North Merced residents are pushing back against a proposed self-storage facility they say threatens the character of their neighborhood.
About two dozen homeowners living in the Oakmont Village neighborhood packed the Merced City Council chambers Monday night.
They were attempting to thwart a proposed business development in northeast Merced that includes 500 storage units and 41 lots for single-family homes.
Residents worry the development will drive down home values and lead to the loss of the tranquil appeal in this part of town.
“Neighbors who bought homes and lots all knew that this was a commercial office set-up, and they looked at the Oakmont Village as a very nice place to live,” resident Tom Clendenin said during public comment.
Clendenin, who owns a home in the Oakmont estates, said he was selected by his neighbors to represent their case against the developer’s plan.
“We did our due diligence, we made our purchases, and that’s how we are now living,” he said. “…This mini storage does not belong on Yosemite Avenue. This is a gateway out to UC Merced. It’s been a long-established road, and it needs to be aesthetically pleasing and business oriented to further promote UC Merced.”
The two-hour discussion with robust public comment concluded with the City Council voting 4-2 to send the item back to the Planning Commission, with Councilmembers Ronnie De Anda and Fue Xiong casting “no” votes.
District 1 Councilmember Darin DuPont recused himself from the vote and discussion because the applicant is a client at a local private law firm where DuPont works as an attorney.
Property developer Eric Gonsalves appealed to council members Monday after the proposed project was rejected by the Planning Commission in April. Commissioners said they were on the fence about the project, but they ultimately decided to deny Gonsalves’ request due to strong opposition from Oakmont Village residents.
“This is a great idea. This is the wrong place to put it,” Commissioner Walter Smith said during the vote, adding, “Let the neighborhood be a neighborhood for the people. We don’t need a storage unit. We need more housing.”
Todd Bender, who owns a marketing firm representing the property owner and developer of the project, told the council that the business model would complement the neighborhood’s aesthetic.
“What we plan to deliver is a beautiful gated-entry [community], to do something unique and different,” Bender said. “We ask for your vote of confidence on that tonight.”
Developer needs to collect more feedback, says council
The location for the proposed project sits on approximately 8 acres of vacant land, owned by Gonsalves, at 1380 E. Yosemite Ave. and 3595 Parsons Ave. It’s located within a one mile-distance from two grocery supermarkets, Raley’s and Sprouts Farmers Market.
The project’s future rides on a land-use zoning change from commercial office to high-medium density residential.
Zoning changes at this location require amending the city’s General Plan, a guide adopted by the city in 2012 outlining future growth.
“Merced is changing, and this might be how it’s changing,” said Councilmember Shane Smith, who represents District 4 where the development is slated to unfold.
The city is experiencing fast-paced growth that the city’s current general plan is struggling to accommodate, Smith added.
Residents opposing the developer’s appeal asked council members to adhere to the city’s original vision in the general plan and accept the Planning Commission’s recommendation to reject the proposal.
Residents expressed concern that a self-storage facility would chip away at the value of their homes and surrounding neighborhood.
Other homeowners said they disapproved of two-story houses overshadowing their single-story dwellings and threatening their sense of privacy.
Still, others vocalized concern regarding the project’s environmental impact on the approximately two-dozen redwood trees that line a portion of the acreage.
The seven-member council voted 5-1 in favor of reviewing the appeal and bringing it back for consideration. Council members said the developer did not collect enough community input for the appeal to move forward and asked him to host more community meetings addressing the residents’ top concerns regarding the project.
District 6 Councilmember Fue Xiong cast the lone “no” vote to revisit the project, saying he opposes gated communities and the developer’s plan lacks affordable housing units.
The residential lots would be sold at market-rate prices to the community, according to the developer.
City planners have been racing to meet California’s housing-stock demand and the state’s goal of building 2.5 million homes by 2030.
From 2016 to 2024, Merced surpassed its targeted number for above moderate-income housing units, but trailed behind on new construction of affordable housing developments.
“We have to respect the business owners who are willing to invest, who are willing to risk their capital, and give them a decent amount of deference as well,” Mayor Matthew Serratto said.
Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly reported the council’s vote on the item. The final vote was 4-2, with Councilmembers Ronnie De Anda and Fue Xiong voting against it. Councilmember Ronnie De Anda did not cast a vote electronically, but he later confirmed his vote verbally. Councilmember Daron DuPont recused himself.