Fresno City Council Rejects 82-Unit Housing Project Near Herndon and Prospect — Photo: David E. Lucas — Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Fresno City Council Rejects 82-Unit Housing Project Near Herndon and Prospect
The Fresno City Council rejected an 82-unit apartment complex planned for the northeast corner of Herndon and Prospect Avenues on July 25, denying an appeal of the Planning and Development Director’s approval.
The council’s rejection blocks Development Permit Application No. P21-00989, filed by Jamie Huelskamp of Park 7, LLC, for a private gated multi-family development on 3.7 acres at 7056 North Prospect Avenue in Council District 2.
City planning staff had recommended the council uphold the Planning and Development Director’s approval of the permit. The council voted the opposite way — the status reads “REJECTED” with no vote tally provided.
The project was deemed exempt from full California Environmental Quality Act review under a Class 32 categorical exemption for in-fill development.
The Breakdown
- Developer Park 7, LLC applied in 2021 for a permit to build 82 housing units on a 3.7-acre site.
- The Planning and Development Director approved the permit in May 2024 with conditions attached.
- Someone appealed that approval to the city council — the material does not state who filed the appeal or what their objection was.
- City staff recommended the council grant the appeal and uphold the director’s approval, letting the project proceed under the stated conditions.
- The council voted against staff’s recommendation on July 25, 2024, rejecting the permit entirely.
What This Means for You
This decision blocks 82 housing units from a site the city’s own planning staff said met the rules. The council gave no public explanation for the rejection.
What to Watch
The material does not identify who appealed the permit, what their objection was, or why the council sided with the appeal over its own staff’s recommendation. A voter has no way to judge this vote without knowing what the problem was supposed to be.
The project was described only as “private gated multi-family development” with no detail on rents, who would live there, or what the developer stood to make. Gated housing by definition excludes someone — the question is who, and whether the council’s vote was about that exclusion or about something else entirely.
Eighty-two units is not a rounding error in a city that has declared a housing emergency. Blocking it has a cost. The material gives no indication anyone on the council or staff named that cost out loud, or explained what the neighborhood gained that justified it.
