Agenda packet — Redlands City Council, July 2, 2024 (part 2 of 4)

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
277 of 864
REV FY23/24 FY24/25 FY25/26 FY26/27 FY27/28 FY28/29
Chino 5.91% $ 2,406,847 $ 2,432,902 $ 2,487,189 $ 2,557,855 $ 2,627,485 $ 2,717,298 12,822,729$ Chino Hills 4.89% $ 1,991,452 $ 2,013,011 $ 2,057,928 $ 2,116,398 $ 2,174,011 $ 2,248,322 10,609,669$ Colton 3.37% $ 1,372,432 $ 1,387,290 $ 1,418,245 $ 1,458,540 $ 1,498,245 $ 1,549,457 7,311,776$ Fontana 13.57% $ 5,526,382 $ 5,586,207 $ 5,710,856 $ 5,873,112 $ 6,032,991 $ 6,239,210 29,442,375$ Grand Terrace 0.81% $ 329,872 $ 333,443 $ 340,884 $ 350,569 $ 360,112 $ 372,421 1,757,430$ Highland 3.55% $ 1,445,737 $ 1,461,388 $ 1,493,997 $ 1,536,444 $ 1,578,269 $ 1,632,218 7,702,316$ Loma Linda 1.60% $ 651,600 $ 658,654 $ 673,351 $ 692,482 $ 711,333 $ 735,647 3,471,466$ Montclair 2.38% $ 969,255 $ 979,748 $ 1,001,609 $ 1,030,067 $ 1,058,107 $ 1,094,276 5,163,806$ Ontario 11.47% $ 4,671,157 $ 4,721,724 $ 4,827,083 $ 4,964,229 $ 5,099,366 $ 5,273,672 24,886,075$ Rancho Cucamonga 11.01% $ 4,483,822 $ 4,532,361 $ 4,633,495 $ 4,765,141 $ 4,894,858 $ 5,062,174 23,888,029$ Redlands 4.57% $ 1,861,132 $ 1,881,280 $ 1,923,258 $ 1,977,901 $ 2,031,744 $ 2,101,193 9,915,376$ Rialto 6.54% $ 2,663,415 $ 2,692,247 $ 2,752,321 $ 2,830,520 $ 2,907,572 $ 3,006,959 14,189,619$ San Bernardino 14.17% $ 5,770,732 $ 5,833,203 $ 5,963,362 $ 6,132,792 $ 6,299,740 $ 6,515,077 30,744,175$ Upland 4.97% $ 2,024,032 $ 2,045,943 $ 2,091,596 $ 2,151,022 $ 2,209,577 $ 2,285,105 10,783,243$ Yucaipa 3.43% $ 1,396,867 $ 1,411,989 $ 1,443,496 $ 1,484,508 $ 1,524,919 $ 1,577,044 7,441,956$ County/Valley 7.76% $ 3,160,260 $ 3,194,471 $ 3,265,751 $ 3,358,537 $ 3,449,964 $ 3,567,890 16,836,613$ Total Valley Region 100.00% $ 40,724,997 $ 41,165,862 $ 42,084,421 $ 43,280,116 $ 44,458,294 $ 45,977,963 216,966,656$ Measure I Local Pass-through Program

VALLEY SUBAREA
Population
Distribution
Percentage
Total FY24/25
through FY28/29
Valley Subarea
Estimated Annual Local Pass-Through Amount
REVISED REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR FY2023/2024 thru FY2028/2029 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
278 of 864
City Council Meeting I. 12.

DATE: 07/02/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Approve the Professional Services Agreement with ALS Group USA, Corp. for sampling and special analytical services with an initial one (1) year term in the amount of $34,000, with options to extend for two (2) additional one-year terms, for a total potential amount not-to-exceed $102,000. Determine that this action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Harris) MOTION(S):

If City Council determines the staff recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:

I move that City Council determine approval of a Professional Services Agreement with ALS Group USA, Corp. is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act; and

1. I move to approve a Professional Services Agreement with ALS Group USA, Corp.

2. RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that City Council determine that approval of a Professional Services Agreement with ALS Group USA, Corp. is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act, and approve a Professional Services Agreement with ALS Group USA, Corp. for sampling and special analytical services with an initial term of one-year and an annual amount not-to-exceed $34,000, with options to extend for two (2) additional one-year terms for a total potential amount of $102,000.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
279 of 864
DISCUSSION:

The State of California and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are currently updating monitoring requirements for emerging contaminants such as perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). These requirements often impose the strictest standards for analysis, including preparation for sampling events and guidelines for sample collection. To fulfill current and future monitoring requirements, the City engages the services of a certified contracted laboratory to assist City staff with sampling and analyzing samples. In February 2024, staff issued a Request for Bids (RFB) for Laboratory Sampling and Special Analytical Services and received bids: from Babcock Laboratories, Inc. (Babcock), located in Riverside, and ALS Group USA, Corp. (ALS) in Irvine. After conducting a comprehensive review and analysis, staff determined that Babcock Laboratories did not acknowledge the bid addendum and was determined to be non-responsive. Therefore, staff concluded that ALS is the most responsive bidder. Staff recommends City Council approval of a Professional Service Agreement with ALS for an initial term of one year, with a not-to-exceed amount of $34,000. If approved, the Agreement may be extended for two (2) additional one-year terms, with a not-to-exceed amount of $34,000 each year, resulting in a total potential Agreement value of $102,000.

Approval of the Professional Service Agreement with ALS Group USA, Corp. is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act, since it can be seen with reasonable certainty that doing so will not result in any significant environmental impact.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council may deny the staff recommendation and provide alternate direction.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

N/A
SUBMITTED BY:

John R. Harris, Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
280 of 864
REVIEWED BY:

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

Jungjoon Park, Laboratory Manager
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year: FY 24/25
Appropriation Required Y/N: No
Amount: $10,500
Budgeted Y/N: Yes
Account No.: 501900
Discussion:

Sufficient funding is included in the FY 24/25 Water Service (501900) budget.

Fiscal Year: FY 24/25
Appropriation Required Y/N: No
Amount: $23,500
Budgeted Y/N: Yes
Account No.: 521900
Discussion:

Sufficient funding is included in the Fiscal Year 24/25 Wastewater Service (521900) budget.

Attachments
Bid Report
ALS Agreement
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
281 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
282 of 864
1 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2

AGREEMENT TO PERFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

This agreement for the provision of Laboratory Sampling and Special Analytical Servies (“Agreement”) is mad e and entered in this 2nd day of July, 20 24 (“Effective Date”), by and between the City of Redlands, a mun icipal corporation (“City ”) and ALS Group USA, Corp ., a Texas Corporation. (“Consultant”). City and Consultant are sometimes individually referred to herein as a “Party” and, together, as the “Parties.” In consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, City and Consultant agree as follows:

ARTICLE 1 – ENGAGEMENT OF CONSULTANT

1.1 City hereby engages Consultant to provide Laboratory Sampling and Special Analytical services for City (the “Services”).

1.2 The Services shall be performed by Consultant in a professional manner, and Consultant represents that it has the skill and the professional expertise necessary to provide the Services to City at a level of competency presently maintained by other practicing professional consultants in the industry providing like and similar types of Services.

ARTICLE 2 – SERVICES OF CONSULTANT

2.1 The Servi ces that Consultant shall perform are more particularly described in Exhibit “A,” titled “Scope of Servi ces,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

2.2 Consultant shall comply with applicable federal, state and local laws and regulati ons in the performance of this A greement including, but not limited to , any applicable State prevailing wage laws.

ARTICLE 3 – RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY

3.1 City designates John R. Harris, Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department Director, as City’s representative with respect to performance of the Services, and such person shall have the authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define City’s policies and decisions with respect to performance of the Services.

ARTICLE 4 – PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES

4.1 Contractor shall perform and complete the Services in a prompt and diligent manner in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “ A,” titled “ Scope of Services ,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

4.2 The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of one (1) year from the Effective Date of this Agreement (the “Initial Term”). The City shall have the option to extend the Initial Term of this Agreement by two (2) additional one -year terms (each, an “Extended Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
283 of 864
2 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2
Term”), on the same terms and conditions, by providing written notice to Consultant at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the Initial Term or any Extended Term.

4.3 If Consultant’s Services include deliverable electronic visual presentation materials, such materials shall be delivered in a form, and made available to Cit y, consistent with City Council-adopted policy for the same. It shall be the obligation of Consultant to obtain a copy of such policy from City staff.

ARTICLE 5 – PAYMENTS TO CONSULTANT

5.1 The compensation for Consultant’s performance of the Services shall not exceed the amount of Thirty-Four Thousand Dollars ($34,000) for the Services provided during the Initial Term. Should this Agreement be extended, the compensation for Consultant’s performance for the Services shall not exceed the amount of Thirty-Four Thousand Dollars ($34,000) for the first Extended Term; and Thirty-Four Thousand Dollar s ($34,000) for the second Extended Term, bringing the total possible amount of compensation to a not -to-exceed amount of One Hundred Two Thousand Dollar s ($102,000). For the Initial Term and each Extended Term, City shall pay Consultant on a time and materials basis up to the not to not -to-exceed amount in accordance with the rates specified in Exhibit “ B,” titled “Price and Fee Bid,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Furthermore, the Unit Price set forth in Exhibit “B” shall be increased July 1 of each calendar year, by an amount reasonably equal to the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index – All Urban Users (Riverside – San Bernardino – Ontario) over the prior year.

5.2 Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the Services performed during the preceding month. Consultant’s invoices shall include a brief description of the Services performed, the dates the Services were performed, the number of hours spent and by whom, and a description of reimbursable expenses related to the Services. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) days after receipt and approval by City of Consultant’s invoice.

5.3 Any n otice or other communication required, or which may be given, pursuant to this Agreement, shall be in writing. Any such notice shall be deemed delivered (i) on the date of delivery in person; (ii) five (5) days after deposit in first class registered mail, with return receipt requested; (iii) on the actual delivery date if deposited with an overnight courier; or (iv) on the date sent by facsimile or electronic mail transmission (including PDF), if confirmed with a copy sent contemporaneously by first class, certified, registered or express mail; in each case properly posted and fully prepaid to the appropriate address set forth below, or such other address as a Party may provide notice in accordance with this section:

CITY: CONSULTANT:

City Clerk Javier Robles, Laboratory Director
City of Redlands ALS Group USA, Corp.
35 Cajon Street 3337 Michelson Drive, Suite CN-750
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
284 of 864
3 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2
P.O. Box 3005 (mailing) Irvine, CA, 92612
Redlands, CA 92373 [email protected]
[email protected] Phone: 714-730-6239
Phone: (909) 798-7531 Fax: 714-730-6462

ARTICLE 6 – INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION

6.1 The following insurance coverage required by this Agreement shall be maintained by Consultant for the duration of its performance of the Services. Consultant shall not perform any Services unless and until the required insurance listed below is obtained by Consultant. Consultant shall provide City with certificates of insurance and endorsements evidencing such insurance prior to commencement of the Services. Insurance policies shall include a provision prohibiting cancellation or modification of the policy except upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to City.

A. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability insurance in the amount that meets statutory requirements with an insurance carrier acceptable to City, or certification to City that Consultant is self -insured or exempt from the workers’ compensation laws of the State of California. Consultant shall execute and provide City with Exhibit “C,” titled “Workers’ Compensation Insurance Certification,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, prior to performance of the Services.

B. Comprehensive General L iability insurance with carriers acceptable to City in the minimum amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence and Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate , for public liability, property damage and personal injury is required. City shall be named as an additional insured and such insurance shall be primary and non -contributing to any insurance or self -insurance maintained by City.

C. Consultant shall secure and maintain professional liability insurance throughout the term of this Agreement in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per claim made.

D. Business Auto L iability coverage, with minimum limits of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence, combined single limit bodily injury liability and property damage liability. This coverage shall include all Consultant owned vehicles used in connection with Consultant’s provision of the Services, hired and non -owned vehicles, and employee non-ownership vehicles. City shall be named as an additional insured and such insurance shall be primary and non -contributing to any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City.

E. Consultant is expressly prohibited from assigning or subcontracting any of the Services without the prior written consent of City. In the event of mutual agreement by the Parties to assign or subcontract a portion of the Services, Consultant shall add such assignee or subcontractor as an additional insured to the insurance policies Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
285 of 864
4 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2
required hereby and provide City with the insurance endorsements prior to any Services being performed by the assignee or subcontractor.

6.2 Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City and its elected and appointed officials, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, losses or liability, including attorneys’ fees, arising from injury or death to persons or damage to property occasioned by any negligent act or omission by, or the willful misconduct of, Consultant, or its officers, employees and agents in performing the Services.

ARTICLE 7 – CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

7.1 Consultant covenants and represents that it does not have any investment or interest in any real property that may be the subject of this Agreement or any other source of income, interest in real property or investment that would be affected in any manner or degree by the performance of Consultant’s Services. Consultant further covenants and represents that in the performance of its duties hereunder, no person having any such interest shall perform any Services under this Agreement.

7.2 Consultant agrees it is not a designated employee within the meaning of the Political Reform Act because Consultant:

A. Does not make a governmental decision whether to:

(i) approve a rate, rule or regulation, or adopt or enforce a City law; (ii) issue, deny, suspend or revoke any City permit, license, application, certification, approval, order or similar authorization or entitlement; (iii) authorize City to enter into, modify or renew a contract; (iv) grant City approval to a contract that requires City approval and to which City is a party, or to the specifications for such a contract; (v) grant City approval to a plan, design, report, study or similar item; (vi) adopt, or grant City approval of, policies, standards or guidelines for City or for any subdivision thereof.

B. Does not serve in a staff capacity with City and in that capacity, participate in making a governmental decision or otherwise perform the same or substantially the same duties for City that would otherwise be performed by an individual holding a position specified in City’s Conflict of Interest Code under Government Code section 87302.

7.3 In the event City determines that Consultant must disclose its financial interests, Consultant shall complete and file a Fair Political Practices Commission Form 700, Statement of Economic Interests , with the City Clerk’s office pursuant to the written instructions provided by the City Clerk.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
286 of 864
5 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2

ARTICLE 8 – GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 In the event any action is commenced to enforce or interpret any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement the prevailing Party shall, in addition to any costs and other relief, be entitled to the recovery of its reasonable attorneys’ fees, including fees for the use of in-house counsel by a Party.

8.2 Consultant shall not assign any of the Services, except with the prior written approval of City and in s trict compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Any assignment or attempted assignment without such prior written consent may, in the sole discretion of City, result in City’s immediate termination of this Agreement.

8.3 Consultant is for all purposes under this Agreement an independent contractor and shall perform the Services as an independent contractor. Neither City nor any its agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or Consultant’s employees, except as herein set forth. Consultant shall supply all necessary tools and instrumentalities required to perform the Services. Assigned personnel employed by Consultant are for its account only, and in no event shall Consultant or personnel retained by it be deemed to have been employed by City or engaged by City for the account of, or on behalf of City. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent, nor shall Consultant have any authority, express or implied, to bind City to any obligation.

8.4 This Agreement may be terminated by City, in its sole discretion, by providing not less than five (5) days prior written notice to Consultant of City’s intent to terminate. If this Agreement is terminated by City, an adjustment to Consultant’s compensation shall be made, but (1) no amount shall be allowed for anticipated profit or unperformed S ervices, and (2) any payment du e Consultant at the time of termination may be adjusted to the extent of any additional costs to City occasioned by any default by Consultant. Upon receipt of a termination notice, Consultant shall immediately discontinue its provision of the Services and, within five (5) days of the date of the termination notice, deliver or otherwise make available to City, copies (in both hard copy and electronic form, where applicable) of project related data, design calculations, drawings, specifications, reports, estimates, summaries and such other information and materials as may have been accumulated by Consultant in performing the Services. Consultant shall be compensated on a pro-rata basis for Services completed up to the date of termination.

8.5 Consultant shall maintain books, ledgers, invoices, accounts and other records and documents evidencing costs and expenses related to the Services for a period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. Such books shall be available at reasonable times for examination by City at the office of Consultant.

8.6 This Agreement, including the Exhibits incorporated herein by reference, represents the entire agreement and understanding between the Parties as to the matters contained Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
287 of 864
6 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2
herein, and any prior negotiations, written proposals or verbal agreements relating to such matters are superseded by this Agreement. Except as otherwise provided for herein, an y amendment to this Agreement shall be in writing, approved by City and signed by City and Consultant.

8.7 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California , without regard to its conflicts of laws provisions. The Parties agree that all actions or proceedings arising in connection with this Agreement shall be tried and litigated only in the state courts located in San Bernardino County, California, and the federal courts located in Riverside County, California.

8.8 If one or more of the sentences, clauses, paragraphs or sections contained in this Agreement is declared invalid, void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the same shall be deemed severable from the remainder of this Agreement and shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remaining sentences, clauses, paragraphs or sections contained herein, unless to do so would deprive a Party of a material benefit of its bargain under this Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, duly authorized representatives of City and Consultant have signed in confirmation of this Agreement.

CITY OF REDLANDS ALS GROUP USA, CORP.

By: ___________________________ By: _________________________ Eddie Tejeda, Mayor Javier Robles, Laboratory Director

ATTEST:

___________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
288 of 864
7 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2
EXHIBIT "A"

SCOPE OF SERVICES

The Consultant must possess the skills, licenses, certifications, and professional expertise necessary to provide analytical services to the City at a level of competency comparable to other environmental testing laboratories in the industry. To achieve this, Consultant shall obtain certification from ELAP, NELAP, and approval from the EPA for all UCMR5 constituents.

Consultant must provide the City staff with updated or renewed laboratory certifications and Fields of Accreditation, including those of subcontracted laboratories.

Moreover, Consultant is required to conduct at least 95% of lab analyses listed in the fee schedule in-house, without subcontracting. This ensures direct oversight and accountability for the quality of results.

The quality of laboratory tests shall adhere to the NELAP-Approved Quality Assurance Manual and a strict Code of Ethics. This includes conducting minimum detection limit tests (MDLs) below the Method Reporting Limit (MRL), Laboratory Control Sample (LCS), and Matrix Spike (MS) tests with each sample batch, where applicable.

Maintaining accreditation, a laboratory license, and auditing recent third-party reports on quality systems and proficiency tests are mandatory for Consultant.

Additionally, Consultant must maintain a comprehensive Quality Assurance (QA) Manual, SOPs for laboratory procedures, Method Acceptance Limits (MALs), and MDLs to ensure precision and accuracy in analysis.

Documentation of Consultant's investments in technological advancements and instrument dedication, especially for critical analyses such as Nitrate Perchlorate, PFAS, and Volatile, is crucial.

Utilizing a web-based data reporting system with Environmental Data Transfer (EDT) and Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) capabilities ensures efficient data transfer.

Consultant should provide well-labeled containers with appropriate preservatives, ice packs, and packaging materials for sample transportation, along with a customized chain of custody form for each sample point.

Reports delivered to the City must be accurate and timely, meeting a ten (10) business day timeframe, or sooner for rush samples, with prompt communication if turnaround times cannot be met.

The report should include essential information such as project details, sample dates, analyst names, analysis results, and any quality control failures.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
289 of 864
8 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2
Consultant staff must promptly notify City staff of abnormal data results within 48 hours, with certain analyses requiring notification within 24 hours.

When providing sampling services, Consultant staff must strictly adhere to method and regulatory requirements to ensure data integrity.

Reports should be provided in PDF and CSV formats, with detailed descriptions of sample kits and adherence to analytical hold times.

Order acknowledgment, work order organization, and effective communication with the City on any issues are essential for seamless service delivery.

Invoices should be submitted to the City within 30 days of report delivery, ensuring timely payment processing.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
290 of 864
9 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2
EXHIBIT "B"
Price and Fee Bid

ITEM
NO.

EST.

QTY DRINKING WATER TEST METHOD UNIT
PRICE
*EXTENDED
PRICE
(QTY X UNIT
PRICE)
1 15 PFAS SWRCB - Potable
Wells Appendix C $275.00 $4,125.00
2 15 PFAS SWRCB - Potable
Sampling Appendix D $350.00 $5,250.00
3 1 UCMR 5 - Lithium
EPA 200.7,
SM3120B (2017),
SM 3120 B-99 or
ASTM D1976-20
$20.00 $20.00
4 1 UCMR 5 - PFAS (29
Contaminants) Appendix B $400.00 $400.00
5 1 Item 3 and 4 as a
package
Method indicated
in items 3-4 $400.00 $400.00
6 1 EPA UCMR 5 Sampling
(Per sample site) Appendix D $350.00 $350.00
DRINKING WATER SUBTOTAL $1,795.00 $10,545.00
ITEM
NO.

EST.

QTY WASTEWATER TEST METHOD UNIT
PRICE
*EXTENDED
PRICE
(QTY X UNIT
PRICE)
7 16 PFAS SWRCB -
Wastewater Per
Sampling Site
Appendix C $275.00 $4,400.00
8 16 PFAS SWRCB -
Wastewater Composite
Sampling per Site
Appendix D $350.00 $5,600.00
9 4 PFAS SWRCB -
Wastewater Sludge
Sampling per Site
Appendix D $295.00 $1,180.00
10 2 Annual: Current List
126 Priority Pollutants
(EPA 40 CFR Part 423,
Appendix - Partial
Priority Pollutant List).

Exclude Asbestos
Refer to EPA 40
CFR Part 423,
Appendix A -
Partial Priority
Pollutant List
$1,120.00 $2,240.00
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
291 of 864
10 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2
11 6 Quarterly Partial
Priority Pollutants List
(To be determined by
detected pollutants from
Line Item #10)
Refer to EPA 40
CFR Part 423,
Appendix A -
Partial Priority
Pollutant List
$1,120.00 $2,240.00
12 8 Priority Pollutants
Composite Sampling per
site
Appendix D $350.00 $350.00
13 1 PFAS SWRCB -
Collection System
(Industrial Waste)
Appendix C $275.00 $275.00
14 1 PFAS SWRCB -
Collection System
(Industrial Waste)
Sampling per Site
Appendix D $350.00 $350.00
WASTEWATER SUBTOTAL $4,135.00 $23,565.00

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
292 of 864
11 I:\cmo\Agreements\ALS Group USA-FY23-0118.docx-msv2
EXHIBIT "C"

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE CERTIFICATION

Every employer, except the State, shall secure the payment of compensation in one or more of the following ways:

(a) By being insured against liability to pay compensation by one or more insurer s duly authorized to write compensation insurance in this State. (b) By securing from the Director of Industrial Relations, a certificate of consent to self-insure, either as an individual employer , or as one employer in a group of employers, which may be given upon furnishing proof satisfactory to the Director of Industrial Relations of ability to self -insure and to pay any compensation that may become due to his or her employees.

CHECK ONE

_____I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workers’ Compensation or to undertake self - insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work and activities required or permitted under this Agreement. (Labor Code §1861).

_____I affirm that at all times, in performing the work and activities required or permitted under this Agreement, I shall not employ any person in any manner such that I become subject to the workers’ compensation laws of California. However, at any time, if I employ any person such that I become subject to the workers’ compensation laws of California, immediately I shall provide the City with a certificate of consent to self -insure, or a certification of workers’ compensation insurance.

I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the information and representations made in this certificate are true and correct.

ALS Group USA, Corp.

By: Date: ___________________
Javier Robles, Laboratory Director

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
293 of 864
City Council Meeting J. 1.

DATE: 07/02/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Discussion and Possible Action Related to the use of Zoom and Teleconferencing under Assembly Bill (AB) 2449 for City Council and Planning Commission meetings (Council Member Saucedo) MOTION:

The City Council may consider one of the following motions:

I move that the City Council authorize the continued use of Zoom for all meetings of the City Council and Planning Commission and to comply with teleconferencing requirements as described in AB 2449.

OR
I move that the City Council authorize the continued use of Zoom only when City Council members or Planning Commissioners are complying with the requirements of AB 2449.

OR
I move that the City Council discontinue the use of Zoom for all meetings of the City Council and the Planning Commission (and all commissions, boards and committees) and only allow remote participation under the Brown Act's traditional, pre-pandemic teleconferencing rules.

RECOMMENDATION:

Council Member Saucedo is recommending this item for City Council consideration.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
294 of 864
DISCUSSION:

At the request of Council Member Saucedo, this item has been added to the agenda to allow for Council discussion regarding the use of Zoom and remote participation under AB 2449 for City Council and Planning Commission meetings.

On July 25, 2023, the City Council authorized the continued use of Zoom and allowed remote participation pursuant to AB 2449 for all meetings of the City Council and Planning Commission.

Council Member Saucedo is proposing the following 3 options for council consideration.

OPTION 1: Maintain the Status Quo
Zoom will continue to be utilized for meetings of the City Council and Planning Commission and to allow Council Members and Planning Commissioners to utilize AB 2449 for remote participation.

OPTION 2: Zoom Available Only for AB2449 Compliance
Zoom will not be available for meetings of the City Council or the Planning Commission, except when a member must participate remotely pursuant to AB 2449. Under AB 2449, a member of the City Council or the Planning Commission may participate in a meeting remotely if the need for the remote participation meets the standards under "Just Cause" or "Emergency Circumstances" and subject to certain conditions including allowing members of the public to participate remotely.
"Just Cause" is defined as the following:

Childcare or caregiving of a child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, or domestic partner that requires a Council Member to participate remotely.

A contagious illness that prevents a member from attending in person.

A need related to a physical or mental disability
Travel while on official business of the City Council or another state or local agency.
"Emergency Circumstances" is defined as a physical or family medical emergency that prevents a Council Member from attending in person.

Additionally, the criteria below must be met to participate remotely under AB2449:

At least a quorum of the members of the City Council must participate from an open and public, singular physical location clearly identified on the agenda;

1. Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
295 of 864
At least one of the following shall be provided as a means by which the public may remotely hear and visually observe the meeting, and remotely address the legislative body:

A two-way audiovisual platform.i.

A two-way telephonic service and a live webcasting of the meeting.ii.

2. In order to provide remote public participation via a two-way audiovisual or telephonic live webcasting service, a Council Member would notify staff by 12:00 PM the Wednesday before a regularly scheduled meeting, and 48 hours prior to the posting of a special meeting agenda.

OPTION 3: Discontinue Zoom for any Public Meetings; Remote Participation only pursuant to the Traditional Brown Act Teleconferencing Rules
The Council may elect to discontinue the use of Zoom for City Council and Planning Commission meetings and require in-person participation in public meetings. Under this option, members of the City Council, and Planning Commission may only participate remotely in meetings pursuant to the traditional Brown Act teleconferencing rules which require that remote participation occur as follows:

Teleconferencing is via some form of video or audio (i.e., conference call or call-in number) technology or both;
At least a quorum of the City Council must participate in teleconferencing locations within the City of Redlands.

Each teleconference location must be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting.

Agendas must be posted at each teleconference location.

Each teleconference location must be accessible and open to the public.

The agenda must provide the opportunity for the public to address the City Council directly at each teleconference location.

All votes must be by roll call.

Under option 3, remote participation by the public would not be possible. As in the past, the public would be able to participate in person, and submit comments via email and USPS mail to the City Clerk's office for distribution to the City Council. Meetings would continue to be televised and available online for real time viewing only.

For all options listed above, rather than participate remotely, Council Members can elect to miss a meeting with the notification of the absence recorded by the City Clerk in the meeting minutes.

Below are the results of a brief survey staff conducted to determine how many municipalities in the surrounding area exercise remote participation under AB 2449 for City Council meetings. Of the 14 municipalities contacted, 3 use AB2449, 11 follow traditional Brown Act rules.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
296 of 864
Municipality AB 2449 Participation

1.Fontana No

2.Palm Springs No

3.San Bernardino No

4.Ontario No

5.Chino No

6.Beaumont Yes

7.Riverside Yes

8.Victorville No

9.Anaheim No

10.Pasadena Yes

11.Rancho Cucamonga No

12.Montclair No

13.Moreno Valley No

14.Yucaipa No
SUBMITTED BY:

Council Member Saucedo
REVIEWED BY:

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

Jennifer Macias, Management Analyst
Fiscal Impact
Discussion:

There is no fiscal impact associated with this agenda item.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
297 of 864
City Council Meeting J. 2.

DATE: 07/02/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Discussion and possible action relating to the designation of a voting delegate and alternate(s) to the 2024 League of California Cities Annual Conference scheduled to occur October 16-18, 2024 in Long Beach (City Manager Duggan)
MOTION:

I move to designate _____________________ to serve as the voting delegate for the League of California Cities 2024 Annual Conference.

1. I move to designate ____________________ to serve as alternate voting delegates for the League of California Cities 2024 Annual Conference.

2. DISCUSSION:

The 2024 Annual Conference of the League of California Cities is scheduled for October 16-18 in Long Beach. An important aspect of the annual conference is the Annual Business Meeting where the League membership considers and takes action on resolutions that establish League policy.

In order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting, the City Council must designate a voting delegate. The City Council may also appoint up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote in the event that the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity.

Additional information is provided in the attached memorandum and voting procedures from the League of California Cities. As of the writing of this report, the 2024 Designation of Delegates and Alternates had not yet been received by the League of California Cities.

SUBMITTED BY:

Charles M. Duggan, Jr., City Manager
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
298 of 864
Attachments
League of California Cities Memo-2023
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
299 of 864
DATE: Wednesday, June 21, 2023
TO: Mayors, Council Members, City Clerks, and City Managers RE: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES
Lea
gue of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Sept. 20-22, 2023, Sacramento SAFE Credit Union Convention Center
Ever
y year, the League of California Cities convenes a member-driven General Assembly at the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo. The General Assembly is an important opportunity where city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy.

Taki
ng place on Sept. 22, the General Assembly is comprised of voting delegates appointed by each member city; every city has one voting delegate. Your appointed voting delegate plays an important role during the General Assembly by representing your city and voting on resolutions.

To cas
t a vote during the General Assembly, your city must designate a voting delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote if the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity. Voting delegates may either be an elected or appointed official.

Plea
se complete the attached voting delegate form and email it to Cal Cities office no later than Monday, August 28.

New t
his year, we will host a pre-conference information session for voting delegates to explain their role. Submitting your voting delegate form by the deadline will allow us time to establish voting delegate/alternate records prior to the conference and provide pre- conference communications with voting delegates.

Please view Cal Cities’ event and meeting policy in advance of the conference.

Acti
on by Council Required. Consistent with Cal Cities bylaws, a city’s voting delegate and up to two alternates must be designated by the city council. When completing the attached Voting Delegate form, please attach either a copy of the council resolution that reflects the council action taken or have your city clerk or mayor sign the form affirming that the names provided are those selected by the city council.

Pleas
e note that designating the voting delegate and alternates must be done by city council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor or city manager alone.

Council Action Advised by August 28, 2023
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
300 of 864
Conference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternates must be registered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. Conference registration is open on the Cal Cities website.

For a city to cast a vote, one voter must be present at the General Assembly and in possession of the voting delegate card and voting tool. Voting delegates and alternates need to pick up their conference badges before signing in and picking up the voting delegate card at the voting delegate desk. This will enable them to receive the special sticker on their name badges that will admit the voting delegate into the voting area during the General Assembly.

Transferring Voting Card to Non-Designated Individuals Not Allowed. The voting delegate card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but only between the voting delegate and alternates. If the voting delegate and alternates find themselves unable to attend the General Assembly, they may not transfer the voting card to another city official.

Seating Protocol during General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

The voting delegate desk, located in the conference registration area of the SAFE Credit Union Convention Center in Sacramento, will be open at the following times:

Wednesday, Sept. 20, 8:00 a.m.- 6:00 p.m. and Thursday, Sept. 21, 7:30 a.m.- 4:00 p.m. On Friday, Sept. 22, the voting delegate desk will be open at the General Assembly, starting at 7:30 a.m., but will be closed during roll calls and voting.

The voting procedures that will be used at the conference are attached to this memo.

Please share these procedures and this memo with your council and especially with the individuals that your council designates as your city’s voting delegate and alternates.

Once again, thank you for completing the voting delegate and alternate form and returning it to Cal Cities office by Monday, Aug. 28. If you have questions, please contact Zach Seals at [email protected].

Attachments:
• General Assembly Voting Guidelines
• Voting Delegate/Alternate Form
• Information Sheet: Cal Cities Resolutions and the General Assembly

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
301 of 864
General Assembly Voting Guidelines

1. One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy.

2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the voting delegate form provided to the Cal Cities Credentials Committee.

3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the voting delegate desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the voting delegate desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the General Assembly.

4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city’s voting card by providing a signature to the credentials committee at the voting delegate desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution.

5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in their possession the city's voting card and voting tool; and be registered with the credentials committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate nor alternate.

6. Voting Area at General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the credentials committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the General Assembly.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
302 of 864
2023 ANNUAL CONFERENCE

VOTING DELEGATE/ALTERNATE FORM
Please complete this form and return it to Cal Cities office by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Forms not sent by this deadline may be submitted to the Voting Delegate Desk located in the Annual Conference Registration Area. Your city council may designate one voting delegate and up to two alternates.

To vote at the General Assembly, voting delegates and alternates must be designated by your city council. Please attach the council resolution as proof of designation. As an alternative, the Mayor or City Clerk may sign this form, affirming that the designation reflects the action taken by the council.

Please note: Voting delegates and alternates will be seated in a separate area at the General Assembly. Admission to this designated area will be limited to individuals (voting delegates and alternates) who are identified with a special sticker on their conference badge. This sticker can be obtained only at the voting delegate desk.

1. VOTING DELEGATE
Name:

Title:

2. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _______________________________
Email: ______________________________

3. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _____________________________

ATTACH COUNCIL RESOLUTION DESIGNATING VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES OR ATTEST: I affirm that the information provided reflects action by the city council to designate the voting delegate and alternate(s).

