Agenda packet — Redlands City Council, October 18, 2022 (part 2 of 8)

OFFICIAL BALLOT

SPECIAL ELECTION FOR
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-1

OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
October 18, 2022
To vote, mark a cross (+ or X) in the voting square after the word “YES” or after the word “NO”. All marks otherwise made are forbidden. All distinguishing marks are forbidden and make the ballot void.

If you wrongly mark, tear, or deface this ballot, return it to the City Clerk of the City of Redlands and obtain another.

PROPOSITION A: Shall Proposition A
authorizing the annual levy of special taxes
on taxable property in the territory proposed
to be annexed to Community Facilities
District No. 2004-1 of the City of Redlands,
County of San Bernardino, State of
California, to pay the costs of the
maintenance public trails and trail fences
adjacent to Planned Development No. 4,
including but not limited to, landscape
maintenance in the area of the Property and
the Community Facilities District, and to
pay costs associated with the determination
of the amount of and the levy and collection
of the special taxes at the special tax rates
provided for Special Tax Rate Category
“A”, as set forth in Exhibit “B” to
Resolution No. 8382 and for Fiscal Year
2022-23, and each Fiscal Year thereafter,
assessed at the rate set forth in Table 2 in
Exhibit “B” to Resolution No. 8382, subject
to annual increases beginning in Fiscal Year
2023-24 by the greater of 2% or the
percentage increase in the Consumer Price
Index as determined pursuant to the method
of apportioning such special taxes set forth
in said Exhibit “B” be approved?
YES
NO
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 247 of 1815
17942.00056\40686996.1

Page 2 of 2 ends

CERTIFICATION
I certify that I am the authorized representative of Duke Realty Limited Partnership, an Indiana limited partnership, the owner of property to be annexed and included within the boundaries of Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 of the City of Redlands, County of San Bernardino, State of California, (the “Owner”) and that I am authorized to vote the Official Ballot to which this certification is attached. I further certify that in voting said ballot it was my intent, as well as the intent of the Owner, to vote all votes to which the Owner is entitled on Proposition A set forth in said ballot as marked in the voting square opposite such proposition. I further certify that the Owner is the owner of approximately 22.57 acres of land proposed to be included within said community facilities district, and that in voting said ballot I intended to vote each vote to which such acreage would entitle the Owner in the manner marked on said ballot.

I certify that this certification was executed on ________________, 2022, at __________________________, California.

DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
an Indiana limited partnership
By: Duke Realty Corporation,
an Indiana corporation,
Its: General Partner
______________________________________
By: Nancy Schultz
Its: Regional President, West Region
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 248 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 249 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 250 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 251 of 1815
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBERS 0292-032-048, 0292-032-36, AND 0292-032-31 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 252 of 1815
1 L:\ca\Reso\8394 Resolution Calling Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx RESOLUTION NO. 8394

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

REDLANDS CALLING SPECIAL ELECTION AND

SUBMITTING TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF

TERRITORY PROPOSED TO BE ANNEXED TO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-1 OF THE

CITY OF REDLANDS THE QUESTION OF LEVYING

SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN THAT TERRITORY
(ANNEXATION 27)
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "City Council") of the City of Redlands (the "City") has heretofore conducted proceedings for the establishment of and has established Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 of the City of Redlands, County of San Bernardino, State of California (the "Community Facilities District"), and the Community Facilities District has been authorized to annually levy special taxes to pay the costs of the maintenance of parks, parkways and open space, including, but not limited to, the maintenance of street trees and landscape, within the Community Facilities District and in the surrounding area, the costs associated with the determination of the amount of and levy and collection of special taxes which will be levied to provide the services, and costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the Community Facilities District; and WHEREAS, the City Council is authorized by Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 53339) of Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the California Government Code, commonly known as the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982," to annex territory to the Community Facilities District; and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 8382, a resolution of intention to annex territory to the Community Facilities District pursuant to Section 53339.2 of the California Government Code, determining that the public convenience and necessity require that certain property, consisting of approximately 22.57 acres, be annexed to the Community Facilities District and containing all of the matters prescribed by Section 53339.3 of said Code, and fixing 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on October 18, 2022, in the meeting room of the City Council, or via teleconference as directed by the City due to COVID-19 social distancing guidelines as the time and place for a hearing upon said resolution; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said resolution, the City Clerk has published and mailed notice of the time and place of said hearing as required by Section 53339.4 of said Code; and WHEREAS, on October 18, 2022, at the time and place of said hearing, the City Council afforded all interested persons for or against the annexation of said property to the Community Facilities District an opportunity to present testimony and to protest against the proposed annexation of said property to the Community Facilities District, and no protests, either oral or in writing, were received; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 53339.7 of said Code, the City Council may now submit the question of levying a special tax within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District to the qualified electors within that territory; Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 253 of 1815
-2-
L:\ca\Reso\8394 Resolution Calling Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds that: (i) the foregoing recitals are correct; (ii) less than 12 persons have been registered to vote within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District during the 90 days preceding the close of the public hearing held on October 18, 2022, and no persons are registered to vote therein; (iii) pursuant to Section 53326 of the California Government Code, as a result of the findings set forth in clause (ii) above, the vote in the special election called by this resolution shall be by the landowners of the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District whose property would be subject to the special taxes if they were levied at the time of the election, and each landowner shall have one vote for each acre, or portion thereof, which he or she owns within said territory which would be subject to the proposed special taxes if they were levied at the time of the election; and (iv) pursuant to said Section 53326, the special election must be held at least 90 days, but not more than 180 days following the date of the adoption of this resolution, unless such time periods are waived with the unanimous waiver of the qualified electors. All of the qualified electors in the territory to be annexed waived the time limits and election formalities of the special election.

Section 2. Special Election. A special election is called for and shall be held on Tuesday, October 18, 2022, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified electors of the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District the question of whether special taxes shall annually be levied within said territory to pay the costs of the maintenance of public trails and trail fences adjacent to Planned Development No. 4, including but not limited to, landscape maintenance in the area of the Property and the Community Facilities District, the costs associated with the determination of the amount of and levy and collection of special taxes which will be levied to provide the services, and costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the Community Facilities District pursuant to the Rates and Method of Apportionment of the Special Taxes, attached as Exhibit "B" to Resolution No. 8382.

Section 3. Ballot Proposition. The proposition to be submitted on October 18, 2022, to the qualified electors of the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District shall be as follows:

First Proposition
PROPOSITION A: Shall Proposition A authorizing the annual levy of special taxes on taxable property in the territory proposed to be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 of the City of Redlands, County of San Bernardino, State of California, to pay the costs of the maintenance public trails and trail fences adjacent to Planned Development No. 4, including but not limited to, landscape maintenance in the area of the Property and the Community Facilities District, and to pay costs associated with the determination of the amount of and the levy and collection of the special taxes at the special tax rates provided for Special Tax Rate Category “A”, as set forth in Exhibit “B” to Resolution No. 8382 and for Fiscal Year 2022-23, and each Fiscal Year thereafter, assessed at the rate set forth in Table 2 in Exhibit “B” to Resolution No. 8382, subject to annual increases beginning in Fiscal Year 2023-24 by the greater of 2% or the percentage increase in the Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 254 of 1815
-3-
L:\ca\Reso\8394 Resolution Calling Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx Consumer Price Index as determined pursuant to the method of apportioning such special taxes set forth in said Exhibit “B” be approved?
Section 4. Conduct of Election. Except as otherwise provided in Section 5 hereof, said election shall be conducted by the City Clerk (the "City Clerk") pursuant to the provisions of the California Elections Code governing elections of cities, and the provisions of Division 4 (commencing with Section 4000) of said Code, insofar as they may be applicable.

Section 5. Election Procedures. The procedures to be followed in conducting said election shall be as follows:
(a) Pursuant to Section 53326 of the California Government Code, ballots for the election shall be distributed to the qualified electors by the City Clerk by mail with return postage prepaid.
(b) Pursuant to applicable sections of the aforementioned provisions of the California Elections Code governing the conduct of mail ballot elections, including in particular Division 4 (commencing with Section 4000) of said Code, the City Clerk shall mail or deliver to each qualified elector an official ballot in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and shall also mail or deliver to all such qualified electors a ballot pamphlet and instructions to voter, including a sample ballot identical in form to the official ballot but identified as a sample ballot, a return identification envelope with prepaid postage thereon addressed to the City Clerk for the return of voted official ballots, and a copy of Resolution No. 8382. (c) The official ballot to be mailed by the City Clerk to each landowner-voter shall have printed or typed thereon the name of the landowner-voter and the number of votes to be voted by the landowner-voter and shall have appended to it a certification to be signed by the person voting the official ballot which shall certify that the person signing the certification is the person who voted the official ballot, and if the landowner-voter is other than a natural person, that he or she is an officer of or other person affiliated with the landowner-voter entitled to vote such official ballot, that he or she has been authorized to vote such official ballot on behalf of the landowner-voter, that in voting such official ballot it was his or her intent, as well as the intent of the landowner-voter, to vote all votes to which the landowner-voter is entitled based on its land ownership on the proposition set forth in the official ballot as marked thereon in the voting square opposite such proposition, and further certifying as to the acreage of the landowner-voter's land ownership within the Community Facilities District.
(d) The return identification envelope delivered by the City Clerk to each landowner-voter shall have printed or typed thereon the following: the name of the landowner, the address of the landowner, a declaration under penalty of perjury stating that the voter is the landowner or the authorized representative of the landowner entitled to vote the enclosed ballot and is the person whose name appears on the identification envelope, the printed name and signature of the voter, the address of the voter, the date of signing and place of execution of said declaration, and a notice that the envelope contains an official ballot and is to be opened only by the City Clerk.
(e) The information-to-voter form to be mailed by the City Clerk to the landowner-voters shall inform them that the official ballots shall be returned to the City Clerk Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 255 of 1815
-4-
L:\ca\Reso\8394 Resolution Calling Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx properly voted as provided thereon and with the certification appended thereto properly completed and signed in the sealed return identification envelope with the certification thereon completed and signed and all other information to be inserted thereon properly inserted by five (5) o'clock p.m. on the date of the election.
(f) Upon receipt of the return identification envelopes which are returned prior to the voting deadline on the date of the election, the City Clerk shall canvass the votes cast in the election, and shall file a statement with the City Council as to the results of such canvass and the election on the proposition set forth in the official ballot.

ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2022.
________________________________________
Paul T. Barich, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 256 of 1815
5 L:\ca\Reso\8394 Resolution Calling Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx EXHIBIT "A"

OFFICIAL BALLOT

SPECIAL ELECTION FOR
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-1

OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
October 18, 2022
To vote, mark a cross (+ or X) in the voting square after the word "YES" or after the word "NO". All marks otherwise made are forbidden. All distinguishing marks are forbidden and make the ballot void.

If you wrongly mark, tear, or deface this ballot, return it to the City Clerk of the City of Redlands and obtain another.

PROPOSITION A: Shall Proposition A
authorizing the annual levy of special taxes
on taxable property in the territory proposed
to be annexed to Community Facilities
District No. 2004-1 of the City of Redlands,
County of San Bernardino, State of
California, to pay the costs of the
maintenance public trails and trail fences
adjacent to Planned Development No. 4,
including but not limited to, landscape
maintenance in the area of the Property and
the Community Facilities District, and to pay
costs associated with the determination of the
amount of and the levy and collection of the
special taxes at the special tax rates provided
for Special Tax Rate Category “A”, as set
forth in Exhibit “B” to Resolution No. 8382
and for Fiscal Year 2022-23, and each Fiscal
Year thereafter, assessed at the rate set forth
in Table 2 in Exhibit “B” to Resolution No.
8382, subject to annual increases beginning
in Fiscal Year 2023-24 by the greater of 2%
or the percentage increase in the Consumer
Price Index as determined pursuant to the
method of apportioning such special taxes set
forth in said Exhibit “B” be approved?
YES
NO
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 257 of 1815
-6-
L:\ca\Reso\8394 Resolution Calling Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx

CERTIFICATION
I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council duly held on the 18th day of October, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ______ day of October, 2022.
_______________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 258 of 1815
1 L:\ca\Reso\8395 Resolution Declaring Results of Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx RESOLUTION NO. 8395

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE SPECIAL ELECTION FOR
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-1 OF THE CITY OF

REDLANDS ON THE PROPOSITION OF THE ANNUAL LEVY OF

SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN THE TERRITORY PROPOSED TO BE

ANNEXED TO SAID COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT TO PAY

THE COSTS OF CERTAIN SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE

COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, DETERMINING THAT THE

TERRITORY PROPOSED TO BE ANNEXED IS ADDED TO AND PART

OF SAID COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT WITH FULL LEGAL

EFFECT, AND ORDERING THE RECORDING OF A MAP OF THE

BOUNDARIES OF SAID COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT

INCLUDING THE TERRITORY ANNEXED THERETO (ANNEXATION
NO. 27)
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "City Council") of the City of Redlands (the "City") has heretofore conducted proceedings for the annexation of approximately 22.57 acres of land to Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 of the City of Redlands, County of San Bernardino, State of California (the "Community Facilities District"), including conducting a public hearing pursuant to Section 53339.5 of the Government Code; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said public hearing, the City Council adopted a resolution calling a special election for October 18, 2022 and submitting to the qualified electors of the territory to be annexed to the Community Facilities District the question of levying special taxes within that territory to pay the costs of the maintenance of public trails and trail fences adjacent to Planned Development No. 4, including but not limited to, landscape maintenance in the area of the Property and the Community Facilities District and the costs associated with the determination of the amount of and levy and collection of special taxes which will be levied to provide the services and costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the Community Facilities District (the "Election Resolution"); and WHEREAS, the City Council has received a statement from the City Clerk (the "City Clerk"), who pursuant to the Election Resolution was authorized to conduct such special election and act as the election official therefor, with respect to the canvass of the ballot returned in and the results of said special election, certifying that at least two-thirds of the votes cast upon the proposition submitted to the qualified electors in said special election were in favor of such proposition.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds that: (i) there are no registered voters residing within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District (the Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 259 of 1815
2 -
L:\ca\Reso\8395 Resolution Declaring Results of Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx "Territory") at the time of the close of the public hearing on October 18, 2022 and pursuant to Section 53326 of the Government Code, the vote in said special election was, therefore, to be by the landowners owning land within the Territory, with each landowner having one vote for each acre or portion thereof of land that he or she owned within the Territory; (ii) pursuant to said Section 53326 and the Election Resolution, the City Clerk caused to be delivered an official ballot for the special election to the owner of the land within the Territory, with return postage prepaid; (iii) said special election has been properly conducted in accordance with all statutory requirements and the provisions of the Election Resolution; (iv) pursuant to said Section 53326, Duke Realty Limited Partnership, the owner of all the land within the Territory, was entitled to twenty-three (23) votes; (v) said landowner returned its ballot to the City Clerk prior to the time set by the City Clerk for the close of the election on October 18, 2022; (vi) the ballot returned to the City Clerk by said landowner voted all votes of said landowner in favor of the proposition set forth therein; (vii) at least two-thirds of the votes cast in such special election on said proposition were in favor thereof, and pursuant to Sections 53328 and 53329 of the Government Code, said proposition carried; (viii) pursuant to Section 53339.8 of the Government Code, the City Council is authorized to determine that the Territory to be annexed has been added to and become a part of the Community Facilities District with full legal effect; and (ix) the City Council is also authorized, pursuant to said Section 53339.8, to annually levy special taxes within the Territory to pay the costs of the services to be provided by the Community Facilities District.

Section 2. Declaration of Results. At least two-thirds of the votes voted in the special election on the proposition of the annual levy of special taxes within the Territory to pay the costs of the services to be provided by the Community Facilities District were voted in favor thereof, and such proposition carried.

Section 3. Annexation. The Territory is annexed and added to and is a part of the Community Facilities District with full legal effect, and the City Council shall annually levy special taxes within the Territory at the rates provided for Special Tax Rate Category “A”, as specified in Resolution No. 8382 adopted by the City Council on September 6, 2022, to pay costs of certain services to be provided by the Community Facilities District. The boundaries of the Territory are shown on the map entitled, Annexation Map No. 27, Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 of the City of Redlands, County of San Bernardino, State of California, which was recorded on September 15, 2022 in the office of the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino as Document No. 2022-0315152.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 260 of 1815
-3-
L:\ca\Reso\8395 Resolution Declaring Results of Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx Section 4. Pursuant to Section 53339.8 of the Government Code and Section 3117.5 of the Streets and Highways Code, the City Clerk shall cause to be filed with the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino an amendment of the notice of special tax lien and a map of the amended boundaries of the Community Facilities District including the Territory.

ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2022.
________________________________________
Paul T. Barich, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 261 of 1815
L:\ca\Reso\8395 Resolution Declaring Results of Election-CFD 2004-1 ANNEX 27.docx

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

NOTICE OF HEARING ON RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF REDLANDS DECLARING INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-1 OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS (ANNEXATION 27)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on September 6, 2022, the City Council of the City of Redlands adopted Resolution No. 8382, declaring the intention of the City Council to annex territory to Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 of the City of Redlands, County of San Bernardino, State of California, and fixing the time and place of a public hearing thereon for 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on October 18, 2022 in the Council Chambers at the City of Redlands Civic Center, 35 Cajon Street, Redlands, California, or via teleconference as directed by the City due to COVID-19 social distancing guidelines, at which time the City Council will hear the testimony of all interested persons for or against the annexation of said territory to the Community Facilities District or the levying of special taxes within such territory to pay the costs of providing certain services which are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City as a result of the development of said real property.

Resolution No. 8382 provides in summary as follows:

1. The City Council declared its intention to conduct proceedings for the annexation to the Community Facilities District of the territory described in Exhibit “A” to Resolution No. 8382. The City Council determined that the public convenience and necessity require that such territory be annexed to the Community Facilities District.

2. The territory which is included in the Community Facilities District is described on the map of the Community Facilities District recorded on May 18, 2004 in Book 76 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts, page 94, and as Instrument No 2004- 0347327 in the official records of the County of San Bernardino. The territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District is described on the map thereof entitled “Annexation Map No. 27, Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 of the City of Redlands, County of San Bernardino, State of California,” which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Redlands.

3. The types of public services to be provided within the Community Facilities District are as follows:

The services to be provided and financed by the Community Facilities District are the maintenance of public trails and trail fences adjacent to Planned Development No. 4, including but not limited to, landscape maintenance in the area of the Property and the Community Facilities District. The Community Facilities District shall also finance costs associated with the determination of the amount of and the levy and collection of special taxes which are levied to provide such services and costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out its authorized purposes. The services described above shall be provided, as needed, throughout the Community Facilities District and the territory proposed to be annexed thereto for the benefit of all owners of property and residents of the Community Facilities District and the territory proposed to be annexed thereto. All owners of taxable parcels of property within the Community Facilities District and the territory proposed to be annexed thereto shall pay special taxes to finance the annual cost of providing such services. The services to be provided and financed by the Community Facilities District, are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 263 of 1815
17942.00056\40677830.1
-2 -
as a result of development occurring within the Community Facilities District and the territory to be annexed thereto.

4. Special taxes sufficient to pay the costs of the services described in Section 3 above and the annual administrative expenses of the City and the Community Facilities District in determining, apportioning, levying and collecting such special taxes, shall be annually levied within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District. The special taxes shall be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure, sale, and lien priority in case of delinquency as is provided for ad valorem taxes. The rates and method of apportionment of said special taxes shall be as set forth in Exhibit “B” to Resolution No. 8382.

The property within the territory proposed to be annexed shall be assigned at the rate set forth for Special Tax Rate Category A as set forth in said Exhibit “B”, and for Fiscal Year 2022-23, and each Fiscal Year thereafter, assessed at the rate set forth in Table 2 in said Exhibit “B”, subject to annual increases beginning in Fiscal Year 2023-24 by the greater of 2% or the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index as determined pursuant to the method of apportioning such special taxes set forth in said Exhibit “B”.

The maximum amounts of special taxes which may be annually levied are as follows:

ASSIGNMENT TO LAND USE CATEGORY
Parcels of Taxable Property in a Development shall be assigned to the appropriate Land Use Category contained in Table 1. Such Parcels shall also be assigned to the appropriate Special Tax Rate Category contained in Table 2, based on the estimated cost for providing the Additional Maintenance, if any, to the Development. The Special Tax shall be levied upon and collected from each such Parcel for each Fiscal Year based on the Benefit Units which are assigned to the Parcel as a result of its assignment to the appropriate Land Use Category and Special Tax Rate Category, as provided in Sections C and D.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 264 of 1815
17942.00056\40677830.1
-3 -
TABLE 1
Land Use Category
Land Use Category Description Benefit Unit(s)
1 Single-family
Residential
One (1) / Residence
2 Commercial Five (5) / Acre
3 Industrial Two (2) / Acre
4 Multi-family
Residential
Six tenths (0.6) / Residential Unit
5 Religious Property Two (2) / Acre

MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES
The Maximum Special Tax Rate per Benefit Unit for each Parcel for each Fiscal Year shall be the total of the Base Rate Per Benefit Unit plus the Additional Maintenance Rate Per Benefit Unit for the Special Tax Rate Category to which the Parcel is assigned. For Fiscal Year 2004-05 the Base Rate Per Benefit Unit and the Additional Maintenance Rate Per Benefit Unit for each Special Tax Category shall be the amounts set forth in Table 2 for such Special Tax Rate Category. The Base Rates Per Benefit Unit and the Additional Maintenance Rates Per Benefit Unit for all Parcels in all Special Tax Rate Categories shall be increased by the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles – Riverside – Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or by two percent (2%), whichever is greater, on July 1, 2005 for Fiscal Year 2005-06 and on each subsequent July 1 for the Fiscal Year then commencing.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 265 of 1815
17942.00056\40677830.1
-4 -
TABLE 2
Maximum Special Tax Rates
Maximum Rates Per Benefit Unit
Special Tax Additional
Rate Category Base Rate Maintenance Rate
A $250 $0
B $250 $100
C $250 $200
D $250 $300
E $250 $400
F $250 $500
G $250 $600
H $250 $700
I $250 $800
J $250 $900
K $250 $1,000
L $250 $1,100
M $250 $1,200
N $250 $1,300
O $250 $1,400
P $250 $1,500
Q $250 $1,600
R $250 $1,700
S $250 $1,800
T $250 $1,900
U $250 $2,000
V $250 $2,100
W $250 $2,200
X $250 $2,300
Y $250 $2,400
Z $250 $2,500
The Parcels which are to be included in the District at the time of its formation and which are identified in Table 3 shall be assigned to the Land Use Category and the Special Tax Rate Category specified in Table 3.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 266 of 1815
17942.00056\40677830.1
-5 -
TABLE 3
Assignment to Land Use Category
and Special Tax Rate Category
Land Use Special Tax Rate
Tract No. Category Category
16408 One (1) K

METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT AND LEVY OF ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX
For each Fiscal Year, commencing with Fiscal Year 2004-05, the Council shall (a) determine the cost of providing the Basic Maintenance in the District and the amount of the Base Rate Per Benefit Unit to be levied on Parcels of Taxable Property in the District to pay the cost of the Basic Maintenance; (b) determine the cost of providing the Additional Maintenance, if any, for each Special Tax Rate Category, as then applicable, and the amount of the Additional Maintenance Rate Per Benefit Unit, if any, to be levied on Parcels of Taxable Property in each Special Tax Rate Category to pay the cost the Additional Maintenance therefor; and (c) levy the Special Tax on all Parcels of Taxable Property in each Special Tax Rate Category, as then applicable. The amount of the Special Tax to be levied on any Parcel of Taxable Property in any Fiscal Year shall be determined by multiplying the Benefit Units for the Parcel, depending on the Land Use Category to which it is assigned, by the Base Rate Per Benefit Unit and the Additional Maintenance Rate Per Benefit Unit, if any, determined pursuant to clauses (a) and (b) above, for the Special Tax Rate Category to which the Parcel is assigned.

No Special Tax shall be levied on property which, at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Formation for the District, is Exempt Property.

5. A public hearing on the annexation of said territory to the Community Facilities District shall be held at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on October 18, 2022, in the Council Chambers at the City of Redlands Civic Center, 35 Cajon Street, Redlands, California, or via teleconference as directed by the City due to COVID-19 social distancing guidelines.

6. The City Clerk shall publish a notice of the time and place of said hearing and shall also give notice of the time and place of said hearing by first-class mail to each registered voter and landowner within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District. Said notice shall be published at least seven (7) days and mailed at least 15 days before the date of the hearing.

7. The voting procedures to be followed in conducting the election on the proposition with respect to the levy of special taxes within the territory proposed to be annexed Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 267 of 1815
17942.00056\40677830.1
-6 -
to the Community Facilities District to pay the costs of services to be financed by the community facilities district shall be as follows:
(a) If at the time of the close of the public or protest hearing at least 12 persons are registered to vote within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District, the election shall be conducted by the City Clerk, and shall be held on a date selected by the City Council, and the ballots for the election shall be distributed to the qualified electors of the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District by mail with return postage prepaid and the election shall be conducted as a mail ballot election.
(b) If at the time of the close of the protest hearing, and for at least the preceding 90 days, less than 12 persons have been registered to vote within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District, and the vote is therefore to be by the landowners of that territory, with each landowner of record at the close of the protest hearing having one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land that he or she owns, the election shall be conducted by the City Clerk as follows:
(1) The election shall be held on the earliest date following the conclusion of the protest hearing upon which it can be held which may be selected by the City Council, or such earlier date as the owners of land within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District and the City Clerk agree and concur is acceptable.
(2) The election may be held earlier than 90 days following the close of the protest hearing if the qualified electors of the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District waive the time limits for conducting the election by unanimous written consent and the City Clerk concurs in such earlier election date as shall be consented to by the qualified electors. (3) Ballots for the election shall be distributed to the qualified electors by the City Clerk by mail with return postage prepaid.
(4) The City Clerk shall mail to each qualified elector an official ballot, and shall also mail to all such qualified electors other required election documents, including a return identification envelope with prepaid postage thereon addressed to the City Clerk for the return of voted official ballots. (5) The information-to-voter form to be mailed by the City Clerk to the landowner-voters shall inform them that the official ballots shall be returned to the City Clerk properly voted as provided thereon and with the certification appended thereto properly completed and signed in the sealed return identification envelope with the certification thereon completed and signed and all other information to be inserted thereon properly inserted by 5:00 o’clock p.m. on the date of the election.
(6) Upon receipt of the return identification envelopes which are returned prior to the voting deadline on the date of the election, the City Clerk Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 268 of 1815
17942.00056\40677830.1
-7 -
shall canvass the votes cast in the election, and shall file a statement with the City Council at its next regular meeting regarding the results of such canvass and the election.

Resolution No. 8382 contains other provisions which are not summarized above.

A copy of Resolution No. 8382 may be reviewed or obtained at the office of the City Clerk of the City of Redlands located at 35 Cajon Street, Redlands, California.

NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that at the time and place of said hearing, all persons interested for or against the annexation of said territory to the Community Facilities District or the levying of special taxes within such territory to pay the costs of providing certain services within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District will be heard. At the hearing, protests against the proposals described in Resolution No. 8382 may be made by any interested person. Any protests pertaining to the regularity or sufficiency of the proceedings shall be in writing and shall clearly set forth the irregularities or defects to which objection is made. All written protests shall be filed with the City Clerk prior to the time fixed for the hearing. The City Council may waive any irregularities in the form or content of any written protests and at the hearing may correct minor defects in the proceedings. Written protests may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the conclusion of the hearing.

If the owners of one-half or more of the area of land in the territory included in the existing district, or if the owners of one-half or more of the area of land in the territory proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District file written protests against the proposed annexation of such territory to the Community Facilities District, and protests are not withdrawn so as to reduce the protest to less than a majority, no further proceedings shall be undertaken for a period of one year from the date of decision of the City Council on the issues discussed at the hearing.

The hearing may be continued from time to time, but shall be completed within 30 days. At the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council may abandon the proceedings or may, after passing upon all protests, submit the question of levying the special tax within the area proposed to be annexed to the Community Facilities District to the qualified electors of the area proposed to be annexed.

DATED: September 6, 2022
/s/
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
City of Redlands, County of San Bernardino
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 269 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 270 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 271 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 272 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 273 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 274 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 275 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 276 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 277 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 278 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 279 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 280 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 281 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 282 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 283 of 1815
CFD 2004-1 Annexations List
In August 2004 Council approved the establishment of community facilities district (CFD) No. 2004-1, for Tract No. 16408, the Centex tract located at the southwest corner of Fifth Avenue and Wabash Avenue in the City of Redlands. The CFD was developed to cover the ongoing cost of maintenance of street trees, citrus groves landscaping and other appurtenances located along Fifth Avenue and Wabash Avenue.

In May 2006 Council approved Annexation No. 1 (Tract No. 16287) to the CFD, located at Occidental Drive and Crystal Court for the maintenance of landscaping and water quality treatment devices in the open space lots. During this last year, Annexation No. 1 subdivided the properties on site from two lots to twelve lots.

Annexation No. 2 (Tentative Tract No. 16586), located north of I-10 and both sides of the proposed Wabash Street alignment has been on hold since October 2006.

In July 2006 Council approved Annexation No. 3 (Tentative Tract No. 17253) to the CFD, located at the southwest corner of Lugonia Avenue and Church Street for the maintenance of the landscape and the associated irrigation equipment on Lugonia Avenue parkway frontages. This project has not yet begun construction.

In October 2008 Council approved Annexation No. 4 (Parcel Map No. 17353) to the CFD, located at Ford Street and Interstate 10 for the maintenance of the landscape in the median island and the associated irrigation equipment.

In October 2008 Council approved Annexation No. 5 (Commission Review and Approval No. 826) to the CFD, located at California Street and Orange Tree Lane for the maintenance of the landscape in the median island and the associated irrigation equipment on California Street and the parkway frontages along both streets.

Annexation No. 6 (Tract No 14790-1), located adjacent to Sunset Hills Lane, west of Alessandro Road did not receive sufficient votes needed to annex into the CFD in June 2009.

Annexation No. 7 (Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No. 15573), located at the northeast corner of San Bernardino Avenue and Mountain View Avenue, has been on hold since February 2011.

In February 2011 Council approved Annexation No. 8 (Tract No. 16806) to the CFD, located at southeast corner of Pennsylvania Avenue and Texas Street for the maintenance of the landscape and the associated irrigation equipment on Pennsylvania Avenue and Texas Street parkway frontages. This project has not yet begun construction.

In November 2012 Council approved Annexation No. 9 (Parcel Map No, 18208) to the CFD located at the southeast corner of Redlands Boulevard and Nevada Street for the maintenance of landscaping and the associated irrigation equipment on Redlands Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 284 of 1815
Boulevard and Nevada Street parkway frontages and the Redlands Boulevard raised center median.

Annexation No. 10 (Tract No. 18762-1), located at the northeast corner of Orange Street and Lugonia Avenue, has been completed since July 2016. Annexation No. 10 is dormant because the property owners have agreed to be responsible for all landscaping and irrigation efforts themselves; therefore the annexations are not being assessed.

In June 2014 Council approved Annexation No. 11 (Parcel Map No. 19371) to the CFD located at the northwest corner of Lugonia Avenue and Wabash Avenue for the maintenance of landscaping and the associated irrigation equipment on Lugonia Avenue and Wabash Avenue Street parkway frontages. Annexation No. 11 is dormant because the property owners have agreed to be responsible for all landscaping and irrigation efforts themselves; therefore the annexations are not being assessed.

In June 2014 Council approved Annexation No. 12 (Tract Map Nos. 16465 and 16627) to the CFD located at the southwest and southeast corners of Pioneer Avenue and Judson Street, respectively, for the maintenance of landscaping and the associated irrigation equipment on Pioneer Avenue and Judson Street parkway frontages, maintenance of landscaping and water quality treatment devices in the open space lots, and for the maintenance of landscaping and the associated irrigation equipment on the common area lots. Annexation No. 12a (Tract No. 16465) is nearly complete. A 50% assessment is being proposed to establish a reserve fund. Annexation No. 12b was completed in July 2016 and is being assessed. Annexation No. 12c (Tract Map Nos. 18979 and 19975) located east of Tract Map No. 16627 and between Pioneer Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue was approved by City Council in June 2016. A 50% assessment is being proposed to establish a reserve fund. Annexation No. 12d (Tract Map No. 20079) was approved by Council in May 2018. A 50% assessment is being proposed to establish a reserve fund.

In June 2014 Council approved Annexation No. 13 (Tract Map No. 18882) to the CFD located at the southwest corner of San Bernardino Avenue and Dearborn Street, respectively, for the maintenance of landscaping and the associated irrigation equipment on San Bernardino Avenue and Dearborn Street parkway frontages and for the maintenance of landscaping and the associated irrigation equipment on the common area lots with the exception of Lot B. Annexation No. 13 is dormant because the property owners have agreed to be responsible for all landscaping and irrigation efforts themselves; therefore the annexation is not being assessed.

In September 2015 Council approved Annexation No. 14 (Parcel Map No. 19496) to the CFD located at the northeast corner of California Street and Lugonia Avenue for the maintenance of landscaping and associated irrigation equipment on the California Street center median. The maintenance of landscaping and associated irrigation equipment on California Street and Lugonia Avenue parkway frontages will be maintained by the property owner and will not be assessed.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 285 of 1815
In December 2017 Council approved Annexation No. 15 (Parcel Map No. 18535-1) to the CFD located at the northwest corner of Eureka Street and Stuart Avenue for the maintenance of street trees, landscaping and irrigation in the rights-of-way and landscape maintenance along the property frontage. Annexation No. 15 will be dormant because the property owners have agreed to be responsible for all landscaping and irrigation efforts themselves; therefore the annexation is not being assessed.

In April 2017 Council approved Annexation No, 16 (Tract Map No. 18988) to the CFD located on the north side of Pioneer Avenue, east of Texas Street for the maintenance of parks, slopes, parkways, median, open space, shade and seating structures, and monuments within and adjacent to said tract.

In July 2017 Council approved Annexation No. 17 (Tract Map No. 17022) to the CFD located at the northeast corner of Pioneer Avenue and Texas Street for the maintenance of slopes, parkways, open space and citrus trees within and adjacent to the tract. This project has not yet begun construction.

In May 2018 Council approved Annexation No. 18 (Parcel Map No. 19465) to the CFD located at the southeast corner of Alabama Street and Park Avenue for the maintenance of street trees, landscaping and irrigation in the rights-of-way and landscape maintenance easement along the property frontage within and in the parcel map. The maintenance of landscaping and associated irrigation equipment on Alabama Street and Park Avenue parkway frontages and landscape maintenance easement will be maintained by the property owner and will not be assessed.

In January 2020 Council approved Annexation No. 19 (Tract Map No.19942) to the CFD located at the northeast corner of Wabash Avenue and Sylvan Boulevard for the maintenance of parks, slopes, parkways, and open space within and adjacent to the tract.

In May 2019 Council approved Annexation No. 20 (Tract Map No. 19956) to the CFD located at the southeast corner of Wabash Avenue and Citrus Avenue for the maintenance of slopes, parkways, and open space within and adjacent to the tract.

In September 2019 City Council approved Annexation No. 21 (Tract Map No. 20126) to the CFD located on the north side of Lugonia Avenue, south of Pennsylvania Avenue, east of Judson Street for the maintenance of parks, slopes, parkways, open space, and citrus groves within and adjacent to the tract.

In September 2020 City Council approved Annexation No. 22 (Parcel Map No. 19981) to the CFD located at the northwest corner of Alabama Street and Park Avenue for the maintenance of parkways.

In April 2021 City Council approved Annexation No. 23 (Parcel Map No. 18536) to the CFD located at the southwest Corner of Stuart Avenue and Eureka Street for maintenance of parkways.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 286 of 1815
In January 2021 City Council approved Annexation No. 24 (CUP No. 1129) to the CFD located at the southeast corner of Eureka Street and Stuart Avenue for the maintenance of parkways.

Annexation No. 25 (Tract Map No. 20065) located on the south side of East Highland Avenue and west of Redlands Street is anticipated to request Council action in early 2023.

In March 2022 City Council approved Annexation No. 27 (Tract Map No. 20257) to the CFD located at the northwest corner of San Bernardino Avenue and Texas Street for the maintenance of perimeter lettered lots, retention basins, and street trees.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 287 of 1815
City Council Meeting K. 2.

DATE: 10/18/2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to consider the proposed Transit Villages Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 65) project and the proposed General Plan Transit Village District consisting of the following items:
(Mayor to declare meeting open as a public hearing)
Resolution No. 8399 - A request to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the proposed project described below, adopt the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approve and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
a.

Resolution No. 8401 (General Plan Amendment No. 146) - A request to amend certain General Plan maps, exhibits, and policies pertaining to land uses and street segments to ensure the proposed Transit Villages Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 65) is consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan Land Use Map (Figure 4-1) would be amended to include and identify the proposed Transit Villages Specific Plan area as a Transit Village District" in Figure 4-1.
b.

Resolution No. 8400 for adoption of the Transit Villages Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 65) and rescind the existing Downtown Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 45) - The proposed Specific Plan would provide the development standards and design regulations for future development of up to:
265,000 square-feet of retail and commercial floor area; 238,000 square-feet of office area; up to 2,400 dwelling units (e.g., apartments, condominiums, and townhomes); up to 220 hotel rooms and 110,000 square-feet of hotel space; and approximately 280,000 square-feet of parks and open space. Public realm improvements are also anticipated, to include pedestrian, bicycle, and transit improvements within the plan area. The project area covers approximately 947 acres (or approximately 1.48 square miles) and is generally bounded to the west by Kansas Street, Redlands Boulevard, Alabama Street, and Tennessee Street; to the north by Interstate 10, Colton Avenue, and Sylvan Boulevard; to the east by Judson Street; and to the south by Citrus Avenue, Central Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, Olive Avenue, Brookside Avenue, Ash Street, Pine Avenue, Tennessee Street, and State Street. The Project area also includes the parcels fronting both sides of the Orange Street corridor between Colton Avenue and Lugonia Avenue. The proposed Transit Villages Specific Plan includes the entire area currently governed by the Downtown Specific Plan, and would replace the existing Downtown Specific Plan.
c.

Ordinance No. 2947 (Zone Change No. 475) - A request to amend the city's Zone Map to include and identify the Transit Villages Specific Plan (Specific d.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 288 of 1815
Plan No. 65) area as a new zoning designation on the Zone Map. (Development Services Director Desatnik)
PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING:

1. Mayor declares the meeting open as a public hearing.

2. Mayor calls upon Department Director for report.

3. Mayor calls for questions/comments from members of the City Council.

Mayor calls for comments/questions/testimony from members of the public (3 minutes per speaker).

4. 5. Mayor calls upon City Clerk to note any written comments received.

6. Mayor closes the public hearing.

7. City Council considers the motion and votes.

MOTION(S):

If the City Council determines that the Planning Commission’s recommendations are appropriate, the following motions are provided:

Motion for Environmental Determination:

"I move that the City Council approve Resolution No. 8399 adopting the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations in accordance with Sections 15091, 15092, and 15093 of the California Environmental Quality Act, certify the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Transit Villages Specific Plan project, and approve and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program."

Motion for General Plan Amendment:

"I move that the City Council approve Resolution No. 8401 adopting the General Plan amendments for the Transit Villages Specific Plan."
Motion for Transit Villages Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 65):
"I move that the City Council approve Resolution No. 8400 adopting the Transit Villages Specific Plan and rescinding the existing Downtown Specific Plan."

Motion for Zone Change:

Mayor requests the City Clerk to read the title of Ordinance No. 2947; "I move to waive further reading of Ordinance No. 2947 and to introduce Ordinance No. 2947." RECOMMENDATION:

At the public hearing on October 5, 2022, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project and the related Final Environmental Impact Report, and received public comments and testimony. Public comments included topics such as: the public outreach process for preparing the proposed Transit Villages Specific Plan (TVSP); the public comment period for the Draft EIR; the proposed TVSP districts should protect existing single-family neighborhoods; protect historic homes and historic districts; potential for flood impacts in the TVSP area; a proposal to amend a Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 289 of 1815
component of the draft sign regulations; and union representatives promoting the hiring of the local construction workforce. Four speakers were in favor of the TVSP, including: Michelle Rogers (Vice President of Administration at the University of Redlands); Ruth Cook (Primary Committee Member on the city's General Plan Update Steering Committee from 2015-17); Jerry Tessier (downtown business owner and developer); and Pat Meyer (local consultant).

Commissioners suggested changing the TVSP district designations in certain residential areas to protect existing single-family homes and neighborhoods (which have been completed and are included in the draft TVSP chapters attached to this staff report).

The Commission voted 6 to 0 recommending that the City Council:
1) Adopt the draft Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Consideration, and certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Transit Villages Specific Plan; 2) Adopt General Plan Amendment No. 146 for certain changes to text, maps, and exhibits related to the proposed project;
3) Adopt the Transit Villages Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 65) and rescind the Downtown Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 45); and
4) Adopt Zone Change No. 475 to update the city’s Zone Map related to the proposed project.

DISCUSSION:

I. BACKGROUND

A) 2035 General Plan

The City of Redlands 2035 General Plan and Climate Action Plan were adopted on December 5, 2017. One primary strategy of the new General Plan is the introduction of the Transit Villages Concept to accommodate future development within the core areas of the City. A total of five Redlands Rail stations are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map, of which three have recently completed construction: one existing station located in Downtown Redlands at the historic Santa Fe Depot (expanded to include Metrolink trains); one new station at the northwest corner of New York Street/West Redlands Boulevard; and one new station at the southeast corner of University Street/East Park Avenue. In the 2035 General Plan document, more than 130 Policies and Actions directly or indirectly pertain to the Transit Villages Concept or future development of the transit villages, and the proposed Transit Villages Specific Plan will be fully consistent with the 2035 General Plan.

Transit Villages Concept: In the 2035 General Plan, Chapter 4 (Livable Community) explains the Transit Villages Concept in detail:
"Transit Villages are areas surrounding a transit station in which the neighborhood is planned, designed, and integrated so that residents, workers, shoppers, and others find it convenient and attractive to patronize transit and other choices in transportation. Transit Villages have the following characteristics:

Densities and intensities that promote working and living environments proximate to transit; Pedestrian and bicycle access to the station, with safe and comfortable pathways; and A transportation system that encourages and facilitates intermodal service and access.

The development of Transit Villages results in public benefits such as relief of traffic congestion, improved air quality, revitalization of neighborhoods, live/travel options for community members who rely on transit, additional job opportunities, and development of attractive neighborhoods."

Two key ingredients to this strategy are a “Mixed Use Core” within each village combined with Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 290 of 1815
Multi-Modal Connections. A mixed-use core means an area with high development intensity and a variety of commercial stores and services that can meet frequent needs of local residents (such as retail and grocery stores, restaurants, coffee and ice cream shops, professional/administrative offices, medical/dental offices, banks, services such as dry cleaners and barbers/salons, and other stores), together with new residential dwelling units in each village. These areas would encourage a high level of pedestrian activity, and as such, would need to provide for a high level of comfort and safety for pedestrians. Multi-modal connections means convenient access such as walking, bike, bus, train, rideshare, or personal automobile (i.e., all modes can be accommodated and fewer automobile trips).

B) Community Outreach and Public Participation

In extensive public outreach effort was made to gather input and encourage participation by Redlands residents, local employees, and other interested persons. Ideas and input from community members can make a plan better. In many instances, local residents and community members are the only people that can provide unique insights about local conditions or the desired future physical form of their community.

From September 2018 through February 2019, a number of public workshops and other public meetings were held to encourage maximum input early in the Planning process. The key activities included the following:

Three Discovery Workshops in September to December 2018 (one each at the Civic Center, the Orton Center at the University, and the Esri Café). A total of approximately 115 persons attended the Discovery Workshops.

Three Alternatives Workshops in October 2018 to January 2019 (one each at the Civic Center, the Orton Center at the University, and the Esri Café). A total of approximately 67 persons attended the Alternatives Workshops (many of whom also attended a Discovery Workshop).

Three Draft Plan Workshops in April and May 2019 (one each at the Civic Center, the Orton Center at the University, and the Esri Café). A total of approximately 110 persons attended the Draft Plan Workshops (many of whom also attended one or more Discovery or Alternatives workshops).

City Council study session at a special meeting on January 4, 2019.

City Council update on April 16, 2019.

Planning Commission updates on January 22, 2019, and April 23, 2019.

A total of nine stakeholder meetings were conducted with groups and agencies representing a variety of interests including property owners, neighborhood representatives, citizen groups, and large employers.

City staff provided a booth and attended a total of twelve Market Night events in downtown Redlands (August through November 2018 and April through June 2019) to provide information to the public and answer questions during the public outreach phase. Staff estimates that approximately 950 persons asked questions about various elements of the specific plan, potential mall redevelopment, and the Redlands Rail project.

A public website (https://redlandstransitvillages.org/) was created to explain the Planning process to the public, provide announcements (e.g., agendas, presentations, summaries for community workshops, etc.), serve as a repository for all Specific Plan documents, and provide mechanisms to encourage feedback and input.

The final draft Specific Plan was made available on the project website (https://redlandstransitvillages.org/) in May 2020. Members of the public are able to review the draft Specific Plan in its entirety.

II. SUMMARY

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 291 of 1815

A) Overview of Chapters

The draft Specific Plan document is organized into nine chapters. Like the General Plan, a specific plan is a policy document articulating the desired vision for future development for the plan area, and includes numerous development standards and criteria to guide future development projects. The difference is that a specific plan is focused on a more limited and well-defined geographical area within the City of Redlands. In this case, that area is the future transit villages around the three future train stations, generally within a half-mile radius around each station site (see Attachment A).

The draft Specific Plan contains a total of nine chapters: Introduction, Vision, Redlands Mall, Development Code, Transportation and Circulation, Parking, Public Realm of Open Space and Landscape, Infrastructure, and Implementation. See Attachment B for an outline of each chapter and subsections within each chapter.

What the specific plan is NOT is a construction plan. The Transit Villages Specific Plan, when adopted, will not by itself result in immediate construction of any new buildings or public improvements. It is a policy document expressing the community’s vision for how the transit villages will look and function in the future. Individual private development projects will still need to be formally submitted to the Development Services Department for the normal development review procedures by City departments, and will include review and approval by the Planning Commission or City Council as may be necessary. Construction plans would only be prepared after an entitlement has been approved (such as a Conditional Use Permit, Commission Review & Approval, or a Tract/Parcel Map, etc.).

City staff may also use the document to apply for a variety of State and regional grants in order to be able to implement some public improvements called for in the plan (such as expanding the bicycle network, improving public sidewalks and crosswalks, pedestrian safety lighting or street lighting, intersection improvements, etc.). Some public improvements would also be constructed in conjunction with private development projects (such as improvements to the right-of-way and street frontages of project site).

Form-Based Code: A “Form-Based Code” emphasizes the shape and placement of the buildings and public space, as well as the mix of different land uses and a minimum density of those uses.

A form-based code is used as a method of regulating development to achieve a specific urban form, and to create a predictable public realm by controlling physical form (while the regulation of land uses is secondary). A key concept is that a form-based code emphasizes the form of the built environment, rather than focusing on regulating or separating different land uses.

Form-based codes typically encourage a mix of complementary uses (e.g., retail, office, commercial, etc.) in close proximity to residential uses and within a convenient walking distance.

This can be contrasted with traditional zoning that focuses not on urban form but on the land uses, with an emphasis on the separation and dispersion of different uses (which often results in sprawl, a heavy reliance on automobile trips to reach destinations, and environmental impacts such as greenhouse gases and air pollutants).

B) Policy Framework and Vision
Chapter 1: Introduction: One key strategy of the 2035 General Plan encourages future growth and development toward infill lots and redevelopment in the City’s core areas, and specifically in the transit village areas. There are more than 100 policies and actions in the General Plan pertaining to this concept including the transit villages, and Chapter 1 lists these policies for easy reference. Chapter 1 provides a summary of existing conditions in the plan area, as well as identifying opportunities and constraints. It also includes an overview of the nine community workshops held throughout Redlands over several months to obtain the widest possible Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 292 of 1815
workshops held throughout Redlands over several months to obtain the widest possible participation from all interested residents and other members of the community.

Chapter 2: Vision: Chapter 2 explains the basic principles of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), including what makes great public places, what makes great streets, and how to achieve a balance of good urban form and a mix of different (yet complementary) land uses. This chapter summarizes the work that occurred in the nine community workshops that were attended by Redlands residents and other interested community members. It includes potential build-out scenarios over many years to illustrate how the plan might be implemented (for each transit village). This chapter also describes and defines the various building types that are typically included in a form-based code.

Chapter 3: Redlands Mall: The Redlands Mall site warrants its own chapter due to the size of the site (11 acres) as well as its prime location in the heart of downtown at the key intersection of Redlands Boulevard and Orange Street. This chapter dives deeper into the unique objectives and design considerations for the Mall site, in particular breaking up the single “megablock” that occupies the former space of six downtown blocks. Historically, East State Street continued westerly from Orange Street and connected to Eureka Street (where West State Street remains), but this 880-foot long segment of State Street was removed when the Mall was constructed.

Re-establishing smaller blocks at the pedestrian-scale will be a critical component of redeveloping the site. Chapter 3 provides three illustrations showing the potential future site layout (as examples only) when the Mall site redevelops, and pedestrian connectivity across and through the site is one key design element to a successful redevelopment project.

C) Development Standards and Regulations
Chapter 4: Development Code: The proposed Development Code chapter provides the bulk of the development standards that will be applicable to the development of private properties, including the Regulating Plan (or Zone Map), zone descriptions, list of permitted land uses, development standards for each zone, and several other requirements.

The Regulating Plan: In the language of Form-Based Codes, the ‘Regulating Plan’ functions as the official zone map for the specific plan. This map is shown on pages 4:4 and 4:5 of the Specific Plan.

Zoning Districts: The proposed zoning districts are described on pages 4:6 and 4:7, and are organized using the “Transect” principle based on differing densities and intensities of development. The districts begin with the highest-intensity development around the train stations (Village Center), decrease in intensity further away from the station core areas (Downtown, Village General, and Village Corridor), and the lowest intensity (Urban Neighborhood) around the periphery near the residential neighborhoods.

Land Use Table: The proposed Land Use Table on pages 4:8 through 4:14 incorporates the existing list of land uses from the Downtown Specific Plan. A form-based code emphasizes regulating the form of the built environment and the public realm amenities, rather than focusing primarily on the land uses. Form-based codes typically encourage a mix of different uses (e.g., retail, office, commercial, and residential in close proximity within convenient walking distance) as well as the appropriate densities of those mix of uses. It is used as a method of regulating development to achieve a specific urban form and to create a predictable public realm by primarily controlling the physical form (and the regulation of land uses is secondary). This can be compared to traditional Euclidean zoning that focuses on the land uses, with an emphasis on separating and dispersing different types of uses, rather than focusing on building a compact and efficient urban form. As a result, traditional zoning often results in sprawl, limits transit and walking options, and tends to create a reliance on automobiles and more vehicle trips.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 293 of 1815
Development Standards: The draft Development Standards provide the requirements for building form and other features in each district. In addition to the typical standards found in most zoning codes (such as required yard setbacks and maximum building height), there are several standards incorporated which emphasize the shape and form of the buildings and the public realm (e.g., street width and sidewalk frontages) as well as parking lot placement and pedestrian access. The relationship of buildings to streets is the most important thing to regulate in a form-based code so that the alignment and shape of buildings will form a “street wall” (composed of building frontages), and encourage a walkable and engaging urban environment. The standards include the following elements:

Building placement, building length, and building separation; Façade lengths and façade breaks;
Minimum frontage types;
Minimum and maximum building setbacks;
Minimum floor-to-floor height, and minimum ground-floor height above grade; Architectural encroachments (awnings, canopies, balconies, eaves, etc.); Placement of parking and the amount of parking;
Landscaping, streetscape, planters and trees; and
Sign regulations.

Maximum Building Heights: The draft Transit Villages Specific Plan includes very detailed and strict height limits. Most of the proposed districts will limit building heights to 2 or 3 stories maximum, in order to be consistent with nearby existing structures as well as provide appropriate transitioning of building heights. The proposed building height limits will be consistent with existing zoning standards. Note that the existing General Commercial (C-3) zoning, which covers large portions of the downtown area, presently has no maximum height limit. The standards will also be consistent with the existing Downtown Specific Plan’s current height limit of 55 feet in the downtown area. The proposed building heights in the draft Transit Villages Specific Plan are summarized below, by district (map of proposed TVSP zoning districts shown in Figure 1 below).

TVSP District Number of Stories Building Height
Neighborhood General 1 2 max. 30 ft. max.

Neighborhood General 2 2 max. 30 ft. max.

Village Corridor 2 max. 30 ft. max.

Downtown 3 max. 45 ft. max.

Village General 3 average 45 ft. average
Village Center 4 max. 55 ft. max.

Table 1. Proposed TVSP Building Height Limits
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 294 of 1815
Figure 1. Proposed TVSP Districts ("Regulating Plan")
The draft plan will NOT allow high-rise buildings (13 floors or above) and will NOT allow mid-rise buildings (6 to 12 floors). In fact, the majority of the Transit Villages Specific Plan area would be limited to 2 or 3 stories in most districts. Only the one district immediately surrounding the train stations (Village Center district) would allow up to 4 stories high maximum. The draft Transit Villages Specific Plan includes very specific and strict height limits, and if adopted, would put in place prescriptive height and building design requirements.

Architectural Design Guidelines: In addition to the detailed building form standards (such as distinct massing and articulation), a number of architectural styles and exterior treatments are encouraged in the design guidelines. The five recommended architectural styles are: Main Street Commercial; Craftsman; Mediterranean; Victorian; and California Contemporary. However, developers are not restricted to these five so long as the quality of design is equivalent, and they can explain how the proposal meets all development standards.

Parking Requirements: The parking requirements are based on general type of land use and the building type, and include specific requirements for retail uses, office uses, residential uses, hotels, etc. The parking categories are more limited than the requirements in the Redlands Municipal Code so that various uses may be interchangeable within the same building space over time (such as retail, restaurants, or office uses being able to rotate through the same space over time without being restricted by vastly different parking requirements). See pages 4:6 through 4:27 (Section D) for the parking requirements.

Landscape, Screening, and Public Art: Standards are included pertaining to on-site landscaping in required yard areas and open space areas, and also incorporates RMC Chapter 18.168 for landscape installation. Public art will be required in accordance with the City’s Art in Public Places program. Utilities, mechanical/electrical equipment, and service areas must be appropriately placed, screened, and architecturally-treated consistent with the development.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 295 of 1815
appropriately placed, screened, and architecturally-treated consistent with the development.

Sign Regulations: The TVSP includes unique sign regulations for the specific plan area, to include: porch sign, yard sign, awning sign, wall sign, projecting sign, building identification, window sign, sidewalk sign, roof sign, marquee, directory sign, temporary sign, and murals, among others. Regulations are included for mixed use projects to differentiate ground-floor tenants from upper-floor commercial tenants. It also incorporates the Measure U requirement for City Council approval of any sign exceeding 120 square-feet in size.

