New 225,000-Square-Foot Rialto Warehouse Proposal Sparks Outrage Amid 8+ Existing Vacant Warehouses in the City

A storm of community dissent and heated exchanges marked the recent City Council meeting as the proposed West Coast Boulevard and Locust Avenue Warehouse Project faced fierce opposition from residents and advocacy groups. The 225,173-square-foot industrial warehouse, proposed by Rialto Springs LLC, has ignited concerns over environmental impact, traffic congestion, and the potential for public health risks, with detractors calling for a halt to the city’s increasingly warehouse-dominated landscape.

The project, planned for the southeast corner of Locust Avenue and West Coast Boulevard, would consolidate six parcels into a singular 11.19-acre lot. While the lower two-thirds of the site is currently a contractor’s storage yard, the northern third remains undeveloped. Under the plan, the warehouse would sit just 108 feet from residences to the north and between 86 and 101 feet from homes to the east.

Concerns of Environmental and Traffic Impact

Key among the objections is the project’s anticipated environmental impact. Ana Gonzalez, Executive Director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice (CCAEJ), filed an appeal after the Planning Commission voted 3-1 on August 7, 2024, to approve the project. Gonzalez, representing 30+ community members, raised alarms over outdated environmental assessments, particularly the reliance on a 1997 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Rialto Airport Specific Plan, which she said fails to account for modern conditions.

“The EIR is based on a study from 1997, long before the current wave of warehouse construction created diesel death zones in our community,” Gonzalez stated at the council meeting. “The environmental dangers posed by this project are exacerbated by the sheer volume of truck traffic we already face.” Gonzalez underscored that the number of nearby residents suffering from respiratory illnesses had surged in recent years, linking this directly to the rise of heavy-duty vehicles operating in close proximity to residential neighborhoods. “How many more lives must be jeopardized before we realize this is an unsustainable path?” she added.

The proposed warehouse would generate 156 daily truck trips, and nearby intersections—Locust Avenue at Casa Grande Drive and Locust Avenue at West Coast Boulevard—are already flagged for significant traffic impacts.

Councilmembers were not left without technical guidance. A traffic analysis by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. estimated the project would generate 235 daily passenger vehicle trips in addition to truck traffic. The analysis found that while the developer is expected to contribute $91,500+ (12.2% of total costs) towards a traffic signal at Locust Avenue and Casa Grande Drive, the looming impact on residential streets remains a pressing concern for many.

A resident currently living on West Coast Boulevard, Alejandra, speaking at the meeting, voiced her frustration, noting that the traffic influx would transform her peaceful family neighborhood into a construction zone. “This proposal threatens the safety of my family and neighbors. Kids walk to and from school in this neighborhood, and construction trucks and machinery will flood our streets,” Alejandra said, her voice heavy with emotion. “This isn’t just a minor inconvenience—this is a threat to our neighborhood’s safety. The increased traffic will add unnecessary danger to an area already struggling with minimal road infrastructure.”

She and other residents proposed making their street a no-through street to prevent industrial traffic. “If the project must proceed, at least protect our neighborhood by making it a cul-de-sac,” she implored, garnering nods from other attendees.

Community Outreach Sparks Heated Debate

Tensions escalated when the applicant took the podium, claiming substantial community outreach efforts, including sending over 214 mailers in English and Spanish and conducting door-to-door outreach. “We met with the largest number of neighbors in October 2023,” the applicant claimed, “and we received feedback that this was the best outreach they had seen.”

However, this assertion was met with jeers and boos from the audience. Mayor Deborah Robertson was forced to intervene, calling for order and ensuring residents would have their chance to speak during public comment. She later criticized the applicant’s outreach efforts, questioning why there were no in-person meetings. “This is a concern,” Robertson said. “There should have been a more personal connection with the community beyond just sending letters.”

Public Backlash Over Warehouse Development

Over 11 residents voiced strong opposition to the proliferation of warehouses in Rialto, a city with over 80 warehouses, of which at least eight are currently vacant. Kelly Valencia, a 35-year resident, expressed deep frustration, stating, “We have enough empty warehouses. I urge the council to consider developing homes, parks, or grocery stores instead. The traffic from Target, Amazon, and other warehouses already congests our streets. Do we need more?” 

Valencia also questioned the city’s development priorities. “Every time we hear about a new project, it’s another warehouse. What about our community’s needs? What about our kids’ future? The air quality is already terrible, and now we’re adding more trucks? Where’s the common sense in that?”

Echoing this sentiment, one resident, who preferred to remain anonymous, brought attention to the socio-economic and racial disparity tied to warehouse placements. “Warehouses tend to be disproportionately placed in low- to median-income minority communities,” he argued. “Pollutants don’t care about your traffic, and property values decline. These jobs are low-paying with few benefits, and the community suffers.” He went on to cite studies conducted in the region that rank Riverside and San Bernardino counties among the most polluted in the United States due to heavy truck traffic.

The project’s proposed setbacks also sparked outrage, with many residents decrying the city’s 10-foot minimum setback requirement as “ridiculous.” 

Councilmember Ed Scott said, “I would hate to think that after living in my house for 20+ years, I’d no longer be able to enjoy a sunset while barbecuing in my backyard because it’s blocked by a giant warehouse building.”

Council Unified as Residents Demand More

During the meeting, an awkward moment unfolded between Mayor Robertson and Councilmember Joe Baca as the public hearing drew to a close. Baca objected to ending the public comment period, prompting Robertson to interject. “You object to the closing of the public hearing, so that we can begin to talk? This is the procedure, right?” Robertson remarked, her tone pointed. Baca clarified, “We can talk, I wanted to make sure we can talk.” The exchange, though brief, carried an awkward tension, likely stemming from their opposing mayoral campaigns, and left the audience momentarily silent before the meeting resumed.

Baca, who has voted against every warehouse project during his tenure, commended the applicant’s commitment to owning rather than selling the development but urged the council to delay its decision. “I hope we can push for something better—retail, parks, recreation, grocery stores—something that improves the quality of life for the people of north Rialto, which has been ignored for too long.” He called for more extensive environmental reviews before any decisions were made, emphasizing that rushed approvals could have dire consequences. “Let’s not make the mistake of prioritizing corporate interests over our own residents,” he urged.

While Baca made a motion to uphold the appeal, there was no second. Councilmember Ed Scott instead motioned to reopen the public hearing and continue the discussion at the November 12, 2024, council meeting, a move seconded by Councilmember Rafael Trujillo.

Trujillo emphasized the need to address traffic safety, particularly for children crossing Locust Avenue. “We need to add traffic lights or other safety measures to take care of our youngest residents,” he said. His comments were met with applause from the audience, many of whom have raised concerns about the potential dangers posed by increased truck traffic in residential areas.

Rialto resident Merna Ruiz voiced her frustration with the council during the public comment session, pointing out the apparent lack of attention councilmembers paid to those speaking. “I appreciate everyone paying attention to me right now,” Ruiz said pointedly, directing her gaze toward Councilman Trujillo, who was observed glancing elsewhere earlier in the session. “We are your constituents. When we speak, you should be listening. It’s disrespectful to ignore us when we’re up here fighting for our community.” Her words drew a wave of nods and murmurs of agreement from the crowd. Trujillo responded, saying, “I was taking notes.” 

While the council remained unified in their decision-making process, the debate over the West Coast Boulevard and Locust Avenue Warehouse Project underscores a broader issue plaguing the Inland Empire: the battle between economic development and environmental justice. For many residents, the price of progress has become too steep, with health risks and quality of life hanging in the balance.

As the city gears up for the next round of hearings, one thing remains clear—this fight is far from over. The residents of north Rialto will continue to push back against what they see as yet another affront to their community’s wellbeing, while city officials must grapple with the delicate balance of meeting industrial demands without sacrificing the very people they are sworn to serve.