Nam
e: ____________________________________ Email: _________________________________ Mayor or City Clerk: ________________________ Date: __________ Phone: ________________ (circle one) (signature)
Please complete and email this form to [email protected] by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
303 of 864
Sixty days before the
Annual Conference and
Expo, Cal Cities members
may submit policy
proposals on issues of
importance to cities. The
resolution must have the concurrence
of at least five additional member cities
or individual members.

How it works: Cal Cities
Resolutions and the General Assembly
General Assembly
General Resolutions
Policy Committees
Developing League of California Cities policy is a dynamic process that engages a wide range of members to ensure that we are representing California cities with one voice. These policies directly guide Cal Cities advocacy to promote local decision-making, and lobby against statewide policy that erodes local control.

The resolutions process and General Assembly is one way that city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy. Here’s how Resolutions and the General Assembly works.

The petitioned resolution
is an alternate method
to introduce policy
proposals during the
annual conference. The
petition must be signed by
voting delegates from 10% of member
cities, and submitted to the Cal Cities
President at least 24 hours before the
beginning of the General Assembly.

Petitioned Resolutions
The Cal Cities President
assigns general resolutions
to policy committees where
members review, debate,
and recommend positions for
each policy proposal. Recommendations are
forwarded to the Resolutions Committee.

Who’s who
The Resolutions
Committee includes
representatives from
each Cal Cities diversity
caucus, regional
division, municipal
department, policy
committee, as well as
individuals appointed by
the Cal Cities president.

Voting delegates
are appointed by each
member city; every city
has one voting delegate.

The General Assembly
is a meeting of the
collective body of
all voting delegates —
one from every
member city.

Seven Policy
Committees meet
throughout the year to
review and recommend
positions to take on
bills and regulatory
proposals. Policy
committees include
members from each Cal
Cities diversity caucus,
regional division,
municipal department,
as well as individuals
appointed by the Cal
Cities president.

During the General Assembly, voting delegates
debate and consider general and petitioned
resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions Committee.

Potential Cal Cities bylaws amendments are also
considered at this meeting.

Cal Cities policy
development is a
member-informed
process, grounded
in the voices and
experiences of city
officials throughout
the state.

For more information visit www.calcities.org/general-assembly Prior to the Annual Conference and Expo
Resolutions Committee
The Resolutions Committee
considers all resolutions.

General Resolutions approved
1 by either a policy committee
or the Resolutions Committee
are next considered by the General
Assembly. General resolutions not approved,
or referred for further study by both a policy
committee and the Resolutions Committee
do not go the General Assembly. All
Petitioned Resolutions are considered by the
General Assembly, unless disqualified.
2 • Voting delegates will receive increased communications to prepare them for their role during the General Assembly.
• The General Assembly will take place earlier to allow more time for debate and discussion.
• Improvements to the General Assembly process will make it easier for voting delegates to discuss and debate resolutions.

What’s new in 2023?
During the Annual Conference and Expo
1 The Resolution Committee can amend a general resolution prior to sending it to the General Assembly. 2 Petitioned Resolutions may be disqualified by the Resolutions Committee according to Cal Cities Bylaws Article VI. Sec. 5(f).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
304 of 864
City Council Meeting K. 1.

DATE: 07/02/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: LBA RVI-COMPANY XLVII, LLC APPLICANT
(Mayor to declare meeting open as a public hearing)
Public Hearing to consider Resolution No. 8606 for the following applications for an approximately four-acre parcel located at 2407 W.

Lugonia Avenue (APN: 0292-032-49-0000) within the Special Development (EV/SD) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan.

Planned Development No. 9 – A proposal to establish permitted uses, conditionally permitted, and development standards consistent with the Commercial Industrial (EV/IC) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow development of an off-street parking facility for trucks, trailers, cabs and other fleet vehicles. The project qualifies for exemption from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) and 153332 (Infill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines

Conditional Use Permit No. 1194 – A request for authorization to operate an off-street truck parking facility with
existing on-site improvements (paving, storm water detention facilities, landscaping, site lighting, fencing and gate) and the construction of a proposed 310 square-foot guard house with restroom facilities. The project qualifies for exemption from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) and 15332 (Infill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. c.
(Development Services Director Desatnik)
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
305 of 864
PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING:

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

Mayor calls upon Department Director for report.2.

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

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

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

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

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

7. Mayor closes the public hearing.8.

City Council considers the motion and votes.9.

MOTION(S):

If the City Council determines that the Planning Commission's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 8606 and approve Planned Development No. 9 and Conditional Use Permit No. 9 for 2407 West Lugonia Avenue.

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:

On April 23, 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed Planned Development No. 9 and voted 5 to 0 adopting a resolution recommending that the City Council approve Planned Development No. 9.

On May 28, 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed Conditional Use Permit No. 1194 and voted 5 to 0 adopting a resolution recommending that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit No. 1194.

BACKGROUND:

Project Description: The applicant is proposing to establish a private, secure, off-street parking lot and construct a 310 square-foot guard house building with two restrooms on an approximately 4-acre site. The parking lot is proposed to be used primarily to park cabs/tractors of semi-trucks or similar fleet vehicles and trailers, and the lot is not designated as required parking for any specific use in the area. Within the parking lot, 98 fleet vehicle (truck/trailer) storage spaces, two standard vehicle spaces and one accessible space is proposed. The project site is located at 2407 W. Lugonia Avenue (see Attachment A – Location Map and Aerial Photograph).

Background: In 2020, an off-street parking lot was proposed for the project site. At that Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
306 of 864
time, no structures were included in the proposal. The site improvements were limited to paving, landscaping, lighting, fencing and water quality basins. When the parking lot was originally proposed, the applicant explained that the purpose of the parking lot was to provide additional overflow parking for warehouse operators in the immediate area, such as Ashley Furniture, which could serve to reduce or minimize truck trips across the City and on-street parking in the area.

Within the Special Development District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EV/SD) the uses permitted within the Commercial Industrial (EV/IC) District include off-street parking is a permitted use within the EV/IC District. As a permitted use by right, with no structures proposed, the parking lot was approved and permitted without entitlements. The applicant now wishes to construct a guard house with restrooms on the project site. As this is considered new construction, entitlements are required, which will allow the City to review the project as a whole, and provide conditions of approval for the ongoing operation of the site.

ANALYSIS:

The proposal was fully evaluated in the Planning Commission staff report of April 23, 2024 (Attachment B-1) with additional analysis related to the Conditional Use Permit included in the Planning Commission staff report of May 28, 2024 (Attachment B-2).

A) General Plan
The project site is located in an area of the City designated for Commercial/Industrial land uses by the 2035 General Plan (see Attachment C). The “Commercial/Industrial” designation supports a variety of commercial and light industrial uses, and a significant portion of the northwest quadrant of the City is designated for commercial/industrial uses. The proposed use and activities will be consistent with the General Plan land use designation.

B) East Valley Corridor Specific Plan
The site is located within the Special Development (EV/SD) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (see Attachment D). The EV/SD District allows the uses permitted in the Administrative/Professional District (EV/AP); General Commercial (EV/CG); Commercial Industrial (EV/IC) district; Public Institutional District (EV/IP); and uses permitted in the Open Space District (EV/O).

Within the EV/SD new construction requires approval of a Planned Development application. The Planned Development application is quasi-legislative and requires City Council approval. In addition to the Planned Development Application, Within the EV/SD District, service uses which typically involve activities which could create noise or other nuisances affecting adjacent or surrounding properties require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed parking lot use has the potential to create nuisances affecting adjacent properties. Therefore, a Conditional Use Permit is required to properly establish this use, and to provide appropriate conditions of approval.

The project has been designed to comply with the requirements of the Commercial Industrial (EV/IC) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. The applicable design standards are included in the table below.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
307 of 864
design standards are included in the table below.

Development Standard Requirements Proposed
Lugonia Avenue building setback 30 feet minimum 55 feet Lugonia Avenue parking setback 15 feet minimum 21 feet
Rear Setback None required 560 feet
Side Yard Setback
- East side:
- West side:

None required 21 feet
280 feet
Floor Area Ratio 0.80 maximum 0.002
Site Landscaping (industrial uses) 15.0% minimum 16%
Existing Site Improvements: The project site is substantially developed currently and includes fences around the perimeter, a gate at the front driveway, a detention basin (for stormwater runoff), landscape and trees in the perimeter planters, light poles, and necessary utility connections (see Attachment E – Site Plan). A large planter area approximately 25 feet in depth at the front of the property provides some visual screening as viewed from Lugonia Avenue. The detention basin is also located at the front of the property. The project complies with the landscape area requirements for the site (a minimum of 15% is required for industrial uses). The subject property provides a landscape area of 25,877 square feet (or 16%) and exceeds the requirement. The existing trees placed around the site include Afgan Pine (Pinus eldarica), Brisbane Box (Tristania conferta), Crape Myrtle (Lagestroemia indica), and Southern Live Oak (Quercus virginiana. Landscaping plans are included as Attachment F.

Parking Lot Design: Due to the project’s specialized use for trucks and fleet vehicles, the parking lot striping exceeds the typical dimensions for passenger vehicle parking.

The project plans indicate that there will be 98 fleet vehicle parking stalls each with a depth of 53 feet and a width of 11 feet. These parking space dimensions can accommodate single semi-trucks (with a trailer), or two cab/tractors parked in tandem.

The parking lot also includes two standard parking spaces and one accessible space.

Drive aisles are shown with minimum dimensions of 65 feet.

Proposed Guard Structure: The proposal includes the construction of a single guard house totaling 310 square feet (31’ by 10’) that includes restrooms for employee and driver use. The proposed structure meets all setback and applicable development standards for the zoning district. The exterior of the building will be smooth metal siding (similar to other industrial guard structures within the City). Inside the guard house, there is an office and two unisex restrooms. Floor plans, elevations, and sample photographs are included as Attachment G.

Conditions of Approval: Conditions of approval are included to ensure that site operations do not become a nuisance to the public. Site development conditions of approval require maintenance of the fencing and landscaping around the perimeter of the site. Conditions pertaining to land use will prohibit: repair and maintenance of trailers and vehicles; storage of boats and recreational vehicles; or storage of hazardous materials. The intent is to limit the use only to operable fleet truck vehicles and trailer parking. No load sorting, processing, or palletizing activities are permitted on-site.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
308 of 864
Further, the conditions of approval prohibit the placement of portable toilets on-site and require the applicant to construct trash enclosures in conformance with City standards.

In addition, a condition specifies a revocation procedure (which is a standard requirement for all CUPs pursuant to RMC Section 18.192.100) and requires the project to be brought back to the Planning Commission for a compliance review in one-year.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the project qualifies for a categorical exemption from environmental review pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) and Section 15332 (Infill Development) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15303 pertains to the construction of small facilities and commercial structures not exceeding 10,000 square-feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use in urbanized areas. Section 15332 pertains to infill development projects on sites that are less than five acres that are consistent with the existing General Plan and Zoning Designations. The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment and qualifies for exemption from environmental review.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may continue the public hearing and direct staff to address any issues or bring back additional information; or

1. The City Council may continue the public hearing and direct staff to prepare findings supporting denial of this request.

2. 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
PREPARED BY:

Sean Reilly, Principal Planner
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
309 of 864
Attachments
Attachment A: Location Map and Aerial Photograph
Attachment B-1: April 23, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report Attachment B-2: May 28, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report Attachment C: General Plan Land Use Map
Attachment D: Zoning Map
Attachment E: Site Plan
Attachment F: Landscape Plans
Attachment G: Guard House Floor Plans and Elevations
Attachment H-1: Resolution No. 8606
Attachment H-2: Land Use Engineering Conditions of Approval Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
310 of 864

MOUNTAIN VIEW AVE

W LUGONIA AVE

ELM AVE

CURTIS ST

SUN AVE

SPADE DR

E GOULD ST

COMMERCE STCORPORATE DR ENTERPRISE DR

E COULSTON ST

E CURTIS LN

BRYN MAWR AVE

E HARDT ST RESEARCH DR
W 10 FRWY
E 10 FRWY

E VICTORIA AVE ALMOND AVE
Copyright nearmap 2015
OneStop.mxd
0 330 660
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.

April 8, 2024
.

Project Location
Location Map
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
311 of 864

W LUGONIA AVE
1480 2456
2470
13152354
1255
2415
1115
0 0
2419
2411
0 2401
1865
0 0
2407
Copyright nearmap
Aerial Photo
OneStop.mxd
0 75 150
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.

April 8, 2024
.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
312 of 864
City of Redlands

REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION

Planning Commission Agenda Item NO. 5.D.

Meeting Date: 04/23/2024
APPLICANT:

LBA RVI-COMPANY XLVII, LLC
(PROJECT PLANNER: SEAN REILLY, PRINCIPAL PLANNER)
PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on Planned Development No. 9 – A proposal to establish an off-street parking facility for trucks, trailers, and cabs on an approximately four-acre parcel and to construct a 310 square-foot guard house with restroom facilities. The subject property is located at 2407 W. Lugonia Avenue (APN: 0292-032-49-0000) within the Special Development (EV/SD) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. The project qualifies for exemption from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) and 15332 (Infill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

SYNOPSIS

1. General Plan
Designation: Commercial/Industrial

2. Existing Zoning: Special Development (EV/SD) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan

3. Surrounding Zoning:

North: Concept Plan No. 1
East: Specific Plan 42
South: Planned Development No. 4
West: Special Development (EV/SD) District

4. Existing Land Use: The property is currently in use as an off-street parking lot.

5. Surrounding Land
Use:

North: Warehouse/Distribution Center
East: Open Space/Southern California Edison Easement
South: Railroad, Flood Control and Warehouse/Distribution Center West: Non-conforming Single-Family Residential

6. Area/Topography: The site is relatively flat in topography.

7. Environmental
Assessment:

The project qualifies for exemption from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) and 15332 (Infill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

8. Socio-Economic/Cost
Benefit
Study:

This project is exempt from the Measure U requirement to prepare a Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study.

9. Planning Commission
Submittal Dates:
(A) Date Submitted:
(B) Date Accepted As Complete:
(C) Planning Commission Meeting:

October 19, 2023
March 4, 2024
April 23, 2024

PROPOSAL
The applicant is proposing to establish a private, secure, off-street parking lot and construct a 310 square-foot guard house building with two restrooms on an approximately 4-acre site. The parking lot is proposed to be used primarily to park the cabs/tractors of semi-trucks or similar fleet vehicles and trailers. Within the parking lot, 98 fleet vehicle (truck/trailer) storage spaces, two standard vehicle spaces and one accessible space is proposed.

The project site is located at 2407 W. Lugonia Avenue (see Attachment A – Location Map). The project site is located in an area designated as Commercial/Industrial in the Redlands General Plan (see Attachment B – General Plan Map) and is within the Special Development District (EV/SD) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (Attachment C – Zoning Map). The proposal also includes the necessary on-site improvements including trash enclosures, landscaping, lighting, and utility connections (see Attachment D – Site Plan).

BACKGROUND
5/13/24, 4:46 PM Print Agenda Item
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5474&rev_num=1&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 1/5 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
313 of 864
In 2020, an off-street parking lot was proposed for the project site. At that time, no structures were included in the proposal. The site improvements were limited to paving, landscaping, lighting, fencing and water quality basins.

When the parking lot was originally proposed, the applicant explained that the purpose of the parking lot was to provide additional overflow parking for warehouse operators in the immediate area such as Ashley Furniture, which could serve to reduce or minimize truck trips across the City.

Within the Special Development District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EV/SD) the uses permitted within the Commercial Industrial (EV/IC) District are permitted. Off-street parking is a permitted use within the EV/IC District. As a permitted use by right, with no structures proposed, the parking lot was approved and permitted without entitlements. The applicant now wishes to construct a guard house with restrooms on the project site. As this is considered new construction, entitlements are required, which will allow the City to review the project as a whole, and provide conditions of approval for the ongoing operation of the site.

ANALYSIS
A) General Plan Policies

The project is located in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) and has a land use designation as Commercial/Industrial on the General Plan Land Use Map, which supports a variety of commercial and light industrial uses. The 2035 General Plan states that this land use category includes flex commercial space as well as business parks, and supports uses such as auto services, commercial retail and services, and manufacturing.

The proposed parking lot will be compatible with the intent of the Commercial/Industrial land use designation.

The surrounding uses include warehouses, retail, and light industrial uses. The proposed use is consistent with goals and policies of the General Plan, including:
4-P.19: Provide lands to accommodate a wide range of light industrial uses including research and development, manufacturing, agricultural processing, and logistics near transportation corridors in areas where low- to moderate intensity operations would be sufficiently buffered. 4-P.20: Provide for the concentration of office, industrial, and commercial uses in appropriate locations near transportation corridors to encourage the development of employment centers and reduce the potential for land use conflicts with sensitive uses.
4-A.16: Improve vehicular accessibility, traffic flow, and parking availability as well as pedestrian access and amenities within office, commercial, and industrial areas.

The applicant is proposing an off-street parking area, which is located in a portion of the City that is heavily developed with warehouse and distribution uses. Trucks associated with these uses often travel through the City to be parked in other locations. By providing this off-street parking area near a concentration of warehouse uses and adjacent to transportation corridors, truck trips through other parts of the City may be limited, non-compliant parking on City streets may be reduced, and areas with primarily residential development will be avoided.

B) East Valley Corridor Specific Plan
The site is located within the Special Development (EV/SD) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (see Attachment C), which is intended to provide flexibility in site design in order to achieve a more economical and efficient use of the land. The EV/SD District allows the uses permitted in the Administrative/Professional District (EV/AP); General Commercial (EV/CG); Commercial Industrial (EV/IC) district; Public Institutional District (EV/IP); and uses permitted in the Open Space District (EV/O).

The proposed off-street parking lot is permitted in the Commercial Industrial (EV/IC) zoning district. The Special Development District does not have traditional development standards as outlined in other zoning districts; instead, the district allows the applicant to propose development standards provided that they comply with Chapter 4: Community Design Guidelines of the EVCSP. The applicable development standards are included in the table below. The project site plan is included as Attachments D. 5/13/24, 4:46 PM Print Agenda Item
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5474&rev_num=1&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 2/5 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
314 of 864

Table 1. Summary of Development Standards
Development Standard Requirement Proposed
Lugonia Avenue building setback 30 feet 55 feet
Lugonia Avenue parking setback 15 feet 21 feet
Rear Setback None 560 feet
Side Yard Setback:

East
West
None 21 feet
280 feet
Floor Area Ratio 0.80 max. 0.002
Site Landscaping 15% min. (industrial use) 16%
Parking and Circulation: The proposed project will provide off-street parking that is not designated as required parking for any specific use in the area. As such, there is no specific parking calculation or number of parking spaces required.

The parking lot is not intended for access or use by the public. Due to the project’s specialized use for trucks and fleet vehicles, the parking lot striping exceeds the typical dimensions for passenger vehicle parking. The project plans indicate that there will be 98 fleet vehicle parking stalls each with a depth of 53 feet and a width of 11 feet.

These parking space dimensions are capable of accommodating single semi-trucks, or two cab/tractors parked in tandem. The parking lot also includes two standard parking spaces and one accessible space. Drive aisles are shown with minimum dimensions of 65 feet.

There is one main entry into the site from Lugonia Avenue. This is a 40-foot-wide gated entry designed to accommodate two-way traffic in and out of the site. The gates are setback approximately 90 feet from the roadway and are constructed of black tubular steel and are eight feet tall.

Guard Shack: The proposed project includes the construction of a single accessory structure for a security guard. The guard shack will be 310 square-feet in total area (31’ by 10’) and meets all setback and lot coverage requirements for the zoning district. The exterior of the building is smooth metal siding, which is similar to other industrial guard shacks that have been installed elsewhere within the City. Within the proposed structure there is an office area and two restrooms. Floor plans, elevations, and a sample photograph of the proposed structure are included as Attachment E.

Landscaping: The proposed plant palette consists of a combination of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. The project complies with the landscape area requirements for the site (a minimum of 15% is required for industrial uses). The subject property provides a landscape area of 25,877 square feet (or 16%) and exceeds the requirement. The majority of the proposed trees were selected from the EVCSP recommended tree list which consist of Afgan Pine (Pinus eldarica), Brisbane Box (Tristania conferta), Crape Myrtle (Lagestroemia indica), and Southern Live Oak (Quercus virginiana).

Overall, the site will provide perimeter landscaping around the entire project site by utilizing a combination of shrubs, accent plants, trees, and groundcover (see Attachment F – Landscape Plans). While the site was initially improved with all the requisite landscaping space and planters, the perimeter landscaping does not currently include trees and shrubs (i.e., screening). To correct this, a condition of approval has been added requiring the applicant to install 15-gallon evergreen trees within the project’s east and west (interior sides) perimeter landscape planters spaced at 20-foot intervals. A condition also requires additional shrubs along the project’s east side perimeter landscaping (where currently there are none). Given the transparent nature of the perimeter chain link fencing, and the proposed active characteristics of the proposed use (essentially a parking lot), the additional trees and shrubs to achieve screening are appropriate.

Should the future use of the site change or evolve into an outdoor storage type of use (whether for motor vehicles, shipping containers, boats or RVs, other containers or materials of various types, etc.) then an opaque screen wall would be more appropriate, such as an 8'0" high CMU split-face wall or equivalent wall type of solid perimeter screening. At this time, however, the proposed project description and functional use of the property does not warrant such a retroactive improvement.
5/13/24, 4:46 PM Print Agenda Item
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5474&rev_num=1&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 3/5 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
315 of 864
Conditions of Approval: Conditions of approval are proposed for the project to ensure that site operations do not become a nuisance to the surrounding properties or the general public. In addition to the conditions of approval discussed above (for additional perimeter landscaping), conditions are included related to the use and activities on the site, a procedure for formal Revision to the entitlement (e.g., for new and other uses), a procedure for revocation of the entitlement, and requirements for other site improvements.

The conditions of approval prohibit repair and maintenance of trailers and vehicles onsite, storage of boats and recreational vehicles. Conditions prohibit heavy equipment storage and storage of hazardous materials. The intent is to limit the onsite uses to fleet vehicle truck and trailer parking. No load sorting, processing, or palletizing activities are permitted on-site. Further, the conditions of approval prohibit the placement of portable toilets on- site and require the applicant to construct trash enclosures in conformance with City standards.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the project qualifies for a categorical exemption from environmental review pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) and Section 15332 (Infill Development) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15303 pertains to the construction of small facilities and commercial structures, not exceeding 10,000 square-feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use in urbanized areas. Section 15332 pertains to infill development projects on sites that are less than five acres that are consistent with the existing General Plan and Zoning designations. The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment and qualifies for exemption from environmental review.

FINDINGS

1. That the proposed Planned Development is in conformity with the General Plan of the City.

The General Plan land use designation of the proposed development site is "Commercial/Industrial" which provides for certain types of commercial and light industrial uses, including flex commercial space as well as business parks, that may be compatibly located. The proposed off-street parking area is consistent with both the General Plan land use designation and applicable General Plan goals and policies, particularly those applying to the East Valley Corridor.

2. That the proposed Planned Development would not adversely affect the surrounding area or the Redlands community in general.

The proposed development site is generally surrounded by existing industrial and commercial development. Due to the presence of existing commercial and industrial development surrounding the project site, no inharmonious existing or reasonably foreseeable land uses are present in the vicinity. Furthermore, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare and will not be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. The proposed parking area is not open to the public and will serve to keep commercial vehicles in a secured parking area and off of public streets. The proposed uses is compatible with the surrounding area and all improvements necessary to adequately serve the new parking lot and new guard structure are existing or will be constructed as part of the development as required by the conditions of approval.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the above analysis and the findings, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1671 recommending approval of the proposed project to City Council.

MOTIONS
If the Planning Commission concurs with staff’s recommendation, the following motion has been provided:
“I move that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1671, recommending that the City Council Approve Planned Development No. 9.”
5/13/24, 4:46 PM Print Agenda Item
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5474&rev_num=1&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 4/5 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
316 of 864
Attachments
Attachment A: Location Map and Aerial Photograph
Attachment B: General Plan Land Use Map
Attachment C: Zoning Map
Attachment D: Site Plan
Attachment E: Accessory Structure Floor Plan and Elevations Attachment F: Landscape Plans
Attachment G-1: Resolution No. 1671
Attachment G-2 - Land Use Engineering Conditions of Approval 5/13/24, 4:46 PM Print Agenda Item
https://destinyhosted.com/print_ag_memo.cfm?seq=5474&rev_num=1&mode=External&reloaded=true&id=73352 5/5 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
317 of 864
City of Redlands

REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION

Planning Commission Agenda Item NO. 5. C.

Meeting Date: 05/28/2024
APPLICANT:

LBA RVI-Company XLVII, LLC
(PROJECT PLANNER: SEAN REILLY, PRINCIPAL PLANNER)
PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on Conditional Use Permit No. 1194 – A request for authorization to operate an off-street truck parking facility on approximately four acres located at 2407 W. Lugonia Avenue (APN: 0292-032-49-0000) within the Special Development (EV/SD) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. The project includes existing on-site improvements (paving, storm water detention facilities, landscaping, site lighting, fencing and gate) and a proposed 310 square-foot guard house with restroom facilities. The project qualifies for exemption from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) and 15332 (Infill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

SYNOPSIS

1. General Plan
Designation: Commercial/Industrial

2. Existing Zoning: Special Development (EV/SD) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan

3. Surrounding Zoning:

North: Concept Plan No. 1
East: Specific Plan 42
South: Planned Development No. 4
West: Special Development (EV/SD) District

4. Existing Land Use: The property is currently in use as an off-street parking lot

5. Surrounding Land Use:

6. Area/Topography: The site is relatively flat in topography.

7. Environmental
Assessment:

8. Socio-Economic/Cost
Benefit
Study:

This project is exempt from the Measure U requirement to prepare a Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study.

9. Planning Commission
Submittal Dates:
(A) Date Submitted:
(B) Date Accepted As Complete:
(C) Planning Commission
Meeting:
(A) Date Submitted: October 19, 2023
(B) Date Deemed Complete: March 4,
2024
(C) Planning Commission Meeting: May
28, 2024
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
318 of 864

PROPOSAL
The Planning Commission reviewed this project on April 23, 2024 (see background section below) for a Planning Development. Subsequent to this meeting, staff determined that this application also requires a Conditional Use Permit.

The applicant is proposing to establish a private, secure, off-street parking lot and construct a 310 square-foot guard house building with two restrooms on an approximately 4-acre site. The parking lot is proposed to be used primarily to park the cabs/tractors of semi-trucks or similar fleet vehicles and trailers.

Within the parking lot, 98 fleet vehicle (truck/trailer) storage spaces, two standard vehicle spaces and one accessible space are proposed. The project site is located at 2407 W. Lugonia Avenue (see Attachment A – Location Map). The project site is located in an area designated as Commercial/Industrial in the Redlands General Plan (see Attachment B – General Plan Map) and is within the Special Development District (EV/SD) District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (Attachment C – Zoning Map). The proposal also includes the necessary on-site improvements including trash enclosures, landscaping, lighting, and utility connections (see Attachment D – Site Plan).

The parking lot would be open for operation 24 hours daily. Drivers (i.e., employees of tenants or third parties) may also park their personal vehicles on the site. Noise to be generated from the site can be expected to include typical motor vehicle engines, brakes, doors and back-up alarms.

No other activities are proposed or would be authorized with this Conditional Use permit. Prohibited activities and uses would include any automotive repair or maintenance work, payload transfer or storage, storage of any other types of vehicles (e.g., boats, RVs, camping trailers, etc.), and other activities listed in Condition No. 3.

BACKGROUND
Within the EV/SD DIstrict new construction requires approval of a Planned Development application. The Planned Development application is quasi-legislative and requires City Council approval, and a recommendation from the Planning Commission. On April, 23, 2024, a Planned Development application for this property (Planned Development No. 9) was presented to the Planning Commission. The Commission voted 5-0 in favor of recommending approval to the City Council.

Within the EV/SD District, service uses which typically involve activities which could create noise or other nuisances affecting adjacent or surrounding properties require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed parking lot use has the potential to create nuisances affecting adjacent properties. Therefore, a Conditional Use Permit is required to properly establish this use, and to provide appropriate conditions of approval.

A detailed discussion and analysis of the project is included in the staff report for the April 23, 2024, Planning Commission meeting (see Attachment E). There are no significant changes proposed with this Conditional Use Permit; however, this report and attached resolution contain a summary of the project, findings specific to a Conditional Use Permit, and appropriate conditions to establish the use as required by the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan.

ANALYSIS
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
319 of 864
A) General Plan

The project site is located in an area of the City designated for Commercial/Industrial land uses by the 2035 General Plan (see Attachment B). The “Commercial/Industrial” designation supports a variety of commercial and light industrial uses, and a significant portion of the northwest quadrant of the City is designated for commercial/industrial uses. The proposal was fully evaluated in the Planning Commission staff report of April 23, 2024 (Attachment E), and the proposed use and activities will be consistent with the General Plan land use designation.

B) East Valley Corridor Specific Plan
Existing Site Improvements: The project site is substantially developed currently and includes fences around the perimeter, a gate at the front driveway, a detention basin (for stormwater runoff), landscape and trees in the perimeter planters, light poles, and necessary utility connections (see Attachment D – Site Plan). A large planter area approximately 25 feet in depth at the front of the property provides some visual screening as viewed from Lugonia Avenue. The detention basin is also located at the front of the property.

The project complies with the landscape area requirements for the site (a minimum of 15% is required for industrial uses). The subject property provides a landscape area of 25,877 square feet (or 16%) and exceeds the requirement. The existing trees placed around the site include Afgan Pine ( Pinus eldarica), Brisbane Box (Tristania conferta), Crape Myrtle (Lagestroemia indica), and Southern Live Oak (Quercus virginiana).

Parking Lot Design: Due to the project’s specialized use for trucks and fleet vehicles, the parking lot striping exceeds the typical dimensions for passenger vehicle parking. The project plans indicate that there will be 98 fleet vehicle parking stalls each with a depth of 53 feet and a width of 11 feet. These parking space dimensions can accommodate single semi-trucks (with a trailer), or two cab/tractors parked in tandem. The parking lot also includes two standard parking spaces and one accessible space.

Drive aisles are shown with minimum dimensions of 65 feet.

Proposed Guard House: The proposal includes the construction of a single guard house totaling 310 square feet (31’ by 10’) that includes restrooms for employee and driver use. The proposed structure meets all setback and applicable development standards for the zoning district. The exterior of the building will be smooth metal siding (similar to other industrial guard structures within the City). Inside the guard house, there is an office and two unisex restrooms. Floor plans, elevations, and sample photograph is included as Attachment G.

Conditions of Approval: Conditions of approval are included to ensure that site operations do not become a nuisance to the public. Site development conditions of approval require maintenance of the fencing and landscaping around the perimeter of the site. Conditions pertaining to land use will prohibit: repair and maintenance of trailers and vehicles; storage of boats and recreational vehicles; or storage of hazardous materials. The intent is to limit the uses only to operable fleet vehicle truck and trailer parking. No load sorting, processing, or palletizing activities are permitted on-site.

Further, the conditions of approval prohibit the placement of portable toilets on-site and require the applicant to construct trash enclosures in conformance with City standards. In addition, a condition specifies a revocation procedure (which is a standard requirement for all CUPs pursuant to RMC Section

18.192.100) and requires the project to be brought back to the Planning Commission for a compliance review in one-year.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
320 of 864
In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the project qualifies for a categorical exemption from environmental review pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) and Section 15332 (Infill Development) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Section 15303 pertains to the construction of small facilities and commercial structures, not exceeding 10,000 square-feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use in urbanized areas. Section 15332 pertains to infill development projects on sites that are less than five acres that are consistent with the existing General Plan and Zoning designations. The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment and qualifies for exemption from environmental review.

FINDINGS

1. That the proposed development will not adversely affect the applicable land use plans of the city.

The proposed land use will not adversely affect the land use plans of the City, as the proposal is consistent with the General Plan’s land use designation as Commercial/Industrial which provides for certain types of commercial and light industrial uses (including flex commercial space as well as business parks) that may be compatibly located. The Special Development District (EV/SD) of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan allows for a variety of commercial and light industrial uses including parking lots and transportation/logistics facilities. The proposal meets all applicable development standards of the EV/SD district (including those for parking spaces, on-site vehicle maneuvering, fences/walls, gates, landscape, lighting, and stormwater treatment). The project will not adversely affect the land use plans of the City.

2. That the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare.

The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. The proposed project includes a perimeter fence for security, on-site lighting, entrance gate for access control, detention basin for stormwater treatment, and landscaping. The proposed parking area is not open to the public and will serve to keep commercial vehicles in a secured parking area and off public streets. The project site has one existing driveway entrance which will serve the proposed use and will not alter Lugonia Avenue or neighboring properties. Lugonia Avenue is a public roadway that has the capacity to provide adequate vehicular access to the project site, and surrounding developments are substantially commercial and industrial in character.

3. That the proposed development will comply to the maximum extent feasible with the regulations of the city’s general plan, the applicable zoning district and the city’s development standards.

The proposed development complies, to the maximum extent feasible, with the City’s General Plan and zoning regulations. The proposal is consistent with the applicable development standards in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and the Redlands Municipal Code pertaining to new parking lots and transit facilities. The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area and all improvements necessary to adequately serve the parking facility and new guard structure are existing or will be constructed as part of the development as required by the conditions of approval.

4. That the proposed development is appropriate at the proposed location.

The proposed use is appropriate for the subject property because the transportation and parking facility (designed to accommodate large trucks and trailers) will be consistent with existing light industrial uses and warehouse uses in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Utilities and services in the area are adequate to serve the proposed use and development, and Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
321 of 864
adjacent roadways have the capacity to provide adequate vehicular access to the development.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the above analysis and findings, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1675 recommending approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit (in conjunction with Planned Development No. 9) to the City Council.

MOTIONS
“I move that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1675, recommending that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit No. 1194.”

Attachments
Attachment A: Location Map and Aerial Photograph
Attachment B: General Plan Land Use Map
Attachment C: Zoning Map
Attachment D: Site Plan
Attachment E: April 23, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report Attachment F: Guard House Floor Plans and Elevations
Attachment H-1: Resolution No. 1675
Attachment H-2: Engineering Conditions of Approval
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
322 of 864

W LUGONIA AVE

RESEARCH DR
1480
2456
2470
13152354
2470
1455
1255
2415
1115
0 0
0 2419
2351
0 2411
0 0
0 2401
1865
0 2250
0 2466
0 2407
1110
Copyright nearmap 2015
General Plan
Map
OneStop.mxd
0 130 260
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.

April 11, 2024
.

Project Location
Commercial/Industrial
Commercial/Industrial
Commercial/Industrial
Commercial/Industrial
Agriculture
Commercial/Industrial
Parks/Golf Courses
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
323 of 864
EV/SD
CP-1
SP42
P D 4

W LUGONIA AVE

RESEARCH DR
1480
2456
2470
1315
2354
2470
1455
1255
2415
1115
0 0
0 2419
2351
0 2411
0 0
0 2401
1865
0 2250
0 2466
0 2407
1110
Copyright nearmap 2015
Zoning Map
OneStop.mxd
0 130 260
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.

April 11, 2024
.

Project Location
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
324 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
325 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
326 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
327 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
328 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
329 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
330 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
331 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
332 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
333 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
334 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
335 of 864
GRAB BAR (3 PLACES) - GENERAL NOTE RR3
ANCHOR CLIP (4 PLACES) - NOTE S5
10 3" ROOF JACK - GENERAL NOTE RR1
SLIDING WINDOW - GENERAL NOTE W2
14 15
13 12
11 3" CORD ACCESS HOLE - GENERAL NOTE A1
25" DEEP SHELF (30 A.F.F.) - GENERAL NOTE A1
8 9
6 5
4 3
2 LEGEND:
1 36" x 80" SWING DOOR - GENERAL NOTE D1 & D2
CUTOUTS REQUIRED MUST BE SPECIFIED PRIOR TO B.I. G.

PRODUCTION RELEASE.

REQUESTED GRAB BARS. ANY OTHER BRACING POINTS OR

ALL RESTROOM EQUIPMENT TO BE SHIPPED LOOSE
FOR INSTALLATION ON SITE BY OTHERS. B.I. G. TO

PROVIDE BRACING HARD POINTS FOR SINK AND ANY
NOTE:
36" x 80" SWING DOOR - GENERAL NOTE D3
HVAC AIR HANDLER - MECH. NOTE M1
HVAC ROOF CONDENSER - MECH. NOTE M1
GUTTER w/DOWNSPOUTS
LOAD CENTER - ELECTRICAL NOTE E1
ELECTRICAL CABINET - ELECTRICAL NOTE E1
12" OVERHANG (3 SIDES) - NOTE R1
10 8
10 4
3 6
7 3
5 5
5 13
12 11
13 7
25" DEEP SHELF (38 A.F.F.) - GENERAL NOTE A1
30 A.F.F.
38 A.F.F.
38 A.F.F.
15 5
OSD OS
14 14
14 14
14 14
60" MIN ADA CLEAR

EXHAUST FAN
9 GFCI
(WP)
J J
J J
J J
J J
P
60" MIN ADA CLEAR
OS
31'-018" BASE

HMC CONSTRUCTION

REDLANDS GUARD BOOTH

SAMPLE FLOOR PLAN
Job: 11461
By:JRM / F.PLAN SAMPLE
Date: 6-16-23
SCALE: AS NOTEDNUMBER OF PAGES: 13
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES, INC.
9702 E. RUSH STREET
SOUTH EL MONTE, CA 91733-1730
(626) 448-1449
TM
SHEET
5 OF
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES ™
THESE PLANS, DRAWINGS, AND/OR CADD FILES ARE THE COPYRIGHTED WORK OF B.I.G.

ENTERPRISES AND IS A TRADEMARK OF B.I.G. ENTERPRISES. COPYING OR UNAUTHORIZED

USE OF THESE DESIGNS OR ITS LIKENESS WILL BE PROSECUTED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED UNDER APPLICABLE STATE AND FEDERAL LAW. ©
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES 1988 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
E2
3 E4
3 E1
2 E3
4 FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 1/2" = 1' - 0"
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
336 of 864
26'-0" [312"] NOMINAL SIZE - TYP
2" 3" 3"
27"
12"
27" 42"42"
41"
40"
10"
38"
4"
27'-8" [332"] O.A. SHIPPING LENGTH
36"
4"
36"
4" 4"
35"14"
3" ROOF JACK

EXHAUST FAN

REMOVABLE LIFTING EYE
(6 PLACES
SLOPED 1/4" PER FOOT

SINGLE GANG J-BOX

FOR CARD READER

HORIZONTAL SLIDING
WINDOW
GUTTER w/DOWNSPOUTS

RESTROOM PRIVACY
LOCKSET:

SARGENT

HARDWARE

DOUBLE GANG J-BOX

FOR WAP DEVICE
SINGLE GANG BOX WITH 1
2" CONDUIT

THRU TO DOOR CONTACT J-BOX
15 8" 15
8"
26'-314" [31514"] INCLUDES 1 5
8" CONT. INSULATION PANELS - TYP
7"
ALL
STEEL
WALL
ALL
STEEL
WALL
ALL
STEEL
WALL
ALL
STEEL
WALL
2" 2"12" 2" 2"
1 2" OVERLAP

DOWNSPOUT TO BE

TIED IN TO ON SITE

STORM SYSTEM BY
OTHERS
10'-0"
[120"]

SHIPPING
HEIGHT

HMC CONSTRUCTION

REDLANDS GUARD BOOTH
Job: 11461
By: RG Rev_A: 7-14-23
Date: 6-16-23
SCALE: AS NOTEDNUMBER OF PAGES: 13
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES, INC.
9702 E. RUSH STREET
SOUTH EL MONTE, CA 91733-1730
(626) 448-1449
TM
SHEET
2 OF
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES ™
THESE PLANS, DRAWINGS, AND/OR CADD FILES ARE THE COPYRIGHTED WORK OF B.I.G.

ENTERPRISES AND IS A TRADEMARK OF B.I.G. ENTERPRISES. COPYING OR UNAUTHORIZED

USE OF THESE DESIGNS OR ITS LIKENESS WILL BE PROSECUTED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED UNDER APPLICABLE STATE AND FEDERAL LAW. ©
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES 1988 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
E1 ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
337 of 864
3"
12'-0" [144"] MAX. SHIPPING WIDTH
36"
3"
3" 36"
3"
36"
7'-6" [90"]

CEILING
HEIGHT
A.F.F.
10'-0" [120"]
3"36"
3"
3" 36"
3"
36"
12" 12"

OVERFLOW SCUPPER
(2 PLACES)
10'-314" [12314"]
15 8" 15
8" 10'-0" [120"]
10'-314" [12314"]
15 8" 15
8"
ALL
STEEL
WALL
ALL
STEEL
WALL10'-0" [120"]

SHIPPING
HEIGHT
ALL
STEEL
WALL

DISCONNECT SWITCH
6" W x 9 1
2" H x 3" D
16 GA HVAC CHASEWAY

GFCI RECEPTACLE
w/ IN-USE COVER

EXTERIOR A/C UNIT TO

SHIP LOOSE FOR ON SITE
INSTALLATION BY OTHERS.
(SHOWN FOR REFERENCE)

DOWNSPOUTS TO BE

TIED INTO ON SITE

STORM SYSTEM BY
OTHERS (2 PLACES)
LIFTING EYE SPAN 9'-9" [117"] C.C.131
2" 131
2"

HMC CONSTRUCTION

REDLANDS GUARD BOOTH
Job: 11461
By: RG Rev_A: 7-14-23
Date: 6-16-23
SCALE: AS NOTEDNUMBER OF PAGES: 13
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES, INC.
9702 E. RUSH STREET
SOUTH EL MONTE, CA 91733-1730
(626) 448-1449
TM
SHEET
3 OF
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES ™
THESE PLANS, DRAWINGS, AND/OR CADD FILES ARE THE COPYRIGHTED WORK OF B.I.G.

ENTERPRISES AND IS A TRADEMARK OF B.I.G. ENTERPRISES. COPYING OR UNAUTHORIZED

USE OF THESE DESIGNS OR ITS LIKENESS WILL BE PROSECUTED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED UNDER APPLICABLE STATE AND FEDERAL LAW. ©
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES 1988 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
E2 ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" E4 ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
338 of 864
3"3" 27"42" 42"38"
2"
44"
2"
43"
3"
43"
3" ROOF JACK

EXHAUST FAN

REMOVABLE LIFTING EYE
(6 PLACES

HORIZONTAL SLIDING
WINDOW
SLOPED 1/4" PER FOOT

DOUBLE GANG J-BOX

FOR WAP DEVICE
15 8" 15
8"
ALL
STEEL
WALL
ALL
STEEL
WALL
2" 2"12"
ALL
STEEL
WALL
ALL
STEEL
WALL
ALL
STEEL
WALL
26'-0" [312"] NOMINAL SIZE - TYP
26'-314" [31514"] INCLUDES 1 5
8" CONT. INSULATION PANELS - TYP
10'-0"
[120"]

SHIPPING
HEIGHT
LIFTING EYE SPAN 12'-1012" [15412"] C.C.81
2" LIFTING EYE SPAN 12'-1012" [15412"] C.C. 131
2"
ALL
STEEL
WALL

HMC CONSTRUCTION

REDLANDS GUARD BOOTH
Job: 11461
By: RG Rev_A: 7-14-23
Date: 6-16-23
SCALE: AS NOTEDNUMBER OF PAGES: 13
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES, INC.
9702 E. RUSH STREET
SOUTH EL MONTE, CA 91733-1730
(626) 448-1449
TM
SHEET
4 OF
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES ™
THESE PLANS, DRAWINGS, AND/OR CADD FILES ARE THE COPYRIGHTED WORK OF B.I.G.

ENTERPRISES AND IS A TRADEMARK OF B.I.G. ENTERPRISES. COPYING OR UNAUTHORIZED

USE OF THESE DESIGNS OR ITS LIKENESS WILL BE PROSECUTED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED UNDER APPLICABLE STATE AND FEDERAL LAW. ©
B.I.G. ENTERPRISES 1988 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
E3 ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/2" = 1' - 0"
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
339 of 864
- Added Cost. Please inquire
for pricing
Color of choice.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
340 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
341 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
342 of 864
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

RESOLUTION NO. 8606

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS APPROVING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 9 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1194 ESTABLISHING THE USE AND AUTHORIZING THE

OPERATION OF A TRUCK AND TRACTOR-TRAILER PARKING FACILITY ON APPROXIMATELY FOUR ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 2407 WEST LUGONIA AVENUE.

WHEREAS, LBA RVI-Company XLVII, LLC (“Applicant”), has filed an application for Planned Development No. 9 and Conditional Use Permit No. 1194 requesting land use authorization to establish and operate a motor vehicle (truck) and tractor-trailer parking lot on 3.98 acres located at 2407 W. Lugonia Avenue (APN: 0292-032-49-0000) (the “Project”); and

WHEREAS, the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 40) requires an application for a Planned Development for new land uses and developments within the plan area, and the proposed type of land use is an allowable land use within the subject zoning district; and

WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 5116 allows a Planned Development application to be submitted as a single stage for the approval of a comprehensive and detailed site plan, and shall be “quasi-legislative” in nature subject to final review and approval by the City Council; and

WHEREAS, on April 23, 2024, following a legally noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council for Planned Development No. 9 to authorize the proposed land use in accordance with the provisions of the East Valley C orridor Specific Plan; and

WHEREAS, on May 28, 2024, following a legally noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council for Conditional Use Permit No 1194 to operate a operate a motor vehicle (truck) and tractor -trailer parking lot in accordance with the provisions of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan; and

WHEREAS, notice of the City Council’s public hearing for the Project was published in a newspaper of general circulation by the City Clerk; and

WHEREAS, on July 2, 2024 , 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 testimon y 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 Planned Development No. 9 subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibits “A,” and “B,” and based upon the following findings:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
343 of 864
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

1. That the proposed Planned Development is in conformity with the General Plan of the City.

2. That the proposed Planned Development would not adversely affect the surrounding area or the Redlands community in general.

The proposed development site is generally surrounded by existing industrial and commercial development. Due to the presence of existing commercial and industrial development surrounding the project site, no inharmonious existing or reasonably foreseeable land uses are present in the vicinity. Furthermore, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare and will not be inju rious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. The proposed parking area is not open to the public and will serve to keep commercial vehicles in a secured parking area and off of public streets. The proposed uses is compatible with the surrounding area and all improvements necessary to adequately serve the new parking lot and new guard structure are existing or will be constructed as part of the development as required by the conditions of approval.

SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Redlands hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 1194 for the Project subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibits “A,” and “B,” based upon the following findings:

1. That the proposed development will not adversely affect the applicable land use plans of the city.

The proposed land use will not adversely affect the land use plans of the City, as the proposal is consistent with the General Plan’s land use designation as Commercial/Industrial which provides for certain types of commercial and light industrial uses (including flex commercial space as well as business parks) that may be compatibly located. The Special Development District (EV/SD) of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan allows for a variety of commercial and light industrial uses including parking lots and transportation/logistics facilities. The proposal meets all applicable development standards of the EV/SD district (including those for parking spaces, on -site vehicle maneuvering, fences/walls, gates, landscape, lighting, and stormwater treatment). Th e project will not adversely affect the land use plans of the City.

2. That the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
344 of 864
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. The proposed project includes a perimeter fence for security, on-site lighting, entrance gate for access control, detention basin for stormwater treatment, and landscaping. The proposed parking area is not open to the public and will serve to keep commercial vehicles in a secured parking area and off public streets. The project site has one existing driveway entrance which will serve the proposed use and will not alter Lugon ia Avenue or neighboring properties. Lugonia Avenue is a public roadway that has the capacity to provide adequate vehicular access to the project site, and surrounding developments are substantially commercial and industrial is character.

3. That the proposed development will comply to the maximum extent feasible with the regulations of the city’s general plan, the applicable zoning district and the city’s development standards.

The proposed development complies, to the maximum extent feasible, with the City’s General Plan and zoning regulations. The proposal is consistent with the applicable development standards in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and the Redlands Municipal Code pertaining to new parking lots and transit facilities. The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area and all improvements necessary to adequately serve the parking facility and new guard structure are existing or will be constructed as pa rt of the development as required by the conditions of approval.

4. That the proposed development is appropriate at the proposed location.

The proposed use is appropriate at the subject property because the transportation and parking facility (designed to accommodate large trucks and trailers) will be consistent with existing light industrial uses and warehouse uses in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Utilities and services in the area are adequate to serve the proposed use and development, and adjacent roadways have capacity to provide adequate vehicular access to the development.

SECTION 3. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 2nd day of July, 2024. ______________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor

ATTEST:

______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
345 of 864
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

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 2nd day of July, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
346 of 864
5 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

EXHIBIT A

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

1. This permit/approval is for Planned Development No. 9 and Conditional Use Permit No. 1194 authorizing the construction and operation of a motor vehicle (truck) and tractor - trailer parking lot, related site and frontage improvements, and ancillary structures subordinate to the primary land use (such as guard/offic e structure) on 3.98 acres located at 2407 West Lugonia Avenue (APN: 0292-032-49-0000). This permit/approval allows the short-term parking of passenger vehicles only associated with the tenant(s), employees, and truck drivers associated with the tenant(s).

This approval shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission for compliance with these Conditions of Approval at twelve (12) months from the approval date.

2. Unless construction has commenced or the authorized use has been established, this approval shall automatically expire two (2) years from the date of City Council approval and shall amount to the forfeiture of all development entitlement.

3. This approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 1194 prohibits any other uses and/or activities not explicitly identified and included as permitted uses on the subject property.

Prohibited uses and activities shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
vehicle/trailer repair or maintenance activities; parking or storage of any Recreation Vehicle (RV), motor home, boat, camping trailer, or other recreational vehicles of any type; parking or storage of any personal or passenger vehicles not associated with the tenant(s) or truck drivers; engine/transmission repair or maintenance activities; wheel/tire repair or maintenance activities; painting or body work; vehicle washing or cleaning activities; storage or handling of any hazardous materials (generally, any substance or product that requires a Material Data Safety Sheet can be considered a hazardous material); truck/trailer loading or unloading activities; load sorting, processing, or palletizing activities; and similar or related uses or activities. Prior to establishing any other uses, the property owner or site operator is directed to contact the Planning Division for further information regarding allowable land uses.

4. There shall be no outdoor storage of any materials/products, shipping containers, temporary structures, temporary trailers functioning as office or service buildings, or heavy equipment located in the parking lot and surrounding areas.

5. All vehicles, trucks, and trailers associated with the use shall only be parked, staged, or idled on and within the subject property. Public streets, roads, alleys, or other private properties shall not be used for the parking, staging, or idling of vehicles/trailers that utilize the subject property or are otherwise associated with the tenant(s). Employees and truck drivers associated with the business or tenant(s) shall only park their personal vehicles within the subject property, and shall not utilize public right-of-way.

6. Trucks, trailers or fleet vehicles, which are inoperable, damaged or out of service may not be stored onsite and shall not occupy the site for more than a 30-day period.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
347 of 864
6 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

7. Modification of this land use authorization shall require a formal application for a Revision to be submitted to the Development Services Department, with review and approval by the Planning Commission (for Conditional Use Permit revision only), in accorda nce with the applicable provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code and/or the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP).

8. Revocation procedure: The Planning Commission may, after notice and public hearing, revoke approval of this permit/approval (CUP No. 1194) for noncompliance with any of its conditions.

A. Notice shall be mailed to the record owner or lessee of the subject property not less than twenty (20) days prior to giving a ten (ten) day public notice. The record owner or lessee notice shall set forth the noncompliance, and shall request appearance by the permittee at the time and place specified for the hearing, to allow them to show cause why this approval should not be revoked.

B. Notice shall be given as provided in RMC Section 18.192.040.

C. Within ten (10) days after the hearing, the Planning Commission may revoke or modify the conditions of approval or the entitlement. After revocation, or modification, the subject property shall conform to all regulations of the zone in which it is located.

D. Following the revocation of this entitlement by the city, no application for a Conditional Use Permit for the same or substantially the same use on the same or substantially same site shall be filed within six (6) months of the date of the denial or the revocation of the Conditional Use Permit.

9. Pursuant to Government Code 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 for those fees, dedications, reservations a nd exactions which are subject to Government Code 66020(a) has commenced to run on the date this project was approved by the City.

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 attac k, 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 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
348 of 864
7 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

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. The issuance of any permits shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP), including RMC Chapter 8.06 (Community Noise Control).

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

13. The applicant shall not make any modifications or changes during construction that are in conflict or contrary to the project’s approved site design, grading plan, landscaping plan, or building elevations without first consulting the Development Services D irector or designee. The Development Services Director is authorized to approve minor modifications to the approved project plans if such modifications shall achieve substantial compliance with said plans and conditions.

14. A copy of the approved Conditions of Approval shall be included on the cover page of the construction plans submitted to the Building Division.

15. No final inspection or certificate of occupancy shall be granted until all applicable conditions of approval have been satisfied.

16. The project site shall be kept in a weed and dust free condition throughout all periods of development.

17. Roof- and ground -mounted equipment shall be screened from public view on all sides subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director, prior to issuance of building permits. All required screening from public view, such as storage spaces, loading docks, and equipment, shall be architecturally integrated with the surrounding building design through the use of concrete, masonry, or other similar materials pursuant to Section EV4.0235(h) of the EVCSP. Solid walls within the buildable lot area shall not exceed a height of eight (8) feet from the highest finished grade. If the height of the wall is not sufficient, appropriate landscaping shall be required to screen the required areas from the freeway.

18. Transformer cabinets and commercial gas meters shall not be located within required setbacks and shall be screened from public view either by architectural treatment or with landscaping. Multiple electrical meters and panels shall be fully enclosed and incorporated into the overall architectural design of the building(s). Backflow preventers shall be enclosed with landscaping that will provide complete screening upon maturity. The location and method of enclosure or screening of this equipment shall be show n on the construction plans and landscape plans prior to building permit issuance. Location for said equipment shall be coordinated with the appropriate utility company (e.g., Southern California Gas Company or Southern California Edison). The applicant shall submit plans Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
349 of 864
8 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

showing details of screening subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director, prior to issuance of building permits.

19. The proposed guard shack for the project shall include a minimum of two indoor restrooms for use by on-site employees, truck drivers, and other persons associated with the tenant(s).

20. No portable toilets shall be placed, installed, or provided on-site.

21. Facility operations shall conform to the performance standards listed under Section EV4.0225 of the EVCSP.

22. The trash/refuse bin enclosure(s) or area(s) shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Section EV4.0230 of the EVCSP.

23. Before placing or constructing any signs on the property, Developer shall obtain a sign permit from the City and comply with the applicable sign code criteria. Sign locations and illumination are subject to review and approval under separate permit(s).

24. On-site lighting (including but not limited to poles, bollards, and any exterior building lighting) shall be designed to contain glare and illumination on -site. The illumination within the parking lot shall be a minimum of 0.5 -foot candle and illumination along all property lines of the project site shall not exceed 0.5 -foot candle. To ensure adherence to the Community Design Standards under Division 4 of the EVCSP, the lighting plan shall demonstrate compliance with the following requirements:
a. Parking lot lighting shall have a maximum height of 30 feet, and such light fixtures shall include shielding permanently attached to fixtures to contain illumination and prevent glare overspill onto abutting or nearby properties. b. Lighting shall be required at (i) pedestrian walkways and plazas, (ii) building entries, driveway entries and parking, and (iii) hazardous locations such as changes of grade and stairways which must be well -lit with lower -level supplemental lighting or additional overhead units.
c. All light fixtures are to be concealed source fixtures except for pedestrian-oriented accent lights.
d. Security lighting fixtures are not to project above the fences or roof line of the building and are to be shielded. The shields shall be painted to match the surface to which they are attached. Security lighting fixtures are not to be substituted for parking lot or walkway lighting fixtures and are restricted only to loading and storage locations or similar service areas.
e. All illuminated signs are to be internally illuminated. f. When walkway lighting is provided primarily by low fixtures, there shall be sufficient peripheral lighting to illuminate the immediate surroundings to ensure public safety. Shatter-proof coverings are recommended on low-level fixtures.

25. All lighting and light fixtures shall be shielded, and no light or glare shall impact the Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
350 of 864
9 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

surrounding properties.

26. Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall demonstrate that light standards will not conflict with tree locations. If any lighting or landscape plan is submitted, the Developer shall submit a plan showing both the lighting and landscape on the same sheet.

27. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall install 15 -gallon evergreen trees at twenty-foot intervals along the east and west sides of the project.

28. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall install shrubs and groundcover within perimeter landscape planters along the east and west sides of the project.

29. All landscaped areas noted on the site plan shall be permanently maintained with healthy planting material, and whenever necessary shall be replanted with suitable vegetation.

30. The Development Services Director is authorized to approve minor modifications to the approval project plans or any of the conditions of approval if such modifications shall achieve substantially the same results as would strict compliance with said plans and conditions.

31. Prior to issuance of any building permits (if applicable), the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of a construction site safety plan by the Redlands Police Department providing adequate security measures such as lights, video cameras, vehicle transponders, locks, alarms, trained security personnel, fencing, etc. The nature of the measures will depend on the specific requirements of the site and may vary with the different stages of construction. The applicant shall be responsible for the complia nce of all subcontractors working on the site.

32. When the Entitlement Review is approved, submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, and energy calculations to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the California Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards which are effective at the time of Plan Check Submittal.

33. Disabled access for the site and guard shack must be in accordance with the State of California and ADA regulations.

Other City Departments/Divisions:

34. 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)

___________________________
Brian Desatnik
Development Services Director
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
351 of 864
10 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8606 CUP 194.docx-JM

EXHIBIT B

LAND USE ENGINEERING DIVISION

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

[ Attached ]

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
352 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
353 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
354 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
355 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
356 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
357 of 864
City Council Meeting K. 2.

DATE: 07/02/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to consider Resolution No. 8571, Ordinance No. 2962, and Ordinance No. 2968 related to Development Impact Fees Adjustments
(Mayor to declare meeting as public hearing)
Public Hearing to consider Resolution No. 8571 adopting the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study; and
a.

Public Hearing to introduce Ordinance No. 2962, amending Chapters 3.32, 3.44, 3.48, 3.54, 3.56, 3.60, 3.70, and 13.40 of the Redlands Municipal Code relating to storm drain facilities fees and public facilities fees; and
b.

Public Hearing to introduce Ordinance No. 2968 adopting Development Impact Fees for new development and
rescinding Resolution No. 7951; and
c.

Determination that adoption of the resolution and ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section
15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Harris)
d.

PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING:

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

Mayor calls upon Department Director for report.2.

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

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

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

Mayor closes the public hearing.6.

City Council considers the motion and votes.7.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
358 of 864
MOTION(S):

If City Council determines the staff recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:

I move that the City Council determine that the adoption of Resolution No. 8571, Ordinance No. 2962, and Ordinance No. 2968 is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Sections 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act, and

1. I move to approve Resolution No. 8571, and2.

I move to introduce Ordinance No. 2962 and Ordinance No. 2968.3.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council determine that adoption of Resolution No. 8571, Ordinance No. 2962, and Ordinance No. 2968 is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act.

Staff further recommends the approval of Resolution No. 8571 and the introduction of Ordinance No. 2962, and Ordinance No. 2968, establishing development impact fees for new development for public facilities (fire, police, library, and government), open space and parks, transportation improvements, storm drain facilities, water facilities, water rights, solid waste facilities, and sewer facilities.

DISCUSSION:

Assembly Bill (AB) 1600, which created Section 66000 et. seq. of the Government Code, was enacted by the State of California in 1987. AB 1600 outlines specific requirements that must be met for municipalities to impose Development Impact Fees (DIF). Periodically, a Nexus Study must be completed to identify the following:

The purpose to which the fee is to be put;1.

A reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged;

2. All sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing for incomplete improvements;

3. Approximate dates on which the funding is expected to be deposited into the appropriate account or fund; and

4. For any action imposing a fee as a condition of approval of a development project by a local agency, the local agency shall determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development

5. Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
359 of 864
on which the fee is imposed.

Generally, the Nexus Study justifies appropriate fees to fund additional infrastructure and services necessary to support new growth. The DIF study analyzes fees identified in the following Redlands Municipal Code (RMC):

RMC
Chapter Chapter Name Fund Name

3.32 Open Space and Park Fees Open Space/Park/Community Center

3.44 Sewer Capital Improvement
Fund
Sewer Capacity

3.48 Water Capital Improvement
Fund
Water Capacity

3.54 Transportation Improvement
Fees
Transportation

3.56 Storm Drain Facilities Fees Storm Drain

3.60 Public Facilities Fees General Government Facilities, Library, Fire, Police

3.70 Solid Waste Capital
Improvement Fund
Solid Waste

13.40 Acquisition of Water Stocks
and Water Rights
Water Source
In January 2017, a comprehensive development impact fee study was completed, establishing regulations governing the imposition of Open Space and Parks fees, Transportation Improvement fees, Storm Drain Facilities fees, and Public Facilities fees. This study was adopted by Resolution No. 7907.

Subsequently, another study was completed in August 2018, which focused specifically on Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) above 750 sq.ft. This study provided recommendations for the amounts of development impact fees that could be imposed on ADUs. This latter study was adopted by Resolution No. 7951 and rescinded Resolution No. 7907.

The updated DIF study was prepared and finalized by David Taussig and Associates, Inc. (DTA) on May 2, 2024, and will update the 2017 and 2018 DIF studies. In addition to the fees analyzed in the 2017 and 2018 DIF studies, the proposed DIF study will also include updated fees for water facilities, solid waste facilities, sewer facilities, and acquisition of water stocks and water rights. The fees shall be evaluated periodically to ensure appropriate revenue is collected from development projects to support expanded services.

Staff prepared Resolution No. 8571 which will adopt the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study completed by DTA. Ordinance No. 2962 was prepared to amend the Redlands Municipal Code for public facilities (fire, police, library, and government), open space and parks, transportation improvements, storm drain facilities, water facilities, water rights, solid waste facilities, and sewer facilities.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
360 of 864
facilities, water facilities, water rights, solid waste facilities, and sewer facilities.

Ordinance No. 2962 determines that the specific amounts of fees for new development are to be established by the City Council. Ordinance No. 2968 was prepared to establish the specific amounts of DIF for new development. These ordinances apply to the Redlands Municipal Code's chapters 3.32, 3.44, 3.48,

3.54, 3.56, 3.60, 3.70, and 13.40 and will become effective sixty (60) days after adoption of the ordinances.

If approved, Resolution No. 8571, Ordinance No. 2962, and Ordinance No. 2968 will establish DIFs for new development for public facilities (fire, police, library, and government), open space and parks, transportation improvements, storm drain facilities, water facilities, water rights, solid waste facilities, and sewer facilities.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to approve Resolution No. 8571, or Ordinance No. 2962, and Ordinance No. 2968. However, this will preclude the assessment of development impact fees on new development.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Priority Focus Areas A (Fiscal Responsibility) and D (Infrastructure).

SUBMITTED BY:

John R. Harris, Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director REVIEWED BY:

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

Veronica Medina, Associate Planner
Fiscal Impact
Discussion:

There is no expense impact associated with this action. Adoption of the proposed DIF ensures that private developments fund infrastructure capacity expansion projects necessitated by the development.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
361 of 864
Attachments
A. Resolution No. 8571
B. 10 & 5 Day Public Notice
C. Ordinance No. 2962 (Legislative)
D. Ordinance No. 2962 (Clean)
E. Ordinance No. 2968
F. Development Impact Fee Study
G. Resolution No. 7951 (Rescinded)
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
362 of 864
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8571 Adopting Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

RESOLUTION NO. 8571

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

ADOPTING THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY

ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FOR NEW

DEVELOPMENT WITH RESPECT TO STORM DRAIN, SEWER, WATER,

SOLID WASTE, ACQUISITION OF WATER STOCK AND WATER RIGHTS,

OPEN SPACE AND PARKS, TRANSPORTATION, AND PUBLIC

FACILITIES

WHEREAS, the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study identifies fees with respect to Chapters 3.32, 3.44, 3.48, 3.54, 3.56, 3.60, 3.70, and 13.40 of the Redlands Municipal Code establish, respectively, Open Space and Parks, Sewer Capital Improvement, Water Capital Improvement, Transportation Improvements, Storm Drain Facilities, Public Facilities Fees, Solid Waste Improvement, and the Acquisition of Water Stock And Water Rights to implement the City’s General Plan to ensure that public facilities improvements which meet City standards are available concurrent with the need caused for such facilities by new development in the City; and

WHEREAS, it is now the desire of the City Council of the City of Redlands (“this City Council”) to adopt the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study establish development impact fees for new development; and

WHEREAS, on May 2, 2024, David Taussig and Associates, Inc. dba DTA, prepared the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 1600 and Government Code Section 6600 0 et. seq. for the City recommending the amounts of development impact fees which may be imposed for new development and the facilities it will finance; and

WHEREAS, the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study identifies development impact fees for new development, including Accessory Dwelling Units above 750 sq.ft. and restate s the development impact fees for all other categories of development.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Redlands as follows:

Section 1. This City Council determines that approval of this Resolution is exempt from review under California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15061(b)(3), as it can be seen with certainty by this City Council that the approva l of this Resolution establishing a Five-Year Capital Project Needs Analysis will have no physical effect on the environment.

Section 2. That the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit “A,” is hereby adopted.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
363 of 864
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8571 Adopting Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 2nd day of July, 2024.

________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor

ATTEST:

____________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
364 of 864
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8571 Adopting Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.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 2nd day of July, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
365 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
366 of 864
1 ORDINANCE NO. 2962 - LEGISLATIVE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AMENDING CHAPTERS 3.32, 3.44,

3.48, 3.54, 3.56, 3.60, 3.70, AND 13.40 OF THE REDLANDS MUNICIPAL CODE

RELATING TO OPEN SPACE AND PARK FEES, SEWER CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT FUND, WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND,

TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FEES, STORM DRAIN FACILITIES FEES ,

PUBLIC FACILITIES FEES , SOLID WASTE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND,

AND ACQUISITION OF WATER STOCKS AND WATER RIGHTS

WHEREAS, Chapters 3.32, 3.44, 3.48, 3.54, 3.56, 3.60, 3.70, and 13.40 of the Redlands Municipal Code establish, respectively, Open Space and Parks, Sewer Capital Improvement, Water Capital Improvement, Transportation Improvements, Storm Drain Facilities, P ublic Facilities Fees, Solid Waste Improvement, and the Acquisition of Water Stock And Water Rights to implement the City’s General Plan to ensure that public facilities improvements which meet City standards are available concurrent with the need caused f or such facilities by new development in the City; and

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Section 3.32 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “Open Space and Park Fees,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.32.040: FEE IMPOSITION:

Open space and parks fees shall be collected from all applicants for development projects for the purpose of acquiring, developing, improving and expanding open space and park lands identified in the city's open space and park lands acquisition and develop ment capital improvement plan in accordance with the amounts established by resolution of the city councilfees approved by the City Council. No building permit shall be issued unless the fees required by this chapter are first paid.

Fees collected pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited into a separate account or fund in a manner to avoid any commingling of such fees with other revenue of the city and the fees shall be expended solely for the purposes for which the fees were collected. (Ord. 2661 § 2, 2007; amd.

Ord. 2912, 7-21-2020)

3.32.060: ADJUSTMENT OF FEE:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the city's finance director, in coordination with the city's facilities and community services director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of open space and parks fees adopted by resolution of the city council approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the "Engineering News-Record" twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the finance director shall use any appropriate official index published by the bureau of labor statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto. Land costs shall also be evaluated annually and adjusted as necessary based on the current market conditions at the time. (Ord. 2661 § 2, 2007; amd. Ord. 2912, 7-21-2020)”

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
367 of 864
2 Section 2. Section 3. 44 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Sewer Capital Improvement Fund,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.44.030: CHARGES:

The specific amounts of the sewer capital improvement charges shall be adopted by resolution of theapproved by the City Council and shall be paid as a condition of issuing building permits, or other City approved entitlement, as determined within the sole discretion of the City, for buildings containing plumbing fixtures and required to have new sewer services tapping into the City's sewage system or increasing flow into the City's sewer system as estimated by the City. The charges shall be those in effect on the date the permit is issued or as such other entitlement issued by the City. (Ord. 2880, 2019)

3.44.040: ADJUSTMENT OF CHARGES:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the City's Finance Director, in coordination with the City's Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of the sewer capital improvement charges adopted by resolution of thefees adopted by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the Engineering News-Record's "Construction Cost Index" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the Finance Director shall use any appropriate official index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto. (Ord. 2880, 2019)”

Section 3. Section 3.4 8 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Water Capital Improvement Fund,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.48.030: CHARGES:

A. Except as otherwise provided for in this section, the water capital improvement charge fees shall be established by resolution of the approved by the City Council and shall be paid as a condition of approval of an application for a new water connection or, for any property or use having an existing water connection and which is increasing its water demand on the City's utilities system, as a condition of issuance of any building permit, business license, or other entitlement from the City associated with the change in the property or use that is causing such increased demand. The charge due shall be that charge in effect on the date the application for a connection is approved or on the date the entitlement authorizing the increased demand is issued. All water capital improvement charges shall be deposited into the City's Water Capital Improvement Fund. (Ord. 2880, 2019)

3.48.040: ADJUSTMENT OF CHARGES:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the City's Finance Director, in coordination with the City's Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of the water capital improvement charges adopted by resolution of thefees approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the Engineering News-Record's "Construction Cost Index" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
368 of 864
3 twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the Finance Director shall use any appropriate official index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto. (Ord. 2880, 2019)”

Section 4. Section 3. 54 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “Transportation Improvement Fees,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.54.040: COLLECTION OF TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FEES:

Transportation improvement fees shall be collected from applicants for development projects as provided in this chapter and in any resolutions adopted by the city council approved by the City Council implementing this chapter. No building permit shall be issued unless the fees required by this chapter are first paid and the development project is consistent with the city's general plan.

Fees collected pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited in a s pecial fund established for the purpose of constructing the transportation improvements provided for in the city's general plan and approved capital improvement programs. The fees required by this chapter are in addition to any other means of financing facilities or improvements identified in the city's general plan which may be imposed on the development of property under the provisions of state law, this code or city policy. (Ord. 2652 § 1, 2006)

3.54.080: ESTABLISHMENT OF FEE:

In accordance with the city's general plan, the transportation improvement fees shall cover one hundred percent (100%) of the city's estimated costs for transportation improvements required by new development projects. The transportation improvement fees t o be paid by a development project shall be based upon a determination of the number of vehicle trips generated by the development project, and the specific transportation improvement fee per trip generated shall be established by resolution of the city co uncilapproved by the City Council . The transportation improvement fees collected shall be allocated to various transportation improvements comprising the city's street system, traffic signal system and freeway interchanges in percentages established by resolution of the city council. (Ord. 2652 § 1, 2006)

3.54.090: ADJUSTMENT OF FEE:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, beginning in July 2007, the director of finance shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of fees adopted by resolution of the city council approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage chain (in the construction cost index of the "Engineering News-Record" - 20 cities annual average) for the preceding twelve (12) month period. This adjustment will offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increase (or any deflation related decreases). If this index should cease publication, the director of finance shall use any appropriate official index published by the bureau of labor statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto. Land costs may be evaluated annually and adjusted as necessary based on the current market conditions at the time. ” (Ord. 2652 § 1, 2006)”

Section 5. Section 3.56 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “Storm Drain Facilities Fees,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
369 of 864
4 “3.56.020: DEFINITIONS:

Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter, they shall have the meanings established by this section:

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT: An attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single -family dwelling is situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following:
(A) An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.

ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY: The director of municipal utilities and engineering of the city.

COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Any building in which wholesale or retail selling or educational activities may occur, and hotel/motel development.

DEVELOPMENT: Any use to which land is put, and any building, construction, or other alteration of land incident thereto.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT: All manufacturing and warehouse development.

MASTER STORM DRAIN PLAN: The storm drain plan prepared by or under the direction of the city public works director and approved by the city and which identifies facilities and improvements required on a citywide basis to serve the projected population of the city as established by the city's general plan.

MULTI-FAMILY UNIT: Each unit of an apartment, duplex, multiple - dwelling structure or dwelling group or condominium, and a manufactured or mobilehome located in a mobilehome park on a temporary, semi-permanent or permanent basis.

OFFICE DEVELOPMENT: All general, professional and medical office development.

SENIOR RESTRICTED DWELLING UNIT: For purposes of this chapter, is defined as:
(A) A unit restricted by a covenant that runs with the land addressing the required age restriction to the satisfaction of the city.
(B) The unit's water meter serves only internal water use. Landscape irrigation shall be provided through a separate water meter service. (C) The dwelling unit shall be less than 1,500 square feet of livable area.

Removal of the age restriction or an increase in the size of the unit will result in a reassessment of the charges.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
370 of 864
5 SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT: An attached or detached one-family dwelling unit. (Ord. 2661 § 3, 2007)

3.56.040: STORM DRAIN FEES:

Storm drain fees shall be collected from applicants for development permits in accordance with the schedule incorporated in this chapter as approved by the City Council. No building permit shall be issued unless the fees required approved by the City Council this chapter are first paid and the permit is consistent with the city's master storm drain plan. Fees collected as required approved by the City Council this chapter shall be deposited in a special fund established for the purpose of constructing the storm facilities provided in the city's master storm drain plan. The fees approved by the City Council required by this chapter are in addition to any other means of financing facilities or improvements identified in the city's master storm drain plan which may be imposed on the development of property under the provisions of state law, this code or city policy. (Ord. 2661 § 3, 2007)

3.56.070: DETERMINATION AND PAYMENT:

The storm drain fees established approved by the City Council this chapter are collected for the construction of storm drain facilities and improvements for which the city has established an account, appropriated funds and adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to final inspection or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the development project for which the fees are imposed, or the fees are to reimburse the city for expenditures previously made, and shall be determined and become due and payable to the city at the time of issuance of a building permit for the development project. (Ord. 2661 § 3, 2007)

3.56.080: ADJUSTMENT OF FEE:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the city's finance director, in coordination with the city's public works director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of storm drain fees adopted by resolution of the city councilapproved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the "Engineering News-Record" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of infla tion related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the director of finance shall use any appropriate official index published by the bureau of labor statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto. Land costs may be evaluated annually and adjusted as necessary based on the current market conditions at the time.” (Ord. 2661 § 3, 2007)”

Section 6. Section 3. 60 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Public Facilities Fees,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.60.020: DEFINITIONS:

Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter, they shall have the meanings established by this section:

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT: An attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
371 of 864
6 same parcel as the single -family dwelling is situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following:
(A) An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.

ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY: The director of municipal utilities and engineering of the city.

COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Any building in which wholesale or retail selling or educational activities may occur, and hotel/motel development.

DEVELOPMENT: Any use to which land is put, and any building, construction, or other alteration of land incident thereto.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT: All manufacturing and warehouse development.

OFFICE DEVELOPMENT: All general, professional and medical office development.

Removal of the age restriction or an increase in the size of the unit will result in a reassessment of the charges.

SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT: An attached or detached one-family dwelling unit. (Ord. 2661 § 4, 2007)

3.60.040: FEES:

Public facility fees shall be collected from applicants for development projects for the purpose of constructing, improving, providing and maintaining public facilities identified in the city's public facility program in accordance with the amounts established approved by the City Councilby this chapter. No building permit shall be issued unless the fees required approved by the City Council this chapter are first paid. Fees collected pursuant toas approved this by the City Councilchapter shall be deposited into separate capital facilities accounts or funds in a manner to avoid any commingling of such fees with other revenues of the city and the fees shall be expended solely for the purposes for which the fees were collected. The fees required of an applicant for a development project approved by the City this chapter are Council are in addition to any other means of Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
372 of 864
7 financing public facilities or related improvements identified in the city's public facility program which may be imposed upon the applicant for the development project under the provisions of federal, state or local law. (Ord. 2661 § 4, 2007)

3.60.050: PAYMENT:

The public facility fees established approved by the City Council by this chapter shall be paid by the applicant for a development project as a condition of, and at the time of issuance of, a building permit for the development project. The cCity cCouncil has determined that the approved fees established by this chapter will be collected for public improvements and public facilities for which an account has been established and funds appropriated and for which the city has adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to the dates of final inspection or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for new development, and/or fees established approved by the City Councilthis chapter are to reimburse the city for expenditures previously made. (Ord. 2661 § 4, 2007)

3.60.060: ADJUSTMENT OF FEE:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the city's finance director, in coordination with the city's public works director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of public facilities fees adopted by resolution of the city councilapproved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the "Engineering News-Record" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose for this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the director of finance shall use any appropriate official index published by the bureau of labor statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto. Land costs shall also be evaluated annually and adjusted as necessary based on the current market conditions at the time. (Ord. 2661 § 4, 2007)” Section 7. Section 3.70 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Solid Waste Capital Improvement Fund,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.70.030: CHARGES:

A. The solid waste capital improvement charge for the following categories shall be established by resolution of the City Council approved by the City Council and shall be paid as a condition of issuance of building permits for buildings required to have new solid waste services from the City’s solid waste system or increasing the solid waste stream into the City’s solid waste system as estimated by the City. The charges shall be those in effect on the date the permit is issued.

1. Accessory dwelling units: The charge for this category shall be per accessory dwelling unit.

2. Single-family dwelling units: The charge for this category shall be per dwelling or unit.

3. Multiple-family dwelling units, apartments, and mobilehome park lots or space: The charge for this category shall be per dwelling or unit or mobilehome space.

4. Nonresidential development: The charge for this category shall be a charge per pound per day estimated solid waste as estimated by the Public Works Department.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
373 of 864
8 5. All solid waste capital improvement charges shall be credited to the Solid Waste Capital Improvement Fund.

B. 1. The owner of the property shall pay to the City the difference in the solid waste capital improvement charges calculated on the basis of currently established charges. a. If a building or the use of a building on a parcel of property which building had been served by the solid waste system is charged in a way that would make the solid waste capital improvement charge greater; or

b. If a building is replaced on a parcel of property, which building had been served by the solid waste system, and the replacement building would have a greater solid waste capital improvement charge than the building replaced.

The difference in charges shall be due prior to final approval of a conditional use permit, if applicable, or, if not, prior to building permit issuance. If not collectible in this manner, such difference shall be invoiced with the next billing for solid waste service and collectible in the same manner as the billing for solid waste service.

2. If a building or the use of a building on a parcel of property is changed in any way that would make the solid waste capital improvement charge less, no refund shall be made, but the property shall retain the amount of credit established for its previous use. (Ord. 2880, 2019)

3.70.040: ADJUSTMENT OF CHARGES:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the City's Finance Director, in coordination with the City's Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of the solid waste capital improvement charges fees adopted by resolution of the approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the Engineering News-Record's "Construction Cost Index" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month pe riod. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the Finance Director shall use any appropriate official index publish ed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto.” (Ord. 2880, 2019)”

Section 8. Section 13.40 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Acquisition of Water Stocks and Water Rights,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“13.40.030: DEVELOPER REQUIREMENTS:

For any development project that will require water service or incremental water demand from the City, a water source acquisition charge shall be established by resolution of the approved by the City Council and shall be paid as a condition of final approval of that development. The charge due shall be that amount in effect on the date approval of the development is given by the City. (Ord. 2880, 2019)

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
374 of 864
9 13.40.040: ADJUSTMENT OF CHARGES:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the City's Finance Director, in coordination with the City's Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of the water source acquisition charges adopted by resolution of thefees approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the Engineering News-Record's "Construction Cost Index" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the Finance Director shall use any appropriate official index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto.” (Ord. 2880, 2019)”

Section 9. The City Council hereby determines that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because this City Council determines that it can be seen with certainty that approval of this ordinance will have no direct or indirect impact on the physical environment, and that approval of this ordinance is not a “project” under CEQA as that term is defined in Public Resources Code section 21065.

Section 10. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or the application thereof to any entity, person or circumstance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council of the City of Redlands hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional

Section 11. The Mayor shall sign this ordinance and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause it, or a summary of it, to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City, and thereafter, this ordinance shall take effect as provided by law.

_________________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor

ATTEST:

____________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
375 of 864
10 I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk, City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council at the regular meeting thereof, held on the ________ day of ____________ 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

__________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
376 of 864
1 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms ORDINANCE NO. 2962

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AMENDING CHAPTERS 3.32, 3.44,

3.48, 3.54, 3.56, 3.60, 3.70, AND 13.40 OF THE REDLANDS MUNICIPAL CODE

RELATING TO OPEN SPACE AND PARK FEES, SEWER CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT FUND, WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND,

TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FEES, STORM DRAIN FACILITIES FEES ,

PUBLIC FACILITIES FEES , SOLID WASTE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND,

AND ACQUISITION OF WATER STOCKS AND WATER RIGHTS

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Section 3.32 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “Open Space and Park Fees,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.32.040: FEE IMPOSITION:

Open space and parks fees shall be collected from all applicants for development projects for the purpose of acquiring, developing, improving and expanding open space and park lands identified in the city's open space and park lands acquisition and develop ment capital improvement plan in accordance with the fees approved by the City Council. No building permit shall be issued unless the fees required by this chapter are first paid. Fees collected pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited into a separate account or fund in a manner to avoid any commingling of such fees with other revenue of the city and the fees shall be expended solely for the purposes for which the fees were collected.

3.32.060: ADJUSTMENT OF FEE:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the city's finance director, in coordination with the city's facilities and community services director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of open space and parks fees approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the "Engineering News-Record" twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflati on related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the finance director shall use any appropriate official index published by the bureau of labor statistics, or similar agency as may then exis t or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto. Land costs shall also be evaluated annually and adjusted as necessary based on the current market conditions at the time. ”

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
377 of 864
2 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms Section 2. Section 3. 44 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Sewer Capital Improvement Fund,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.44.030: CHARGES:

The specific amounts of the sewer capital improvement charges shall be approved by the City Council and shall be paid as a condition of issuing building permits, or other City approved entitlement, as determined within the sole discretion of the City, for buildings containing plumbing fixtures and required to have new sewer services tapping into the City's sewage system or increasing flow into the City's sewer system as estimated by the City. The charges shall be those in effect on the date the permit is issued or as such other entitlement issued by the City.

3.44.040: ADJUSTMENT OF CHARGES:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the City's Finance Director, in coordination with the City's Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of the sewer capital improvement fees adopted by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the Engineering News-Record's "Construction Cost Index" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the Finance Director shall use any appropriate official index published by the Bureau of Labor Stati stics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto.”

Section 3. Section 3.4 8 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Water Capital Improvement Fund,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.48.030: CHARGES:

A. Except as otherwise provided for in this section, the water capital improvement fees shall be approved by the City Council and shall be paid as a condition of approval of an application for a new water connection or, for any property or use having an existing water connection and which is increasing its water demand on the City's utilities system, as a condition of issuance of any building permit, business license, or other entitlement from the City associated with the change in the property or use that is causing such increased demand. The charge due shall be that charge in effect on the date the application for a connection is approved or on the date the entitlement authorizing the increased demand is issued. All water capital improvement charges shall be deposited into the City's Water Capital Improvement Fund.

3.48.040: ADJUSTMENT OF CHARGES:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the City's Finance Director, in coordination with the City's Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of the water capital improvement fees approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the Engineering News-Record's "Construction Cost Index" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the Finance Director shall Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
378 of 864
3 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms use any appropriate official index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto.”

Section 4. Section 3. 54 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “Transportation Improvement Fees,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.54.040: COLLECTION OF TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FEES:

Transportation improvement fees shall be collected from applicants for development projects as provided in this chapter and approved by the City Council implementing this chapter. No building permit shall be issued unless the fees required by this chapter are first paid and the development project is consistent with the city's general plan. Fees collected pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited in a s pecial fund established for the purpose of constructing the transportation improvements provided for in the city's general plan and approved capital improvement programs.

The fees required by this chapter are in addition to any other means of financing fac ilities or improvements identified in the city's general plan which may be imposed on the development of property under the provisions of state law, this code or city policy.

3.54.080: ESTABLISHMENT OF FEE:

In accordance with the city's general plan, the transportation improvement fees shall cover one hundred percent (100%) of the city's estimated costs for transportation improvements required by new development projects. The transportation improvement fees t o be paid by a development project shall be based upon a determination of the number of vehicle trips generated by the development project, and the specific transportation improvement fee per trip generated shall be approved by the City Council. The transportation improvement fees collected shall be allocated to various transportation improvements comprising the city's street system, traffic signal system and freeway interchanges in percentages established by resolution of the city council.

3.54.090: ADJUSTMENT OF FEE:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, beginning in July 2007, the director of finance shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of fees approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage chain (in the construction cost index of the "Engineering News-Record" - 20 cities annual average) for the preceding twelve (12) month period. This adjustment will offset the effects of inflation related constructio n cost increase (or any deflation related decreases). If this index should cease publication, the director of finance shall use any appropriate official index published by the bureau of labor statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be m ost nearly equivalent thereto. Land costs may be evaluated annually and adjusted as necessary based on the current market conditions at the time.”

Section 5. Section 3.56 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “Storm Drain Facilities Fees,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.56.020: DEFINITIONS:

Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter, they shall have the meanings established by this section:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
379 of 864
4 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT: An attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single -family dwelling is situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following:
(A) An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.

ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY: The director of municipal utilities and engineering of the city.

COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Any building in which wholesale or retail selling or educational activities may occur, and hotel/motel development.

DEVELOPMENT: Any use to which land is put, and any building, construction, or other alteration of land incident thereto.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT: All manufacturing and warehouse development.

OFFICE DEVELOPMENT: All general, professional and medical office development.

Removal of the age restriction or an increase in the size of the unit will result in a reassessment of the charges.

SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT: An attached or detached one-family dwelling unit.

3.56.040: STORM DRAIN FEES:

Storm drain fees shall be collected from applicants for development permits as approved by the City Council. No building permit shall be issued unless the fees approved by the City Council are Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
380 of 864
5 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms first paid and the permit is consistent with the city's master storm drain plan. Fees collected as approved by the City Council shall be deposited in a special fund established for the purpose of constructing the storm facilities provided in the city's master storm drain plan. The fees approved by the City Council are in addition to any other means of financing facilities or improvements identified in the city's master storm drain plan which may be imposed on the development of property under the provisions of state law, this code or city policy.

3.56.070: DETERMINATION AND PAYMENT:

The storm drain fees approved by the City Council are collected for the construction of storm drain facilities and improvements for which the city has established an account, appropriated funds and adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to final inspection or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the d evelopment project for which the fees are imposed, or the fees are to reimburse the city for expenditures previously made, and shall be determined and become due and payable to the city at the time of issuance of a building permit for the development project.

3.56.080: ADJUSTMENT OF FEE:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the city's finance director, in coordination with the city's public works director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of storm drain fees approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the "Engineering News-Record" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of infla tion related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the director of finance shall use any appropriate official index published by the bureau of labor statistics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto. Land costs may be evaluated annually and adjusted as necessary based on the current market conditions at the time.”

Section 6. Section 3. 60 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Public Facilities Fees,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.60.020: DEFINITIONS:

Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter, they shall have the meanings established by this section:

ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY: The director of municipal utilities and engineering of the city.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
381 of 864
6 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Any building in which wholesale or retail selling or educational activities may occur, and hotel/motel development.

DEVELOPMENT: Any use to which land is put, and any building, construction, or other alteration of land incident thereto.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT: All manufacturing and warehouse development.

OFFICE DEVELOPMENT: All general, professional and medical office development.

Removal of the age restriction or an increase in the size of the unit will result in a reassessment of the charges.

SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT: An attached or detached one-family dwelling unit.

3.60.040: FEES:

Public facility fees shall be collected from applicants for development projects for the purpose of constructing, improving, providing and maintaining public facilities identified in the city's public facility program in accordance with the amounts approved by the City Council. No building permit shall be issued unless the fees approved by the City Council are first paid. Fees collected as approved by the City Council shall be deposited into separate capital facilities accounts or funds in a manner to avoid any commingling of such fees with other revenues of the city and the fees shall be expended solely for the purposes for which the fees were collected. The fees requ ired of an applicant for a development project approved by the City Council are in addition to any other means of financing public facilities or related improvements identified in the city's public facility program which may be imposed upon the applicant for the development project under the provisions of federal, state or local law

3.60.050: PAYMENT:

The public facility fees approved by the City Council shall be paid by the applicant for a development project as a condition of, and at the time of issuance of, a building permit for the development project. The City Council has determined that the approved fees will be collected for public improvements and public facilities for which an account has been established and funds appropriated and for which the city has adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to the dates of final inspection or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for new development, and/or fees approved by the City Council are to reimburse the city for expenditures previously made.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
382 of 864
7 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms

3.60.060: ADJUSTMENT OF FEE:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the city's finance director, in coordination with the city's public works director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of public facilities fees approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the "Engineering News -Record" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose for this adjustment is to offset the effects of infl ation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the director of finance shall use any appropriate official index published by the bureau of labor statistics, or similar agency as may the n exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto. Land costs shall also be evaluated annually and adjusted as necessary based on the current market conditions at the time. ”
Section 7. Section 3.70 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Solid Waste Capital Improvement Fund,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“3.70.030: CHARGES:

A. The solid waste capital improvement charge for the following categories shall be approved by the City Council and shall be paid as a condition of issuance of building permits for buildings required to have new solid waste services from the City ’s solid waste system or increasing the solid waste stream into the City ’s solid waste system as estimated by the City. The charges shall be those in effect on the date the permit is issued.

1. Accessory dwelling units: The charge for this category shall be per accessory dwelling unit.

2. Single-family dwelling units: The charge for this category shall be per dwelling or unit.

3. Multiple-family dwelling units, apartments, and mobilehome park lots or space: The charge for this category shall be per dwelling or unit or mobilehome space.

4. Nonresidential development: The charge for this category shall be a charge per pound per day estimated solid waste as estimated by the Public Works Department.

5. All solid waste capital improvement charges shall be credited to the Solid Waste Capital Improvement Fund.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
383 of 864
8 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms

3.70.040: ADJUSTMENT OF CHARGES:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the City's Finance Director, in coordination with the City's Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of the solid waste capital improvement fees approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the Engineering News-Record's "Construction Cost Index" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjustment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the Finance Director shall use any appropriate official index published by the Bureau of Labor Stati stics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto.”

Section 8. Section 13.40 of the Redlands Municipal Code, entitled “ Acquisition of Water Stocks and Water Rights,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“13.40.030: DEVELOPER REQUIREMENTS:

For any development project that will require water service or incremental water demand from the City, a water source acquisition charge shall be approved by the City Council and shall be paid as a condition of final approval of that development. The charge due shall be that amount in effect on the date approval of the development is given by the City.

13.40.040: ADJUSTMENT OF CHARGES:

On July 1 of each fiscal year, the City's Finance Director, in coordination with the City's Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director, shall make annual adjustments to the specific amounts of the water source acquisition fees approved by the City Council by a percentage equal to the percentage change in the construction cost index of the Engineering News-Record's "Construction Cost Index" - twenty (20) cities annual average for the preceding twelve (12) month period. The purpose of this adjust ment is to offset the effects of inflation related construction cost increases or any deflation related decreases. If this index should cease publication, the Finance Director shall use any appropriate official index published by the Bureau of Labor Statis tics, or similar agency as may then exist or may then be most nearly equivalent thereto.”

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
384 of 864
9 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms Section 10. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or the application thereof to any entity, person or circumstance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council of the City of Redlands hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional

_________________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor

ATTEST:

____________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
385 of 864
10 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2962 Amending RMC Relating to Open Space and Park Fees Sewer Captital Improvement Fund.docx-ms

I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk, City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council at the regular meeting thereof, held on the ________ day of ____________ 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

__________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
386 of 864
1 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2968 Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

ORDINANCE NO. 2968

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FOR NEW

DEVELOPMENT WITH RESPECT TO STORM DRAIN, SEWER, WATER,

SOLID WASTE, ACQUISITION OF WATER STOCK AND WATER RIGHTS,

OPEN SPACE AND PARKS, TRANSPORTATION, AND PUBLIC
FACILITIES, AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 7951

WHEREAS, Chapters 3.32, 3.44, 3.48, 3.54, 3.56, 3.60, 3.70 , and 13.40 of the Redlands Municipal Code establish, respectively, Open Space and Parks, Sewer Capital Improvement, Water Capital Improvement, Transportation Improvements, Storm Drain Facilities, Public Facilities Fees, Solid Waste Improvement, and the Acquisition of Water Stock And Water Rights to implement the City’s General Plan and Master Plans to ensure that public facilities improvements which meet City standards are available concurrent with the need caused for such facilities by new development in the City; and

WHEREAS, new residential and non -residential development within the City will generate additional residents and employees who will require additional public facilities. Land for these facilities will have to be acquired and public facilities and equipment will have to be expanded, constructed or purchased to meet this increased demand; and

WHEREAS, the Development Impact Fee Nexus Study (“Fee Study”) has been prepared in response to the projected direct and cumulated effect of future development. Each new development will contribute to the need for new public facilities. Without future development many of the new public facilities on the Needs Lists would not be necessary as the existing facilities are adequate for the City’s present population. In instances where facilities would be built regardless of new development, the costs of such facilities have been allocated to new and existing development based on their respective level of benefit; and

WHEREAS, the proposed impact fee will be charged to all new/future development, irrespective of location, in the City. Even future “in fill” development projects contribute to impacts on public facilities because they are an interactive component of a much greater universe of development located throughout the City. First, the property owners and/or the tenants associated with any new development in the City can be expected to place additional demands on City facilities funded by the fee. Second, these property owners and tenants are dependent on and, in fact, may not have chosen to utilize their development, except for residential, retail, employment and recreational opportunities located nearby on other existing and future development. Third, the availability of residents, employees, and customers throughout the City has a growth inducing impact without which some of the “in-fill” development would not occur. As a result, all development projects in the City contribute to the cumulative impacts of development; and

WHEREAS, the fee will be used for the acquisition, installation, and construction of the public facilities identified on the Needs Lists, included in Section IV of the Fee Study and other appropriate costs to mitigate the direct and cumulative impacts of new development in the City. The fee will provide a source of revenue to the City to allow for the acquisition, installation, and construction of public facilities, which in turn will maintain the current standard of service, preserve the quality of Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
387 of 864
2 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2968 Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

life in City and protect the health, safety, and welfare of the existing and future residents, visitors, and employees; and

WHEREAS, it is the projected direct and cumulative effect of future development that has prompted the preparation of the Fee Study. Each development will contribute to the need for new public facilities. Without future development, the City would have no need to construct many of the public facilities on the Needs Lists. For all other facilities, the costs have been allocated to both existing and new development based on their level of benefit. Even future “infill” development projects, which may be adjacent to existing facilities, further burden existing public facilities.

Consequently, all new development within the City, irrespective of location, contributes to the direct and cumulative impacts of development on public facilities and creates the need for new facilities to accommodate growth; and

WHEREAS, the fees will be expended for the acquisition, installation, and construction of the public facilities identified on the Needs Lists and other authorized uses, as that is the purpose for which the Fee is collected. As previously stated, all new development creates either a direct impact on public facilities or contributes to the cumulative impact on public facilities. Moreover, this impact is generally equalized among all types of development because it is the increased demands for public facilities created by the future residents and employees that create the impact upon existing facilities; and

WHEREAS, all new development within the City, irrespective of location, contributes to the direct and cumulative impacts of development on public facilities and creates the need for new facilities to accommodate growth. Without future development, many of the facilities on the Needs Lists would not be necessary. For certain other facilities, the costs have been allocated to both existing and new development based on their level of benefit; and

WHEREAS, it is now the desire of the City Council of the City of Redlands (“this City Council”) to establish development impact fees for new development; and

WHEREAS, on May 2, 2024, David Taussig and Associates, Inc. dba DTA, prepared a study in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 1600 and Government Code Section 6600 0, et. seq. for the City recommending the amounts of development impact fees which may be imposed for new development; and

WHEREAS, the development impact fee provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code provide that the specific amounts of fees shall be established by this City Council;

WHEREAS, the term “Residential Property” includes Accessory Dwelling Unit above 750 sq.ft., Single Family, Multi-Family, and Transit Oriented; and

WHEREAS, by purposes of efficiency, it is further the desire of this City Council to establish the development impact fees for new development in this ordinance.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Open Space and Parks Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
388 of 864
3 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2968 Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 1.1794

Section 2. The Library Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 0.5997

Section 3. The Storm Drain Facilities Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 0.5113

Non-Residential Fee per 1,000 Building Sq.Ft.

1. Retail $ 611.00

2. Commercial $ 611.00

3. Food Service and Entertainment $ 611.00

4. Office $ 611.00

5. Warehousing – Standard $ 611.00

6. Warehousing – High Cube $ 611.00

7. Manufacturing and Assembly $ 611.00

8. Industrial/Other $ 645.00

9. Industrial and Health Care $ 645.00

Non-Residential Fee per Room
Hotel/Motel $ 351.00

Section 4. The Public Facilities Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 0.7145

Non-Residential Fee per 1,000 Building Sq.Ft.

1. Retail $ 1,052.00

2. Commercial $ 261.00

3. Food Service and Entertainment $ 5,243.00

4. Office $ 3,296.00

5. Warehousing – Standard $ 1,414.00

6. Warehousing – High Cube $ 283.00

7. Manufacturing and Assembly $ 381.00

8. Industrial/Other $ 3,900.00

9. Industrial and Health Care $ 874.00

Non-Residential Fee per Room
Hotel/Motel $ 226.00

Section 5. The Fire Protection Facilities Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
389 of 864
4 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2968 Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 0.4503

Non-Residential Fee per 1,000 Building Sq.Ft.

1. Retail $ 663.00

2. Commercial $ 165.00

3. Food Service and Entertainment $ 3,305.00

4. Office $ 2,077.00

5. Warehousing – Standard $ 891.00

6. Warehousing – High Cube $ 178.00

7. Manufacturing and Assembly $ 240.00

8. Industrial/Other $ 2,458.00

9. Industrial and Health Care $ 551.00

Non-Residential Fee per Room
Hotel/Motel $ 143.00

Section 6. The Police Facilities Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 0.5197

Non-Residential Fee per 1,000 Building Sq.Ft.

1. Retail $ 765.00

2. Commercial $ 190.00

3. Food Service and Entertainment $ 3,814.00

4. Office $ 2,397.00

5. Warehousing – Standard $ 1,029.00

6. Warehousing – High Cube $ 206.00

7. Manufacturing and Assembly $ 277.00

8. Industrial/Other $ 2,837.00

9. Industrial and Health Care $ 636.00

Non-Residential Fee per Room
Hotel/Motel $ 165.00

Section 7. The Transportation System Improvements Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 1.3954

Non-Residential Fee per 1,000 Building Sq.Ft.

1. Retail $ 7,382.00

2. Commercial $ 7,150.00

3. Food Service and Entertainment $14,979.00

4. Office $ 4,312.00
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
390 of 864
5 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2968 Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

5. Warehousing – Standard $ 1,522.00

6. Warehousing – High Cube $ 563.00

7. Manufacturing and Assembly $ 833.00

8. Industrial/Other $ 2,729.00

9. Industrial and Health Care $ 6,462.00

Non-Residential Fee per Room
Hotel/Motel $ 2,253.00

Section 8. The Sewer Capital Improvement Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 0.2696

Non-Residential Fee per 1,000 Building Sq.Ft.

1. Retail $ 450.00

2. Commercial $ 450.00

3. Food Service and Entertainment $ 450.00

4. Office $ 450.00

5. Warehousing – Standard $ 480.00

6. Warehousing – High Cube $ 480.00

7. Manufacturing and Assembly $ 480.00

8. Industrial/Other $ 480.00

9. Industrial and Health Care $ 150.00

Non-Residential Fee per Room
Hotel/Motel $ 392.00

Note, the Sewer Capital Improvement Fee shall not be applicable to any accessory dwelling unit created within the existing space of a single -family residence or accessory structure, including but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure.

Section 9. The Water Capital Improvement Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 2.3657

Non-Residential Fee per 1,000 Building Sq.Ft.

1. Retail $ 438.00

2. Commercial $ 951.00

3. Food Service and Entertainment $ 951.00

4. Office $ 1,141.00

5. Warehousing – Standard $ 190.00

6. Warehousing – High Cube $ 190.00

7. Manufacturing and Assembly $ 951.00
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
391 of 864
6 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2968 Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

8. Industrial/Other $ 951.00

9. Industrial and Health Care $ 3,139.00

Non-Residential Fee per Room
Hotel/Motel $ 1,902.00

Note, the Water Capital Improvement Fee shall not be applicable to any accessory dwelling unit created within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure, including but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure.

Section 10. The Solid Waste Capital Improvement Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 0.0702

Non-Residential Fee per 1,000 Building Sq.Ft.

1. Retail $ 60.00

2. Commercial $ 60.00

3. Food Service and Entertainment $ 60.00

4. Office $ 60.00

5. