Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Warehousing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Moreno Valley council adopts 45-day moratorium on logistics (warehouse) developments
Summary
After hours of public comment and debate, the Moreno Valley City Council on Feb. 3 adopted a 45-day urgency moratorium on logistics warehouse developments as defined under Senate Bill 415 to avoid processing conflicts while the city finalizes a general plan update and negotiates with the California Attorney General’s Office.
The Moreno Valley City Council voted to adopt a 45‑day urgency moratorium on logistics warehouse developments on Feb. 3, citing the need to avoid procedural complications while the city completes a contentious general plan update and negotiates outstanding questions with the California Attorney General’s Office.
City Attorney Steven Quintanilla told the council the proposed urgency ordinance ties the moratorium to the definition of “logistics warehouse” in Senate Bill 415 — buildings primarily used to store and move cargo that rely on heavy-duty trucks and do not serve retail customers on site — and would take effect immediately if the council approved it. “We are recommending a 45 moratorium tonight under its urgency ordinance, that identifies logistics pursuant to Senate Bill 415,” Quintanilla said during staff remarks.
The moratorium passed after lengthy public comment that split residents, labor and business groups. Environmental and community advocates said the pause is needed to assess the cumulative health and traffic impacts of concentrated logistics development in the Inland Empire. “No community should be treated as a dumping ground,” Val Verde teacher Brielle Fierro told the council, citing local air-quality and road-deterioration concerns.
Construction and union representatives urged the council to reject the pause, saying it risks jobs and undermines projects already underway. Juan Serrato of the Laborers International argued that freezes on projects hurt working families: “When projects get frozen, paychecks get frozen,” he said.
Council member Bernard, who made the motion, framed the measure as a narrowly drawn, short-term tool to allow staff and the city attorney to finish negotiating with state officials and to study health impacts. “I motion to approve a 45 day moratorium on all logistic and and use developments as designated by city staff's recommendation,” he said on the dais. The motion passed with three votes in favor (Council members Bernard, Delgado and Baca Santa Cruz) and two against (Mayor Pro Tem Gonzales and Mayor Cabrera).
Council and staff said applications already deemed complete by city staff before the moratorium would be exempt from the pause; the moratorium applies only to applications submitted after adoption and not yet deemed complete. City Attorney Quintanilla said the purpose is to avoid processing applications under the city’s 2006 general plan and zoning that may conflict with new state law and the pending general plan update.
Councilmembers asked staff during the 45 days to research public-health data and cumulative impacts and return with any recommended follow-up. The ordinance is intended as a temporary, urgency measure; council members noted it could be extended if necessary but emphasized the immediate goal of avoiding legal and procedural complications while the general plan work continues.
The council’s action does not itself change development standards; staff and legal counsel said further legislative action would be required to adopt any lasting zoning changes or new standards.
