Answers to those planning questions before us all now
| Wednesday, Oct 28 2009 10:32 PM
Last Updated Wednesday, Oct 28 2009 10:32 PM
Loading Stories
Advertisement
Rarely do we hear our elected officials discuss the "big picture" -- public policy concepts that affect the well-being of everyone who lives in Bakersfield.
But that is what happened Monday night when Kern County supervisors held a workshop to consider policies that should be included in a new metropolitan Bakersfield general plan.
Should urban growth be controlled? What incentives can be used to encourage development in the core, rather than on the outskirts of town? Can Bakersfield's streets and freeways serve residents for decades to come? What can be done to encourage people to use public transportation?
Do the city and county share the same "vision" for growth, or is each jurisdiction more interested in fueling development to create tax dollars to feed their coffers? Should there be a single city-county plan, or should each jurisdiction go its separate way?
Supervisors and the county's planning staff kicked around these questions Monday night. Here are a few of our answers:
* Yes, a new metropolitan Bakersfield general plan should have lines drawn to limit urban development's outward growth and preserve prime agricultural land. These lines should allow reasonable growth, but discourage sprawl.
* Residents should enjoy a good streets and freeways system to relieve traffic congestion. But coordination with public transit agencies is needed to provide better services to entice drivers out of their cars.
* More incentives are needed through tax breaks and building rules to encourage development in the city's core.
* Yes, creation of a joint city-county general plan is critical to metropolitan Bakersfield's orderly growth. That means the city and county must not compete for development and the tax dollars. Rather property and sales taxes should be shared.
The policies Kern County supervisors and Bakersfield City Council members place in metropolitan Bakersfield new general plan will determine the quality of life in the city for many future generations.
While planning and development in metropolitan Bakersfield falls mostly under the jurisdiction of the City of Bakersfield, many "county islands" exist. These islands were created when the city annexed land around pockets of urban growth in unincorporated areas. As a result, since the early 1990s, a jointly adopted city-county general plan has helped guide metropolitan Bakersfield's growth.
Development of a new general plan has been the subject of months of "visioning" sessions and city-county planning commission workHeadlineshops. The city and county are sharing the cost of hiring consultants to help prepare the new plan.
It is always good to have a robust discussion of policy issues. But what is needed more is to have our elected city and county officials share a vision and sound policies that benefit all residents of metropolitan Bakersfield.
