A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Planning commission adopts EIR and approves Adelanto Industrial Center project, clearing way for two large warehouses

May 15, 2024 | Adelanto, San Bernardino County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Planning commission adopts EIR and approves Adelanto Industrial Center project, clearing way for two large warehouses
Jim Hirsch of the City of Adelanto planning division presented the Adelanto Industrial Center project to the Planning Commission, describing a proposal to subdivide 128.26 acres into two lots and construct two industrial/warehouse buildings totaling approximately 2,483,836 square feet in the Airport Development District (ADD). "The project proposes the development of 2 industrial logistic buildings for distribution and warehousing, totaling 2,483,836 square feet on a 128.26 acre development site located on the Northeast corner of Adelanto Road and Avalon Avenue," Hirsch said, and noted building heights, parking and loading counts and that the project complies with ADD development standards.

Hirsch summarized the city's environmental review: a Notice of Preparation was circulated on Dec. 13, 2023; an EIR scoping meeting was held Jan. 9, 2024; and the draft EIR was circulated for public review from March 8 to April 22, 2024. Staff recommended adoption of the final EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 4312352) and approval of Location and Development Plan LDP 23‑06 and Tentative Parcel Map 20745, subject to the conditions in the staff report.

Steelwave representatives (introduced in the staff report as the applicant, Greg Hall/Steelwave LLC) described required off‑site infrastructure—new paved roads (including a new Mesa Linda Road), extensions of 12‑ to 18‑inch water lines, a proposed 15‑inch sewer extension and a sewer force main relocation in coordination with the Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority—and said the developer will prepare a cumulative traffic impact analysis and fund or bond necessary improvements. The applicant emphasized potential economic benefits and workforce development, saying typical employment from million‑square‑foot fulfillment facilities can range from about 1,000 to 1,800 jobs per million square feet; staff estimated the overall development could employ roughly 3,000 to 4,500 people depending on users.

Labor and workforce speakers testified in support of the project, including representatives from Ironworkers Local 416 and other unions who said the developer has committed to using skilled, union labor and local hiring and apprenticeship opportunities. Jonathan Daley, speaking for the laborers, said the project would provide jobs and health care for union members and urged approval: "We ask you please approve this project, and we are ready to get to work," he said.

After public comment the chair moved to adopt Resolution P‑24‑02 to adopt the Environmental Impact Report (SCH 4312352) and to approve the tentative parcel map and LDP 23‑06 to subdivide the parcel and construct the two buildings; Vice Chair Delgado seconded. The motion passed in the meeting; the transcript records the motion, a second and commissioners' statements of support but does not include a formal roll‑call tally by name.

Why it matters: the project will require significant off‑site infrastructure investment (roads, water and sewer) and could substantially increase local employment and tax revenue; it also required an EIR and related technical studies. Next steps: compliance with final mitigation and conditions of approval, completion of the traffic impact analysis, execution of improvement agreements and recordation of the final map prior to building permit issuance.

Details and caveats: the staff presentation, EIR and applicant slides contain many technical exhibits (utility corridor, water/sewer alignments, roadway listings and parcel numbers). The record includes a letter from a property owner, Robert Krasner, raising access concerns; staff responded that access remains possible but may require a longer route and described trade‑offs versus paving unpaved roads.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee