Family Service Association fundraiser will support local meal programs serving thousands of low-income residents
Returning core and dominant two-way star Katelyn Gandara power Bulldogs to 29-4 start and No. 7 national ranking
Commissioners seek more detail on rebuilding rules, height limits and protections for entitled projects; more than 1 million square feet of warehouse space is currently available in Redlands
Commissioners seek more detail on rebuilding rules, height limits and protections for entitled projects; more than 1 million square feet of warehouse space is currently available in Redlands
REDLANDS, Calif. — The Redlands Planning Commission voted Tuesday to continue its discussion of a proposed ordinance that would prohibit new large warehouses and logistics distribution centers in the city, saying more work is needed before sending a recommendation to the Redlands City Council.
The proposed amendment, known as Ordinance Text Amendment No. 372, would ban new warehouses of 50,000 square feet or more, or facilities with six or more truck docks or dock-high loading doors, in affected commercial and industrial zones and several specific plan areas.
It would also allow existing warehouses and previously entitled projects to remain, while setting rules for how those facilities could be repaired, rebuilt and maintained.
The city council previously directed the planning commission to draft a new ordinance addressing warehouse development, prompting the current proposal.
Commissioners did not take action on the ordinance itself. Instead, they voted to continue the public hearing indefinitely so staff can return with revised language and more analysis.
The discussion focused largely on how much flexibility existing warehouses should have if they are rebuilt in the future.
Brian Foote, the city’s planning manager, said the draft ordinance is intended to prohibit new large warehouse development without taking away rights already granted to existing or entitled properties.
“The intent of this is not to find ways to be restrictive on existing entitled properties,” Foote told commissioners.
Under the draft, warehouses legally established before the ordinance takes effect could continue operating. They could also be rebuilt to their existing square footage and height, with allowances for maintenance, repairs, code compliance, technology upgrades and full reconstruction.
Commissioners raised questions, however, about whether the ordinance should more clearly define terms such as “intensity of use” and “rebuild,” and whether it should place additional limits on changes that could increase truck traffic or environmental impacts.
Commissioner Kawa Shwaish said he was concerned that allowing taller rebuilt warehouses could effectively increase capacity and lead to more truck trips, even if the square footage remained the same.
“As long as it’s very clear that the increase in height is not to increase capacity, then I think we could make those adjustments for logistical purposes,” Shwaish said. “But if we leave it up for grabs, I think we run the risk of working around the provision.”
Commissioner Mark Stanton argued that the ordinance should leave room for flexibility as warehouse design changes over time. Stanton said building height can affect a distribution center’s ability to store inventory and use automation, but said it does not “necessarily mean it’s going to be more truck trips.”
“I just don’t want us to have an ordinance that’s so tight that we become non-competitive in the marketplace,” Stanton said.
He also suggested an option requiring a four-fifths vote to allow height changes on a case-by-case basis.
Shwaish said the city’s goal should not be to compete in the industrial distribution market.
“I don’t think our goal is to be the most competitive industrial distribution city,” he said.
Commissioner Emily Elliott suggested additional environmental review for rebuilding, including requiring that any additional environmental impacts be fully — not partially — mitigated.
“I do want to give careful consideration to environmental review for any rebuilds when there is a delta between what was previously approved and what’s being asked for,” Elliott said.
Elliott also asked staff to make protections for previously approved warehouse projects more explicit throughout the ordinance text.
Foote said two projects with valid prior entitlements would be protected under the draft language. One is under construction and the other is in plan check, he said.
Several commissioners asked staff to return with options for addressing height changes, including whether requests to increase building height should come back to the commission for review and how to define operational intensity.
During public comment, speakers offered competing views on how much flexibility the ordinance should allow.
Warehouse owner Prologis submitted a letter opposing parts of the ordinance. According to staff, the company asked the city to remove restrictions on building height, clearly preserve projects with valid prior entitlements, and apply those protections consistently throughout the zoning text and related specific plans.
Prologis is the owner of a warehouse development at 301 Tennessee St. currently in plan check. The project, totaling nearly 200,000 square feet, does not yet have a tenant.
Bill Blankenship, speaking on behalf of NAIOP Inland Empire — a commercial real estate development association — urged the city to allow accommodations for height so warehouse properties do not become obsolete over time.
He said older industrial buildings with lower clear heights are already struggling in the market and warned that Redlands must consider competition from nearby county areas known locally as the “donut hole.”
Julia Lenhart, an atmospheric and climate scientist at the University of Redlands, said future rebuilds should be required to meet updated environmental standards and asked whether changes in warehouse operations could create new impacts over time.
For example, she asked whether a facility could shift from a manufacturing warehouse to a refrigerated logistics distribution center, which may have different environmental impacts.
Another Redlands resident, with a background in urban and regional planning, argued that the city should not try to predict future industry needs at the expense of community character and quality of life.
“Flexibility of the city is a healthy city, so if there are other uses that can fill those, that’s fine,” she said. “It may not be distribution and logistics, so just leave your minds open to that.”
While some speakers warned that limiting rebuilding flexibility could make Redlands less competitive, available warehouse inventory in the city suggests there is already significant unused space.
More than 1 million square feet of warehouse space was available in Redlands, according to LoopNet listings, as of April 2026, including:
The available space includes a mix of recently built and older facilities, several of which are classified as four-star properties.
Commissioners ultimately voted to continue the item to a future meeting, giving staff time to refine the ordinance and address questions related to building height, operational intensity and environmental review.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter
