Fresno lawmakers are moving forward with a policy to allow developers to build housing on property zoned for offices, but it won’t be as clear, cut and dry for developers as initially proposed.
The council decided against making it so developers have to simply meet a checklist of certain requirements to have their housing projects on office zones approved automatically. But the policy will still have to go through another vote in the future to finally become law.
The backstory: The city has been debating the policy for months, as it first came before the planning commission in March. The planning commission voted it down at the time.
- Under the initial proposal, developers could have their projects approved ministerially, meaning they would be automatically approved if they met certain standards.
- The proposal was introduced to the council last month and was not voted on at the time. The council added an amendment to it to prohibit new residential development under the proposal on office zones within 500 feet of a school.
The big picture: Fresno City Councilmember Nelson Esparza made a motion on Thursday to approve the policy to streamline development on office zones, but removed all of the ministerial components from the item, pitching his view as a middle ground.
- Councilmember Nick Richardson made a second to Esparza’s motion, as long as the 500-foot buffer zone for schools remained. Esparza accepted Richardson’s request.
- The council ultimately supported it after around an hour of debate on a 4-3 vote. Councilmembers Miguel Arias, Tyler Maxwell and Annalisa Perea voted against it, in part because they argued removing the ministerial portions of the policy would make it more difficult to build housing on land zoned for office space.
- City Manager Georgeanne White also confirmed during Thursday’s council meeting that the policy will help the city to regain its Prohousing Designation with the state, which gives communities priority over others when applying for affordable housing grants.
What they’re saying: Much of the discussion on the dais centered on boosting development with ministerial approvals versus the public getting a say on infill projects in their neighborhoods.
- “We absolutely do need more housing, and I’ll continue to enthusiastically support housing projects throughout the city,” Esparza said. “But even after all of the discussion and kind of flushing this out, I’m still pretty wary of the long-term impacts of expanding ministerial approval in particular.”
- Perea, who proposed the initial version of the policy, argued against removing the ministerial components, saying that the policy built in many requirements up front – such as a full traffic impact report – leaving little incentive for developers to move forward without the automatic approvals in place.
- “When I say that it will make housing production harder in our city, this policy adds a lot of those safeguards, a lot of additional requirements that aren’t today required, and then in addition there’s no real incentive either at the forefront or at the backend,” Perea said. “So I won’t be able to support the motion as is, and I caution the other councilmembers.”
What we’re watching: The city council will have to consider the policy once again at a future meeting because it was altered on Thursday. The council will take a final vote on it at a future meeting. Esparza said he plans to discuss the ordinance with city staff regarding further alterations.
