Reference no: EM132250337

City of Ontario, CA, and City of Culver City, CA

General Plan Analysis

A current general plan is mandated by State law and represents the most basic planning document for all incorporated municipalities in the State of California. While State law dictates a minimum set of required elements in the general plan and provides guidelines for the adoption process, it allows considerable discretion in terms of the goals outlined by the plan and the format for the plan.

As a consequence, individual cities have very different general plans-both in terms of their content and in terms of their format. (It should be noted that California is currently revising the guidelines for general plans and the State may provide much greater guidance on the required content of general plans in the future).

Taking advantage of the flexibility provided by the current State guidelines, the City of Ontario and its planning consultants (The Planning Center - DC&E) developed a very distinctive general plan andadopted a completely on-line or "e-plan" (c. 2010).

Claiming that their goal was to create an "incredibly transparent" general plan, the Ontario plan is completely accessible via the City's website and is presumably formatted for easy on-line navigation.

Given the importance of precedents in urban planning, it is not surprising that the Ontario general plan has become a model for many other cities and "e-plans" are becoming increasingly common as other cities update their general plans.

By comparison, the City of Culver City has a relatively traditional general plan that was adopted more than 20 years ago (c. 1995; of course the housing element has been periodically updated, most recently in 2014).

Like the City of Ontario plan, the Culver City general plan is entirely accessible via the City's website-but the links to the plan essentially take viewers to PDFs of conventional documents that were not originally designed for on-line viewing nor contain links to other parts of the plan. (c. 2018 Culver City is undertaking an update of its general plan).

An analysis of these two cities' plans may help you understand some of the problems, limitations, and opportunities for members of the public (and city officials) to use the general plan in directing their city's development.

Assignment:

1) Imagine that you are considering purchasing a home in Ontario or in Culver City. Go to a real estate website (e.g. trulia.com, Zillow.com, etc.) and look through the listings for a house in each city that isattractive to you. Take note of the addresses of the houses you like.

2) As a knowledgeable prospective resident, you know you should investigate the general plan of the city where you're considering buying a home so you can anticipate how the city and the neighborhood around your house might change/develop while you're living there.

Go to the city websites for the City of Ontario and the City of Culver City and locate their general plan-you know it's got to be there somewhere; Dr. Hoffman told you virtually every city has its general plan available on-line...

3) When you've located the general plan for each city, read through it and consider the following questions:

Is the plan presented in a logical, easily understandable manner?

Can you readily identify the goals/policies of the city with respect to all of the elements addressed in the plan?

Can you easily locate the seven elements required by the State in each general plan? Can you easily determine what optional elements are included in each plan?

Are sufficient data presented (with appropriate citations) in each plan for you to understand and evaluate all the assumptions on which the planning goals/objectives/programs have been based?

Are the general plan map and other illustrations appropriate and useful for the non-professional in each plan?

Are the illustrations (maps, diagrams, graphs, photos, etc.) of substantive utility or do they appear to be largely aesthetic additions to the plans?

Does each plan include an "executive summary" or other summary (e.g. an abstract or annotated outline) that would make its content clear to the average citizen without having to read entire plan?

Does each plan provide decision-makers (e.g. city council, planning commission, etc.) and the public (e.g. you) adequate information to make rational decisions on issues related to the respective city's future growth?

4) Now reconsider each plan from the perspective of where your potential homes are located (using the address from step #1 above).

Can you identify the location of your house on the city's general plan map?

Can you determine what the general plan designation is for the area where your house is located? Can you determine the associated zoning?

Can you determine what the general plan designation is for adjacent areas?

Can you tell what changes, if any, are likely for your area based on the plan?

5) Then compare and contrast each plan:

Which general plan was easier to access? Why?

Which city appears to consider planning more important? Why do you think so?

Is the "e-plan" of Ontario easier to understand, use, and navigate than the conventional plan of Culver City? Why/why not?

Which plan did you prefer analyzing? Why?

6) With respect to the Ontario plan:

What's "The Ontario Plan?" Is it the city's "general plan" or something else? If it's not the "general plan," what is it? What's the "Policy Plan?" How does it relate to "The Ontario Plan?"

What are the "elements" of The Ontario Plan?

What is the "vision" statement of The Ontario Plan? Is it part of the city's general plan? Is it a policy statement? A set of objectives? Or a list of programs?

Is "governance" part of Ontario's general plan? Is it typically part of a general plan? Should it be? Why/why not?

Are "city council priorities" part of the general plan? Should they be? Why/why not?

What does Ontario call its "general plan?"

How many elements are there in Ontario's "general plan?" How easy are they to find and identify? To understand?

7) With respect to the Culver City plan:

How easy was it to locate the Culver City general plan?

What are the elements of the Culver City general plan? How easy are they to find and identify? To understand?

Is the plan "user friendly" or does it appear to be a technical document useful primarily to planning professionals and city staff?

Are the planning goals, objectives, and programs clear in the Culver City plan?

8) Finally, write a brief analysis (3 pages maximum) of the two plans using the questions in items 3 - 7 above to help you formulate your response (you don't need to answer each question, but use them as a guide to help structure your analysis and focus on the questions you found most important as you examined the two plans).

As you write your analysis, remember that every city's general plan is supposed to be a guideline for the benefit of the general public (e.g. city residents and local business owners) and public officials (e.g. city council, planning commission, etc.) in making decisions about their city's future. A general plan is not just a technical document for professional planners.

You might also remember that Ontario's "e-plan" is widely viewed as an innovative model for other cities to emulate as they update their general plans. Based on your analysis, do you think that it's a general plan precedent other cities should copy? Why or why not?