Hemet council reopens Newland Simpson warehouse proposal for review after applicant shrinks plan

The Hemet City Council voted 3–2 on May 13 to direct staff to consider an amended application for the Newland Simpson project and to set the matter for the next available council meeting so the public and council can review the changes.

The project, originally studied in a full environmental impact report, drew repeated public comment and opposition in May from residents who said the proposed warehouse complex would increase truck traffic, noise and air pollution and would be an undesirable gateway at Warren Road and Domenigoni Parkway. At the meeting, the applicant submitted a revised plan that removes one of two proposed industrial buildings, a change the project team said would reserve the parcels facing Warren Road for future commercial or office uses.

Council and staff said the amended plan was not studied in the EIR and should be publicly reviewed. City Attorney Steven Grama Pacifico told the council the city had two defensible options: adopt a prepared resolution to decline certification and deny entitlements for the project as proposed, or accept the applicant’s amended materials and set the revised project for another council hearing with whatever additional environmental analysis is required. "If the city council wanted to consider the amended project application, you could," Grama Pacifico said, noting state noticing and CEQA steps would likely be required.

Speakers during the public-comment period urged the council to hold the line on its April action to decline the EIR and deny entitlements. Roy Michael, representing himself as a 10‑year Hemet resident, said the landowner had warned the community the state could place a prison or homeless facility on the site if the project was denied: "They stated twice that they would allow the state of California to build a prison or homeless shelter on the property if you guys don't approve it," Michael said.

Representatives for the project argued the modified plan responded to council concerns. Page Gosney, a project representative, said the industrial footprint had been reduced and some parcels were being reserved for future commercial development. "The industrial footprint has been reduced by over 40%," Gosney said during the hearing, arguing the change preserved opportunities for retail, office and a hotel along Warren Road and would still allow a single large logistics building to deliver jobs.

After debate, Councilmember Tom Lodge made a motion to adopt staff recommendation 2 — to consider the amended application and set the revised project for the next available council meeting — seconded by Councilmember Joe Mayles. The roll call was: yes — Lodge, Mayles and Mayor Jackie Peterson; no — Councilmembers Connie Clark and Krupa. The motion passed 3 to 2.

Councilmembers who voted against the motion said they remained concerned that even the reduced industrial proposal would have significant environmental and traffic impacts and that the April 8 denial of the EIR represented the council’s considered judgment. Councilmember Krupa said her April vote to deny meant she intended to deny the project outright. "My intent was to deny the project," Krupa said, adding she did not believe a scaled-back submittal at this stage should allow CEQA certification.

Council directed staff to consult with the city’s environmental consultant to determine the appropriate level of supplemental review — for example, an errata, a supplemental EIR, or recirculation — and to return the item for public hearing. The council did not take final action to approve or deny the project.

The project has been the subject of repeated public hearings: the council declined to certify the draft EIR on April 8, 2025 and the applicant submitted the May 6, 2025 amended application that the council voted to review further. Any future decision will be made after additional public notice and any required environmental work is completed.