REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Title
Action on Objectives for the Patrick Henry Specific Plan, Freedom Circle Specific Plan and City North Vision Plan
Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On August 22, 2018, the City commenced the planning process for the Freedom Circle and Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plans with consultants, MIG, Inc. (MIG), to establish a land use plan and policies for the redevelopment of low-intensity office and industrial parks in northern Santa Clara into high-density mixed-use neighborhoods.
The planning process also includes preparation of a comprehensive City North Vision Plan for the broader geographical area in which the Specific Plan areas are located to articulate a unifying vision for these neighborhoods, to broadly analyze the infrastructure and service needs to support new development and to establish a framework for how these new neighborhoods will become part of a complete community. Preparation of the City North Vision Plan, along with the Freedom Circle and Patrick Henry Specific Plans, is underway, including community outreach efforts and establishment of Technical Advisory Committees and Stakeholder Steering Groups.
Staff is now seeking feedback from the City Council on the City’s overall objectives for the Freedom Circle and Patrick Henry Specific Plans, including objectives for residential densities, building heights, parkland, affordable housing, transportation, and neighborhood serving retail and commercial uses. Establishing these objectives earlier in the Specific Plan preparation process will enable the City to give full consideration of how best to address each objective.
BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clara 2010-2035 General Plan identifies future Focus Areas for higher density residential growth intended to help meet the future housing needs of the community and to address the City’s jobs-housing balance. The General Plan also identifies three phases for the implementation of these Focus Areas over the timeframe of the General Plan, and requires the preparation of a comprehensive plan as well as the evaluation of infrastructure needs and other considerations as a prerequisite to the implementation of the Phase 3 Focus Areas. Land in the vicinity of Patrick Henry Drive is one of the Phase 3 Focus Areas which, according to the General Plan, will be transformed into a “higher-density residential and mixed-use [neighborhood] with a full complement of supportive services.”
In 2016, the City received two proposals for significant development projects in the northwest portion of the City. One project site is located within the area identified as the Patrick Henry Focus Area in the General Plan and one is located on the opposite side of Great America Parkway between Freedom Circle and San Tomas Aquino Creek, an area which is not currently identified as a Focus Area. Rather than consider these proposals as independent applications, City Council directed staff at its March 21, 2017 City Council meeting to begin preparation of Specific Plans for the Freedom Circle and Patrick Henry areas that could comprehensively provide the land use framework for the development of new high-density mixed-use development in each area. The Specific Plan process is intended to provide an opportunity to better coordinate redevelopment efforts among participating stakeholders, including City agencies and area landowners, to help ensure that Santa Clara’s continued growth and evolution align with the goals and policies identified in the General Plan as well as continue to provide a high quality of life for all residents, employees, and visitors.
Also at the March 21, 2017 meeting, the Council asked staff to prepare a comprehensive plan for the North Santa Clara area that would address the need to build a complete community composed of multiple neighborhoods and incorporate prerequisite studies to comprehensively address related service and infrastructure needs. Following City Council direction, staff initiated preparation of the Patrick Henry and Freedom Circle Specific Plans by conducting a Request for Proposals (RFP) process to hire a planning consultant. A total of eight firms responded to the RFP and staff identified a preferred firm, MIG, Inc. to serve as a planning consultant for both Specific Plans as well as the comprehensive plan for the North Santa Clara area. On July 17, 2018, City Council approved a professional services contract with MIG.
Staff is proceeding to work with MIG to concurrently prepare the two Specific Plans and a City North Vision Plan. The Vision Plan study area includes the portion of Santa Clara between Highway 101 and Highway 237 to the north, bounded by the Calabazas Creek to the west and extending eastward to San Tomas Aquino Creek south of Tasman Boulevard and to the Guadalupe River north of Tasman Boulevard.
Consistent with General Plan policies, the majority of the costs for preparation of the Specific Plans are being funded by private developers. There are currently ten landowners in the Patrick Henry Plan area interested in redevelopment and three in the Freedom Circle Plan area. Each of these property owners is represented on a Stakeholder Steering Group for the appropriate Specific Plan and has provided funding for the Specific Plan processes.
Initial outreach activities have been conducted for the Specific Plans, including stakeholder and technical advisory meetings and the City’s first City North Vision workshop held on Monday, February 25, 2019. Future milestones for the planning process include issuance of a Notice of Preparation for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in May/June, preparation of the EIR and public circulation in the fall, and final City Council consideration of the Specific Plans and Vision Plan in the spring of 2020.
Stakeholder Input
As initial stakeholder engagement, MIG conducted phone interviews with property owners and developer representatives participating in the Specific Plan processes to better understand their redevelopment interests as well as the challenges, assets, and opportunities they perceive in each area. These stakeholders are now part of the Stakeholder Steering Groups for each Specific Plan. MIG conducted an initial assessment of the Vision North planning area (Attachment 1) and facilitated stakeholder input based on this assessment. There have been two meetings with the Stakeholder Steering Group for each plan area and ad hoc follow-up consultations. During the meetings, stakeholders provided the following input:
• Plan for high-density residential and high-intensity mixed-use neighborhoods;
• Provide flexibility to allow development that is responsive to the real estate market and allows construction of wood-frame-over-podium product types;
• Provide clarity on City requirements for parking and open space requirements; and
• Include tools that allow equitable cost-sharing among property owners for infrastructure, parkland and other community infrastructure.
Technical Advisory Committee Input
A Technical Advisory Committee comprised of several City departments and partner agencies (including the City of Sunnyvale) are being asked to provide input and feedback to the project team throughout the development of the Specific Plans. City staff held an initial internal orientation meeting, and MIG has facilitated one meeting with the Committee. Technical Advisory Committee members provided the following input:
• Provide programmable, adequately-sized public parkland for new residential neighborhoods;
• Add density near existing transit service along Great America Parkway and Tasman Drive;
• Ensure that fire and police services are maintained at a high level;
• Ensure adequate infrastructure and support district-level sustainability;
• Co-locate community amenities, such as libraries, parks and schools to create social hubs and areas of activity; and
• Incorporate multi-modal transportation facilities.
DISCUSSION
Staff is now requesting City Council input on key objectives to guide the next steps in the preparation of the Patrick Henry and Freedom Circle Specific Plans. These objectives should more specifically communicate how the Plans can implement the goals and policies set forth in the City’s General Plan. These objectives will be incorporated into the two Specific Plans and into the Vision Plan to guide development, investment and improvements across the entire “City North” district. The intent of identifying these objectives early in the planning process is to set clear expectations for landowners and stakeholders within the plan areas, as well as the larger community and to allow the Specific Plans to be effectively developed around the City’s most important land use objectives.
Collectively, the City is now contemplating the development of approximately 22,000 new residential units within the Santa Clara area north of Highway 101. These units could support a population of approximately 50,000 people. It is critical that the City plan carefully for each of the new districts or neighborhoods within North Santa Clara and collectively for the area as a whole to promote the long-term viability and quality of life for future residents, employees and visitors.
General Plan Framework
The General Plan establishes seven Major Strategies (Attachment 2) intended to act as the basis for all high level land use decisions made by the City:
1. Enhance the City’s High Quality of Life
2. Preserve and Cultivate Neighborhoods
3. Promote Sustainability
4. Enhance City Identity
5. Support Focus Areas and Community Vitality
6. Maintain the City’s Fiscal Health and Quality Services
7. Maximize Health and Safety Benefits
These Major Strategies are expanded in the General Plan and supported by numerous goals and policies throughout the General Plan, including goals and policies specifically for the Future Focus Areas (Attachment 3 and Attachment 4).
As expressed through the General Plan, the City’s intent is to transform Focus Areas into high density mixed-use environments that positively impact the City’s jobs-housing balance and provide for the needs of current and future residents. General Plan land use policies (e.g., Land Use Policy 5.3.1-G3) strongly promote development that minimizes vehicle miles traveled, capitalizes on existing public investments in transit and infrastructure, and is compatible with surrounding uses. The General Plan supports walkability and placemaking as important ingredients for building successful urban neighborhoods. These policies reflect the value of land as a limited resource and the importance of using it efficiently to meet the developing needs of the City. The Tasman East Specific Plan is a recent example consistent with these principles. The City established a high minimum density of 100 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) for the plan and required neighborhood serving retail and other commercial uses as key ingredients to support placemaking and walkability focused on a “Main Street” that could support up to approximately 100,000 square feet of commercial uses.
City North Key Planning Elements
To implement the General Plan Strategies, Goals and Policies, staff recommends that the City’s planning for the two Specific Plans and the Vision Plan emphasize the following elements:
• Density - maximizing density will allow the City to maximize production of housing while preserving employment lands, increasing fiscal benefits and supporting environmental goals.
• Services - planning for a new community must include all of the services necessary to support a complete community, including local serving retail, public parklands, and civic uses such as schools, libraries, and community centers.
• Infrastructure - to be viable, new development must be supported by physical infrastructure including transportation, water, sewer and electricity.
• Placemaking, Urban Design and Amenities - in addition to planning the right mix of land uses, significant attention must be given to the design and programming of open spaces within high density development to insure there are publicly accessible spaces designed to support community life.
• Mixed-Use - mixed-use development is a key strategy to promote walkability and placemaking.
• Community Benefits - new development should provide affordable housing and other benefits that contribute to the good and welfare of the larger community.
Recent large Neighborhood Plans in Santa Clara and regional Cities
Below, staff is providing recent examples of large Neighborhood Plans in Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Mountain View and San Jose and how issues of construction of infrastructure, community amenities and public facilities were addressed.
The City previously went through a large neighborhood planning process for the development of Rivermark. In many ways the Rivermark development is considered successful, although there are also some areas where the community has expressed dissatisfaction. Rivermark benefitted from the large scale of the land area addressed in a single plan and the ability to leverage a large amount of new development to deliver significant community amenities. Rivermark also benefitted from a high level of attention given to the design of project architecture and public spaces, including unique streetscape standards. Among the areas that could have been improved, foremost is the size of the public school included in the Plan area. School officials underestimated the popularity of the school and the student population generated by the new development, particularly the townhouse component. Community members have also suggested that the central large park area is not well defined or designed to support specific uses and that more attention could have been given to designing the interface between private and public areas.
Mountain View, Sunnyvale and San Jose have all developed large area neighborhood plans that address the construction of infrastructure, community amenities and public facilities tied to new development potential. A review of the adopted plans for those jurisdictions generally demonstrates an effort by each city to require community benefits from development within the designated plan areas that exceed generally applicable citywide requirements. Mountain View and Sunnyvale have both utilized a community benefits system that allows higher density for projects that voluntarily offer benefits such as additional funding of public schools, green building measures that exceed Building Code requirements and contributions toward local transportation infrastructure improvements. This incentive system is primarily focused on new commercial development, but also includes some residential development. While the North San Jose plan did not include a similar system, the Plan does include specific requirements for new parklands and planning for other community facilities, including a school and neighborhood serving retail, as prerequisites to new housing development.
Planning for adequate park space has been a key issue for Santa Clara’s Specific Plan process. While the City’s Parkland Dedication Ordinance and City policies establish a goal of 3.0 acres of dedicated parkland per resident, it is impracticable to fully achieve this ratio for new high-density residential developments due to the corresponding population densities and credits available through the Ordinance for private recreational space. Developers pay in-lieu fees to address any shortfall in achieving the mandated ratio. For example, the recently adopted Tasman East Specific Plan (TESP) requires 10 acres of open space, approximately 1 acre per 1,000 population, which corresponds to 22% of the total land area of 45 acres. The TESP allows that 5 acres of the open space may be a mix of publicly accessible private open space and private open space. If the City had applied the full dedication requirement of 3.0 acres per 1000 population to the TESP, it would have required that approximately 30 acres of the 45 acres be dedicated parkland. As approximately 7 acres are street right-of-way, there would have been only 8 acres, or 18% of the land area, available for development.
Mountain View, Sunnyvale and San Jose all utilize similar parkland goals and ordinances, but have demonstrated a pragmatic approach in the implementation of parklands within their jurisdictions that does not produce parklands at the same ratio as that achieved in Santa Clara. In adopted Plans for those jurisdictions, the provision of parkland is often to be accomplished by utilizing existing open spaces where available and ultimately new acres of parkland are delivered at ratios (parkland per capita) below goals otherwise established within the respective General Plans for each city. The North San Jose plan, including creek trails and other open space areas would achieve approximately 1.5 acres per 1,000 population. Recent plans in Mountain View and Sunnyvale will achieve less than 0.5 acres per 1,000 population. The North San Jose plan is the most ambitious as it requires the development of 5 new 5-acre parks as well as a larger community park facility. Mountain View’s adopted North Bayshore plan supports a new population of approximately 22,000 people with a range of up to 9 acres of new parkland. Mountain View’s East Whisman plan, currently under development, is establishing a goal of approximately 20 acres of open space to support a population of 10,000 residents, utilizing a mix of neighborhood parks, mini-parks, linear parks and privately owned publicly accessible space.
Requirements for affordable housing are slightly higher within the neighboring cities’ adopted Plan areas, either through a greater percentage requirement (e.g., a 20 percent rather than 15 percent inclusionary requirement) or through a deeper level of required affordability (e.g., a percentage of units that must be affordable to low income or very low income residents rather than moderate income residents).
Locally adopted plans do not extensively address public facilities beyond parklands. The North San Jose plan references the need for a school and other public amenities. Plans adopted in Mountain View and Sunnyvale do not provide for additional public facilities, beyond identifying payment of school fees as a community benefit. Each plan does include requirements for new commercial development in some form.
The Tasman East Specific Plan establishes a minimum residential density of 100 units per acre, requires approximately 100,000 square feet of neighborhood serving commercial uses, and provides environmental clearance for a small format urban school site. Toward the end of the Tasman East planning process, requirements were added for a community room, a book mobile parking area, and incentives for higher density. These requirements for public amenities were tied together under a placemaking strategy for the new neighborhood that would form with the plan’s implementation. The preparation of the Tasman East Specific Plan benefited when the City established objectives earlier in the process such as the 4,500 unit target, the Main Street placemaking strategy and the 10 acre open space requirement. Objectives that were raised later in the process, such as the addition of library services, were more difficult to address.
Learning from these recent examples, the City should carefully consider and plan for school facilities to support future residential growth, give significant emphasis to design of both building architecture and the public realm, require neighborhood serving retail and focus on placemaking. Further, the City should evaluate greater requirements for affordability, library facilities, community rooms and other public amenities. The City should consider a minimum of 22% of available land dedicated to open space, and carefully design that space for efficient use and programmability to meet the needs of future residents. Establishing objectives earlier in the planning process will facilitate the incorporation of such objectives into the Specific Plan.
Proposed Objectives for the City North Plans
Based upon the key planning elements, community input, existing land entitlements and site specific analysis, and evaluation of local precedents, staff is proposing that the following objectives be used to guide the remainder of the planning process for the Santa Clara City North area.
City North Overall Vision
City North is a polycentric urban district comprised of connected neighborhoods integrated with a dynamic public realm. The City North area consists of the following neighborhoods (Attachment 5): Central Park North, CityPlace, Freedom Circle, Great America Corridor, Great America Park, Freedom Circle, 3005 Democracy Way, Mission College, Patrick Henry, Tasman East and Tasman North Industrial Park.
City North Planning Principles
• Urban Scale: Develop City North as Santa Clara’s first large-scale urban-style district, including high-density housing and multiple job centers connected by innovative and/or dynamic transportation infrastructure and walkable streets.
• Polycentric District: Develop City North as an interconnected network of districts that have multiple activity centers. Each district will support a unique mix of land uses that complements its neighboring areas.
• Complete Neighborhoods: Provide within each neighborhood in City North a mix of core community uses so that Santa Clara residents can easily access places to live, work and play. Plan sufficient school facilities and other public facilities to fully meet the needs of the projected future population.
• Innovative Multi-Modal Mobility: Establish a street network flexibly designed to accommodate a balanced mix of travel modes including walking, cycling, driving, and transit. City North will incorporate innovative strategies to provide additional mobility options and support transit use including a districtwide Transportation Management Association (TMA).
• Human-Scale Public Realm: Promote a pedestrian-oriented, human-scaled environment within the public realm that links one neighborhood to another.
• Compatibility: Provide transitions between new development areas and adjacent land uses that address changes in use and density and provide for new connections where opportunities are available.
Policies Applicable to both the Patrick Henry and Freedom Circle Specific Plans:
• Neighborhood Planning: Establish new land use designations customized for the plan area; frameworks for the development of parks and open spaces, circulation, urban design; an infrastructure plan with funding strategies, design criteria and guidelines for buildings, streets and open spaces; and implementation plans.
• Commercial Development: Strategically locate retail nodes throughout plan areas. All new residential development should be within a 10-minute walk of at least 20,000 square feet of neighborhood serving commercial uses.
• Parkland and Open Space: Establish a parkland dedication standard (consistent with the recently developed Tasman East Specific Plan) which requires a minimum of 22 percent of total developable land be allocated to programmable public parkland and other open space amenities. A maximum of 50 percent of this total dedication may be developed in the form of private open space, with the remainder required to be dedicated as programmable public parkland. Applicants will also be required to comply with the Parkland Dedication Ordinance, including payment of fees equivalent to the total obligation identified in City Code Chapter 17.35. Include privately owned publicly accessible spaces throughout new development to provide additional open space amenities and support placemaking.
• Community Amenities: Identify a location for a new public school, branch library and publicly accessible community meeting spaces. Locate the school with connections to open space areas. Consider a range of library types, such as siting a new urban library on the ground floor of a mixed-use development or locating a library within a new park. Create new meeting spaces which would be accessible during evening and weekend hours for public use. Evaluate the potential for a new community center.
• Infrastructure: Develop an infrastructure plan and associated funding plan that ensure infrastructure will be adequate to support planned uses, densities and intensities. The infrastructure plan will ensure orderly, efficient provision of infrastructure and establish an equitable structure through which improvements will be funded.
• Walkability: Repurpose and redesign existing rights-of-way to provide a human-scale, multi-modal environment with greatly enhanced pedestrian facilities.
• Affordability: Require 15 percent of all residential units developed to be made affordable to households at or below 80 percent of area median income (AMI). The Specific Plans include the conversion of industrial and commercial lands to residential uses, which have higher market land value, supporting a higher standard for the delivery of affordable units than seen Citywide. While the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance requires 15 percent of residential units to be developed as affordable, the affordability of the units is set at 100 percent of AMI. Creating an 80 percent AMI affordability requirement for affordable units produced in the Specific Plans will diversify the City’s affordable housing inventory and create opportunities for households with lower income levels.
Patrick Henry Specific Plan Objectives
• Establish land use policies that allow the transformation of the area from office and light industrial uses to a high-density residential urban neighborhood.
• Support high density land use, with some mixed-use buildings to provide neighborhood- and site-serving retail and community amenities.
• Provide approximately 4,500 - 5,000 residential units with estimated densities ranging from 85 - 200 du/acre.
• Allow a range of building heights between 5 and 25 stories, with lower height buildings planned along the western edge of the plan area.
• Provide a primary public park centrally located within the plan area, connected to a central north-south greenway and supported by plazas and other smaller scale open space areas.
• Increase east-west and north-south non-vehicular connectivity options, including a new “slow street” connecting to the 3005 Democracy Way (Kylli) Project and VTA service to the north that emphasizes pedestrian and bicycle movement over automobile traffic flow.
• Provide a new vehicle connection to Mission College Boulevard.
• Provide improved connectivity to the Calabazas Creek trail.
• Identify a potential branch library site and spaces for day care or other community amenities.
Freedom Circle Specific Plan Objectives
• Establish land Use policies that will direct the redevelopment of the 136-acre commercial area to a mixed-use office, residential and retail neighborhood.
• Support high-intensity mixed-use land use designations allowing a mix of office, hotel, retail, and very high-density residential development.
• Require high-intensity office and commercial uses fronting Great America Parkway.
• Provide approximately 5,400 -6,000 residential units with estimated densities ranging from 85 - 150 du/acre.
• Allow building heights ranging from 5 to 25 stories;
• Provide a large public community park supported by a network of distributed neighborhood public parks.
• Provide a mixed-use neighborhood-serving retail node north of Mission College Boulevard.
• Provide increased east-west and north-south pedestrian and bicycle connections, including to transit service on Great America Parkway and San Tomas Aquino Trail.
• Provide a signature recreation feature - the Freedom Loop multi-purpose trail that links with planned bikeways on Mission College Boulevard and San Tomas Aquino trail, and provides a 0.8-mile loop for joggers, walkers and cyclists.
• Consider an additional new school site to serve the Santa Clara North area.
Project Timelines and Next Steps
Following input from City Council, the Freedom Circle and Patrick Henry Drive project teams will revise and refine the preliminary concepts for each plan area, and develop and evaluate alternatives for consideration as appropriate. The MIG team will concurrently draft the Santa Clara City North Vision Plan for review.
Following review and refinement of a preferred alternative for each plan area, the team will develop design guidelines as well as implementation, infrastructure and financing tools. The environmental review is expected to begin in the summer of 2019.
Contingent upon the extent and nature of City Council, stakeholder, technical advisory and community input at each planning phase, the project team anticipates the following general timetable and deliverables for both Specific Plans (which to date have remained on the same project timeline):
• Preferred alternative (Spring 2019)
• NOP and scoping (Spring 2019)
• Administrative draft plan (Summer 2019)
• Draft EIR (Summer - Fall 2019)
• Public draft plan (Winter 2019-2020)
• City Council Hearing (Spring 2020)
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) in that it is a governmental organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.
Prior to adoption, a single Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be prepared to address the two Specific Plans and the Santa Clara City North Vision Plan in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to inform key decision-makers and the general public of the potential environmental effects that would arise from implementation of the Specific Plans and Vision Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City entered into funding agreements on August 24, 2018 with the two property owner groups for the preparation of the Specific Plans, and is in receipt of developer funds to cover the full cost of preparation of both the Freedom Circle Specific Plan and the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan. Based on these agreements, total funds of $1,711,502 ($900,000 for the Freedom Circle Specific Plan and $811,502 for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan) have been deposited by the developers into accounts established by the City for the consultant services.
The proposed change in land uses would significantly increase land values as well as demand for services, having both positive and negative fiscal impacts upon the City. While the City has not conducted a fiscal analysis for the Specific Plans, it is understood that residential land uses generally have a net negative fiscal impact (as increased land value revenue does not completely offset increased costs for service), but infill development and higher density development, particularly utilizing Type I or Type III construction, can provide for more efficient delivery of services and support more tax revenue generating activity, potentially resulting in net neutral or positive fiscal implications.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Finance Department and the City Attorney’s Office.
PUBLIC CONTACT
A community workshop was held on February 25, 2019 in the Council Chambers. The purpose of the workshop was to identify community priorities for the redevelopment of the specific plan areas and to receive input on the 3005 Democracy Way (Kylli) project. Approximately 30 members of the public attended the meeting, including property owners, developers, and community members. Feedback included a need for a variety of housing types, open space, retail, and amenities.
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email clerk@santaclaraca.gov <mailto:clerk@santaclaraca.gov> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Direct staff to proceed with preparation of the Santa Clara City North Vision Plan, Patrick Henry Specific Plan and Freedom Circle Specific Plan with the identified objectives.
2. Direct staff to proceed with preparation of the Santa Clara City North Vision Plan, Patrick Henry Specific Plan and Freedom Circle Specific Plan with modified objectives.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation
Alternative 1.:
Direct staff to proceed with preparation of Santa Clara City North Vision Plan, Patrick Henry Specific Plan and Freedom Circle Specific Plan with the identified objectives.
Staff
Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director of Community Development
Approved by: Deanna J. Santana, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. MIG City North Assessment Maps
2. General Plan Major Strategies
3. General Plan Future Focus Areas Goals and Policies
4. General Plan Goals and Policies
5. City North Neighborhoods