Documented by Kristina Mansfield
Here’s what you need to know
- The Clovis Planning Commission voted 3-2 to approve a resolution recommending the Clovis City Council decline to certify several items needed to move forward with Wilson Home’s new mega-development north of Clovis. The proposed project is not located within the city’s existing Sphere of Influence (SOI), and will require an SOI expansion and annexation into the city before development can proceed.
- Last year, Wilson Homes said they will be working with environmental authorities on how to mitigate the issue of tiger salamanders living in the project area, although they didn’t yet know what the mitigation would be. However, no mitigation measures related to the endangered California tiger salamander were mentioned during the meeting or outlined in any staff reports.
Follow-up questions
- Will the city address the issue of the endangered California tiger salamander and its habitat/breeding grounds?
- Why was just $150,000 in mitigation fees approved for this development?
- When were notices sent out about the development and how?
The Scene
The regular meeting of the Clovis Planning Commission took place Nov. 16, 2023, at 6 p.m. in Council Chambers at City Hall, 1033 Fifth St. in Clovis. The meeting lasted four hours and included lively discussion from the public and debate from the commissioners.
Regular meetings are held generally on the fourth Thursday of each month (third Thursday in April, November and December). You can check a brief run-of-show here. They are open to the public, and there are many ways to participate: in person at city hall, by calling in by phone, by submitting written comments online, or by viewing the meeting as it is webcast. Detailed instructions on how to participate can be found on each meeting agenda, uploaded here 72 hours prior to the start of each.
Per its website, the Planning Commission is the body that reviews the development proposals for compliance with the general plan and makes recommendations to the City Council in the following areas: long-range plans and maps for the city and plans for public improvements; plans and development plans; and zoning and rezoning of property. It consists of five Clovis residents appointed by the City Council to make decisions and recommendations. Decisions made by the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council.
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Alma Antuna called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. Commissioner Brandon Bedsted led the Pledge of Allegiance and the commission secretary called the roll. Thirty-two people attended the meeting in person.
ROLL CALL Commissioners in attendance were:
Chair Alma Antuna
Chair Pro Tem Brandon Bedsted
Amy Hatcher, commissioner
Joseph Hebert, commissioner
Paul Hinkle, commissioner
Also in attendance at the meeting were David Merchen and Eric Garcia from the city Planning Department.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES The first item on the agenda was the approval of the Oct. 26 minutes. The motion carried (5-0).
COMMISSION SECRETARY COMMENTS Next, a proposed calendar of the 2024 meeting dates was distributed.
PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR There were none.
PUBLIC HEARING. Next up was the public hearing portion of the meeting. The Planning Commission heard several items related to the development of 77 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Shepherd and N. Sunnyside avenues. Great Bigland, LP. (d.b.a Wilson Homes) is the owner/applicant; Harbour and Associates are the representative.
For context, public hearings are formal opportunities for public comment. They are usually required for specific types of actions, such as general plan adoption, zoning ordinances and development permits. The hearing guarantees that the fundamentals of due process – such as the right to send notices and the opportunity to be heard – are incorporated into the decision-making process. For a rundown of what happens during a public hearing, go here.
Clovis Planning and Development Senior Planner George Gonzalez and Civil Engineer Sean Smith presented, along with Steve McMurty of De Vono Planning, who participated in the meeting online. Gonzalez said Smith could answer traffic-related inquiries from the commission and McMurty could answer questions related to the environmental impact or the CEQA report.
The staff presentation addressed eight topics: the additional correspondence received post-staff report publication, a description of the project area, a brief history of the project timeline, the proposed residential development project, the proposed planning entitlements, the proposed SOI expansion and annexation, project opposition and finally their recommendations. A Sphere of Influence is the area in which a city plans to do urban development.
Additional comment Gonzalez said his department had prepared a memo that included nine additional comment letters about the project that staff had received after their stated deadline.
- “Per our municipal code, all of the [nine] letters are considered late,” he said. Per the code, he explained, it is left to the commission’s purview whether they decide to accept them into the public record for consideration or not. “It is the staff’s professional opinion that there is enough evidence on the record for the commission this evening to take action on the project, either for it or against it,” Gonzalez said. Of the nine letters, seven were in opposition to the proposed project and associated draft and final environmental impact report (EIR), one was in support and one was neutral.
Area in the vicinity of the proposed project Gonzalez said there are single-family residential developments to the west (Lennar Homes) and primarily rural residential, single-family developments elsewhere.
Brief history Gonzalez said it was prudent for the commission to understand the events leading to the project’s present status, and reiterated that it was important to understand its history. In June 2016 city staff received a request from the applicant to allow for the urban development of the property and began the lengthy process. He stressed that no formal direction was given by the staff to proceed in June or September 2018.
- Gonzalez said in his presentation to the commission that the Clovis City Council approved a request by Wilson Homes to reduce the acreage in its Shepherd North Sphere of Influence from 1,050 acres to just 155 acres in November 2021. While technically true, Gonzalez’s presentation to the commission failed to mention why Wilson Homes made the request in the first place: some acreage being identified as potential breeding habitat of the threatened California tiger salamander.
- Wilson Homes had amended its request to avoid a lengthy workaround process, and reports at the time simply said the acreage could be considered for development again in the future should a developer express interest. In December 2022, even with confirmation of the presence of the endangered animal, the City Council voted to move forward with the developer’s full plan to potentially build thousands of single-family homes on that 1000-acre tract.
- With a $600,000 contract, the city commissioned the De Novo Planning Group to prepare an EIR, which was required for the city’s proposed northward expansion of its sphere of influence that includes the 1,000 acres. The results of that report were made public for review earlier this year, with public comment closing Sept. 5, 2023. The final version of the EIR was released earlier this month.
Proposed residential development The project is a 605-lot single-family residential development accessible from two main entrances. One entry is along the Shepherd Avenue frontage and the second is along Sunnyside Avenue at the roundabout.
- A general plan amendment is required to allow for the Shepard Avenue access. Vehicle access points allow residents to exit and enter from Shepherd and Sunnyside. Wilson Homes is also proposing a gated entry on Perrin Road for emergency vehicles and as an exit-only for residents.
- Wilson Homes is proposing the following models and lot sizes: four one-story models and one two-story model with three exterior options for the proposed Citrea home product; four two-story models with three exterior options for the Elev8ions Home development; three one-story models and two two-story models with five exterior options for the proposed Regent Home development. Lot sizes range from 1,980 to 15,943 square feet. The average size is 3,363 square feet.
- The development will include three gated communities, two adjacent to Shepherd Avenue and one on Sunnyside. These communities have different specs than the rest of the proposed development in Clovis and will include 37-foot-wide private streets with no sidewalks. Although not referenced in the presentation, the project includes a proposed Homeowners Association (HOA) to maintain the open space/common areas and provide enforcement for illegally parked vehicles within the gated communities. Nongated streets will be 40 feet wide and have city-standard sidewalks.
- Regarding its amenities, Gonzalez said Wilson Homes is proposing a combination of in-project and off-site amenities that, coupled together, will provide a general public benefit commensurate with the deviations being requested, he said.
- For the development design, Wilson Homes requested deviations in lot sizes, reduced setbacks, increased lot coverage, reduction in lot width and lot depth requirements and nonstandard garages. The proposed in-project amenities are targeted towards homeowners, and include two community areas – one for each of the restricted residential neighborhoods on Shepherd – and a paseo along the northern-most gated neighborhood on Perrin. Each community area, nestled behind its neighborhood’s gated entryways, will have its own recreation building and community pool; and all three gated communities will feature embellished landscaping on internal streets.
- Wilson Homes proposes a $150,000 contribution to the city for utilization in future off-site open space and/or park improvements in areas of the community that have a need. Gonzalez said this is an amount enough to restore one restroom facility or install one playground structure in a park somewhere it’s needed. He said that a critical component of the project is the proposed installation of a community trail on the north side of Shepard, connecting the southeast corner of Shepard and Fowler avenues and at the Dry Creek TrailHead. A second trail is proposed at Fordham Avenue connecting north with the neighborhood park.
- Gonzalez said developers will be able to design its own thematic elements since it is located outside the boundaries of the Heritage Grove Urban Center and therefore is not required to adhere to its guidelines, but said that staff is encouraging the aesthetics to link.
- The project’s impacts to water and sewer were analyzed during the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. The city engineer concluded that the city has capacity to accommodate the project upon completion of the recommended connections.
- Gonzalez said that the project is not eligible to use surface water from the Kings River because it lies outside the Fresno Irrigation District (FID) boundary. “This project will pay fees to acquire water supplies necessary for the project demands,” he said.
Entitlements Next Gonzalez discussed the specific entitlements required to move the development forward.
- He said it was important to mention for the record that staff recommended the amendments to the Land Use Element as a package in conjunction with the prezoning, tract map and planned development permit applications that establish project-specific development standards and design components of the project.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Gonzalez then described the CEQA processes and handed off the presentation to McMurty, who was hired by the city as a third-party CEQA expert to review the project. He presented the Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Consideration for the Shepherd North Project.
- According to the report, the Findings provide the written analysis, substantial evidence and conclusions of the City Council regarding the project’s environmental impacts, mitigation measures and alternatives to the project, as well as the overriding considerations – economic, social and technical – which in the council’s view, justify approval of the project, despite its environmental effects.
- For context, as required under CEQA, the Final EIR describes the project, adverse environmental impacts of the project and mitigation measures and alternatives that would substantially reduce or avoid those impacts. The information and conclusions contained in the EIR reflect the city’s independent judgment.
- “The project EIR determined that most potential impacts associated with the proposed project were less than significant,” McMurty said. “However, the analysis identified that implementation of the proposed project will result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds despite the application of feasible mitigation measures, resulting in significant and unavoidable impacts.” Project implementation would result in VMT increases that are greater than 87% of baseline increases, he said, and no mitigation measures can be put in place that would change that.
- McMurty said the City Council will adopt a statement of overriding considerations, a determination that specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, allowing the adverse environmental effects to be considered acceptable.
Sphere of Influence (SOI) expansion and annexation The proposed project is in conjunction with a proposed expansion in the SOI (155 acres) and annexation (77 acres).
- Per the staff report, the SOI and annexation will be considered by the council in a separately noticed public hearing. The SOI area was established in consultation with LAFCo (Local Agency Formation Commission).
Opposition/concerns Last, Gonzales addressed a few concerns about the project.
- First he discussed Sunnyside Avenue. He said: “Sunnyside Avenue north of Shepherd will be developed to full build; Sunnyside Avenue south of Shepherd will not be developed. The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) study did not provide evidence to support any changes. Shepherd is conditioned for full build-outs on the north and side of the street to a four-lane divided street.”
- Gonzalez said De Novo had grouped feedback from the public into categories and drafted auto-responses to the most popular comments received from them.
Staff recommendations Staff concluded the presentation with its recommendations: that the commission approve the five action items tied to the Wilson Homes project. Following approval, the items will continue on to the City Council for final approval.
- Bedsted asked about Shepherd’s dangerous curve and asked to show the Shepard roadway with the access point. He said it’s currently “two-lane with quite a curve” and said he’d like to understand a bit more about the plans for the street. Staff said the plan is to soften the curve.
- Hatcher asked about the city’s history for changing expressways.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
- John Kinsie gave a comment on behalf of the applicant, Wilson Homes. “We will be creating Homeowners Associations,” he said. “Meaningful aesthetic controls. Much of the homes will be gated.” He said homes in the proposed development will proceed at market rate and cited a range of $500,000-$700,000.
- Eric Olson, a homeowner in Clovis, spoke out in opposition to the project because of the high density, and encouraged people to “come out and walk around” to get a feel for the neighborhood.
- Kristi Diener, a homeowner in Clovis, said she opposes the project and has issues with the Stanford Avenue egress. She said she understands the city likes the project but said it is going to create even more problems.
- Jacquelyn Petro, a homeowner in Clovis and member of the Quail Run 18 group, said her family bought their property with the understanding that they would be surrounded by other private properties. She also opposed including a neighborhood park and proposed it be moved inside of the project. “Parks bring parties, loud music, lights and crime,” she said, citing two commonly debunked studies often cited by right-wing conservatives.
- Curtis Cookingham, a homeowner in Clovis, spoke in opposition to the project. He commented on the worsening water situation in their existing development and said it was a tragedy that homeowners have to pay so much for basic services.
- Patrick Quigley, a homeowner in the area and member of the Quail Run 18 group, said he drove around in his car earlier and captured video to share with the commission. He took screenshots of the suggested directions from Apple Maps and Waze and took the given routes, sharing the photos he took along the way to illustrate specific areas of interest.
- Richard Wathen is one of the 18 homeowners in the Quail Run Community. He came to share his personal and professional opinion and said he spent 35 years in residential home building. He said some sort of development will be compatible with their neighborhood and asked that they just press pause on the development. He said the final EIR just came out on Nov. 6, and they still haven’t seen the final product design. He said that now that the final project materials are available he’d welcome the option to sit down with Wilson developers. Lastly, he said while he understood the need for affordable housing, he asked why the city would OK a rogue development after approving Heritage Grove and questioned the capability of taking rural residential zoning to high-density zoning.
- Jared Callister, a member of the Quail Run 18 who also submitted an opposition letter to the commission, said the development will have a significant impact on neighboring communities. “Common sense must prevail,” he said, and added that the development process has been rushed, and lacked an understanding of the complex issues within the area, citing the Dry Creek Preserve and its noted water issues as an example.
“The only thing that’s been years in the making is the sphere of influence boundary change,” he said. “This is a warp speed project. For years we were told by the city this would be a multi-step process, allowing for community input at every stage: first the sphere of influence change, followed by annexation and proposed entitlements, and then a tract map. Instead what we’re witnessing is a rapid consolidation of these steps into a single action. This approach contradicts the very essence of proper planning. The intent of a step-by-step process is to be deliberate.”
- Lewis Smith said in a letter to the commission that neighbors on the north of the Wilson Homes development are concerned about the access point onto Perrin. “By adding an exit point for 600-plus homes, this will create a dangerous condition that is unacceptable,” he wrote.
- Kinsie again appeared on behalf of the applicant to give a rebuttal. He said he understands that there’s always a fear of change and a fear of developers not honoring their commitments. He objected to the CEQA deadlines and said people who have concerns about these types of projects deserve to be heard.
- Hinkle went on an unrelated tangent about Sacramento and ADUs before thanking the developers of the project for “putting in a park for handicapped people.”
- Hebert said the commission “got a little ahead of its skis on the development” and cited the VMT issue. “I go down that road to go to Del Taco, I know that road,” he said before questioning the practicality of presenting the commission with a report nearly 3,000 pages in length and only four days to review it.
- Alma had concerns with the traffic as well, but said that the staff reports are very precise and can’t just be dismissed.
The commission then voted 3-2 against staff recommendations to approve a resolution recommending that the City Council approve six action items related to the development. The action items were:
- Item A – A resolution of the Clovis Planning Commission recommending that the City Council: (1) Certify the Final Project Environmental Impact Report for the Shepherd North Project; (2) Adopt CEQA Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Consideration; and (3) Adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
- Item B – A resolution recommending that the City Council approve a request to amend the circulation element of the general plan to allow for the placement of a Shepherd Avenue access point on the north side of Shepherd Avenue, between N. Sunnyside and N. Fowler avenues.
- Item C – A resolution recommending that the City Council approve a request to amend the land use element of the general plan for the Development Area (approximately 77 acres) from the rural residential land use designation to the medium-high density residential land use designation.
- Item D – A resolution recommending that the City Council approve a request to prezone property within the development area (approximately 77 acres) of the project site from the Fresno County AL20 Zone District to the Clovis R-1-PRD Zone District.
- Item E – A request to approve a vesting tentative tract map for a 605-lot single-family planned residential development subject to the City Council’s approval of the annexation and sphere of influence expansion.
- Item F – A resolution recommending that the City Council approve a request to approve a planned development permit for a 605-lot single-family residential development.
These items will continue on to the City Council for final consideration. The City Council will also consider separately the proposed expansion to the city’s SOI and an annexation proposal of the development area.
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS There were none.
MEETINGS AND KEY ISSUES Per the meeting agenda, the next scheduled meeting of the Clovis Planning Commission is Dec. 14.
If you believe anything in these notes is inaccurate, please email us at fresnodocs@fresnoland.org with “Correction Request” in the subject line.