D) Public Improvements and Infrastructure

The four chapters following the Development Code provide the guidelines for implementation of public realm improvements. These chapters will be consistent with other applicable community plans, as follows.

Chapter 5: Transportation & Circulation: Chapter 5 explains the desired transportation and street improvements over the long-term as project sites develop, and emphasizing pedestrian improvements and bicycle network improvements. There is also a summary of the bus transit network and potential future alignments that may be desirable, specifically around the train station sites. This chapter provides conceptual cross-sections for streets to include Complete Streets concepts, such as for multiple users including pedestrians and bicyclists.

Chapter 6: Parking: Chapter 6 also includes concepts and proposals for sufficient public parking within each transit village, and incorporates the work previously completed for the Downtown Parking Study. It includes a number of recommended strategies for public parking on streets and public parking lots over the long-term as parking demand changes.

Chapter 6 incorporates the work previously completed by the City in 2017 for the Downtown Parking Study. Several of its recommendations included painting of previously unmarked on-street parking spaces (totaling up to 1,465 spaces) that are underutilized due to the absence of adequate striping and signage. Over the past two years, City departments have started implementing some of the recommendations by painting and marking existing spaces so they are more readily apparent to shoppers and others.

Chapter 7: Open Space & Landscape: Chapter 7 describes the improvements for the public realm (meaning the shared public spaces like sidewalks, plazas, and parklets) and includes landscaping guidelines. It provides suggested plant and tree palettes for streets, parkways, and medians. It also includes ideas for sustainable stormwater treatment, suggestions for improvements to freeway underpasses (including lighting and artwork), and wayfinding signage.

It incorporates the existing Mill Creek Zanja as well as the existing Orange Blossom Trail Plan and suggests pedestrian/bicycle trail options for these important features.

Chapter 8: Infrastructure: Chapter 8 describes public infrastructure (existing and potential future needs) for water supply, wastewater systems, storm drain systems, floodwater diversion alternatives, and sustainable stormwater management. It incorporates the City’s existing Master Plan of Drainage, as well as an additional engineering drainage study specifically prepared for the Transit Villages Specific Plan. Developers would be responsible for constructing public improvements immediately adjacent to their project site (i.e., requirements attached to a development project as mandatory Conditions of Approval), which typically includes public sidewalks, curbs and gutters, street paving improvements, storm drains, street trees, light poles, etc.

Chapter 9: Implementation: Chapter 9 includes strategies and recommendations for funding long-term public improvements associated with the transit villages, including common tools and funding sources used by public agencies. It also includes an explanation for administration of the Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 296 of 1815
Specific Plan (such as Specific Plan Amendments that may be needed in the future). The time frame for full buildout of the Specific Plan is likely to be 20 years or more, and development will occur on individual sites incrementally as it currently does throughout the City of Redlands. An entire village area will not immediately transform within five years, and redevelopment of the Mall site will likely require several years and multiple phases of construction.

Some public improvements such as implementing the bicycle network per the City’s new Sustainable Mobility Plan (previously the Bicycle Master Plan) are already under way, with funding sources including State transportation grants. Other public improvements such as completing segments of the Orange Blossom Trail per the City’s existing Orange Blossom Trail Plan are already under way, with funding sources including the existing capital improvement budget as well as grants. Some public improvements such as roadway bulb-outs, enhanced crosswalks, new medians, or new landscapes may take several years to implement depending on funding availability (such as State transportation or transit-oriented development grants) or deferring construction until new development occurs nearby.

E) General Plan Amendment
The project area currently contains a variety of General Plan land use designations: Commercial, High Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Commercial/Industrial, Public/Institutional, and Parks. The General Plan Land Use Map will need to be updated to show the proposed TVSP area and designate that area within the boundaries as “Transit Village” land use. In addition, some minor text changes are needed for certain General Plan policies and exhibits so that the Transit Villages Specific Plan will be consistent. These other amendments are listed in detail in the attached Resolution (see Attachment H).

The proposed Specific Plan would otherwise be consistent with numerous policies in the 2035 General Plan and effectively implement the Transit Village Concept in the General Plan. The proposed Specific Plan will be consistent and will implement more than 130 Policies and Actions from the 2035 General Plan (see Attachment C). These policies are directly or indirectly related to implementing the Transit Village Concept, and the Transit Village strategy is one of the main organizing principles in the 2035 General Plan.

F) Zone Map Update
Zone Change No. 475 is necessary to update the City’s official Zone Map to reflect the new district designations created by the Transit Villages Specific Plan (TVSP). The existing zoning designations (i.e., zoning from RMC Title 18) for properties within the TVSP area would be replaced by the proposed new TVSP districts: Village Center, Village General, Downtown, Village Corridor, Neighborhood General 1, Neighborhood General 2, Special District, or Civic Space.

In addition, the existing Downtown Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 45) will need to be rescinded so that it can be replaced by the Transit Villages Specific Plan. The entire area of the Downtown Specific Plan lies within the Transit Villages Specific Plan boundaries. The existing Downtown Specific Plan area would be replaced by the following TVSP districts: Village Center, Village General, Downtown (along east side of Orange St.), and Neighborhood General 1 (between 6th St. and Church St.).

G) Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Analysis

City Council Resolution No. 5579 states that General Plan Amendments, Specific Plans, and Specific Plan Amendments are exempt from the requirement for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study. However, given the significant interest in this project, a socio-economic model was prepared. Typically, only individual project proposals with certain discretionary actions for Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 297 of 1815
prepared. Typically, only individual project proposals with certain discretionary actions for developments exceeding 5,000 square feet would be required to prepare a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study pursuant to Resolution No. 5579.

Two buildout scenarios of the TVSP were analyzed by the model: full buildout (100%) of the anticipated project; and approximately half (50%) buildout of the anticipated project. Both scenarios are hypothetical (i.e., based on assumptions) for analysis purposes; actual future buildout of the TVSP may vary and be lower than the projections. Both scenarios would result in positive Cost/Benefit Ratios exceeding 1.0, which means that future development would provide a net gain of new revenues to the City for the provision and maintenance of public infrastructure and public services (i.e., for every $1.00 the City spends on infrastructure and public services, the City will receive significantly more than $1.00 in revenue from property taxes, sales taxes, fees for service, business license fees, and other revenues).

Scenario Residential
Uses
Non-Residential
Uses
Cost / Benefit Ratio
Full buildout
(100%) 2,400 DU
265,000 SF Retail/Commercial;
238,000 SF Office;
220 room Hotel
Residential: 2.06
Non-Residential: 4.71
Total Ratio: 2.44
Half buildout
(50%) 1,200 DU
132,500 SF Retail/Commercial;
119,000 SF Office;
110 room Hotel
Residential: 1.97
Non-Residential: 4.77
Total Ratio: 2.33
Table 2. Summary of Cost/Benefit Ratios
III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

A) Background

An EIR is intended to inform decision-makers and the general public of the potentially significant environmental impacts of a proposed project. The EIR also considers the availability of mitigation measures to minimize significant impacts and evaluates reasonable alternatives to the Proposed Project that may reduce or avoid one or more significant environmental effects. Based on the alternatives analysis, an environmentally superior alternative is identified.

This EIR is a programmatic EIR that examines the potential effects resulting from implementing designated land uses and anticipated future development projects in the draft Transit Villages Specific Plan (the “Proposed Project”). The impact assessment evaluates the Project as a whole and identifies the broad, regional effects that may occur with its implementation. As a programmatic document, this EIR does not assess site-specific impacts. Future development projects (if they are not consistent with the analysis in this EIR) may be subject to individual, site-specific environmental review, if required by State law. The EIR represents the best effort to evaluate the proposed Transit Village Specific Plan. The EIR evaluates the following topics required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Topics Analyzed: CEQA requires certain topics to be considered in environmental documents, and these 19 environmental topics are listed below:

1. Aesthetics

2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources

3. Air Quality

4. Biological Resources

5. Cultural Resources

6. Energy

7. Geology and Soils
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 298 of 1815

8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

10. Hydrology and Water Quality

11. Land Use and Planning

12. Mineral Resources

13. Noise

14. Population and Housing

15. Public Services

16. Recreation

17. Transportation

18. Tribal Cultural Resources

19. Wildfires
Determining Levels of Significance: A total of 56 criteria (required by CEQA) were utilized to measure the impacts of the proposed Project on the environment. For each potential environmental impact criteria identified in this EIR, a statement of the level of significance of the impact is provided. Impacts are assessed as one of the following categories:

The term “No Impact” is used when the environmental resource being discussed would not be adversely affected by implementation of the proposed Project. It means no or negligible change from existing environmental conditions. This impact level does not need mitigation measures.

A “Less Than Significant Impact” would cause a minor change in the physical environment but the impact would not meet or exceed the significance threshold. This impact level does not require mitigation measures, even if feasible. In addition, existing standard requirements implemented by Federal, State, or local laws and regulations also serve as mitigating factors. In addition, project design features or existing General Plan policies can avoid creating any significant impacts, and likewise do not require additional mitigation measures.

A “Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation” is an effect that may cause a substantial adverse effect on the environment, however, there are feasible mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level (i.e., after mitigation measures are applied to reduce the impact). Mitigation measures would be specific for the proposed Project, would be crafted to reduce the unique impact identified in the EIR, and they would be included in the Project as mandatory Conditions of Approval.

A “Significant and Unavoidable Impact” would cause a substantial adverse effect on the environment, and no known feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. Under CEQA, a project with significant and unavoidable impacts may be approved, but the Lead Agency (in this case, the City) must prepare findings of fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations in accordance with Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, explaining how the benefits of the project outweigh the potential for significant impacts.

The results of the EIR analysis are summarized in Section D below.

B) Notice of Preparation

The first step in beginning the EIR process is the circulation of a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”).

An Initial Study was also prepared to accompany the NOP and to provide preliminary analysis of the environmental topics proposed to be included in the EIR analysis. The NOP process provides a 30-day public comment period to allow members of the public and other agencies the opportunity to provide early comments on the scope of the environmental analysis. A total of 30 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 299 of 1815
opportunity to provide early comments on the scope of the environmental analysis. A total of 30 written comments were received.

During the NOP process, several topic areas were scoped out of the EIR process as it could be seen with certainty there would not be any potential effects on the environment. These were:

Agricultural and Forestry Resources; Biological Resources; Mineral Resources; and Wildfires.

Therefore, the EIR does not further analyze these topics.

Following the 30-day NOP comment period, the consultant began work on the technical studies (e.g., traffic, air quality, greenhouse gases, noise, cultural resources, etc.) and began writing the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”) document. As a result of the NOP and Initial Study, several topics were determined to not require any further analysis in the EIR as there was no possibility of any environmental effects related to those topics. The topics that were “scoped out” of the EIR were: Agriculture and Forestry Resources; Biological Resources; Mineral Resources; and Wildfire. Therefore, the remaining 15 topics were analyzed in detail on the Draft EIR.

Public Scoping Meeting: A public Scoping Meeting was held on September 15, 2021, at 5:00 p.m. as a virtual meeting on Zoom (due to the current pandemic). A total of ten persons participated in the meeting and provided comments to the City’s environmental consultant.

Project Description: The proposed project description (i.e., buildout assumptions) to be used for preparation of the technical studies and Draft EIR are as follows:

Up to 2,400 dwelling units throughout the TVSP area;
Up to 238,000 square-feet of office floor space in the TVSP area; Up to 265,000 square-feet of retail and commercial floor space in the TVSP area; Hotel use with up to 220 guest rooms; and
Various public realm, infrastructure, and multi-modal transportation improvements.

C) Notice of Availability

The Draft EIR (Attachment D) was completed in summer 2022, and the Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of Availability (NOA) were released on July 20, 2022. A legal advertisement circulating the NOA was published in the Redlands Daily Facts on July 20, 2022. The NOA and a copy of the Draft EIR were posted at the County Clerk’s Office on July 20, 2022. The NOA was published in the Redlands Daily Facts on July 20, 2022, as a display ad. The Draft EIR and related documents and notices were distributed to the State Clearinghouse (Governor’s Office of Planning & Research) on July 20, 2022, and subsequently circulated to State agencies for review and comment.

The 45-day public review and comment period began on July 21, 2022, and ended on September 6, 2022 (a total of 48 days due to a holiday during that time). Printed copies of the Draft EIR and related appendices (technical studies) were distributed to the A.K. Smiley Public Library, the City Clerk’s Office, and the Planning Division public counter. The Draft EIR and appendices were also made available on the City’s Planning Division website ( https://www.cityofredlands.org/post/environmental-documents) and the State Clearinghouse website (https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2021080622).

D) Summary of Environmental Impacts

The EIR found that there were No Impacts to 22 criteria, Less Than Significant Impacts to 31 criteria, and Significant and Unavoidable Impacts to three (3) criteria. See Table 3 below for a summary. Those topics for which a Significant and Unavoidable Impacts were found applied to Air Quality and Transportation. The significant impact to Transportation (in terms of Vehicle Miles Traveled) was for only one portion of the TVSP project area that contains the area around the Tri Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 300 of 1815
Traveled) was for only one portion of the TVSP project area that contains the area around the Tri City Center shopping center (which is the farthest from any train stations); however, that impact might only occur when (or if) the Tri City Center area ever redevelops with higher-intensity uses as permitted by the TVSP. If that area never redevelops, then there would be no impact to Transportation compared to today's environmental conditions.

Environmental Topic Criteria
Evaluated
No Impact Less Than
Significant Impact
Significant and
Unavoidable Impact

5.1 Aesthetics 4 1 3 --

5.2 Air Quality 4 1 1 2

5.3 Cultural Resources 3 1 2 --

5.4 Energy 2 1 1 --

5.5 Geology & Soils 4 3 1 --

5.6 Greenhouse Gases 2 -- 2 --

5.7 Hazards & Hazardous Materials 7 6 1 --

5.8 Hydrology & Water Quality 5 3 2 --

5.9 Land Use & Planning 2 1 1 --

5.10 Noise 3 1 2 --

5.11 Population & Housing 2 1 1 --

5.12 Public Services 5 1 4 --

5.13 Recreation 2 -- 2 --

5.14 Transportation 2 -- 1 1

5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources 2 -- 2 --

5.16 Utilities & Service Systems 7 2 5 --
TOTALS: 56 22 31 3
Table 3. Summary of Environmental Impacts
E) Alternatives Analyzed
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) mandates consideration and analysis of alternatives to the Proposed Project. According to CEQA Guidelines, the range of alternatives “shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic purposes of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant impacts” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(d)(2)). The discussion must also include an evaluation of the No Project Alternative to allow decision-makers to compare the impacts of approving the Proposed Project against the impacts of not approving it.

In much of Redlands, alternative land uses are limited in several ways. First, there is geography.

The Redlands Planning Area is bordered by the incorporated cities of Loma Linda (west), San Bernardino (north), Highland (north), and Yucaipa (east), and cannot expand in those directions.

Riverside County is to the south and the City limit cannot cross County boundaries. The Santa Ana River Wash, Crafton Hills, and San Timoteo Canyons (which define borders with the surrounding jurisdictions) also form natural boundaries to urban growth. Second, the City is approaching 90% buildout. There is little undeveloped land remaining that can support a variety of large development scenarios. Third, Measure U provides fairly strict limitations on the type of development that can occur on the remaining undeveloped land. For these reasons, alternative scenarios in Redlands are limited.

The preferred plan, the proposed Project (the “Transit Villages Specific Plan”), can best be described as emphasizing infill development and redevelopment in the City’s core areas – Downtown, along Redlands Boulevard, around the Esri campus, and south of the University of Redlands campus. On the periphery of the City, the 2035 General Plan emphasizes the preservation of open space and agricultural land, as well as controlling and minimizing further Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 301 of 1815
sprawling development (such as conversion of productive agricultural land or open space to new single-family subdivisions).

Chapter 6 of the EIR explains the three Alternatives that were analyzed and provides a detailed discussion of the environmental impacts compared among the three alternatives.

1. No Project /
Buildout of
Existing Zoning
Under the No Project alternative, the existing zoning (RMC Title 18) and Downtown Specific Plan (Specific Plan 45) remain as they are today, and the proposed Transit Villages Specific Plan is not adopted. There would be no changes to the existing zoning, and future development projects would be built in compliance with the current zoning regulations.

2. Reduced
Specific Plan
Area
Under this alternative, the New York Street Village area is slightly reduced and there would be a 25% reduction to the buildout of residential and non-residential floor areas in the New York Street Village. The Downtown Village and University Village areas remain largely unchanged, and full buildout of future developments in Downtown Village and University Village areas could proceed.

3. Reduced
Development
Intensity
Under this alternative, a 60% reduction in the number of dwelling units, retail commercial uses, and office uses would be developed within each proposed Transit Village (i.e., up to 960 dwelling units, 88 hotel rooms, 106,000 square-feet of retail commercial, and 95,200 square-feet of office uses through the year 2040).

Table 4. Summary of Alternatives
The EIR analyzed each alternative according to the criteria of the environmental topics. More detail on the analysis can be found in the Table 6-1 of the EIR (see Attachment D).

Summary of Alternatives: The Proposed Project would have significant and unavoidable impacts in two topics, Air Quality and Transportation. The proposed Specific Plan would fully implement the goals and objectives of the 2035 General Plan including the Transit Villages concept and strategy.

The three alternatives, for the most part, would have similar environmental impacts as the Proposed Project. Two of the alternatives (the Reduced Specific Plan Area alternative and the Reduced Intensity alternative) would have slightly fewer impacts in six (6) or seven (7) topic areas, respectively, but would not fully implement the vision of the 2035 General Plan for new Transit Villages in the core areas of Redlands. A Transit Villages Specific Plan implemented on a smaller scale, as explained in these two alternatives, would make the plan less likely to encourage or attract the types of compact and pedestrian-scale projects that contribute to successful downtowns and transit-oriented developments.

The No Project alternative (i.e., future development under existing zoning and the existing Downtown Specific Plan) would encourage “business as usual” under existing zoning, with unrestrained growth and sprawl around the periphery of the city. This alternative would generate more severe and significant impacts to Transportation because of the greater amounts of motor vehicle trips and Vehicle Miles Traveled that would result from less compact development that is more spread out using the traditional zoning method (i.e., discourages pedestrians, bicycles, and transit use). This alternative would also be more likely to result in the continued loss of agricultural land and open space around the city’s periphery, as well as the associated environmental impacts (such as increased traffic and Vehicle Miles Traveled, air quality and greenhouse gas impacts, increased water use, expansion and maintenance costs for public infrastructure, and other impacts).

F) Final EIR

The Final EIR (see Attachment E) consists of the Draft EIR, comments received on the Draft EIR, and the responses to those comments. The primary purpose of the Final EIR is to respond to comments received during the 45-day public review period of the Draft EIR. The review period for the Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2021080622) was July 21, 2022, to September 6, 2022. There are no revisions to the Draft EIR as a result of the comments; however, a few Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 302 of 1815
typographical errors were corrected.

Public Comments Received: A total of 23 written comments have been received (two agencies, two organizations, and 19 individuals or residents). Four of the comments were received late (after the deadline of 5:30 PM on September 6, 2022); however, they are included in the Final EIR and responses to comments.

Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program: A Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (“MMRP”) is included in the Executive Summary that summarizes all mitigation measures as well as the outline program for monitoring the future implementation of each mitigation measure.

G) Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Consideration

CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093, state no public agency shall approve a project for which a certified EIR identifies one or more significant environmental effects unless the agency makes findings regarding each effect. These findings can show that significant environmental effects can be avoided or substantially lessened by changes required in or incorporated into the project or by changes that are within the responsibility or jurisdiction of another public agency and that can or should be adopted.

Findings can also be made of specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities that make the mitigation measures or project alternatives infeasible. In addition, findings are required if specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects. In such a situation, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable” and the project approved. The proposed Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Consideration are included as Attachment F (note that the three Significant and Unavoidable Impacts are in the topics of Air Quality and Transportation only).

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council can continue the proposal and direct staff to address any further issues.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

The proposed Transit Villages Specific Plan, if approved, will implement or support the following goals in the Strategic Plan.

Priority A: Quality of Life. Ensure Redlands continues to be a vibrant community that honors its heritage and provides a broad range of opportunities to live, work and play.

Objective 2: Economic Vitality
Implement policies and programs to expand the City’s affordable housing opportunities.

Encourage redevelopment efforts in the transit corridor (i.e. University Village and mall site).

Priority D: Sustainability. Preserve and protect what makes Redlands special by maintaining core services, infrastructure and community values.

Objective 3: Infrastructure
Engineer and construct transportation facilities to accommodate all potential users – motorists, cyclists and pedestrians.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 303 of 1815
SUBMITTED BY:

Brian Desatnik, Development Services Director
RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
PREPARED BY:

Brian Foote, City Planner/Planning Manager
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year: 22-23
Appropriation Required Y/N: No
Discussion:

There is no fiscal impact associated with the adoption of the Transit Villages Specific Plan. The City has been reimbursed for the cost of preparing the Specific Plan by a Sustainable Communities Grant from the California Department of Transportation. The City will be reimbursed for the cost of preparing the Environmental Impact Report by a Senate Bill 2 (SB 2) Planning Grant and a portion of a Local Early Action Planning (LEAP) Grant from the California Department of Housing & Community Development.

Attachments
Attachment A: Transit Villages Area Boundary Map
Attachment B: Transit Villages Specific Plan
Attachment B-1: Chapter 1 - Introduction
Attachment B-2: Chapter 2 - Vision
Attachment B-3: Chapter 3 - Redlands Mall
Attachment B-4: Chapter 4 - Development Code
Attachment B-5: Chapter 5 - Transportation
Attachment B-6: Chapter 6 - Parking
Attachment B-7: Chapter 7 - Open Space and Landscape
Attachment B-8: Chapter 8 - Infrastructure
Attachment B-9: Chapter 9 - Implementation
Attachment C: List of General Plan Policies and Actions Attachment D: Draft Environmental Impact Report
Attachment E: Final Environmental Impact Report
Attachment F: EIR Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Consideration Attachment G: Resolution No. 8399 (Environmental Determination) Attachment G-1: Exhibit A (Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations) Attachment G-3: Exhibit B (Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program) Attachment H: Resolution No. 8401 (General Plan Amendment) Attachment I: Resolution No. 8400 (Transit Villages Specific Plan) Attachment J: Ordinance No. 2947 (Zone Change)
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 304 of 1815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 305 of 1815
Redlands Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California
20 February 2020
1 Station Area Boundaries
1/2 Mile
10 Minute Walk
1/4 Mile
5 Minute Walk
Church St.

Route 10
Colton Ave. Texas St.

Brookside Ave.

Eureka St.Orange St.

University St.

Route 10
Redlands Blvd.

Citrus Ave.

Tennessee St.

New York St.

Brockton Ave.

Lugonia Ave
Judson St.

Cajon St.

Olive Ave.

Gorgonio Dr.

Ash St.

Pine Ave.

Kansas St.

Redlands Blvd.

Alabama St.

Route 10
Cypress Ave.

State St.

San
State St.

Michigan
Citrus Ave. Esri Downtown
University of
Redlands
New York Street/
Esri Station Downtown
Station
University Street
Station
Arrow Passenger Rail
New York Street/Esri Station Area
Downtown Station Area
University Street Station Area
LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 306 of 1815
Chapters in the Transit Villages Specific Plan
Policy Framework and Vision

1. Introduction 1.1 Context

1.2 Specific Plan Location and Boundaries

1.3 Plan Purpose

1.4 Plan Preparation Process

1.5 Relationship to the General Plan and Other Plans

1.6 Existing Conditions

1.7 Constraints & Opportunities

2. Vision 2.1 Principles of Transit-Oriented Development

2.2 The Plan

2.3 New York Street Station Area

2.4 Downtown Station Area

2.5 University Station Area

2.6 Building Types

3. Redlands Mall 3.1 Principles of Transit-Oriented Development

3.2 Existing Conditions

3.3 Vision
Development Standards and Requirements

4. Development Code 4.1 Purpose and Applicability

4.2 Regulating Plan, Zones, and Land Uses

4.3 Development Standards

4.4 On-Site Open Space Standards

4.5 Building Articulation and Massing Standards

4.6 Frontage Standards

4.7 Building Design Standards

4.8 Emergency Shelter Standards

4.9 Signage Standards

4.10 Services and Utilities Placement and Screening

4.11 On-Site Landscape and Outdoor Lighting Standards

4.12 Parking Design Standards

4.13 Sustainable Storm Water Management Guidelines

4.14 Block Design Standards

4.15 Special Lot Conditions

4.16 Street and Streetscape Design Standards

4.17 Park, Plaza, and Open Space Design Standards
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 307 of 1815
Public Improvements & Infrastructure

5. Transportation 5.1 Transportation Objectives

5.2 Transportation and Circulation Improvements

5.3 Pedestrian Improvements

5.4 Bicycle Improvements

5.5 Transit Network

5.6 Street Types

6. Parking 6.1 Parking Objectives

6.2 Parking Management

6.3 Downtown Parking Strategy and Improvements

6.4 New York Street/Esri Station Area Parking Improvements

6.5 University Village Parking Improvements

7. Public Realm of Open
Space and Landscape

7.1 Public Realm Objectives

7.2 Public Realm Improvements

7.3 Open Space and Streetscape

7.4 Trees and Planting

7.5 Downtown Station Area

7.6 New York Street/Esri Station Area

7.7 University Station Area

7.8 Wayfinding Signage

8. Infrastructure 8.1 Infrastructure Objectives

8.2 Infrastructure Improvements

8.3 Potable Water

8.4 Non-potable (Recycled) Water System

8.5 Wastewater System

8.6 Floodwater and Drainage

8.7 Sustainable Stormwater Management and Strategies

8.8 Dry Utilities
Implementation & Administration

9. Implementation 9.1 Specific Plan Implementation Background

9.2 Specific Plan Implementation Recommendations

9.3 Implementation Framework

9.4 Specific Plan Administration

9.5 Entitlement and Permit Process
Entire document available on project website at:
https://redlandstransitvillages.org/resources/
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 308 of 1815
Prepared by:

Moule & Polyzoides Architects and Urbanists
for
City of Redlands

REDLANDS TRANSIT VILLAGES SPECIFIC PLAN
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 11, 2022
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 309 of 1815

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
Funding in part provided by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) through the Sustainable Communities Grant Program.

TEAM PARTICIPANTS

CITY OF REDLANDS
35 Cajon Street, Suite 20
Redlands, California 92373
Paul W. Foster, Mayor
Denise Davis, Mayor Pro Tem
Paul Barich, Council Member
Toni Momberger, Council Member
Eddie Tejeda, Council Member
Charles M. Duggan, Jr., City Manager
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Brian Desatnik, Director of Development Services Department Brian Foote, Planning Manager/City Planner, Development Services Department, Project Manager Catherine Lin, Principal Planner, Development Services Department Don Young, Engineering Manager, Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department

MOULE & POLYZOIDES ARCHITECTS AND URBANISTS
Stefanos Polyzoides, Partner
Vinayak Bharne, Principal
Juan Gomez-Novy, Project Manager and Development Code
Nicole Cotes
Sen Wang

IAN ESPINOZA ASSOCIATES
Ian Espinosa, Founder

STUDIO-MLA
Jan Dyer, Principal
Yong Kim, Senior Associate
Manuel Merino, Associate

NELSON/NYGAARD
Paul Moore, Principal
Roger Pardo, Associate
MK Planning
Michael R. Kodama, President
Crabtree Group
Paul Crabtree, Principal

HR&A ADVISORS
Amitabh Barthakur, Partner
Jane Carlson, Principal
City Council
City Staff
Urban Design/Code
Architectural Renderings
Landscape Architecture
Transportation
Parking
Civil Engineering
Economic and Market Analysis
Copyright © 2020 City of Redlands. All rights reserved. This document may be downloaded, printed, and shared without permission for personal use or for purposes of obtaining a permit, project entitlement, or other City of Redlands building and development related purposes. For all other uses, permission of the City of Redlands is required.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 310 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

iii
_______, 2020: Approved by City Council, Resolution No. _______ CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:1

1.2. Specific Plan Location and Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:3

1.3. Plan Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:4

1.4 Plan Preparation Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:5

1.5 Relationship to Other Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:6

1.6 Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:12

1.7 Constraints and Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:21 CHAPTER 2: VISION

2.0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:1

2.1. Principles of Transit Oriented Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:2

2.2. The Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:4

2.3. New York Street Station Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:6

2.4. Downtown Station Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:11

2.5. University Street Station Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:18

2.6. Building Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:26 CHAPTER 3: REDLANDS MALL

3.0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3:1

3.1. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3:2

3.2. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3:4

3.3. Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3:5 CHAPTER 4: DEVELOPMENT CODE

4.0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:1

4.1. Purpose and Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:2

4.2. Regulating Plan, Zones, and Land Use Standards . . . . . . . . . 4:4

4.3. Development Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:15

4.4. On-Site Open Space and Fence/Wall Standards . . . . . . . . . . . 4:28

4.5. Building Articulation and Massing Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:34

4.6. Frontage Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:37

4.7. Building Design Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:44

4.8. Emergency Shelter Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:52

4.9. Signage Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:53

4.10. Service and Utility Placement Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:62

4.11. On-Site Landscape, Outdoor Lighting,
and Public Art Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:63

4.12. Parking Design Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:64

4.13. Sustainable Stormwater Management Guidelines . . . . . . . . . 4:67

4.14. Block and Special Lot Design Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:68

4.15. Street and Streetscape Design Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:72

4.16. Park, Plaza, and Open Space Design Standards . . . . . . . . . . 4:74 CHAPTER 5: TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

5.0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5:1

5.1. Transportation Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5:2

5.2. Transportation and Circulation Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . 5:2

5.3. Pedestrian Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5:4

5.4. Bicycle Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5:6

5.5. Transit Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5:9

5.6. Street Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5:13 CHAPTER 6: PARKING

6.0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:1

6.1. Parking Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:2

6.2. Parking Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:3

6.3. Downtown Parking Strategy and Improvements . . . . . . . . . . 6:4

6.4. New York Street/esri Station Area Parking
Strategy and Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:10

6.5. University Village Parking Improvements .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:12 CHAPTER 7: PUBLIC REALM OF OPEN SPACE AND

LANDSCAPE

7.0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7:1

7.1. Public Realm Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7:2

7.2. Public Realm Improvements Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7:2

7.3. Open Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7:4

7.4. Streetscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7:10

7.5. Trees and Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7:18

7.6. Sustainable Stormwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7:22

7.7. Underpasses Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7:23

7.8. Mill Creek Zanja and Ornage Blossom Trail . . . . . . . . . . 7:23

7.9. Wayfinding Signage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7:25 CHAPTER 8: INFRASTRUCTURE

8.0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8:1

8.1. Infrastructure Objectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8:2

8.2. Infrastructure Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8:2

8.3. Potable Water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8:2

8.4. Non-potable (Recycled) Water System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8:4

8.5. Wastewater System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8:4

8.6. Floodwaters and Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8:6

8.7. Sustainable Stormwater Management and Strategies . . . . . . 8:11

8.8. Dry Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8:11 CHAPTER 9: IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION

9.0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9:1

9.1. Specific Plan Implementation Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9:1

9.2. Specific Plan Implementation Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . 9:1

9.3. Implementation Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9:2

9.4. Specific Plan Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9:6

REDLANDS TRANSIT VILLAGES SPECIFIC PLAN
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 311 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 312 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:1
After an extensive visioning and public engagement process, the City Council adopted the 2035 General Plan on December 5, 2017. A central component of the 2035 General Plan is the “Transit Villages Concept” and the creation of transit villages around the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority’s (SBCTA) Arrow Passenger Rail line, which is expected to begin operating in 2021-22, and will provide passenger rail service between Redlands and the San Bernardino Transit Center. Of the five train stops planned within Redlands, three are slated to be built in time for the opening of Arrow service: the University Station (adjacent to the University of Redlands campus), the Downtown Redlands Station (at the historic Santa Fe Depot), and the New York Street/Esri Station (near the Esri campus).

This Transit Villages Specific Plan implements the 2035 General Plan’s transit village strategy for the University of Redlands, Downtown Redlands, and New York Street stations, providing policies, a vision, detailed land use and building standards, architectural and landscape guidelines, and public realm and circulation plans for the areas located within approximately one-half mile of the three proposed stations. Each of these Transit Villages has its own unique character, reflecting the setting, character, history, architecture, and land uses within it. Typical characteristics of these villages, include: development intensities that place lots of people within walking distance to transit; tree-lined, pedestrian-friendly streets that provide safe and comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access to the stations; buildings that face and are accessed from the adjacent sidewalk, with on-site parking located behind; and convenient access to neighborhood-serving retail and servicess; and a transportation network that encourages and facilitates intermodal service and access.

Transit Villages result in a variety of public benefits, including: reduced traffic congestion; improved air quality; revitalization of neighborhoods and districts; living and travel options for people who rely on transit; additional job opportunities; and development within the core areas of the city, rather than on agricultural and open space land around the periphery of the city.

This Introduction Chapter consists of the following sections:

1.1. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:1

1.2. Specific Plan Location and Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:3

1.3. Plan Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:4

1.4 Plan Preparation Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:5

1.5 Relationship to Other Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:6

1.6 Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:12

1.7 Constraints and Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:21 Redlands Passenger Rail “Arrow” Train
Transit Villages Land Use Map from 2035 General Plan
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 313 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:2

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT

1.1. BACKGROUND
The vision for development within the Redlands Transit Villages Specific Plan area is derived from town planning principles used to build great small towns all across America prior to World War II. These towns were small and compact and provided a true balance between town and country: they centered around a mixed-use downtown, which in turn was surrounded by a ring of residential neighborhoods; on the outskirts were farms and ranches; beyond the farms was pure untrammeled wilderness. All aspects of these towns – from their overall size, to the dimensions of their blocks, to the design of their sidewalks, to the scale of their buildings – were designed to serve the pedestrian. While people did use trains, streetcars, and automobiles to get to their destination or to travel longer distances, the principle method of getting around at their destination was by foot. Accordingly, ithe public realm of beautiful streets and spacious public parks of these towns was just as important as the buildings which defined the public realm’s edges.

Redlands was one of these small towns. It was laid out on a rectilinear grid of blocks approximately 250 to 400 feet in dimension with the majority of the blocks being bisected by alleys. The block pattern and size was walkable, promoting easy navigation and providing multiple ways of getting from place to place. Redlands was served by the Southern Pacific and Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroads, which connected Redlands to San Francisco and to the rest of the United States, and the Pacific Electric Railway, which connected Redlands to San Bernardino, Downtown Los Angeles, and other Southern California destinations.

Homes were designed with their fronts facing the street and their backs oriented towards the alley. Thus, the more public rooms of the house, such as the parlor and dining room, faced the street. Service rooms such as the kitchen and bathrooms faced the sideyards or towards the alley. Entry doors, accessed by way of a porch or stoop, always faced State Street looking west towards Orange Street during the 1940s. State Street beyond the Security First National Bank building was vacated in 1977 to make room for the Redlands Mall (A.K. Smiley Public Library Archives). 1888 Birdseye view of Redlands looking southeast. Redlands provided a true balance between town and country. The original crossroads or “100% corner” occurs at the intersection of State Street and Orange Street (A.K. Smiley Public Library Archives).

State Street looking toward Mt. San Bernardino. Three- and four-story high buildings have articulated facades and varied massing to ensure they maintain a human-scale (A.K. Smiley Public Library Archives).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 314 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:3
the street. The porch, forming a clear transition between the public world of the street and the private realm of the home, also provided a comfortable and shady place for residents to relax on warm summer days and to socialize with passing neighbors.

Commercial buildings followed the same set of principles. Their streetfacing facades were constructed of quality and durable materials and expressed the particular uses of the building. Ground floors, generally retail in use, had easily identifiable entrances and large storefront windows to display the wares sold inside. Upper floor windows, smaller in size and usually vertical in orientation, conveyed the residential or office uses that occurred inside. Many of these buildings were three and four stories in height, but employed varied massing (including towers), frontage types (shopfronts, arcades, stoops, ), and architectural elements such as rafter tails, cornices, awnings, and assorted window types and sizes that ensured that the massing and height was varied, interesting, and human-scaled. Storage and garbage facilities were found at the back of the building.

The town planning and architecture of Redlands embodied a civic spirit that represented a genuine pride of place. Civic leaders, owners, designers, and the community recognized that this sense of place was dependent on the creation of a public realm of great streets, great open spaces, and the relationship of beautiful buildings to these streets and open spaces.

Since World War II, however, the town and country character of Redlands has been eroded and compromised by car-oriented, low-density, single land use approach to city design (sprawl) The introduction of the I-10 freeway in the 1960s separated the neighborhoods north of Downtown from Downtown and devalued the value of properties adjacent to the freeway. The construction of the Redlands Mall in 1977 demolished six blocks of Downtown’s traditional urban fabric including the removal of State Street between Orange Street and Eureka Street, resulting in the loss of Downtown’s “100% corner.” The new mall building, located at the center of a megablock and surrounded by surface parking, degraded the pedestrian and urban character of the street. Today the mall sits vacant. In addition, much of the farmland and open space at Redlands periphery has been replaced with single-family houses, apartment buildings, strip malls, and office, and industrial parks. The growth management measures of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s were in response to the rapid growth on Redlands’ periphery. Meanwhile – whether due to the market realities of up to now it being less expensive to build low-density development at the edge, or the overbearing presence of the freeway, or the fact that many of these parcels are located within the 100 year floodplain – many parcels in the city center remain vacant and underutilized.

The 2035 General Plan seeks to rectify this disparity by encouraging development in the center of town around the soon to be built Redlands Passenger Rail stations at New York Street/Esri, Downtown, and University Street. This Specific Plan implements this General Plan objective by providing the road map for introducing up to 2,000 residential units and 500,000 square feet of commercial space on the largely vacant parcels located around the proposed Redlands Passenger Rail stations.

The traditional urban fabric and buildings that are still in place have much to teach us. After all, the desire of communities to preserve their historic buildings, neighborhoods, and districts is a testament to the power and spirit of this traditional urban fabric. Indeed, these historic buildings and neighborhoods are not preserved merely because they are old, but also because of their transcending place-making characteristics.

The spirit of these traditional buildings, neighborhoods, and districts is the inspiration for the vision and implementing development code of this Transit Villages Specific Plan.

Redlands and vicinity in 2019.

BIRDSEYE VIEW OF REDLANDS 2019
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 315 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:4
FIGURE 1-1. REGIONAL LOCATION.

1.2. SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATION AND BOUNDARIES
A. Regional Location. Redlands is located at the base of the San Bernardino Mountains in San Bernardino County, 60 miles northeast of Los Angeles and 45 miles west of Palm Springs. Redlands is a mid-sized city with a 2016 population of 68,049 (see Figure 1-1).

Redlands is situated along the Interstate 10 (I-10) freeway corridor, which links the city with the cities of San Bernardino, Ontario, and Los Angeles to the west and Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley to the east. Interstate 210 (I-210), or the Foothill Freeway, originates in Redlands, traverses the northwest part of the city, and heads west towards Pasadena.

B. The Specific Plan Area. The Specific Plan applies to parcels located within approximately one-half mile, or a 10-minute walk, of the New York Street, Downtown Redlands, and University Street. Arrow passenger rail stations (see Figure 1-2). The Specific Plan area is generally bounded to the west by Kansas Street, Redlands Boulevard, Alabama Street, and Tennessee Street; to the north by the I-10 Freeway Colton Avenue, and Sylvan Boulevard; to the east by Judson Street; and to the south by Citrus Avenue, Central Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, Olive Avenue, Brookside Avenue, Ash Street, Pine Avenue, Tennessee Street, and State Street. The Specific Plan area also includes the parcels along both sides of Orange Street between Colton Avenue and Lugonia Avenue.

C. Redlands Passenger Rail Project. Metrolink commuter rail service currently links San Bernardino to Downtown Los Angeles. The San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) has started construction on the Redlands Passenger Rail, also called Arrow, which will provide rail transit between Redlands and the San Bernardino Transit Center. Using the former Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway right-of-way, the nine mile long route will initially provide three stations in Redlands: New York Street/Esri, Downtown Redlands, and University Street near the University of Redlands.

Stations at Alabama and California Streets will be constructed in later phases.

D. Specific Plan Transit Villages. The Specific Plan area is divided into three Transit Villages: New York Street/Esri, Downtown, and University Street (see Figure 1-2). The New York Street/Esri Station Area is located generally west of Texas Street and Center Street. The Downtown Station Area is generally bounded to the east by Church Street, and to the west by Texas Street, and includes the parcels along both sides of Orange Street between Colton Avenue and Lugonia Avenue. The University Street Station Area is located east of Church Street and west of Judson Street. Each of these station area has its own unique character, and this Specific Plan provides land use, development, and public realm standards that ensure each transit village develops according to (or establishes) its unique character. Land uses – particularly retail – should not compete with those of the other villages.

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
Redlands Passenger Rail vehicle and Route Map.

Los Angeles
Pasadena
Burbank
Santa
Clarita
Santa
Monica
Inglewood
Torrance
Downey
Anaheim
Long
Beach
Cerritos
Fullerton
West
Covina
Pomona Ontario
Chino
San
Fernando
Beverly
Hills
Orange
Santa
Ana
Irvine
Newport
Beach
Huntington Beach
Manhattan
Beach
El Segundo Hawthorne
Fontana
San
Bernardino
Redlands
Corona
Riverside
Jurupa
Valley
Moreno Valley
Yucaipa
Lake
Forest
Laguna
Niguel
Laguna
Beach
San
Clemente
Temecula
Murrieta
Lake
Elsinore
Menifee
Perris San
Jacinto
Winchester
Hemet
Beaumont Banning
Cherry
Valley
Big
Bear
Yucca
Valley
Palm
Springs
Rancho
Mirage
Palm
Desert Indio
Dana
Point
Rancho
Palos Verde
Monterey
Park
Alhambra Covina Clairmont
Arcadia
Baldwin
Park
Rancho
Cucamonga
Yorba
Linda Placentia
Carson
South
Gate
Culver
City
Whittier
Glendale
Norwalk
El Monte
Compton
Victorville
Palmdale
Montebello
An geles National For es t
S an B ernadino National For es t
Joshua Tree
Nationa l P ar k
S anta R os a
an d
S an Jacint o
M ountai ns
Nationa l
Monumen t
Rialto
Cle v elan d
Nationa l
For es t
C le v elan d
Nationa l
For es t
Joshua
Tree
Cathedral
City
243
10 10
79 74
111
74 371
79 76
79 10
10 5
5 5
5 5
405
405
405
605
605
710
110
105
210
210
210
15 15
215
215
60 15
215
91 60
66 60
71 57
1 1
1 1
110
110
101
101
14 138 18
138
22 74
241
133
58 58 241
74 73
405
18 395
247
247
18 62
62 38
15 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 316 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:5

1.3. PLAN PURPOSE
This Redlands Transit Villages Specific Plan (TVSP) is enacted by ordinance on the authority vested in the City of Redlands by the State of California, including but not limited to the State Constitution; the Planning and Zoning Law (Government Code Section 65000 et seq.), and the City’s 2035 General Plan and Municipal Code. The specific plan enables a community to define a clear and specific vision for the future evolution of a specified planning area. This Specific Plan provides a “road map” for growth and change for the plan area until the year 2040.

It is comprised of unique and customized standards that enable the City to shape or reshape its streets and public spaces and property owners to develop or redevelop their properties according to the vision of the Specific Plan. It guides public and private reinvestment and construction in a highly coordinated and integrated way in order to yield specific types of urban places that are the result of discussion, debate, and ultimately consensus by a majority of the community.

When development projects within the Specific Plan area are reviewed by the City, staff will use this Specific Plan as a primary means of evaluating them. Projects will be judged on their consistency with this Specific Plan’s vision and policies and for conformance with its development standards as contained in its Development Code. For projects within the specific plan area, the standards in this Specific Plan shall take precedence over more general policies and standards applied throughout the rest of the City, unless otherwise stated in the City of Redlands Municipal Code or the 2035 General Plan. In situations where policies or standards relating to a particular subject have not been provided in this Specific Plan, the applicable policies and standards of the currently adopted 2035 General Plan and Title 18 of the Municipal Code (Zoning Regulations) shall govern.

The result of extensive community outreach, debate, and consensus building, this Specific Plan guides and focuses public investment over time on essential infrastructure and streetscape projects that, in turn, will incentivize private parties to improve their property with the certainty that they are supported by long-term public commitment.

The primary purposes of this Specific Plan are to define:

1. A vision for the future of the three station areas that recognizes the importance of Redlands’ unique history and tradition while embracing opportunities for continued reinvestment, growth, and beneficial change.

2. Application of the General Plan’s goals, policies, and actions to achieve the revitalization of the Plan Area.

3. New form-based zoning standards for the Plan Area that will replace current zoning regulations. These new standards are calibrated to deliver new development that is consistent with Redlands’ physical character, history, and culture, as well as the community’s vision for its future growth.

4. An implementation strategy for transforming the Plan Area’s streets, infrastructure, parks, and other public spaces.

The above purposes provide private property owners with a clear understanding of the future context within which they are investing and reinvesting in their properties.

FIGURE 1-2. SPECIFIC PLAN STATION AREAS
LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Arrow Passenger Rail
New York Street Transit Village University Street Transit Village Downtown Transit Village
1/2 Mile
10 Minute Walk
1/4 Mile
5 Minute Walk
Church St.

Route 10
Colton Ave. Texas St.

Brookside Ave.

Eureka St.Orange St.

University St.

Route 10
Redlands Blvd.

Citrus Ave.

Tennessee St.

New York St.

Brockton Ave.

Lugonia Ave
Judson St.

Cajon St.

Olive Ave.

Gorgonio Dr.

Ash St.

Pine Ave.

Kansas St.

Redlands Blvd.

Alabama St.

Route 10
Cypress Ave.

State St.

San
State St.

Michigan
Citrus Ave. Esri Downtown
University of
Redlands
New York Street/
Esri Station Downtown
Station
University Street
Station
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 317 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:6

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT

1.4. PLAN PREPARATION PROCESS
The TVSP is both a record and a manifestation of the community’s goals.

Through participation in a series of public workshops and meetings, community members articulated a vision for the future of each of the TVSP’s three Station Areas. This vision carries an expectation that the streets, open spaces, and buildings within each Plan Area will be improved and developed to generate a mixed-use, transit-accessible, pedestrian-friendly, environment that embodies Redlands’ community spirit and pride and differentiates Redlands from other nearby communities within the Inland Empire.

The evolution of this plan was based on extensive community input throughout all phases of planning, including: Discovery, Alternatives, and Preferred Alternative Workshops, preparation of the Specific Plan, and adoption of the Specific Plan.

A. Analysis. Following an extensive analysis of existing physical, regulatory, transportation, circulation, parking, utilities, and market conditions, the team interviewed a broad range of interested stakeholders to solicit input regarding potential issues, opportunities, constraints, and observations about each Transit Village. Stakeholders interviewed included property owners, business owners, developers, realtors, members of various City departments, and representatives of SBCTA, Omnitrans, Esri, and the University of Redlands. Important outcomes of these interviews included confirmation of key opportunity sites, stakeholder plans for some of these opportunity sites, and preliminary ideas for establishing a use mix for each transit area that does not compete with that of the others. Key opportunities and constraints were also identified during the analysis phase and are described in Section 1.7 of this Chapter.

B. Discovery and Visioning Workshops. With a thorough understanding of the Plan Area and initial stakeholder needs and wishes, the team then participated in a series of nine public workshops, three for each Station Area:

1. Discovery Workshops: September 26, 2018 (Downtown), October 11, 2018 (New York Street/Esri); and December 13 (University Street). During these workshops the team described the
planning process, reviewed each Station Area’s constraints and opportunities, showed the proposed specific plan boundary, identified opportunity sites for development, and then solicited input from workshop attendees Key input received during these workshops included:
• Create a mixed-use, multi-modal village around the
Downtown Station.
• Generate active, walkable streets with wide sidewalks, shade trees, benches, outdoor dining, and safe pedestrian crossings.
• Provide pedestrian and bicycle connections between the train station and Downtown’s unique destinations (Redlands Bowl, C.K. Smiley Library, etc.) and surrounding residential neighborhoods, especially those located north of the freeway. • Replace the Redlands Mall with an interconnected street and paseo network lined with street trees and urban buildings. • Infill vacant, underulitilized parcels and parking lots with buildings that are up to 3 or 4 stories in height in core areas around the train stations, are designed according to a variety of architectural styles (but avoid 1960s styles), and employ massing in character with Redlands’ historic buildings. • Preserve Downtown’s historic buildings and reference
Redlands’ cultural heritage and agricultural past.
• Build housing for a variety of income levels and family types, including parents with children and seniors.
• Introduce pocket parks, plazas, and greens that
accommodate playgrounds, dog parks, public art, and
creative uses such as arts and craft booths.
• Complete the Orange Blossom Trail as a link between the three stations and between Sylvan Park, Jennie Davis Park, and new parks, greens, and plazas.
• Introduce additional parking in structures lined with commercial or residential uses.
• Accommodate alternative transportation forms such as Uber and Lyft.

2. Alternatives Workshops: October 24, 2018 (Downtown), November 14, 2018 (New York Street/Esri); January 23, 2019 (University Street). Taking into account the community input received during the Discovery Workshops, the team shared with workshop attendees precedent images and illustrative design concepts for each Station Area showing how each Station Area could potentially develop over time. For the opportunity sites, the team generated street network and open space alternatives and developed initial ideas about the character/make-up of each particular Station Area.

The team also identified streets that could relieve sreetscape and/ or multi-modal improvement, especially Orange Street, New York Street, University Street, Redlands Boulevard, and Colton Avenue.

3. Preferred Alternative Workshops: April 17, 2019 (New York Street/Esri), May 1, 2019 (University Street), and May 6, 2019 (Downtown). Following up on the input received during the Alternatives Workshops, and from direction received from the City Council on January 4, 2019 and April 16, 2019, the team presented the final vision to the community. ,
C. Specific Plan Preparation. Following the Preferred Alternative Workshops, the team prepared the Specific plan
D. Adoption. [To be written at later date.]
Downtown Discovery Workshop. New York Street/Esri Discovery Workshop. University Street Discovery Workshop Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 318 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:7

1.5. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS
A. 2035 General Plan. The City of Redlands 2035 General Plan is the City’s primary policy planning document. Through its seven elements and the 2013-2021 Housing Element, the General Plan provides the framework for the management and utilization of the City’s physical, economic, and human resources. Each element contains goals, policies, and implementation measures that guide development within the City. This Specific Plan meets the goals, policies, and actions established in the General Plan by providing a framework for future development within the Planning Area (see applicable and pertinent policies and actions in Table 1-1 on pages 1:8-1:12). The Specific Plan provides a direct link between the City’s General Plan and detailed plans for development, and will direct the character and arrangement of future development and land uses within the Specific Plan Area.

An important goal of the 2035 General Plan is to encourage future development within the core areas of the city, and preserve the agricultural and open space land around the periphery of the city. This approach places residents, workers, students, and visitors in close proximity to stores, jobs, entertainment, and transit, while enabling more efficient use of existing infrastructure (such as roads, wastewater and stormwater systems, etc.).

B. Downtown Specific Plan. Adopted in 1994, the Downtown Specific Plan applies generally to the area within the Downtown Station Area bounded by Church Street to the east, Redlands Boulevard to the south, Texas Street to the west, and the I-10 Freeway to the north.

The Downtown Specific Plan’s primary goal is to support the economic vitality of Downtown Redlands and facilitate the development of financial, technical, professional and research-development offices, and services Downtown, supported by retail, restaurants, entertainment, and cultural activities.

Upon adoption of this Transit Villages Specific Plan, the 1994 Downtown Specific Plan will be repealed and the provisions of the TVSP will completely replace the regulations of the 1994 Downtown Specific Plan.

C. Transit Rail Stations Accessibility Plan. Concurrent with the preparation of this TVSP, the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) is preparing the Transit Rail Stations Accessibility Plan which provides recommendations for improving access to the various stations along the Redlands Passenger Rail route.

D. Growth Management Measures. Beginning with Proposition R in 1978, growth management measures were originally adopted in response to rapid residential development. Residential development peaked during the 1980s, when 20 percent of the current housing stock was constructed in a single decade. Since that period, residential growth has slowed substantially.

1. Measure N. Measure N, a growth control ordinance that amended Proposition R, was approved by Redlands voters in 1987. The measure limits the development of residential dwelling units to 400 units per calendar year. Of the 400 units, 50 units are, by resolution, reserved for single-family homes, duplexes, triplexes and four-plexes on existing lots, with the remainder to be allocated according to a point system, which emphasizes design amenities.

2. Measure U. Measure U, adopted by the voters in 1997, further articulated growth management policies. Measure U amended the Redlands General Plan Land Use Element to “plan for” a housing mix of 75 percent single-family and 25 percent multifamily dwelling units at build-out. The City Council adopted a clarification of this policy determining that “for-sale” condominiums (which are considered multifamily dwellings by the Census and the Department of Finance) will be considered single-family dwellings for purposes of this calculation. The measure has not proved to be hindrance for Redlands to achieve its regional housing fair share needs, and Redlands continues to have a certified Housing Element.

Measure U also establishes level of service (LOS) mandates, including requiring that all intersections presently at LOS C or better maintain LOS C or better and that the LOS of intersections with LOS below C may not be reduced the current level. However, new projects located within the Downtown Specific Plan area, per the boundaries existing in December 1997, are exempt from the above provisions with a four-fifths vote of the City Council.

Cover of the City of Redlands General Plan 2035.

City of Redlands
GENERAL PLAN 2035
Adopted December 5, 2017
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 319 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:8

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
FROM CHAPTER. 3: PROSPEROUS ECONOMY
3-A.10: Encourage mixed-use projects within the Transit Villages that will attract a wide array of uses including retail, restaurant, entertainment, office, residential, and cultural offerings. 3-A.14: Encourage commercial development, neighborhood retail, and professional offices and services of the appropriate scale and business types along neighborhood commercial corridors, such as Orange Street and Colton Avenue. 3-P.12: Promote Redlands as a destination where visitors can shop, dine, play, and stay, and help create opportunities for increased visitation, hotel stays, sales tax generation, and employment.
3-P.16: Strengthen Downtown as a center of commerce and culture, with attractions for local residents, workers, and regional visitors year-round.
3-A.33: Support efforts to improve the economic and physical environment in the Downtown area by enhancing and expanding tourism-related activities and capital improvements, and generating external in-kind and monetary support for these efforts.
3-A.36: Support revitalization of underutilized commercial space throughout Downtown, including the Redlands Mall, which could create new opportunities for businesses and residents, and provide a critical link to rail.
3-A.37: Ensure adequate parking Downtown and efficiency in traffic flow to enable the continued revitalization of the commercial core.
3-A.38: Improve the safety and sense of safety throughout Downtown and the adjoining commercial areas.
3-A.39: Encourage and support the development of additional housing Downtown to increase the vitality and diversity of Downtown retail and services.
3-A.40: Enhance and expand the public spaces Downtown
(streetscapes, plazas, parks) to improve the pedestrian experience.

FROM CHAPTER 2: DISTINCTIVE CITY
2-A.16: Use transit stations as focal points for interconnectivity; plan to equally serve travelers from north and south. Plan for each village around the transit stations to have a unique character that complements the adjacent neighborhoods.
2-A.51: Encourage new construction that ties the new with the old in a harmonious fashion, enhancing the historic pattern.
2-P.25: Encourage a variety of uses and activities, such as a mix of commercial, office, restaurant, specialty retail, and residential uses, and civic, cultural, and entertainment activities to attract visitors and residents from across the community by creating a lively, interesting social environment.
2-P.26: Foster transit-oriented development that is consistent/compatible with and sensitive to the historical structures in the vicinity of the proposed railway station.
2-P.27: Conserve Downtown’s character and historic assets while infusing it with new uses, buildings, and activities. New development should proportionately relate to and complement existing structures and the pedestrian environment. 2-A.90: Complete and adopt a Downtown Specific Plan as the guide for Down-town development that will establish guidelines or standards for roadways, building forms, architecture, signage, streetscape, parking, and public realm amenities. 2-A.94: Encourage mixed-use projects Downtown that integrate retail, restaurant, office, and residential uses. Permit urban housing at a density up to the High-Density Residential standard. 2-A.95: Enhance and extend the civic realm through vibrant streetscapes.
2-A.96: Promote redevelopment of the Redlands Mall with a vibrant mix of uses. Explore feasibility of re-extending the traditional street grid through the new development.
2-A.97: Seek an increased presence of both residents and activity in Downtown with new development—particularly residential
as part of mixed-use development—as well as commercial, entertainment, and cultural uses that serve both residents and visitors.
2-A.98: Promote a variety of housing types to attract a spectrum of households to live Downtown.
2-A.99: Ensure that new development along Redlands Boulevard is pedestrian-oriented.
2-A.101: Address parking demand by finding additional areas to provide parking for Downtown, and by developing creative parking management strategies, such as shared parking,
maximum parking standards, “smart” metering, utilizing
on-street parking for reuse of existing buildings, paid parking, etc. Monitor the impacts of new technology such as the autonomous vehicle and car hire /car share services on the total demand for parking.
2-A.102: Improve connections from Downtown to adjacent neighborhoods, including areas north of I-10, through streetscape enhancement and multi-modal improvements.

TABLE 1-1. APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES AND ACTIONS Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 320 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:9
4-P.26: Support the University of Redlands in the development of its campus and the surrounding area in a manner that enriches both the University and Redlands communities.
4-A.23: Support development of the campus in ways that both strengthen its ties to the community and enhance its status as a major activity center for the neighborhood.
4-P.39: Promote infill and mixed-use development along Redlands Boulevard to create a cohesive commercial corridor connecting the Transit Villages and providing a retail and service destination for community members.
4-A.87: Promote clusters of mixed-use development along Redlands Boulevard near the Mixed Use Cores of the proposed Transit Villages, providing opportunities for commercial, office, and residential development consistent with the needs and characteristics specific to each Transit Village. 4-A.88: Promote infill development along Redlands Boulevard where it is classified as a Boulevard to create a continuous corridor of mixed-use and commercial activity.
4-A.89: Complete and enhance the sidewalk system along both East and West Redlands Boulevard. Make pedestrian enhancements to facilitate the safe crossing of the street. 4-A.90: Extend and enhance the center median of Redlands Boulevard with landscaping, public art, and lighting to improve the aesthetics and enhance its function as a major east-west boulevard. 4-P.40: Encourage the revitalization of the commercial corridors on Colton Avenue at Orange Street by providing opportunities for a variety of commercial uses and providing guidelines for site design to create a more welcoming visual environment. 4-A.91: Develop an area plan for the Colton Avenue and Orange Street corridors that will improve the public spaces, enhance the quality of architecture and landscape architecture, attract a mix of family-friendly retail and professional businesses to serve the neighborhoods, and improve the overall attractiveness of the areas. 4-A.93: Seek to improve the mix of office, professional, and service related businesses along Colton Avenue and Orange Street that will serve the neighborhood.
4-A.95: Promote infill development to create a continuous corridor of mixed-use and commercial activity.
4-A.96: Encourage site designs that create an active street frontage and screen parking from the Colton Avenue and Orange
Street frontages.
4-A.97: Encourage the development of bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access that reduces the need for on-site parking. Improve the pedestrian experience within these corridors through street trees and landscaping.

FROM CHAPTER 4: LIVABLE COMMUNITY
4-P.7: Promote a diversity of compatible land uses throughout the city, providing opportunities for the development of a range of businesses, services, residential types, and public facilities to meet the needs of the community.
4-P.8: Provide for buffers and transitions between low- and highintensity land uses. 4-P.9: Locate medium- and high-density development near regional access routes, transit stations, employment centers, shopping areas, and public services. 4-P.10: Ensure that the scale and character of new development is appropriate for surrounding terrain and the character of existing development.
4-P.12: In areas planned to accommodate new growth, such as Downtown and the Transit Villages, use area plans, design standards and guidelines, and other tools to ensure cohesive transition in scale to existing neighborhoods.
4-P.13: Encourage mixed-use development (two or more uses within the same building or in close proximity on the same site) in Downtown, the Transit Villages, and along Redlands Boulevard to promote vibrancy. 4-P.14: Encourage mixed-use projects Downtown that integrate retail, restaurant, office, and residential uses. Permit urban housing at a density up to the High Density Residential standard. 4-P.16: Promote a variety of housing types to serve the diverse needs of the community.
4-A.7: Promote a range of residential densities to encourage a mix of housing types in varying price ranges and rental rates. 4-A.8: Promote the development of a greater variety of housing types, including single-family homes on small lots, accessory dwelling units, townhomes, lofts, live-work spaces, and senior and student housing to meet the needs of future demographics and changing family sizes.
4-A.9: Encourage the incorporation of residential units in Downtown mixed-use projects consistent with the Redlands Downtown Specific Plan.
4-A.11: Ensure that opportunities exist for the development of housing types that are affordable to all segments of the Red-lands community and are distributed equitably throughout the
community.
4-A.12: Support new residential development in Downtown, the Transit Villages, and other focused infill sites accessible to transit and in central parts of the community.
4-A.20: Establish new neighborhood commercial centers to serve the needs of community members in areas planned to accommodate new growth, such as Downtown and the Transit Village areas.

TABLE 1-1. APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES AND ACTIONS (CONTINUED) Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 321 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:10

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
4-A.115: Provide pedestrian routes between offices, neighborhoods, and Downtown.
4-A.116: Implement bicycle route improvements that provide strong east-west connections to other Transit Villages as well as north-south connections to improve access to existing
neighborhoods to the north. Routes would include the
Orange Blossom Trail, the Lugonia Trail on New York Street, and a route along Texas Street.
4-A.117: Implement intersection improvements, including pedestrian improvements, at the I-10 undercrossings at New York and Texas Street to increase comfort and safety for all modes of travel.
4-A.118: Ensure safe railway crossings at Tennessee Street, Texas Street, and New York Street for bicyclists and pedestrians. 4-A.119: Maintain single-family residential neighborhoods designated as low- and low medium-density residential in the General Plan within the TVOZ. Transition higher density housing when adjacent to these neighborhoods.

ACTIONS FOR THE DOWNTOWN REDLANDS TRANSIT VILLAGE
4-A.120: Complete and implement an update of the Downtown Specific Plan to create a cohesive town center with amenities and pedestrian-oriented streets.
4-A.121: Encourage a centrally-located mix of uses to promote activity and economic vitality.
4-A.122: Maintain a distinctive character that builds on Downtown’s many historic features and its citrus heritage.
4-A.123: Promote the reuse of citrus packing houses, historic warehouses, and other historic commercial buildings to create a destination for residents and tourists.
4-A.124: Ensure accessibility within the Transit Village to arts and cultural venues and programming. 4-A.125: Provide streetscape improvements along the major corridors of Colton Avenue, Texas Street, and Redlands Boulevard
to enhance comfort and safety for all modes of travel and increase accessibility to and from surrounding areas.
4-A.126: Establish boulevards along Orange Street, Colton Avenue, and Redlands Boulevard with pedestrian-oriented streetscape improvements and ground-floor active uses.
4-A.127: Strengthen pedestrian and bicycle circulation routes within Downtown and to and from adjacent neighborhoods.
4-A.128: Implement bicycle route improvements that provide strong east-west and north-south connections. Routes would
include the Orange Blossom Trail, the Mission Creek Zanja Trail, and routes on Colton Avenue, Orange Street, and Citrus Avenue.
4-A.129: Improve the I-10 undercrossing at Eureka Street, Orange Street, and 6th Street to increase comfort and safety for all modes of travel and enhance north-south circulation.
4-A.130: Maintain single-family residential neighborhoods designated as low- and low medium-density residential in the General Plan within the TVOZ. Transition higher density housing when adjacent to these neighborhoods.
4-P.41: Foster a connected, accessible, and active community by creating attractively designed pedestrian- and transit-oriented villages with a mix of uses in a compact area.
4-P.42: Provide for new jobs, housing, and entertainment opportunities in compact, walkable environments. 4-P.43: Ensure that each Transit Village has a unique character and identity that reflects its existing assets and unique characteristics, and provides appropriate services at that location. 4-P.44: Provide choices for travel options, including walking, biking, vehicular, and transit.
4-P.45: Accommodate all appropriate modes of transportation in Transit Villages, and promote seamless transitions between modes.
4-P.46: Improve connectivity between Transit Villages and existing neighborhoods.
4-P.47: Provide for appropriate transitions between Transit Villages and surrounding neighborhoods.
4-P.48: Provide development and infill opportunities as alternatives to building at the edges of the city.
4-P.49: Allow residential and mixed-use projects in the Mixed Use Core at densities up to the High Density Residential standard. 4-P.50: Allow for density bonuses in the Transit Village Overlay Zone contingent on the provision of public benefits. Density bonuses shall be a minimum of 25 percent within a quartermile of each transit station, and 10 percent in areas located between a quarter-mile and a half-mile radius of each transit station. Public benefits may include but are not limited to amenities such as a public park, plaza, or playground; enhanced streetscaping; public art; or participation in a voluntary transfer of development rights program. 4-P.51: Complete a Transit Village Plan that will define: village character, design guidelines for architecture and site development, permitted and conditional uses, building setbacks and heights, yards, interfaces with the public streets and sidewalks, security measures, and transitions to existing neighborhoods.
4-P.52: Encourage stops of larger trains (Metrolink) in stations that can adequately accommodate their size and have greater
availability of and access to parking.

ACTIONS FOR THE NEW YORK STREET TRANSIT VILLAGE
4-A.112: Create an active and compact transit-oriented core with office uses that pro-vide opportunities for jobs and innovation, as well as commercial and residential uses to serve the needs of the area’s workers.
4-A.113: Provide streetscape improvements along the major corridors of Colton Avenue, Texas Street, and Redlands Boulevard
to enhance comfort and safety for all modes of travel and increase accessibility to and from surrounding areas.
4-A.114: Establish boulevards along Redlands Boulevard and Colton Avenue with pedestrian-oriented streetscape improvements and ground-floor active uses.

TABLE 1-1. APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES AND ACTIONS (CONTINUED) FROM CHAPTER 4: LIVABLE COMMUNITY - TRANSIT VILLAGES
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 322 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:11
5-A.4: Consider innovative design solutions to improve mobility, efficiency, connectivity, and safety through the use of traffic calming devices, roundabouts, curb extensions at intersections, separated bicycle infrastructure, high visibility pedestrian treatments and infrastructure, and signal coordination. 5-A.5: As part of street redesigns, plan for the needs of different modes – such as shade for pedestrians, lighting at pedestrian scale, mode-appropriate signage, transit amenities, etc. 5-A.6: Add bike and pedestrian facilities on roads with excess capacity where such facilities do not exist, using supporting transportation plans as guidance. Excess capacity includes street right-of-ways or pavement widths beyond the standards, or excess capacity in road-ways based on actual vehicular travel versus design capacity.
5-A.7: Add new streets to create a finer-grained, pedestrian-scaled road net-work where the roadway network is characterized by particularly long blocks, connecting residential areas to parks and Transit Village cores. Ensure the street systems in Transit Villages support development of connected and accessible communities.
5-A.8: Manage travel speeds in Downtown, at Transit Villages, and near schools, parks, and the University to enhance safety. 5-A.9: Adopt a “vision zero” approach to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all. 5-P.17: Provide a safe, direct, and healthful pedestrian environment through means such as providing separate pedestrian-ways in parking lots, avoiding excessive driveway widths, and providing planting strips between side-walks and streets where feasible.
5-P.19: Enhance street lighting for pedestrians where current lighting is inadequate. 5-A.20: Provide pedestrian routes between offices, neighborhoods, Downtown, and Transit Villages. Plan for direct connections from the interiors of residential tracts to neighboring parks, schools, retail, and other services using side-walks, trails, and paseos.
5-A.21: Strengthen trail connections to Down-town (such as Orange Blossom Trail, Lugonia Trail, Citrus Avenue, and Church Street).
5-A.22: Include amenities such as shade trees, transit shelters and other transit amenities, benches, trash and recycling receptacles, bollards, public art, and directional signage that can enhance the pedestrian experience.
5-P.21: Develop bike routes that provide access to rail stations, Downtown, schools, parks, the University, employment, and shopping destinations.
5-A.25: Implement bicycle and trail improvements that provide strong east-west connections between Transit Villages and in the city’s wider bicycle network. Routes would include the Orange Blossom Trail, the Mission Creek Zanja Trail, routes on Colton Avenue and Citrus Avenue, Santa Ana River Trail, and the San Timoteo Canyon Trail.
5-A.27: Implement safety improvements in mid-block areas that allow for bicycles to safely cross heavily traveled roads.

Improvements can include stop signs for cyclists, warning beacons, and illuminated signs initiated by pedestrians and cyclists.

ACTIONS FOR THE UNIVERSITY TRANSIT VILLAGE
4-A.131: Provide more multi-family housing for university students, staff, and other members of the community in the Mixed Use Core and adjacent residential areas.
4-A.132: Create opportunities for ground-floor commercial uses, such as restaurants and cafes, retail, and professional services to serve university students, staff, and neighborhood residents in the Mixed Use Core.
4-A.133: Promote pedestrian circulation between the station, homes, schools, and parks, with primary routes along multi-purpose trails (the Orange Blossom and Mill Creek Zanja trails), Citrus Avenue, and University Street.
4-A.134: Implement bicycle route improvements that enhance circulation between the station, homes, schools, and parks and provide connections to Downtown. Routes would include the Orange Blossom Trail, the Mill Creek Zanja Trail, and routes on Citrus Avenue, University Street, and Colton Avenue. 4-A.135: Improve the I-10 undercrossing at Sylvan Boulevard to allow safe trail con-nections along the Mill Creek Zanja.
4-A.136: Improve the I-10 undercrossings at University Street and Citrus Avenue to allow safe and comfortable access for
vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists.
4-A.137: Establish a boulevard along University Street from I-10 to Colton Avenue.
4-A.138: Maintain single-family residential neighborhoods designated as low- and low medium-density residential in the General Plan within the TVOZ. Transition higher density housing when adjacent to these neighborhoods.

FROM CHAPTER 5: CONNECTED CITY
5-P.1: Maintain a cohesive circulation system through a “layered network” approach promoting complete streets and mobility for all modes while emphasizing specific transportation modes for specific corridors and geographic areas.
5-P.4: Support transportation infrastructure improvements such as safer street crossings and attractive streetscapes to encourage bicyclists, walkers, and users of mobility devices. 5-P.9: Design a layered transportation net-work for individuals of all ages and abilities.
5-P.11: Implement standards for pavement design and roadway and intersection striping so streets are accessible by all users and all modes, and safety is improved.
5-P.13: Ensure streets are designed to accommodate bicyclists per the Bicycle Master Plan.
5-P.14: Design streets to accommodate various modes according to roadway classification and reduce conflicts and safety risks between modes per Figure 5-4.
5-P.15: Incorporate green infrastructure into the design of new roadways and retrofit existing roadways where appropriate. 5-P.16: Strengthen active transportation circulation routes within Downtown and the Transit Villages, and to/from adjacent neighborhoods.
5-A.2: Integrate complete streets and a layered networks approach into all City streets, traffic standards, plans, and details.

TABLE 1-1. APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES AND ACTIONS (CONTINUED) FROM CHAPTER 4: LIVABLE COMMUNITY - TRANSIT VILLAGES (CONTINUED) Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 323 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:12

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
5-A.17: Locate public parking facilities to serve the downtown around the periphery so as not to draw additional vehicles into the core areas. Ensure that easily identifiable pedestrian connections exist between public parking areas and the downtown core.
5-P.29: Ensure a balanced parking supply that adequately serves the community while employing strategies to reduce both the number of parking spaces needed, the area occupied by parking, and the number of vehicular trips needed within predominantly pedestrian oriented areas.
5-A.70: Locate Downtown public parking to encourage a park once approach. Pro-vide pedestrian directional signage to direct persons from peripheral parking to downtown destinations. 5-A.73: Provide adequate parking availability Downtown for residents, commuters, visitors, and shoppers throughout the day.
5-A.74: Design parking to meet applicable urban design goals from area plans and minimize negative impacts on pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users.
5-A.75: Consider techniques to reduce the amount of area in the Transit Villages occupied by parking, especially for developments located within easy walking distance of the Passenger Rail stations.
5-A.77: Encourage developers to meet their minimum parking requirements via shared parking between uses, payment of in-lieu fees, joint parking districts, or off-site parking within a reasonable walking time of 10 minutes or less.
5-A.78: Develop flexible on-site vehicle parking requirements. Such requirements would include implementation of innovative parking techniques, implementing effective TDM programs to reduce parking demand, and consideration of other
means to efficiently manage parking supply and demand.
5-A.80: Design parking structures in a manner so that they can be adaptively reused if they become obsolete for parking needs in the future.
5-A.36: Allow for flexibility and creativity in the roadway standards, where appropriate, to preserve historic features, specimen trees and significant landscaping, accommodate turn lanes, parking, wider sidewalks, bike paths, turnouts for buses, public art, and landscaped medians.
5-A.37: Encourage the use of car share and car hire services within Redlands to provide vehicular transportation alternatives. 5-A.38: Plan for future innovations in vehicular transportation such as self-driving vehicles.
5-A.44: Establish new boulevards Downtown and in the Transit Villages that include planted center medians, accommodations for transit, wider sidewalks, and amenities for pedestrians. 5-P.27: Support passenger rail as an alternative mode of regional transit.
5-A.61: Support investments in passenger rail by providing effective on-site circulation and multi-modal connections to transit stations.
5-A.62: Develop station area plans to determine the appropriate modes of transportation to be accommodated at each passenger rail station, the inter connections between those modes, and the facilities to be provided to support each mode.
5-A.67: Encourage convenient and safe pedestrian linkages to and from transit service to provide better first-mile and last-mile connectivity.

TABLE 1-1. APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES AND ACTIONS (CONTINUED) FROM CHAPTER 5: CONNECTED CITY FROM CH. 5: CONNECTED CITY [FOR PARKING CHAPTER] Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 324 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:13

2. Downtown Station. The Downtown station area contains the Downtown core and the historic Santa Fe Depot. Blocks located east of Orange Street, including within Downtown, are small and promote walkability, while those located west of Orange Street are larger and less pedestrian-friendly.

The Downtown area, west of Orange Street, is pedestrian-friendly with commercial and mixed-use buildings built adjacent to and accessed directly from the sidewalk. West of Orange Street, buildings and site design are more car-oriented, with many buildings located behind street-facing parking lots and/or facing the street with blank facades. Parcels west of the proposed station are largely vacant, underutilized, and primed for transitoriented infill development. A few vacant packinghouse buildings to the north and south of the Santa Fe Depot provide opportunities for adaptive reuse with uses that can activate the station area.

The Mill Creek Zanja enters the Downtown Station Area from the east as an open trench to 9th Street, where it enters a culvert that passes underground through the majority of the Downtown Village.

3. University Street Station. The University Street Station Area includes the portion of the University of Redlands campus located south of the Mill Creek Zanja and Sylvan Park. Blocks within the University Street Transit Village, especially near the proposed station site, are large. Parcels located north of the I-10 freeway and west of University Street are occupied by Sylvan Park, single-family houses, and some multifamily buildings.

The southeast portion of the Village is occupied primarily by multifamily buildings. Like the other station areas, most of the land surrounding the proposed station site is vacant, underutilized, and ready for development.

1.6.EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Urban Form. Covering 947 acres, stretching three miles in length, containing Downtown, Smiley Park, and Sylvan Park, and situated adjacent to the University of Redlands and Esri campuses, the specific plan area is characterized by a varied urban form.

1. New York Street/Esri Station. Currently the New York/Esri Street station area is car-oriented. Blocks are large and commercial and light industrial buildings tend to be set back away from the street behind parking lots or landscaped front yards. The railroad tracks traverse the Station Area from west to east, running along the north side of Redlands Boulevard, until New York Street, where they branch off as they proceed eastward. The Mill Creek Zanja traverses east-west through the New York Street Station Area as an open channel.

The New York Street/Esri station will be located along the north side of Redlands Boulevard at New York Street. Immediately to the south of the proposed station site is Esri’s world headquarters, a beautifully landscaped office campus within easy walking distance of the proposed station. Located
southeast of the proposed station is Jennie Davis Park, a 5.2 acre neighborhood park with picnic and playground facilities.

Existing development to the west of the Esri campus and south of the railroad tracks consists primarily of large footprint, light industrial and warehouse buildings. North of the railroad tracks existing development consists of an assorted mix of car-oriented uses, including strip shopping centers, fast-food restaurants, Redlands Ford, the Redlands Elks Lodge, the Ayres Hotel, and a Motel 6. North of the freeway are Toyota of Redlands, Empire Bowl, Quality Inn, Hertz, the Salvation Army Store, and singlefamily houses. Other buildings and points of interest within the New York Street/Esri Station Area include Orangewood High School and the Redlands Police Department. The parcels surrounding the proposed New York Street/Esri station are largely vacant and underutilized.

Shops along State Street.

The historic Downtown Redlands Depot building.

New York Street looking north towards station site.

Caption.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 325 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:14
B. Historic Resources. There are a number of buildings within and adjacent to the Specific Plan area that are listed on the National, State, and Local historic registers. The majority of structures with historic significance are located within the Downtown Station Area and are located primarily in the following areas:

1. The Redlands Santa Fe Depot District. Surrounding the Downtown train station, the Santa Fe District is listed as a historic district on the National Register of Historic Places.

Located between Eureka Street, Fifth Street, Stuart Street, and Redlands Boulevard, the district contains approximately twenty contributing or significant buildings dating from between 1888- 1964, including industrial packinghouses, associated citrus industry related structures, and the train depot.

2. The State Street Area. The area bounded by Orange Street, Cajon Street, Olive Street, 9th Street, and Redlands Boulevard, as well as Orange Street between the railroad right-of-way and Redlands Boulevard, comprises Redlands’ old Downtown,
and maintains a fine selection of contributing structures. The portion of the historic Downtown located west of Orange Street was demolished to make way for the Redlands Mall in 1977.

3. The High Avenue Area. Located between Sixth and Ninth Streets, the High Avenue area contains a number of small cottage residences built in the early 1900s, as well as several architecturally noteworthy buildings. The physical condition of many of the cottages in the area is poor, although all have the potential for rehabilitation as small offices.

Finally, the Mill Creek Zanja, which runs through the University Street and New York Street/Esri station areas, was designated a California Historical Landmark in 1932 and placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1977. Built in 1819 to convey water from Mill Creek to farms located east of the city, the Zanja now carries drainage water and storm runoff and has the double distinction of being the oldest continuously operating irrigation canal in California, and the oldest civil engineering project in Southern California.

FIGURE 1-3. HISTORIC RESOURCES
LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Arrow Passenger Rail
Historic Districts
Major Historic Buildings and Structures

1.6.EXISTING CONDITIONS (CONTINUED)

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
Historic Mill Creek Zanja
1/2 Mile
10 Minute Walk
1/4 Mile
5 Minute Walk
Church St.

Route 10
Colton Ave. Texas St.

Brookside Ave.

Eureka St.Orange St.

University St.

Route 10
Redlands Blvd.

Citrus Ave.

Tennessee St.

New York St.

Brockton Ave.

Lugonia Ave
Judson St.

Cajon St.

Olive Ave.

Gorgonio Dr.

Ash St.

Pine Ave.

Kansas St.

Redlands Blvd.

Alabama St.

Route 10
Cypress Ave.

State St.

San
State St.

Michigan
Citrus Ave. Esri Downtown
University of
Redlands
New York Street/
Esri Station Downtown
Station
University Street
Station
Redlands Depot Building. Historic building along Downtown’s Orange Street. Mill Creek Zanja.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 326 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:15
zero side yard setbacks and are located at the back of sidewalk, forming a continuous “street wall” along the sidewalk. These buildings have commercial ground floors and can have residential or commercial upper floors, although most mixed-use buildings in Redlands currently have commercial upper floors. The proposed buildings within a quarter-mile of the future stations will be mainly the block-form types, although house-form building types will be appropriate for new development that occurs near existing residential neighborhoods.

C. Building Types. There are a variety of building types within, and in the vicinity of, the Specific Plan area. These range from single-family houses to house-form multi-family buildings (duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes, and courts), to block-form mixed-use buildings. Houseform building types are set back from their property lines and are massed and scaled to resemble single-family houses. These buildings typically accommodate residences, but along corridors can be converted to commercial uses. Block-form buildings typically have embedded within the surrounding neighborhoods. Schools within the Specific Plan area include Orangewood High School, Redlands Adventist Academy, and the southern portion of the University of Redlands. There are approximately 16 churches within the Specific Plan area, some located within single-family houses. Clubs within the Plan Area include the Rotary Club of Redlands, the Elks Lodge, and the historic Masonic Lodge.

D. Civic Buildings and Sites. Civic buildings are buildings that accommodate meetings, education, and religious or cultural activities. They include important landmarks such as the Lincoln Memorial Shrine, the historic U.S. Post Office building, and the Santa Fe Depot, as well as public and private schools, churches, clubs, libraries, government buildings such as City Hall and the Police Department Annex Building, and outdoor venues such as the Redlands Bowl. Civic buildings and sites are plentiful within and near the Specific Plan area, and are well Single Family Houses. House-form quadplex. House-form court.

House-form rowhouse. House-form residential Block. Mixed-Use Block.

Redlands Bowl. Redlands City Hall.

Lincoln Memorial Shrine. First Congregational Church. Historic Redlands Post Office Building.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 327 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:16
other elements such as awnings, balconies, and bay windows. Key to successful building frontages are ample windows and entries that are accessed directly from the sidewalk. Existing buildings within the Specific Plan, as shown in the below photos, employ a variety of these various frontage types and elements. This Specific Plan provides frontage standards to ensure that new buildings face the street and open spaces with pedestrian-oriented, human-scaled facades.

E. Frontage Types. Frontage types provide a transition between the pubic realm of the street and the private realm of building interiors.

They add interest to a building’s massing, help transition the scale of a building to the street (for instance, the scale of a two-story building next to a one-story front building can be reduced with the introduction of a one-story porch), and add a human-scale to buildings. Frontages include entry types, such as porches, stoops, dooryards (terraces enclosed by a low wall or hedge), arcades, and shopfronts, as well as one- and two-story in height. Single-family houses tend to be onestory, and multi-family buildings tend to be two-story. Allowed building heights by existing zoning within the commercial zones (such as C-3, General Commercial) are, for the most part, unlimited (subject to discretionary approval). Allowed building height in the existing Downtown Specific Plan is limited to 4 stories or 55 feet in all districts. Allowed building heights for the multi-family residential zones range from 2.5 to 4 stories.

F. Existing Building Heights. The majority of the buildings within the Specific Plan area are one-story in height, although many of the light industrial and retail buildings have higher-ceiling spaces, presenting tall one-story facades to the street. The majority of buildings within the Downtown Transit Village are one- and twostory in height. A notable exception is the Citibank building, which is six-stories tall. In addition, many of the old packinghouse buildings surrounding the station are one-story buildings with tall interiors. Most of the buildings within the University Village are

1.6.EXISTING CONDITIONS (CONTINUED)

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
Front Yard. Porch. Stoop.

Dooryard. Arcade. Shopfront.

Esri’s three-story world headquarters building. Tall packing house building.

The two-story Ayres Hotel. Two-story mixed-use building along State Street.

Two-story multi-family buildings.

Bekins Hall at the University of Redlands.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 328 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:17
G. Historic Building Heights. While Redlands’ rich heritage of singlefamily houses is relatively intact, many of Reldands’ commercial buildings have been demolished. These buildings, many as tall as three and four stories, employed varied massing, frontage types, and architectural elements such as awnings and bay windows to break down the scale of the building into human-scaled proportions.

To promote transit ridership by locating more residents and/or workers in close proximity to the three stations (and to meet the General Plan’s goal to encourage future development to occur within the city’s core areas), building densities, intensities, and heights should be higher than the one- and two-story heights of most buildings within the Plan Area. This Specific Plan provides building articulation standards that ensure that new buildings, regardless of architectural style, are built with massing and architectural strategies employed by Redlands’ historic predecessors – pedestrian-friendly, human-scaled, buildings that reflect Redlands unique character.

H. Open Space. There are several parks within the Specific Plan area that provide open space and recreational opportunities to nearby residents, workers, and visitors. As multifamily housing and/or offices are built around the station areas, these parks will provide valuable open space for future residents, office workers, and visitors.

The sole park within the New York Street/Esri Station Area is Jennie Davis Park, which provides a large grassy lawn, picnic areas, playground equipment, and a small restroom building. The Mill Creek Zanja passes along the southern edge of the park and the Orange Blossom trail runs along the opposite bank from the park.

The Downtown Station Area contains three parks within its boundaries: Terrace Park, Ed Hales Park, and the northeastern tip of Smiley Park. Terrace Park is a linear park built along the south side of Colton Avenue between Orange Street and Church Street.

It accommodates a tree-lined path down its center. The portion of Smiley Park within the Downtown Transit Village consist of the lawns, paths, and benches that surround the historic Police Annex building. While the Police Annex provides a welcoming face to the Park, the building along the north side of the park fronts the park with blank, windowless wall. The rest of Smiley Park, which meanders through the historic Smiley Neighborhood, is home to the Redlands Bowl amphitheater, the Lincoln Memorial Shrine, the A.K. Smiley Library, shuffleboard courts, and a restroom building. It also provides open lawn areas, paths, benches, and is planted with groves of mature trees. Located on the northeast corner of State Street and Fifth Street in Downtown, Ed Hales Park provides picnic tables beneath a canopy structure.

The University Street Station Area is home to Sylvan Park, an 18- acre community park that contains open space amenities such as large lawn areas, individual and group picnic areas, pathways, benches, playground equipment, and a traditional rose garden. It also accommodates recreational activities such as lawn bowling, horseshoe pits, and a soon-to-be-built skateboard park. The historic Mill Creek Zanja, flanked by the Orange Blossom Trail, also passes through the center of Sylvan Park. Academic quadrangles and other greens on the University of Redlands campus provide additional open space amenities to the north of the proposed University Village station.

State Street in early 1900s. State Street looking east, ca. 1904.

Corner of Orange and State Streets, ca. 1906. Casa Loma Hotel in the 1920s. State Street during 1950s.

Bird’s-eye view of Jennie Davis Park. Bird’s-eye view of Smiley Park. Bird’s-eye view of Sylvan Park.

State Street during early 1900s.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 329 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:18

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
reach 100% in most parking venues. This Specific Plan provides parking management strategies to ensure existing parking is used efficiently and in a manner that safeguards surrounding neighborhoods from spillover parking; describes how parking for each station is accommodated; suggests ways to accommodate new parking as needed; and provides standards to ensure on-site parking is not visible from the street.

K. Parking. Parking within the majority of the Specific Plan area is provided on the street and on site in either surface garages or parking lots. Parking within Downtown is provided in on-street spaces, parking lots, the Citrus Avenue parking garage located at the corner of Citrus Avenue and 6th Street, and public and private surface lots.

There is generally sufficient public parking Downtown except during events and Thursday night Market Nights when parking occupancies incomplete bicycle facilities, the unfinished Orange Blossom Trail, and narrow freeway underpass roadways. This Specific Plan provides recommendations and strategies for improving the pedestrian and bicycle environment around the stations, including the introduction of pedestrian-scaled blocks, intersection improvements, highway underpass enhancements, preservation of the Downtown rail crossing, new sidewalks, new and improved streetscape, and improved bicycle facilities and amenities.

I. Pedestrian and bicycle amenities. As mentioned above, portions of the Plan Area – primarily within the historic Downtown – consist of an interconnected street network that facilitates walking and biking.

However, the remainder of the Plan Area presents a generally hostile environment for pedestrians and cyclists. Key pedestrian deficiencies include: megablocks (blocks measuring more than 500 feet by 500 feet); car-oriented intersections, unwelcoming underpasses, and deficient and missing sidewalks. Key bicycle deficiencies include I-10 Freeway between the San Bernardino Transit Center and Yucaipa.

This Specific Plan provides recommendations for rerouting existing transit routes to better serve the proposed stations and indicates proposed bus stop and staging locations.

J. Transit. Redlands is served by Omnitrans, the primary transit operator in San Bernardino County. Currently, four routes provide service to the Plan Area: Route 8, which provides service between San Bernardino and Crafton Hills College; Route 15, which provides service between Fontana and Downtown Redlands; Route 19, which provides service between Fontana, the San Bernardino Transit Center, and Yucaipa; and Route 208, which provides commuter service primarily along the

1.6.EXISTING CONDITIONS (CONTINUED)
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

DRAFT April 7, 2019
5:10

2. Downtown. All four bus routes currently converge in Downtown along Redlands Boulevard in front of the Redlands Mall approximately one block south of the future Downtown rail station (see Figure 5-6). Since Redlands is the terminus of the short route, the ability for short route bus drivers to layover at the route’s terminus should be considered.

To provide direct access to the Downtown Station, select bus routes should be rerouted to provide convenient transfers between buses and rail. Following are two alternatives for rerouting buses within the Downtown: one along Stuart Avenue and a second along Shoppers Lane.
a. Alternative 1: Bus Circulation Along Stuart Avenue. Alternative 1 redirects route 15 along Stuart Avenue (see Figure 5-7). Buses could be routed in either direction since existing stoplights on both Eureka Street and Orange Street enable any necessary left turns, although locating bus stops along the south side of Stuart Avenue would ensure riders do not have to cross Stuart Avenue to get to the train station. Route 8, which currently passes by the Downtown Station along Orange Street, retains its current routing.

In order to avoid increasing run times, the routing of Route 19 along Redlands Boulevard is also retained.

To facilitate the flow of vehicular traffic during bus stops and/ or layovers, either a bus pullout should be considered or curb space should be designated and clearly identified for buses.

Consideration should also be given to dedicate curb space for the pick-up and drop-off needs of Transit Network Companies such as Uber and Lyft.
b. Alternative 2: Bus Circulation Along Shoppers Lane. Alternative 2 redirects route 15 to the south of the station, along Shoppers Lane. This alternative assumes Shoppers Lane is extended to Eureka Street and that buses are, in turn, routed along Shoppers Lane (see Figure 5-8). If Shoppers Lane is not extended between Third Street and Eureka Street, buses could be routed along Shoppers Lane, down Third Street, to Redlands Boulevard. Like Alternative 1, either a bus pullout should be considered or curb space should be designated and clearly identified for buses.

Consideration should also be given to dedicate curb space for Transit Network Companies such as Uber and Lyft. Additionally, a new signal would be required at the intersection of Shoppers Lane/Orange Street to facilitate traffic flow.

Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Eureka Street
Third Street
Shoppers Lane
Orange Street
Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Eureka Street
Third Street
Shoppers Lane
Orange Street
Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Eureka Street
Third Street
Shoppers Lane
Orange Street
Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Eureka Street
Third Street
Shoppers Lane
Orange Street
FIGURE 5-7. ALTERNATIVE 1: BUS CIRCULATION ALONG STUART AVENUE FIGURE 5-8. ALTERNATIVE 2: BUS CIRCULATION ALONG SHOPPERS LANE FIGURE 5-9. ALTERNATIVE 3: BUS CIRCULATION ALONG SHOPPERS LANE LEGEND
Arrow Passenger Rail
Future Metrolink Platform
Future Arrow Platform
Specific Plan Boundary
1/4 Mile Pedestrian Shed
1/2 Mile Pedestrian Shed
Omnitrans Route 8
Omnitrans Route 15
Omnitrans Route 19
FIGURE 5-6. EXISTING DOWNTOWN BUS CIRCULATION
Omnitrans Route 208
Existing Traffic Signal
Proposed Traffic Signal
Angled Parking along State Street. Redlands Mall parking lot. Ed Hales public parking lot.

Unfriendly pedestrian and bicycle environment. Missing sidewalks and bicycle faclities. Class II bike lane on Brookside Avenue.

View of the Omnitrans Route 8 bus stop on Redlands
Boulevard just east of Texas Street.

Omnitrans bus. Existing Downtown Bus Routes.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 330 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:19
In general, wastewater effluent from south of the 10 Freeway flows to the south and then west in a collector line in Redlands Boulevard, while the effluent north of the Freeway flows north and west towards the treatment plant. This Specific Plan describes the recommended wastewater pipe upgrades needed to accommodate the proposed development.

3. Potable Water Supply, Water Distribution, and Fire Protection.

The City of Redlands currently serves approximately 24,000 customers with a 5-year average potable water demand of 26,165 acre feet per year. Currently, the majority of water is obtained from the Santa Ana River, Mill Creek, and groundwater. The City operates two surface water treatment plants, 20 wells, 37 booster pumps, 18 reservoirs, and 400 miles of transmission and distribution lines to provide water to its customers. Based on the City’s available supplies, the City can continue to meet multiple and single dry year demands. Potable water mains exist in all of the Plan Area’s streets and there are plenty of fire hydrants in the Plan Area. This Specific Plan describes the recommended water pipe upgrades needed to accommodate the proposed development.

5. Non-Potable Water. The city’s non-potable distribution lines are located in the vicinity of the plan area. This Specific Plan describes the recommended non-potable water pipe upgrades needed to accommodate the proposed development.

L. Stormwater and Utility Infrastructure.

1. Flooding. The plan area has historically experienced flooding during moderate storm events. Portions of the plan area, particularly the majority of the parcels within a quarter mile of the three stations are located within the Flood Zone (see Figure 1-4)below).

Causes of the flooding include both local and regional storm drain deficiencies, including a lack of conveyance capacities in the Mission Zanja (Zanja), Redlands Boulevard storm drain, and the Oriental storm drain.

Any new “occupiable” finished floor must be at least 2 feet above the 100-year flood elevation. In addition, any floodplain crosssection modifications (earthen platforms) may not cause more than a one foot water surface elevation increase upstream.

This Specific Plan recommends methods for relieving or eliminating the 100-year flood zone, thereby reducing the number of properties subject to flood insurance as well enabling retail buildings to be built at sidewalk grade.

2. Wastewater. The Redlands Wastewater Treatment Facility (WTTP) is located in northwest Redlands adjacent to the Santa Ana River.

All wastewater collected and treated is from the City’s service area and discharged within the City’s service area. The City utilizes all wastewater collected and treated at its WWTP in its service area for distribution to customers and percolation into Bunker Hill. The City requires new commercial development to provide dual plumbing for irrigation systems to accommodate the use of recycled/non-potable water.

LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Arrow Passenger Rail
Historic Zanja
Current Zanja
100-Year Flood Plain
FIGURE 1-4. EXISTING 100-YEAR FEMA FLOOD PLAIN
1/2 Mile
10 Minute Walk
1/4 Mile
5 Minute Walk
Church St.

Route 10
Colton Ave. Texas St.

Brookside Ave.

Eureka St.Orange St.

University St.

Route 10
Redlands Blvd.

Citrus Ave.

Tennessee St.

New York St.

Brockton Ave.

Lugonia Ave
Judson St.

Cajon St.

Olive Ave.

Gorgonio Dr.

Ash St.

Pine Ave.

Kansas St.

Redlands Blvd.

Alabama St.

Route 10
Cypress Ave.

State St.

San
State St.

Michigan
Citrus Ave. Esri Downtown
University of
Redlands
New York Street/
Esri Station Downtown
Station
University Street
Station
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 331 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:20
M. Vacant and Underdeveloped Parcels. There are a number of vacant parcels located within the Specific Plan area, mostly concentrated along and near the railroad right-of-way (see Figure 1-5). In addition, there are many underdeveloped parcels that currently contain development that does not contribute to the walkable, multimodal, urban environment envisioned by the General Plan (i.e., not conforming to design regulations of this form-based code) that are ripe for intensification. Examples include sites where a parking lot is located between the building and the sidewalk, sites where the majority of the land is vacant, or sites with buildings with blank walls that face the street. Buildings on some of these sites are vacant or contain underperforming businesses. These underdeveloped parcels also tend to be located along the railroad right-of-way and within a quarter mile of the stations.

FIGURE 1-5. VACANT AND UNDERDEVELOPED PARCELS.

LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Arrow Passenger Rail
Vacant Parcels
Non-Conforming Parcels

1.6.EXISTING CONDITIONS (CONTINUED)

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
1/2 Mile
10 Minute Walk
1/4 Mile
5 Minute Walk
Church St.

Route 10
Colton Ave. Texas St.

Brookside Ave.

Eureka St.Orange St.

University St.

Route 10
Redlands Blvd.

Citrus Ave.

Tennessee St.

New York St.

Brockton Ave.

Lugonia Ave
Judson St.

Cajon St.

Olive Ave.

Gorgonio Dr.

Ash St.

Pine Ave.

Kansas St.

Redlands Ave.

Redlands Blvd.

Alabama St.

Route 10
Cypress Ave.

State St.

San
State St.

Michigan
Citrus Ave. Esri Downtown
University of
Redlands
New York Street/
Esri Station Downtown
Station
University Street
Station
Vacant parcels in New York Street Station Area. Vacant parcels in Downtown Station Area. Vacant parcels in University Street Station Area.

Vacant parcels in New York Street Station Area. The Redlands Mall. Vacant parcels in University Street Station Area.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 332 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:21
N. Areas of Change Together, the Plan Area’s vacant and underdeveloped parcels – particularly those around the proposed station sites – offer the perfect opportunity for building a pedestrianfriendly, transit-oriented, mixed-use, environment. These parcels – particularly those located within a quarter mile of the proposed passenger rail stations – have been identified as areas of immediate change where transformation in the near future is envisioned (see Figure 1-6). Many of these parcels are also owned by a single land owner. In areas where the urban fabric is more complete, where sporadic vacant and underutilized parcels can be found, and where properties have not been consolidated, infill development could occur incrementally and over time – these are areas of incremental or future change. The vision represented in Chapter 2 shows how the areas of immediate change could develop over time.

FIGURE 1-6. AREAS OF CHANGE
LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Arrow Passenger Rail
Areas of Immediate Change
Areas of Incremental/Future Change
FIGURE 1-7. AREAS OF CHANGE IN RELATION TO ENTIRE CITY OF REDLANDS The areas of immediate change
shown in Figure 1-6 contain
approximately 150 acres of
developable area (0.64% of the
City of Redlands entire land area).

This Specific Plan anticipates,
however, that only about half of
these parcels will develop (75
acres) – representing a mere

0.32% of the City of Redlands
entire land area (see Figure 1-7).

LEGEND
City of Redlands Boundary
Specific Plan Boundary
Potential Parcels Developed
during Plan Horizon (by 2040)
Esri
1/2 Mile
10 Minute Walk
1/4 Mile
5 Minute Walk
Church St.

Route 10
Colton Ave. Texas St.

Brookside Ave.

Eureka St.Orange St.

University St.

Route 10
Redlands Blvd.

Citrus Ave.

Tennessee St.

New York St.

Brockton Ave.

Lugonia Ave
Judson St.

Cajon St.

Olive Ave.

Gorgonio Dr.

Ash St.

Pine Ave.

Kansas St.

Redlands Blvd.

Alabama St.

Route 10
Cypress Ave.

State St.

San
State St.

Michigan
Citrus Ave. Esri Downtown
University of
Redlands
New York Street/
Esri Station Downtown
Station
University Street
Station
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 333 of 1815
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

1:22

1.7.CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES
A. Constraint and Challenges

1. Existing Growth Management Measures. Existing City of Redlands growth management measures and regulations limit the amount of development that can occur in Redlands to 400 units per calendar year with a housing mix of 75 percent single-family and 25 percent multi-family.

2. Megablocks. Most of the blocks within a quarter mile of all three stations are “megablocks” (blocks measuring more than 500 feet by 500 feet) that contain vacant and underutilized land or conventional suburban developments with large, street-facing parking lots. These megablocks maximize vehicular throughput at the expense of pedestrian comfort and safety. Pedestrians must walk long distances with limited crossing opportunities. Megablocks also restrict connectivity for cars, buses, and emergency vehicles by offering less routes to a given destination, while reducing opportunities for turning movements.

3. Car Oriented Streets. Many streets within the Plan Area – especially Redlands Boulevard and University Street – are designed for cars, not for pedestrians and cyclists. They promote fast vehicular speeds and lack adequate pedestrian and bicycle facilities, such as bike lanes and comfortable ways for pedestrians to cross the street.

3. Pedestrian Barriers. The freeway forms a barrier between the neighborhoods and corridors located on the other side of the freeway. In addition, some of the I-10 underpasses currently are unpleasant for pedestrians and cyclists to pass through due to insufficient lighting and the location of the sidewalk immediately next to fast-moving traffic.

5. Incomplete Bicycle Network. The existing bicycle network outside the Plan Area is relatively well developed, but is deficient within the Plan area. Bicycle connectivity to the future stations – including the neighborhoods located on the other side of the freeway – is critical for generating multi-modal access to the train station. The Orange Blossom Trail, a Class 1 facility, has been built at the western and eastern ends of the Plan Area. However, the connection through Downtown has yet to be built.

6. 100-Year Floodplain. The 100-year floodplain runs east-west through the Plan Area and covers most of the parcels identified as “Areas of Immediate Change” in Figure 1-7. Property owners within the floodplain must pay flood insurance. In addition, new residential uses must be located a minimum of two feet above the floodplain. The parcels located north of the New York Street/ Esri Station, however, have base elevations above the 100-year floodplain.

B. Assets and Opportunities

1. Access and Proximity to Transportation. The Plan Area is welllocated in relation to transit and freeway access. Downtown Redlands is served by Omnitrans bus routes 8, 15, 19, and 208 which provide service to San Bernardino, Fontana, Yucaipa, and destinations between. The Orange Blossom Trail when completed through Downtown Station Area will provide an opportunity to connect the three station areas. Freeway access is provided at Alabama Street, Tennessee Street, 6th Street, Orange/Eureka Street, and University Street.

2. Infill Opportunities. There are many vacant and underutilized parcels located within a quarter mile of each station that provide excellent opportunities for mixed-use, transit-oriented infill development around each station. The arrival of the Arrow Passenger Rail will help catalyze development within the Plan Area, particularly on parcels identified as “Areas of Immediate Change” in Figure 1-7. In addition, the 2035 General Plan land use designations and associated Transit Village Overlay Zone (TVOZ) enable mixed-use, transit-oriented development around each station.

3. Walkable Urbanism Precedents. The Plan Area is graced with excellent precedents of walkable, tree-lined streets; buildings that face and are accessed from the street through appropriate frontages (porches, stoops, shopfronts, etc.); and well-designed parks and open spaces that can serve as models for development that occurs within the Specific Plan’s “Areas of Immediate Change.” In addition, there are many historic resources and contributing buildings within the Downtown Transit Village.

4. Walkable, Interconnected Street Precedents. Redlands’ historic Downtown core and the residential neighborhoods north and south of the plan area have an interconnected street network and small blocks – the indispensable components of a walkable, multi-modal, mixed-use environment. State Street and its cross streets, in particular, are excellent examples of pedestrian-friendly roadway design that calms vehicular traffic and provides convenient access to adjacent retail and restaurant uses. Additionally, Orange Street has a number of pedestrian crossings, facilitating pedestrian connections between Downtown and the future station area. This network can and should be extended into the areas identified as “Areas of Immediate Change” in Figure 1-7.

In addition, Downtown Redlands has alleys, some of which have been transformed into pedestrian-only passageways that accommodate street art and outdoor dining. Such pedestrian-only passageways could also be introduced in other parts of the Plan Area.

5. Proximity of Existing Parks. All three station areas have convenient access to existing parks: Jennie Davis Park within the New York/Esri Station Area; Terrace Park, Ed Hales Park, and Smiley Park within the Downtown Station Area; and Sylvan Park within the University Street Station Area.

6. Flood Control Improvements. For parcels located within the flood plain, redesigning the flood water conveyance system could provide an opportunity for relieving or eliminating the 100-year flood zone. Reducing the size of the floodplain will reduce the number of properties that are subject to flood insurance as well enable buildings – especially building with retail ground floors – to be built at sidewalk grade.

In addition, future open spaces within the Plan Area and continuous planters between the roadway and the sidewalk provide opportunities for incorporating passive stormwater and flood management strategies – such as infiltration basins, bioswales, or bioretention systems – that can mitigate the impacts of floodwater.

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
Eureka Street freeway underpass. State Street. Orange Street Alley.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 334 of 1815

2.0. INTRODUCTION
The principles, goals, and vision that will shape the transformation and revitalization of the three station areas governed by this Specific Plan were established through an extensive public outreach process that included interviews with dozens of stakeholders, nine community workshops (three for each station area), and meetings with the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission, the Planning Commission, and the City Council.

This Chapter describes and illustrates the outcomes of this public process. It begins with an overview of the principles of town-making and transit oriented development. This is followed by a description of the vision for the whole Specific Plan area and then a more detailed description of each station area, including its existing conditions, the goals that were established through the community process, and illustrations of the vision. The Chapter wraps up with a discussion of the traditional building types that are found within Redlands’ historic core and surrounding neighborhoods. The pedestrian scale of these buildings, and how they relate to the street and to each other, forms the basis of the Specific Plan’s Development Code (Chapter 4).

This Vision Chapter is comprised of the following sections:

2.1. Principles of Transit Oriented Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:2

2.2. The Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:4

2.3. New York Street Station Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:6

2.4. Downtown Station Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:11

2.5. University Street Station Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:18

2.6. Building Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2:26 View of the New York Street/Esri Station area and an Arrow Passenger Rail train. View of Redlands Boulevard with planted median and multi-family development.

View of park in Midtown Neighborhood (between Downtown and New York Street/ Esri Station)
View of Market Hall in University Village.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:1
CHAPTER 2: VISION
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 335 of 1815
Make Great Public Places. The center of a TOD is the locus of its public life. Its civic buildings enhance community identity and foster civic pride. Its shops and workplaces provide convenient access to goods and services without need for a car trip. Its streets and public spaces generate a unique and supportive public realm that provides places for social interaction. Easy access to transit (whether train or bus) as well and to roadways (whether local roads or freeways) makes such a place accessible to a wide array of people, from those living there, to those driving in by car or arriving by train.

Make Great Streets. TODs are structured on individual blocks and a network of thoroughfares that provide a comfortable environment for pedestrians, while accommodating automobiles, bicycles, and other emerging transportation technologies. This interconnected block and thoroughfare pattern provides multiple routes that diffuse vehicular traffic, while providing more options for emergency personnel to reach a distressed location. Street intersections have minimal curb radii to slow turning cars and reduce the crossing distance of pedestrians. Streets are two-way, improving pedestrian crossing safety, reducing automobile speeds, and facilitating navigation. On larger streets, landscaped center medians reduce apparent street width, while intersection bulb-outs reduce pedestrian crossing distance and time and also provide space for streetscape and street furniture. Finally, streets accommodate on-street parking to provide convenient parking in front of stores or guest parking in front of residences, while providing a buffer between moving traffic and pedestrians on the sidewalk.

Live Above and Next to Stores and Businesses. The quality and amount of housing in a TOD determine its particular character. In the case of mixed-use environments, one of the most appealing characteristics is the opportunity for people to live above or near stores, providing residents the ability to walk or bike to these businesses, while reducing their reliance on a car. Such dwellings allow for a variety of families to live near diverse services, while providing a constant 24/7 rhythm of use.

2. VISION

2.1. PRINCIPLES OF TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT
Town-making is in sharp contrast to conventional suburban development, the form of growth which has produced large-scale sprawl throughout Southern California over the last fifty years. Sprawl development is characterized by homogeneous single-use zones, with the housing tract, the shopping center, and the business park as its basic elements. These segregated use areas are connected by a discontinuous system of wide thoroughfares designed for the rapid movement of cars.

Within such a homogeneous urban structure, uninspiring and repetitive buildings are typically designed without any particular obligation to define a realm of public space. The vast majority of such places designed since the 1940s are architecturally undistinguished and urbanistically destructive, as they absorb and eliminate the local landscape while generating a placeless, undistinguished fabric of buildings.

Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) has emerged in recent decades as an alternative to conventional suburban development. It stems from the recognition that commuter lines and stations can and should be more than travel nodes. Proximity to transit reduces dependency on the automobile and enhances the value of surrounding buildings as a place to live, work and shop. The typical size of a TOD is a quarter-mile radius from physical center to edge. This distance – known as the walkability shed – encompasses the neighboring population within an average five minute walk of the mixed-use center. Thus, the optimal size of a TOD is determined not by density but by the walkability shed.

Living in pleasant dwellings, connecting to neighbors by choice, and being able to walk to fulfill civic obligations and enjoy commercial entertainment and recreational opportunities are the hallmark of living in a traditional community. It is a way of life that is appropriate and desirable, and possible to recreate for the future of Redlands.

Design principles for creating such mixed-use, transit-oriented places are shown on this and the following page.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:2
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 336 of 1815
Get the Retail Right. Retail should respond to the housing, restaurant, entertainment, and education needs of the community and the local climate. The retail industry has discovered that outdoor, Main Streettype retail better fits the lifestyle of busy consumers, often yielding more regular trips and higher sales volumes than standard shopping centers.

Under this model, retail should be concentrated to encourage and facilitate pedestrian storefront shopping. Buildings should face streets that accommodate cars and on-street parking. Long-term parking should be located in shared “park once” lots or structures, convenient to and compatible with the Main Street retail.

Get the Parking Right. The typical suburban, sequential pattern of "shop and park" requires two vehicular movements and one parking space to be dedicated for each visit to a shop, office, or civic institution.

For three tasks, this requires six vehicular movements and three parking spaces, due to the long, car-dependent distances between single-use destinations. By contrast, the compactness and mixed-use nature and walkability of TODs lend themselves to only two vehicular movements, parking just once, and completing multiple tasks on foot. This reduces traffic and limits the amount of parking that needs to be built. The subsequent transformation of drivers into pedestrians walking from one task to the next, is the immediate generator of pedestrian life, animating public streets and sidewalks and generating patrons of street-friendly retail businesses. It is this pedestrian "scene" that creates the energy and attraction to sustain a thriving mixed-use environment.

Provide a Variety of Housing Choices. A mature village setting provides diverse housing choices that attract a varied and prosperous resident population. It is not unusual to encounter lofts, live/work units, courtyard housing, row housing, even duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes in such a village environment. These dwelling types accommodate and attract a range of household types (singles, newlyweds, families with children, elderly), income levels (students, teachers, professionals, the retired), and employment arrangements (live/work and home occupation), producing a diverse and well-rounded resident population. All of these dwelling types may be provided in either rental or ownership configurations.

Build a Variety of Buildings. TODs include a variety of building types, including mixed-use commercial blocks, rowhouses, condominiums, and apartment buildings. Varying the size and massing of these buildings and carefully considering their placement enhances the pedestrian friendliness of the streets and open spaces they face and insures that new buildings are compatible with those in adjacent nearby neighborhoods.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:3
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 337 of 1815
Active sidewalks.

Active sidewalks with outdoor dining.

FIGURE 4-1: REGULATING PLAN

2. VISION

2.2. THE PLAN
The Illustrative Plan, shown in Figure 2-1 (Illustrative Plan), shows one way of arranging future streets, buildings, and open spaces within the Plan area. The drawing serves as a guide for understanding the greater goals of this Specific Plan: to create a walkable, mixed-use district that features beautiful streets, diverse housing types, and unique shopping and office opportunities – a place that both enlivens surrounding neighborhoods and secures the city’s future. The terms and conditions underlying this particular design are presented later in this document under the provisions of the Development Code (see Chapter 4). The element of time may modify this particular Illustrative Plan, but the fundamental character, qualities and intentions of the plan will remain intact.

It is important to note that all private development shown in the Illustrative Plan consist of voluntary projects pursued by property owners and/or developers who seek to improve their land in response to market demands for housing, office, retail, restaurant space, and entertainment space. Similarly, the acquisition of individual parcels to assemble parcels for larger projects occurs as a voluntary transaction between property owners for the mutual benefit of both parties. No development within the Transit Villages Specific Plan area will occur through eminent domain.

Redlands BoulevardOrange Street
Sixth Street
Eureka Street
Texas Street
Eureka Street
Tennessee Street
Colton Avenue
New York Street
State Street
Citrus Avenue
Brookside Avenue
Olive Avenue
State Street
Center Street
I-10 Freeway
1/4 Mile
5 Minute Walk
1/2 Mile
10 Minute Walk
See Page 2:5
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:4
FIGURE 2-1. ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
5 4
3 2
1 9
8 7
6 11
See Page 2:5
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 338 of 1815
Mixed-use Main Street buildings.. Inviting open spaces. Parking lot with tree orchard.

Multi-Family Housing. Active open spaces. A lined parking garage. Sixth Street Church Street Citrus Avenue
Park Avenue
University Street
Olive Avenue
Cook Street
Grove Street
Ninth Street
I-10 Freeway
See Page 2:5
Colton Avenue
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:5
LEGEND
New York Sreet/Esri Station
New York Street Neighborhood
Jennie Davis Park
Esri Campus
5 Midtown Neighborhood
4 3
2 1 Downtown Station
Redlands Mall
Smiley Park
Downtown Core
10 High Avenue Neighborhood
9 8
7 6 Mill Creek Zanja
Sylvan Park
University Street Station
University Village
15 University of Redlands
14 12
11 10
15 14
13 12
11 11
14 13
See Page 2:4
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 339 of 1815

2. VISION

2.3. NEW YORK STREET STATION AREA
Currently the New York/Esri Street station area is car-oriented. Blocks are large and commercial and light industrial buildings tend to be set back away from the street behind parking lots or landscaped front yards.

The railroad tracks traverse the Station Area from west to east, running along the north side of Redlands Boulevard, until New York Street, where they branch off as they proceed eastward. The Mill Creek Zanja traverses east-west through the New York Street Station Area as an open channel.

The New York Street/Esri Station will be located along the north side of Redlands Boulevard at New York Street. Immediately to the south of the proposed station site is Esri’s world headquarters, a beautifully landscaped office campus within easy walking distance of the proposed station. Located southeast of the proposed station is Jennie Davis Park, a 5.2 acre neighborhood park with picnic and playground facilities.

Existing development to the west of the Esri campus and south of the railroad tracks consists primarily of large footprint, light industrial and warehouse buildings. North of the railroad tracks, existing development consists of an assorted mix of car-oriented uses, including strip shopping centers, fast-food restaurants, Redlands Ford, the Redlands Elks Lodge, the Ayres Hotel, and a Motel 6. North of the freeway are Toyota of Redlands, Empire Bowl, Quality Inn, Hertz, the Salvation Army Store, and single-family houses. Other buildings and points of interest within the New York Street/Esri Station Area include Orangewood High School and the Redlands Police Department. The parcels surrounding the proposed New York Street/Esri station are largely vacant and underutilized.

A. Goals. Based on robust input from stakeholders, the community, City staff, and City’s review bodies, the following goals for the New York Street/Esri Station Area were identified:

1. Infill vacant, under ulitilized parcels and parking lots with buildings that create a mixed-use, multi-modal village around the New York St. Station.

2. Generate active, walkable streets with wide sidewalks, shade trees, and safe pedestrian crossings.

3. Provide pedestrian and bicycle connections between the train station and the neighborhoods located north of the freeway.

4. Build housing for a variety of income levels and family types, including parents with children and seniors. Locate housing away from the freeway, near the station.

5. Introduce pocket parks, plazas, and greens that accommodate playgrounds, dog parks, and public art.

6. Complete the Orange Blossom Trail as a link between the three stations and between Jennie Davis Park, Sylvan Park, and new parks, greens, and plazas along the way.

7. Accommodate Esri’s expansion to the north and to the south of its campus.

B. Vision. The vacant and underutilized parcels located within a quarter mile of the New York Street/Esri Station are transformed into a lively, transit-oriented neighborhood. Tree lined streets and sidewalks provide safe and convenient access to the Station, the Esri Campus, and Downtown. Greens and neighborhoods parks provide residents living in surrounding multi-family buildings access to open space, and offer a place for office workers to get some fresh air or take their lunch break. Buildings accommodate housing for a variety of income levels and enable employees of Esri and other local businesses and institutions to live in Redlands.

C. Plan. The adjoining drawing illustrates how, based on input from stakeholders, the community, City staff, and the City’s review bodies, the New York Street Station Area could develop over time. Key components of this version of the New York Street Station University Village are described in further detail on the pages that follow.

Birdseye view of New York Street Station Area and Esri Campus Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:6
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 340 of 1815
Proposed New York Street Streetscape.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:7
FIGURE 2-2. ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN: NEW YORK STREET STATION AREA 5 4
3 2
1 8
7 6
3 3
4 3
3 5
5 9
LEGEND
New York Sreet/Esri Station
Neighborhood Park
Multi-Family Housing
Mixed-Use Development
5 Office Buildings
4 3
2 1 Parking Garage
Jennie Davis Park
Esri Campus
9 Mill Creek Zanja
8 7
6 5
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 341 of 1815

2. VISION

2.3.1. THE STATION
Located to the north of and within walking distance of the Esri campus.

Its platform is located just to the west of New York Street, enabling pedestrian access across the railroad tracks at New York Street. Unlike the two other stations, the New York Street/Esri Station does not provide commuter parking, although curb space for passenger pick-ups and drop-offs, taxi, and transportation network company drop-off is provided along Redlands Boulevard.

2.3.2. THE NEW YORK STREET NEIGHBORHOOD.

The New York Street Neighborhood is a pedestrian-friendly, transitoriented, neighborhood located to the north of the New York Street/Esri Station. Key components of the neighborhood include:

1. New, tree-lined streets that transform the vacant and underutilized megablocks into blocks that are in scale
Downtown’s traditional core and the surrounding pre-World War II neighborhoods.

2. New buildings that face and are accessed from the street.

Buildings with retail ground floors are located at the back of sidewalk, while buildings with residential ground floors are located behind small front yards. Buildings adjacent to the station face the station.

3. A new neighborhood park provides open space for residents living in surrounding multi-family buildings and/or employees working in nearby office buildings.

4. New York Street is enhanced with bike lanes and new street trees planted between on-street parallel parking spaces.

Proposed Redlands Bolverad Streetscape
Proposed Redlands Bolverad Streetscape
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:8
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 342 of 1815

2.3.3. REDLANDS BOULEVARD INFILL
The character, appearance, and configuration of Redlands Boulevard between Texas Street and Tennessee Street is improved in order to provide better access to the Station and to create a more inviting and attractive entry into the New York Street/Esri Station area and the Esri campus from the east and west and at New York Street. Key components include:

1. Infill of vacant and underutilized parcels along Redlands Boulevard with urban buildings that face and are accessed from the sidewalk.

2. The introduction of open spaces and landscaping on the narrow and triangular parcels that are too small to accommodate buildings.

3. The improvements of Redlands Boulevard with the introduction of missing sidewalks, a planted center median, bicycle lanes, and a crosswalk at New York Street.

Proposed Redlands Bolverad Streetscape
Ground floor retail. Street trees planted between parked cars.

Multi-family housing.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:9
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 343 of 1815
Existing conditions in the year 2020. Illustrative Phase 1. The following are built: the New York Street/Esri Station; the New York Street and Redlands Boulevard streetcape improvements; the street network and mixed-use and residential buildings on the parcels north of the Station.

Illustrative Phase 5. The following are built: the road connecting the Rambla to Citrus Avenue and the westbound I-10 Cypress Avenue off-ramp; the park-once garage; the mixed-use and residential building to the south of Central Avenue.

2.3.4. NEW YORK STREET/ESRI STATION AREA ILLUSTRATIVE BUILDOUT SCENARIO The below diagrams show how the New York Street/Esri Station Area as shown in the Illustrative Plan could develop over the next 30 years according to the transit oriented design principles described in Section

2.1 (Principles of Transit Oriented Development) and as governed by this Specific Plan’s Development Code (Chapter 4). Though the phasing sequence shown in the below diagrams could occur in a different order, consist of different projects, or contain parcels not shown in the sequence, the diagrams nevertheless demonstrate how the Plan Area could be developed in a manner that generates a genuine, urban environment that encourages walkablity and access to transit.

Illustrative Phase 4. The following are built: Buildings east of the neigborhood park.

Illustrative Phase 3. The following are built: buildings north of the neighborhood park.

Illustrative Phase 2. The following are built: commercial, residential, or mixed-use buildings along Redlands Boulevard.

2. VISION
Redlands Boulevard
Tennessee Street
Stuart Avenue
New York Street
Park Avenue
Texas Street
I-10 Freeway
New York Street
Tennessee Street
Stuart Avenue
New York Street
Park Avenue
Texas Street
I-10 Freeway
New York Street
Tennessee Street
Stuart Avenue
New York Street
Park Avenue
Texas Street
I-10 Freeway
New York Street
Tennessee Street
Stuart Avenue
New York Street
Park Avenue
Texas Street
I-10 Freeway
New York Street
Tennessee Street
Stuart Avenue
New York Street
Park Avenue
Texas Street
I-10 Freeway
New York Street
Tennessee Street
Stuart Avenue
New York Street
Park Avenue
Texas Street
I-10 Freeway
New York Street
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:10
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 344 of 1815

2.4. DOWNTOWN STATION AREA
The Downtown Station area contains the Downtown core and the historic Santa Fe Depot. The Downtown area, east of Orange Street, is pedestrian-friendly with commercial and mixed-use buildings built on small blocks and located adjacent to and accessed directly from the sidewalk. West of Orange Street, buildings and site design are more car-oriented, with buildings built on large blocks and many buildings located behind street-facing parking lots and/or facing the street with blank facades. Parcels west of the proposed station are largely vacant, underutilized, and primed for transit-oriented infill development. A few vacant packinghouse buildings to the north and south of the Santa Fe Depot provide opportunities for adaptive reuse with uses that can activate the station area.

The Mill Creek Zanja enters the Downtown Station Area from the east as an open trench to 9th Street, where it enters a culvert that passes underground through the majority of the Downtown Village.

A. Goals. Based on robust input from stakeholders, the community, City staff, and City review bodies, the following goals for the Downtown Station Area were developed

1. Create a mixed-use, multi-modal village around the Downtown Station.

2. Generate active, walkable streets with wide sidewalks, shade trees, benches, outdoor dining, and safe pedestrian crossings.

3. Recalibrate Downtown streets to create a balanced and safe environment for all travel modes: walking, biking, and driving.

4. Provide pedestrian and bicycle connections between the train station and Downtown’s unique destinations (Redlands Bowl, C.K. Smiley Library, etc.) and surrounding residential neighborhoods, especially those located north of the freeway.

5. Replace the Redlands Mall with an interconnected street and paseo network lined with street trees and urban buildings.

6. Infill vacant, underulitilized parcels and parking lots with buildings that are up to 3 or 4 stories in height, are designed according to a variety of architectural styles, and employ massing in character with Redlands’ historic buildings.

6. Preserve Downtown’s historic buildings and reference Redlands’ cultural heritage and agricultural past.

7. Build housing for a variety of income levels and family types, including parents with children and seniors.

8. Introduce pocket parks, plazas, and greens that accommodate playgrounds, dog parks, and public art.

9. Complete the Orange Blossom Trail as a link between the three stations and between Sylvan Park, Jennie Davis Park, and new parks, greens, and plazas along the way.

10. Introduce additional parking in structures lined with commercial or residential uses.

11. Accommodate alternative transportation forms such as Uber and Lyft.

B. Vision. The Downtown Station Area is envisioned as a walkable mixed-use district consisting of pedestrian-scaled blocks; beautiful, tree-lined streets with comfortable seating and exterior dining opportunities; and inviting squares and plazas. The urban character of Redlands’ Downtown core is expanded westward to Eureka Street and northward to the Downtown Station. Surface parking lots are infilled with urban buildings that are located at, and take access from the sidewalk. The primary entries into Downtown – Orange Street and Redlands Boulevard – are enhanced with new street trees and street lights, and other streetscape elements. Underutilized parcels and parking lots are infilled over time with urban buildings that face and are accessed from the sidewalk. Parking is accommodated on the street, and as downtown begins to infill, in parking garages.

C. Plan. The drawing below illustrates one way the Downtown Station Area could develop over the next twenty to thirty years. Key components of the Downtown Station area are described in further detail in the pages that follow.

Birdseye view of Downtown Station Area and Esri Campus
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:11
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 345 of 1815
Downtown Redlands Santa Fe Railway depot

2. VISION

2.4.1. STATION VICINITY
The Downtown Station is located adjacent to the historic Redlands Depot building. The station accommodates Arrow Passenger Rail trains and Metrolink Commuter Rail. The former provides all-day service and stops at a platform located in front of the historic depot; the latter provides limited morning and evening service and stops at a platform located on the north side of the tracks between Eureka Street and the Third Street right-of-way.

Key components of the area immediately surrounding the Downtown Station include:
• Rehabilitation of the Santa Fe Depot.
• A garage that provides parking for rail commuters and for patrons of nearby businesses. The garage also provides bicycle storage for commuters who ride their bikes to the train station.
• A pedestrian passage across the railroad tracks along the Third Street alignment that enables pedestrians to cross between the north and south side of the tracks and provides access to the train platforms buses parked on Stuart Avenue and/or Shoppers Lane.

The pedestrian passage is lined with stores and restaurants. • A plaza located south of the tracks that welcomes commuters and visiors arriving into Downtown Redlands.
• Bus parking along Stuart Avenue or Shoppers Lane within sight of, and walking distance of, the depot.

Route 10
Stuart Avenue
Colton Avenue
Brookside Avenue
Olive Avenue
Texas Street
Eureka Street
Redlands Boulevard
Third Street
Orange Street
Citrus Avenue
Sixth Street
High Avenue
Stuart Avenue
Church Street
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:12
FIGURE 2-4. ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN: DOWNTOWN STATION AREA
LEGEND
Downtown Station
Smiley Park
3 Midtown Neighborhood
2 1 Midtown Neighborhood Park
High Avenue Neighborhood
Mill Creek Zanja/Orange
Blossom Trail
5 4
6 1
2 3
4 5
6 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 346 of 1815

2.4.2. REDLANDS MALL
The Redlands Mall is reurbanized with the reintroduction of State Street and Third Street into the site, restoring the interconnected block pattern that existed prior to the construction of the Mall in the 1970s. Key components of the redeveloped Mall include:
• A new plaza or green, shown in the illustartive Plan at the corner of State Street and Third Street.
• A Market hall or other civic building facing the plaza or green. • New mixed-use and multi-family buildings, ranging from three to five stories in height, are located next to and accessed from the sidewalk. • Parking in a garage located at the center of the block and lined with retail, office, and/or residential uses.

See Chapter 3 for a more detailed description of the Redlands Mall.

2.4.3. HIGH AVENUE NEIGHBORHOOD
The low scale of the High Avenue Neighborhood is generally preserved and the Orange Blossom Trail is extended into the Neighborhood to Ninth Street. Key components of the neighborhood include:
• The incremental infill of vacant and underutilized parcels with buildings with street frontages that are generally in scale with the preWorld War II house-form buildings that are currently in place. • The introduction in the long term of a park-once garage as more infill continues and more parking is needed (shown on the Illustrative Plan between Seventh Street and Ninth Street).
• The continuation of the Orange Blossom Trail, flanked by a greenway, to Ninth Street.

2.4.4. DOWNTOWN INFILL
In order to enable continued infill within the Downtown Core, a parking garage is built on the existing Ed Hales parking lot, enabling surface parking lots to be infilled with buildings.

View of University Village Station Depot
Caption.

Caption.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:13
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 347 of 1815

2. VISION
Site Plan
2 1
4 3
6 5
10 9
11 13 8
7 14
10 10
Olive Avenue
Eureka Street
Stuart Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Third Street
Orange Street
Shoppers Lane
State Street
Citrus Avenue
Sixth Street
Brookside Avenue
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:14
FIGURE 2-5. ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN: DOWNTOWN STATION AREA
LEGEND
Arrow Platform
Metrolink Platform
Station Parking Garage
Station Plaza
Downtown Plaza
Market Hall
New Downtown Garage
4 3
2 1 Existing Garage
New Ed Hales Garage
Mixed-Use/Multi-Family
Rowhouses
Smiley Park
Smiley Park Extension
Hotel
10 9
8 10
6 5
11 12
13 7 14
12 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 348 of 1815

2.4.5. MIDTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD.

The Midtown Neighborhood is located between Eureka Street and Texas Street. It is a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly, neighborhood that provides multi-family housing within walking distance of the New York Street/Esri and Downtown Stations and in close proximity to the Downtown and the Esri Campus. New streets generate an interconnected street network scaled to the block sizes of Downtown and its surrounding pre-World War II neighborhoods. Key features include:
• New, tree-lined streets that generate walkable blocks that are consistent with Downtown Redlands’ traditional street and block pattern. • A neighborhood park between the railroad tracks and Oriental Avenue and east of Texas Street. The park is landscaped in the lush character of Esri’s existing campus.
• A greenway and park network along Stuart Avenue between the Midtown Park and Eureka Street that extends the lush landscape character of the ESRI campus eastward towards Downtown. • A variety of residential building types that face and are accessed from the street.

Courtyard housing envisioned for Cook Street.

Alley behind multi-family building.

Texas Street
Oriental Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
State Street
Stuart Avenue
Eureka Street
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:15
FIGURE 2-6. ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN: MIDTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD
2 1
4 3
6 5
4 4
4 5
LEGEND
Midtown Neighborhood Park
2 Courtyard Housing
1 Rowhouses
4 Multi-Family Housing
3 Retail
6 Downtown Station
5 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 349 of 1815
View of a multi-modal Redlands Boulevard with planted median and multi-family development.

View of park in Midtown Neighborhood.

Courtyard housing with usable, shared common space. Rowhouses facing a pedestrian passage.

2. VISION
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:16
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 350 of 1815

2.4.6. ILLUSTRATIVE BUILD-OUT SCENARIO
The below diagrams show how the Downtown Station Area as shown in the Illustrative Plan could develop over the next 30 years according to the transit oriented design principles described in Section 2.1 (Principles of Transit Oriented Development) and as governed by this Specific Plan’s Development Code (Chapter 4). Though the phasing sequence shown in the below diagrams could occur in a different order, consist of different projects, or contain parcels not shown in the sequence, the diagrams nevertheless demonstrate how the Plan Area could be developed in a manner that generates a genuine, urban environment, encourages walkablity, and promotes retail and entertainment activity Existing conditions in the year 2020. Illustrative Phase 1. The following are built: the Station platforms; the Station Parking Garage; the Station Plaza; retail along the Third Street pedestrian passage across the tracks; retail buildings along Stuart Avenue at Eureka Street, Oriental Avenue at Eureka Street, and Shoppers Lane at Orange Street; the Orange Street streetscape improvements; and incremental development in the East of Orange Neighborhood.

Illustrative Phase 2. The following are built: the Redlands Mall, including the street extensions into the Mall megablock, the plaza, the parking garage, and mixed-use and residential buildings; the Redlands Boulevard streetscape improvements; the Midtown Neighborhood Park; housing along the south side of Stuart Avenue just to the west of Texas Street; and incremental development in the East of Orange Neighborhood.

Illustrative Phase 3. The following are built: buildings on the parcels immediately to the north, to the west, and to the south of the Mall block; incremental development in the East of Orange Neighborhood.

Illustrative Phase 4. The following are built: the Midtown Neighborhood, including the street network, open spaces, and multi-family buildings; infill development in the Downtown core along Redlands Boulevard and Citrus Avenue.

Illustrative Phase 5. The following are built: the East of Orange Garage to spur additional infill development within the East of Orange Neighborhood; transformation of the Police Annex Building block into northeast end of Smiley Park; a parking garage on the Ed Hales parking lot, if necessary.

Eureka Street
Citrus Avenue
Church Street
Sixth Street
Olive Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Orange Street
Brookside Avenue
Texas Street
State Street
Colton Avenue
Ninth Street
Eureka Street
Citrus Avenue
Church Street
Sixth Street
Olive Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Orange Street
Brookside Avenue
Texas Street
State Street
Colton Avenue
Ninth Street
Eureka Street
Citrus Avenue
Church Street
Sixth Street
Olive Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Orange Street
Brookside Avenue
Texas Street
State Street
Colton Avenue
Ninth Street
Eureka Street
Citrus Avenue
Church Street
Sixth Street
Olive Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Orange Street
Brookside Avenue
Texas Street
State Street
Colton Avenue
Ninth Street
Eureka Street
Citrus Avenue
Church Street
Sixth Street
Olive Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Orange Street
Brookside Avenue
Texas Street
State Street
Colton Avenue
Ninth Street
Eureka Street
Citrus Avenue
Church Street
Sixth Street
Olive Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Stuart Avenue
Orange Street
Brookside Avenue
Texas Street
State Street
Colton Avenue
Ninth Street
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:17
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 351 of 1815
Wide sidewalks.

A mixed-use building.

Birds-eye view of University Village from the northwest. The University of Redlands is visible in the forground left and Sylvan Park in foreground right.

2. VISION

2.5. UNIVERSITY STREET STATION AREA
The majority of change within the University Street Station Area is anticipated to occur on the vacant and underutilized parcels located east of University Street, south of Sylvan Boulevard, west of Grove Street and Cook Street, and north of Citrus Avenue. Blocks within the University Transit Village, especially near the proposed station site, are large.

Parcels located north of the I-10 freeway and west of University Street are occupied by Sylvan Park, single-family houses, and some multifamily buildings. The southeast portion of the Village is occupied primarily by multifamily buildings. Like the other station areas, most of the land surrounding the proposed station site is vacant, underutilized, and ready for development.

A. Vision. The University Village is envisioned to be a vibrant, inviting, urban, mixed-use place where people want to live, work, shop, dine, have a cup of coffee, study, watch a movie, or simply walk around.

Conceived as the “town” counterpart to the University of Redlands “gown,” it provides a host of amenities for students, faculty, staff, and alumni within walking distance of the campus. It also provides retail, service, and dining offerings for University Village residents and residents of surrounding neighborhoods, and is a retail, dining, and entertainment destination for people living in the surrounding region.

Built on a pedestrian-friendly, interconnected street and block network, it is a place that is easy to get to, whether on foot, bicycle, train, or car; is well connected to its surroundings, including the campus, Sylvan Park, and surrounding neighborhoods. It embraces and enhances the open space and recreation amenities of Sylvan Park and the extended Orange Blossom Trail and greenway.

B. Plan. The adjoining drawing illustrates one way the University Village could develop over the next couple of decades. Subject to a variety of development variables, the Village will more than likely be developed with a pattern of buildings and places different from the ones shown. Key areas of this version of the University Village are described in further detail on the following pages.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:18
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 352 of 1815
University Street streetscape improvements between Park Avenue and Sylvan Bouevard. 3 5
2 1
7 2
6 6
5 8
4 3
University Street
Cook Street
Grove Street
Cypress Avenue
Central Avenue
Sylvan Boulevard
Park Avenue
I-10 Freeway
Colton Avenue
Citrus Avenue
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:19
FIGURE 2-3. ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN: UNIVERSITY VILLAGE
LEGEND
Station
North Village
Village Center
4 South Village
3 2
1 Rambla
Sylvan Neighborhood
Sylvan Park
Zanja Greenway
7 6
5 8
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 353 of 1815

2. VISION

2.5.1. THE STATION
The center of the Village will be the University Street Station, the terminus of the proposed nine-mile long Arrow passenger rail line connecting the University of Redlands to the San Bernardino Transit Center. Key elements include:
• A new, tree-lined street couplet, Park Avenue North and Park Avenue South, that flanks the station, providing access to University Village and to commuter parking.
• A new station depot building, incorporating classical revival elements of the historic Downtown Redlands Station and the cupola of the University of Redlands’ own Memorial Chapel. Designed as a gateway, it greets students, visitors, residents, and office workers arriving to the Village and campus, while sheltering those waiting for departing trains.
• Strong pedestrian connections to the Village and across University Street to Sylvan Park.

Rambla

2.5.2. THE NORTH VILLAGE
Located north of the University Village Train Station, the North Village links the Train Station and the Village Center to the University, providing academic and campus-oriented uses. Key features include:
• A direct pedestrian connection to the campus from the train station across Park Avenue and up a new staircase to the existing green located between Ann Peppers Hall and the Theater Arts Building. • New academic buildings arranged around a quadrangle in what is now the existing parking lot north of the Theater Arts Building and Ann Peppers Hall. These new buildings bridge the existing gap between Ann Peppers Hall, the Theater Arts Building and the rest of the campus.
• The northern end of the Rambla, a distinctive and extraordinary thoroughfare between Central Avenue and Sylvan Boulevard with travel lanes on either side of a wide median. Paved with cobblestones or pavers, the Rambla median could also be configured to accommodate angled parking. The Rambla defines the image of University Village and is the principal destination for visitors. Mixed-use buildings front the Rambla with retail ground floors and residential, office, or academic upper floors. The portion located north of the University Village Train Station, will provide University-serving uses.
• A Central Park located to the east of the train station within the railroad right-of-way. Shown park uses are an amphitheater and a passive park, although other uses, could also be accommodated.

The park can also detain rainwater during major flood events. A small open pavilion that could accommodate events such as weddings, concerts, arts and crafts fairs, or other similar temporary uses could be introduced between Central Park and the Station. • A University-oriented hotel and conference center located on the block east of the Rambla. The hotel fronts Central Park to the south and a pond that stores non-potable irrigation water to the north. • As the North Village infills over time, a new parking structure, located north of Ann Peppers Hall accommodates campus parking.

The parking structure is lined with ground floor retail uses and upper floor office or residential uses.

University Street
Cook Street
Sylvan Boulevard
Park Avenue North
Park Avenue South
Park Avenue
Park Avenue
LEGEND
Station and Pavilion
Sylvan Park
Academic Buildings
Rambla
Central Park
4 3
2 1 Hotel
Pond
Parking Garage
Mixed-use Buildings
University of Redlands
8 7
6 9
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
5 10
9 9
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:20
10 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 354 of 1815
The original Rambla in Barcelona, Spain.

Arcade facing the University Village Rambla. This alternative shows angled parking in the Rambla median.

Plan and elevation of view of proposed University Village Station Pavilion.

A non-potable water pond.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:21
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 355 of 1815

2. VISION

2.5.3. THE VILLAGE CENTER
The Village Center is located between the proposed University Village train station and Citrus Avenue. Within walking distance of the campus, Sylvan Park, and the neighborhoods to the south and east, the Village Center will be a lively destination for visitors, shoppers, students, and surrounding residents, as well as an inviting place to live and/or work.

Key components of the Village Center include:
• Mixed-use blocks with ground floors that accommodate
neighborhood-serving retail uses such as banks, pharmacies, personal services, real estate and financial services, florists, a mail center, quick casual food, bakeries, coffee shops, and restaurants.

Additional uses could include a cinema and bookstore, lined with ground floor retail uses that hide the “black box” functions of the theaters.
• A market hall or grocery store at the terminus of Station Street, on axis with the train station.
• Parking located in on-street parallel or angled spaces and in a parking lot or park-once garage located between the Market Hall and the freeway.
• Residential courtyard buildings along the eastern edge, facing Cook Street. The building facing Central Park could be either an allresidential building or a mixed-use building with ground floor retail uses.
• Station-serving parking located in on-street parallel or angled stalls and in parking lots and/or a park-once garage located in the Rambla– South area of the Village. University Street
Central Avenue
Rambla
Park Avenue North
Park Avenue South
Station Street

2.5.3. THE VILLAGE SOUTH
The Village South is located between Central Avenue and Citrus Avenue. Due to its proximity to the freeway, the Village Center could accommodate regional serving uses, particularly if a direct connection into the Village from the westbound Cypress Avenue freeway exit ramps is introduced. Key components of the Village South include:
• The new street that provides direct access to University Village from the westbound I-10 off-ramp, enhancing regional access to University Village’s retail, dining, and entertainment offerings.
• A roundabout at the end of the westbound Cypress Avenue off-ramp at Cypress Avenue. The Roundabout could contain unique landscape, public art, or signage announcing entry into the University Village. • Commercial and mixed-use buildings that house regional retail uses such as fashion and shoe stores, home furnishings, art and gifts stores, and restaurants. Other uses could include a hotel with conference facilities and signature restaurant. Upper floor uses are residential, office, or a combination of the two.
• As the Village infills over time, a park-once garage lined with occupiable uses (stores, offices, or residential lofts) will be introduced – shown on the Illustrative Plan at the corner of Citrus Avenue and Cook Street.
• Residential courtyard buildings along Cook Street.

Citrus Avenue
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 7
7 7
8 8
9 Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:22
LEGEND
Station and Pavilion
Sylvan Park
Rambla
Central Park
Market Hall
4 3
2 1 Theater
Mixed-use Blocks
Multi-Family Buildings
Parking Garage
8 7
6 9
5 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 356 of 1815
View of the New Zanja as it passes through the Village Center.

View down Station Street towards the Market Hall.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:23
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 357 of 1815
Illustrative Plan of Sylvan Neighborhood
View of the Mill Creek Zanja and greenway as it passes by the Sylvan Neighborhood.

House-form multi-family buildings A shared courtyard. Multi-use bicycle trail.

2. VISION

2.5.4. THE SYLVAN NEIGHBORHOOD
The Sylvan Neighborhood occupies
the blocks to the east of the North
Village area and south of the Zanja. It
is devoted solely to residential uses
in stacked-flats, courtyard buildings,
rowhouses, or bungalow courts.

Buildings are set back from the street
behind small front yards and provide
on-site shared open space in the form
of courtyards or backyards. Streets
are narrow, tree-lined, and flanked by
sidewalks and continuous landscape
planters.

The Zanja and the extension of the
Orange Blossom/Zanja Trail run
along the northern edge of the Sylvan
Neighborhood, providing convenient
access to recreation and the Zanja’s
natural setting.

LEGEND
1 Multi- Family Housing 2 Zanja Greenway 3 University of Redlands 1 1 1
Park Avenue
Cook Street
Grove Street
Sylvan Boulevard
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:24
3 2
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 358 of 1815

2.5.5. ILLUSTRATIVE BUILD-OUT SCENARIO
The below diagrams show how University Village as shown in the Illustrative Plan could develop over the next 30 years according to the transit oriented design principles described in Section 2.1 (Principles of Transit Oriented Development) and as governed by this Specific Plan’s Development Code (Chapter 4). Though the phasing sequence shown in the below diagrams could occur in a different order, consist of different projects, or contain parcels not shown in the sequence, the diagrams nevertheless demonstrate how the Plan Area could be developed in a manner that generates a genuine, urban environment, encourages walkablity, and promotes retail and entertainment activity Existing conditions in the year 2020. Illustrative Phase 1. The following are built: the University Street Station and Pavilion; the Park Street couplet; the commuter parking lot east of the Station; the University Street streetscape improvements; the stormwater improvements, including the non-potable irrigation pond and riparian creek; the Orange Blossom Trail; and the Sylvan Neigborhood.

Illustrative Phase 2. The following are built: the Rambla between Park Street and Central Avenue and the mixed-use and residential blocks south of the Station.

Illustrative Phase 3. The following are built: the Rambla between Park Street and Sylvan Boulevard; the buildings along both sides of the Rambla; the North Village parking garage; the hotel and conference center; the academic building to the west of the parking garage.

Illustrative Phase 4. The following are built: the Central Park and the mixed-use and residential building to the south.

Sylvan Boulevard
University Street
Citrus AvenueCook Street
Grove Street
Central Avenue
Park Avenue
I-10 Freeway
Cypress Avenue
University Street
Citrus AvenueCook Street
Grove Street
Cypress Avenue
Central Avenue
Sylvan Boulevard
Park Avenue
I-10 Freeway
University Street
Citrus AvenueCook Street
Grove Street
Cypress Avenue
Central Avenue
Sylvan Boulevard
Park Avenue
I-10 Freeway
University Street
Citrus AvenueCook Street
Grove Street
Cypress Avenue
Central Avenue
Sylvan Boulevard
Park Avenue
I-10 Freeway
University Street
Citrus AvenueCook Street
Grove Street
Cypress Avenue
Central Avenue
Sylvan Boulevard
Park Avenue
I-10 Freeway
University Street
Citrus AvenueCook Street
Grove Street
Cypress Avenue
Central Avenue
Sylvan Boulevard
Park Avenue
I-10 Freeway
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:25
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 359 of 1815

2.6. BUILDING TYPES
Critical to realizing diverse, walkable neighborhoods is the introduction of buildings that enable and form such an environment. Characteristics of these buildings include:
• Buildings are generally located at the front of the lot. • Parking is generally located behind buildings. Where surface parking abuts the street, it is screened with a low hedge, a low wall, or landscape.
• Buildings face the street and open spaces with ample windows. • Buildings with residential ground floors are set back behind small front yards and entered directly from the sidewalk through porches, stoops, courtyards, or common lobbies.
• Buildings with commercial ground floors are located at the back of sidewalk and entered directly from the sidewalk through shopfronts. • Upper floor uses in mixed-use buildings are accessed through lobbies that, in turn, are accessed directly from the sidewalk. • Architectural style is secondary to how buildings are deployed and how they relate to the street and neighboring buildings. A building can contribute to a walkable, pedestrian-friendly environment regardless of its architectural style.

2. VISION
Six or more house buildings arranged linearly along either side of a common green. Having the same right-of-way width as a narrow neighborhood street, the Rosewalk (in contrast to the Bungalow Court) connects two parallel streets. Pedestrian access to the building entrances is from the common green and/or primary street. Rosewalks are prohibited on corner lots.

Primary Street (Front)
Side Street
Primary Street (Front)

ROSEWALK

BUNGALOW
COURT

DUPLEX/TRIPLEX/

QUADPLEX

ROWHOUSES
D
C
E
F
C Rosewalk
Carriage Houses are independent buildings that share a project site with a street-facing single family house (“primary building”). Carriage Houses are smaller than the primary building and are located at the rear of the project site in one of the following configurations: a detached building; a detached building above or beside a garage.

Carriage houses can double the number of dwelling units on a singlefamily house neighborhood street.

A Carriage House
Houses are one-unit residential buildings surrounded on all four sides by setbacks (front yard, side yards, rear yard). On-site open space is provided through a rear yard.

B House
Side Street
Side Street
Side Street
HOUSE

COURT G

LIVE/ H WORK
B

MIXED-USE

CARRIAGE HOUSE

I BLOCK
A
Alley
Building Types
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:26
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 360 of 1815
Rowhouses in a Live-Work configuration consist of an integrated housing unit and working space, occupied and utilized by a single household in a structure, either single-family or multi-family, that has been designed or structurally modified to accommodate joint residential occupancy and work activity.

A building designed for occupancy by retail, service, and/or office uses on the ground floor, with upper floors configured for residential or office uses. Ground floor uses are accessed directly from the sidewalk through a shopfront. Upper floors are accessed from the street through a street-level lobby, an elevator, and corridors.

Rowhouse (Live-Work Variant).

Mixed-Use Block
F
I
Large houses that contain two, three, or four dwellings, respectively, and are surrounded on all four sides by setbacks (front yard, side yard, rear yard). On-site open space is provided by a rear yard that serves all the dwellings.

E Duplex/Triplex-Quadplex
Five or more House buildings arranged around a shared courtyard, with pedestrian access to the building entrances from the courtyard and/or fronting street. The courtyard is wholly open to the street and parking is placed in the rear of the lot or behind each unit. Bungalow courts are prohibited on corner lots that do not have alley access.

D Bungalow Court
A group of attached dwelling units arranged to share one or more common courtyards, with pedestrian access to each unit directly from the courtyard or the street through porch or stoop frontage types. The courtyard is intended to be a shared outdoor area that is visible from and accessed from the Primary Street. Courtyard buildings may accommodate residential or commercial uses.

G Court.

Two or more attached dwelling units arrayed side by side, with the ground floor typically raised above grade to promote privacy. The building is located at the front of the lot, with parking behind in tuckunder garages or standalone garages separated from the primary building by a rear yard. Rowhouses are typically set back behind a small front yard and are accessed directly from the sidewalk through a stoop or porch frontage.

H Live-Work Building
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:27
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 361 of 1815

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

2. VISION
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

2:28
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 362 of 1815

3.0. INTRODUCTION
The Redlands Mall site provides an opportunity to revitalize an underperforming site that occupies an important junction between the Downtown Passenger Rail Station, the Downtown commercial core, Sylvan Park, and the neighborhoods to the south. The Mall site originally consisted of six Downtown blocks that accommodated a variety of commercial and mixed-use buildings that were demolished in 1977 to make room for the Mall. With the exception of the CVS Pharmacy and some stores in the standalone retail building at the corner of Redlands Boulevard and Orange Street, the Mall is currently vacant, and has been since 2010.

This chapter provides a brief background and description of the existing conditions of the Mall site, a vision for the future redevelopment of the site, and a summary of important design considerations needed to generate development that is consistent with a pedestrian-friendly, mixeduse, transit-oriented, downtown setting.

This Redlands Mall Chapter is comprised of the following sections:

3.1. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3:2

3.2. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3:4

3.3. Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3:5 Bird’s-eye view of the existing Redlands Mal site. View of the Redlands Mall looking west from State Street towards Orange Street.

Bird’s-eye view of a revitalized Redlands Mall site. View of the redeveloped Redlands Mall site from State Street at Orange Street.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

3:1
CHAPTER 3: REDLANDS MALL
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 363 of 1815
1888 Bird’s-eye view of Redlands looking southeast. The most important intersection (“100% corner”) of Redlands’ original town center can be seen at the at the intersection of State Street and Orange Street (A.K. Smiley Public Library Archives).

3. REDLANDS MALL

3.1. BACKGROUND
The Redlands Mall is located on an approximately 11 acre site bounded by Orange Street, Redlands Boulevard, Eureka Street, and Citrus Avenue.

The site is located at the intersection of State Street and Orange Street – an intersection that from its earliest beginnings was Downtown’s most important corner. A 1888 Sanborn Insurance Map shows the intersection to be the only one that has buildings on all four corners (see page 3:3). Similarly, a birds-eye map from the same period shows Downtown’s principal commercial and mixed-use buildings lining State Street, focusing on the intersection with Orange Street.

The construction of important buildings at the intersection over the ensuing thirty to forty years – the First National Bank Building in 1914 and the La Posada Hotel in 1931 in particular – demonstrates the continued status of State Street and Orange Street as Redlands’ “100 percent corner.” These buildings not only welcomed visitor, but also marked Downtown’s presence for passing motorists, who may not be stopping in Downtown, but definitely knew they were passing through it. Even with the introduction of Highway 99 along Redlands Boulevard, which undoubtedly diverted through-traffic away from State Street, the important status of State Street and its intersection with Orange Street continued.

Downtown’s pre-World War II buildings, originally designed and built to accommodate people disembarking from trolley or train lines, were pedestrian-oriented. Typically set flush with the back of sidewalk with wall or projecting signage oriented toward pedestrians, their scale and ornamentation aimed to attract passing pedestrians. As automobiles replaced the trolleys and trains as the predominant form of transportation, Downtown continued to accommodate cars with onstreet parking and signage oriented towards pedestrians and passing cars.

Following World War II, Redlands’ commercial built environment underwent profound changes. New construction expanded well beyond the original downtown commercial district, first following the new Highway 99 route along Redlands Boulevard, then shifting north to cater to traffic on Interstate 10 (completed in 1962). Meanwhile, many existing buildings within the original commercial core were demolished, making way for construction on various scales: single buildings on single lots, multi-parcel parking lots, and shopping centers occupying one or more entire blocks. Chief among these was the Redlands Mall.

Completed in 1977, the Mall was built according to the urban renewal principles of the 1960s and 1970s of “clearing away” under-performing, “obsolete” buildings to make room for expanded civic centers, apartments, and new retail, typically in the form of shopping malls. The development of the Mall resulted in the leveling of six Downtown blocks, including the First National Bank building, the La Posada Hotel, and the Redlands Elks Club, as well as numerous stores and businesses.

The “100 percent corner” status of the intersection – eroded away by the presence of surface parking lots between the sidewalk and the windowless Mall building – was immediately lost.

Planned with the intention of revitalizing Downtown Redlands, the twostory Mall contained more than 173,000 square feet of enclosed leasable space, including space for a department store anchor (first Harris’ and then Gottschalks), and a 12,586-square-foot freestanding retail building at the corner of Orange Street and Redlands Boulevard.

During the mid 1990s the mall began showing signs of decline as popular, nationwide stores began to gradually be replaced by independent tenants. In 1998, Gottschalks acquired Harris’ and the Mall’s Harris’ store was replaced by Gottschalks. The Mall’s decline continued into the early 2000s as sales dropped to precipitously low levels. In 2009, Gottschalks filed for bankruptcy and closed all stores, including the Redlands Mall location. After struggling financially following the closure of Gottschalks, the Mall was closed for good on September 30, 2010 and all leases were immediately terminated. Except for the CVS Pharmacy and the stores in the freestanding retail building at the corner of Redlands Boulevard and Orange Street (Denny’s, Union Bank, and a Mattress Showroom), the Mall remains closed to this day.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

3:2
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 364 of 1815
State Street looking west towards Orange Street during the 1940s. The First National Bank Building can be seen to the left and the La Posada Hotel to the right. State Street beyond Orange Street was vacated in 1977 to make room for the Redlands Mall (A.K. Smiley Public Library Archives).

The First National Bank Building, originally located on the southwest corner of State Street and Orange Street, was demolished in 1975.

The La Posada Hotel, originally located on the northwest corner of State Street and Orange Street, was demolished in 1975.
1959 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map. The brown parcels along the west side of Orange Street at State Street are the First National Bank (south) and La Posada Hotel (north). 1888 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map. Note buildings on all four corners of States Street and Orange Street.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

3:3
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 365 of 1815
The Redlands Transfer Center is an uninviting and unappealing place to wait for and transfer between buses.

3. REDLANDS MALL

3.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Surrounded on all sides by surface parking lots, the Mall building is located at the center of the site, is completely internally oriented, and lacks street-facing windows. When it was still open for business, the Mall was accessed from one entrance on the east side and two along the north and south sides (one into the Mall and the other directly into the anchor store). A vine-covered trellis connects the Mall’s Orange Street entrance to Orange Street along the State Street alignment.

In stark contrast to Downtown’s traditional, pedestrian-oriented blocks and buildings located to the east of Orange Street, this configuration inhibits north-south circulation (between the Downtown Station, Smiley Park, and the neighborhoods to the south) and east-west circulation (between Downtown, the Esri campus, and neighborhoods to the west), and has compromised the “100% corner” status that Orange Street and State Street once held.

Currently the surface parking lots along Orange Street provide visitors with convenient parking across the street from Downtown stores, restaurants, and businesses located east of Orange Street, as well as for special events such as Market Night.

In addition, there is a stormwater easement on the southeast corner of Eureka Street and Redlands Boulevard. Construction on the corner can only occur if the subterranean stormwater pipe that crosses through the easement is relocated.

The Redlands Mall along Redlands Boulevard currently serves as Redlands’ transfer center, providing timed transfers between four bus lines – see Section 5.5 (Transit Network) for more information. Because of the urban unfriendly design of the Mall, the bus stop is an uninviting and unappealing place to wait for and transfer between buses.

The demolition of the First National Bank Building. The vacant Redlands Mall (photo courtesy San Bernardino Sun).

Vine-covered arcades provide pedestrian access between the Mall and Orange Street.

The Redlands Mall fronts Redlands Boulevard with a blank, windowless wall, and a surface parking lot.

The entrance to the Gottschalks entrance, boarded up since 2009.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

3:4
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 366 of 1815
Illustrative Plan of the revitalized Redlands Mall site.

3.3. VISION
Located within easy walking distance of the Downtown Station and various bus and bicycle routes, Smiley Park, and restaurants and stores along State Street and Orange Street, the Mall site is transformed into a vibrant pedestrian-oriented extension of Downtown, reminiscent of what existed prior to the construction of the Mall in 1977. Key features include:
• The extension of State Street, Third Street, and/or Fourth Street into the site, resurrecting the interconnected block network that existing prior to the Mall, encouraging pedestrians and others to move through and into the site, rather than being forced to traverse around the site. • The extension into the Mall site of the landscape character of State Street east of Orange Street (large canopy trees located in the street between angled parking spaces).
• New streets (whether public or private) detailed with sidewalks, curbs, street trees, street lights, and, as applicable, street furniture. • A plaza or park that provides outdoor space for Downtown residents, employees, shoppers, and visitors and that can accommodate events and activities such as Redlands’ annual New Year’s Eve festivities. A market hall or civic building could be introduced adjacent to the plaza or park. A park or common area for the adjacent housing can also be introduced over the stormwater easement.
• New mixed-use and multi-family buildings that are located next to and accessed directly from the sidewalk and face the street and proposed plaza/park with ample windows and ground floor frontage elements that provide a pedestrian-friendly transition from the sidewalk to the building – shopfronts for retail and restaurant uses, and stoops or lobbies with articulated entries for residences. Ranging from three to five stories in height, these buildings employ massing strategies in character with Redlands’ historic buildings.
• Parking in a subterranean garage(s) and/or a garage(s) located at the center of the block and lined with retail, office, and/or residential uses in order to provide sufficient parking and to enable the creation of a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented public realm.

Eureka Street
State Street
Third Street
Orange Street
Oriental Avenue
Citrus Avenue
Brookside Avenue
Sixth Street
Redlands Boulevard Fourth Street
Shoppers Lane
Example of an urban plaza (Healdsburg, California).

The landscape of State Street is extended westward into the Mall site.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

3:5
2 3
5 4
7 LEGEND
Downtown Station
State Street Extension
Third Street Extension
Fourth Street Extension
Plaza and Park
Park or Common Area over
Stormwater Easement
Parking Garage
Existing Downtown
Smiley Park
3 2
1 5
4 6
7 8
1 8
9 6
9 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 367 of 1815
Bird’s-eye view of a revitalized Redlands Mall site.

New building on Mall site reminiscent in deisgn to the demolished La Posada Hotel.

3. REDLANDS MALL

3.3. VISION (CONTINUED)
A market hall building.

An urban park.

Active sidewalks.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

3:6
Eureka Street
Third Street
Orange Street
Fourth Street
Redlands Boulevard
Citrus Avenue
Shoppers Lane
State Street
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 368 of 1815
A. Alternatives. The Illustrative Plan on the previous page and the three alternatives on this page show three of many different ways the Redlands Mall could be redeveloped into a walkable, pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use, transit-oriented destination. Key attributes of each alternative are:

1. Alternative 1. State Street and Third Street are extended through the site with the section between Third and Euareka streets being pedestrian-only. A new plaza or park is introduced on the west side of Orange Street, centered on State Street and terminating the vista from either direction. Cars navigate around the north and south sides of the plaza or park. A park is also introduced on the stormwater easement that crosses the southeast corner of Eureka street and Redlands Boulevard. A new lined parking garage is built on the block bounded by Orange Street, Redlands Boulevard, State Street, and Third Street.

2. Alternative 2. State Street, Third Street, and Fourth Street are extended into the site. Like Alternative 1, a plaza or park is introduced centered on State Street, but at the center of the site. A new lined parking garage is located on the block bounded by Eureka Street, Redlands Boulevard, Third Street, and State Street, assuming the stormwater pipe is relocated.

3. Alternative 3. State Street, Third Street, and Fourth Street are extended into the site. A north-south linear park flanks the Third Street and Fourth Street extensions, connecting Redlands Boulevard to Citrus Avenue. Like Alternative 2, a new lined parking garage is located on the block bounded by Eureka Street, Redlands Boulevard, Third Street, and State Street, assuming the stormwater pipe is relocated.

All of the alternatives extend the existing landscape character of State Street into the site, provide new buildings with pedestrian-oriented ground floors and massing that is consistent with Redlands’ historic buildings (both existing and demolished), and provide a comfortable and attractive place for transit riders to wait for buses and other transit options along Redlands Boulevard. Regardless of how the site develops, proposed designs must adhere to the principles of transit oriented development described in Section 2.1 and to the standards of the Development Code (Chapter 4).

State Street
Orange Street
Citrus Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Eureka Street
Fourth Street
State Street
Orange Street
Citrus Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Eureka Street
Fourth Street
State Street
Orange Street
Citrus Avenue
Redlands Boulevard
Eureka Street
Fourth Street
Third Street Third Street
State Street extension through the Redlands Mall site.

A parking garage located at the center of the block and lined with commercial uses.

A new building with varied massing.

Redlands Mall Illustrative Alternative 3 (with connected parks concept).

Redlands Mall Illustrative Alternative 1 (with pedestrian paseo concept).

Redlands Mall Illustrative Alternative 2 (with central park/plaza concept).

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

3:7
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 369 of 1815

3. REDLANDS MALL

3.3. VISION (CONTINUED)
B. Design Considerations. The pedestrian-scaled, downtown character envisioned for the Mall site requires that new buildings, open spaces, and streets be designed together to generate a walkable, pedestrianscaled environment. Key design considerations, further elaborated in the Development Code (Chapter 4), needed to achieve this end, include:

1. Building Design. New buildings on the Mall site must be designed not as over-sized, monolithic structures, but as a series of smaller scale buildings, similar to those currently found in Downtown and to historic buildings that have been demolished over the years.

This is achieved by introducing multiple buildings on each bock, or designing single buildings to appear like multiple buildings.

Strategies for achieving this include:
• Employing interesting building articulation strategies. • Assigning unique architectural styles or design treatments to individual buildings or portions of buildings.
• Accentuating corner buildings and/or providing corner plazas. • Providing a variety of frontage elements, and varying their type, design, and/or detailing.
• Varying how residential buildings are accessed, including direct access from the sidewalk through a stoop or porch, or through a common lobbies.
• Designing buildings along Orange Street to be compatible with the massing and scale of the historic buildings along the west side of Orange Street (across the street from the Mall site).

See Section 4.5 (Building Articulation and Massing Standards), Section 4.6 (Frontage Standards), Section 4.7 (Building Design Standards), and Section 4.15 (Special Lot Conditions)

2. Open Space Design. The Mall’s plaza or park must be designed as an attractive, inviting, comfortable outdoor room. Key design components include:
• The park or plaza must be at least one third of an acre in size (0.33 acre) and must front at least one street.
• Visibility from one side of the park or plaza to the other is essential. Hedges, walls, and other visual impediments must be kept low and to a minimum.
• Adjacent buildings must face the park or plaza with windows, doors, and appropriate frontage types. Park-facing ground floor uses should be retail and/or restaurant uses.
• Access to the park or plaza must be provided from adjacent sidewalks by accessible paths that are consistent with the design theme of the park or plaza and with its urban, downtown setting.

See Section 4.16 (Park, Plaza, and Open Space Design Standards) of the Development Code for more detailed requirements.

3. Block Design. A street and block network must be introduced in order to generate a walkable, interconnected, Downtown environment. New streets must accommodate automobile traffic and on-street parking, although State Street between the Third Street alignment and Eureka Street may be pedestrian-only. See Section

4.14 (Block Design Standards) of the Development Code and Section

5.6 (Street Types) for more detailed requirements.

4. Street Design. The design of new streets within the Mall site and new streetscapes along existing surrounding streets must be designed to promote an inviting, active, walkable, downtown environment. Key design components include:
• Street trees that provide shade, do not uplift sidewalks, and can thrive in an urban environment.
• Pedestrian-scaled street lighting.
• Street furnishings such as benches, waste receptacles, bicycle racks, and similar items that help to define pedestrian use areas. Additional and optional amenities include tables, chairs, umbrellas, kiosks, and planters.

See Section 4.16 (Street and Streetscape Design Standards) of the Development Code for more detailed requirements.

A downtown plaza hosts an evening concert.

A mixed-use building with a corner tower element.

A multi-family building with varied floor heights.

A new street detailed with curbs, street trees, and street lights.

Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California

3:8
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10-18-22 370 of 1815
CHAPTER 4: DEVELOPMENT CODE
Transit Villages Specific Plan
Redlands, California
4:1
Church St.

Stuart Ave.

Route 10
Redlands Blvd.

Citrus Ave.

Cajon St.

Cypress Ave.

State St.

Orange St.Sixth St.

Brookside Ave.

Ninth St.

Clark Ave.

4.0. INTRODUCTION
The Development Code provides standards for implementing the City's goals of meeting State of California mandates to increase housing supply, especially near transit stations, and of creating walkable, mixeduse districts and neighborhoods comprised of beautiful streets and open spaces that are fronted by buildings that accommodate a variety of housing, office, and retail opportunities within walking and biking distance of the three proposed Redlands Passenger Rail stations, the Downtown commercial district, Smiley and Sylvan Parks, and the Esri and University of Redlands campuses.

To this end, the Development Code provides land use and design standards for the development of buildings on private property that face and are accessed from the street through appropriate frontage types; locate parking either subterranean or at the center of the block; have massing and articulation that resembles a series of smaller scale buildings in keeing with Redlands' small town character; and that provide on-site open spaces conceived as outdoor rooms, not just leftover space to be landscaped. The Development Code also provides street and block standards designed to break up the automobileoriented megablocks surrounding each station through the introduction of pedestrian-scaled streets and blocks that are consistent in scale with the those of Downtown and the surrounding pre-World War II residential neighborhoods. Development Code Sections are: