Patterson Irrigator

So, what exactly happened Thursday at the city General Plan Advisory Committee meeting?

What’s clear is the committee voted that the city should plan for a density of four homes per acre. What that means is up for debate.

Does the four-homes-per-acre figure contain roadways and open space in the mix, or does it refer only to lot sizes on an acre?

A brief phone poll of about half of the members indicated that some thought they had voted on gross acreage, some thought they decided on net acreage and some had no idea.

There’s no doubt that these are confusing matters, and it’s laudable that members of the community have taken time to study complicated planning issues to come up with a plan to benefit the city.

However, it seems there must be some way for everyone to get on the same page. After all, planning for quarter-acre lots for the average home is much different than including four homes on an acre along with other amenities.

City officials and consultants might need to take a bit more time to better explain issues to those who seem confused.

Of course, there is a fine line between explaining an issue and leading committee members to make certain decisions, which definitely must be avoided. So staff and consultants face a tough challenge.

However, committee members need to know what they’re voting on. After all, Patterson’s future is like an open book. It can become a first-class Central Valley community or a place that people want to avoid.

Advisory committee members likely are volunteering because they want to benefit Patterson and provide educated feedback, but first they need to understand what they’re doing.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Write comment

Name

Email

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Add Comment