General plans are just that: "general." California courts have confirmed that "[b]ecause policies in a general plan reflect a range of competing interests, the governmental agency must be allowed to weigh and balance the plan’s policies when applying them, and it has broad discretion to construe its policies in light of the plan’s purposes." But what happens when the language in a general plan becomes ever more specific and mandatory? As some cities and counties adopt general plans with highly detailed policies, these plans can become traps for the unwary.
California law requires each city and county to adopt a general plan, a comprehensive long-term plan for the development of that city or county famously referred to by the state Supreme Court as a "constitution for all future development." A general plan must contain seven mandatory "elements," foremost among them a "land use element" to designate the level of intensity and general distribution of land uses, a "circulation element" to identify the general location and extent of existing and proposed roadways, and a "housing element" to provide a comprehensive assessment of current and projected housing needs for the entire community as well as policies for the provision of adequate housing. Generally speaking, a city or county may not amend any one of the mandatory elements more than four times in one calendar year. Critically, "the propriety of virtually any local decision affecting land use and development depends upon [a finding of] consistency with the applicable general plan and its elements."
