Tag: developers

Categories : Fresno HousingTags : 1 Comment

Fresno councilors trying to kill infill general plan again

On By jamesinclair

Developers aching for more sprawl versus everybody else. Sound familiar? It should, because in December of 2014, I published this post: Will Fresno council kill infill general plan? with that exact sentence.

Five years later, here we are again.

As a reminder, the 2035 General Plan Update (enacted in late 2014) directed Fresno to focus on infill development instead of continuous sprawl. Local developers were furious, and pulled every trick they could to block it. Fortunately, the council at the time did listen to the people of Fresno, who throughout the public process strongly preferred curtailing sprawl. Click to read more!

Categories : UncategorizedTags : 8 Comments

Beautiful countryside to make way for massive 5,000 home sprawl project

On By jamesinclair

There’s something almost sinister about the way a developer gushes about the natural landscapes, beautiful views, and rolling hills he is about to bulldoze to build cookie-cutter tract homes.=&0=&” he’s ever seen.=&1=&

Categories : UncategorizedTags : Leave a comment

One week remains to comment on Fresno general plan update

On By jamesinclair

All the information you need is on this page, but a quick summary here.

  • Last general plan update was November 2012
  • This proposed one is controversial because developers dislike how it mentions focusing on infill vs sprawl 
  • The draft General Plan is available for a 45-day public review period commencing on Wednesday, July 2, 2014 and ending on Monday, August 18, 2014. 

The middle point is why public comment may actually be important. Don’t let the developers sabotage the plan, let the city know you support infill development. 

Mind you, the developers have already managed to water it down:

“The Council’s modified (plan) shifted more development to
single-family housing and with more focus on growth west and southwest
of State Route 99, but maintained a strong commitment to Downtown and
major corridor revitalization, Complete Neighborhoods, and more compact
development.” Click to read more!

Categories : UncategorizedTags : 5 Comments

Chipping away at the Clovis trail system – again.

On By jamesinclair

A few years ago, Clovis developed master plans for future residential areas of the city, namely the Harlan Ranch and Loma Vista areas. Both of these master plans required that all new development include a new trail system, and provide the necessary connections so that cyclists and pedestrians can use the trails for recreation and commuting. 

Most developers comply with the requirements and build the trails. They realize that it’s an important asset that will increase the value of their property and make their new homes easier to sell. Residents who move in expect that the planned trails will materialize.

Some developers, however, disagree. They care only about the shortest of terms, and request that the trail requirement be removed so that they can fit in one extra lot, or a larger backyard somewhere.

Sadly, the city is usually quick to agree to these changes, even when the developer wants to block existing trail connections with a masonry wall.. 

This month, another developer is at it again, and is requesting that their new subdivision not include any trail at all. Like usual, the city is ok with it, even though once these homes are built, the missing trail will be all but impossible to build in the future.This type of policy not only hurts future residents, but current residents who bought their homes with expectations that the master plan will be followed. 

Map showing the proposed trail link being eliminated, in the red bubble

photo paseo1_zps39aa9086.jpg

Image showing the existing trail was planned to continue straight….now it will just end. Existing homes to the north will lose a planned amenity.

photo paseo2_zps0b8761b0.jpg

That’s not all – in the master plan, this property was zoned for high density residential (15.1-25 units per acre) and the developer asked for the city to change the zoning to medium density (4.1-7 units per acre). Of course, they got that change. So the developer wants to build suburban housing instead of apartments, AND they want to eliminate the path requirement? 

The item being discussed (PDF) goes before the planning commission on April 25th, which is open to the public if you want to speak against the change.

Incidentally, if you look at the previous image, notice something….even though everything you see here, the roads, houses, sidewalks etc were all built within the past 8 years, it was done wrong. The crosswalks don’t connect. Three curb ramps point diagonally and one only points in one direction. In all cases, pedestrians and cyclists must leave the crosswalk and enter the center of the intersection to cross the road.

photo paseo3_zpsc3448d05.jpg

Categories : UncategorizedTags : Leave a comment

Visalia votes for sprawl

On By jamesinclair

The Fresno Bee reports that the Visalia City Council voted to move forward with an update to their growth plan. The update will divert focus from their downtown to new commercial strips on what is currently agricultural land.

I thought this quote was particularly amusing

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

“Take
a cue from some of the mistakes Fresno made related to Blackstone,” he
said. “Once you open the barn door, all of the cattle leave and you can’t
get them in the barn again.”  Click to read more!

Categories : UncategorizedTags : Leave a comment

Important planning decision at city council meeting tonight

On By jamesinclair

This merits a long and lengthy post, but I’ve no time at all, so I shall let some other sources speak to what is going on.

The Fresno City Council is to vote on the 2035 general plan as recommended by the planning commission. A long list of developers who depend on sprawl development to make all their money are lining up on one side, so it’s important to either attend the meeting or email the council-members asking them to oppose the developers and approve what the planning commission came up with (after months of community input).

The planning option is far…(far!) from perfect, but if the developers oppose it, you know they’ve done something right.

Of course, the developers want to ignore months of public process and get whatever they want.

Bill McEwen writes:

Now, after the formation of a citizens committee, 12 community workshops and a citywide telephone survey, we’re about to see if the City Council has the backbone to stand up to developers seeking more Fresno sprawl.

The test comes 5 p.m. Thursday when the council selects one of five options for the 10-year update to the 2025 General Plan.

The Planning Commission last month unanimously approved “Alternative A,” which would add 76,000 housing units. Thirty-nine thousand of the new residences would be in existing neighborhoods and 37,000 in planned growth areas.

But two days before the Planning Commission vote, developers unveiled their ideas during a citizen committee and community workshop at Dailey Elementary Charter School. A Building Industry Association executive then presented “Alternative E” to the Planning Commission. Click to read more!

Categories : UncategorizedTags : Leave a comment

Patio takeover of trail delayed, for now

On By jamesinclair

The Bee has the some good news about last nights planning meeting concerning the proposed expansion of a restaurant onto the right-of-way of the Sugar Pine Trail.

Fresno’s planning commission on Wednesday rejected a proposal to allow a northeast Fresno restaurant to put a patio into part of the Sugar Pine Trail — but said the restaurant owner could return with a new proposal.

In rejecting the proposal by Yosemite Ranch owner David Fansler, commissioners asked the City Council to clarify when and how the city should allow shared use of public spaces.

Fresno Bee

As I wasn’t at the meeting, it’s hard to get the full tone of the message, but the news is mostly positive. At least for now, there will be no takeover of the trail.

The bad news is that the rejection was not outright. Instead of issuing a firm no, the commission bounced the issue away to the city council to come up with a policy on how to treat proposals that infringe on the trail right-of-way.

That is, the “fight” (Yosemite Ranch’s description of the issue) moves on to another date in which the full City Council draws up and votes on guidelines. It is possible that those guidelines may make it very easy for private developers to take trail space. However, with proper advocacy, it would be possible to ensure that any policy completely safeguards the trail from future appropriation by private interests. At the very least, any future policy should require a considerable amount of mitigation by the developer, and a full-proof legal stance that the city could demolish the addition at any time.

The current proposal simply was “we want to do this, let us do this, it’s for the best, we promise”.

If the developer doesn’t care about the community, the guidelines should require mitigation that does take care of the citizens of Fresno, who would be giving up publicly owned space. For example, in return for taking over half the trail, the restaurant would have to fund the full cost of the river-side trail, and, with 3 months notice, the city could require removal of the expansion at the expense of the builder. Basically, the public interest must be protected to the full extent. If the reverse was true, and the city was trying to take Yosemite Ranch’s property to build a trail, I guarantee the restaurant would fight in court for every last penny.

Another bit of good news is that the planning group understands the importance of the trail.

“Since we don’t have a policy , we’re setting up something that could destroy the trail, which is something we want to fight as hard as we can to preserve,” said commission chairwoman Jaime Holt. Click to read more!