Planning Commission rejects northwest Fresno housing proposal, sides with residents

The Fresno Planning Commission unanimously rejected a proposed housing project 5-0 in an affluent neighborhood near the San Joaquin River bluffs in northwest Fresno after a well-attended hearing that saw overwhelming opposition by the neighboring community. Commissioners Haley Wagner and Jacqueline Lyday were absent from the meeting.

Fresno Planning Commission chair Peter Vang initiated the motion to reject the project, choosing to go against the city staff’s recommendation to approve it. Vang said the project would “have issues in regards to traffic that would be detrimental to the public.”

“You want to be a good neighbor, a good steward to the community,” Vang said during the hearing’s closing statements. “I don’t want to be responsible…have my name tied to the fact that I allowed for such an apartment complex to happen.” 

The project from local developer James Huelskamp of Land Value Management consists of three three-story buildings and one four-story building totaling 82 market-rate two-bedroom and two-bathroom housing units. The project would be on the northeast corner of West Herndon Avenue and North Prospect Avenue, neighboring Orchid Park and H. Roger Tatarian Elementary School. 

Land Value Management declined to comment on the rejection.

Many residents attended the Fresno Planning Commission hearing to voice their opposition, with many more having submitted comments to the city leading up to the meeting.

The development will be market rate, without any subsidy for people who cannot afford rent – but the hearing saw comments that perpetuate stereotypes that have been mostly disproven— such as decreasing property value, increased crime rates and worsening traffic. 

“With 82 new families moving in, I am sure that a portion of this will need to be Section 8 housing,” read a comment template that was submitted repeatedly to the city. “While I am not opposed to giving those people who need low income housing a break, it should be done in the correct neighborhoods. This is a middle to upper scale neighborhood, as you can see from the housing prices in the area…

“…Not only will this bring the local housing prices down, but it will bring in people who are not as wealthy as those in the area, and may cause some of those to misappropriate things from others as they think that they can afford to have things taken from them. More traffic will also bring more opportunity for theft in the area.”

Architect Scott Vincent represented developer Land Value Management at Wednesday’s meeting. Vincent disagreed with residents’ concerns over the introduction of the apartment complex.

“There’s a lot of fear factor when you talk about apartments, and unfortunately most of those fears are inaccurate,” Vincent said during the hearing. “Crime does not necessarily go up if the project is well maintained and well managed, and that’s what we expect here. We’re coming into a prime area and expecting prime rents. We’re not going to let people come in and ruin that value.” 

The decision also comes after Fresno’s housing element was considered inadequate by the California Department of Housing And Community Development. The state department and attorney general have also recently been more proactive in pursuing litigation against cities for blocking housing projects. 

During Thursday’s city budget presentation, Councilmember Miguel Arias raised concerns over the commission’s decision to reject the project.

“If we support new housing and we’re in a housing crisis,” Arias questioned, “why are we allowing the commission to deny housing projects?”

No residents spoke in favor of the project

Fresno’s council chambers nearly reached capacity during the Wednesday night meeting as an overwhelming show of opposition appeared to give comment during the hearing. The high attendance led Vang to shorten public comment time from three minutes to two and a half. 

A total of 29 people participated in public comment. None spoke in favor of the project.

The public speakers followed a wave of submitted comments sent to the city leading up to the hearing.

One of the submitted comments says that having such a tall structure so close to an elementary school “could make the children subjects of voyeurism.”

Another felt that the apartment complex would not fit with the surrounding neighborhood, which is filled with one or two-story housing units.

“This lack of conformity could disrupt the aesthetics appeal of our neighborhood and set an undesirable precedent for future development in the area.”

Fresno Unified School District board president Susan Wittrup also submitted comments in opposition to the project. 

“As an elected official representing this community, it is my duty to convey the concerns of my constituents regarding this development project,” Wittrup wrote.

“Most importantly, I am deeply concerned about the impact this project may have on nearby Tatarian Elementary School…Increased traffic congestion and higher population density resulting from the construction of this housing complex could pose significant risks to the students and staff…”

‘Ignore the rules and do the right thing’

City documents show that the project has been under development since 2021, with opposition following shortly after. Notably, this proposal only sought to get a permit from the city to build the project, since the land is already zoned for multi-family residential units. 

Rob Holt, supervising planner for Fresno’s Planning and Development Department recommended the commission approve the project.

“The appropriateness of the proposed project has been examined with respect to its goals and policies,” the staff report reads. 

“Upon consideration of this evaluation, it can be concluded that the proposed project is appropriate for the project site.”

In response to multiple concerns from residents, the developer argued that they did what they could to address them. 

Vincent said that the housing complex was once planned to be an 88-unit complex, but they reduced it to 82 units after concerns were raised from residents. 

The Fresno Planning Commission asked if the developer held a meeting with the community, but Vincent said they were not required to. Vincent claimed, however, that a community meeting was held in 2021 organized by Fresno City Councilmember Mike Karbassi — who represents the neighborhood where the proposed housing project would take place — but the developers were asked not to attend. 

In light of threats of litigation coming from neighborhood residents, the developers decided not to attend the meeting.

Commissioner Kathy Bray –who was also appointed to serve as the commission’s vice chair on Wednesday – said she wished they would have done more to engage with the community. 

“I know that the rules were followed, but sometimes we have to ignore the rules and do the right thing,” Bray said.

Deputy Chief of the Fresno Fire Department Ted Semounious said the fire department does not oppose projects but does give approvals over whether safety requirements are met. The project currently does not have the approval of the fire department, though Semonious noted they’ve given the developer notes on what it would need to help get approval — changes that include “an increase in fire alarm robustness” and creating “on-site access to meet the aerial apparatus requirement.” 

What’s next?

Following the Fresno Planning Commission decision there is a 15-day appeal period. An appeal to the decision would push the matter to the city council’s agenda. Either Mayor Jerry Dyer or Karbassi would need to introduce the appeal. 

As with all of the city’s boards and committees, the planning commission serves Fresno’s government in an advisory capacity. The Fresno City Council could have the final judgment on the fate of the project if this item reaches their agenda. 

There is nothing stopping the council from voting against the commission’s advice.

Karbassi told Fresnoland on Thursday that he currently has no plan to appeal the commission’s decision. 

“I know it’s kind of early; I haven’t met with the planning department yet or the city attorney’s office, but no one asked me to appeal it, so I don’t plan on it.”

The mayor’s office did not respond to Fresnoland’s request for comment.