Report to City Council
ID: 25-0418 Page 1
TO: City Council
FROM: Angelica Frausto-Lupo, Community Development
Director
Colby Cataldi, Planning Official
AGENDA DATE: October 7, 2025
TITLE: MORENO VALLEY BUSINESS PARK BUILDING 5 -
CONSISTING OF SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
(PEN23-0092), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (PEN24-
0167), PLOT PLAN (PEN23 -0042), AND RELATED
CEQA ANALYSIS (REPORT OF : COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT) (DISTRICT 2)
TITLE SUMMARY: Request to Consider Approval of the Following Entitlements:
General Plan Amendment (PEN24-0167) to Amend the
General Plan Land Use Designation from Commercial (C) to Business Park (BP); Specific Plan Amendment (PEN23 -
0092) to Amend the Specific Plan 205 Land Use
Designation From Retail Commercial (RC) to Mixed Use
(MU); Plot Plan (PEN23 -0042), and Environmental Impact Report (PEN23-0063) for an Approximately 220,390 Square Foot Light Industrial Building, Located on the Southeast Corner of Heacock Street and Ironwood Avenue.
DISTRICT: District 2
Recommendation(s)
That the City Council:
1. ADOPT Resolution No. 2025-[next in order] , adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the Proposed Project
ID: 25-0418 Page 2
pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) prepared for the Proposed Project pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines;
2. ADOPT Resolution No. 2025-[next in order] to a pprove the General Plan Amendment (PEN24-0167) and Plot Plan (PEN23-0042); and
3. INTRODUCE [First Reading] Ordinance No. [next in order] approving Specific Plan Amendment (PEN23-0092).
SUMMARY
The purpose of this public hearing is to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Plot Plan and Environmental Impact Report to allow for the development of an approximately 220,390 square foot industrial building, commonly known as the “District” Project (“Proposed Project”).
DISCUSSION
Planning Commission Recommendation
The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on September 11, 2025 .
After considering public testimony, the Planning Commission voted (4-2) to recommend the City Council approve the Proposed Project. Prior to the Planning Commission hearing, several comment letters, both in favor and in opposition to the Proposed Project, were submitted, which are attached to this staff report.
Project History
Initially, the Proposed Project was presented to the Planning Commission on January 19, 2021, and the Planning Commission voted unanimously (7-0) recommending that the City Council approve the Proposed Project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and approve the Proposed Project’s entitlements. As such, the Proposed Project and the Proposed Project’s MND were presented to the City Council in the context of a duly noticed public hearing that took place at a City Council regularly scheduled meeting on February 2, 2021. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council voted unanimously (5-0) to approve the Proposed Project and the Proposed Project’s MND.
However, following the initial approval of the Proposed Project, a CEQA Petition for a Writ of Mandate (lawsuit) was filed against the City and the Applicant (as a Real Party In Interest) challenging the City Council’s approval of the Proposed Project’s MND. The Petitioners alleged that the level of analysis to support the findings of the MND were inadequate. The Petitioners prevailed in the case, and on March 18, 2025, pursuant to the Court’s order (Writ of Mandate ) the City Council officially repealed the Proposed Project’s 2021 approvals, albeit the Court retained jurisdiction over the legality of these proceedings since the Court anticipated that the Applicant would resubmit the Proposed Project to the City for consideration. In summary, the Writ of Mandate anticipated that the Applicant would be seeking approval for a revised project, since it also ordered the City to file and serve a Return to the Writ no later than one- hundred eighty (180) days after service of the Writ
ID: 25-0418 Page 3
and any subsequent Returns to the Writ every 90 days thereafter, as necessary . The return(s) (response(s)) to the Writ is/are required to specify the actions taken to comply with the terms and conditions of the Writ, which includes complying with CEQA and the applicable CEQA Guidelines. As such, if the Proposed Project is approved by the City Council, the necessary Return will be f iled with the Court as evidence that the City complied with the terms and conditions of the Writ, which again includes complying with CEQA and the applicable CEQA Guidelines.
In response to the Writ of Mandate, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared which incorporates the Initial Study and contains additional technical, project specific analysis/investigation as to Proposed Project’s potential environmental impacts. A Public Scoping Meeting was held on September 7, 2023, and the Draft Environmen tal Impact Report was circulated for public review from January 16, 2025, through March 3, 2025.
Public and agency comments were received and responded to in the Final EIR. The Final EIR findings concluded that the Proposed Project would not create any sig nificant and unavoidable impacts on the environment with mitigation. This conclusion is supported by substantial evidence contained in the administrative record prepared for and considered in the context of the current proceedings . This includes without limitation the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program that was prepared for the Proposed Project consistent with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The Final EIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are included as attachments to this s taff report. A more detailed description of the environmental review process, including comments received on the Proposed Project’s DEIR, and the responses to those comments in the FEIR, is provided under the “Environmental” section of this staff report.
Project Description
The Applicant is proposing the construction of a light industrial building of approximately 220,390 square feet in size with associated parking and landscape improvements. The Proposed Project will be located at the southeast corner of Heacock Street and Ironwood Avenue (“Project Site”). To facilitate the Proposed Project, a Specific Plan Amendment is requested to change the Specific Plan zoning classification from Commercial/Retail (RC) to Mixed Use (MU), consistent with the adjacent parcels to the south and east of the Project Site. The Mixed-Use (MU) designation allows for a wider range of uses, including, but not limited to, business parks, office, retail, and other commercial and light industrial uses.
Additionally, the Applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment to amend the Project Site’s General Plan land use designation from Commercial (C) to Business Park (BP). As proposed, the General Plan designation will be consistent with the adjacent parcels to the south and east of the Project Site and would result in a total increase of approximately 9.96- acres of Business Park (BP) designated land and a corresponding reduction of approximately 9.96-acres of Commercial (C) designated land.
Both the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment will require necessary and corresponding amendments to the City’s Zoning Atlas to reflect the proposed changes in the zoning classification and/or redistricting associated with each Amendment.
ID: 25-0418 Page 4
Project Site and Surrounding Area
The approximately 9.96-acre Project Site is located on the southeast corner of Heacock Street and Ironwood Avenue, which include APNs 481-020-013, -029, -030, -034, -035 and -038. The Project Site has long been under-utilized, and at times has been problematic due to illegal dumping and trespassing.
The surrounding area includes existing single family homes and an electrical substation to the north of the Project Site (across Ironwood Avenue) on property zoned Residential 5 (R5); light industrial buildings located within Specific Plan 205 to the south and east of the Project Site; and a mix of existing single family homes, offices, and commercial businesses to the west of the Project Site on property zoned Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Office Commercial (OC).
Access/Parking/Truck Routing
Access to the Project Site will be from two driveways on Heacock Street – the southerly entrance for trucks and the northerly entrance for automobiles, with an additional access driveway on Ironwood Avenue for both automobiles and trucks on easterly portion of the Project Site.
Parking for both automobiles and trucks meets the Municipal Code parking requirements.
Ninety-eight (98) automobile stalls will be provided that will accommodate the required ADA and E.V. parking and vehicle charging stations. Thirty -six (36) truck parking stalls will also be provided in the truck court.
Truck access and circulation for the Proposed Project is designed to operate entirely with right-turning movements. Trucks wil l enter the Project Site from SR-60 at the southerly access on Heacock Street. Loading docks are located out of public view and internal to the Project Site, adjacent to other light industrial uses. Trucks will then be able to drive through the Project Site to the driveway on Ironwood Avenue, where they will be able to make a right-turn to access SR-60 via the City-designated Perris Avenue Truck Route.
Design/Landscaping
The Proposed Project will be situated beyond the minimum 20-foot setback requirement (for light industrial buildings) from the public right-of-way. The building will sit approximately 70 feet from the back of the public sidewalk, featuring a 20-foot landscape buffer, fire access lane, and parking spaces. Th e additional set-back reduces the perceived size of the building, which stands at approximately 35 feet tall, which incidentally is 20 feet below the permitted maximum height of 55 feet. Architecturally, the Proposed Project incorporates a contemporary design that consists of a combination of materials such as concrete, metal, and glass. The building has been designed to incorporate an architectural focal point near the intersection of Heacock Street and Ironwood Avenue with enhanced design features including spandrel glass, metal canopies, and landscaping. These materials are further utilized along both street frontages to enhance the Proposed Project’s aesthetics by upgrading the appearance of the tilt-up concrete panels traditionally associated with light industrial buildings.
ID: 25-0418 Page 5
The Project Site has been designed to locate the loading docks and truck parking to the southeast corner of the Project Site, adjacent to the other light industrial buildings within the Specific Plan area.
The Proposed Project meets and exceeds the required design and landscape standards and objectives set forth in the Municipal Code. The landscape elements of the Proposed Project include the landscape setback areas along Heacock Street and Ironwood Avenue with enhanced landscaping along the frontage of both streets and adjacent to the building that will include street trees, on-site trees and other types of landscaping.
ENVIRONMENTAL
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH 2023080366) was prepared by Applied Planning, Inc. in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines. The EIR examined the potential of the Proposed Project’s impact on the environment. The EIR found the Proposed Project would not create any significant impacts and it would not result in any unavoidable impacts on the environment with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures. Technical studies prepared in support of the EIR include the following: Air Quality Impact Analysis, MSHCP Consistency Analysis, Traffic Impact and VMT Analysis, Health Risk Assessment, Greenhouse Gas Assessment, Geotechnical Investigation, Noise Impact Analysis, Energy Assessment, and Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment. The electronic files for the EIR have been posted on the City’s website and are included with the appendices attached to this staff report.
Mitigation measures are recommended for the Proposed Project in the following areas:
Biological Resources and Cultural/Tribal Resources, all of which are incorporated into the Mitigation Monitor ing and Report Program included in the Final EIR. The mitigation measures for Cultural Resources have been included to address input from the Tribal governments. These measures are intended to ensure that potential Tribal resources that might be discovered are protected. However, these measures are not required to address a known significant impact. Notwithstanding, based on the EIR, and the proposed mitigation measures, the Proposed Project will not result in significant and unavoidable impacts to the environment.
The public comment period for the Draft EIR began on January 16, 2025, and continued through March 3, 2025, which satisfies the CEQA- required 45-day public review period.
Comment letters were received from: Governor’s Office of Land Use and Clima te Innovation, CA Department of Transportation District 8, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission, Riverside Transit Agency, Sierra Club, and Sierra Club attorney Abigail Smith, Blum, Collins & Ho, LLP , and George Hague.
A Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) was prepared as required by CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines to respond to the comments received. The FEIR addresses comments on the DEIR ; which includes all responses to comments received during the 45-day public review period, including without limitation, comments on the Draft EIR received from George Hague. The Final EIR has been distributed to commenters and
ID: 25-0418 Page 6
posted for public review 10-days in advance of today’s City Council Public H earing, consistent with the requirements established in the CEQA Guidelines.
The Draft and Final EIR documents have been made available for public review and inspection online at http://www.moreno- valley.ca.us/cdd/documents/about-projects.html.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the Proposed Project as recommended by the Planning Commission . (Staff recommends this alternative).
2. Do not approve the Proposed Project as recommended by the Planning Commission. (Staff does not recommend this alternative).
3. Approve the Proposed Project as recommended by the Planning Commission with modifications. (Staff does not recommend this alternative).
FISCAL IMPACT
The Proposed Project will be required to pay development impact fees and other such fees to various regional agencies as well as the City, in effect at the time they are due.
NOTIFICATION
Consistent with the Moreno Valley Municipal Code provisions and exceeding the posting and distance requirement of applicable state law, notice of the public hearing was sent to all property owners of rec ord within 600 feet of the Project Site, and the same public notices were posted on the Project Site and published in the Press Enterprise Newspaper, at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. As of the preparation of this Staff Report, Staff has receiv ed additional public comments regarding the Proposed Project , which are included in the appended to this report.
PREPARATION OF STAFF REPORT
Prepared By: Department Head Approval:
Emily Elliot, AICP Angelica Frausto-Lupo
Contract Planner Community Development Director
Concurred By: Concurred By:
Danielle Harper-Scott Colby Cataldi
Senior Planner Planning Division Manager/Official
CITY COUNCIL GOALS
Positive Environment. Create a positive environment for the development of Moreno Valley's future.
Community Image, Neighborhood Pride and Cleanliness. Promote a sense of community pride and foster an excellent image about our City by developing and
ID: 25-0418 Page 7
executing programs which will result in quality development, enhanced neighborhood preservation efforts, including home rehabilitation and neighborhood restoration.
CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
1. Economic Development
2. Public Safety
3. Library
4. Infrastructure
5. Beautification, Community Engagement, and Quality of Life
6. Youth Programs
ID: 25-0418 Page 8
Report Approval Details
Document
Title:
STAFFREPORT_CDD_PEN23-0092_MVBP_BUILDING_5b.docx
Attachmen
ts:
- RESOLUTION NO. 2025.XX - CEQA.docx
- EXHIBIT
A_FINAL_ENVIORNMENTAL_IMPACT_REPORT_AND_APPENDICES
_W_RTC.pdf
- Appendix A_NOP and Comment Letters.pdf
- Appendix B_Moreno Valley SP 205-Amd No. 2.pdf
- Appendix C_Transportation Scoping Agreement and VMT Analysis.pdf - Appendix D_AQIA and HRA.pdf
- Appendix E_GHGA.pdf
- Appendix F_Energy Assessment.pdf
- Appendix G_Noise Impact Analysis.pdf
- Appendix H_MHSCP Consistency Analysis.pdf
- Appendix I_Geotechnical Investigation.pdf
- Appendix J_Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment.pdf
- DEIR_Initial Study.pdf
- Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.pdf
- RESOLUTION NO. 2025_XX_GPA_PP.docx
- EXHIBIT A_ LAND_USE_MAP (PEN25-0007).pdf
- EXHIBIT B _PLOT_PLAN_PROJECT_PLANS (PEN23-0042).pdf
- EXHIBIT C_ PLOT_PLAN_CONDITIONS_OF_APPROVAL (PEN23-
0042) .pdf
- ORDINANCE_NO.XXXX_SPA.docx
- EXHIBIT A_SPECIFIC_PLAN_AMENDMENT.pdf
- EXHIBIT B_SPECIFIC_PLAN_AMENDMENT_MAP.pdf
- MVBP5_COMMENT_LETTERS.pdf
Final
Approval
Date:
Oct 2, 2025
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Angelica Frausto-Lupo
Sean Kelleher
Natalia Lopez
No Signature - Task assigned to Dena Heald was completed by workflow administrator Patty Rodriguez
ID: 25-0418 Page 9
Dena Heald
Launa Jimenez
Brian Mohan
Patty Rodriguez