Warehous
e Ordinance Outreach Summary
Below summarizes the feedback and sugges�ons received by various groups from late August through October 2023. The points summarize numerous comment leters and mee�ngs held with City staff in the crea�on of the proposed warehouse ordinance.
Mee�ngs Conducted (alphabe�c order)
• Atorney General’s Representa�ve Mee�ngs: 8/30, 9/13, 9/21, 10/5 • Environmental Advisor Mee�ngs: 9/11, 9/14, 9/18, 9/21, 9/26, 10/11 • Industrial Advisor Mee�ng: 9/6, 9/20, 10/5
• Mee�ng with group of concerned residents: 9/18
• Mee�ng Climate Specialist: 10/3,
• Mee�ng with Municipali�es with Warehouse Ordinance or Considera�ons: 9/28, 9/29 • Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Commitee Mee�ng: 8/30, 9/7, 9/14, 9/21 (9/21 Release of Ad-Hoc Notes) • Planning Commission Study Sessions: 8/10, 8/24, 9/28, 10/12 • Release of Ad-Hoc Mee�ng Notes: 9/21
• Release of Working Dra� standards to Public and Groups: 9/15, 10/12, and 10/19
# Comment or Issue Raised City Response
Atorney General’s Representa�ve Mee�ng
1. EV fleets and monitor could be difficult to implement
and enforce. Suggest looking at truck routes (exis�ng
and new) to move away from sensi�ve receptors and
project review to ensure truck routes stay away from
these receptors before approval of the project’s
design.
Staff is open to adding project specific reviews that prohibit new Truck routs from being located next to sensi�ve receptors like schools and homes.
2. Does not want City staff to limit their review of
op�ons to just the MOA or past examples given to the
City.
City staff are inves�ga�ng and exploring op�ons. The City is upda�ng its climate ac�on plan in 2024 and did indicate to the AG representa�ve that a general plan amendment would likely take this effort into summer or fall of 2024.
3. The AG representa�ve wondering if the City would be open to General Plan amendments to reroute trucks
and explore ways to buffer land uses.
Staff indicated a General Plan amendment would take �me and can only be done four �mes a year with the city already engaging in possible amendments for the city and private ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
# Comment or Issue Raised City Response
projects. The industrial areas in the general plan were carefully selected, reviewed per CEQA, and adopted so staff would not be comfortable making changes per the MOA that would alter or impact on the land use adopted in the general plan.
4. The AG office is open for an extension should
measures need further discussion.
Staff will discuss if needed.
5. The AG office prefers a 1,000� buffer, rather than
300’ required and Tier 2 standards be considered for
new construc�on.
City staff are inves�ga�ng.
6. The AG’s office sent clarifica�on measures to the City on 10/9/23.
While some measure included alterna�ve language, most of the sugges�ons seem to indicate the AG’s officed preference the original measures included in the MOA and addi�onal items add for clarify and enhanced features (i.e., trees). Staff will con�nue to work with the AG’s office for Op�on B adjustments and
propose the MOA in the original form.
Environmental Advisor Mee�ngs
7. Would like the city to enforce CARB standards directly instead of the Air District which is tasked with
implemen�ng state and CARB standards. Staff
reaching out to Air District and state staff on the
mater.
City staff are inves�ga�ng; however, discussion with air district and climate specialist indicate that the state is s�ll working on standards and process to update new standards. This
complicates the task of applying new standards as they are s�ll being worked on.
8. Does not oppose development but feels the region
needs projects that improve air quality for residents.
Staff will con�nue to work on improving environmental and health condi�ons.
9. Understands staff shortages but would like the City to looking more monitoring and enforcement
procedures to ensure facili�es stay current with best
prac�ces.
City staff are inves�ga�ng. City exploring more informa�on on the city’s website as con�nual monitor of exis�ng opera�ons would be costly and �me consuming as is not a typical prac�ce of most ci�es.
10. Encourages staff to reach out to residents. Especially in the south Stockton areas.
Staff have met with some residents and will con�nue to reach out for this and other city efforts (development code and housing efforts). This includes the rezones in 2022 to remove industrial uses from south and east Stockton areas.
Industry Advisors Mee�ngs
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
# Comment or Issue Raised City Response
11. Concerns with added costs of implemen�ng
standards that could make development projects
infeasible. Will put Stockton at a compe��ve
disadvantage with surrounding ci�es that are
suppor�ve of industrial and logis�c uses as job
generators and key components to the economic
market.
Staff exploring feasibility through use of an outside consultant.
This includes review of direct project cost impacts and a compara�ve analysis of how those cost impacts compare with surrounding areas. Study should be complete by October 2023.
12. Does not oppose energy efficiency or climate
reduc�on methods but prefers a well thought out
approach.
No response yet. Coordina�ng with other departments on
status of the City’s Climate Ac�on Plan Update.
13. Significant concerns with requirement to regulate
electric vehicle fleet mixes on industrial operators
and EV repor�ng and compliance. Regula�on should
remain at the state level (Clean Air Resources Board
(CARB)), since they enter into agreements with heavy
and medium duty vehicle manufacturers regarding
vehicle produc�on availability to open market
deadlines. Further adequate vehicle charging
facili�es are s�ll not readily available through the
state to support EV heavy duty and medium duty
vehicles.
City Staff discussing with the AG and Sierra Club, since requirement came from the setlement agreements for
Mariposa Industrial Project.
14. Concerns with costs of compliance with CalGreen Tier two building code requirements and are not a
requirement in most ci�es in the state for Industrial
development.
City staff inves�ga�ng, reques�ng industrial to share cost analysis is available. Not much data on how many ci�es have Tier 1 or Tier or the quan�ta�ve amounts for cost or benefits.
15. Concerns with Solar requirements to construct solar infrastructure, and encouraging the City to join the
East Bay Energy Collec�ve (EBEC), so industry can
purchase clean energy from Collec�ve to provide for
base power opera�ons
City Staff have been going the EBEC and will consider it an op�on.
16. Concerns with what can occur in the 300’ buffer area.
Recommending the City of Fontana ordinance model
restricts diesel trucks in the area.
Staff Inves�ga�ng City of Fontana Ordinance and other sources.
Examples given by the DOJ representa�ve are the basis for the ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
# Comment or Issue Raised City Response
Op�on B adjusted measures which include the DOJ’s best
prac�ces.
Mee�ng with group of concerned residents
17. Many feel an ad-hoc commitee of residents is s�ll
needed regardless of consensus on measures. A
commitee for the measures and any Climate Ac�on
Plan update.
Coordina�ng with other departments on status of the City’s Climate Ac�on Plan Update.
18. Although the larger warehouse is not located near
south Stockton homes in urbanized areas, some feel
there will be indirect impacts (traffic, air quality) that need to be accommodated.
In 2022, staff rezoned various industrial proper�es in south Stockton to commercial to remove the poten�al for noxious uses. Staff is hoping to expand on this approach as part of the Development Code overhaul. In addi�on, in 2024 the City will begin the process of upda�ng its climate ac�on plan which will involve a revised emission report.
19. Need for direct dialogue with Commissioners and
Councilmembers on the issues impac�ng south
Stockton communi�es.
Staff encouraged addi�onal mee�ng with city departments and outreach and comments at the hearings.
20. While inclusion of nonprofits and agency are
encouraged, some residents feel these groups do not
represent residents and owners within the
community.
Staff encouraged addi�onal mee�ng with city departments and outreach and comments at the hearings. In addi�on, staff have reached out to the Air District’s AB617 commitee
representa�ves and the Transforma�ve Climate Communi�es (TCC) representa�ves. In addi�on, the environmental advisors are comprised of community representa�ves and individuals familiar with the MOA and Mariposa Industrial Project
measures.
21. Members want staff to extend the MOA �meline first,
and then discuss measures, outreach, and other
efforts to help south Stockton.
Staff will discuss this at the study session and with the Atorney General’s office.
Mee�ng with Climate Specialist
22. Many groups and ci�es are watching what happens
with Stockton as this issue is something many are
Staff will con�nue to explore.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
# Comment or Issue Raised City Response
dealing with, and Fontana was the last example of
what the State wanted.
23. The state is s�ll working to outline how the new 2045 carbon neutral direc�ve will be implemented. This
includes new standards and direc�on to the regional
bodies tasked with implemen�ng them.
Staff will con�nue to explore.
24. EV truck technology is present but s�ll not
commercially viable.
Staff will con�nue to explore.
Mee�ng with Municipali�es with Warehouse Ordinance or Considera�ons
25. Many groups and ci�es are watching what happens
with Stockton as this issue is something many are
dealing with, and Fontana was the last example of
what the State wanted. Many ci�es have received
similar leters from environmental groups on similar
mi�ga�on measures for their projects.
Staff will con�nue to explore and coordinate with those ci�es on feasible best prac�ces.
26. Some of the ci�es do not have the same poli�cal
environment or land available to large new
warehouses.
No ac�on.
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Commitee1
27. Release measures as soon as possible to allow �me to review before adop�on.
Dra� zoning language released to public for review on Friday September 15, 2023. The September 28th mee�ng will focus on dra� language while the October 12th mee�ng will focus on alterna�ves and final language for a proposed ordinance.
28. Members didn’t feel the City should exceed or
expedite items that are the responsibility of the state to monitor and enforce.
Measures requiring monitoring or enforcement of measures that exceed current code enforcement and zoning prac�ces removed. This includes measures that require enforcement of items not commercially available.
1 Mee�ng Notes and Materials included in Exhibit 1 and on the CDD Zoning Update Website ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
# Comment or Issue Raised City Response
29. Due to �me constraints, the Commitee directed staff
to form a group of environmental/health advocates
and industry advisors in addi�on to mee�ng with
residents and the AG office.
Staff conducted several weekly mee�ngs with each of these groups to solicit feedback and prepare dra� language for con�nued discussion.
30. Members requested staff inves�gate alterna�ve
measures for EV fleets and examples that allow
alterna�ve fuel op�ons instead of just EV.
City staff are inves�ga�ng.
31. Requested feasibility analysis be conducted. Study is currently underway.
32. Requested all public feedback be considered in staff’s discussion for the proposed zoning standards.
Staff will include a summary of all comments and leters
received to indicate if the item is addressed or can be addressed.
E
xhibit 1- Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Notes and Materials (release to public 9/21/23) ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Present:
Ad Hoc Commitee Member Gurneel Boparai
Rajan Nathaniel
Terry Hull
Michael McDowell, City Staff
Stephanie Ocasio
Mat Diaz
Adriana Guerrero (taking notes)
Mike an
d Mat – Gave PPT presenta�on.
Stephan
ie - Ad Hoc Commitee needs to iden�fy stakeholder groups (advisors) and determine when they need to be present at Ad Hoc mee�ngs.
Mike - Mee�
ng with Atorney General this week.
- EV Fleet is a significant issue. Equipment may be difficult for Logis�cs Operators to find for purchase.
- Sierra Club can be a regular advisor; it is the Ad Hoc’s choice. - Setbacks of industrial projects (i.e.: air quality for South Stockton) - Commitee needs to determine involvement of advisors
- Recommends 2 measures are reviewed per mee�ng
Terry Hull -
Too many advisors may take longer to get things done.
Gurneel
- Voiced preference for order of mee�ngs with advisors. - As decisions are finalized, Ad Hoc should have mee�ngs for advisors to give input - Wants to get this done as quickly as possible.
Rajan - Ad H
oc should be very clear on what informa�on is being requested of advisors. - Staff can engage with advisors during regular business hours and bring info back to Ad Hoc. - Possible AG li�ga�on if deadline is not met.
Gurneel
- Ad Hoc should have 2 workshops with advisors.
Mike - Need
ed clarifica�on on “workshops.”
Gurneel
- At least 2 mee�ngs with advisors. Does City Staff have capacity to meet and stay in contact with advisors?
Mike - Sta
ff can communicate with interested par�es, get feedback, and report back to Ad Hoc.
Gurneel
- Different perspec�ve but willing to move forward as long as advisor/community input is received.
Stephan
ie - Needs clarity.
Terry - Com
ments from the public will s�ll be received.
Gurneel
- Minutes should be made available to public.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Stephan
ie – No official minutes for Ad Hoc, just notes to ensure nothing is forgoten.
Rajan - Ok wi
th City staff engaging with advisors.
Stephan
ie - Ad Hoc is leading and will advise City staff on direc�on of responses to measures along with public input. Would like concurrence on all decisions made.
Gurneel
- Appreciates City staff ge�ng input from the public.
Terry - There wi
ll be plenty of public comment on 9/28 Study Session.
Mike - “P
ublic” is advisors/stakeholders.
Gurneel
- Agrees
Mike - Su
ggested Sierra Club as advisor
Terry - Con
tractor and industry should be involved to advise of feasibility.
Terry - Dates
do not seem realis�c.
- Equipment might not be available by deadlines
Mike - Si
erra Club & Atorney General agreed that deadlines are not realis�c with current Mariposa Road project.
Terry - New c
ode should be more realis�c.
Mat - Shou
ld focus on six (6) bigger items. Staff needs to determine how to follow up on standards put into place. Feasibility study being done.
Mike – Kn
ows of two industrial industry par�es available for City staff to bring in as advisors if needed.
Gurneel
- Agrees with Hull. Demand for EV chargers and current ordinance is too heavy handed and manufacturers for chargers are backlogged.
- Hinderance and a loss of money
- There should be a Zoning designa�on for EV charging. Chargers should not be on warehouse proper�es.
Rajan - Wha
t other direc�on is needed from Ad Hoc?
Mike - Need
to finalize length, frequency, and start �mes of mee�ngs.
Rajan - Sug
gests 1 hour and extend to 1.5 hours as needed for difficult topics.
Terry - 5pm
is challenging. Can make it but is not ideal. 1 hour is ok.
Mike - Su
ggests lunch hour.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Gurnee
l - Ok with lunch hour. Would like to keep under 1 hour.
Rajan - Ok with lunch hour
Mike - Thursdays?
Terry – Agreed to Thursdays
Mike - Time?
Terry – 1 pm
Rajan – Agreed to 1 pm
Gurneel – Agreed to 1 pm
All - Agreed to weekly Ad Hoc Mee�ngs on Thursdays at 1pm from 9/7/23 – 9/28/23.
Mat - 8/10 PPT atached to Teams chat
- Will keep everyone updated
- Dra�s will be posted to City website
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
PLANNING COMMISSION
Warehouse Ad-Hoc
Committee
Industrial Warehouse Standards
August 30, 2023
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Today’s Meeting
1. Project Schedule
2. Overview of Measures
– Define what staff proposes to keep; and items
to discuss with
the ad-hoc group
3. Working Draft of Code
4. Measures Needing Discussion
5. Implementation and Alternatives
6. Ground Rules
7. Use of Advisors
8. Ad-Hoc Schedule
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
1) Project Schedule
• September
– Ad-Hoc and Working Group Meetings
– Ord. Worki
ng Draft Available to Public Mid-Sept
• 9/28- PC Study Session on
Committee/gro
up findings & Draft Ordinance
• 10/26- PC for Recommendation
• 12/5- CC Conside
ration for Adoption
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
2) MOA Overview
• 26 measures total
– 19 measures proposed to carry over into Code
– 5 measures for focusing Ad-Hoc discussions
• Several of the 6 measures/items may be consolidated
– 2 measures removed
• Discussion on size/definition applicability
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
3) Working Draft Code
• MOA measures converted to typical code
outline.
• About
19 measures proposed to carry over.
• All were edited for codification, some of
which were chan
ged from their original
thresholds.
• Organized into submittal requirements,
development
standards, construction, and
ongoing activities.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
4) Measures for Discussion
• There are five (5) measures and one (1) size
qualifier to
discuss.
• Some may get included into the Code, but
others ma
y have alternatives proposed if
staff cannot find a reasonable compromise.
• Staff defines the issues and possible
solutions that wil
l likely require collaboration
with stakeholder groups (advisors).
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
5) Implementation Table
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
5) Alternatives
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
6) Ad-Hoc Schedule
1. 8/30- this meeting
2. 9/7- possible 2nd meeting
3. 9/13 - possible 2nd meeting
4. 9/18 or 9/21- possible 3rd meeting
5. 9/28- PC Study Session (no proposed Ad-
Hoc)
6. More/ot
her?
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
7) Ground Rules
• Meeting Times
• Information Sharing
• At least 3 more ad-hoc meetin gs
– 1 per week ending PC meeting week 9/28
• Estimates an hour or more each
• Two discussion measures per meeting
• Materials will be sent to groups for review and
comment se
parate from the discussion items
• Each meeting will have some time to
discuss comme
nts
• Roughly leaves 25-30 minutes for each discussion
point.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
8) Advisors
• Ad-Hoc group meets weekly
• Advisors
called on as needed
• Working Draft release in mid-September
– Will send to stakeholders and all individuals
expressing
interest in the effort. CDD
Warehouse Website
• Effort could extend into 2024, requires
consent of Sier
ra Club and A.G Office.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Present:
Gurneel Boparai
Rajan Nathaniel
Terry Hull
Michael McDowell
Stephanie Ocasio
Mat Diaz (taking notes)
Adriana Guerrero
General
• ADC wanted the public dra�s release asap to give people �me to review • Agreed with staffs approach to the advisors and reaching out to the general public • Wanted staff to include all comments received, even if it is more policy based that may result in ac�ons beyond the code wri�ng.
• Staff indicated measure 20 and the applicability would be the next topic for discussion. • Staff indicated that the 9/28 study session could extend into 10/12 for the city and stakeholders to feel comfortable in moving towards a 10/26 or 11/7 PC and 12/5 CC • Staff informed the ADC that the city received grant money to update the climate ac�on plan and that some may be more interested in that effort than the code.
Measure 20-
• Most seem agreeable to the program, but wanted to know if there were costs associated with its inclusion.
• ADC stated the city should not be responsible for monitoring the program and agreed with staff that enforcement of the program could be messy.
• The ADC indicated a preference to either amend the measure to remove enforcement/monitoring or look for an alterna�ve if agreeable to the DOJ
Measure 14/17-
• Staff outlined the requirement for permit approval, the monitoring, and enforcement issues with requiring an all EV fleet with yearly monitoring.
• The ADC members indicated it was not the city’s place to require and monitor/enforce forcing an industry standard that is not applied by the state and may result in a significant impact in the market.
• The ADC was interested in a feasibility analysis for how this impacts the market. • One member of the ADC wanted staff to explore incen�ves and alterna�ve fuels in addi�on to EV items.
• Staff indicated that the DOJ is mee�ng with staff to explore alterna�ves to these measures that would be more project based or involve analysis of truck movement. • The ADC directed staff to explore more op�ons and alterna�ves and examples of how other ci�es are dealing with similar measures or with requiring EV fleet mixes. • Since the ADC did not support the measures, the members agreed with staff that an alterna�ve measure(s) should be explored with the help of the DOJ.
(MOA#20) The tenant/operator of the qualifying facility(ies) shall enroll and par�cipate the in SmartWay program for eligible businesses.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Issue: Staff
is unsure how to enforce the inclusion for all future tenants, if a compliant is filled about a facility not repor�ng data to the voluntary program.
Solu�on (order of preference):
1. Define needed only at issuance of permit.
2. Remove programs (DOJ isn’t worried)
3. Alterna�ve measure for monitoring.
(MOA#14) EV Fleet and (MOA#17) EV Monitoring
Issue:
• This measure exceeds the �meline of the state’s implementa�on of carbon neutral by 2045.
• The technology does not seem to be there for EV fleets. • Staff �me to monitory and legally of enforcing these measures. • Impacts to the city’s good movement and industrial sector.
Solu�on (14/17):
• Remove and find alterna�ve (revised truck routs via DOJ recommenda�on)
• Comply with CARB
• Look into alterna�ve fuel op�ons.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/14/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM) 1 Present: Gurneel Boparai
Rajan Nathaniel
Terry Hull
Michael McDowell
Stephanie Ocasio
Matt Diaz
Adriana Guerrero (taking notes)
Notes:
Mike
- Requested Ad-Hoc member’s availability for Special meeting on 9/20 or 9/21.
All
- Yes, all are available.
Mike
- Might not have a quorum for tonight’s PC Meeting
- Will still have PC Meeting and continue items to Special Meeting
-----------
Mike
- Working with 4 Industry Representatives
Matt
- Some advisors are also consulting with other individuals on other committees - Explained how he has been interacting with consultants - Smart Way programs/EV - Sierra Club does not have confidence that Air District will enforce compliance to State standards
o Need to reach out to AG
- Has had group meetings with citizens that desire to be on Ad Hoc Committee o Discussed direction of groups & why there are no other committees being formed o Citizens want Ad-Hoc committee
o Shared info & process before code
o $650,000 grant for Housing Action Plan
o Citizens may be at next meeting voicing their concerns Gurneel
- Thinks current Ad Hoc Committee have already met guidelines set by City legal Matt
- Citizens did not give specifics on concerns
- Meeting with Environmental Advisors today
Gurneel
- Appreciates staff engaging with public on behalf of Ad-Hoc Committee Mike
- Targeting a 9/28 Study Session with PC
Matt
- Will be summarizing in notes from each advisory group in hopes to help study session on 9/28
- Solar Power Energy and Solar Systems
o No definition of base power makes it difficult
John
- Base Power can be defined in different ways
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/14/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM) 2 - Base Power will dictate what size solar system will be required - There are different places where solar can be installed o Roof top, car port, ground mount
o Ground mount system requires fire access roads
- How to deal with future changes to building
o Future occupants may have a different type of company (energy need) - Batteries
o Backup battery system so generators do not have to be used o Solar energy stored in batteries
o Too many batteries stored in building can cause hazardous occupancy o Spec Shell buildings - Buildings that are constructed without tenant present a challenge as energy need is not defined yet
Gurneel
- Storing solar energy in batteries is very expensive
- Father is starting a solar farm
- Suggests considering zone or utility piece that companies can offload into John
- Solar panels must be kept at 80% efficiency
Rajan
- What does Industry say about this measure?
Mike
- Industry is trying to define definition of base power.
Rajan
- Will need to know % of base power
Gurneel
- He understands base power to mean all in one system.
- Will need to know how much power is coming in and how much will need to be stored Stephanie
- What was AG’s perspective? How did this become a mitigation.
Mike
- AG & Sierra Club wanted to ensure less reliance on the grid - Industry does not think measure is reasonable or feasible Stephanie
- Confirmed intent was to reduce reliance on grid and the reduction of greenhouse gases Terry
- Do any other cities have similar measures?
Gurneel
- Need to calculate how much solar power will be needed Stephanie
- Base power may change depending on other factors
- How many solar panels will be enough?
Matt
- Will need to be reviewed at time of construction via building permit process - Will standard be enough to cover future tenants?
Stephanie
- Concerns with monitoring
Matt
- Staff does not have the capacity to monitor
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/14/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM) 3 Matt
- Staff is not an expert
- Need to be easy to understand by applicants and by staff Stephanie
- Can baseline be estimated from energy currently being used without solar? Matt
- There are different ways to determine energy needed
- Anything Ad-Hoc Committee would like Staff to consider/explore? Rajan
- Recommends looking into percentage/amount of power being generated by solar Terry
- Recommends finding examples from other cities
- Do not reinvent the wheel
Matt
- AG provided case studies which were usually dictated by policy instead of standard Gurneel
- Make sure we are calculating amount of energy from solar Mike
- Community Solar Program with the State
o Not yet implemented
- East Bay Energy Collective is an offshoot of Community Solar Program o Solar power will be provided for citizens that cannot pay their energy bills Gurneel
- Confirmed this is Assembly Bill 2316
Mike
- Industry would like this to be included as an option in the standard Stephanie
- How are reductions in greenhouse gases quantified?
Matt
- AG is not worried about quantifying if groups are okay with the measure - AG has raised concerns of incentives & programs
- Might come up at 9/28 PC Meeting
Applicability
Matt
- Logistics is not only warehousing type. Trying to define “logistics” with AG. - Average warehouse size is 600-700 k sq ft, on a 20-50 acre project site - Staff is working on a map that identifies future use areas Gurneel
- 100k sq ft is a lot lower than the average determined by Dept of Labor which is 670k sq ft Matt
- Shared map of past entitlement improvements of the area o Used to determine average of sq ft
o 700k sq ft will require around 38 acres
Stephanie
- Recommends a large square footage and use market info to support Gurneel
- Can get that info from Dept of labor
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/14/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM) 4 Rajan
- Agrees with using larger sq ft along with market info Gurneel
- Suggests threshold of 100k – 400k
Mike
- Different sq ft might need different measures, similar to Fontana Ordinance. - Meant for logistics as in Cold storage and distribution with a lot of trucks Matt
- Is group interested in that type of standard?
Gurneel
- Requests staff determine and come back to Ad-Hoc with info Matt
- Next meeting will be discussing Measure 10 which is about energy efficiency of buildings Mike
- Would like to have draft ordinance by 9/28 PC Study Session Matt
- Committee will be receiving draft language of measure soon - Will also be released to the public
Gurneel
- Staff is doing a great job & he appreciates the work
Matt
- Will email to all that are interested in measure and post on website Gurneel
- Wants to be sure that final version is sent to the public
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/21/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM)
1 Meeting: PC Ad-Hoc Meeting
Date: 09/21/2023
Time: 1:00 – 2:00 pm
Attendance: Staff Ad Hoc Committee
Stephanie Ocasio Gurneel Boparai
Mike McDowell Rajan Nathaniel
John Schweigerdt Terry Hull
Matt Diaz
Adriana Guerrero (note taker)
Notes:
Mike
- Continued item from 9/14 PC meeting will be continued again due to applicant not being available for 9/28 PC meeting.
- Staff is compiling meeting notes for Ad Hoc Committee meetings and will post on City website.
- Ad Hoc members will receive notice regarding Draft Warehouse Ordinance which includes AG measures and alternate language recommended by Ad Hoc and advisors.
Rajan
- Glad notes are being released to the public
Matt
- Shared draft language of Warehouse standards
- Currently receiving feedback on wording
- Would like to focus on issues or standards that need to be discussed - Has received some feedback regarding landscape buffer - Explained what will be discussed at 9/28 PC Meeting
- Questions? (none from Committee)
Matt
- Measure #10 states that all buildings must meet Tier 2 CalGreen standards John
- Currently enforces statewide minimum/mandatory requirements of the CalGreen Code - Levels of the CalGreen Code are Mandatory, then Tier 1, Tier 2 - Tier 2 will be enforced with new ordinance. This is 2 levels higher than current.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/21/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM)
2 - Complying with entire division in CalGreen code will result in override of other measures that require Tier 1.
Matt
- Staff prefers consistent standards for everything
- Environmental groups prefer Tier 2
- Industry prefers current standards
- Staff is looking for healthy medium between the two
- Questions? (none from Committee)
Gurneel
- Needs time to go through CalGreen standards
- How many fall into each tier in the AG’s Best Practice Report? Matt
- Difficult to lock down AG best practices. Looking to have analysis ready for future study sessions.
- Will review each measure.
- DOJ Best Practices recommend and prefer tier 2
- Doing a cost estimate and will have figures at a later meeting Gurneel
- We need to get cleaned up and will review standards
Matt
- Will have an outline at a high level in the future
- Won’t have estimate from consultants before 9/28 PC Meeting Mike
- Asked John to share reference document that explains the differences between tiers John
- Shared a summary chart from CalGreen. Applies to all buildings. - 15 measures over minimums for Tier 1
- 25 measures over minimums for Tier 2
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/21/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM)
3 - Each tier is more restrictive.
Mike
- Regarding EV charging, what is currently mandatory under CalGreen? John
- About 10% of stalls
Matt
- LEED certification is reviewed by private outside agency and will still need to comply to CalGreen
John
- Confirmed
Matt
- LEED standards will be reviewed but will not determine a Tier of CalGreen.
Rajan
- Cost analysis will be helpful
Matt
- General Assessment of Costs is available online
- Asked Ad Hoc members to share ideas
- Questions?
Terry
- Has Fontana code been reviewed by staff?
Matt
- Staff has been putting together a list of alternatives to Fontana code Terry
- Fontana is the only code he’s been able to find in the state Matt
- Reviewer from AG Office recommends not using Fontana as an example - Staff is looking for a healthy medium. AG prefers a larger buffer zone.
Terry
- Fontana is the only example
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/21/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM)
4 Matt
- Staff has compiled all examples from AG Office and is reviewing Terry
- Fontana’s code was just adopted in April 2022. Would like to see impacts to development since adoption.
Mike
- Current code is 20 feet. Agreement encourages staff consider a buffer of 1,000 ft. - Per AG, no semi trucks can be located in the buffer.
Stephanie
- Is Staff parking (i.e. personal passenger vehicles) permissable in buffer? Mike
- Yes
Matt
- Asked AG if Zero emissions trucks are ok to park in buffer but there is no way to regulate/monitor this
- Shared image of map that indicates areas that will accommodate new warehouses of that size
- Map shows industrial vacant lots that are 5.5 acres or more based on a calculation of 10 recent projects and lot coverage.
- Staff has paired standards provided by AG with Fontana and is using as a template - Staff is not comfortable implementing as proposed
Terry
- Colton is smaller than Stockton
Matt
- Colton standards are more aggressive than others but Colton does not have the same makeup as Stockton.
- Would like to find out how standards in Colton evolved Terry
- Fontana is closer to the size of Stockton
Matt
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/21/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM)
5 - Will most likely not have time to discuss alternatives at next PC Meeting. Staff to recommend discussing at a future meeting.
Mike
- Hopes PC will make determination at 9/28 meeting if discussions should continue Matt
- If PC recommends continuation, should we have another Ad Hoc meeting? Mike
- Deferred to Ad Hoc
Terry
- Will probably want to meet again
Gurneel
- Agrees to meeting again
Terry
- Might not be present at 9/28 PC Meeting
Mike
- Would like as many voters as possible to be present
Terry
- Will try and make it to meeting
Terry
- Can make it to the 10/26 meeting
Mike
- No action to be taken on 9/28 PC meeting but encouraged attendance for Ad Hoc members.
Matt
- Reviewed follow up items: staff will continue to review standards, Committee has no preference on Tiers without seeing financial figures, and Ad Hoc will meet again between 9/28 and 10/12 PC Meetings.
Terry
- Confirmed
Mike
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Planning Commission Ad-Hoc Committee 9/21/23 Meeting Notes (1:00-2:00 PM) 6 - Ad Hoc will not meet next week as there’s the PC Study Session that evening.
Matt
- Will need to schedule an additional meeting if item continued Mike
- Will most likely be scheduled for 10/5
Gurneel
- Requested staff’s notes on CalGreen be shared with committee.
Matt
- Information will be in Staff Report and PPT presented at PC meeting. Will try to have ready by 9/28 meeting.
Stephanie
- Everything shared during Ad Hoc meetings will be attached to the meeting notes Matt
- Will be posting notes online
Gurneel
- Thanked staff for their hard work.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
!"
#"$"!
#%"& ' $$" '(
!
"#$
%
!
&
! "#$!%
$&'$( )$
*
"($*'
$
+
&
$ $),
+*"*!$-($!
'$
"
*$(%$* ($
* *$ &./&
)'$ "!
0(
%
+* ,
($
+ **$1 $, $ , !
!(!'2 )$
,$!
''
"
# 0(
%
+* ,$+$ $,
3 $
',
$' $ , *
(
*
$ **, *
**,
3.$
$ ***,$ '*
$
*
(%
+*, %,*
$
*
,(*, %
, %
+'$!#*$(
*
%
,$'$
",$ $',#(
%
+*,
#
(%%
,
%$!
'
(
*
$ **
/ '"
****!
!
,
4.24
,*%! "#*(#*(%'$$*$1! *($*'$!1* 4
* +,
#-,
!(!
% $"
5
% $"6,7
*8
',
$1*
*'6, $
5
$6,7
*8
',
$1*
*'6, $
5
$&6,7
*8
#
!
*+
% $7
+'$9(
''
,
*5
$
%
$&
"8
$/ :'
* *
$ .:'
* *
$,
6, $+
+ $/.:'
* *
$4 :'
* *
6
'
%(;
*
%''
'
<&
&
3 '
=&
&
>
'
<&
&
?&
'
=&
&
&3
%%
1
'$!1*
/ %%
1*
'$!1*
&
.%%''.
$+"$'$!
& @&#
(%$
+,
+ $
2.:' $>
(%$
+,
+ $
2.:' $>
'
#
@*
$
$),
+*"*!
,!
!(!*
$
* 1
+*'$
'.
'
#
@*
$
$),
+*"*!
,!
!(!*
$
* 1
+*'$
'.
A $,(*%$*
* A $,(*%$*
*
6!
" ,% "
+,
+
$-($!
*
6!
" ,% "
+,
+
$-($!
*
, (*, $1$" , (*, $1$"
$+"0(%+2 :$
2.:' $>
(
%
1 ('
$+"0(%+2.:$
? :' $>
(
%
1 ('
// %%''.
"!0 "
%$A $* &:
1
+* &.:
1
+*
%%
1
'$!1*
/
/ %%
1*
'$!1*
/
4,
"!0 "
!"'%%''.1
6
*$(
A *
%(
*> :$%(
*?.:$%(
"
%6
B$"
%
! $
*'$.:'
! $
*
B$"
%
! $
*'$ :'
! $
*
%%
1
'$!1*
4
/ %%
1*
'$!1*
4
0"&
2
. )
6
*
9
$
+ 2.:''
$
+!*
6
!*
..:''
$
+!*
6
!*
)
6
,$!
*(
6!
" ,
6
!*
*
) %%%
'$!
%,"%
*(
%!
" ,
6 !*
%%
1
'$!1*
/ %%
1*
'$!1*
"
, !! %%
1
'$!
"%1*
/ %%
1*
'$!
"%1*
$$")& "
, !! &
6"$+,D&.&/
$
6%6(
@
@$*
*$*5
E;
8
'()
*+ ,+
,-
"
.) /
-
0
1
0-
$
-
2 $
.
-
#
!
&
.%%''.
0"&
2
.
&
10 16
If Division 5.3 and 5.4
were included. Without Divisions 5.3 and
5.4 included. Difference
of (6) total measures
between Tier levels.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
Summary of CALGreen Measures w/ Proposed Warehouse Ordinance
CALGreen Related Measures from MOA (Exhibit A):
MOA Reference: Measure:
Pg. 5, Bullet #3 Cool Roof
Pg. 6, Bullet #5 Advanced Energy Efficiency
Pg. 12, Bullet #1,
Sub Bullet #1
Passenger EV
Pg. 12, Bullet #1,
Sub Bullet #2
Fuel Efficient Vehicle Parking:
Conflicting Measures:
• The “advanced energy efficiency” requirement above, specified for compliance with CALGreen Tier 2, would override the “cool roof” requirement that is specified for compliance at Tier 1. To meet compliance with Division A5.1, Tier 2, the aged solar reflectance and thermal emittance will exceed Tier 1 requirements nullifying the “cool roof” MOA measure.
• The “advanced energy efficiency” requirement above, specified for compliance with CALGreen Tier 2, would override the “passenger EV” requirement that is specified for compliance at Tier 1. To meet compliance with Division A5.1, Tier 2, the minimum number of EV stalls will exceed Tier 1 requirements by 15% nullifying the “passenger EV” MOA measure.
• The “advanced energy efficiency” requirement above, specified for compliance with CALGreen Tier 2, would override the “fuel efficient vehicle parking” requirement that is specified for compliance at Tier 1. To meet compliance with Division A5.1, Tier 2, the minimum number of stalls designated for fuel efficient ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
vehicles will exceed Tier 1 requirements by 15% nullifying the “fuel efficient vehicle parking” MOA measure.
Other Conflicts:
MOA Reference: Measure:
Pg. 6, Bullet #2 VOC Limits
• Section 5.504 of the CALGReen Code, specifically Table 5.504.4.3, already has requirements for VOC content limits for architectural paints and coatings as part of the mandatory measures. This measure exceeds any level provided for in the CALGreen Code.
CALGreen Tier 1/Tier 2 Comparison Table.
Attached is a summary table of the differences between Tier 1 and Tier 2. Note that the MOA does not require compliance with Divisions A5.3 or A5.4 for Tier level compliance, however the mandatory measures of Division
5.3 and 5.4 are still applicable.
Attachments:
CALGreen Tier 1 and Tier 2 Comparison Table
Executed Memorandum of Agreement
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
!"
#"$"!
#%"& ' $$" '(
!
"#$
%
!
&
! "#$!%
$&'$( )$
*
"($*'
$
+
&
$ $),
+*"*!$-($!
'$
"
*$(%$* ($
* *$ &./&
)'$ "!
0(
%
+* ,
($
+ **$1 $, $ , !
!(!'2 )$
,$!
''
"
# 0(
%
+* ,$+$ $,
3 $
',
$' $ , *
(
*
$ **, *
**,
3.$
$ ***,$ '*
$
*
(%
+*, %,*
$
*
,(*, %
, %
+'$!#*$(
*
%
,$'$
",$ $',#(
%
+*,
#
(%%
,
%$!
'
(
*
$ **
/ '"
****!
!
,
4.24
,*%! "#*(#*(%'$$*$1! *($*'$!1* 4
* +,
#-,
!(!
% $"
5
% $"6,7
*8
',
$1*
*'6, $
5
$6,7
*8
',
$1*
*'6, $
5
$&6,7
*8
#
!
*+
% $7
+'$9(
''
,
*5
$
%
$&
"8
$/ :'
* *
$ .:'
* *
$,
6, $+
+ $/.:'
* *
$4 :'
* *
6
'
%(;
*
%''
'
<&
&
3 '
=&
&
>
'
<&
&
?&
'
=&
&
&3
%%
1
'$!1*
/ %%
1*
'$!1*
&
.%%''.
$+"$'$!
& @&#
(%$
+,
+ $
2.:' $>
(%$
+,
+ $
2.:' $>
'
#
@*
$
$),
+*"*!
,!
!(!*
$
* 1
+*'$
'.
'
#
@*
$
$),
+*"*!
,!
!(!*
$
* 1
+*'$
'.
A $,(*%$*
* A $,(*%$*
*
6!
" ,% "
+,
+
$-($!
*
6!
" ,% "
+,
+
$-($!
*
, (*, $1$" , (*, $1$"
$+"0(%+2 :$
2.:' $>
(
%
1 ('
$+"0(%+2.:$
? :' $>
(
%
1 ('
// %%''.
"!0 "
%$A $* &:
1
+* &.:
1
+*
%%
1
'$!1*
/
/ %%
1*
'$!1*
/
4,
"!0 "
!"'%%''.1
6
*$(
A *
%(
*> :$%(
*?.:$%(
"
%6
B$"
%
! $
*'$.:'
! $
*
B$"
%
! $
*'$ :'
! $
*
%%
1
'$!1*
4
/ %%
1*
'$!1*
4
0"&
2
. )
6
*
9
$
+ 2.:''
$
+!*
6
!*
..:''
$
+!*
6
!*
)
6
,$!
*(
6!
" ,
6
!*
*
) %%%
'$!
%,"%
*(
%!
" ,
6 !*
%%
1
'$!1*
/ %%
1*
'$!1*
"
, !! %%
1
'$!
"%1*
/ %%
1*
'$!
"%1*
$$")& "
, !! &
6"$+,D&.&/
$
6%6(
@
@$*
*$*5
E;
8
'()
*+ ,+
,-
"
.) /
-
0
1
0-
$
-
2 $
.
-
#
!
&
.%%''.
0"&
2
.
&
10 16
If Division 5.3 and 5.4
were included. Without Divisions 5.3 and
5.4 included. Difference
of (6) total measures
between Tier levels.
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary
City Limits
Large Industrial Parcels
Legend
Vacant Industrial
Parcels Larger than
5.5-Acres
Map created by City of Stockton Advanced Planning
staff on September 18, 2023. Aerial image is from
ArcGIS baselayer, "Earthstar Geographics".
City of Stockton
Community Development Department
345 N. El Dorado Street
Map created by: Advanced Planning staff
Map created on: September 18, 2023
Eight Mile Road
Hammer Lane
March Lane
Pacific Avenue
Airport Way
Harding Way
West Lane
ATTACHMENT C - Outreach Summary