot.com site shortly as soon as we have time to summarize them.
School overcrowding could be the most important issue facing the
majority
of Cupertino residents. Yet, the policy trying to address the very issue
was simply removed because it is illegal under Senate Bill50. SB50
should not be used simply as an excuse to
ignore the problem. School overcrowding problem is true and real. Other
policies should be considered to address the
problem in different ways so that they do not directly violate SB50. But
nothing were suggested as a replacement.
Traffic congestion around schools could be addressed. Air quality,
noise and safety for kids walking and biking to schools could be
addressed. Policies could be put in place so that Environment Impact
Report (EIR) properly address traffic congestion and safety, noise and
air quality issues around schools.
Important policies meant to maintain a tolerable traffic condition in
Cupertino were removed in the new General Plan "Community Vision 2040"
(CV2040) in order to comply with state law SB743. However, those
policies on traffic Level of Service (LOS) do not violate SB374 at all.
SB374 merely requires an alternative measure to be added for multi-modal
transportation. This is yet another example where a state law was
misinterpreted and incorrectly applied to the new General Plan.
All policies edited, added, removed to comply with the state laws in CV2040 should be reviewed in detail to determine whether the modifications are truly required to comply with the state laws.
All policies edited, added, removed to comply with the state laws in CV2040 should be reviewed in detail to determine whether the modifications are truly required to comply with the state laws.
The reasons given for each modification in Comparison Tables for the
General Plans often do not reflect the true effect of the modification.
"Edits" often drops one essential sentence in the original policy or
soften the language or even replace a policy by something else with a
totally different intent. "Merged" and "Split" often removes one policy
or strategy, which is quite different from the policy it is replaced
with. "Edited/deleted for compliance with a state law" is often misused
since the specified state law does not require the given modification.
Unless each column of the Comparison Tables is read in detail, one
cannot truly comprehend how much is changed in a chapter.
Here are some policy changes from the Land Use Section where some
significant changes are not properly described in the Comparison
Tables. These are just important ones we come across in a casual
perusal. Not a comprehensive list of all mis-described modifications.
Many Planning Areas see fundamental and drastic changes on their
characteristics. These changes were never discussed during Dec. 2nd
& 3rd Council Meeting.
The
Comparison Tables only compared policies, but not texts outside of
policies. However, there are a lot of texts in the 2000-2020 General
Plan that were deleted or dramatically changed. These texts often
describe the desired character of the City under the General Plan or
identify important issues to be addressed in the General Plan.
The new General Plan CV2040 does not mention these important issues any more.
The View Preservation policy in 2000-2020 General Plan seeks to "limit building heights in order to preserve hillside views throughout the City."
This policy was totally removed in the new General Plan, Community
Vision 2040" (CV2040). Such policy removal was not required to comply to
any state law. And such policy removal was never put on the City
Council agenda for discussion. The public was never given a chance to
comment on it either.
And this is just one of the many examples of policies removed without any Council approval or public input. CV2040 should not be approved in its current state since it contains too many, way too many policy changes that drastically altered the intent of the original policy in the 2000-2020 General Plan.
And this is just one of the many examples of policies removed without any Council approval or public input. CV2040 should not be approved in its current state since it contains too many, way too many policy changes that drastically altered the intent of the original policy in the 2000-2020 General Plan.
State Law SB375 is used as the reason that to remove another important
policy: Job-Housing Balance. However, SB375 in fact requires Job-Housing
Balance in order to reduce greenhouse emission. We have to question.
Have many policies the new General Plan "Community Vision 2040" are
resulted from mistaken interpretation or improper generalization of the
state laws?
Page 26 and 27 of the Comparison Table for "Mobility Element"
confirmed that the following policies meant to protect communities from
pollution caused by the Quarry and its traffic were removed or
rewritten in the new General Plan "Community Vision 2040"
(CV2040). These modifications were not required to comply with any state
law. They were simply removed without Council approval. These
modifications were never listed on any Council meeting agenda and never
deliberated in any Council meeting.
Paid for by Cupertino Residents for Sensible Zoning Action Committee, PO Box 1132, Cupertino, CA 95015, FPPC #1376003
No comments:
Post a Comment