Santa Fe Springs planning panel approves two-building industrial project, certifies final EIR

The Santa Fe Springs Planning Commission on March 3 approved a tenant parcel map (TPM 84502) and two development plan approvals (DPA 1006 and DPA 1007) to subdivide a 26.77-acre former oil field and build two large industrial buildings, and certified the project’s final environmental impact report (EIR). The commission adopted Resolution No. 281-2025 by a 5-0 roll-call vote.

The project would split the subject parcel (APN 8005-015-051) into Parcel 1 (about 13.45 acres) and Parcel 2 (about 13.09 acres) and construct a roughly 298,373-square-foot tilt-up industrial building on Parcel 1 and a roughly 286,305-square-foot building on Parcel 2, with associated drive aisles, loading docks and landscaping. Associate Planner Jimmy Wong presented staff’s recommendation to certify the EIR, adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) of seven mitigation measures, and approve the TPM and DPAs, finding the project consistent with the general plan and M2 heavy manufacturing zoning.

Staff’s environmental review identified several mitigation measures for air quality, geology/soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and tribal cultural resources. Transportation analysis found the project would result in a significant and unavoidable vehicle‑miles‑traveled (VMT) impact: staff reported a home‑based work VMT per employee estimate of 26.5, above the 18.3 threshold. Staff said the proposed mitigation measure (TRA-1) would reduce VMT by about 23.8% but would not bring the project below the threshold, leading staff to recommend a statement of overriding considerations under the Public Resources Code and CEQA guidelines.

The applicant, Dane Plangen of EPD Solutions representing Bridgeland Resources, described the site as heavily disturbed by long‑running oil and gas activity and said the proposal includes abandonment and closure of existing wells to meet CalGEM and Fire Department standards. Bridgeland representatives said the site contains roughly 100 wells (about 40 injector wells, about 30 active producers and the remainder idle) and estimated abandonment costs at about $15 million to $18 million.

Project design details presented to the commission included minimum 53-foot setbacks from Hawkins Street, a maximum building height of 52 feet, 39 loading doors and one grade-level door for Building 1 (all on the self elevation) and 36 loading doors and one grade-level door for Building 2 (on the north elevation). Parking proposals call for 345 stalls for Parcel 1 (268 standard, 69 EV‑ready, 8 accessible) and 293 stalls for Parcel 2 (226 standard, 59 EV‑ready, 8 accessible). Trailer parking provided was reported as 46 stalls on each parcel (requirements were 10 and 9, respectively). Landscaping area was listed as 46,601 square feet for Parcel 1 and 38,409 square feet for Parcel 2; the applicant will provide 14‑foot screening walls along loading areas and 8‑foot wrought‑iron fences along property lines.

The commission’s discussion touched on oversight of well abandonment and contamination remediation. Staff and the applicant said that CalGEM (California Geologic Energy Management Division) and the Santa Fe Springs Fire Department would be among the regulators overseeing abandonment and that remedial work and soil removal would be performed where needed. The city’s Community Development and Fire departments were identified as responsible for many MMRP items.

Commissioners and the applicant negotiated two conditions recorded in the approval: Bridgeland will work with staff to post job openings with city resources and the Santa Fe Springs Chamber to help local residents access employment when tenants occupy the buildings, and Bridgeland will work with staff to determine and pay a pro rata share of any Hawkins Street assessment once the amount is known. The commission clarified those two conditions during the roll call.

Labor representatives from the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters publicly supported the project; Frankie Rodriguez testified the union expects to use local labor and urged approval. Applicant representatives said they intend to use union construction labor and estimated long‑term employment at about 385 positions once the buildings are occupied, but staff noted there is no contractual local‑hire requirement and any preferential hiring would be implemented through outreach rather than as a mandatory condition.

After deliberations, the commission made a motion to approve TPM 84502, DPA 1006 and DPA 1007, certify the final EIR, adopt the MMRP and adopt Resolution No. 281-2025; the motion passed on a 5-0 roll-call vote (Chair Sarno, Vice Chair Jimenez, Commissioner Flores, Commissioner Cervantes and Commissioner Ayala voting aye). A 14-day appeal period applies.

Looking ahead, staff noted next steps include final engineering, well abandonment work in coordination with CalGEM and the fire department, and later plan‑check, permitting and construction sequencing if tenants are secured. The applicant said Building 1 is in final engineering, Buildings 2 and 3 are scheduled for Q3 2025 completion, and Building 4 for Q4 2026 per prior approvals and ongoing work on adjacent parcels. The commission meeting adjourned at about 6:50 p.m.