Warehouse ordinance 4507-26

A steering committee member urging adoption, noting the ordinance is more restrictive than the Planning Board draft but is the strongest realistic option after the 2023 ban.

Supported the ordinance but asked the Council to adopt an amendment reducing loading dock ratios and to close the local-delivery truck route loophole.

Asked the Council to table the ordinance and return with a build-out analysis and a possible cap on total warehouse development.

An attorney for five warehouse property owners objected that the ordinance is arbitrary, capricious, and effectively a prohibition, especially the one-mile I-287 rule and data center ban.

A professional planner testifying that the one-mile distance standard is arbitrary and not found elsewhere, and that the ordinance cumulatively over-restricts development.

Supported the ordinance and asked that the summary acknowledge that warehouse impacts have already occurred, not just anticipated.

An attorney for 400 Atrium LLC and USPS Randolph LP said the ordinance abandons the negotiated tiered system and functions as a de facto warehouse ban; urged rejection.

Disagreed with the attorneys but agreed the ordinance shouldn't pass as-is without integrating truck traffic data into the analysis.

A Canal Walk board member reported overwhelming resident support for the advocates' position on warehouses.

Asked for a long-term build-out analysis of Ward 2's roughly 10 million square feet of B-I land before acting.