Grow Better, Not Bigger:

AFT Joins Fresno County, Calif., Coalition in
Recommending Compact Growth

Harlan Ranch--Shawn Stevenson's family farm in Clovis, Calif.--is bustling. Last week the pistachios were harvested and trucked off to the processor. A few days ago the crews started picking and packing the naval oranges; soon they'll start on the lemons and kiwis.

Stevenson's family has farmed in California since before the Gold Rush and, at Harlan Ranch, in Fresno County for half a century. About 1,400 acres are in farming--mostly fruit, nuts and hay--and cattle graze on 3,000 more.

Autumn is harvest time in Fresno County, Calif., as in so many other farming regions across the country. In fact, thanks to the ideal growing conditions here in the San Joaquin Valley, in the heart of the famous Central Valley farming region, whatever time of year it is, some crop is being harvested. Among these lush green trees, boughs sagging from the weight of the ripe orange and yellow fruit, the 12-lane highways and endless housing developments of Los Angeles, 200 miles to the south, seem worlds away.

Or are they? A mere 40 years ago, the wall-to-wall sprawl that is Los Angeles County was the number-one agricultural county in the United States. Fresno County now holds that honor, boasting more than $3.3 billion in annual farm-gate sales. But by all indications, it's already following L.A.'s old script.

Fresno is now one of the most rapidly growing counties in the state, with a current population projected to increase more than 227 percent--to 2.4 million--by the year 2040. And at current patterns of residential and commercial development, the county will lose more than 240,000 of farmland, two-thirds of which is considered prime and important.

In an effort to save irreplaceable San Joaquin Valley farmland, American Farmland Trust has joined California building and development, agricultural and business groups to endorse more compact growth in Fresno County.

When the City of Fresno's general plan came up for review and revision this summer, representatives of AFT, the Building Industry Association of the San Joaquin Valley, the Fresno County Farm Bureau and the Fresno Chamber of Commerce sent a letter to the City of Fresno planning director, urging adoption of a more compact, efficient pattern of growth and infill development within existing urban areas.

With the stroke of a pen these organizations--representing widely diverse land-use interests--put aside past disagreements over growth issues and spoke out in unison in favor of moderate increases in urban density, says Greg Kirkpatrick, AFT's field representative based in Visalia, Calif.

"It comes down to economics," Kirkpatrick says. "Everyone recognizes that agriculture is the primary economic provider for the San Joaquin Valley. Coming to some consensus on how to best manage growth is critical to the future of the county's agriculture."

This is not saying "no" to development altogether, Kirkpatrick points out. "There's no question that the population will grow there and that new jobs will be needed to support it," he says. "But at the same time, all the key parties here agree that we shouldn't permanently sacrifice our best, nonrenewable economic resources for one-shot development."

Stevenson--who is also president of the Fresno County Farm Bureau--was one of the letter's signers. The population growth of the city of Fresno as well as encroachment of low-density suburbs nearer by has had a direct impact on him as a farmer and rancher, he says. "We're right on the edge of urbanization, and there's a tremendous growth heading our way. We've had ag-urban interface problems, such as neighbors complaining when we spray crops or run tractors at night.

"We've also had to deal with trespassing, vandalism, and even more serious crimes--gangs have brought stolen cars here to strip them, and a murder victim was once found on our ranch," Stevenson says.

Many of the newest single-family houses in Fresno County are being built on lots as large as four or five acres, and in the San Joaquin Valley that almost always means farmland. Many of the factors that make a plot of land good for farming--such as flat topography, good drainage and access to roads and commercial areas--also make it desirable for building stores and houses. But the cost of delivering services, such as water, electricity, sewers, roads and public schools, to these scattered housing units is significantly higher than the amount of taxes paid in by the new homeowners.

"We've seen more and more county services going to the urban-suburan populations," Stevenson observes, "leaving those of us in the ag land out in the cold, especially for things like fire and sheriff response times. The state and local governments keep channeling funds to those other areas to pay for the new growth, and then they come to the farmers saying that they need more taxes and fees from us."

As AFT reported last year in Alternatives for Future Urban Growth in California's Central Valley, by the year 2040 the annual cost of providing services to each new urban resident in the region, at the present low-density growth rate, would be $123 more than that resident would contribute in taxes. In contrast to that deficit, the same resident would provide a $67 surplus under a compact-growth scenario.

Kirkpatrick notes that compact growth also holds advantages for the building industry. "The economics of housing construction and infrastructure costs dictate that to be able to provide affordable housing, a city will have to grow at slightly higher densities. We can grow more efficiently and provide for the same number of people with the same amount of economic growth."

Stevenson says the Fresno County Farm Bureau, with assistance from AFT, formed an agriculture preservation committee to look at the options to protect farmland and reduce the impact of urbanization on farmers. "These are issues I'd been concerned about and aware of for a long time," he says, "but after spending nearly 18 months on this committee and participating in dozens of meetings, it's become clear what the best solutions are. We need to come up with a good general plan and stick with it, and encourage higher density growth in the county and cities."

So far, eight of the 15 cities in Fresno County have adopted resolutions supporting the recommendations in the task force letter. "If the political will is there," Stevenson declares, "we can save agriculture in Fresno County."

# # #

[sidebar]

The Compact Growth Alternative

In the search for livable and economically viable solutions to rapid population growth, urban planners are looking to the principles of compact growth, which include:

Building homes at optimal density. Usually, the most cost-efficient and profitable way to produce single-family houses is to place four to seven of them on an acre of land. Because these dwellings cost less to build than today's standard tract houses, and because there is less land to buy, more people can afford them. Smaller lots can even bring environmental benefits: For example, with less landscaping, fewer chemical fertilizers and less water--so vital to the region's agriculture--are needed.

Renewing the inner city. Unlike in most European cities (where the central areas are the most desirable places in which to live and work), the hearts of many American cities are run-down and economically strapped. The city of Fresno is typical in this regard; the population has grown away from its center and spread out to the north and the east, all but abandoning the downtown area. "In recent years Fresno has been working on some very innovative downtown renovation projects," Kirkpatrick says. "It's been a long and slow journey, but they're making progress." While revitalizing urban centers may be costly, it is still usually less expensive than building new cities--infrastructure and all--at the urban edge.

Using existing infrastructure. Repairing or even replacing roads and power and sewer lines usually costs less than building new ones to reach outlying areas. Keeping a town's confines as compact as possible also makes public transportation convenient and cost-effective and keeps emergency-service response time to a minimum.

U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Federico Peña, speaking at a recent workshop on building livable communities, noted, "There is no question that the American suburban pattern of growth and development helped fuel our national prosperity. But communities from Seattle to Miami are beginning to question whether the way we are growing--ever lower densities, expansion into open spaces and agricultural lands--is a course we can still afford."

# # #

[SIDEBAR]

The following letter was sent to City of Fresno Planning Director Alvin P. Solis, with copies to Fresno City Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners.

Dear Mr. Solis:

As the population of Fresno grows, we are continually faced with questions about where new residents will live and work. The General Plan Update process currently underway in Fresno seeks to define just that. The goals and policies of the Land Use Element and the Urban Design Element of the General Plan will guide development patterns within the city for the next 25 years. The pattern of growth we choose now will certainly affect the economic health and quality of life of the city for many years to come.

Recent studies in the San Joaquin Valley indicate that moderate increases in urban density are likely to have a number of positive benefits for local citizens and economies. The benefits include: