How to best help run-down Fresno neighborhoods? By not growing outward

One of the basic functions of a city is to plan for orderly growth. Fresno went through that process not long ago, adopting in 2014 an update to the general plan, the overall guide for how development was to occur. That process itself took three years, cost $2 million and required countless meetings.

Five years later, some City Council members want to kick off another update. They say that much has changed when it comes to planning for housing, both locally and statewide, so council members Luis Chavez, Miguel Arias and Mike Karbassi are sponsoring a measure to get an update started. The council is to vote on that proposal at its Thursday meeting.

To be sure, since 2014 California’s housing crisis has only worsened. There are more homeless people living on the streets in cities throughout the state; rents are rising seemingly everywhere, including Fresno; and not enough new homes are being built to meet demand.

So the council acting as leaders to address Fresno’s housing needs is the right thing to do.

However, the council did that very thing five years ago when it passed, on a 5-2 vote, the general plan that is now being questioned. Rather than throw away all the hard work, staff time and public participation involved in the 2014 approval, the council should respect the strong points of the last update, namely its focus on renewing the vitality of the existing city, and especially downtown, and avoiding sprawl growth.

The 2014 general plan had a 20-year vision that will only be realized if the council holds true to it.

Motivating factor

Chavez told Bee staff writer Thaddeus Miller that the general plans needs updating because much fewer new homes have been built in the past five years than expected. The plan outlined the possibility of 76,000 new homes in Fresno over its 20-year horizon. Chavez says from 2014 through 2018 only 7,331 building permits were taken out by developers.

At the same time, new developments have gone up in Clovis, Sanger and southern Madera County. Chavez worries that such peripheral growth will continue if Fresno does not act. He wants the city to remain the regional hub of development.

State officials also are drawing up housing targets that cities will need to meet to ease the crisis.

But it is wrong to say the problem lies with the 2014 plan. The real question is not where has development happened, but where should it go. The City Council has the chance to provide critical support for the vision of the 2014 plan, which is to value existing properties within the city rather than continuing Fresno’s history of sprawling outward.

In-fill growth

The current general plan emphasizes residential and commercial growth within Fresno’s existing boundaries, otherwise known as in-fill. The principle is that the city can improve best by creating new housing on open lots in existing neighborhoods, rather than leaving the older housing behind.

Arias and Chavez say they don’t want Fresno to sprawl, but rather be planned smartly. But the resolution going before the council includes direction to city staff to study an expansion of Fresno’s “sphere of influence,” which marks its ultimate limits.

One question is why it would be necessary to expand to the sphere of influence, as there is ample land available within the city for development. According to city planning staff, 134,693 new housing units can be built within current limits. Expanding to the existing sphere would add 154,466 more units. Taken together, the total is 289,159 housing units.

It is easier for developers to build on vacant land than on open lots within existing neighborhoods. But sprawl growth is a major reason why Fresno faces the budget challenges it has today. Providing services outward only increases costs, and home development is not the best generator of tax revenue.

Sprawl growth leaves older neighborhoods ... older. Without new development freshening up existing neighborhoods, there is little incentive for those land owners to improve their properties. That is why many areas of town remain run-down.

Five years ago one of the supporters of the general plan was a council conservative named Lee Brand, now Fresno’s mayor. “It’s a step in the right direction,” he said then. “It’s important to try and rebuild older parts (of the city). This is the first plan in 50 years that didn’t expand the sphere of Fresno. That’s what I voted on.”

As to Thursday’s resolution, Brand said it is not what he initially backed, and he won’t support it.

Public involvement

The councilmen promise that updating the 2014 general plan will be done in a public way. A 17-member task force would be created, with each council member appointing two members and the mayor appointing three.

The task force would conduct hearings to get residents’ views on growth. Its recommendations would then go to the council for a vote. The process will take several years and will cost as much as $3 million.

Involving the public is a must. But, taking a step back, The Bee is not convinced a new general plan is needed. The council should instead flex its leadership by using the 2014 plan as intended. Development should be directed into Fresno, not outside of it. The best way to bring value into the city is to invest in it. Sprawling outward only further lowers the value of neighborhoods distressed by years of neglect.

If you go

The Fresno City Council is scheduled to consider the general plan item at its meeting Thursday, Dec. 12 The council will meet in City Hall, 2600 Fresno St.

This story was originally published December 4, 2019 at 6:00 AM.