Agenda packet — Redlands City Council, December 19, 2023 (part 5 of 6)

September 15, 2021
Stefanie Griffin
FirstCarbon Solutions
Via Email to: [email protected] & [email protected] Re: Native American Tribal Consultation, Pursuant to the Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), Amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014), Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 (m), 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2 and 21084.3, Redlands Song Property Project, San Bernardino County Dear Ms. Griffin:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (c), attached is a consultation list of tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the above-listed project. Please note that the intent of the AB 52 amendments to CEQA is to avoid and/or mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources, (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)) (“Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource.”) Public Resources Code sections 21080.3.1 and 21084.3(c) require CEQA lead agencies to consult with California Native American tribes that have requested notice from such agencies of proposed projects in the geographic area that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribes on projects for which a Notice of Preparation or Notice of Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration has been filed on or after July 1, 2015. Specifically, Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (d) provides:

Within 14 days of determining that an application for a project is complete or a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, the lead agency shall provide formal notification to the designated contact of, or a tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, which shall be accomplished by means of at least one written notification that includes a brief description of the proposed project and its location, the lead agency contact information, and a notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation pursuant to this section.

The AB 52 amendments to CEQA law does not preclude initiating consultation with the tribes that are culturally and traditionally affiliated within your jurisdiction prior to receiving requests for notification of projects in the tribe’s areas of traditional and cultural affiliation. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) recommends, but does not require, early consultation as a best practice to ensure that lead agencies receive sufficient information about cultural resources in a project area to avoid damaging effects to tribal cultural resources.

The NAHC also recommends, but does not require that agencies should also include with their notification letters, information regarding any cultural resources assessment that has been completed on the area of potential effect (APE), such as:

1. The results of any record search that may have been conducted at an Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), including, but not limited to:

CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño

VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

SECRETARY
Merri Lopez-Keifer
Luiseño

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk

COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache

COMMISSIONER
Julie TumamaitStenslie
Chumash

COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Christina Snider
Pomo

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1037 of 1429

Page 2 of 2 ends

• A listing of any and all known cultural resources that have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE, such as known archaeological sites;
• Copies of any and all cultural resource records and study reports that may have been provided by the Information Center as part of the records search response; • Whether the records search indicates a low, moderate, or high probability that unrecorded cultural resources are located in the APE; and
• If a survey is recommended by the Information Center to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.

2. The results of any archaeological inventory survey that was conducted, including:
• Any report that may contain site forms, site significance, and suggested mitigation measures.

All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for public disclosure in accordance with Government Code section 6254.10.

3. The result of any Sacred Lands File (SLF) check conducted through the Native American Heritage Commission was positive. Please contact the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians on the attached list for more information.

4. Any ethnographic studies conducted for any area including all or part of the APE; and

5. Any geotechnical reports regarding all or part of the APE.

Lead agencies should be aware that records maintained by the NAHC and CHRIS are not exhaustive and a negative response to these searches does not preclude the existence of a tribal cultural resource. A tribe may be the only source of information regarding the existence of a tribal cultural resource.

This information will aid tribes in determining whether to request formal consultation. In the event that they do, having the information beforehand will help to facilitate the consultation process.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify the NAHC. With your assistance, we can assure that our consultation list remains current.

If you have any questions, please contact me at my email address: [email protected].

Sincerely,
Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1038 of 1429
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Jeff Grubbe, Chairperson
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
Phone: (760) 699 - 6800
Fax: (760) 699-6919
Cahuilla
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Patricia Garcia-Plotkin, Director
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
Phone: (760) 699 - 6907
Fax: (760) 699-6924
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Morongo Band of Mission
Indians
Robert Martin, Chairperson
12700 Pumarra Road
Banning, CA, 92220
Phone: (951) 755 - 5110
Fax: (951) 755-5177
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Serrano
Morongo Band of Mission
Indians
Ann Brierty, THPO
12700 Pumarra Road
Banning, CA, 92220
Phone: (951) 755 - 5259
Fax: (951) 572-6004
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Serrano
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma
Reservation
Jill McCormick, Historic
Preservation Officer
P.O. Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
Phone: (760) 572 - 2423
historicpreservation@quechantrib
e.com
Quechan
San Manuel Band of Mission
Indians
Jessica Mauck, Director of
Cultural Resources
26569 Community Center Drive
Highland, CA, 92346
Phone: (909) 864 - 8933
Jessica.Mauck@sanmanuelnsn.gov
Serrano
Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair
P.O. Box 391820
Anza, CA, 92539
Phone: (951) 659 - 2700
Fax: (951) 659-2228
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Serrano Nation of Mission
Indians
Wayne Walker, Co-Chairperson
P. O. Box 343
Patton, CA, 92369
Phone: (253) 370 - 0167
[email protected]
Serrano
Serrano Nation of Mission
Indians
Mark Cochrane, Co-Chairperson
P. O. Box 343
Patton, CA, 92369
Phone: (909) 528 - 9032
[email protected]
Serrano
Soboba Band of Luiseno
Indians
Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson
P. O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
Phone: (951) 654 - 5544
Fax: (951) 654-4198
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Luiseno
1 of 1
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1 for the proposed Redlands Song Property Project, San Bernardino County.

PROJ-2021-
004775
09/15/2021 03:48 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Tribal Consultation List
San Bernardino County
9/15/2021
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1039 of 1429

UNITED STATES
T +1 888 826 5814
T +1 714 508 4100
F +1 714 508 4110
E [email protected]
Irvine
250 Commerce
Suite 250
Irvine, CA 92602
Bay Area
1350 Treat Boulevard
Suite 380
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
Central Valley
7726 N. First Street
#413
Fresno, CA 93720
Inland Empire
967 Kendall Drive
#A-537
San Bernardino, CA 92407
Sacramento Valley
2351 Sunset Boulevard
Suite 170-301
Rocklin, CA 95765
Utah
2901 Bluegrass Boulevard
Suite 200-62
Lehi, UT 84043
Connecticut
2 Corporate Drive
Suite 450
Shelton, CT 06484
New York
10 Monument Street
Deposit, NY 13754
56 Broome Corporate Parkway
Conklin, NY 13748
CANADA

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
Morongo Band of Mission Indians
Ann Brierty, THPO
12700 Pumarra Road
Banning, CA, 92220
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Ann Brierty:

FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) is preparing a cultural resources assessment for the proposed Redlands Song Property Project in the City of Redlands. As part of the environmental review process, we are conducting a cultural analysis.

The proposed development would construct up to 75 residential dwelling units on 9.61 acres. The project site is located at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands, on the north side of Pioneer Avenue, the south side of W. Domestic Avenue, west of Interstate 210 (I-210) Freeway, and immediately east of Citrus Valley High School. Attached is a Records Search map with a 0.5-mile buffer around the site for your reference.

As part of the cultural resources assessment, FCS conducted a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and California Historical Resource Information System (CHRIS) search. The results of the SLF records search was positive. The CHRIS search showed that there are no reports or resources recorded within the project site. However, there are are 31 reports recorded within a half mile radius of the project area. Additionally, there are 22 resources recorded within a half mile radius of the project site, 2 of which are prehistoric and 17 of which are historic. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) suggested you might be able to provide further information. If you have any additional information regarding potential historic or cultural resources in proximity or relation to the proposed project area, we would greatly appreciate your input.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1040 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
Serrano Nation of Mission Indians
Mark Cochrane, Co-Chairperson
P. O. Box 343
Patton, CA, 92369
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Co-Chairperson Cochrane:

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1042 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
Patricia Garcia-Plotkin, Director
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Director Garcia-Plotkin:

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1044 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
Jeff Grubbe, Chairperson
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Chairperson Grubbe:

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1046 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
Morongo Band of Mission Indians
Robert Martin, Chairperson
12700 Pumarra Road
Banning, CA, 92220
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Chairperson Martin:

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1048 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Jessica Mauck, Director of Cultural Resources
26569 Community Center Drive
Highland, CA, 92346
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Jessica Mauck:

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1050 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
Jill McCormick, Historic Preservation Officer
P.O. Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Jill McCormick:

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1052 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians
Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair
P.O. Box 391820
Anza, CA, 92539
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Tribal Chair Redner:

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1054 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson
P. O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Chairperson Vivanco:

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1056 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
September 16, 2021
Serrano Nation of Mission Indians
Wayne Walker, Co-Chairperson
P. O. Box 343
Patton, CA, 92369
Subject: Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Dear Co-Chairperson Walker:

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1058 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

Sincerely,
Stefanie Estelle Griffin, MA,
Archaeologist
FirstCarbon Solutions
967 Kendall Drive # A-537
San Bernardino, CA 92407
Enc: Attachment A: Records Search Map
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1059 of 1429
From: Quechan Historic Preservation Officer
To: Maddie Dolan
Cc: Stefanie Griffin
Subject: RE: 4940.0030 Tribal Consultation Request for the Proposed Redlands Song Property Project Date: Friday, September 17, 2021 8:49:28 AM
This email is to inform you that we have no comments on this project. We defer to the more local Tribes and support their decisions on the projects.

From: Maddie Dolan [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 6:37 PM
To: Quechan Historic Preservation Officer
Cc: Cultural Resources
Subject: 4940.0030 Tribal Consultation Request for the Proposed Redlands Song Property Project Hello,
Attached is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment of the proposed Redlands Song Property Project in the City of Redlands. Please feel free to contact Stefanie Griffin at [email protected] if you would like to provide input. Thank you for your assistance.

Best,
Madelyn Dolan (she | her | hers)
Environmental Services, Analyst
Mobile +1 925 451 7133
FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS)
An ADEC Innovation
LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter
Virus-free. www.avast.com
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1060 of 1429
From: Ryan Nordness
To: Maddie Dolan; Stefanie Griffin
Cc: Cultural Resources
Subject: RE: 4940.0030 Tribal Consultation Request for the Proposed Redlands Song Property Project Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 10:44:35 AM
Hello Maddie,
Thank you for reaching out to the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians concerning the proposed project area. SMBMI appreciates the opportunity to review the project documentation received by the Cultural Resources Management Department on September 21st. The proposed project is not located near any known SLFs, Serrano villages, or archaeological sites. Thank you again for your correspondence, if you have any additional questions or comments please reach out to me at your earliest convenience.

Respectfully,
Ryan Nordness
From: Maddie Dolan <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 1:34 PM
To: Ryan Nordness <[email protected]>; Stefanie Griffin <[email protected]> Cc: Cultural Resources <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 4940.0030 Tribal Consultation Request for the Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Thank you! Let me know if this attachment works for you.

Best,
Madelyn Dolan (she | her | hers)
Environmental Services, Analyst
Mobile +1 925 451 7133
FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS)
An ADEC Innovation
LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter
From: Ryan Nordness <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 1:32 PM
To: Maddie Dolan <[email protected]>; Stefanie Griffin <[email protected]> Cc: Cultural Resources <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 4940.0030 Tribal Consultation Request for the Proposed Redlands Song Property Project
Hey Maddie,
I am the cultural resource analyst for the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians.

From: Maddie Dolan <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 12:58 PM
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1061 of 1429
Dear Ms. Stefanie Griffin,
The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) appreciates your efforts to include the Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) in the Redlands Song Property project. The project area is not located within the boundaries of the ACBCI Reservation. However, it is within the Tribe’s Traditional Use Area. For this reason, the ACBCI THPO requests the following:
[VIA EMAIL TO:[email protected]]
First Carbon Solutions
Ms. Stefanie Griffin
650 E. Hospitality Lane, Suite 125
San Bernardino, California 92408
October 29, 2021
Re: Redlands Song Property Project
Again, the Agua Caliente appreciates your interest in our cultural heritage. If you have questions or require additional information, please call me at (760)699-6956. You may also email me at [email protected].

Cordially,
Lacy Padilla
Archaeologist
Tribal Historic Preservation Office

AGUA CALIENTE BAND

OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
03-027-2021-006
0 *A cultural resources inventory of the project area by a qualified archaeologist prior to any development activities in this area.
0 *A copy of the records search with associated survey reports and site records from the information center.
0 *Copies of any cultural resource documentation (report and site records) generated in connection with this project.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1062 of 1429
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

Page 1 of 2 ends

1. The results of any record search that may have been conducted at an Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), including, but not limited to:

CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño

VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

SECRETARY
Merri Lopez-Keifer
Luiseño

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk

COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache

COMMISSIONER
Julie TumamaitStenslie
Chumash

COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Christina Snider
Pomo

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1063 of 1429

Page 2 of 2 ends

2. The results of any archaeological inventory survey that was conducted, including:
• Any report that may contain site forms, site significance, and suggested mitigation measures.

4. Any ethnographic studies conducted for any area including all or part of the APE; and

5. Any geotechnical reports regarding all or part of the APE.

This information will aid tribes in determining whether to request formal consultation. In the event that they do, having the information beforehand will help to facilitate the consultation process.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify the NAHC. With your assistance, we can assure that our consultation list remains current.

If you have any questions, please contact me at my email address: [email protected].

Sincerely,
Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1064 of 1429
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Jeff Grubbe, Chairperson
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
Phone: (760) 699 - 6800
Fax: (760) 699-6919
Cahuilla
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Patricia Garcia-Plotkin, Director
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
Phone: (760) 699 - 6907
Fax: (760) 699-6924
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Morongo Band of Mission
Indians
Robert Martin, Chairperson
12700 Pumarra Road
Banning, CA, 92220
Phone: (951) 755 - 5110
Fax: (951) 755-5177
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Serrano
Morongo Band of Mission
Indians
Ann Brierty, THPO
12700 Pumarra Road
Banning, CA, 92220
Phone: (951) 755 - 5259
Fax: (951) 572-6004
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Serrano
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma
Reservation
Jill McCormick, Historic
Preservation Officer
P.O. Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
Phone: (760) 572 - 2423
historicpreservation@quechantrib
e.com
Quechan
San Manuel Band of Mission
Indians
Jessica Mauck, Director of
Cultural Resources
26569 Community Center Drive
Highland, CA, 92346
Phone: (909) 864 - 8933
Jessica.Mauck@sanmanuelnsn.gov
Serrano
Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair
P.O. Box 391820
Anza, CA, 92539
Phone: (951) 659 - 2700
Fax: (951) 659-2228
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Serrano Nation of Mission
Indians
Wayne Walker, Co-Chairperson
P. O. Box 343
Patton, CA, 92369
Phone: (253) 370 - 0167
[email protected]
Serrano
Serrano Nation of Mission
Indians
Mark Cochrane, Co-Chairperson
P. O. Box 343
Patton, CA, 92369
Phone: (909) 528 - 9032
[email protected]
Serrano
Soboba Band of Luiseno
Indians
Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson
P. O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
Phone: (951) 654 - 5544
Fax: (951) 654-4198
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Luiseno
1 of 1
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1 for the proposed Redlands Song Property Project, San Bernardino County.

PROJ-2021-
004775
09/15/2021 03:48 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Tribal Consultation List
San Bernardino County
9/15/2021
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1065 of 1429
4940.0030 • 04/2022 | 49400030_re c o rd _se arc h.mxd
Re c o rd S e arc h Map
S o urc e : US GS Re d lan d s 7.5' Quad ran gle / T1S ,R3W,se c 16

CITY OF REDLANDS

EMM PROPERTY (S ONG PROPERTY REDLANDS )
I 2,000 1,000 0 2,000
Fe e t
Project Area
Half-Mile Radius
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1066 of 1429

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
Morongo Band of Mission Indians
Ann Brierty, THPO
12700 Pumarra Road
Banning, CA, 92220
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Ann Brierty:

FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) is preparing a cultural resources assessment for the proposed Emm Property Project in the City of Redlands. As part of the environmental review process, we are conducting a cultural analysis.

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

There are also 31 reports recorded within a half mile radius of the project area. Additionally, The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) suggested you might be able to provide further information. If you have any additional information regarding potential historic or cultural resources in proximity or relation to the proposed project area, we would greatly appreciate your input.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1067 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
Serrano Nation of Mission Indians
Mark Cochrane, Co-Chairperson
P. O. Box 343
Patton, CA, 92369
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Co-Chairperson Cochrane:

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1069 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
Patricia Garcia-Plotkin, Director
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Patricia Garcia-Plotkin:

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1071 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
Jeff Grubbe, Chairperson
5401 Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA, 92264
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Chairperson Grubbe:

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1073 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
Morongo Band of Mission Indians
Robert Martin, Chairperson
12700 Pumarra Road
Banning, CA, 92220
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Chairperson Martin:

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1075 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Jessica Mauck, Director of Cultural Resources
26569 Community Center Drive
Highland, CA, 92346
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Jessica Mauck:

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1077 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
Jill McCormick, Historic Preservation Officer
P.O. Box 1899
Yuma, AZ, 85366
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Jill McCormick:

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1079 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians
Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair
P.O. Box 391820
Anza, CA, 92539
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Tribal Chair Redner:

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1081 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson
P. O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Chairperson Vivanco:

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1083 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

UNITED KINGDOM

PORTUGAL
FRANCE
KENYA

AUSTRALIA

PHILIPPINES
CHINA

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE
1 Request Letter
May 12, 2022
Serrano Nation of Mission Indians
Wayne Walker, Co-Chairperson
P. O. Box 343
Patton, CA, 92369
Subject: Proposed Emm Property Project
Dear Co-Chairperson Walker:

The Applicant is proposing to construct a new residential development on approximately

14.4 acres at 1160 W. Pioneer Avenue in the City of Redlands. The proposed project includes the development of a total of approximately 117 motorcourt homes.

Please note that this letter is a request for information pertaining to a cultural resources assessment and is not notification of a project under Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Designated lead agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1085 of 1429
2 Request Letter
(NEPA) are handling project notification and consultation requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 209.608.0028 or via email at [email protected] and thank you for your valuable assistance.

Sincerely,
Stefanie Estelle Griffin, MA,
Archaeologist
FirstCarbon Solutions
967 Kendall Drive # A-537
San Bernardino, CA 92407
Enc: Attachment A: Records Search Map
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1086 of 1429
From: Ryan Nordness
To: Stefanie Griffin
Subject: Information Request for Proposed Emm Property Project Date: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 3:14:40 PM
Thank you for reaching out to the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (formerly known as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) concerning the proposed project area. YSMN appreciates the opportunity to review the project documentation received by the Cultural Resources Management Department on May 20th 2022. The proposed project is not located near any known cultural resources. Thank you again for your correspondence, if you have any additional questions or comments please reach out to me at your earliest convenience.

Respectfully,
Ryan Nordness
Ryan Nordness
Cultural Resource Analyst
[email protected]
O:(909) 864-8933 Ext 50-2022
M:(909) 838-4053
26569 Community Center Dr Highland, California 92346
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1087 of 1429

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1088 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
FirstCarbon Solutions
Appendix D:

Project Area Photographs
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1089 of 1429

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1090 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc–Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D
First Carbon Solutions
Photograph 1: Overview photo taken from southeast corner of project area and the start of Transect 1 bearing northwest. Longitude 34.04.54 by latitude 117.1156.

Photograph 2: Overview bearing southeast at 160 degrees end of Transect 1 Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1091 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc–Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D
First Carbon Solutions
Photograph 3: Overview photo of northern boundary West Domestic Avenue end of Transect 1 bearing northwest at 310 degrees. Longitude 34.05.04 by latitude 117.1156 Photograph 4: Start of Transect 2 bearing southeast at 152 degrees. Longitude 34.05.04 by latitude 117.1155 Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1092 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc–Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D
First Carbon Solutions
Photograph 5: End of Transect 2 bearing southwest 152 degrees, facing West Pioneer Avenue.

Longitude 34.05.04 by latitude 117.1155
Photograph 6: Overview start of Transect 3. Longitude 34.04.51 by latitude 117.1152 Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1093 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc–Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D
First Carbon Solutions
Photograph 7: Overview end of Transect 3. Bearing northwest at 341 degrees.

Longitude 34.0845 by latitude 117.1156
Photograph 8: Overview start of Transect 4 bearing southeast 160 degrees.

Longitude 34.0845 by latitude 117.1156
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1094 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc–Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D
First Carbon Solutions
Photograph 9: End of Transect 4 bearing South at 172 degrees. Longitude 34.08450 by latitude 117.1992 Photograph 10: Overview start of Transect 5 bearing northwest 340 degrees.

Longitude 34.08450 by latitude 117.1992
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1095 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc–Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D
First Carbon Solutions
Photo 11: End of Transect 5 bearing northwest 330 degrees. Longitude 34.08450 by latitude 117.1992 Photo 12: End of survey overview photo of western boundary bearing South at 156 degrees. Photo taken from northwest corner of survey area. Longitude 34.84501 by latitude 117.1992 Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1096 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc–Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D
First Carbon Solutions
Photo 13: Start of Transect 1, from southwest corner. View North.

Photo 14: End of Transect 1 from northwest corner. View South Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1097 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc–Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D
First Carbon Solutions
Photo 15: Start of Transect 3, from southeast corner. View North.

Photo 16: End of Transect 3 from northeast corner. View South.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1098 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
FirstCarbon Solutions
Appendix E:

Cultural Resources Regulations and Evaluation Criteria
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1099 of 1429

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1100 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
FirstCarbon Solutions

CULTURAL RESOURCES REGULATIONS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA
Local, state, and federal government agencies have developed laws and regulations designed to protect significant cultural resources that may be affected by projects regulated, funded, or undertaken by the agency. Federal and state laws that govern the preservation of historic and archaeological resources of national, state, regional, and local significance include the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In addition, laws specific to work conducted on federal lands includes the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA), the American Antiquities Act, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA).

The following federal or CEQA criteria were used to evaluate the significance of potential impacts on cultural resources for the proposed project. An impact would be considered significant if it would affect a resource eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or if it is identified as a unique archaeological or Tribal Cultural Resource (TCR).

Federal-Level Evaluations
Federal agencies are required to consider the effects of their actions on historic properties and afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings under NHPA Section 106 (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 800).

Additionally, federal agencies are responsible for initiating NHPA Section 106 review and completing the steps outlined in these regulations. They must determine if NHPA Section 106 applies to a given project and, if so, initiate review in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and/or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO). Federal agencies are also responsible for involving the public and other interested parties. Furthermore, NHPA Section 106 requires that any federal or federally assisted undertaking, or any undertaking requiring federal licensing or permitting, consider the effect of the action on historic properties listed in or eligible for the NRHP. Under the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 800.8), federal agencies are specifically encouraged to coordinate compliance with NHPA Section 106 and the NEPA process. The implementing regulations “Protection of Historic Properties” are found in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800. Resource eligibility for listing on the NRHP is detailed in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63 and the criteria for resource evaluation are found in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 60.4 (a-d).

The NHPA established the NRHP as the official federal list for cultural resources that are considered important for their historical significance at the local, state, or national level. To be determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, properties must meet specific criteria for historic significance and possess certain levels of integrity of form, location, and setting. The criteria for listing on the NRHP include—significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture as present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. In addition, a resource must meet one or all of these eligibility criteria:

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1101 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Regulatory Framework Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment FirstCarbon Solutions
a) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
b) Is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or c) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic values, represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or d) That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Criterion D is usually reserved for archaeological resources. Eligible properties must meet at least one of the criteria and exhibit integrity, measured by the degree to which the resource retains its historical properties and conveys its historical character.

Criteria Considerations
Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, buildings that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the NRHP. However, such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they fall within the following categories:
a) A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance.
b) A building or structure removed from its original location but which is primarily significant for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event.
c) A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building associated with his or her productive life. d) A cemetery that derives its primary importance from graves of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events.
e) A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived.
f) A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance.
g) A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance.

Thresholds of Significance
In consultation with the SHPO/THPO and other entities that attach religious and cultural significance to identified historic properties, the Lead Agency shall apply the criteria of adverse effect to historic Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1102 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
FirstCarbon Solutions
properties within the Area of Potential Effect (APE). The Lead Agency official shall consider the views of consulting parties and the public when considering adverse effects.

Federal Criteria of Adverse Effects
Under federal regulations, 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800.5, an adverse effect is found when an undertaking alters, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualifies the property for inclusion in the NRHP in a manner that diminishes the integrity of the property’s location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. Consideration will be given to all qualifying characteristics of a historic property, including those that may have been identified subsequent to the original evaluation of the property’s eligibility for listing in the NRHP. Adverse effects may include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the undertaking that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance, or be cumulative.

According to 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800.5, adverse effects on historic properties include, but are not limited to, those listed below:
• Physical destruction of or damage to all or part of the property. • Alteration of a property, including restoration, rehabilitation, repair, maintenance, stabilization, hazardous material remediation, and provision of handicapped access, which is not consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties per 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 68 and applicable guidelines. • Removal of the property from its historic location.
• Change of the character of the property’s use or of physical features within the property’s setting that contribute to its historic significance.
• Introduction of visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that diminish the integrity of the property’s significant historic features.
• Neglect of a property that causes its deterioration, except where such neglect and deterioration are recognized qualities of a property of religious and cultural significance to an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.
• Transfer, lease, or sale of property out of federal ownership or control without adequate and legally enforceable restrictions or conditions to ensure long-term preservation of the property’s historic significance.

If Adverse Effects are Found
If adverse effects are found, the agency official shall continue consultation as stipulated at 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800.6. The agency official shall consult with the SHPO/THPO and other consulting parties to develop alternatives to the undertaking that could avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to historic resources. According to 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800.14(d), if adverse effects cannot be avoided then standard treatments established by the ACHP may be used as a basis for Memorandum of Agreement (MOA).

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1103 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Regulatory Framework Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment FirstCarbon Solutions
According to 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800.11(e), the filing of an approved MOA, and appropriate documentation, concludes the NHPA Section 106 process. The MOA must be signed by all consulting parties and approved by the ACHP prior to construction activities. If no adverse effects are found and the SHPO/THPO or the ACHP do not object within 30 days of receipt, the agencies’ responsibilities under NHPA Section 106 will be satisfied upon completion of report and documentation as stipulated in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800.11. The information must be made available for public review upon request, excluding information covered by confidentiality provisions.

State-Level Evaluation Processes
For the purposes of CEQA, cultural resources are broadly divided into the following four categories:
• Historic Resources: Historic resources typically refer to buildings, structures, and locations that maintain a connection or association with significant events, individuals, or architectural trends from California’s past.
• Archaeological Resources: Archaeology is the study of artifacts and material culture with the aim of understanding human activities and cultures in the past. Archaeological resources may be associated with prehistoric indigenous cultures as well as historic periods. • Burial Sites and Cemeteries: Burial sites and cemeteries are formal or informal locations where human remains have been interred.
• Tribal Cultural Resources: Tribal cultural resources include sites, features, places, or objects that are of cultural value to one or more California Native American Tribes.

More specifically, cultural resources may be understood as resources that have been formally recognized by a lead agency and/or are listed or determined eligible for listing on the CRHR (Public Resources Code [PRC] § 5024.1, Title 14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] § 4852). An archaeological site may be considered a historical resource if it is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California per Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(j) or if it meets the criteria for listing on the CRHR per California Code of Regulations at Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 4850.

The most recent amendments to the CEQA Guidelines direct lead agencies to first evaluate an archaeological site to determine whether it meets the criteria for listing in the CRHR. If an archaeological site is a historical resource, in that it is listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, potential adverse impacts to it must be considered as stated in Public Resources Code Sections 21084.1 and 21083.2(l). If an archaeological site is considered not to be a historical resource but meets the definition of a “unique archaeological resource” as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2, then it would be treated in accordance with the provisions of that section.

With reference to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2, each site found within a project area will be evaluated to determine whether it is a unique archaeological resource. A unique archaeological resource is described as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1104 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
FirstCarbon Solutions
demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets one or more of the following criteria:

1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information.

2. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.

3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

As used in this report, “non-unique archaeological resource” means an archaeological artifact, object, or site that does not meet the criteria for eligibility for listing on the CRHR, as noted in subdivision (g) of Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. A non-unique archaeological resource requires no further consideration, other than simple recording of its components and features.

Isolated artifacts are typically considered non-unique archaeological resources. Historic structures that have had their superstructures demolished or removed can be considered historic archaeological sites and are evaluated following the processes used for prehistoric sites. Finally, the California State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) recognizes an age threshold of 45 years.

Cultural resources built less than 45 years ago may qualify for consideration, but only under the most extraordinary circumstances.

Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3 Section 15064.5 is associated with determining the significance of impacts to archaeological and historical resources. Here, the term historical resource includes the following:

1. A resource listed in, or determined eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the CRHR (PRC § 5024.1; Title 14 CCR, § 4850 et seq.).

2. A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k) or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(g) requirements, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant.

3. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript, which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered a historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be historically significant if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (PRC § 5024.1; Title 14 CCR § 4852) including the following:

A. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.

B. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1105 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Regulatory Framework Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment FirstCarbon Solutions
C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.

D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Typically, archaeological sites exhibiting significant features qualify for the CRHR under Criterion D because such features have information important to the prehistory of California. A lead agency may determine that a resource may be a historical resource as defined in Public Resources Code Sections 5020.1(j) or 5024.1 even if it is:
• Not listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR. • Not included in a local register of historical resources pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k).
• Identified in a historical resources survey per Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(g).

Thresholds of Significance
If a project will have a significant impact on a cultural resource, several steps must be taken to determine whether the cultural resource is a “unique archaeological resource” under CEQA. If analysis and/or testing determine that the resource is a unique archaeological resource and therefore subject to mitigation prior to development, a threshold of significance should be developed. The threshold of significance is a point where the qualities of significance are defined, and the resource is determined to be unique under CEQA. A significant impact is regarded as the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of the resource will be reduced to a point that it no longer meets the significance criteria. Should analysis indicate that project development will destroy the unique elements of a resource; CEQA regulations require that the project implement appropriate and feasible mitigation measures. The preferred form of mitigation is to preserve the resource in place, in an undisturbed state. However, as that is not always possible or feasible, appropriate mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to:

1. Planning construction to avoid the resource.

2. Deeding conservation easements.

3. Capping the site prior to construction.

If a resource is determined to be a “non-unique archaeological resource,” no further consideration of the resource by the lead agency is necessary.

Local Regulations
City of Redlands General Plan 2035
Cultural Resources Policies
Principles
2-P.8 Identify, maintain, protect, and enhance Redlands’ cultural, historic, social, economic, architectural, agricultural, archaeological, and scenic heritage. In so Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1106 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
FirstCarbon Solutions
doing, Redlands will preserve its unique character and beauty, foster community pride, conserve the character and architecture of its neighborhoods and commercial and rural areas, enable citizens and visitors to enjoy and learn about local history, and provide a framework for making appropriate physical changes. 2-P.9 Provide incentives to protect, preserve, and maintain the city’s heritage. 2-P.10 Foster an understanding and appreciation of history and architecture. 2-P.11 Encourage retention of the character of existing historic structures and urban design elements that define the built environment of the city’s older neighborhoods. 2-P.12 Encourage retention of historic structures in their original use or reconversion to their original use where feasible. Encourage sensitive, adaptive reuse where the original use is no longer feasible.
2-P.13 Encourage preservation of and public access to defined and established significant scenic vistas, viewpoints, and view corridors.
2-P.14 Coordinate preservation of historic resources with policies designed to preserve neighborhoods and support the affordability of housing in historical structures. 2-P.15 Balance the preservation of historic resources with the desire of property owners of historic structures to adopt energy efficient strategies. 2-P.16 Work with local paleontologists to identify significant non-renewable paleontological resources.
2-P.17 Protect archaeological and paleontological resources for their aesthetic, scientific, educational, and cultural values.

Actions
Historic and Scenic Conservation
2-A.23 Prepare a City of Redlands Historic Context Statement as part of the Certified Local Government Program.
2-A.24 Undertake and maintain a comprehensive citywide inventory and assessment of historic resources. Establish and keep current a list of potential historic resources, historic districts, citrus groves, palm rows, and historic scenic areas. The inventory must identify the values of the resources’ contribution to the city’s historic context.

Set up a priority system for designation and proceed with designation. 2-A.25 Require any application that would alter or demolish an undesignated and unsurveyed resource over 50-years-old to be assessed on the merits of the structure, and to be approved by the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1107 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Regulatory Framework Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment FirstCarbon Solutions
2-A.26 Provide development standards and guidelines to encourage conversion of historic structures to alternative uses without compromising the quality of the neighborhood if preservation of the original use is an economic hardship. 2-A.27 Establish guidelines and incentives for appropriate adaptive reuse of historic structures.
2-A.28 Develop strategies or guidelines to enhance the public realm and context sensitive landscapes in the historic and scenic districts.
2-A.29 Retain existing easements and rights of way for use as viewpoints, turnouts, and scenic walkways where feasible.
2-A.30 Identify historic design features characteristic of the city and its individual neighborhoods that can be used to establish themes and design guidelines. 2-A.31 Develop ordinance language and procedures to allow designation of thematic resources. Thematic resources can include historical resources such as the street grid and streetscapes established by Judson and Brown, architectural resources such as the vernacular packinghouse style, or environmental resources such as the Zanja. 2-A.32 Support a strong and effective Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission as a key element in decisions affecting historic and scenic resources. 2-A.33 Ensure that public funds for rehabilitation are not used to the detriment of private or public historic resources.
2-A.34 Uphold the designation of the following streets within the city as scenic highways, drives, and historic streets. Special development standards have been adopted by Resolution for these streets. The streets are:
• Brookside Avenue, from Lakeside Avenue to Eureka Street; • Olive Avenue, from Lakeside Avenue to Cajon Street;
• Center Street, from Brookside Avenue to Crescent Avenue; • Highland Avenue, from Serpentine Drive to Cajon Street; • Sunset Drive, from Serpentine Drive to Edgemont Drive; • Cajon Street;
• Mariposa Drive, between Halsey and Sunset Drive; and
• Dwight Street, between Pepper Street and Mariposa Drive.

In addition, consider designating the following roads as scenic drives within the community as neighborhood connectors and recreational routes for drivers and bike riders.
• Riverview Drive along the Santa Ana River Wash;
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1108 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
FirstCarbon Solutions
• Live Oak Canyon Road;
• San Timoteo Canyon Road;
• Sylvan Boulevard;
• Nevada Street, from the Orange Blossom Trail to Barton Road; • Pioneer Avenue, from River Bend Drive to Judson Street; and • Rural roads in Crafton.
2-A.35 Establish standards for the evaluation of exterior lighting for new development and redevelopment to ensure that exterior lighting (except traffic lights, navigational lights, and other similar safety lighting) is minimized, restricted to low-intensity fixtures, shielded, and concealed to the maximum feasible extent, and that highintensity perimeter lighting and lighting for sports and other private recreational facilities is limited to reduce light pollution visible from public viewing areas.

Historic City Properties
2-A.36 Maintain and improve City-owned historic buildings and houses in an architecturally and environmentally sensitive manner.
2-A.37 Maintain and improve Redlands’ streets, trees, streetlights, parkways, parks, stone curbs, ditches, walls, and citrus groves in a manner that enhances the city’s beauty and historic fabric.
2-A.38 Use exemplary design quality and sensitivity to surrounding historic structures in new City construction, public works, entry ways, and City signs.

Privately-Owned Historic Resources
2-A.39 Ensure that permanent changes to the exterior or setting of a designated historic resource be done in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior standards for historic properties.
2-A.40 Seek creative solutions to the problem of preservation and maintenance of large houses.
2-A.41 Encourage appropriate adaptive reuse of historic resources in order to prevent disuse, disrepair, and demolition, taking care to protect surrounding neighborhoods from disruptive intrusions.
2-A.42 Should demolition of a designated historic resource occur, endeavor to ensure that a building of equal or greater design quality and/or use of equal or greater benefit to the community be constructed. Require that a report documenting the history of the property and archival-quality drawings and/or photographic records be prepared to document the historic resource.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1109 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Regulatory Framework Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment FirstCarbon Solutions
2-A.43 Institute an architectural salvage program to preserve architectural artifacts from buildings that are demolished.
2-A.44 Encourage the use of tax credits, donated easements, and other fiscal incentives for preservation.
2-A.45 Encourage energy conservation alterations that are compatible with preservation. 2-A.46 Encourage preservation, maintenance, enhancement, and reuse of existing buildings in revitalization areas; retention and renovation of existing residential structures; and, if retention on-site is not feasible, relocation of existing residential structures within the city.
2-A.47 Encourage the highest maintenance of historic resources by:
• Providing information to homeowners as to how to maintain their historic property;
• Pursuing funding programs to assist people in doing needed repairs; and • Proactively enforcing code compliance.

Historic Considerations for New Development
2-A.48 Establish design review guidelines for historic areas to ensure that new architecture will relate to and respect the historical and environmental context. 2-A.49 Encourage compatibility of new land uses and new construction adjacent to historical buildings. Encourage construction that is physically and aesthetically complementary to the historic buildings in architectural features and relationship to adjoining structures.
2-A.50 Encourage historical depictions commemorating historic sites or events in Redlands’ history. Such depictions could be incorporated into new commercial or rehab development projects. Historical depictions may be monuments, plaques, archaeological viewing sites, exhibits, or illustrative art works, such as sculpture, mosaics, murals, tile-work, etc.
2-A.51 Encourage new construction that ties the new with the old in a harmonious fashion, enhancing the historic pattern.

Citizen Participation and Cooperation with Preservation Groups 2-A.52 Encourage public participation in the process for evaluating and preserving historic and scenic resources.
2-A.53 Encourage citizens to participate in public hearings on designation, Certificates of Appropriateness, and Certificates of Hardship.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1110 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
FirstCarbon Solutions
2-A.54 Encourage citizens to become involved in historic preservation by training them in survey techniques and involving them in the ongoing surveys of historic resources. 2-A.55 Cooperate with public and private organizations doing preservation work and serve as liaison for such groups.

Education and Public Relations on Redlands Heritage
2-A.56 Seek to educate the general public about Redlands’ heritage and to educate owners of historic properties about how to rehabilitate and maintain their property. 2-A.57 Where inappropriate alterations have been made, endeavor to explain how such alterations detract from the property, how they may be removed, and the economic and cultural benefits of proper restoration.
2-A.58 Encourage involvement of Redlands’ schools, adult education classes, and the University of Redlands, as well as civic organizations and service clubs, in preservation programs and activities.
2-A.59 Continue to work with local newspapers to inform the community of the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission and other preservation activities. 2-A.60 Print informational brochures and develop electronic media explaining the preservation process and preservation techniques to the public. 2-A.61 Issue awards and commendations as appropriate to owners of historic and scenic resources who have done particularly admirable rehabilitation and to others who have made special contributions to the preservation effort. 2-A.62 Make special efforts to reach out to the business community and to inform its members about Redlands’ heritage and the opportunities it presents. 2-A.63 Promote Redlands’ image, its cultural life, and its outstanding architectural, historic, and scenic resources to attract new business and tourism to the city. 2-A.64 Work with civic groups who wish to hold meetings to educate their members about preservation.
2-A.65 Support the development of organizations such as the Redlands Historical Museum, the Redlands Area Historical Society, the Redlands Conservancy, and other historical organizations to educate the public and visitors alike about Redlands’ history.

Preservation of Older Neighborhoods
2-A.66 Promote neighborhood preservation and stabilization.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1111 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Regulatory Framework Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment FirstCarbon Solutions
2-A.67 Permit densities, design, and uses that will help preserve the character and amenities of existing older neighborhoods.
2-A.68 Discourage changes in residential areas that would disturb the character or clearly have a destabilizing effect on the neighborhood.
2-A.69 Encourage shared parking or in-lieu parking in older neighborhoods. 2-A.70 Encourage preservation of historic public and private improvements, such as street curbs, street trees, specimen trees, streetlights, hitching posts, masonry walls, and early paved sidewalks.

Archaeological and Paleontological Resources
2-A.71 Using an annually updated Archaeological Resource Sensitivity Map, review proposed development projects to determine whether a site contains known prehistoric or historic cultural resources and/or to determine the potential for discovery of additional cultural resources.
2-A.72 Require that applicants for projects identified by the South Coastal Information Center as potentially affecting sensitive resource sites hire a consulting archaeologist to develop an archaeological resource mitigation plan and to monitor the project to ensure that mitigation measures are implemented.
2-A.73 Require that areas found during construction to contain significant historic or prehistoric archaeological artifacts be examined by a qualified consulting archaeologist (RPA certified) or historian for appropriate protection and preservation.
2-A.74 Proactively coordinate with the area’s native tribes in the review and protection of any tribal cultural resources discovered at development sites. 2-A.75 Require, as a standard condition of approval, that project applicants provide an assessment as to whether grading for the proposed project would impact underlying soil units or geologic formations that have a moderate to high potential to yield fossiliferous materials, prior to issuance of a grading permit. If the potential for fossil discovery is moderate to high, require applicants to provide a paleontological monitor during rough grading of the project.
2-A.76 Establish a procedure for the management of paleontological materials found onsite during a development, including the following provisions:
• If materials are found on-site during grading, require that work be halted until a qualified professional evaluates the find to determine whether it represents a significant paleontological resource.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1112 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
FirstCarbon Solutions
• If the resource is determined to be significant, the paleontologist shall supervise removal of the material and determine the most appropriate archival storage of the material.
• Appropriate materials shall be prepared, cataloged, and archived at the applicant’s expense and shall be retained within San Bernardino County if feasible.

Tribal Cultural Resources and Tribal Consultation
Under CEQA, TCRs refer to sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to one or more California Native American tribes. To be considered significant under CEQA, these resources must also be included or determined eligible for inclusion in the CRHR or a local register of historical resources or be determined significant pursuant to the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 by the lead agency (PRC § 21074).

Cultural resource assessment reports will often include the results from a Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File search and outreach to Native American Representatives Identified as potentially having interest or information on the project area by the NAHC. The primary process for identifying and evaluating potential impacts to TCRs, however, is through government-togovernment consultation between the CEQA lead agency and Native American Tribes pursuant to the following California statutes.

California Senate Bill 18
Senate Bill (SB) 18 states that prior to a local (city or county) government's adoption of any General Plan or Specific Plan, or amendment to General and Specific Plans, or a designation of open space land proposed on or after March 1, 2005, the city or county shall conduct consultations with California Native American tribes for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to Cultural Places. Consultations are for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to places, features, and objects described in Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993 of the Public Resources Code that may be affected by the proposed adoption or amendment to a general or specific plan. According to the Government Code Section 65352.4, "consultation" is defined as:

The meaningful and timely process of seeking, discussing, and carefully considering the views of others, in a manner that is cognizant of all parties' cultural values and, where feasible, seeking agreement. Consultation between government agencies and Native American Tribes shall be conducted in a way that is mutually respectful of each party's sovereignty.

Consultation shall also recognize the tribes' potential needs for confidentiality with respect to places that have traditional tribal cultural significance.

SB 18 requires public notice to be sent to tribes listed on the NAHC’s SB 18 Tribal Consultation list within the geographical areas affected by the proposed changes. Tribes must respond to a local government notice within 90 days (unless a shorter time frame has been agreed upon by the tribe), indicating whether or not they want to consult with the local government. Notice must be sent regardless of prior consultation, and it is suggested that local governments send written notice by certified mail with return receipt requested.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1113 of 1429
MLC Holdings, Inc.—Song and Emm Properties Project
Regulatory Framework Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment FirstCarbon Solutions
California Assembly Bill 52
Assembly Bill (AB) 52 was signed into law on September 25, 2014, and provides that any public or private “project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” TCRs include “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the CRHR or included in a local register of historical resources.” AB 52 formally added the category of “tribal cultural resources” to CEQA and extends the consultation and confidentiality requirements to all projects, rather than just projects subject to SB 18 as discussed above.

AB 52 requires a lead agency to notify and offer the opportunity for consultation to a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project, if the tribe has previously requested in writing to be informed by the lead agency of proposed projects in their geographic area. This notification must be sent prior to determining whether a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report is required for a project. Tribes must respond to the notice within 45 days (unless a shorter time frame has been agreed upon by the tribe), indicating whether or not they want to consult with the lead agency.

The bill makes the above provisions applicable to projects that have a notice of preparation, or a notice of negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration filed on or after July 1, 2015. The parties must consult in good faith, and consultation is deemed concluded when either: (1) the parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect on a TCR (if such a significant effect exists); or (2) when a party concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached. Mitigation measures agreed upon during consultation must be recommended for inclusion in the environmental document. AB 52 also identifies mitigation measures that may be considered to avoid significant impacts if there is no agreement on appropriate mitigation. Recommended measures include:
• Preservation in place.
• Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource. • Protecting the traditional use of the resource.
• Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
• Permanent conservation easements with culturally appropriate management criteria.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1114 of 1429
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8529 Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program.docx-ms RESOLUTION NO. 8529

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION

MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM PIONEER AVENUE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF INTERSTATE 210 AND PIONEER AVENUE AT 1160 WEST PIONEER AVENUE (APN: 0167- 061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000).

WHEREAS, MLC Holdings, LLC, has filed applications for General Plan Amendment No. 145, Specific Plan No. 40 Amendment No. 49 (East Valley Corridor Specific Plan), Specific Plan No. 64 Amendment No. 1 (Bergamot Specific Plan), Tentative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review and Approval No. 945 for a 117-lot single family residential development located at the northeast corner of Interstate 210, and West Pioneer Avenue at 1160 West Pioneer Avenue (APNs: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000) (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project and circulated for public review for a period of thirty days beginning on October 4, 2023, and ending on November 2, 2023; and
WHEREAS on November 3, 2023, notice of the Planning Commission’s public hearing for the Project and related Project Entitlements was published in the Redlands Daily Facts and notices were mailed to property owners within a 300 foot radius; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the staff report, oral report, the testimony, and the written evidence submitted by and on behalf of the applicant and by members of the public; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the MND be adopted; and
WHEREAS, the MND and related materials for the Project that were reviewed by the Planning Commission in making its recommendation for approval have been forwarded to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, notice of the City Council’s public hearing for the Project was published in the Redlands Daily Facts by the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on December 19, 2023, at which interested persons had the opportunity to provide verbal and written testimony on the Project and proposed MND;
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1115 of 1429
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8529 Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program.docx-ms

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

Section 1. CEQA Compliance. As the decision-making body for the Project, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Initial Study and MND, related technical studies and analyses, public comments received, the Responses to Comments, and supporting documentation. The City Council determines that the MND and related documents contain a complete and accurate reporting of the environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with the Project. The City Council finds that the MND was prepared in compliance with CEQA, and that the City complied with CEQA’s procedural and substantive requirements.

Section 2. Independent Judgment of Lead Agency. The MND for the Project, prepared by the City’s environmental consultant, reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis. The City has exercised independent judgment and analysis in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3) in managing as appropriate the environmental consultant, and directing the consultant in the preparation of the MND. The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the MND and accompanying technical studies/reports, and finds that the MND reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City.

Section 3. Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration. The City Council finds on the basis of the whole record that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment, including mitigation measures and any project design features, and hereby adopts the MND for the Project.

Section 4. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program attached to the MND, and all mitigation measures are included as conditions of approval for the Project.

Section 5. Notice of Determination. The City Council adopt the MND for the Project and the accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and direct staff to file and post a Notice of Determination in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines.

Section 6. Custodian of Records. The custodian of documents and other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based is the Development Services Director or designee, and all records are located in the City’s Development Services Department.

Section 7. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1116 of 1429
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8529 Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program.docx-ms ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this December 19, 2023.
______________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1117 of 1429
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8529 Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program.docx-ms I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1118 of 1429
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8530 Approval of the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for the Pioneer Avenue Residential Project.docx-ms RESOLUTION NO. 8530

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

APPROVING THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC COST/BENEFIT STUDY FOR THE

PIONEER AVENUE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF INTERSTATE 210 AND PIONEER AVENUE AT 1160 WEST PIONEER AVENUE (APN: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03- 0000).

WHEREAS, MLC Holdings, LLC, has filed applications for General Plan Amendment No. 145, Specific Plan No. 40 Amendment No. 49 (East Valley Corridor Specific Plan), Specific Plan No. 64 Amendment No. 1 (Bergamot Specific Plan), Tentative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review and Approval No. 945 for a 117-lot single family residential development located at the northeast corner of Interstate 210, and West Pioneer Avenue at 1160 West Pioneer Avenue (APNs: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000) (the “Project”); and WHEREAS on November 3, 2023, notice of the Planning Commission’s public hearing for the Project Entitlements was published in the Redlands Daily Facts and notices were mailed to property owners within a 300 foot radius; and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the staff report, oral report, the testimony, and the written evidence submitted by and on behalf of the applicant and by members of the public; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study be adopted; and WHEREAS, a copy of the Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and related materials for the Project that were reviewed by the City’s Planning Commission in making its recommendation have been forwarded to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, notice of the City Council’s public hearing for the proposed Project, including the Socio- Economic Cost/Benefit Study, was published in the Redlands Daily Facts by the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on December 19, 2023, at which interested persons had the opportunity to provide verbal and written testimony on the Project and Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study;

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

Section 1. The City Council of the City of Redlands herby approved the Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study for the Project based upon the following findings:

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1119 of 1429
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8530 Approval of the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for the Pioneer Avenue Residential Project.docx-ms A. THE PROJECT WILL NOT CREATE UNMITIGATED PHYSICAL BLIGHT

WITHIN THE CITY OR OVERBURDEN PUBLIC SERVICES INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE SUFFICIENCY OF POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES.

The Project will not create significant unmitigable physical blight in the City of Redlands (“City”) or overburden public services, including without limitation police and fire protection services, because the mitigation measures for environmental impacts, described in the study, have been added to the project as Conditions of Approval.

The Project provides improvements to enhance the surrounding community through the provision of significant areas of public open space, trail connections to the Santa Ana River Trail, residences with architectural enhancement along all public rights-of-way, decorative fencing and a masonry perimeter wall, and the planting of new trees on the Project site.

The Project developer will make improvements to facilitate implementation of the Project, including the construction of adjacent roadways and roadway improvements the project frontage. The Project would provide connections to existing City infrastructure. Utilities, less than 66KV, will be placed underground. The Project developer is required to fund its fair share allocation of any necessary public infrastructure associated with development of the Project.

B. THE BENEFITS TO THE CITY RESULTING FROM DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT OUTWEIGH ANY DIRECT COST TO THE CITY THAT MAY RESULT.

The Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study demonstrates that, annually, the Project will generate “new net” revenues of approximately $189,331 and approximately $82,854 in cost and have a positive balance of $106,476 (or ratio +2.29). For every dollar the City spends in providing services to the Project, the City will receive $2.29 in “new net” revenue. The Project would provide for the development of 117 new single family residences. Schools will be enhanced with the payment of school fees. Further, with the additional revenue provided to the City through increased property tax assessment, and the payment of development impact fees, indirect funding will be provided for cultural enhancements, downtown district enhancements, public safety (Police and Fire) enhancements, and traffic enhancements. The project also provides a public open space to be built constructed by the project.

Section 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1120 of 1429
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8530 Approval of the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for the Pioneer Avenue Residential Project.docx-ms ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 19th day of December, 2023. ______________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1121 of 1429
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8530 Approval of the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for the Pioneer Avenue Residential Project.docx-ms I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1122 of 1429
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8531 Approval of the Conversion of Agricultural Land Pursuant to Redlands General Plan - Measure U.docx-ms RESOLUTION NO. 8531

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

APPROVING THE CONVERSION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND TO
RESIDENTIAL LAND PURSUANT TO SECTION 4.40s OF THE REDLANDS GENERAL PLAN FOR 14.62 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF INTERSTATE 210 AND PIONEER AVENUE AT 1160 WEST PIONEER AVENUE (APN: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000).

WHEREAS, by ballot initiative in 1997, Measure “U” was enacted by the residents of the City to amend the Redlands General Plan and establish comprehensive growth management principles to preserve, enhance and maintain the quality of life in the Redlands community; and WHEREAS, MLC Holdings, LLC, has filed applications for General Plan Amendment No. 145, Specific Plan No. 40 Amendment No. 49 (East Valley Corridor Specific Plan), Specific Plan No. 64 Amendment No. 1 (Bergamot Specific Plan), Tentative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review and Approval No. 945 for a 117-lot single family residential development located at the northeast corner of Interstate 210, and West Pioneer Avenue at 1160 West Pioneer Avenue (APNs: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000) (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the Project site currently contained active agricultural production on June 1, 1987, thus making the provisions of Measure “U” applicable to the Project; and WHEREAS, the Project involves the adoption of a new Specific Plan for a 117-lot single family residential development at a density of 8.1 units per acre, which exceeds the Residential Estate (R-E) density of 3.0 units per acre; and
WHEREAS on November 3, 2023, notice of the Planning Commission’s public hearing for the Project and related Project Entitlements was published in the Redlands Daily Facts and notices were mailed to property owners within a 300 foot radius; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the staff report, oral report, the testimony, and the written evidence submitted by and on behalf of the applicant and by members of the public; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Project to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, notice of the City Council’s public hearing for the Amendment was published in the Redlands Daily Facts by the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, on December 19, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the staff written and oral reports, the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the testimony and written evidence submitted by and on behalf of the applicant, and testimony by members of the public; and
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1123 of 1429
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8531 Approval of the Conversion of Agricultural Land Pursuant to Redlands General Plan - Measure U.docx-ms WHEREAS, the purpose of the following analysis is to determine whether the increased density permitted by designating the property as Specific Plan No. 64 which would allow approximately 8.1 units per gross acre would be consistent with the mandatory findings required by Measure “U.”

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

Section 1. In accordance with Section 4.40s of the Redlands General Plan, the City Council of the City of Redlands hereby approves the re-zoning of lands designated “Urban Reserve” in the Redlands General Plan (as of June 1, 1987) or in active agricultural production (as of November 3, 1986) to permit residential density greater than the Residential Estate (R-E) classification as the same existed as of June 1, 1987, based upon the following findings:

A. There are substantial and overriding economic or social benefits to the City and its residents and taxpayers from the proposed density.

Under the existing zoning designation, the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) contains goals and policies aimed at preserving agricultural uses within the East Valley Corridor as long as this type of land use remains realistic and financially feasible. As continued agricultural production on the site has been determined to be infeasible in the long term, through the removal of the remaining citrus groves in 2009, the conversion of the site to development would be consistent with the EVCSP’s intent.

The additional 117 units would substantially add to the tax revenue accruing to the City that helps fund infrastructure and public services, which is a direct economic benefit to the City. As part of the project, the developer will also pay development impact fees for transportation and other infrastructure, as well as police, fire, and for the library. From a social benefit standpoint, the project will include common open space through pocket parks, and a public open space for gathering, recreation and socialization of residents of the whole City of Redlands, filling a recognized public need.

In addition, the construction of new homes on small lots provides a variety of housing types and affordability levels in the City of Redlands, which is consistent with the policies contained within the City’s current 2035 General Plan and will contribute an additional 117 new housing units that will help the City meet its overall housing goals.

B. The proposed density increase will not cause adverse environmental impacts, either individually or cumulatively, directly or indirectly.

The project has been analyzed through the drafting of an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, with thirteen mitigation measures that have been incorporated as Conditions of Approval, referencing technical studies prepared for the project, to ensure the project will not have a significant impact on the environment, either individually or cumulatively, directly, or indirectly.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1124 of 1429
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8531 Approval of the Conversion of Agricultural Land Pursuant to Redlands General Plan - Measure U.docx-ms C. The proposed density increase will not convert viable agricultural land to nonagricultural uses.

The proposed density increase would not convert viable agricultural land to nonagricultural uses. The area surrounding the project site is becoming urbanized, with development to the north and south and the existing Citrus Valley High School to the east. Aerial photograph indicates that the agricultural uses, which once utilized this area of the City, have been removed over time as citrus groves have become less economically viable. The IS/MND, discusses Agriculture and Forestry Resources, and how the loss of farmland at the site was evaluated in the 2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in the larger context of the General Plan.

This specific site is one of many locations identified in the General Plan EIR as having prime farmland that has a land use designation that would convert the property to non-agricultural use.

The City adopted findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the General Plan EIR.

In addition, the conversion of this agricultural site was anticipated by the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the EVCSP, which evaluated the impacts to Agriculture and adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration, as well. Therefore, the increase in density from 3.0 units per acre to 8.1 units per acre will not convert viable agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses.

D. The proposed density will not have a growth-inducing effect on other property.

The property is surrounded by urban development with a freeway and commercial development to the west, high school to the east, residential to the north and southeast, as well as commercially designated property to the south and west. The development of this property as well as those of the adjacent properties with residential land use designations was anticipated when Citrus High School was proposed in 2004 and in the City’s most recent General Plan update. While the adjacent parcels may develop in the future, the proposed project’s density is consistent with its proposed land use designation of Medium Density Residential and the development of this property on its own would not be considered to contribute to growth-inducing effects on adjacent properties. As such, the density increase is not expected to have any growth-inducing effect on other property, as there are no residentially designated properties adjacent to the project site that have not already been developed.

E. The resulting use will be compatible with uses on adjacent land.

The project has been designed to be compatible with the current residential development in the Bergamot Specific Plan area to the north, adjacent vacant parcels as well as the Citrus Valley High school located to the south. The development of Citrus Valley High School within a commercially zoned area changed the context of the area, and residential uses adjacent to the high school would be a compatible use. The project incorporates pedestrian facilities to accommodate safe routes to the nearby high school, sidewalks and an extension of the Santa Ana River Trail on the west side of the property.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1125 of 1429
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8531 Approval of the Conversion of Agricultural Land Pursuant to Redlands General Plan - Measure U.docx-ms F. The proposed density or height increase will not require substantial expansion of public infrastructure, facilities or services.

The project would connect and enhance the existing infrastructure in the area and would not require substantial infrastructure improvements to water and sewer service to accommodate project demands. Sewer service and water service will be extended to the project from Texas Street with the development to the north and located adjacent to the project site. The existing water treatment facilities within the City, are capable of serving the proposed project and not substantial expansion would be required. The developer would be required to pay the appropriate development impact fees for transportation and infrastructure improvements as well as school fees, and development impact fees for public safety, parks and open spaces and the library. These developer impact fees represent the new development’s fair share of planned facilities and are not intended to address any needed facilities required to serve existing development. Therefore, the additional residential density would not require substantial expansion of public infrastructure, facilities or services.

Section 2. In accordance with Measure “U,” this resolution has been adopted by a 4/5ths vote of the membership of the City Council.

Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 19th day of December, 2023. ______________________________
ATTEST: Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1126 of 1429
5 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8531 Approval of the Conversion of Agricultural Land Pursuant to Redlands General Plan - Measure U.docx-ms I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1127 of 1429
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8532 Adopting General Plan Amendment No. 145.docx-ms RESOLUTION NO. 8532

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS ADOPTING AMENDMENT NO. 145 TO THE REDLANDS GENERAL PLAN

TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM
‘COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL’ TO ‘MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL’ FOR TWO PARCELS TOTALING 14.62 ACRES LOCATED AT 1160 WEST PIONEER AVENUE (APNS: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000).

WHEREAS, MLC Holdings, LLC, has filed applications for General Plan Amendment No. 145, Specific Plan No. 40 Amendment No. 49 (East Valley Corridor Specific Plan), Specific Plan No. 64 Amendment No. 1 (Bergamot Specific Plan), Tentative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review and Approval No. 945 for a 117-lot single family residential development located at the northeast corner of Interstate 210, and West Pioneer Avenue at 1160 West Pioneer Avenue (APNs: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000) (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, on November 3, 2023, notice of the Planning Commission’s public hearing for the Project was published in the Redlands Daily Facts; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing at which interested persons had an opportunity to testify in support of, or in opposition to, the Project, and at which the Planning Commission considered the Project; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 145 be approved; and WHEREAS on or about December 8, 2023, notice of the City Council’s public hearing for the Amendment was published in the Redlands Daily Facts by the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, on December 19, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the staff written and oral reports, the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the testimony and written evidence submitted by and on behalf of the applicant, and testimony by members of the public; and
WHEREAS, following the public hearing on the Amendment, the City Council determined that adoption of the Amendment is in the best interests of the public health, safety and general welfare;

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

SECTION 1. APPROVAL. General Plan Amendment No. 145 is hereby approved to change the General Plan land use designation of two parcels, totaling approximately 14.62 acres, Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1128 of 1429
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8532 Adopting General Plan Amendment No. 145.docx-ms from ‘Commercial/Industrial’ to ‘Medium Density Residential’ located at 1160 West Pioneer Avenue (APNs: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000) as more particularly shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 19th day of December, 2023. ______________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1129 of 1429
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8532 Adopting General Plan Amendment No. 145.docx-ms I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1130 of 1429
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8532 Adopting General Plan Amendment No. 145.docx-ms Attachment A-1
Existing General Plan Land Use Designation
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1131 of 1429
5 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8532 Adopting General Plan Amendment No. 145.docx-ms Attachment A-2
Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation (Amendment)
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1132 of 1429
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8533 Approval of Specific Plan No. 40 Amendment No. 49 EVCSP.docx-ms RESOLUTION NO. 8533

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 49 TO THE EAST
VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN (SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 40), TO

AMEND THE LAND USE MAP TO REMOVE TWO PARCELS CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 14.62 ACRES FROM THE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR

SPECIFIC PLAN, RESCINDING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF SCIENCE

RESEARCH PARK (EV/SRP) LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF INTERSTATE 210 AND PIONEER AVENUE AT 1160 WEST PIONEER
AVENUE (APN: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000).

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

Section 1. General Plan Conformity. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment to remove the Project site (the proposed Bergamot Specific Plan Amendment) from the boundaries of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan will conform with the Redlands General Plan.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1133 of 1429
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8533 Approval of Specific Plan No. 40 Amendment No. 49 EVCSP.docx-ms Section 2. Approval of Specific Plan Amendment No. 49 to the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Specific Plan Amendment No. 49 to the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 40) is hereby approved. Specific Plan Amendment No. 49 shall amend the EVCSP land use map and city’s Zoning Map to remove following two parcels (APNs: 0167-061- 01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000) from the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan boundary, rescinding the zoning designation of “Science Research Park District (EV/SRP)” as more particularly shown in “Exhibit “A” attached hereto.

Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 19th day of December, 2023. ______________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1134 of 1429
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8533 Approval of Specific Plan No. 40 Amendment No. 49 EVCSP.docx-ms I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1135 of 1429
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8533 Approval of Specific Plan No. 40 Amendment No. 49 EVCSP.docx-ms Exhibit “A”
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1136 of 1429
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8534 Approval of the Amendment to the Bergamot Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 64).docx-ms RESOLUTION NO. 8534

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE BERGAMOT SPECIFIC PLAN (SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 64), TO ADD APPROXIMATELY

14.62 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF INTERSTATE 210 AND PIONEER AVENUE AT 1160 WEST PIONEER AVENUE (APN:
0167-061-01-0000 & 0167-061-03-0000) TO THE BERGAMOT SPECIFIC

PLAN, DESIGNATE THE NEW RESIDENTIAL AREA AS NEIGHBORHOOD 4 (N-4) AND ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD 4 (N-4).

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

Section 1. General Plan Conformity. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment to add the Project site (the proposed Bergamot Specific Plan Amendment) to the boundaries of the Bergamot Specific Plan area will conform with the Redlands General Plan.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1137 of 1429
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8534 Approval of the Amendment to the Bergamot Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 64).docx-ms Section 2. Approval of Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 to the Bergamot Specific Plan.

Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 to the Bergamot Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 64) is hereby approved. Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 shall amend the Bergamot Specific Plan land use map and city’s Zoning Map to add the following two parcels (APNs: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167- 061-03-0000) to the Bergamot Specific Plan boundary, designate the area as “Neighborhood 4” (N-4), and establish development standards for Neighborhood 4 (N-4), as more particular detailed within the document attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.

Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 19th day of December, 2023. ______________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1138 of 1429
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8534 Approval of the Amendment to the Bergamot Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 64).docx-ms I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1139 of 1429
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8534 Approval of the Amendment to the Bergamot Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 64).docx-ms Exhibit “A”
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1140 of 1429
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms RESOLUTION NO. 8535

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 20528 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 14.62 ACRES INTO 117 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS FOR DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, 26 LETTERED LOTS

FOR PRIVATE ALLEYS AND DRIVE AISLES, NINE LETTERED LOTS FOR

ON-SITE LANDSCAPING, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, AND PRIVATE ON-SITE OPEN SPACE, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 117 MOTOR COURT HOMES AND RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF INTERSTATE 210 AND PIONEER
AVENUE AT 1160 WEST PIONEER AVENUE (APN: 0167-061-01-0000 AND 0167-061-03-0000).

WHEREAS, MLC Holdings, LLC, has filed applications for General Plan Amendment No. 145, Specific Plan No. 40 Amendment No. 49 (East Valley Corridor Specific Plan), Specific Plan No. 64 Amendment No. 1 (Bergamot Specific Plan), Tentative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945 for a 117-lot single family residential development located at the northeast corner of Interstate 210, and West Pioneer Avenue at 1160 West Pioneer Avenue (APNs: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000) (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority per Chapter 17.07 of the Redlands Municipal Code to take action on Tentative Tract No. 20528 to subdivide approximately 14.62 acres into 117 single family residential lots with 26 lettered lots for private alleys and drive aisles, nine lettered lots and the construction of 117 single-family motor court homes; and WHEREAS on November 3, 2023, notice of the Planning Commission’s public hearing for the Project and related Project Entitlements was published in the Redlands Daily Facts and notices were mailed to property owners within a 300 foot radius; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the staff report, oral report, the testimony, and the written evidence submitted by and on behalf of the applicant and by members of the public; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that Tentative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review and Approval No. 945 be approved; and
WHEREAS, notice of the City Council’s public hearing for Tentative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945 was published in the Redlands Daily Facts by the City Clerk; and
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1141 of 1429
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms WHEREAS, on December 19, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the staff written and oral reports, the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the testimony and written evidence submitted by and on behalf of the applicant, and testimony by members of the public.

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

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Redlands hereby approves Tentative Tract Map No. 20528 and related Inclusionary Housing Plan subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibits “A,” “B,” and “C,” and based upon the following findings:
1) The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan or any applicable specific plan, or other applicable provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code.

The proposed map will be consistent with the General Plan. The project’s proposed Medium Density Residential land use designation allows for 8-15 units per acre and the project has been designed at 8.1 units per acre. The tentative tract map is also consistent with the policies contained within the General Plan, which encourages small-lot subdivisions. The proposed map will be consistent with the Bergamot Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 64), as a Specific Plan Amendment is being processed concurrently, and the Specific Plan’s design guidelines and development standards will support development of the project. The proposed map will also be consistent with the provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code.
2) The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development.

The project site is physically suitable for the type of development. The site has a relatively flat grade with a very gradual 2 percent fall towards the northwest over distance, and is large enough at 14.62 acres to be subdivided into 117 residential lots, 26 lettered lots for private alleys and drive aisles, nine lettered lots for on-site landscaping, public open space, private on-site open space and the construction of the necessary on-site circulation. On-site and off-site improvements proposed as part of the project’s design will ensure the property is compatible with adjacent developments and mitigate potential impacts to traffic and other environmental factors to a less than significant level. 3) The site is physically suitable for the density of the development.

The maximum density allowed within the Medium Density Residential Land Use Designation is fifteen (15) units per acre. The project is designed at 8.1 units per acre. The project site is relatively flat in topography, and does not include the creation of residential lots on land with slopes exceeding 15%. As such, the site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1142 of 1429
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms 4) The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Based on the Initial Study that has been prepared for the project, there are no environmental factors that cannot be mitigated to a level of less than significant. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration lists mitigation measures for Biological Resources, regarding pre-construction surveys for sensitive species. As such, the project is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 5) The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems.

The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause any serious public health problems. An Air Quality Analysis and a Health Risk Assessment was prepared for project and the project will be required to comply with all local, state, and federal laws addressing air quality impacts. The memorandum found that the project would cause a less than significant impact to air quality and health risks. The nature of the residential use does not involve any substantial amounts of hazardous materials, and would not cause serious public health problems.
6) The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

The project will improve access in the immediate vicinity by installing public improvements such as sidewalks along Domestic Avenue and Pioneer Avenue.

Additionally, public streets and pedestrian access will be provided throughout the project site. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with any easements on or through the proposed subdivision.
7) That pursuant to Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act, the land is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (commencing with section 51200 of the Government Code) and that the resulting parcels following a subdivision of the land would be too small to sustain their agricultural use.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1143 of 1429
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms The subject property is not under a Williamson Act Contract pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, and will not be detrimental or otherwise affect lands in agricultural use.

SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Redlands hereby approves Commission Review & Approval No. 945 and related Inclusionary Housing Plan for the Project subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibits “A,” “B,” and “C,” and based upon the following findings:
1) The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, and all of the required yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features will adjust the use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood;
The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use. The subject property will be developed with 117 residential lots, public and private open space and will provide the necessary on-site improvements including parking, landscaping, lighting, and utility connections. The project site complies with the applicable development standards as proposed by the Bergamot Specific Plan Amendment including requirements for setbacks, lot coverage and design. The proposed use will also be compatible with the surrounding uses such as the existing Bergamot Specific Plan and Citrus Valley High School located adjacent to the project site and will be consistent with the anticipated future residential development on parcels with residential land use designations in the immediate vicinity.
2) The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways which are properly designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use.

The site is designed to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the proposed use.

The site will provide new improved access from Domestic Avenue and Pioneer Avenue.

These improvements are designed to carry the volume of residential traffic anticipated to be generated by the project and implement the project’s portion of the roadways designated for the area by the General Plan as well as additional roadway necessary to facilitate required access.
3) The conditions set forth in the approval and those shown on the approved site plan are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare.

The conditions of approval for the project will protect the public health, safety and general welfare. The project has been conditioned to comply with the provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1144 of 1429
5 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 19th day of December, 2023. ______________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1145 of 1429
6 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1146 of 1429
7 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms

EXHIBIT A

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

1. This approval is for Tentative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review and Approval No. 945 to subdivide 14.62 acres into 117 single family residential lots with 26 lettered lots for private alleys and drive aisles, nine lettered lots and the construction of 117 single-family motor court homes, located at the northeast corner of Interstate 210, and West Pioneer Avenue at 1160 West Pioneer Avenue from the boundaries of the Specific Plan (APNS: 0167-061-01-0000 and 0167-061-03-0000).

2. Unless construction has commenced pursuant to a building permit, or a time extension is granted in accordance with Code, this approval shall expire two (2) years from the date of City Council approval.

3. Any application(s) for an extension of time of the above expiration date shall be filed with the Planning Division not less than 90 days prior to the expiration date and shall comply with Title 17 (Subdivision Regulations) of the Redlands Municipal Code. Upon application by the subdivider prior to the expiration of the approved or conditionally approved tentative map, the tentative map shall be automatically extended in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act.

4. The issuance of any permits shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code and Specific Plan No. 64.

5. All plans submitted to the City shall reflect the City Council approval and any other changes required by the City Council, Planning Commission and/or staff. This condition applies to the site plan, landscape plans, building elevations and materials, and all other illustrations, text, or plans submitted to the City in connection with this project.

6. No final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted until all conditions of approval have been satisfied.

7. The applicant shall record the subdivision by a final tract map. No building permits shall be issued until a final tract map has been recorded.

8. The final map shall substantially conform to the tentative map as approved by the City Council.

9. Any conditions of approval determined by the City to not be completed prior to Final Map approval shall be included within the Subdivision Improvement Agreement entered into by the developer with the City.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1147 of 1429
8 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms

10. The applicant for this permit, and its successors and assigns, shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Redlands, and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all claims, actions, and proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this permit by the City, or brought against the City due to acts or omissions in any way connected to the applicant’s project that is the subject of this permit. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages, fees, costs, liabilities, and expenses incurred in such actions or proceedings, including damages for the injury to property or persons, including death of a person, and any award of attorneys’ fees.

In the event any such action is commenced to attack, set aside, void or annul all, or any, provisions of this permit, or is commenced for any other reason against the City for acts or omissions relating to the applicant’s project, within fourteen (14) City business days of the same, the applicant shall file with the City a performance bond or irrevocable letter of credit (together, the “Security”) in a form satisfactory to the City and in the amount of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000), to ensure applicant’s performance of its defense and indemnity obligations under this condition. The failure of the applicant to provide the Security shall be deemed an express acknowledgement and agreement by the applicant that the City shall have the authority and right, without objection by the applicant, to revoke all entitlements granted for the project pursuant to this permit. The City shall have no liability to the applicant for the exercise of City’s right to revoke this permit.

11. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d), certain fees, dedications, reservations or exactions imposed by the City as a condition of approval of this project are subject to a statutory ninety (90) day protest period. Please be advised that the ninety (90) day protest period for those fees, dedications, reservations and exactions which are subject to Government Code Section 66020(a) has commenced to run on the date this project was approved by the City.

12. The applicant shall not make any modifications or changes during construction that are in conflict or contrary to the project’s approved site design, or building elevations without first consulting with the Development Services Director or designee.

13. Common open space and recreational areas shall utilize durable materials and related protection devices to protect the area from vandalism by individuals or the use of skateboards.

14. A Home Owner’s Association shall be established for the tract for maintenance of lettered lots and their related improvements.

15. Any slopes greater in height than three feet (3’) shall be provided with irrigation systems and planted with groundcover, shrubs, and trees to prevent erosion, as approved by the Development Services Department and Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department.

16. All utilities on-site shall be placed underground, including utility vaults. Prior to approval of the final map the applicant shall bond for undergrounding of utilities, and submit plans Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1148 of 1429
9 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms to be approved by the Development Services Director that detail undergrounding of all utilities found on-site. Bonds shall be calculated and included in any bonds required by the City of Redlands Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department.

17. A Minor Exception Permit shall be required for any wall or fence heights in excess six feet, and of wall or fence heights listed in Specific Plan No. 64.

18. In order to provide safe and efficient automated solid waste collection services the containers will need to be placed on the public streets A and B (curbside). Containers shall be placed in the street at the curb. Containers shall not be placed within three feet (3’) from any obstacle, such as a parked vehicle, fence, lamp post, mailbox and at least one foot (1’) from any other container. No trash services to be performed in an alley or access road.

19. No parking shall be permitted between the hours of 6am to 2:30pm on the day of collection services.

20. Prior to issuance of building permits for the project, the applicant and/or developer shall provide payment of In -lieu Fees in accordance with the approved Inclusionary Housing Plan provided with the application.

21. The applicant shall establish a Home Owners Association (HOA) for the care and maintenance of all property improvements held in common ownership of the subdivision.

The HOA shall be formed for the property, and Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R’s) shall be prepared, submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney, prior to approval of the Final Map. The HOA and the CC&R’s shall cover the care and maintenance of all property and improvements held in common ownership of the subdivision.

22. Prior to Final Tract Map clearance, the applicant shall submit one (1) copy of each of the final Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws of the Homeowners’ Association, and Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) to the Planning Division for review and approval. After recordation of the final CC&Rs, two (2) copies of said recorded CC&Rs shall be submitted to the Planning Division.

23. Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions ("CC&Rs") shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the City for the project. The CC&Rs shall contain the following:
a. A provision which reads substantially as follows: "The City shall have the right to review and approve any proposed amendment or termination of [the CC&Rs] when such termination or amendment would alter, amend, terminate or otherwise impair the rights of the City under those provisions of [the CC&Rs] which satisfy the conditions of approval imposed by the City for the project. All proposed amendments shall be submitted to the City's Development Services Director and shall be approved in writing by the City Attorney as a precondition of and prior to Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1149 of 1429
10 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms the recordation of such amendment."
b. A provision which reads substantially as follows: "[The CC&Rs] shall be covenants running with the land, and shall, in any event, and without regard to technical classification or designation, legal or otherwise, be, to the fullest extent permitted by law and equity, binding for the benefit and the favor of, and enforceable by the City of Redlands. Although the City of Redlands shall be a beneficiary of [the CC&Rs], and shall have a right to enforce [them], the City of Redlands shall not be obligated hereunder to exercise such rights of enforcement." c. CC&Rs shall detail the ownership and maintenance requirements for Lots A through I, stating that the required open space areas for the project shall be owned and maintained by the Home Owners Association for the project in perpetuity. d. The Conditional, Covenants, and Restrictions (“CC&R’s”) shall specify that individual trash service shall not occur upon an alley or private streets. Trash receptacles must be placed curbside upon the nearest local street. Further containers shall not be placed within three feet (3’) of any obstacle, such as a parked vehicle, fence, lamp post, mailbox and at least one foot (1’) from adjacent containers.

Mitigation Measures

24. Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 1 (BIO-1):

Pre-Construction Survey for Nesting Birds. Ground-disturbing activities shall be conducted during the non-breeding season for birds (approximately September 1 through January 31) to avoid violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code § § 3503, 3503.5 and 3513.

If grading or construction activities are scheduled to occur during the bird breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a pre-construction survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified Designated Biologist who is experienced in the identification of avian species and conduction nesting bird surveys using appropriate survey methodology.

The nest survey shall include the project site and any adjacent areas (i.e., construction site entrances and/or staging areas) where the project activities have the potential to cause nest failure. The pre-construction survey shall be conducted no more than three days prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities within the bird breeding season at the appropriate time of day/night, and during appropriate weather conditions. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, site preparation and construction activities may begin. If nesting birds are found to be present, avoidance or minimization measures shall be undertaken to avoid potential project-related impacts. If a nest is suspected, but not confirmed, the Designated Biologist shall establish a disturbance-free buffer until additional surveys can be completed, or until the location can be inferred based on observations confirm that a nest does not exist or is inactive. If a nest is observed, but Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1150 of 1429
11 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms thought to be inactive, the Designated Biologist shall monitor the nest for one hour (four hours for raptors during the non-breeding season) prior to approaching the nest to determine status. The Designated Biologist shall use their best professional judgement regarding the monitoring period and whether approaching the nest is appropriate.

If an active avian nest is confirmed, the Designated Biologist shall immediately establish a conservative avoidance buffer surrounding the nest based on their best professional judgement and experience. The Designated Biologist shall monitor the nest at the onset of project activities, and at the onset of any changes in such project activities (e.g., increase in number or type of equipment, change in equipment usage, etc.) to determine the efficacy of the buffer. If the Designated Biologist determines that such project activities may be causing an adverse reaction, the Designated Biologist shall adjust the buffer accordingly or implement alternative avoidance and minimization measures, such as redirecting or rescheduling construction or erecting sound barriers. All work within these buffers will be halted until the nesting effort is finished (i.e., the juveniles are surviving independent from the nest). The on-site qualified biologist will review and verify compliance with these nesting avoidance buffers and will verify the nesting effort has finished. Work can resume within these avoidance areas when no other active nests are found. Upon completion of the survey and nesting bird monitoring, a report shall be prepared and submitted to the City for mitigation monitoring compliance record keeping.

25. Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 2 (BIO-2):

Pre-Construction Surveys for Burrowing Owl. The project applicant shall retain a qualified Biologist to perform a pre-construction burrowing owl survey to determine whether burrowing owls are present within 30 days prior to construction activities, according to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) 2012 guidelines. If construction is delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the survey, the area shall be resurveyed.

Survey for occupied burrows shall be completed within all construction areas and within 300 feet from the proposed project impact area (where possible and appropriate based on locations of barren or ruderal habitats).

If burrowing owls are detected during the pre-construction survey, the City shall consult with the CDFW and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to develop and implement a Burrowing Owl Mitigation Plan that includes mitigation measures outlined in CDFW (2012) guidelines and a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP).

26. Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 3 (BIO-3):

Pre-Construction Surveys for Special-Status Reptiles. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall provide evidence that a qualified designated biologist has been retained to perform a pre-construction survey of the entire project impact area, including any staging/laydown areas, for Southern California legless lizard and San Diegan tiger whiptail.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1151 of 1429
12 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms • If special-status reptiles are observed during construction activities, all work within 50 feet of the animal(s) will be stopped. At no time shall work occur within 50 feet of the animal without the Biological Monitor present. Any special-status wildlife species detected within the project impact area, including any staging/laydown areas, shall be allowed to move away on their own and shall not be captured or handled without authorization from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). • Avoidance of Entrapment: To prevent inadvertent entrapment of special-status reptiles during construction, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches may need to be covered at the close of each working day with plywood or other suitable material or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to regularly inspect open trenches during the construction phase. • Environmentally Sensitive Area Fencing: Areas that support sensitive habitats or reptile species shall be temporarily fenced to protect them from construction activities and traffic. The project applicant may need to retain a qualified designated biologist to monitor Environmentally Sensitive Areas during the construction phase.
• Worker Environmental Awareness Program: A Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training shall be implemented by a qualified designated biologist to educate construction workers about the presence of special-status plant and reptile species on and near the project site and shall be administered to construction personnel prior to the initiation of ground-disturbing or vegetation/habitat altering activities.

27. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 1 (CUL-1):

Native American Treatment Agreement. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall enter into a Tribal Monitoring Agreement with the Consulting Tribe[s] for the project. The Tribal Monitor shall be on-site during all ground-disturbing activities (including, but not limited to, clearing, grubbing, tree and bush removal, grading, trenching, fence post placement and removal, construction excavation, excavation for all utility and irrigation lines, and landscaping phases of any kind). The Tribal Monitor shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect, or halt the ground-disturbing activities to allow identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of cultural resources.

28. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 2 (CUL-2):

Retention of Archaeologist. Prior to any ground-disturbing activities (including, but not limited to, clearing, grubbing, tree and bush removal, grading, trenching, fence post Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1152 of 1429
13 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms replacement and removal, construction excavation, excavation for all utility and irrigation lines, and landscaping phases of any kind), and prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Standards (SOI). The archaeologist shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities to identify any known or suspected archaeological and/or cultural resources. The archaeologist will conduct a Cultural Resource Sensitivity Training, in conjunction with the Tribe[s] Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO), and/or designated Tribal Representative. The training session will focus on the archaeological and tribal cultural resources that may be encountered during ground-disturbing activities as well as the procedures to be followed in such an event.

29. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 3 (CUL-3):

Cultural Resource Management Plan. Prior to any ground-disturbing activities the project archaeologist shall develop a Cultural Resource Management Plan (CRMP) and/or Archaeological Monitoring and Treatment Plan (AMTP) to address the details, timing, and responsibilities of all archaeological and cultural resource activities that occur on the project site. This Plan shall be written in consultation with the Consulting Tribe[s] and shall include the following: approved Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of Approval (COA), contact information for all pertinent parties, parties’ responsibilities, procedures for each MM or COA, and an overview of the project schedule.

30. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 4 (CUL-4):

Pre-Grade Meeting. The retained qualified archeologist and Consulting Tribe[s] representative shall attend the pre-grade meeting with the grading contractors to explain and coordinate the requirements of the monitoring plan.

31. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 5 (CUL-5):

On-site Monitoring. During all ground-disturbing activities the qualified archaeologist and the Native American monitor shall be on-site full-time. The frequency of inspections shall depend on the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and any discoveries of Tribal Cultural Resources as defined in California Public Resources Code Section 21074.

Archaeological and Native American monitoring will be discontinued when the depth of grading and the soil conditions no longer retain the potential to contain cultural deposits.

The qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American monitor, shall be responsible for determining the duration and frequency of monitoring.

32. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 6 (CUL 6):

Inadvertent Discovery of Cultural Resources. In the event that previously unidentified cultural resources are unearthed during construction, the qualified archaeologist and the Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1153 of 1429
14 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms Native American monitor shall have the authority to temporarily divert and/or temporarily halt ground disturbance operations in the area of discovery to allow for the evaluation of potentially significant cultural resources. Isolates and clearly non-significant deposits shall be minimally documented in the field and collected so the monitored grading can proceed.

If a potentially significant cultural resource(s) is discovered, work shall stop within a 60- foot perimeter of the discovery and an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) physical demarcation/barrier constructed. All work shall be diverted away from the vicinity of the find, so that the find can be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and Tribal Monitor[s].

The archaeologist shall notify the Lead Agency and consulting Tribe[s] of said discovery.

The qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the Lead Agency, the consulting Tribe[s], and the Native American monitor, shall determine the significance of the discovered resource. A recommendation for the treatment and disposition of the Tribal Cultural Resource shall be made by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the Tribe[s] and the Native American monitor[s] and be submitted to the Lead Agency for review and approval. Below are the possible treatments and dispositions of significant cultural resources in order of CEQA preference:

A. Full avoidance.

B. If avoidance is not feasible, Preservation in place.

C. If Preservation in place is not feasible, all items shall be reburied in an area away from any future impacts and reside in a permanent conservation easement or Deed Restriction.

D. If all other options are proven to be infeasible, data recovery through excavation and then curation in a Curation Facility that meets the Federal Curation Standards (CFR 79.1)

33. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 7 (CUL 7):

Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. Consulting Tribe[s] request the following specific conditions to be imposed in order to protect Native American human remains and/or cremations. No photographs are to be taken except by the coroner, with written approval by the consulting Tribe[s].

A. Should human remains and/or cremations be encountered on the surface or during any and all ground-disturbing activities (i.e., clearing, grubbing, tree and bush removal, grading, trenching, fence post placement and removal, construction excavation, excavation for all water supply, electrical, and irrigation lines, and landscaping phases of any kind), work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall immediately stop within a 100-foot perimeter of the discovery. The area shall be protected; project personnel/observers will be restricted. The County Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1154 of 1429
15 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms Coroner is to be contacted within 24 hours of discovery. The County Coroner has 48 hours to make his/her determination pursuant to State and Safety Code §7050.5. and Public Resources Code (PRC) § 5097.98.

B. In the event that the human remains and/or cremations are identified as Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of determination pursuant to subdivision (c) of HSC §7050.5.

C. The Native American Heritage Commission shall immediately notify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD has 48 hours, upon being granted access to the Project site, to inspect the site of discovery and make his/her recommendation for final treatment and disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the remains and all associated grave goods pursuant to PRC §5097.98.

D. If the Consulting Tribe(s) has been named the Most Likely Descendant (MLD), the Tribe may wish to rebury the human remains and/or cremation and sacred items in their place of discovery with no further disturbance where they will reside in perpetuity. The place(s) of reburial will not be disclosed by any party and is exempt from the California Public Records Act (California Government Code § 6254[r]). Reburial location of human remains and/or cremations will be determined by the Tribe’s Most Likely Descendant (MLD), the landowner, and the City Planning Department.

34. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measure 1 (HAZ-1):

Soil Management Plan. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) shall be prepared by a qualified environmental professional with Phase II/Site Characterization experience. The SMP shall be approved by the City and made available by the project Applicant to the contractor and the City Engineer for use during grading activities. The SMP shall include guidelines for safety measures and soil management in the event that soils are to be disturbed, and for handling soil during any planned earthwork activities. The SMP shall also include a decision framework and specific risk management measures for managing soil, including any soil import/export activities, in a manner protective of human health and consistent with applicable regulatory requirements.

As part of this SMP, all excavation activities shall be documented daily using digital photography. In addition, the sides and the bottom of the excavation areas of concern shall be appropriately logged on scaled paper. Observed materials, including an estimate of the quantity observed, and PID and dust monitor readings shall be recorded on the Daily Field Record and/or the Direct Reading Log.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1155 of 1429
16 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms If the results of the stockpile samples show no contamination, or detected concentrations of chemicals within acceptable regulatory limits for residential uses, then the soil may be redistributed within the excavation. If soil is deemed contaminated, then it shall be disposed of off-site at an approved landfill facility. Should any soils be imported or exported at an off-site location, a Phase II/Site Characterization Specialist shall verify that all imported/exported soils are not contaminated with hazardous materials above regulatory thresholds. If import/export soils are determined to be contaminated above regulatory thresholds, the Phase II/Site Characterization Specialist would recommend proper handling, use, and/or disposal of these soils.

35. Hazards Mitigation Measure 2 (HAZ-2):

Removal of Organochloride Pesticides (OCP) Contaminated Soils. Prior to site grading activities, the project Applicant shall submit documentation as proof, to the City Engineer, that the OCP-impacted soils at the project site have been excavated and disposed of at a licensed facility with confirmation sampling to show that all remaining soil OCP concentrations are below applicable regulatory screening thresholds for residential uses.

The excavation, transport, and disposal of all OCP-impacted soils from the project site shall occur in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and/or local regulations. In no event shall the project Applicant proceed with site grading activities at any location on the site where OCP contamination is found to be present above regulatory thresholds for residential use.

36. Transportation Mitigation Measure 1 (TR-1):

Traffic Management Plan. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall prepare a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for approval by the City of Redlands Traffic Engineer. The TMP shall include measures to minimize potential safety impacts during the short-term construction process if partial or full lane closures are required. The TMP shall specify that one direction of travel in each direction on adjacent roadways (West Pioneer Avenue and West Domestic Avenue) must always be maintained during project construction activities. If full lane closures are required and one direction of travel in each direction cannot be maintained, the TMP shall identify planned detours. The TMP shall include measures such as construction signage, limitations on timing for lane closures to avoid peak hours, temporary striping plans, and use of construction flagperson(s) to direct traffic during heavy equipment use. The TMP shall be incorporated into project specifications for verification prior to final plan approval.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1156 of 1429
17 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms Other Departments/Divisions

37. Conditions of Approval from the following City Departments/Divisions are applicable to the project, and are hereby incorporated by reference:
a. Land Use Engineering Division (Exhibit B)
b. Fire Department (Exhibit C)
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1157 of 1429
18 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms

EXHIBIT B
Land Use Engineering Division
Conditions of Approval
[ Attached ]
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1158 of 1429
19 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8535 Approval of Tenative Tract Map No. 20528 and Commission Review & Approval No. 945.docx-ms

EXHIBIT C
Fire Department
Conditions of Approval
[ Attached ]
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1159 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1160 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1161 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1162 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1163 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1164 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1165 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1166 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1167 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1168 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1169 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1170 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1171 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1172 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1173 of 1429

FIRE DEPARTMENT
November 2, 2023
City of

REDLANDS
Incorporated 1888
City of Redlands
35 Cajon Street, Suite 12, Redlands, CA 92373

COMMUNITY RISK

REDUCTION DIVISION
Subject: TTM 20528 – Fire Department Conditions
Fire Department Conditions

1. Street A Dead End Turnaround provisions for Fire Apparatus No curbside parking shall be permitted in the cul-de-sac of “Street A” and driveways 'AE' and 'AF' shall be constructed to support a 75,000 lb fire apparatus. This can be finalized during the grading plan review and permit process.

2. Fire Hydrant Location Corner of Street B
Proposed hydrant shall be relocated to southwest corner of “Street B”.

3. Fire Access Plan
Prior to recordation of the final map and/or grading permit issuance, the applicant shall provide a Fire Access Plan for review and approval by the Redlands Fire Department.

Vince Anderson | Fire Marshal
Redlands Fire Department
Phone 909.798.7601
Email [email protected]
35 Cajon St, Ste. 12 Redlands, CA 92373
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1174 of 1429
City Council Meeting H. 2.

DATE: 12/19/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of Resolution No. 8536 - Appeal of the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission's decision to deny Certificate of Appropriateness Permit No. 665
(Mayor to declare meeting open as a public hearing)
PUBLIC HEARING to consider Resolution No. 8536 - An
Appeal of the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission's decision to deny Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, a request to legalize/approve an existing 6-foot-high vinyl fence and a rolling gate within the street-side setback for the property located at 232 West Olive Avenue (APN:
0171-244-40-0000) in the Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) District and the Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic and
Scenic District (Historic District No. 8) by appellants Beverly and Kenneth Winchester (Development Services Director
Desatnik)
a.

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.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1175 of 1429
MOTION(S):

If the City Council wishes to approve the Appeal, the following motion is provided:

I move to adopt Resolution No.8536 to uphold the Appeal, and approve Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 subject to the conditions of approval.

RECOMMENDATION:

The City Council may uphold the Appeal and approve Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 subject to the recommended conditions of approval, if the changes to the project and the conditions of approval are sufficient to address the Council's concerns.

DISCUSSION:

The appellant filed their Appeal (Attachment A-1) on July 13, 2023, within the required ten days after the decision by the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission on July 6, 2023. This item was presented to the City Council on September 19, 2023, and no final decision was made. The Council continued the matter, allowing staff additional time to work with the applicant to incorporate alternative screening and design considerations (for potential approval).

A) Background & Project Description
Property History: The subject property is within the Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic & Scenic District (Historic District No. 8). Based on the Historic Inventory Sheet (Attachment C) for the subject parcel, the one-story residence was constructed in 1898 and is a good example of the Victorian style.

Certificate of Appropriateness: Beverly and Kenneth Winchester submitted an application to legalize/approve a 6-foot-high vinyl fence and a rolling slide gate placed within the street-side setback along Grant Street. The vinyl fence and gate were installed by the applicant in April 2022 without any building permits, and without the required approval of a Minor Certificate of Appropriateness and Minor Exception Permit. The subject property is located at 232 West Olive Avenue (Attachment B - Location Map and Aerial Photograph) in the Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) District.

The application was reviewed by the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission in four meetings, with several suggestions made by Commissioners to assist the applicant in achieving consistency with the Secretary of Interior Standards so that the application might be approved. The applicant declined Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1176 of 1429
numerous suggestions and did not want to revise the design with vinyl. On July 6, 2023, the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission (HSPC) voted to deny the Minor Certificate of Appropriateness application based on the inappropriate material of the fence/gate, lack of sufficient screening (i.e., vinyl fencing and vinyl-coated steel trellises for a landscape screen), and the applicant’s unwillingness to change the proposed materials. Staff reports from the previous HSPC meetings are included as Attachment D.

On September 19, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the Appeal (see Attachment E) and continued the meeting to an unspecified date. At that meeting, the Council instructed the staff to work with the appellant to consider appropriate screening alternatives to achieve consistency with the City’s "Historic and Scenic Preservation Design Manual" and the Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines.

Staff met with the appellant on September 26, 2023 and October 12, 2023, to discuss fence placement and screening alternatives. Staff discussed appropriate screening alternatives based on what was suggested previously by the HSPC during four meetings (e.g., paint the exterior of the fence and the gate, use wider wood trellises that cover the entire fence panel, and plant Jasmine or an alternative dense foliage). Staff also helped the appellant to find an appropriate paint that would adhere to vinyl (as exposed and untreated vinyl material was a significant concern of the HSPC).

Minor Exception Permit: The Minor Exception Permit (MEP) Committee met on November 13, 2023, since an MEP application was submitted concurrently with the Certificate of Appropriateness application. The MEP Committee proposed conditions of approval to address a landscape "green" screen to help mitigate the appearance of the 6' fence (as previously discussed by the City Council during the prior appeal hearing), as well as modifying the fence corner adjacent to the property at 137 Grant Street to provide a sufficient traffic sight safety area.

The appellant agreed to implement all conditions of approval as discussed. The Minor Exception Committee voted 3 to 0 to approve the request, subject to the following Conditions of Approval:

The exterior sides of the fence on the south (Olive Ave.) and west (Grant St.) sides shall include lattice (approximately five to six feet high) installed across the width of the fence panel to provide surfaces for climbing vines or shrubs on the exterior of the fence for landscape screening purposes.

Landscape screening is required in addition to the applicant painting the exterior sides of the fence panels a flat white color.

1. The applicant shall modify the northwest corner of the fence (adjacent to 137 Grant Street) to provide adequate traffic sight safety distance at the driveway. The fencing shall be moved back the distance of one fence panel (or approximately five to six feet) on both the west and north sides.

2. The applicant shall have up to 120 days from the date of approval to: a) modify the corner cutoff for traffic sight safety, and b) paint the exterior side of the fence and gate with a non-reflective flat white color (or similar color

3. Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1177 of 1429
of the fence and gate with a non-reflective flat white color (or similar color with a non-reflective and non-glossy finish) to mitigate the appearance of the fence/gate at the existing placement where it was installed. The 120-day grace period shall end on March 12, 2024.

B) Analysis
Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines: The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings states, “The relationship of buildings to each other, setbacks, fence patterns, views, driveways and walkways, and street trees and other landscaping together establish the character of a district or neighborhood”.

Regarding fencing, the Guidelines explain that protective fencing for security may be installed in historic districts/neighborhoods if it is as unobtrusive as possible and should take into consideration the location of the fencing and its visibility so that the fencing does not negatively impact the historic character of the setting.

As previously noted, the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission did not consider the vinyl fence to be compatible with the house or the district. The appellant has now agreed to paint the exterior side of the fence with a flat white color so that the panels will more closely resemble a wood fence (rather than a vinyl fence). The appellant has also agreed to implement the conditions of approval from the Minor Exception Committee to provide landscape screening on the exterior sides of the fence on the south (Olive Ave.) and west (Grant St.) for additional screening of the fence panels. Therefore, if the City Council determines these measures are adequate treatments to achieve consistency with the Secretary of Interior Standards, then the change may be considered to be satisfactorily mitigated and a less than significant impact.

City of Redlands Historic and Scenic Preservation Design Manual: The Victorian style is well established in Redlands, with row upon row of Victorian homes in the areas around Olive Avenue, Highland Avenue, and Cajon. The predominant material used is typically wood, wood siding, wood shingles, stone, brick, and masonry. Although the MEP Conditions of approval do not change the underlying material of the fence and the gate, they are intended to provide screening and reduce the exposed glossy appearance of vinyl.

Environmental Review: CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(3) states that “generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource”. If the Council determines that the proposal is consistent with the applicable Secretary of Interior Standards and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual, then the fence material Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1178 of 1429
and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual, then the fence material and its impacts on the subject property (as well as the surrounding Smiley Park Historic & Scenic District) could then be considered to be satisfactorily mitigated and would be a less than significant impact. Therefore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) may be utilized for the project.

ALTERNATIVES:

1. The City Council may deny the appeal and uphold the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission's decision to deny Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, and find that the project does not meet the criteria to be exempt from CEQA.

2. The City Council may continue the public hearing to allow for additional information.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Not applicable.

SUBMITTED BY:

Brian Desatnik, Development Services Director
RECOMMENDED BY:

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

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
Brian Foote, City Planner/Planning Manager
PREPARED BY:

Laylee Hokmollahi, Assistant Planner
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year: 22-23
Revenue Generating: No
Appropriation Required Y/N: No
Discussion:

There is no fiscal impact associated with the appeal request. The appellant paid the applicable Appeal filing fee.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1179 of 1429
Attachments
Attachment A-1: Appeal Form
Attachment A-2: Site Photographs
Attachment A-3: Exhibits from Applicant
Attachment B: Location Map & Aerial
Attachment C: Historic Inventory Sheet
Attachment D: HSPC Staff Reports
Attachment E: City Council Staff Report of Sept. 19, 2023 Attachment F: Resolution 8536
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1180 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1181 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1182 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1183 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1184 of 1429
Redlands Regular 1185 meeting of 1429of 12-19-23
Redlands Regular meeting of 1186 12-19-23 of 1429

W OLIVE AVE

ALVARADO ST

GLENWOOD DR
S 4TH ST

PARKWOOD
DR

S EUREKA ST

GRANT ST
Copyright nearmap
Location Map
OneStop.mxd
0 60 120
Feet
Scale
This map was produced by the City of Redlands,
Geographic Information System.

The City of Redlands assumes no warranty or
legal responsibility for the information contained
on this map.

The data used to generate this map is dynamic
in nature, therefore the information shown may
or may not be the most current.

February 15, 2023 .Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 Attachment B-1: Location Map 232 West Olive Avenue Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1187 of 1429

W OLIVE AVE

GRANT ST
218
214
137
132
310
232
223
314
136
134
304
135
224
Aerial
OneStop.mxd
0 20 40
Feet
Scale
This map was produced by the City of Redlands,
Geographic Information System.

The City of Redlands assumes no warranty or
legal responsibility for the information contained
on this map.

The data used to generate this map is dynamic
in nature, therefore the information shown may
or may not be the most current.

February 15, 2023 .Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 Attachment B-2: Aerial 232 West Olive Avenue Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1188 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1189 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1190 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1191 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1192 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1193 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1194 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1195 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1196 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1197 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1198 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1199 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1200 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1201 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1202 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1203 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1204 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1205 of 1429
ATTACHMENT “D-1”
HSPC Staff Report of March 2, 2023
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1206 of 1429

REQUEST FOR HISTORIC AND SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ACTION V.A. KENNETH WINCHESTER, APPLICANT
PUBLIC HEARING to consider Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 – A request to legalize/approve an existing 6-foot-high, vinyl fence and a rolling slide gate with galvanized steel frame located within the street-side setback along Grant Street. The subject property is located at 232 West Olive Avenue (APN: 0171-244-40-0000) within the Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) District and the Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic & Scenic District (Historic District No. 8). The proposal may qualify for exemption from environmental review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) or Section 15270 (Projects Which Are Disapproved).

HISTORIC AND SCENIC PRESERVATION MEETING: March 2, 2023 Planner: Laylee Hokmollahi, Junior Planner

PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING

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

2. Chairperson calls upon staff for report.

3. Chairperson calls for questions/comments from members of the Commission.

4. Chairperson calls upon applicant, or its representative, for comments/testimony.

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

6. Chairperson calls upon the applicant, or representative, for rebuttal comments (5 minutes).

7. Chairperson closes the public hearing.

8. Commission considers the motion(s) and votes.

SYNOPSIS

1. Historic Designation: The subject property is located within Historic District (HD) No. 8, known as the “Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic and
Scenic District.” The subject property is not individually designated as a historic resource.

2. Existing Land Use: The property has one existing single-family dwelling with residential use.

3. Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission submittal dates:
(A) Date Submitted: October 11, 2022
(B) Date Accepted as Complete: November 3, 2022
(C) Historic and Scenic Preservation
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1207 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
MARCH 2, 2023
PAGE 2
Commission Meeting: March 2, 2023

4. Attachments:

A) Location Map & Aerial Photograph
B) Site Photos
C) Historic Inventory Sheets
D-1) Resolution No. 2023-02 (Approval)
D-2) Resolution No. 2023-02 (Denial)

PROPOSAL
The property owner, Kenneth Winchester is requesting approval of a Minor Certificate of Appropriateness to legalize/approve an existing 6-foot-high, vinyl fence and a rolling slide gate with galvanized steel frame located within the street-side setback, adjacent to Grant Street, which extends along western and northern property lines, at the rear portion of the lot. Site Photographs are included as attachment B.

The applicant has replaced shrubs with the existing fence for the purpose of saving water, increasing security, and providing privacy for a small exercise pool that is going to be built this year.

BACKGROUND
Property History: The one-story residence was constructed in 1898 and is Victorian style.

The following is the description from the Historic Inventory Sheet prepared by Helen Watts:

This is a Victorian Cottage style, one-story house with a brick chimney, a hip composition roof with slight bell cast and exposed rafters. There is a shingled gable with overhand and double windows of all four sides at the attic level. There is a decorated frieze. A recessed at left half of front extends halfway around the left side. The porch roof is supported by turned pillars.

The main entry is at front center with a second entry at left side. Entrance doors are wood paneled with a glass panel at the top. Both entrances have cement steps with cobble stone rails. The porch has a stick work rail. A large single window is centered at right front. Sash type windows have wooden moldings. The house has wooden overlapping siding and there is a decorative crest at the roof ridge.

Karen Flippin further described the house in 2013, “The house sits on a corner lot with cut stone curbing all around. A low cement wall runs along the lawn. In the southeast corner of the property is a large palm tree, there are also palm trees along Olive Avenue.” Historic Inventory Sheets are included as Attachment C.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1208 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
MARCH 2, 2023
PAGE 3
The Sanborn map from 1900 shows the main dwelling at the exact same location and footprint of the present structure. Between 1900 and 1908, a garage was built on the north side of the main dwelling. Between 1938 and 2007, a carport was added next to the garage. Aerial maps from 2004 to 2019 show the same landscaping that was subsequently removed (sometime in 2021 or early 2022) and replaced with the current vinyl fence. The property owner stated that the fence was constructed in April 2022.

Application for Certificate of Appropriateness: The application was filed as a Minor Certificate of Appropriateness. Staff was unable to approve the existing vinyl fencing, and the applicant has been informed that wood fencing would be more appropriate to the style of the building and preserve its historic appearance and integrity. Wood fencing would also be more appropriate for the surrounding historic district considering the home styles and predominant use of wood. The applicant has declined to remove the fence and has requested review by the Commission.

Exterior Condition: An approximately 4’0” high shrub row was in place (and since removed) where the new fence has been installed. Aerial maps show the shrubs from at least 2004 to 2019. In 2022 the landscaping was removed, the ground was paved, and the vinyl fence was constructed. Additional information about the condition of the exterior is available via Google Streetview and aerial images online. Although the fence can be seen on Google Map, the Google Streetview is not up to date and shows the old shrubs.

ANALYSIS
A) Zoning Standards
The subject property is within the High Density Residential (R-3) Zone, and has a required front yard setback of 15 feet and required street-side yard equal to the front yard requirement. On corner lots, in residential districts, side yards abutting the street, shall be not less than the required front yard for lots in the district in which the lot is located, and in no case, not less than fifteen feet (15') (RMC Section 18.148.030). Presently, the property has an existing six foot (6’) high vinyl fence, with a vehicle access gate, which runs along the property line adjacent to Grant Street. The Municipal Code requires that open fences within the front yard setback area not taller than four feet and solid fences may not be taller than three feet; however, the Municipal Code does provide a mechanism to allow variances to these fence requirements. As the height of the existing fence exceeds the height limit of three feet (3’) for solid fences within the front setback, the applicant submitted a Minor Exception Permit (MEP) application. By applying for an MEP, the applicant can request variances or deviations to the City’s wall and fencing standards.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1209 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
MARCH 2, 2023
PAGE 4
B) Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines
At the present time, the proposal does not appear to meet the recommended SOI Standards due to the existing fence material’s incompatibility with the historic building materials and historic style.

The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings states the following about historic neighborhoods and districts: “The relationship of buildings to each other, setbacks, fence patterns, views, driveways and walkways, and street trees and other landscaping together establish the character of a district or neighborhood”. Regarding fencing, the Guidelines explain that protective fencing for security may be installed in historic districts/neighborhoods if it is as unobtrusive as possible and should take into consideration the location of the fencing and its visibility so that the fencing does not negatively impact the historic character of the setting.

The proposal is to legalize/approve the existing 6-foot-high vinyl fence and a rolling slide gate, and staff’s concern is regarding the compatibility (or lack of compatibility in this case) of the vinyl material with both the house on the subject property as well as other houses on surrounding residential properties within Historic District 8. The Commission may make recommendations for the property owner to achieve compatibility with the SOI Standards and the City’s guidelines.

C) City of Redlands Historic and Scenic Preservation Design Manual The Victorian style is well established in Redlands, with row upon row of Victorian homes in the areas around Olive Avenue, Highland Avenue, and Cajon. The predominant material used is typically wood, wood siding, wood shingles, stone, brick, and masonry.

The guidelines note that “most of the houses would be nearly impossible to duplicate today” and “in the construction of new buildings in historic areas, materials should be the same as or representative of those used in original construction” (page 4/1-7).

Regarding decorative elements, “Architectural detailing is a key factor in all of these styles…. Landscape elements such as sculpture, fence details, and plant materials should be used in a way that will enhance the historical character of the structure and the site” (page 4/1-7).

D) Summary
At the present time, the proposal may not meet the SOI Standards or the City’s historic guidelines due to the fence’s material incompatibility with the historic building material Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1210 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
MARCH 2, 2023
PAGE 5
and historic style. The Commission may make recommendations for the property owner to achieve compatibility with the guidelines.

The Commission may also approve Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 if the property owner will agree to accept and implement the Commission’s recommendations for a compatible fence material and style (as conditions of approval). If so, then the project would then be consistent with the Redlands Municipal Code, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual.

Following the review by the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission (on the appropriateness of the fence material only), the application for a Minor Fence Exception will be reviewed by the Minor Exception Permit Committee (scheduled for March 9, 2023).

The Minor Exception Permit Committee will make a decision regarding the fence height and placement on the subject property and incorporate the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission’s decision on the fence material as a condition of approval.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
If the proposal is revised to use a compatible material (e.g., wood) then the application may be deemed to be consistent with the applicable Secretary of Interior Standards and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual, and then would be considered to be satisfactorily mitigated and is a less than significant impact (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(3)). In that case, CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) may be utilized for the project.

Significant changes to historic resources are considered to be a potentially significant impact on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.5(b)(1) and 15064.5(b)(2)).

Alternatively, CEQA Guidelines Section 15270 may be utilized that pertains to projects which are disapproved.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission discuss alternative fencing materials to assist the applicant in achieving consistency with the applicable Secretary of Interior Standards and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual.

Should the applicant propose an acceptable fencing material, then the Commission may make findings to approve the application and approve COA No. 665 subject to the conditions of approval.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1211 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
MARCH 2, 2023
PAGE 6
Alternatively, should the applicant decline to replace the fence with a compatible fencing material then the Commission may make findings to deny the application and deny COA No. 665.

MOTION
If the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission deems it appropriate, staff recommends the following motion:

Motion (for Continuance):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission continue the public hearing for Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 (to April 6, 2023, or date to be determined).” Motion (for Denial):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission adopt Resolution No. 2023-02 to deny Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 and find that the project does not qualify for exemption from environmental review in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines.”
Alternative Motion (for Approval):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission adopt Resolution No. 2023-02 and approve Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, subject to conditions of approval, and find that the project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines.”
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1212 of 1429
ATTACHMENT “D-2”
HSPC Staff Report of April 6, 2023
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1213 of 1429

HISTORIC AND SCENIC PRESERVATION MEETING: April 6, 2023 Planner: Laylee Hokmollahi, Junior Planner

PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING

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

2. Chairperson calls upon staff for report.

3. Chairperson calls for questions/comments from members of the Commission.

4. Chairperson calls upon applicant, or its representative, for comments/testimony.

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

6. Chairperson calls upon the applicant, or representative, for rebuttal comments (5 minutes).

7. Chairperson closes the public hearing.

8. Commission considers the motion(s) and votes.

SYNOPSIS

2. Existing Land Use: The property has one existing single-family dwelling with residential use.

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
APRIL 6, 2023
PAGE 2
Commission Meeting: March 2, 2023
April 6, 2023

4. Attachments:

A) Location Map & Aerial Photograph
B) Site Photos
C) HSPC Staff Report of March 2, 2023
D-1) Resolution No. 2023-02 (Approval)
D-2) Resolution No. 2023-02 (Denial)

PROPOSAL
The applicant is requesting approval of a Minor Certificate of Appropriateness to legalize/approve an existing 6-foot-high, vinyl fence and a rolling slide gate with galvanized steel frame located within the street-side setback (defined as a front yard) adjacent to Grant Street. The fence and gate extends along the western (Grant Street) and northern (rear) property lines at the northwestern rear portion of the lot around a parking area. Site photographs are included as attachment B.

The applicant’s proposal has been revised to pull the fence and the gate back from the sidewalk to the next fence post (approximately 6’0” back from the sidewalk), to create space to provide a planter area between the sidewalk and the fence for screening purposes. Landscaping would be installed (such as a high hedge up the height of the fence) to screen the vinyl fence, and the sliding gate portion would not be screened.

BACKGROUND
The Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission held a public hearing on March 2, 2023, received the staff report and the applicant’s presentation, and continued the public hearing to April 6, 2023. The Commission continued the public hearing so that the applicant would have more time to contact the fencing company and explore some design alternatives that were discussed at the meeting (such as use of wood fencing, etc.).

A Minor Exception Fence Permit application was submitted at the same time with this proposal. The Minor Exception Committee met on March 9, 2023, at the subject property and discussed options regarding the placement and height of the fence. The applicant requested additional time to consider the design alternatives (such as the distance to pull the fence back from the sidewalk) as well as landscaping screening options. The applicant also needed additional time to be able to discuss the potential fence placement and landscape alternatives with the HSPC (as that may influence the Commission’s decision about the fence material). Therefore, the Minor Exception Committee meeting was continued to a date uncertain.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1215 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
APRIL 6, 2023
PAGE 3

ANALYSIS
The proposed (revised) fence location will provide approximately six feet (6’0”) of planter space along Grant Street for landscape screening. To fully screen the vinyl fence, the most likely plant selection would be a hedge type shrub that could grow to 6’0” high and be maintained to fully screen the fence. Several hedge options are available that are a columnar variety and a row could be planted abutting the exterior side of the fence. Staff believes that the proposed fence location pulled back 6’0” will provide sufficient space to provide a dense landscape screen for the fence.

The exception is the sliding gate portion that could not be screened with and significant landscaping or hedge, because a functional driveway would still be needed to the rear parking area behind the house.

However, the revised proposal does not change the material of the fence and the gate, and exposed vinyl paired with the predominantly wood-sided house within a Historic District is still not consistent with City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual. If the vinyl fence is fully screened with a hedge and landscaping at all times, then the proposal may be more consistent with the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
If the proposal is deemed to be consistent with the applicable Secretary of Interior Standards and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual, then the change would be considered to be satisfactorily mitigated and is a less than significant impact (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(3)). In that case, CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) may be utilized for the project.

Significant changes to historic resources are considered to be a potentially significant impact on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.5(b)(1) and 15064.5(b)(2)).

Alternatively, CEQA Guidelines Section 15270 may be utilized that pertains to projects which are disapproved.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
If the Commission agrees that a high landscape hedge (installed and maintained at 6’0” high) is sufficient to meet the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, then the Commission may make findings to approve COA No. 665 subject to the conditions of approval.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1216 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
APRIL 6, 2023
PAGE 4
The Commission may also make further suggestions for any changes that may be needed to achieve consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual. The applicant may make further submittals of other alternative materials or designs, if necessary, and the hearing may be continued.

Alternatively, if the Commission finds that the proposed revisions and conditions of approval are not sufficient to meet the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, then the Commission may make findings to deny COA No. 665.

MOTION
If the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission deems it appropriate, staff recommends the following motion:

Motion (for Continuance):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission continue the public hearing for Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 (to May 4, 2023, or date to be determined).” Alternative Motion (for Approval):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission adopt Resolution No. 2023-02 and approve Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, subject to conditions of approval, and find that the project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.” Alternative Motion (for Denial):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission adopt Resolution No. 2023-02 to deny Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 and find that the project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15270 (Projects Which Are Disapproved) of the CEQA Guidelines.”
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1217 of 1429
ATTACHMENT “D-3”
HSPC Staff Report of May 4, 2023
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1218 of 1429

REQUEST FOR HISTORIC AND SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ACTION IV-A. BEVERLY & KENNETH WINCHESTER, APPLICANT
Continued PUBLIC HEARING to consider Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 – A request to legalize/approve an existing 6-foot-high, vinyl fence and a rolling slide gate with galvanized steel frame located within the street-side setback along Grant Street.

The subject property is located at 232 West Olive Avenue (APN: 0171-244-40-0000) within the Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) District and the Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic & Scenic District (Historic District No. 8). The proposal may qualify for exemption from environmental review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) or Section 15270 (Projects Which Are Disapproved).

HISTORIC AND SCENIC PRESERVATION MEETING: May 4, 2023
Planner: Laylee Hokmollahi, Junior Planner

PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING

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

2. Chairperson calls upon staff for report.

3. Chairperson calls for questions/comments from members of the Commission.

4. Chairperson calls upon applicant, or its representative, for comments/testimony.

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

6. Chairperson calls upon the applicant, or representative, for rebuttal comments (5 minutes).

7. Chairperson closes the public hearing.

8. Commission considers the motion(s) and votes.

SYNOPSIS

1. Historic Designation: The subject property is located within Historic District (HD) No. 8, known as the “Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic and Scenic District.” The subject property is not individually designated as a historic resource.

2. Existing Land Use: The property has one existing single-family dwelling with residential use.

3. Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission submittal dates:
(A) Date Submitted: October 11, 2022
(B) Date Accepted as Complete: November 3, 2022
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1219 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
MAY 4, 2023
PAGE 2
(C) Historic and Scenic Preservation
Commission Meeting: March 2, 2023
April 6, 2023
May 4, 2023

4. Attachments:

A) Location Map & Aerial Photograph
B) Site Photos
C) HSPC Staff Report of April 6, 2023
D-1) Resolution No. 2023-11 (for Denial)
D-2) Resolution No. 2023-11 (for Approval)

The applicant is proposing to pull the fence and the gate back from the sidewalk to the next fence post (approximately 6’0” back from the sidewalk), install wood veneer or wood slats on the gate only, install redwood trellis in front of each panel, and plant honeysuckles or climbing rose bushes to screen the fence.

The Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission held the continued public hearing on April 6, 2023. The applicant revised their proposal so that the fence and gate would be placed six feet (6’0”) back from the sidewalk (to the next available fence post) to create space to provide a 6’0” wide planter area between the sidewalk and the fence (for landscape screening purposes). The Commission received the staff report and the applicant’s presentation, and continued the public hearing to May 4, 2023, so that the applicant would have more time to explore more design alternatives that were discussed at the meeting (such as possibly painting the fence, putting wood slats in Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1220 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
MAY 4, 2023
PAGE 3
front of the fence and gate, etc.). The hearing was continued again to May 4, 2023.

A Minor Exception Fence Permit application was submitted at the same time with this proposal. The Minor Exception Committee previously met on March 9, 2023, at the subject property and discussed options regarding the placement and height of the fence. The applicant requested additional time to consider the design alternatives (such as the distance to pull the fence back from the sidewalk) as well as landscaping screening options. The applicant also needed additional time to be able to discuss the potential fence placement and landscape alternatives with the HSPC (as that may influence the Commission’s decision about the fence material). Therefore, the Minor Exception Committee meeting was continued to a date uncertain.

ANALYSIS
The proposed fence location will provide approximately six feet (6’0”) of planter space along Grant Street for landscape screening. To fully screen the vinyl fence, the most appropriate plant selection would likely be a tall hedge type shrub that could grow to 6’0” high and be maintained to fully screen the fence. Several hedge plant options were discussed with the applicant that are of a columnar variety, and a row could be planted abutting the exterior side of the fence. Staff believes that the proposed fence location pulled back 6’0” will provide sufficient space to provide a dense landscape screen for the fence.

The applicant is proposing to plant honeysuckle plants or climbing rose bushes on each trellis to screen the fence panels (that sliding gate portion could not be screened with landscape). Honeysuckle tends to have denser foliage and is faster growing compared to a rose bush. The proposed honeysuckle is likely a more appropriate selection due to the density of foliage and the potential to grow to 6’0” high within a few years; however, staff’s concern is that this would not have sufficient density of foliage (and thus immediate screening) as compared to the types of plants that were discussed with the applicant (i.e., a dense row of tall columnar type hedges that would provide immediate screening).

Installing wood veneer or wood slats on the gate would be consistent with the Commission’s previous suggestions. The redwood trellis in front of each vinyl panel will help to screen the fencing, except that the posts will only be screened with landscaping and may remain somewhat exposed and apparent to plain view from the public right-ofway.

However, the revised proposal does not change the material of the fence and the gate, and exposed vinyl paired with the predominantly wood-sided house within a Historic District is still not consistent with City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual. If the vinyl gate is disguised with wood slats and the vinyl fence is fully screened at all times Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1221 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
MAY 4, 2023
PAGE 4
with redwood trellis and hedge type landscaping (except the posts), then the proposal may be more consistent with the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. However, a landscape screen would be required to be maintained in place and in good condition at all times by the present owners as well as any future property owners.

If the proposal to use vinyl fencing is deemed to be not consistent with the applicable Secretary of Interior Standards and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual, then the proposal would likely not be able to use an exemption from environmental review. Significant changes to historic resources are considered to be a potentially significant impact on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.5(b)(1) and 15064.5(b)(2)). Alternatively, CEQA Guidelines Section 15270 may be utilized that pertains to projects which are disapproved.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
If the Commission agrees that putting redwood trellises in front of the fence panels, putting veneer or wood slats on the gate and planting honeysuckle, or climbing rose bushes is sufficient to meet the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, then the Commission may make findings to approve COA No. 665 subject to the conditions of approval.

The Commission may also make further suggestions for any changes that may be needed to achieve consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual. The applicant may make further submittals of other alternative materials or designs, if necessary, and the hearing may be continued.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1222 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
MAY 4, 2023
PAGE 5
MOTION
If the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission deems it appropriate, staff recommends the following motion:

Motion (for Denial):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission adopt Resolution No. 2023-11 to deny Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 and find that the project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15270 (Projects Which Are Disapproved) of the CEQA Guidelines.”
Alternative Motion (for Continuance):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission continue the public hearing for Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 (to June 1, 2023, or date to be determined).”
Alternative Motion (for Approval):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission adopt Resolution No. 2023-11 and approve Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, subject to conditions of approval, and find that the project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.” Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1223 of 1429
ATTACHMENT “D-4”
HSPC Staff Report of July 6, 2023
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1224 of 1429

HISTORIC AND SCENIC PRESERVATION MEETING: July 6, 2023
Planner: Laylee Hokmollahi, Junior Planner

PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING

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

2. Chairperson calls upon staff for report.

3. Chairperson calls for questions/comments from members of the Commission.

4. Chairperson calls upon applicant, or its representative, for comments/testimony.

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

6. Chairperson calls upon the applicant, or representative, for rebuttal comments (5 minutes).

7. Chairperson closes the public hearing.

8. Commission considers the motion(s) and votes.

SYNOPSIS

1. Historic Designation: The subject property is located within Historic District (HD) No. 8, known as the “Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic and Scenic District.” The subject property is not individually designated as a historic resource.

2. Existing Land Use: The property has one existing single-family dwelling with residential use.

3. Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission submittal dates:
(A) Date Submitted: October 11, 2022
(B) Date Accepted as Complete: November 3, 2022
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1225 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
July 6, 2023
PAGE 2
(C) Historic and Scenic Preservation
Commission Meeting: March 2, 2023
April 6, 2023
May 4, 2023
June 1, 2023
July 6, 2023

4. Attachments:

A) Location Map & Aerial Photograph
B) Site Photos
C) HSPC Staff Report of May 4, 2023
D) Exhibits from Applicant
E) Wood Lattice Examples
F-1) Resolution No. 2023-15 (for Denial)
F-2) Resolution No. 2023-15 (for Approval)

The applicant is proposing to pull the fence and the gate back from the sidewalk to the next fence post (approximately 6’0” back from the sidewalk), paint the fence and the gate, install two green vinyl coated steel trellises in front of each fence panel, and plant climbing rose bushes to screen the fence.

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
July 6, 2023
PAGE 3
landscape screening purposes). The Commission received the staff report and the applicant’s presentation, and continued the public hearing to May 4, 2023, so that the applicant would have more time to explore more design alternatives that were discussed at the meeting (such as possibly painting the fence, putting wood slats in front of the fence and gate, etc.). The hearing was continued again to May 4, 2023.

The Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission held the continued public hearing on May 4, 2023. The applicant revised their proposal so that the fence and gate would be placed six feet (6’0”) back from the sidewalk (to the next available fence post), paint the gate only, put redwood trellises in front of fence panels (one in front of each panel along Grant Street only), and plant Star Jasmine to screen the fence which would not include the gate. The Commission received the staff report and the applicant’s presentation, and continued the public hearing to June 1, 2023, so that the applicant would have more time to explore a wider type of wood trellis that was suggested by the Commission (shown as “Attachment E”) and provide a sample paint color for painting the fence and gate.

On June 1, 2023, the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission continued the public hearing to July 6, 2023 per the applicant’s request.

Painting the fence and the gate would be consistent with the Commission’s previous suggestions. However, the proposal of installing two green vinyl-coated trellises in front Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1227 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
July 6, 2023
PAGE 4
of each fence panel would not be consistent with the wooden trellis that was suggested by the Commission previously (shown in Attachment E) and does not have enough coverage to screen the width of each fence panel.

The applicant is also proposing to plant climbing rose bushes to screen the fence panels, not including the sliding gate. The proposed rose bushes drop their leaves in the fall or early winter and would not be an appropriate screening option. Staff believes Star Jasmine, which was proposed at the May 4th meeting, is evergreen and tends to have denser foliage compared to rose bushes and may be more appropriate. The types of plants that were discussed with the applicant (i.e., a dense row of tall columnar type hedges that would provide immediate screening), would be appropriate options as well.

Overall, staff believes the current proposal is not consistent with the suggestions received by the Commission at the May 4th meeting.

However, the revised proposal does not change the material of the fence and the gate.

The residence is a predominantly wood-sided structure within a Historic District and the fencing material and gate proposed is still not consistent with the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual. If the vinyl gate is disguised with paint color, and the vinyl fence is painted and fully screened at all times with wooden trellises (see Attachment E) with a tall dense hedge-type landscaping (except the posts), then the proposal may be more consistent with the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. However, a landscape screen would be required to be maintained in place and in good condition at all times on all three sides (north, south and west) by the present owners as well as any future property owners.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1228 of 1429

HISTORIC & SCENIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665
July 6, 2023
PAGE 5
Staff believes the applicant’s current proposal does not align with the Commission’s previous suggestions, and therefore is not consistent with the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual and the Secretary of Interior Standards. The proposed trellis type is not consistent with the type that was previously suggested, and the planting type does not provide appropriate screening.

The Commission may make further suggestions for any changes that may be needed to achieve consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and the City’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual.

MOTION
If the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission deems it appropriate, staff recommends the following motion:

Motion (for Denial):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission adopt Resolution No. 2023-15 to deny Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 and find that the project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15270 (Projects Which Are Disapproved) of the CEQA Guidelines.”
Alternative Motion (for Continuance):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission continue the public hearing for Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 (to August 3, 2023, or date to be determined).”
Alternative Motion (for Approval):
“I move that the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission adopt Resolution No. 2023-15 and approve Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, subject to conditions of approval, and find that the project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.” Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1229 of 1429
11/17/23, 3:07 PM Print Staff Report
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5049&rev_num=0&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 1/7 City Council/Financing Authority Meeting AGENDA ITEM NO. K.1.

DATE: 09/19/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT:Appeal of a decision by the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission that denied Certificate of Appropriateness Permit No. 665 by appellants Beverly and Kenneth Winchester
(Mayor to declare the meeting open as a public hearing) a. PUBLIC HEARING to consider Resolution No. 8514 denying the Appeal and upholding the decision by the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission to deny Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, a request to legalize/approve an existing 6-foot-high vinyl fence and a rolling gate within the street-side setback for the property located at 232 West Olive Avenue (APN: 0171-244-40-0000) in the Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) District and the Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic and Scenic District (Historic District No. 8) (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.

4. Mayor calls upon applicant, or his/her representative, for comments and testimony.

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

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

7. Mayor calls upon the applicant, or representative, for rebuttal comments (5 minutes).

8. Mayor closes the public hearing.

9. City Council considers the motion and votes.

MOTION(S):

If the City Council concurs with staff's recommendation, the following motion is provided:

I move to adopt Resolution No. 8514 and deny the Appeal, and uphold the decision of the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission to deny Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665.

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1230 of 1429
11/17/23, 3:07 PM Print Staff Report
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5049&rev_num=0&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 2/7 Staff recommends that the City Council deny the Appeal, and uphold the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission’s decision to deny Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 based upon the evidence in the record and the analysis in this report.

BACKGROUND:

The appellant filed their Appeal (Attachment A) on July 13, 2023, within the required ten days after the decision by the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission on July 6, 2023.

A) Project Description
Beverly and Kenneth Winchester submitted an application to legalize/approve a 6-foot-high vinyl fence and a rolling slide gate placed within the street-side setback along Grant Street. The vinyl fence and gate were installed by the applicant in April 2022 without any building permits, and without the required approval of a Minor Certificate of Appropriateness and Minor Exception Permit. The subject property is located at 232 West Olive Avenue (Attachment B - Location Map and Aerial Photograph) in the Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) District. The home is not an individually designated historic resource; however, the property is within the Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic and Scenic District (Historic District No. 8). On July 6, 2023, the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission (HSPC) voted to deny the Minor Certificate of Appropriateness application. The appellant has filed an Appeal to reverse the decision of the HSPC.

B) Property History
Based on the Historic Inventory Sheet (Attachment C) associated with the subject parcel, the one-story residence was constructed in 1898 and is Victorian style. The following is the description from the Historic Inventory Sheet prepared by Helen Watts:
"The subject property has a Victorian Cottage-style one-story house with a brick chimney, a hipcomposition roof with slight bell cast, and exposed rafters. There is a shingled gable with overhang and double windows on all four sides at the attic level, and a decorated frieze. The porch roof is supported by turned pillars, and the porch has wood railing. The main entry is in the front at the center, with a second entry on the left side. Entrance doors are wood paneled with a glass panel at the top. Both entrances have cement steps with cobble stone rails. Sash type windows have wooden moldings. The house has wooden overlapping siding and there is a decorative crest at the roof ridge."
The Sanborn map from 1900 shows the main dwelling at the exact same location and footprint of the present structure. Between 1900 and 1908, a garage was built on the north side of the main dwelling. Between 1938 and 2007, a carport was added next to the garage. Aerial maps from 2004 to 2019 show the same landscaping that was subsequently removed (in early 2022) and replaced with the current vinyl fence. The property owner stated that the fence was constructed in April 2022 (Attachment D - Site Photographs), and replaced shrubs (shown in Attachment E) with the existing fence for the stated purpose of saving water, increasing security, and providing privacy for a future small pool.

The appellant filed their Appeal on July 13, 2023, within the required ten days after the HSPC's decision on July 6, 2023.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1231 of 1429
11/17/23, 3:07 PM Print Staff Report
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5049&rev_num=0&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 3/7 C) Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission
The project was originally reviewed by the HSPC on March 2, 2023. At that time, the Commission received the staff report and the applicant’s presentation and continued the public hearing to April 6, 2023 so that the applicant would have more time to contact the fencing company and explore some design alternatives that were discussed at the meeting (such as use of wood fencing, etc.).

A Minor Exception Fence Permit application was submitted concurrently with this proposal. As defined by Section 18.08.585 of the Redlands Municipal Code (RMC), “A side yard adjacent to a street shall be the same as a front yard.” Therefore, pursuant to RMC Section 18.168.020 (B), “Fences and walls not to exceed six feet (6') in height shall be permitted along the side and rear property lines, except that no fence or wall exceeding three feet (3') in height shall be located within any required front yard area.” However, RMC Section 18.168.050 provides for the granting of minor exceptions to the fencing development standards. The Minor Exception Committee met on March 9, 2023 at the subject property, and discussed options regarding the placement and height of the fence. The applicant requested additional time to consider the design alternatives (such as the distance to pull the fence back from the sidewalk) as well as potential landscape screening options. The applicant also needed additional time to be able to discuss the potential fence placement and landscape alternatives with the HSPC (as that may influence the Commission’s decision about the fence material). Therefore, the Minor Exception Committee meeting was continued to a date uncertain.

The HSPC held the continued public hearing on April 6, 2023. At this meeting, the applicant’s proposal was to relocate the fence and the gate further back from the sidewalk to the next fence post (approximately 6’0” back from the sidewalk), to create space to provide a planter area between the sidewalk and the fence for screening purposes. The applicant also proposed installing landscaping (such as a high hedge up to the height of the fence) to screen the vinyl fence, but the sliding gate portion would not be screened. At the April 6 HSPC meeting, the Commission received the staff report and the applicant’s presentation, and then continued the public hearing to May 4, 2023 so that the applicant would have more time to explore other design alternatives that were discussed at the meeting (e.g. painting the fence, installing wood slats in front of the fence and gate).

The HSPC held the continued public hearing on May 4, 2023. At this time, the applicant proposed to only paint the gate, install one redwood trellis in front of each fence panel, and plant Star Jasmine along Grant Street to screen the fence. The Commission received the staff report and the applicant’s presentation, and continued the public hearing to June 1, 2023 so that the applicant would have more time to explore other types of wood trellis that were suggested by Commissioners (see Attachment F) and provide a sample paint color (wood color preferred) for the fence and gate.

On June 1, 2023, at the applicant's request, the HSPC continued the public hearing to July 6, 2023.

The HSPC held the continued public hearing on July 6, 2023. At this meeting, the applicant’s proposal was to paint the gate, install two green vinyl-coated steel trellises in front of each fence panel, and plant climbing rose bushes and Star Jasmine to screen the fence on three exterior sides (north, south, and west). The Commission did not find the applicant’s proposal consistent Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1232 of 1429
11/17/23, 3:07 PM Print Staff Report
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5049&rev_num=0&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 4/7 with previous suggestions. The Commissioners discussed appropriate alternatives with the applicant (such as paint the entire fence and gate, use wider wood trellises that cover the entire fence panel, and plant only Star Jasmine or an alternative dense foliage). The applicant was not willing to change their proposal; therefore, the Commission voted to deny the Minor Certificate of Appropriateness application.

D) Analysis
Certificate of Appropriateness
A "Certificate of Appropriateness" is a permit process that ensures any proposed changes or alterations to designated historic properties and structures located within a historic district are compatible and consistent with the historic character and architectural qualities of the subject property or district. Section 2.62.200(D) of the Redlands Municipal Code states: “Certificates of appropriateness for minor improvements where proposed work does not adversely affect the exterior architectural features of the historic resource nor adversely affect the character or historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the resource and its site, may be approved by the preservation officer. The preservation officer shall inform the commission in writing of decisions regarding minor alterations.” In this case, the fence is considered a "minor improvement" subject to approval or denial from the staff historic preservation officer. Rather than deny the application, the historic preservation officer chose to elevate this application to the HSPC for decision, to avoid requiring the applicant to appeal the staff decision. As detailed in this report, the HSPC denied the application which is the subject of this appeal to the City Council.

Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines:

The existing fence does not meet the recommended guidelines of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards due to the existing fence material’s incompatibility with historic building materials and historic style. The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings states, “The relationship of buildings to each other, setbacks, fence patterns, views, driveways and walkways, and street trees and other landscaping together establish the character of a district or neighborhood”. Regarding fencing, the Guidelines explain that protective fencing for security may be installed in historic districts/neighborhoods if it is as unobtrusive as possible and should take into consideration the location of the fencing and its visibility so that the fencing does not negatively impact the historic character of the setting.

City of Redlands Historic and Scenic Preservation Design Manual:

The Victorian style is well established in Redlands, with row upon row of Victorian homes in the areas around Olive Avenue, Highland Avenue, and Cajon. The predominant material used is typically wood, wood siding, wood shingles, stone, brick, and masonry. The guidelines state, “Most of the houses would be nearly impossible to duplicate today” and “...in the construction of new buildings in historic areas, materials should be the same as or representative of those used in original construction” (page 4/1-7).

Regarding decorative elements, the guidelines state, “Architectural detailing is a key factor in all of these styles… landscape elements such as sculpture, fence details, and plant materials should Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1233 of 1429
11/17/23, 3:07 PM Print Staff Report
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5049&rev_num=0&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 5/7 be used in a way that will enhance the historical character of the structure and the site....” (page 4/1-7).

E) Appeal Filed
On July 13, 2023, the applicant filed an Appeal to reverse the decision of the Commission. The appellant’s grounds for appeal state:
“I am writing to appeal the denial of my claim for an existing vinyl fence so I may increase security and provide security for a small fiberglass exercise pool I plan on putting in next year.

When we had the fence contractor over, he said I did not need a permit because it was not over 6 feet tall and not a special fence. I have 15 pictures of 6 feet vinyl fences and gates within 5 blocks of my house.”
F) Staff Response to Appeal
The subject property is within the Smiley Park Historic & Scenic District. The original application was reviewed by the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission in four meetings to allow the appellant sufficient time to consider alternative materials and designs. The Commission has previously approved other fences located in historic districts only when they were wood fences or otherwise compatible with the historic properties. In this case, the appellant had declined to make any substantive changes to their proposal after four meetings. The Commission felt they were left with no choice but to deny the application due to the inappropriate material of the fence and screening (i.e., vinyl fencing and vinyl-coated steel trellises for a landscape screen) and the applicant’s unwillingness to change the proposed materials.

The appellant states that a total of fifteen properties within five blocks of 232 West Olive Avenue also have vinyl fences. However, staff reviewed the addresses and determined that only three of the properties are within a historic district and have unpermitted vinyl fences. One property located directly across Grant Street from the subject property (at 304 W. Olive Avenue) has both a Certificate of Appropriateness and a Minor Fence Exception Permit for an existing 6- foot-high wooden fence around the rear yard, and although it is similar in height and placement, it is not comparable because it uses appropriate wood materials.

Over the course of four meetings during which the public hearings were continued, the HSPC made multiple suggestions for alternative materials and designs that the applicant could consider.

The applicant declined to make any substantive or significant changes to the vinyl fence and proposed to provide a landscape screening in front of the fence. The Commissioners made several suggestions for wood trellises (see Attachment F) so that climbing vines or landscaping could totally screen the vinyl fence panels, and also considered a treatment to paint the fence and the gate (to simulate wood appearance). The applicant refused to consider using wood, refused to consider painting the fence, and returned with a proposal for vinyl-coated steel trellises (however, the small size of trellises would not be sufficient to provide any substantial screening - see Attachment G).

The Commissioners cited their objective for the fence material to be consistent with the style of house on the property (i.e., use wood fence panels or at least treat the vinyl panels to create a wood appearance) as well as achieve appropriateness for the surrounding historic district. The city’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual identifies the house as Victorian style, which utilizes predominantly wood siding plus wooden trim and treatments. Surrounding houses within Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1234 of 1429
11/17/23, 3:07 PM Print Staff Report
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5049&rev_num=0&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 6/7 the same historic district are likewise Victorian and utilize predominantly wood siding. Therefore, only a wood fence and gate would be fully appropriate and consistent with the subject property and historic district.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

For the denial of Minor COA No. 665, the proposal qualified for exemption from environmental review in accordance with Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Section 15270 (Projects Which Are Disapproved) states that CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.

Prior to considering any possible approval of Minor COA No. 665, the proposal must be found to be exempt from CEQA, or else an Initial Study must be prepared to evaluate the proposal’s compliance with CEQA and the relevant threshold criteria pertaining to impacts on historic properties (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5). The HSPC declined to find the proposed vinyl fence to be consistent with the city’s Historic and Scenic Preservation Manual or the Secretary of the Interior Standards pertaining to historic properties and structures, which therefore precluded using a common exemption category under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures).

The HSPC made multiple efforts over four meetings to explore potential design alternatives with the applicant/appellant.

The suggested alternatives may have helped the appellant achieve some level of consistency with the applicable historic design guidelines (which if found consistent, would have enabled using the CEQA exemption). If the proposal is deemed to be consistent with the city’s Historic & Scenic Preservation Manual and the applicable Secretary of Interior Standards, then the fence material and its impacts on the subject property (as well as the surrounding Smiley Park Historic and Scenic District) could then be considered to be satisfactorily mitigated and would be a less than significant impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(3) states that generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource.

The HSPC frequently seeks and emphasizes compliance with the applicable Secretary of Interior Standards prior to determining if a proposal may be found exempt from CEQA. If a proposal is found to be consistent, then CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) may be utilized for the project. The Commission has previously requested changes to project designs or materials in numerous other applications for the purpose of achieving consistency and also utilize a CEQA exemption. However, at the present time, this current proposal does not appear to qualify for a CEQA exemption (due to the proposed fence height and design, prominent appearance of vinyl material, and lack of any substantial exterior treatment or screening).

ALTERNATIVES:

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1235 of 1429
11/17/23, 3:07 PM Print Staff Report
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5049&rev_num=0&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 7/7

1. The City Council may continue the public hearing to allow for additional information; or

2. The City Council may overturn the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission's decision to deny Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, and thereby approve the appellant’s request to legalize the 6’0” vinyl fence and gate (or subject to additional Conditions of Approval if deemed appropriate). Note: The City Council would need to determine and find that the appellant's proposal is consistent with the applicable Secretary of the Interior's Standards (so that a CEQA exemption may be utilized).

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
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Laylee Hokmollahi, Junior Planner
Brian Foote, City Planner/Planning Manager
Attachments
Attachment A - Appeal Form
Attachment B - Location Map & Aerial
Attachment C - Historic Inventory Sheet
Attachment D - Site Photographs
Attachment E - Previous Landscaping
Attachment F - Appropriate Wood Lattice Examples
Attachment G - Exhibits from Applicant
Attachment H - HSPC Staff Reports
Attachment I - HSPC Resolution No. 2023-15
Attachment J - Council Resolution No. 8514
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1236 of 1429
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8536 Upholding the Appeal and Approving Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665.docx-ms RESOLUTION NO. 8536

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

UPHOLDING THE APPEAL AND APPROVING MINOR
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665.

WHEREAS, Beverly Winchester, applicant and property owner, submitted an application for Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 to legalize and approve an existing 6-foot-high vinyl fence and rolling slide gate with galvanized steel frame for the property located at 232 West Olive Avenue (APN: 0171-244-40-0000) within the Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic and Scenic District (Historic District No. 8); and
WHEREAS, the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission held public hearings on March 2, 2023, April 6, 2023, May 4, 2023, and July 6, 2023, at which time the Commission considered the staff report, oral report, the testimony and the written evidence submitted by and on behalf of the applicant and by members of the public; and WHEREAS, following the public hearing on July 6, 2023, the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission denied the application for Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 based on the facts and findings contained in Resolution No. 2023-15 adopted by the Commission on July 6, 2023; and
WHEREAS, Beverly Winchester (“Appellant”), filed a timely Appeal application on July 13, 2023, requesting to overturn the Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission’s decision to deny Certificate of Appropriateness Permit No. 665; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code section 65090, on or about September 8, 2023, the City Clerk gave notice by publication in a newspaper of general circulation of the holding of a public hearing at which the Appeal and Certificate of Appropriateness Permit No. 665 would be considered by City Council; and
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2023, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Appeal of the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission’s decision to deny Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, and considered the findings and the verbal and written testimony of City Staff, the appellant, and public comments from members of the public, and was continued to an unspecified date; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code section 65090, on or about December 7, 2023, the City Clerk gave notice by publication in a newspaper of general circulation of the holding of a public hearing at which the Appeal and Certificate of Appropriateness Permit No. 665 would be considered by City Council; and
WHEREAS, on December 19, 2023, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Appeal of the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission’s decision to deny Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, and considered the findings and the verbal and written testimony of City Staff, the appellant, and public comments from members of the public; and Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1237 of 1429
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8536 Upholding the Appeal and Approving Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665.docx-ms WHEREAS, the applicant has agreed to make changes to the proposed project that will mitigate the environmental impacts on historic resources, and the proposed project therefore qualifies for exemption from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.

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

Section 1. California Environmental Quality Act. The approval of Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665 is exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, subject to the applicant complying with the conditions of approval.

Section 2. Findings for Upholding the Appeal. The City Council approves the Appeal and overturns the decision of the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission that denied Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, based upon the following findings:
a) The applicant/appellant has agreed to implement exterior treatments consistent with the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission’s previous suggestions (e.g., changing the appearance of the exterior side of the fence and gate to not resemble vinyl, and install wooden trellises that will cover the whole fence panels and provide opaque landscape screening). Therefore, the proposal with the Conditions of Approval, (included as Exhibit A attached to this resolution) would be consistent with the city’s Historic & Scenic Preservation Manual and the applicable Secretary of Interior’s Standards.

Section 3. Approval of Appeal. The City Council hereby upholds the Appeal and approves Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665, subject to the attached conditions of approval.

Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption.

ADOPTED, SIGNED, AND APPROVED this 19th day of December, 2023.

__________________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1238 of 1429
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8536 Upholding the Appeal and Approving Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665.docx-ms I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1239 of 1429
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8536 Upholding the Appeal and Approving Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665.docx-ms

EXHIBIT A

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 665

1. This approval is to legalize and approve an existing 6-foot-high vinyl fence and rolling slide gate with galvanized steel frame for the property located at 232 West Olive Avenue (APN: 0171-244-40-0000) within the Smiley Park Neighborhood Historic and Scenic District (Historic District No. 8).

2. Unless construction has commenced pursuant to a building permit, this permit/approval shall expire in eighteen (18) months from the approval date. This permit/approval can be extended by staff per RMC Section 2.62.200(K) for a period not to exceed thirty-six (36) months.

3. The applicant or property owner shall paint the exterior side of the fence and gate with a non-reflective flat white color (or similar color with a non-reflective and non-glossy finish) to mitigate the appearance of the fence/gate and not appear to be vinyl material. The painting shall be completed no later than March 12, 2024.

4. The exterior sides of the fence on the south (Olive Ave.) and west (Grant St.) sides shall include lattice (approximately five to six feet high) installed across the width of the fence panel to provide surfaces for climbing vines or shrubs on the exterior of the fence for landscape screening purposes. Landscape screening is required in addition to the applicant painting the exterior sides of the fence panels a flat white color.

5. The property owner(s) shall be responsible for maintaining the painting and landscape screening on the trellises installed on the exterior sides of the fence. This permit/approval is conditional upon the full screening of the vinyl fence material in order to be consistent with the City’s Historic Design Manual.
a) If the paint on the fence and the gate, trellises on the exterior sides of the fence panels, and landscape screening is removed or the landscaping substantially reduced in the future, then the property owner at that time shall be responsible for replacing the vinyl fence with a wood fence to achieve consistency with the City’s Historic Design Manual and the Secretary of Interior Standards, and may be subject to additional subsequent review by the Historic & Scenic Preservation Commission. The property owner shall install the replacement wood fence within sixty (60) days of notification of the Commission’s decision or the Development Services Director’s determination, whichever is applicable.

6. The applicant shall not make any modifications or changes during construction that are in conflict or contrary to the project’s approved site design or building elevations without first consulting the Development Services Director or designee.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1240 of 1429
5 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8536 Upholding the Appeal and Approving Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 665.docx-ms

7. The applicant for this permit, and its successors and assigns, shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Redlands, and its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees, from and against any and all claims, actions, and proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this permit by the City, or brought against the City due to acts or omissions in any way connected to the applicant’s project that is the subject of this permit. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages, fees, costs, liabilities, and expenses incurred in such actions or proceedings, including damages for the injury to property or persons, including death of a person, and any award of attorneys’ fees.

In the event any such action is commenced to attack, set aside, void, or annul all, or any, provisions of this permit, or is commenced for any other reason against the City for acts or omissions relating to the applicant’s project, within fourteen (14) City business days of the same, the applicant shall file with the City a performance bond or irrevocable letter of credit (together, the “Security”) in a form and in an amount satisfactory to the City, to ensure applicant’s performance of its defense and indemnity obligations under this condition. The failure of the applicant to provide the Security shall be deemed an express acknowledgment and agreement by the applicant that the City shall have the authority and right, without objection by the applicant, to revoke all entitlements granted for the project pursuant to this permit. The City shall have no liability to the applicant for the exercise of City’s right to revoke this permit.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1241 of 1429
City Council Meeting H. 3.

DATE: 12/19/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of Resolution No. 8528 - Adopting In-lieu fee amounts for compliance with the City's Inclusionary Housing Requirements
(Mayor to declare meeting open as a public hearing)
Consideration of a determination of exemption pursuant
to Sections 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
a.

Public Hearing to consider Resolution No. 8528 to adopt In-lieu Fees for the City's Inclusionary Housing program b.
(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):

I move to adopt Resolution No. 8528, and find that the Resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1242 of 1429
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 8528.

DISCUSSION:

At the June 20, 2023 meeting, the City Council adopted an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Attachment B) that requires a certain percentage of affordable housing units be provided. The ordinance authorizes an alternative means of compliance whereby a developer may pay an in-lieu fee if the housing development consists of for-sale or rental units, and for any fractional unit that is determined when calculating the total number of inclusionary units required. Details on the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance can be found in the Agenda Report for the June 20, 2023 meeting (Attachment C).

Payment of an In-lieu fee is one of the alternative means of compliance provided for by the Inclusionary Ordinance. For-sale developments and rental developments of less than 23 units have the option of paying an in-lieu fee by-right. For a rental housing development with greater than 22 units, the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requires City Council approval of a developer’s request to pay an in-lieu fee, and to approve such a request the City Council must find that providing the affordable units in the development would create an unreasonable economic hardship due to such factors as project size, site constraints, and/or excessively large affordability gaps.

The City’s consultant, Keyser Marston Associates, recently updated the Inclusionary Housing In-lieu Fee Analysis (Attachment D) and made small adjustments to the recommended In-lieu Fees.

The recommended fee for For-Sale housing is $9.10 per square foot, up from previously recommended $8.80. This was due to interest rates which increased from 6.14% in April to 7.7% in October, which decreases the Affordable Sales Price. During the same period, the market rate sales prices stayed relatively flat. The combination resulted in increases to the affordability gaps.

The recommended fee for Apartment developments is $18.10 per square foot, down from $19.80. This was due to an increase in the median income of approximately 7%, which increased the Affordable Rents. The market rents stayed relatively flat during the 9 months between rent surveys. The result is a reduction in the Affordability Gap.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1243 of 1429
ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council can continue this item and request additional information from staff.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Priority A - Quality of Life, Strategic Objective 2. Economic Vitality SUBMITTED BY:

Brian Desatnik, Development Services Director
RECOMMENDED BY:

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

Yvette Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
Fiscal Impact
Discussion:

NA
Attachments
Attachment A: Resolution 8528 Adopting In-lieu Fees
Attachment B: Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Attachment C: June 20, 2023 Agenda Report
Attachment D: Updated Inclusionary Housing In-lieu Fee Analysis Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1244 of 1429
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8528 Adopting a Fee Schedule for the Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee.docx-ms RESOLUTION NO. 8528

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS ADOPTING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING INLIEU FEE PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. 2959 WHEREAS, on July 5th, 2023, the City Council of the City of Redlands adopted Ordinance No. 2959 to add Chapter 18.230 to the Redlands Municipal Code relating to Inclusionary Housing; and
WHEREAS, as backup to Ordinance No. 2959, the City Council received a Policy Recommendation report dated January 23, 2023 and a Supplemental In-lieu Fee Analysis Memorandum from Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) which include analyses pertaining to the City’s methodology for calculating the payment of Inclusionary Housing fees; and WHEREAS, an Updated In-lieu Fee Analysis dated October 28, 2023 was prepared by KMA and distributed to the City Council as part of the agenda packet for the December 19, 2023 meeting; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2959 enhances the public welfare by requiring certain housing developments provide affordable units or comply with alternative means to promote the City’s legislative policy of ensuring the development of affordable housing; WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2959 authorizes an alternative means of compliance whereby a developer may pay an in-lieu fee if the housing development consists of for-sale or rental units, and for any fractional unit that is determined when calculating the total number of inclusionary units required; and
WHEREAS, for a rental housing development with greater than 22 units, Ordinance No. 2959 requires City Council approval of a developer’s request to pay an in-lieu fee, and to approve such a request the City Council must find that providing the affordable units in the development would create an unreasonable economic hardship due to such factors as project size, site constraints, and/or excessively large affordability gaps; and
WHEREAS, the amount of the in-lieu fee pursuant to Ordinance No. 2959 must be established by City Council resolution in a noticed public hearing; and WHEREAS, the notice of the public hearing on December 19, 2023 was published in a newspaper of general circulation on December 8, 2023.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1245 of 1429
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8528 Adopting a Fee Schedule for the Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee.docx-ms Section 1. The Inclusionary Housing In-lieu Fee shall be as set forth in Attachment A to this resolution.

Section 2. If, in computing the total number of Inclusionary Units required in a Residential Development, there is a fractional unit required, the in-lieu fee for the fractional unit shall be as set forth in Attachment B to this resolution.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 19th day of December, 2023. ________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1246 of 1429
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8528 Adopting a Fee Schedule for the Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee.docx-ms I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of December 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1247 of 1429
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8528 Adopting a Fee Schedule for the Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee.docx-ms Attachment A
In-lieu Fee Payment Schedules
Per Square Foot of Total Leasable or Saleable Area in Project # of Units
Ownership
Housing
Developments
Apartment
Developments
10 $0.70 $1.39
11 $1.40 $2.78
12 $2.10 $4.18
13 $2.80 $5.57
14 $3.50 $6.96
15 $4.20 $8.35
16 $4.90 $9.75
17 $5.60 $11.14
18 $6.30 $12.53
19 $7.00 $13.92
20 $7.70 $15.32
21 $8.40 $16.71
22 or more $9.10 $18.10
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1248 of 1429
5 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8528 Adopting a Fee Schedule for the Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee.docx-ms Attachment B
Fractional In-lieu Fee Payment Calculations
Measured Per Square Foot of the Leasable Area of One Unit in an Apartment Complex Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit $171,900
Average Unit Size (Square Feet of Leasable Area) 973
In-lieu Fee Per Square Foot of One Unit $176.80
Fractional In-lieu Fee: Total Fractional In-lieu Fee:

Fraction Per Square Foot of One Unit Apartment Development

0.10 $17.70 $17,210

0.20 $35.40 $34,430

0.30 $53.00 $51,540

0.40 $70.00 $68,760

0.50 $88.40 $85,970

0.60 $106.10 $103,180

0.70 $123.80 $120,400

0.80 $141.40 $137,510

0.90 $159.10 $154,720

1.00 $176.80 $171,940
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1249 of 1429
6 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8528 Adopting a Fee Schedule for the Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee.docx-ms Fractional In-lieu Fee Payment Calculations
Measured Per Square Foot of the Saleable Area of One Unit in an Ownership Housing Development
Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit $442,000
Average Unit Size (Square Feet of Saleable Area) 2430
In-lieu Fee Per Square Foot of One Unit $181.90
Fractional In-lieu Fee: Total Fractional In-lieu Fee:

Fraction Per Square Foot of One Unit Apartment Development

0.10 $18.20 $44,230

0.20 $36.40 $88,450

0.30 $54.60 $132,680

0.40 $72.80 $176,900

0.50 $91.00 $221,130

0.60 $109.10 $265,110

0.70 $127.30 $309,340

0.80 $145.50 $353,570

0.90 $163.70 $397,790

1.00 $181.90 $442,020
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1250 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1251 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1252 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1253 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1254 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1255 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1256 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1257 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1258 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1259 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1260 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1261 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1262 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1263 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1264 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1265 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1266 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1267 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1268 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1269 of 1429
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1270 of 1429
City Council Meeting AGENDA ITEM NO. J. 1.

DATE: 06/20/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 2959 - ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
REDLANDS AMENDING TITLE 18 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF

THE REDLANDS MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER

18.230 FOR AN INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PROGRAM FOR THE
CITY OF REDLANDS.
(Mayor to declare meeting open as a public hearing)
Consideration of a determination of exemption pursuant to Sections 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
a.

Public Hearing to consider Ordinance No. 2959 for Ordinance Text Amendment No. 367 to amend Title 18 (Zoning
Regulations) of the Redlands Municipal Code by adding
Chapter 18.230 for an Inclusionary Housing Program.
b.
(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.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1271 of 1429
MOTION(S):

I move to introduce Ordinance No. 2959, and find that the Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.

RECOMMENDATION:

On April 25, 2023, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. 1601 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed Inclusionary Housing Ordinance by adding Chapter 18.230 to the Redlands Municipal Code.

DISCUSSION:

Background
The City's recently adopted Housing Element includes a program calling for the City to evaluate and consider adopting an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.

Through the Housing Element, the City is required to plan for the provision of its share of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) as determined by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). For the current 2021-2029 Housing Element period, the City's RHNA allocation numbers consist of the following household income levels: 967 very-low income units; 615 low-income units; 652 moderate-income units; and 1,282 above-moderate income units. While there are programs to encourage developers to include affordable units in their developments, such as the Density Bonus Program, most developers opt not to do so. Approximately 170 cities in California have adopted Inclusionary Housing Ordinances that require a certain percentage of affordable housing units be provided (or an in-lieu fee to be deposited into an affordable housing fund) in every new residential development. This percentage is usually somewhere between 5 and 15 percent.

It is important to note that the State density bonus law, which is described in Attachment C to this report, would apply to all projects subject to an inclusionary housing ordinance. That is, the affordable housing units that a developer would build pursuant to an inclusionary ordinance would entitle the developer to the benefits of the density bonus law, including the density bonus, mandated parking standards, other incentives, and waiver of standards necessary to achieve increased density.

Staff made an introductory presentation on Inclusionary Housing to the City Council at its October 4, 2022 meeting. At the October 4 meeting, the City Council also approved a contract with Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) to prepare a financial evaluation that tests the impacts created by the imposition of Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1272 of 1429
income and affordability restrictions on new residential development and recommends policies to be incorporated into an Inclusionary Housing program. The financial evaluation and policy recommendations are provided as separate documents attached to this staff report (see Attachments D and E).

Staff presented a proposed ordinance to the Planning Commission at its February 14, 2023 meeting. The Committee reviewed the ordinance, took public comment, and appointed an ad-hoc sub-committee to work with staff on refining the ordinance.

After hearing some of the comments made at the February 14 Planning Commission meeting and a meeting with representatives from the Building Industry Association, staff asked KMA to revise the in-lieu fee analysis by modifying some of the price assumptions for new housing (Attachment F -- Supplemental In-lieu Fee Analysis). This analysis resulted in a reduction in the proposed in-lieu fee for single-family homes from $15/square foot to $8.80/square foot. The amount of the in-lieu fee is not part of the ordinance or the action to be taken by the City Council tonight; it will be adopted at a future public hearing by resolution of the City Council.

At its April 25, 2023 meeting, the full Planning Commission considered the ordinance and by unanimous vote recommended its approval to the City Council. The Planning Commission made several other recommendations that staff will incorporate into the administrative guidelines for administering the program; these are further described below.

Proposed Ordinance
Applicability Threshold: The provisions of the ordinance would apply to residential developments of 10 units or greater. Inclusionary requirements impact smaller projects disproportionately and most cities establish a threshold to which the inclusionary requirements would apply.

Inclusionary Requirements for For-Sale Housing: Five (5) percent of the total number of dwelling units must be made affordable to Moderate Income households. This would apply to single-family detached homes, townhomes, and condominiums. Inclusionary housing programs generally set the affordability requirements for ownership housing development at the moderate income level.

This is done as a reflection of the fact that higher income households are likely to have more discretionary income to devote to the ongoing costs associated with home ownership than that of lower income households.

Inclusionary Requirements for Rental Housing: The original draft of the Inclusionary Ordinance set the inclusionary requirement at nine (9) percent of the total number dwelling units affordable to Low Income households. In its review of the ordinance, the Planning Commission recommended that there be an option for a developer to target some Moderate Income households as well.

Staff has thus revised the proposed ordinance to require one of the following Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1273 of 1429
percentages of the total number of dwelling units:
5% Low income units and 7% moderate income units; or
5% Very low income units and 5% moderate income units; or 9% Low income units
A table showing the affordable income categories and assisted affordable rents is Attachment G to this report. A developer may, at its discretion, choose to provide more affordable units than required by the above percentages which would entitle the developer to a greater density bonus pursuant to State density bonus law.

Duration of Affordability Covenants: For-sale units would have an affordability period of 55 years. During this time, sales of designated affordable units would have to be made to income qualified buyers. Rental inclusionary units would be restricted for a period of 55 years, after which the affordability restrictions would only be removed if the land is rezoned or put to another use.

Development Standards for Inclusionary Units:

Dispersed throughout the development
Rental inclusionary units must be designated before issuance of building permits
Built concurrently with market rate units
Comparable in construction quality to market rate units Bedroom mix proportional to bedroom mix of market rate units
Interior finishes and features comparable to base unit finishes of market rate units
Alternatives: The proposed ordinance provides several alternative means of fulfilling the inclusionary housing obligations beyond proving the actual units in the development. These are described below.

Payment of In-lieu Fee: For-sale developments and rental developments of less than 23 units will have the option of paying an in-lieu fee by-right.

Rental projects with 23 or more units will be able to pay an in-lieu fee subject to approval by the City Council and upon a demonstration that providing affordable units in the project would create an unreasonable economic hardship. KMA recommends that the In-lieu Fee be set at $8.80 per square foot for detached single-family/townhome developments and $19.80 per square foot for apartment developments. The amount of the in-lieu fee is not part of the ordinance; it will be adopted at a future public hearing by resolution of the City Council.

Off-site Development of Affordable Units: This is only an option for for-sale housing developments. Such developments can fulfill their requirements by providing off-site affordable rental units.

Land Dedication: Dedicate real property to the City for the purpose of developing affordable housing.

Owner Occupancy Required for For-sale Units: Inclusionary For-sale units must Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1274 of 1429
Owner Occupancy Required for For-sale Units: Inclusionary For-sale units must be owner-occupied and used as a principal residence.

Inclusionary Housing Plan: All projects subject to this ordinance will be required to prepare an Inclusionary Housing Plan, that will be reviewed and approved with the project entitlements, that demonstrates how the project will comply with the ordinance.

Current Development Applications: Projects for which the City has received a development application on or before March 1, 2023 may fulfill the inclusionary requirements by providing 5% very low income rental units. This provision has been included to accommodate the two projects that have current applications with the City, both of which are far along into the entitlement process and had planned to provide 5% very low income units.

Additional Planning Commission Recommendations
The Planning Commission made several recommendations that staff proposes to incorporate into the administrative guidelines for the Inclusionary Housing program. These are summarized below.

Home Buyer down payments: The KMA recommendation was to require a minimum of 5% down payment with at least 1% coming from homebuyers' personal funds. The Commission felt that the 1% requirement was not necessary because the conventional lenders that will provide the primary mortgages would have more stringent requirements. Staff will reflect the Commission's recommendation in drafting the administrative procedures.

1. The subcommittee recommended that part of the inclusionary requirement be targeted at moderate-income households. Staff added options for moderate income targeting in rental developments to the Inclusionary Ordinance. For reference, attached to this report is a document showing the affordable rents for the very low, low and moderate income categories and how these rents are calculated (Attachment E).

2. The City should establish an oversight committee (or designate a Commission) to review and provide recommendations on how funds in the Inclusionary Housing Fund, received from payment of in-lieu fees, are utilized. Staff supports this recommendation and recommends that the Planning Commission initially serve as the oversight body for the program.

The proposed ordinance states that "monies in the inclusionary housing fund and all earnings from investment of the monies in the inclusionary housing fund shall be expended exclusively to provide housing affordable for very low-income, low-income, and moderate-income households."

3. There should be an annual status report provided to the Planning Commission on program activity, including the use of funds in the Inclusionary fund. Staff will include this in the Administrative Procedures that will be developed for implementation of the program.

4. Households in affordable rental units are provided with 12 months notice when they will be required to relocate if their annual income certification

5. Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1275 of 1429
when they will be required to relocate if their annual income certification shows that they no longer qualify for the income restricted unit in which they reside. Staff will incorporate this into the administrative procedures.

Next Steps
If the City Council approves the proposed ordinance, staff will begin the preparation of the Administrative Procedures for the program. The in-lieu fee will be brought back at a future public hearing for adoption by resolution of the City Council.

Environmental Review
The proposed Ordinance Text Amendment No. 367 qualifies for exemption from environmental review and the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Under section 15061(b)(3), the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the project is exempt from CEQA. This Ordinance Text Amendment will not affect the physical environment by permitting a new use or intensifying an existing use.

Instead, the Ordinance Text Amendment establishes affordable housing requirements through a range of means for individual projects. There is no potential for the proposed code amendment to result in a significant effect on the environment.

ALTERNATIVES:

1. The City Council can request changes to the proposed ordinance.

2. The City Council can continue this item and request additional ordinance.

The City Council can choose not to adopt an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.

3. STRATEGIC PLAN:

Priority A - Quality of Life, Strategic Objective 2. Economic Vitality SUBMITTED BY:

Brian Desatnik, Development Services Director
RECOMMENDED BY:

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

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1276 of 1429
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Brian Desatnik, Development Services Director
Fiscal Impact
Revenue Generating: Yes
Appropriation Required Y/N: N
Discussion:

If the City Council approves this ordinance, staff will bring back an amendment to the KMA contract for the preparation of the Administrative Procedures, including application materials. There will be an on-going administrative cost to this program which can be charged to the Inclusionary Housing Fund that will be established and funding by in-lieu fees.

Attachments
Attachment A: Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Ord. No. 2959) Attachment B: Summary of Density Bonus Law
Attachment C: KMA Financial Evaluation
Attachment D: KMA Policy Recommendations
Attachment E: KMA Supplemental In-lieu Fee Memorandum
Attachment F: Affordable Rent Calculations
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1277 of 1429
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING:

UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS
Prepared for:

City of Redlands
Prepared by:

Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

October 28, 2023
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1278 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 1 A. BASE IN-LIEU FEE AMOUNTS...................................................................................................... 1 B. IN-LIEU FEE SCHEDULES ............................................................................................................ 1 II. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 4 III. ANALYSIS ORGANIZATION.............................................................................................. 4 IV. APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS .......................................................................... 6 A. APARTMENT RENT ESTIMATES .................................................................................................... 6 B. ESTIMATED AFFORDABILITY GAPS – APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT ...................................................... 7 C. IN-LIEU FEE CALCULATIONS – APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT .............................................................. 8 V. OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS........................................................... 9 A. SALES PRICE ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................ 9 B. ESTIMATED AFFORDABILITY GAPS – OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ....................................... 10 C. IN-LIEU FEE CALCULATIONS – OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ............................................... 11 VI. RECOMMENDED IN-LIEU FEE UPDATES......................................................................... 13

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Affordable Housing Cost Calculation Methodologies Appendix A: Affordable Rent Calculation Methodology
Appendix B: Affordable Sales Price Calculation Methodology Attachment 2: Apartment Development
Appendix A: Rent Survey
Appendix B: Affordable Rent Calculations
Appendix C: In-Lieu Fee Calculations
Attachment 3: Ownership Housing Development
Appendix A: Home Resales Survey
Appendix B: Affordable Sales Price Calculations
Appendix C: In-Lieu Fee Calculations
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1279 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 1
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On July 5, 2023, the City of Redlands (City) City Council adopted Ordinance 2959 (Ordinance), which enacted an Inclusionary Housing requirement on residential developments that include 10 more units.

Chapter 18.230 of the City Code of Redlands, California describes the requirements imposed by the Ordinance.

Chapter 18.230.110 provides several alternative means of fulfilling the Inclusionary Housing obligations including the payment of a fee in lieu of producing affordable units. Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) prepared an in-lieu fee analysis as part of the Inclusionary Housing: Financial Evaluation (Financial Evaluation) that KMA submitted on January 23, 2023. In recognition of the time that has elapsed since the Financial Evaluation was prepared, the following report provides an updated in-lieu fee analysis.

The results of the KMA updated analysis are summarized in the following tables:

A. Base In-Lieu Fee Amounts
As shown in the following table, KMA recommends that the base in-lieu fee payments be set, in 2023 dollars, at the following amounts:

Recommended Base In-Lieu Fee Payment Amounts
Measured Per Square Foot of Total Leasable or Saleable Area in the Residential Project
Apartment Development $18.10
Ownership Housing Development $9.10
B. In-Lieu Fee Schedules
Inclusionary housing requirements have a disproportionate impact on smaller projects, because there are fewer market rate units available to spread the impact created by the income and affordability standards. To reflect this, KMA recommends that City impose the in-lieu fee on a sliding scale basis for residential projects that consist of between 10 and 22 units.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1280 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 2
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 KMA recommends that the in-lieu payment schedules presented in the following table be applied. The recommended fees are presented in 2023 Dollars.

KMA recommends that the following in-lieu fee schedules be applied to a fractional “Inclusionary Unit" obligation incurred by a residential development. The recommended fractional in-lieu fee amounts are presented in 2023 dollars.

Number of Units
Apartment
Development
Ownership Housing
Development
10 $1.39 $0.70
11 $2.78 $1.40
12 $4.18 $2.10
13 $5.57 $2.80
14 $6.96 $3.50
15 $8.35 $4.20
16 $9.75 $4.90
17 $11.14 $5.60
18 $12.53 $6.30
19 $13.92 $7.00
20 $15.32 $7.70
21 $16.71 $8.40
22 $18.10 $9.10
Recommended In-Lieu Fee Schedules
Measured Per Square Foot of Leasable or Saleable Area
in the Residential Development
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1281 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 3
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit $171,900
Average Unit Size (Square Feet of Leasable Area) 973
In-Lieu Fee Per Square Foot of One Unit $176.80
Fraction
Fractional In-Lieu Fee:

Per Square Foot of One Unit
Total Fractional In-Lieu Fee:

Apartment Development

0.10 $17.70 $17,210

0.20 $35.40 $34,430

0.30 $53.00 $51,540

0.40 $70.70 $68,760

0.50 $88.40 $85,970

0.60 $106.10 $103,180

0.70 $123.80 $120,400

0.80 $141.40 $137,510

0.90 $159.10 $154,720

1.00 $176.80 $171,940
Fractional In-Lieu Fee Payment Calculations
Measured Per Square Foot of the Leasable Area of One Unit in an Apartment Development Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit $442,000
Average Unit Size (Square Feet of Saleable Area) 2,430
In-Lieu Fee Per Square Foot of One Unit $181.90
Fraction
Fractional In-Lieu Fee:

Per Square Foot of One Unit
Total Fractional In-Lieu Fee:

Ownership Housing Development

0.10 $18.20 $44,230

0.20 $36.40 $88,450

0.30 $54.60 $132,680

0.40 $72.80 $176,900

0.50 $91.00 $221,130

0.60 $109.10 $265,110

0.70 $127.30 $309,340

0.80 $145.50 $353,570

0.90 $163.70 $397,790

1.00 $181.90 $442,020
Fractional In-Lieu Fee Payment Calculations
Measured Per Square Foot of the Saleable Area of One Unit in an Ownership Housing Development Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1282 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 4
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 II. BACKGROUND
Chapter 18.230.110 A. details the following specific conditions under which an in-lieu fee can be paid:

1. Apartment developments that are subject to the Inclusionary Housing requirements, and that have 22 or fewer units, can pay an in-lieu fee by right.

2. All ownership housing developments that are subject to the Inclusionary Housing requirements, can pay an in-lieu fee by right.

3. An in-lieu fee can be paid for any fraction of an affordable unit that is required to be produced under the Inclusionary Housing requirements.

The foundational premise of this analysis is that an in-lieu fee should correlate to the “Affordability Gap” associated with producing the “Inclusionary Units” required by the Ordinance. The Affordability Gap can generally be defined as the difference between the achievable market rate rents or sales prices and the allowable rents or sales prices for the designated Inclusionary Units.

The following report provides updates to the following variables that are applied in the in-lieu fee calculations:

1. Apartment developments:
a. The currently achievable market rents for apartment projects that are designated with four or more stars by the CoStar rating system; and
b. The calculations used to set the “Affordable Rents” for low income apartment units.

2. Ownership housing developments:
a. The currently achievable market rate sales prices for single family home units; and b. The calculations used to set the “Affordable Sales Prices” for moderate income single family home units.

III. ANALYSIS ORGANIZATION
The KMA analysis supported by the following Attachments and Appendices:

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1283 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 5
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 ATTACHMENT 1: AFFORDABLE HOUSING COST CALCULATION METHODOLOGIES Appendix A: Affordable Rent Calculation Methodology
Appendix B: Affordable Sales Price Calculation Methodology ATTACHMENT 2: APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
Appendix A: Rent Survey 4+ Star Properties
Appendix B: Affordable Rent Calculations
Appendix C: In-Lieu Fee Calculations
ATTACHMENT 3: OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
Appendix A: Home Resales Survey
Appendix B: Affordable Sales Price Calculations
Appendix C: In-Lieu Fee Calculations
The in-lieu fee analyses are divided into the following categories:

1. The supportable in-lieu fee amounts were estimated based on the Affordability Gaps associated with the following requirements:
a. A 9% low income requirement for apartment developments; and b. A 5% moderate income requirements for ownership housing developments.

2. The imposition of Inclusionary Housing requirements creates a disproportionate impact on small development projects. To mitigate this impact, KMA created discounted in-lieu fee schedules for projects that consist of between 10 and 22 units.

3. Schedules of in-lieu fee payments are provided for any fraction of an Inclusionary Unit that is required to be produced under the Ordinance requirements.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1284 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 6
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 IV. APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS
A. Apartment Rent Estimates

MARKET RATE RENTS
In October 2023, KMA surveyed apartment projects that received 4+ stars in the CoStar quality ranking system (Attachment 2: Appendix A). Based in part on this survey, the market rate apartment rents used in this analysis are presented in the following table.

AFFORDABLE RENTS
The methodology used to calculate the Affordable Rents is described in Attachment 1: Appendix A, and the calculations are presented in Attachment 2: Appendix B. The results are summarized in the following table:

Transit Village
1 Prototypes
Transit Village
2 Prototypes
R-3
Prototypes
Number of Bedrooms
Studio Units $2,090
One-Bedroom Units $2,280 $2,350 $2,140
Two-Bedroom Units $2,660 $2,790 $2,170
Three-Bedroom Units $2,880 $2,540
Weighted Average Rent Per
Square Foot of Leasable Area $2.57 $3.05 $2.53
Projected Market Rate Rents
Apartment Development
Number of Bedrooms
Low Income
Rents
Studio Units $1,169
One-Bedroom Units $1,327
Two-Bedroom Units $1,440
Three-Bedroom Units $1,552
Affordable Rents (2023)
Apartment Development
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1285 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 7
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 B. Estimated Affordability Gaps – Apartment Development KMA estimated the Affordability Gaps associated with three prototype apartment developments using the following calculation methodology:

1. The differences between the estimated achievable market rate rents and the defined Affordable Rents were calculated for studio, one-bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom apartment units.

2. KMA assumed that the property taxes for projects that include designated affordable housing units would be based on a lower assessed value due to the reduction in net operating income that would be generated by the project. KMA deducted this lower property tax expense from the estimated rent difference.

3. The estimated “Net Annual Rent Difference Per Inclusionary Unit” represents the annual rent difference minus the estimated property tax savings.

4. The “Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit” is estimated by capitalizing the Net Annual Difference Per Inclusionary Unit at the threshold return derived from a pro forma analysis of the prototype apartment development at unrestricted market rate rents.

The Affordability Gap calculations are provided in Attachment 2: Appendix C, and the results are summarized in the following table:

Prototype
Affordability
Gap
Transit Village 1 $188,000
Transit Village 2 $184,000
R-3 $144,000
Weighted Average $171,900
Estimated Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit
Apartment Development
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1286 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 8
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 C. In-Lieu Fee Calculations – Apartment Development
The Affordability Gaps Per Inclusionary Unit were converted into the in-lieu fee payment that would be required to fulfill the affordable housing requirements on site within a proposed market rate apartment development. The conversion calculations are presented in Attachment 2: Appendix C, and the recommended in-lieu fee payment amounts are summarized in the following table.

To mitigate the disproportionate impact an Inclusionary Housing obligations creates on small projects, KMA prepared a discounted in-lieu fee schedule for apartment developments that consist of between 10 and 22 units. The recommended in-lieu fee schedule, which is presented in 2023 dollars, is provided in the following table:

Weighted Average Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit $171,900 In-Lieu Fee Payment Per Square Foot of Leasable Area $18.10 Recommended In-Lieu Fee Payment
Apartment Development
Number of Units In-Lieu Fee
10 $1.39
11 $2.78
12 $4.18
13 $5.57
14 $6.96
15 $8.35
16 $9.75
17 $11.14
18 $12.53
19 $13.92
20 $15.32
21 $16.71
22 $18.10
Recommended In-Lieu Fee Schedule
Measured Per Square Foot of Leasable Area
in the Apartment Development
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1287 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 9
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 Some developers may choose to pay a fee in lieu of fulfilling an obligation to produce a fraction of an Inclusionary Unit. The following table provides a schedule of fractional in-lieu fee payments for apartment development, presented in 2023 dollars:

V. OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS
A. Sales Price Estimates

MARKET RATE SALES PRICES
In October 2023, KMA compiled a survey of single family homes that were sold over the previous two years (Attachment 3: Appendix A). Based in part on this survey, the projected market rate sales prices are presented in the following table.

Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit $171,900
Average Unit Size (Square Feet of Leasable Area) 973
In-Lieu Fee Per Square Foot of One Unit $176.80
Fraction
Fractional In-Lieu Fee:

Per Square Foot of One Unit
Total Fractional In-Lieu Fee:

Apartment Development

0.10 $17.70 $17,210

0.20 $35.40 $34,430

0.30 $53.00 $51,540

0.40 $70.70 $68,760

0.50 $88.40 $85,970

0.60 $106.10 $103,180

0.70 $123.80 $120,400

0.80 $141.40 $137,510

0.90 $159.10 $154,720

1.00 $176.80 $171,940
Fractional In-Lieu Fee Payment Calculations
Measured Per Square Foot of the Leasable Area of One Unit in an Apartment Development Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1288 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 10
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023

AFFORDABLE SALES PRICES
The methodology used to calculate the Affordable Sales Prices is described in Attachment 1: Appendix B, and the calculations are presented in Attachment 3: Appendix B. The results are summarized in the following table:

B. Estimated Affordability Gaps – Ownership Housing Development The Affordability Gaps that were derived from the KMA analysis of single family home development are presented in the following table:

Number of Bedrooms
Detached Single
Family Homes
Three-Bedroom Units $598,000
Four-Bedroom Units $760,000
Five-Bedroom Units $824,000
Weighted Average Price Per
Square Foot of Leasable Area $307
Projected Market Rate Sales Prices
Ownership Housing Development
Number of Bedrooms
Moderate Income
Sales Prices
Three-Bedroom Units $293,900
Four-Bedroom Units $303,800
Five-Bedroom Units $313,800
Affordable Sales Prices (2023)
Ownership Housing Development
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1289 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 11
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 C. In-Lieu Fee Calculations – Ownership Housing Development The weighted average Affordability Gaps are translated into the in-lieu fee payment that would be required to fulfill the affordable housing requirements on site within a proposed market rate ownership housing development. These calculations are presented in Attachment 3: Appendix C, and the results are summarized in the following table:

To mitigate the disproportionate impact an Inclusionary Housing obligations creates on small projects, KMA prepared a discounted in-lieu fee schedule for ownership housing developments that consist of between 10 and 22 units. The recommended in-lieu fee schedule, which is presented in 2023 dollars, is provided in the following table:

Number of
Bedrooms
Market Rate
Prices
Moderate
Income Prices
Affordability
Gap
3 $598,000 $293,900 $304,100
4 $760,000 $303,800 $456,200
5 $824,000 $313,800 $510,200
Estimated Affordability Gaps Per Inclusionary Unit
Single Family Home Development
Ownership Housing Development
Weighted Average Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit $442,000 In-Lieu Fee Payment Per Square Foot of Saleable Area $9.10 Recommended In-Lieu Fee Payment
Ownership Housing Development
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1290 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 12
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 The following table provides a schedule of fractional in-lieu fee payments for developers that choose this option for fulfilling an obligation to produce a fraction of an Inclusionary Unit. The fractional inlieu fee schedule is presented in 2023 dollars:

Number of Units In-Lieu Fee
10 $0.70
11 $1.40
12 $2.10
13 $2.80
14 $3.50
15 $4.20
16 $4.90
17 $5.60
18 $6.30
19 $7.00
20 $7.70
21 $8.40
22 $9.10
Measured Per Square Foot of Saleable Area
in the Ownership Housing Development
Recommended In-Lieu Fee Schedule
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1291 of 1429
Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Analysis Page 13
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. 2310012.RED:KHH / 18500.004.004 October 28, 2023 VI. RECOMMENDED IN-LIEU FEE UPDATES
In a policy recommendations report dated January 30, 2023, KMA recommended that the in-lieu fee payment amount be adjusted each year based on the percentage change in new home prices in San Bernardino County as published annually by the Real Estate Research Council (RERC). During the intervening period RERC ceased publication of this information. As a substitute, KMA recommends that the in-lieu fee be updated annually using the following methodology:

1. Median sales value information for “All New Residential Development” in San Bernardino County should be compiled annually. The Redfin Corporation currently produces and publishes this information.

2. The increase or decrease in the in-lieu fee payment amounts should be based on the year-toyear percentage change in the median new home sales price derived from this Redfin Corporation information.

Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit $442,000
Average Unit Size (Square Feet of Saleable Area) 2,430
In-Lieu Fee Per Square Foot of One Unit $181.90
Fraction
Fractional In-Lieu Fee:

Per Square Foot of One Unit
Total Fractional In-Lieu Fee:

Ownership Housing Development

0.10 $18.20 $44,230

0.20 $36.40 $88,450

0.30 $54.60 $132,680

0.40 $72.80 $176,900

0.50 $91.00 $221,130

0.60 $109.10 $265,110

0.70 $127.30 $309,340

0.80 $145.50 $353,570

0.90 $163.70 $397,790

AFFORDABLE HOUSING COST CALCULATION METHODOLOGIES
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1293 of 1429
Affordable Housing Cost Calculation Methodologies Page 1 Inclusionary Housing: Updated In-Lieu Fee Analysis October 28, 2023

APPENDIX A

AFFORDABLE RENT CALCULATION METHODOLOGY

ASSUMPTIONS
The Affordable Rent calculations are presented in Attachment 2: Appendix B. The calculations are based on the following assumptions:

The household income information used in the calculations is based on 2023 income statistics for San Bernardino County as a whole. The household incomes for lower income households are produced by United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and distributed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) annually in a “State Income Limits” memorandum.

The household size appropriate for the unit is based on the California Health and Safety Code (H&SC) Section 50052.5 standard of the number of bedrooms in the home plus one.1 H&SC Section 50052.5 refers to this as “the family size appropriate for the unit.” This is a benchmark that is used for calculation purposes only. It is neither an occupancy minimum nor a maximum.

The benchmark household incomes used in the Affordable Rent calculations are based on 80% of the area median income (AMI). This is based on the standard imposed by Assembly Bill 1505.

The following monthly utilities allowances were applied in this analysis.2 Utility Allowances
Apartment Development Prototypes
Number of
Bedrooms
Monthly Utilities
Allowances
Studio $154
1 $185
2 $261
3 $338
1 For example, the imputed household size for a one-bedroom unit is two persons. 2 Utilities allowances are based on utilities costs comprised of electric heating, cooking and water heating; and basic electric, and air conditioning. The allowances are based on the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino apartment schedule effective as of October 1, 2023.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1294 of 1429
Affordable Housing Cost Calculation Methodologies Page 2 Inclusionary Housing: Updated In-Lieu Fee Analysis October 28, 2023

AFFORDABLE RENTS
The resulting affordable rents are presented in the following table:

Affordable Rents (2023)
Apartment Development
Number of
Bedrooms Low Income Rents
Studio $1,169
1 $1,327
2 $1,440
3 $1,552
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1295 of 1429
Affordable Housing Cost Calculation Methodologies Page 3 Inclusionary Housing: Updated In-Lieu Fee Analysis October 28, 2023

APPENDIX B

AFFORDABLE SALES PRICE CALCULATION METHODOLOGY

ASSUMPTIONS
The Affordable Sales Price calculations are presented in Attachment 3: Appendix B. The calculations are based on the following assumptions:

1. The household income information used in the calculations is based on 2023 income statistics for San Bernardino County as a whole. The household incomes for moderate income households are produced and distributed annually by HCD.

2. The Affordable Sales Price estimates are based on the calculation methodology imposed by H&SC Section 50052.5.

The elements included in the Affordable Sales Price calculations are described in the following sections of this Attachment.

Household Size
For the sole purposes of calculating Affordable Sales Prices, H&SC Section 50052.5 sets household sizes based on the number of bedrooms in the home plus one. As discussed previously, this is neither an occupancy minimum nor a maximum. Rather, it is a benchmark that creates a consistent Affordable Sales Price calculation methodology.

Household Income
For calculation purposes only, H&SC Section 50052.5 applies benchmark household incomes as the standard for determining the Affordable Sales Prices. For moderate income households the benchmark is set at 110% of the San Bernardino County AMI.

The identified benchmark percentage of AMI is not an income cap. The household income qualification standards are based on 120% of AMI for moderate income households and are based on the actual size of the home buyer’s household.

Income Allocated to Housing-Related Expenses
H&SC §50052.5 allocates 35% of the benchmark household incomes to the payment of housing-related expenses.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1296 of 1429
Affordable Housing Cost Calculation Methodologies Page 4 Inclusionary Housing: Updated In-Lieu Fee Analysis October 28, 2023 Housing-Related Expenses
Based on research undertaken by KMA, the variable housing related expense assumptions used in this analysis are presented in the following table:

Variable Housing Related Expenses
Ownership Housing Development Prototypes
Number of
Bedrooms
Monthly Utilities
Allowances 3
Monthly
Maintenance &
Insurance
3 $659 $100
4 $800 $125
5 $940 $150
The property tax expense estimates are based on 1.15% of the defined Affordable Sales Prices. This assumes that the City will require the homes to be resold at an Affordable Sales Price throughout one cumulative 45-year covenant period.

Supportable Mortgage Amount
The mortgage amounts used in the Affordable Sales Price calculations are estimated using the income available after the other housing-related expenses are paid. The mortgage terms used in this analysis were based on a 30-year fully amortizing loan at a 7.70% interest rate. 4 Benchmark Down Payment
KMA set the benchmark down payment at 5% of the estimated Affordable Sales Price. A down payment of this magnitude is commonly allowed by affordable housing programs.

AFFORDABLE SALES PRICES
The resulting Affordable Sales Prices are estimated as follows:
3 Utilities allowances are based on utilities costs comprised of electric heating, cooking and water heating; basic electric; and water, sewer and trash services. The allowances are based on the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino single family home schedule effective as of October 1, 2023. 4 Based on a 100 basis points premium applied to the Freddie Mac monthly average, between November 2022 and October 2023, for a fixed-interest rate loan with a 30-year amortization period.

Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1297 of 1429
Affordable Housing Cost Calculation Methodologies Page 5 Inclusionary Housing: Updated In-Lieu Fee Analysis October 28, 2023 Affordable Sales Prices (2023)
Ownership Housing Development
Number of
Bedrooms
Moderate Income
Sales Prices
3 $293,900
4 $303,800
5 $313,800
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1298 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 2

APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Apt ILF; Att 2 Apt Page 1 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1299 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 2: APPENDIX A

RENT ANALYSES

APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Apt ILF; App A RS Page 2 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1300 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 2: APPENDIX A
RENT SURVEY 4+ STAR PROPERTIES 1

APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Name # of Units
Unit Size
(SF) Total Per SF Year Built
I.

The Crossings at Redlands 26000 W Lugonia Ave Redlands 92374 44 485 $1,818 $3.75 2019 Redlands Lawn and Tennis 1400 Barton Rd Redlands 92373 32 510 $1,712 $3.36 1986 Minimum 485 $1,712 $3.36
Maximum 510 $1,818 $3.75
Weighted Average 496 $1,773 $3.58
II.

Cypress Villas Apt Homes 301 E Cypress Ave Redlands 92373 14 610 $2,366 $3.88 2005 Redlands Lawn and Tennis 1400 Barton Road Redlands 92373 136 656 $1,936 $2.95 The Crossings at Redlands 26000 W Lugonia Ave Redlands 92734 171 718 $2,118 $2.95 Venue at Orange 1610 Orange Avenue Redlands 92373 158 726 $2,101 $2.89 2023 The Summit 27431 San Bernardino Ave Redlands 92734 145 756 $2,207 $2.92 2019 Barton Vineyard 26630 Barton Rd Redlands 92373 120 778 $1,989 $2.56 2006 Circa 2020 27000 W Lugonia Ave Redlands 92734 171 836 $2,246 $2.69 2015 Minimum 610 $1,936 $2.56
Maximum 836 $2,366 $3.88
Weighted Average 744 $2,113 $2.85
Average Effective Rent
One-Bedroom Units
Studio Units
Address
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Apt ILF Page 3 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1301 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 2: APPENDIX A
RENT SURVEY 4+ STAR PROPERTIES 1

APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Name # of Units
Unit Size
(SF) Total Per SF Year Built
Average Effective Rent
Address
III.

Cypress Villas Apt Homes 301 E Cypress Ave Redlands 92373 61 833 $2,301 $2.76 Redlands Lawn and Tennis 1400 Barton Road Redlands 92373 328 874 $2,482 $2.84 The Summit 27431 San Bernardino Ave Redlands 92734 124 1,019 $2,432 $2.39 Barton Vineyard 26630 Barton Rd Redlands 92373 152 1,098 $2,252 $2.05 Venue at Orange 1610 Orange Avenue Redlands 92373 143 1,118 $2,417 $2.16 Circa 2020 27000 W Lugonia Ave Redlands 92734 124 1,130 $2,599 $2.30 The Crossings at Redlands 26000 W Lugonia Ave Redlands 92374 128 1,177 $2,617 $2.22 The Village at Redlands 301 Wabash Ave Redlands 92734 40 1,400 $2,434 $1.74 2005 Minimum 833 $2,252 $1.74
Maximum 1,400 $2,617 $2.84
Weighted Average 1,034 $2,453 $2.41
IV.

Cypress Villas Apt Homes 301 E Cypress Ave Redlands 92373 7 1,178 $2,902 $2.46 The Summit 27431 San Bernardino Ave Redlands 92734 12 1,257 $3,362 $2.67 Venue at Orange 1610 Orange Avenue Redlands 92373 27 1,297 $3,035 $2.34 Barton Vineyard 26630 Barton Rd Redlands 92373 24 1,320 $2,716 $2.06 Circa 2020 27000 W Lugonia Ave Redlands 92734 11 1,412 $3,182 $2.25 Minimum 1,178 $2,716 $2.06
Maximum 1,412 $3,362 $2.67
Weighted Average 1,303 $2,997 $2.30
1 Source: CoStar, October 2023.

Two-Bedroom Units
Three-Bedroom Units
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Apt ILF Page 4 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1302 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 2: APPENDIX B

AFFORDABLE RENT CALCULATIONS

APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Apt ILF; App B Aff Rent Page 5 of 8 Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1303 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 2: APPENDIX B

AFFORDABLE RENT CALCULATIONS
LOW INCOME - 2023 INCOME STANDARDS

APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Studio Units
One-Bedroom
Units
Two-Bedroom
Units
Three-Bedroom
Units
I. Household Income Assumptions
Benchmark Household Size 1 1 2 3 4
Area Median Income 2 $66,150 $75,600 $85,050 $94,500
% of AMI Used for Rent Setting Purposes 3 80% 80% 80% 80% Benchmark Annual Household Income $52,920 $60,480 $68,040 $75,600 II. % of Income Allotted to Housing Expenses 30% 30% 30% 30% III. Gross Affordable Rent
Annual $15,876 $18,144 $20,412 $22,680
Monthly $1,323 $1,512 $1,701 $1,890
(Less) Monthly Utilities Allowance 4 ($154) ($185) ($261) ($338) IV. Net Affordable Rent $1,169 $1,327 $1,440 $1,552
1 2
3 Based on 80% of AMI. This percentage of AMI is based on the standard identified in AB 1505. 4 Based on 2023 San Bernardino County household incomes published by the California Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD).

Utilities allowances are based on the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino utility allowance schedule for apartment development effective as of 10/1/23. Assumes: Electric Heating, Electric Cooking, and Electric Water Heater; Basic Electric; and Air Conditioning.

Under the California Health & Safety Code Section 50052.5 calculation methodology, the "family size appropriate for the unit" benchmark is set at the number of bedrooms in the unit plus one. This benchmark is used solely for the purposes of calculating the Affordable Rents. It is neither an occupancy cap nor a floor.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates
File name: 10 28 23 Apt ILF; Aff Rent Page 6 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1304 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 2: APPENDIX C

IN-LIEU FEE CALCULATIONS

APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Apt ILF; App C ILF Page 2 of 5
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1305 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 2: APPENDIX C

IN-LIEU FEE CALCULATIONS

APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Transit Village 1
Prototypes
Transit Village 2
Prototypes R-3 Prototypes
I. Rent Difference
A. Studio Units
Market Rents 1 $0 $2,090 $0
Affordable Rent 2 0 1,169 0
Difference $0 $921 $0
B. One-Bedroom Units
Market Rents 1 $2,280 $2,350 $2,140
Affordable Rent 2 1,327 1,327 1,327
Difference $953 $1,023 $813
C. Two-Bedroom Units
Market Rents 1 $2,660 $2,790 $2,170
Affordable Rent 2 1,440 1,440 1,440
Difference $1,220 $1,350 $730
D. Three-Bedroom Units
Market Rents 1 $2,880 $0 $2,540
Affordable Rent 2 1,552 0 1,552
Difference $1,328 $0 $988
II. Distribution of Total Units 3
Studio Units 0% 20% 0%
One-Bedroom Units 45% 50% 35%
Two-Bedroom Units 50% 30% 55%
Three-Bedroom Units 5% 0% 10%
III. Annual Rent Difference Per Inclusionary Unit $13,263 $13,208 $9,418 Less: Property Tax Difference 4 (3,590) (3,570) (2,550) Net Annual Rent Difference Per Inclusionary Unit $9,673 $9,638 $6,868 IV. Assumptions
Total Units 60 232 135
Total Leasable Area 58,350 184,880 117,250
Weighted Avg Unit Size (Sf) 973 797 869
Inclusionary Housing Percentage 9% 9% 9%
Inclusionary Units 5 21 12
V. Supportable In-Lieu Fee
Weighted
Averages
Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit 5 $188,000 $184,000 $144,000 $171,900 Total $940,000 $3,864,000 $1,728,000 $6,532,000
Per Total Unit in the Project $15,670 $16,660 $12,800 $15,300 Per Square Foot of Total Leasable Area $16.10 $20.90 $14.70 $18.10 1 The market rents are drawn in part from the survey of apartment projects that are designated with four or more stars by the CoStar rat 2 See ATTACHMENT 2: APPENDIX B.
3 Based on the unit mix distribution applied in the Financial Evaluation pro forma analysis. 4 Based on the rent differential capitalized at a 4.25% rate to establish the value, and a 1.15% property tax rate. 5 Based on the Net Annual Rent Difference Per Inclusionary Unit capitalized at the Threshold Return on Total Investment generated by each prototype apartment development.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates
File name: 10 28 23 Apt ILF; ILF Page 3 of 5
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1306 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 3

OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Own ILF; Att 3 Own Page 1 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1307 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 3: APPENDIX A

OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA

HOME SALES SURVEY
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File Name: 10 28 23 Own ILF; App A HSS Page 2 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1308 of 1429

APPENDIX A
SINGLE FAMILY HOME RESALE SURVEY 1

OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Unit Size (SF) Total Per SF Year Built
918 Lawton St Redlands 92374 1,200 $540,000 $450 2019
1499 Shannon Ave Redlands 92374 1,627 $647,821 $398 2021 1483 Shannon Ave Redlands 92374 1,627 $623,797 $383 2021 1676 Camellia Ln Redlands 92374 1,864 $670,000 $359 2022 1710 Camellia Ln Redlands 92374 1,864 $532,450 $286 2022 1696 Camellia Ln Redlands 92374 1,864 $536,990 $288 2022 943 Dahlia Ave Redlands 92374 1,949 $667,888 $343 2022
Minimum 1,200 $532,450 $286 2019
Maximum 1,949 $670,000 $450 2022
Average 1,714 $602,700 $352 2021
906 Lawton St Redlands 92374 1,430 $550,000 $385 2022
1227 Herald St Redlands 92374 1,750 $579,000 $331 2023
1443 Claire Ave Redlands 92374 1,853 $678,000 $366 2020 915 Dahlia Redlands 92374 1,949 $675,000 $346 2022
31040 Sutherland Dr Redlands 92373 2,191 $900,000 $411 2018 1431 Wicklow Ave Redlands 92374 2,227 $645,000 $290 2020 1766 Mardi Gras Ln Redlands 92374 2,253 $641,007 $285 2023 1760 Gold Medal Ln Redlands 92374 2,253 $655,226 $291 2023 26634 Fino Ct Redlands 92373 2,386 $836,000 $350 2019
1710 Lucas Ln Redlands 92374 2,396 $865,000 $361 2018
1652 Penny Ln Redlands 92374 2,397 $922,000 $385 2018
842 Royal Knight Trl Redlands 92374 2,449 $633,190 $259 2022 866 Royal Knight Trl Redlands 92374 2,590 $648,003 $250 2022 848 Orangedale Ave Redlands 92374 2,590 $662,060 $256 2023 1459 Shane Ct Redlands 92374 2,726 $812,500 $298 2019
1580 Adeline Ave Redlands 92374 2,741 $715,000 $261 2018 858 Royal Knight Trl Redlands 92374 2,877 $667,756 $232 2022 1744 Sunny Heights Ln Redlands 92374 2,877 $677,056 $235 2022 1690 Lucas Ln Redlands 92374 2,924 $900,000 $308 2019
1462 Elliott Ct Redlands 92374 3,090 $910,000 $294 2019 313 Silvertree Ln Redlands 92374 4,100 $1,250,000 $305 2018 Minimum 1,430 $550,000 $232 2018
Maximum 4,100 $1,250,000 $411 2023
Average 2,479 $753,400 $304 2020
Sales Price
Address
Three-Bedroom Units
Four-Bedroom Units
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Own ILF; Home Resales Page 3 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1309 of 1429

APPENDIX A
SINGLE FAMILY HOME RESALE SURVEY 1

OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Unit Size (SF) Total Per SF Year Built
Sales Price
Address
1721 Camellia Ln Redlands 92374 2,010 $555,990 $277 2022 1475 Galway Ave Redlands 92374 2,537 $720,000 $284 2020 1447 Wicklow Redlands 92374 2,537 $670,000 $264 2020
1462 Shannon Ave Redlands 92374 2,537 $734,000 $289 2021 1506 Shannon Ave Redlands 92374 2,537 $731,272 $288 2021 1454 Shane Ct Redlands 92374 2,726 $870,000 $319 2019
1854 Montecito Ln Redlands 92374 3,248 $975,000 $300 2019 1814 Pansy Ct Redlands 92374 3,297 $955,000 $290 2019
1811 Adeline Ct Redlands 92374 3,297 $1,150,000 $349 2019 10985 Sunny Cove Ct Redlands 92373 3,320 $890,000 $268 2018 Minimum 2,010 $555,990 $264 2018
Maximum 3,320 $1,150,000 $349 2022
Average 2,805 $825,100 $294 2020
1 Source: Redfin. Based on single family homes built between 2018 and 2023. The sales occurred between October 2021 and October 2023.

Five-Bedroom Units
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Own ILF; Home Resales Page 4 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1310 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 3: APPENDIX B

AFFORDABLE SALES PRICE CALCULATIONS

OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File Name: 10 28 23 Own ILF; App B ASP Page 5 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1311 of 1429

APPENDIX B - EXHIBIT II
AFFORDABLE SALES PRICE CALCULATIONS 1

DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOME PROTOTYPE
MODERATE INCOME - 2023 INCOME STANDARDS

OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Three-Bedroom
Units
Four-Bedroom
Units
Five-Bedroom
Units
I. General Assumptions
Benchmark Household Size 2 4 5 6
Area Median Income 3 $94,500 $102,050 $109,600
Annual Utilities Allowance 4 $7,908 $9,600 $11,280
HOA, Maintenance & Insurance 5 $1,200 $1,500 $1,800
II. Calculations
A. Income Allotted to Housing Based on 110% AMI
Benchmark Annual Household Income $103,950 $112,255 $120,560 Income Allotted to Housing @ 35% of Income $36,380 $39,290 $42,200 B. Property Taxes @ 1.15% of Affordable Sales Price $3,380 $3,490 $3,610 C. Income Available for Mortgage Debt Service 6 $23,892 $24,700 $25,510 D. Affordable Sales Price
Supportable Mtg @ 7.70% Interest 7 $279,200 $288,600 $298,100 Home Buyer Down Payment @ 5% of ASP 14,700 15,200 15,700 Affordable Sales Price $293,900 $303,800 $313,800
1 The Affordable Sales Price calculations are based on the California Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5 methodology. 2 3
4 5 Based in part on the HOA dues identified in the home sales survey presented in APPENDIX A. 6 7
Under the California Health & Safety Code Section 50052.5 calculation methodology, the "family size appropriate for the unit" benchmark is set at the number of bedrooms in the unit plus one. This benchmark is used solely for the purposes of calculating the Affordable Sales Price. It is neither an occupancy cap nor a floor.

Based on 2023 San Bernardino County household incomes published by the California Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD).

Utilities allowances are based on the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino utility allowance schedule for detached homes effective as of 10/1/23. Assumes: Electric Heating, Electric Cooking, Electric Water Heater, Basic Electric, Air Conditioning, Water, Based on the Income Allotted to Housing minus the following: Annual Utilities Allowance; HOA, Maintenance & Insurance; and Property Taxes @ 1.15% of Affordable Sales Price.

Based on a 100 basis points premium applied to the Freddie Mac monthly average, between November 2022 and October 2023, for a fixed-interest rate loan with a 30-year amortization period.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates
File name: 10 28 23 Own ILF; ASP Page 6 of 8
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1312 of 1429
ATTACHMENT 3: APPENDIX C

IN-LIEU FEE CALCULATIONS

OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File name: 10 28 23 Own ILF; App C ILF Page 4 of 5
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1313 of 1429

APPENDIX C
IN-LIEU FEE CALCULATIONS (5% STANDARD)

OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: UPDATED IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS

REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA
Single Family
Home Prototype
I. Sales Price Difference
A. Three-Bedroom Units
Market Rate Sales Price 1 $598,000
Affordable Sales Price 2 293,900
Difference $304,100
B. Four-Bedroom Units
Market Rate Sales Price 1 $760,000
Affordable Sales Price 2 303,800
Difference $456,200
C. Five-Bedroom Units
Market Rate Sales Price $824,000
Affordable Sales Price 313,800
Difference $510,200
II. Distribution of Total Units 3
Three-Bedroom Units 20%
Four-Bedroom Units 50%
Five-Bedroom Units 30%
III. Assumptions
Total Units 60
Total Saleable Area 145,800
Weighted Avg Unit Size (Sf) 2,430
Inclusionary Housing Percentage 5.0%
Inclusionary Units 3
IV. In-Lieu Fee
Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit 4 $442,000
Total In-Lieu Fee $1,326,000
Per Total Unit in the Project $22,100
Per Sf of Total Saleable Area $9.10
1 The market rate sales prices are drawn from the pro forma analyses. 2 See ATTACHMENT 3: APPENDIX B.
3 Based on the unit mix distribution applied in the pro forma analyses. 4 Based on unit mix distribution and the weighted average difference between the Market Rate Sales Prices and the Affordable Sales Prices.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

File Name: 10 28 23 Own ILF; ILF Page 5 of 5
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1314 of 1429
City Council Meeting I. 1.

DATE: 12/19/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of Additional Appropriations for 2022-23 Year-End Encumbrance and Carryover Balances (Management
Services/Finance Director Garcia)
MOTION(S):

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided.

I move to approve additional appropriations to the Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget for the Fiscal Year 2022-23 year-end encumbrances and carryovers.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve additional appropriations to the Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget for the Fiscal Year 2022-23 year-end encumbrances and carryovers.

DISCUSSION:

During the year-end closing process, staff routinely reviews previously approved budget activities and projects that remain in-progress and have not yet been completed. The reason being is that at the close of the previous fiscal year, all unexpended appropriations will lapse unless otherwise designated. To preserve unexpended appropriations for in-progress projects and purchases, it is necessary to request that those specific carryovers and encumbrances be approved as continuing appropriations in the current Fiscal Year 2023-2024. An encumbrance refers to a budgeted expense for which a purchase order was issued in one fiscal year, but the goods or services were not received and paid for until the next fiscal year, thus crossing fiscal years. Carryovers are for project, capital and contractual expenditures that were included in the budget, but at the end of the fiscal year, had not yet been encumbered or spent. Grant carryovers reflect active grant awards that have been advanced or are 100% Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1315 of 1429
carryovers reflect active grant awards that have been advanced or are 100% reimbursable but remained unspent the close of the previous fiscal year (June 30, 2023).

Although the City Council adopted a two-year budget for fiscal years 2023 & 2024, budget policy requires that these unexpended appropriations in FY 2023 be presented to the Council with a request to approve their carryover into the current fiscal year. Because expenditures of previously encumbered and carried over items will occur in the 2023-24 fiscal year, an additional appropriation is necessary to prevent overspending of the current fiscal year's budget. In the attachments to this report, specific projects and encumbrances are listed for the General Fund and non-General Funds, as well as the specific grant carryovers that are requested.

ALTERNATIVES:

The Council could decide not to appropriate any of these funds at this time. This is not recommended as many of the carryover requests are for items and services that have already received City Council approval during the FY2022-23 and FY2023-24 Biennial Budget process.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Not applicable.

SUBMITTED BY:

Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
RECOMMENDED BY:

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

Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
PREPARED BY:

James Garland, Assistant Finance Director
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1316 of 1429
Fiscal Impact
Discussion:

There is no fiscal impact. The amounts listed in each respective fund have been previously accounted for, both in the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 12-Month Projections within the Adopted Budget as well as in the various fund balance projections. Estimated available fund balances have previously been reduced by these amounts.

Attachments
2023-24 General Fund Encumbrances
2023-24 Other Fund Encumbrances
2023-24 Grant Carryovers
Redlands Regular meeting of 12-19-23 1317 of 1429

CITY OF REDLANDS

ENCUMBRANCES - GENERAL FUND
AS OF 06/30/2023
P.O. # VENDOR AMOUNT

CITY CLERK
22300017 101110 6710 Sterling Codifiers Llc $ 16.28
$ 16.28

CITY MANAGER
Carryover 101121 6708 City Branding For Fy 2023-24 $ 50,000.00 Carryover 101121 6710 Community E-Boards 35,000.00
22302250 101125 6105 Nancy K Bohl Incorporated 5,000.00 22212069 101125 6106 Cooperative Personnel Services 100,000.00 22302515 101125 6106 The Freeman Investigative Group Inc 2,125.00 22302475 101125 7001 Citrograph Printing Company 119.63 22302295 101125 7003 Gourmet Pizza Shoppe, The 569.29
22300555 101125 7810 Sparkletts 100.73
$ 192,914.65

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
22300766 101161 6710 Walker Consultants Inc $ 2,508.00
Carryover 101161 6710 Placer Ai Foottraffic Analytics 25,000.00 Carryover 101161 6710 Downtown Parking Study 19,848.47
22302566 101161 6901 Citrograph Printing Company 108.75 Carryover 101161 8703 Electronic Plan Review Equipment 5,000.00 22301379 101162 6703 Avolve Software Corp 35,331.25
Carryover 101162 6703 Electronic Plan Review Software 445,177.00 22302566 101162 6901 Citrograph Printing Company 543.75 Carryover 101162 8703 Electronic Plan Review Equipment 25,000.00 Carryover 101163 6005 Permits With The County Of San Bernardino 143,000.00 22301821 101163 6106 Webb Municipal Finance Llc 12,569.40 22302566 101163 6901 Citrograph Printing Company 217.50 Carryover 101163 8703 Electronic Plan Review Equipment 25,000.00 22200529 101164 6106 Environment Plan Dvlpmnt Solutions Inc 6,042.36 22211967 101164 6106 Michael Baker International 147,162.70 22301007 101164 6106 Keyser Marston Associates Inc 49,085.00 Carryover 101164 6106 On-Call Planning Services 166,603.55 22211978 101164 6107 Enviromine Inc 1,860.25
22302576 101164 6107 Environment Plan Dvlpmnt Solutions Inc 72,145.00 22211681 101164 6107 Lilburn Corporation 1,027.00
22212473 101164 6107 Lilburn Corporation 10,007.25
22300666 101164 6107 Lsa Associates Inc 41,767.78
22300667 101164 6107 Lsa Associates Inc 1,966.16
22301813 101164 6107 Michael Baker International 68,442.50 22302225 101164 6107 Michael Baker International 123,376.25 22301129 101164 6107 Moore Iacofano Goltsman Inc 7,419.75 22301978 101164 6107 Moore Iacofano Goltsman Inc 36,402.03 22302357 101164 6107 Moore Iacofano Goltsman Inc 68,933.46 22302566 101164 6901 Citrograph Printing Company 1,087.50 Carryover 101164 8703 Electronic Plan Review Equipment 30,000.00 $ 1,572,632.66

LIBRARY
Carryover 101190 8501 Boiler Replacement $ 350,000.00
Carryover 101190 8503 Cash Match For Grant Funds 220,613.00 $ 570,613.00
ACCT. #
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL

Page 1 of 5 ends

Redlands City CouncilDecember 19, 2023

Redlands City Council
December 19, 2023