Did You Know Sunnyvale: Sunnyvale's Balanced Growth Profile

By Andy Frazer, May 2014
Last Update: July 2014

For a PDF version of this page, click here.

Sunnyvale’s Land Use and Transportation Element (Chapter Three of The General Plan) lays out the policies related to future land use, transportation improvement, open space and the economy. The General Plan defines the zoning which describes what sort of buildings and facilities can go in each neighborhood (for example, office buildings, housing, retail, schools and parks). The zoning also defines the maximum density of office buildings and housing for each parcel of land.

However, if developers build too much new office space without any new housing, the region will suffer from traffic congestion on the freeways. If developers build too much housing without building new schools, the schools will be over-crowded. The same applies to increased transportation infrastructure, increased city services, and parks. This is where the Balanced Growth Profile (B.G.P.) fits in.

#1 The Balanced Growth Profile Is A Planning Tool. It Is Not A Policy.

The city’s website describes the B.G.P as ”a planning tool which can be used to monitor growth and to determine the relative balance … between population growth and job growth, and between development and the infrastructure which supports it.”

THE CITY'S WEBSITE DESCRIBES THE BALANCED GROWTH PROFILE AS ‘A PLANNING TOOL WHICH CAN BE USED TO MONITOR GROWTH AND TO DETERMINE THE RELATIVE BALANCE …BETWEEN POPULATION GROWTH AND JOB GROWTH, AND BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT SUPPORTS IT’

So, why is Sunnyvale approving new office space and new high-density housing, while we still have traffic congestion, crowded schools and a shortage of park space?

Unfortunately, the B.G.P. is not a policy. Neither the Planning Commission nor the City Council (or the developers) are required to follow the B.G.P.

#2 Sunnyvale Is Required To Plan For More Housing

The State of California requires Sunnyvale to plan for a specific amount of population growth. The population growth number is handed down to Sunnyvale every 8 years through an often-hated agency called the Association of Bay Area Governments.

'AN IMPORTANT FACTOR THAT MUST BE KEPT IN MIND WHEN CONSIDERING LIKELY AND/OR DESIRABLE POPULATION GROWTH IS THAT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA REQUIRES ALL CITIES AND COUNTIES IN THE STATE TO PLAN FOR THEIR FAIR SHARE OF GROWTH. THE POPULATION PROJECTION FOR THE BAY AREA IS PREPARED BY THE STATE. THE STATE THEN REQUIRES THE BAY AREA'S REGIONAL PLANNING BODY, ABAG, TO ALLOCATE THAT POPULATION GROWTH TO EACH CITY BASED UPON A "FAIR SHARE FORMULA" DEVELOPED BY ABAG'.

Here are two important points. First, Sunnyvale does not forecast its own housing growth. This number comes from the State of California. Are these population projections accurate? And does the state have a reasonable system for dividing up that number among all regions? Could these projections be subject to political pressures? Second, what happens if the city refuses to plan for enough housing to meet the ABAG numbers? Nobody seems to know. The State may withhold federal and state funding for other projects. But it’s not clear if they would actually do that.

The General Plan spells out the most important projections for the 20 years between 2005 and 2025: more residents, and more jobs.

...the future challenge posed by the above projections is the ability and
the willingness of Sunnyvale to accommodate more than the 20 years
between 2005 and 2025 an additional 18,000 residents and 24,800 jobs.
This translates into a net increase of approximately 7,200 housing units
and 7,600,000 square feet of office/industrial floor area.

o - p.2-31 General Plan.

Remember this: Sunnyvale projected to add 18,000 new residents and 24,800 new jobs between 2005 and 2025. Imagine if the city approved all that housing before the school districts could add more school capacity? Or imagine if the city approved new office space for all these new jobs, but not enough new housing for the new employees? That would create traffic congestion, especially along the freeways.

#3 The Balanced Growth Profile Is Designed To Ensure That New Jobs And Housing Do Not Exceed The Infrastructure Required To Support It

More jobs and more housing requires more city services and more infrastructure, such as roads, public transportation, parks, city services and Public Safety.

The … challenge is to maintain a reasonable balance between
population growth and job growth, and between development
and the infrastructure which supports it.

o - p.2-45 General Plan

SUNNYVALE HAD PROJECTED TO ADD 18,000 NEW RESIDENTS AND 24,800 NEW JOBS BETWEEN 2005 AND 2025. IMAGINE IF THE CITY APPROVED ALL THAT HOUSING BEFORE THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS COULD ADD MORE SCHOOL CAPACITY?

In 2006, the city held a Community Visioning Festival where residents helped design a plan for the amount jobs, housing and infrastructure for the next 20 years.

The Community Vision and the Long-range Planning Goal seek to achieve
this growth while sustaining an outstanding quality of life; and to
accommodate growth in a balanced manner, so development of
new housing units generally keeps up with development of new jobs,
and infrastructure capacity improvements keep up with the growth overall

o - p.2-44 General Plan

Pages 2-47 and 2-48 he General Plan contemplates a “Balanced Growth Profile” (“BGP”).

“..a planning tool which can be used to monitor growth and to determine
the relative balance among the factors cited above. The Balanced Growth
Profiles [began by showing] the first five years of the 20-year planning period.
The profile is extended one year each year, adding on the incremental growth from the preceding year. This profile assumes that Sunnyvale is in a reasonably
balanced state in 2005. This is supported by the high level of satisfaction
expressed by the population in the 2005 Resident Satisfaction Survey, by the adequate functioning of utilities, by the satisfactory level of service in
traffic operation and by the lack of severe overcrowding in the schools.”

- From “Balanced Growth Profile” City webpage

#4 The Balanced Growth Profile Chart Is Easy To Interpret

The above example of the BGP is from the March 25, 2014 City Council meeting.

In this chart, the 0% column represents capacity for year 2005. The 100% column represents capacity for the year 2025. The 40% column (dotted line) represents year 2013.

#5 The Balanced Growth Profile Indicates That Sunnyvale’s Office Growth Is Out Of Balance With The Infrastructure

Source: CalTrain

In the chart on the previous page, notice the bar to the right of “Office/Industrial floor area”. It extends out to the 90% column. This means that by 2013, the city had either built of approved all the office/industrial space forecast through 2023. Notice the bar to the right of “Housing units”. It indicates the city has already approved the housing that was forecast through 2017. But notice the bars in the three bottom rows: Transportation, Utilities and Parks. They indicate the city has added practically no transportation, utility or park capacity. Sunnyvale’s Balanced Growth Profile indicates that Sunnyvale’s development and infrastructure are out of balance.

In December 2013, one member of the city’s Planning Commissioner appealed to the City Council to consider this imbalance. In his letter “Discussion Of Potential Joint Study Session With The City Council Regarding The General Plan And Balanced Growth Profile”, he wrote:

“Notably, for the entire 20-year planning period of the General Plan
(2005 to 2025), it was contemplated that 7.6 million square feet of
office/industrial floor area would be built. As of late 2013 (eight years
into the plan), nearly 95% of the 7.6 million square feet had either been
built or been entitled to be built (“approved-not-built”). Why: In only
eight years, we have built or have approved to be built nearly the
entirety of what was contemplated for office/industrial floor area for
the full 20-year planning period of the General Plan. No other
metric in the BGP has experienced such a high rate of growth
in recent years as has office/industrial floor area, and no other
metric is as out of balance to the BGP.”

#6 There Is Debate About The Relevance Of The Balanced Growth Profile

Some people believe the city has approved too much new development. This group does not want to revise the BGP because they want to maintain the growth rate guidelines that were designed in 2007. It is important to have a discussion of the relevance of the BGP because the Planning Commission and City Council have been prone to ignore the planned growth rates.

On the other hand, some people support more office development because it brings money into the city. They support more housing development for a number of reasons that we’ll discuss in the future. These people want to revise the Balanced Growth Profile because they see it as an impediment to their plans for development plans.

#7 The Balanced Growth Profile May Be Revised, Or Ignored

At the 2014 Study Session Workshop, the Council discussed whether to conduct a study session to discuss the relevance of the Balance Growth Profile (CCD-1418 - Understanding the Relevance of the Balanced Growth Profile as it Relates to the General Plan).

We have provided a transcript of this discussion. Below is a synopsis of the Council discussion.

City staff supported studying revising the BGP since the city will also be revising the Land Use Transportation Element of the General Plan.

● Mayor Griffith said, “The goal here would be to set expectations for how the Balanced Growth Profile is to be used as it currently exists as a precursor to redoing the visioning and possibly redoing what it means and how it is integrated into the General Plan”.

● Councilmember Whittum said, “The Balance Growth Profile did not take the General Plan as an input and by means of some algorithm produce an outcome for a number. It was a result of community visioning. I will be ranking that low, because I think we’ve already ranked highly the idea of having another community visioning. “

● Councilmember Hendricks said, “I’m interested in a discussion; I’m not interested in redoing the Balanced Growth Profile and changing the numbers and changing the scale”

● Councilmember Martin-Milius said, “If we’re going to have a decision-making process, then we need to have something that has better metrics, and I think this study session addresses the issue of getting better metrics so we can look at what we’re doing from a more strategic level”.

● Councilmember Larsson said, “It would be worthwhile to actually update this tool to be more useful and to be clearer.”

#8 Many Council Members and Planning Commissioners Disagree About The Relevance Of The Balanced Growth Profile

In May 2014, the City Council and the Planning Commission held a joint study session to discuss the role of the Balanced Growth Profile.

You can read a transcript of this meeting. Most council members were very clear on whether they thought the Balanced Growth Profile was relevant, or whether they wanted to dismiss it.

I was very uncomfortable with the Council’s and Planning Commission’s reaction at the Joint Study Session. I felt that many of them were more interested in looking for an excuse to outright dismiss the Balanced Growth Profile, instead of working with city staff to fix the small problems that were discussed in the meeting. In August 2014 I wrote an op-ed in the Sunnyvale Sun outlining how the majority of the city could seemed eager to dismiss the Balanced Growth Profile.

Did You Know Sunnyvale

Sunday, November 23, 2014

Sunnyvale's Balanced Growth Profile - 8 Things You Should Know