Growth and Re-Development

By Jerry L Duncan

In order to get a handle on our growth issues we must first update the general plan then stick to it. District 6 needs an independent voice who understands the bigger picture.

People choose to live in an area for many reasons. Financial ability, safety, quality of the schools and the opportunity for increased home values are all critical factors in the decision of which home to buy. These market forces create the basic demand for homes. If changes to what the market is currently demanding is going to occur, improvements must be made to these critical factors throughout Fresno.

Unless we can also get the County and Clovis involved, real solutions will be difficult. I have met with each member of the Clovis City Council and the County Board of Supervisors individually and they all indicate a strong willingness to get to work on this issue. Update the General Plan.

A major reason why we are experiencing some of the problems that we are regarding growth is based from the fact that the General Plan, which is the document that in part puts down on paper how and where new development will occur, has not been updated for 15 years. It normally is updated every 10 years. Had it been updated in 1994 by the previous City Council, many of the current problems would probably not be happening. To illustrate this point, the Woodward Park Community Plan, which specifies zoning and growth for much of District 6, has had 33 amendments to it approved by the City Council in the last 10 years. 

The current City Council and the Mayor are working on the update of the General Plan now. When it is adopted and approved this will be our roadmap for growth in our near future. It will be the responsibility of the next council to carry this plan forward.

It is important that our council member from District 6 be truly objective and independent. As a candidate that is not interested in building political capital for a future run at higher office, I can provide a truly objective voice that the district needs.   Encouraging re-development in the central part of the city will be a major objective of the next council. Our efforts to establish successful results will come when the public sector and the private sector can work together on the problem to come up with market based solutions. Bringing together all of those involved looking for solutions will achieve the process that will yield results. The road we are currently on of alienating and vilifying those who will ultimately be able to help us solve the problem does not make sense. Re-development will include a combination of rehabilitation and new construction. As we address the opportunities of re-development, it should also be a clear objective to encourage ownership by the person who lives there, not to to create rental properties.

In a recent article in "The Atlantic Monthly" by Bruce Katz and Jennifer Bradley titled "Divided We Sprawl" where they discuss the challenges communities face in rebuilding urban cores, they state "that unless these places have good schools, safe streets, and efficient government people will not move from the edge back towards the center." It is not just a development problem.

We must also strive to de-politicize our planning process. Cities such as Mission Viejo, California have done just that and are models of what quality non-political community planning can be.

If we don't address these issues soon we will run the risk of eventually having significant urban sprawl and badly planned growth. We have examples of good planning in Fresno. The Dominion in Northeast Fresno is a fine example of good planning and is a model for what we can do more of.

Fresno is going to grow. It is up to us to decide what kind of city we will become. It is imperative that we preserve the primary basis for our economy, our farmland. Future development must be directed at minimizing the impact on our farmland and recognize the reality of environmental responsibility.

Many of the points brought out in the study A Landscape of Choice are valid and should be adopted. This is for the most part a well thought out plan on how we can improve our quality of life and provides a framework for achieving this. I especially support that aspect of more regional planning and mixed use. I am not however in favor of turning over our planning decisions to the State of California as has been proposed. We must however recognize that Fresno competes with many surrounding communities and we must be able to provide the housing, industrial development and other services that the market demands. Unless a major effort is undertaken to improve communication with the County and the City of Clovis, it will be difficult for any long term solutions to emerge. This effort has been lacking in Fresno's recent history.

Stagnating home values have affected the entire state in recent years. As has been happening in other parts of California, as the local economy begins to improve, home values increase because the demand for housing increases. In Fresno, we are still behind the rest of the state in the improving value of homes. The single most important thing we can do as a community to increase home values is to focus all of our energy on improving our local economy, not deny our citizens the opportunity to purchase a new home and as a result putting thousands of highly paid skilled construction workers out of work.