A city (or county) is not an accident but the result of coherent visions and aims

C H A P T E R   4 :   R E Q U I R E D   E L E M E N T S
   |   67
4
Type of Infrastructure
What is serving the 
community now?
What is the need for 
additional infrastructure?
How can finance mecha-
nisms meet the need?
Which other programs 
and policies could ad-
dress the infrastructure 
deficiency?
What is the community’s 
input?
Required (
§65302.10
)
Water
Wastewater
Stormwater 
Drainage
Structural Fire 
Protection
Potential Additional 
Services
Police Protection
Sidewalks
Lighting
Libraries, Schools, 
Community Cen-
ters, etc.
Alleys and other 
unsafe roadways
Public transit/ 
transportation
Preschools and 
childcare providers
The analysis must also review the use of benefit assessment districts or other financing alternatives that could make the 
extension of services to identified communities financially feasible. Each time the
 housing element 
is updated, the analysis for 
these communities must be reviewed, and if necessary, updated. 
For more information, please see OPR’s 
SB 244 Technical Advisory
.
Cities and counties should use this chart to ask these questions while undergoing disadvantaged communities analysis:
The land use element should be updated to include disadvantaged unincorporated communities analysis (
Gov. Code § 
65302.10
). Since all elements of a general plan must be internally consistent, the safety element, the 
circulation
 element, and 
other elements as necessary should be reviewed to ensure consistency (
Gov. Code § 65300.5
).
The disadvantaged unincorporated analysis should consider where there may be opportunities to provide more efficient, high 
quality service through consolidation, extension of services, and other regional solutions to address inadequacy of services 
and infrastructure. In addition, the analysis should consider whether the reorganization will unify or divide any other public 
agencies such as school districts, transit districts, and flood management agencies.
Correlation with Circulation Element
Senate Bill 375
, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (Steinberg), hereinafter referred to as SB 375, 
supports the state’s climate action goals to reduce GHG emissions through coordinated transportation and land use planning 
and to create sustainable communities. This concept is discussed further in the 
circulation
 element section.

---

C H A P T E R   4 :   R E Q U I R E D   E L E M E N T S
   |   68
4
The Land Use Element and Regional Sustainable Communities Strategies
California’s land is an exhaustible resource, not just a commodity, and is essential to the economy, environment 
and general well-being of the people of California. It is the policy of the state … to protect California’s land 
resource, to insure its preservation and use in ways which are economically and socially desirable in an attempt to 
improve the quality of life in California. (
Gov. Code § 65030
)
.
Most land use approvals occur at the local government level. Nevertheless, local land use elements must reflect their statewide 
and regional contexts. For example, 
Government Code section 65030.1
 states: 
[D]ecisions involving the future growth of the state, most of which are made and will continue to be made at the local 
level, should be guided by an effective planning process, including the local general plan, and should proceed within the 
framework of officially approved statewide goals and policies directed to land use, population growth and distribution, 
development, open space, resource preservation and utilization, air and water quality, and other related physical, social 
and economic development factors.” 
When adopting a general plan, local governments must consult with other entities that may be affected by the plan, such as 
neighboring cities, counties and special districts, school districts, local agency formation commissions, area-wide planning 
agencies, federal agencies, the military, water providers, and California Native American tribes (
Gov. Code § 65352
). 
Several regional activities may directly bear on local land use planning. One significant example is the sustainable communities 
strategy contained within regional transportation plans. While the Government Code states that a sustainable communities 
strategy does not regulate the use of land (
Gov. Code § 65080(b)(2)(K)
), local governments should consider and, if appropriate, 
incorporate applicable policies into local land use elements for several reasons. 
First, sustainable communities strategies should already reflect the basic outlines of local plans. Second, some transportation 
funding is tied to consistency with the regional transportation plan. Third, consistency with the sustainable communities 
strategy may help streamline benefits under the 
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA)
. Fourth, CEQA analysis 
for the general plan requires analysis of any inconsistency with the regional transportation plan.
A sustainable communities strategy might be relevant to a local land use element in several ways. A sustainable communities 
strategy should identify locations within the region where land use and transportation investments can be maximized. 
Therefore, a local government planning agency should consider whether the land use element places development in 
transportation-efficient locations as identified in the sustainable communities strategy. Other relevant policies include density 
and intensity maximums and minimums, as well as policies related to active transportation and protection of public health. 
Incorporating such policies into a local land use element and diagram may assist the local government in avoiding conflicts 
with neighboring jurisdictions and perhaps more importantly, in maximizing the benefits of transportation funding and 
regulatory streamlining.

---