Bakersfield council adopts Active Transportation Plan to expand walking and biking network

The Bakersfield City Council on Jan. 22 adopted a long-range Active Transportation Plan that maps prioritized walking and bicycling connections across the city and positions Bakersfield to compete for state and federal grants to build them.

The plan, described by city staff and consultants as a state-required planning document and eligibility tool for funding, proposes 19 trails totaling about 28 miles of separated and protected bicycle/pedestrian facilities, about 453 miles of neighborhood connectivity and sidewalk improvements, and lists an estimated $616,000,000 construction cost for full buildout.

City staff and the consultant said the plan is a high-level, long-range blueprint intended to guide project prioritization and to improve safety and equity. Daryl DePonsier of Kimley Horn and Associates, who led the consultant presentation, said the plan used crash data, demographic measures and proximity to schools and parks to rank corridors and that it integrates existing city, county and KernCOG plans. "The objective is to find the best opportunities to improve walking and biking activities in the city," DePonsier said.

Public comment reflected both support and concern. Yesenia Fernandez, policy coordinator with Blue Zones Project Bakersfield, said the group strongly supports the plan as a way to "incorporate safe and accessible routes for people of all ages and abilities" and to create more equitable opportunities. Michael Turnipseed criticized the plan's long-term price tag and urged caution on funding assumptions, saying the city should consider off-road trail models and questioning where funds would come from. Dave Demahowski, representing the Home Builders Association of Kern County, said his group supported safety goals but asked for time to meet with staff to discuss possible effects on development costs and noted concerns about impact fees, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) mitigation fees and CEQA risks.

Council members and staff responded by emphasizing that the Active Transportation Plan is a planning document, not a budget or new fee ordinance. A city staff member explained the plan is intended to enhance eligibility for grant programs and that individual projects would return to council for environmental review, design, and construction funding decisions. The city attorney offered to include clarifying language in the resolution to make clear the plan itself would not change development impact fees or impose a city-specific VMT fee.

Council Member Gonzalez framed the issue around public safety, citing national rankings and local crash trends: "This is an urgent matter that has significant consequences to the health and well-being of all Bakersfield residents." She and other council members said projects identified in the plan are intended to reduce pedestrian and bicyclist injuries by creating safer routes and filling gaps in connectivity.

Staff and the city manager told the council the plan is intended to improve the city’s competitiveness for multiple grant programs (including the Active Transportation Program, HSIP and Safe Streets and Roads for All). The city manager noted recent success obtaining competitive grants, saying the city secured about $150,000,000 in competitive grants over the last two years and that roughly $20,000,000 in active-transportation work was included in the prior year's capital program. City staff reiterated that most projects would rely on grants, with the city typically providing relatively small matches through existing capital and maintenance programs.

Council Member Smith moved to adopt the plan. The motion passed; the clerk announced the motion was approved with Council Member Weir absent.

Votes at a glance Adopt Active Transportation Plan (Resolution, Item 3a) — Motion to adopt moved by Council Member Smith; second not specified in the record. Vote: approved (motion announced as approved with Council Member Weir absent).

Background and next steps The consultant noted the plan's rankings are conceptual and project-level environmental review and design would be required before construction. The plan lists potential funding approaches including grant programs, integration with routine repaving and maintenance work, developer impact fees (where applicable), VMT mitigation strategies, and special assessment districts as possible tools. City staff said they will continue outreach with stakeholders, may add clarifying language to the resolution, and will return individual projects and funding requests to the council through the Capital Improvement Program and standard contract and environmental review processes.