What this means:
A Fresno County judge has ruled that the city council has two months to approve a market-rate housing proposal in northwest Fresno that has been the source of multiple contentious and controversial rejections.
A Fresno County judge delivered a major win for a local housing developer, potentially signaling the beginning of the end of his contentious fight to build a market-rate housing project in northwest Fresno.
In a ruling handed down on Monday, Judge Robert Whalen Jr. said the City of Fresno must approve a proposal for a four-story, 82-unit, market-rate housing development that was controversially rejected last year by the city’s planning commission and city council.
The housing proposal would be on the northeast corner of West Herndon Avenue and North Prospect Avenue. Developer James Huelskamp and his company LandValue Management first applied for the project in 2021.
The council and planning commission rejected the project, arguing it didn’t meet the city’s codes and general plan. But the judge said the city could not back up that claim in court.
Whalen gave the city 60 days to decide on the final conditions of approval for the project, and to identify whether it qualifies for an exemption from state environmental review.
Another argument Huelskamp made was that the Fresno City Council rejected the housing proposal in bad faith, according to the lawsuit, but the court did not agree.
The Fresno City Council voted to reject the project in a split 4-3 vote last year.
Fresno City Council president Mike Karbassi, who represents northwest Fresno, was one of the “no” votes.
In a statement on Monday’s ruling, the council president said he disagreed with the court’s decision and that it “highlights how state law continues to erode local control, stripping authority from representatives who work and live in these neighborhoods and hear directly from residents every day.”
The statement also added that neighboring residents have felt the developer’s approach to the project “has been marked not just by neglect but by blatant disrespect toward a community that has consistently voiced thoughtful concerns.”
“We absolutely need more housing,” Karbassi’s statement reads, “but we must build responsibly, with full transparency and genuine respect for the voices of the communities we serve.”
Huelskamp and LandValue Management did not immediately respond to Fresnoland’s request for comment.
Fresno City Attorney Andrew Janz did not immediately respond to Fresnoland’s request for comment.
How we got here
The Huelskamp project has gone through some alterations since the initial bid in 2021, with the final proposal promising 82 market-rate, two-bedroom and two-bathroom homes. The apartments would be housed in three three-story buildings and one four-story building.
The city’s planning department approved the project in March last year, a decision that sparked a groundswell of neighboring residents calling on their elected officials to kill the project.
Two months later, the appeal was first heard by the city’s planning commission, who controversially rejected the project based on residents’ traffic and safety concerns.
Dyer and Karbassi issued a statement in the days following, saying that they would hear an appeal by the developer at a future city council meeting. The hearing, the statement said, came following the advice of the city attorney, who said a rejection could result in a violation of the state’s housing accountability act.
The Fresno City Council ultimately decided to reject the project in a split 4-3 vote in July last year 2024. Citing likely litigation coming no matter how the council voted, the body decided to side with the residents, who consistently showed up to voice their fierce opposition to the project.
What happens next?
Whalen’s decision gives the city council 60 days to vote on the final conditions of approval for the housing project.
It is not immediately clear what alternatives the city has and whether they will choose to keep fighting the housing project.
The court ruling also says that Huelskamp can file a separate motion to court asking the city to reimburse his legal fees.
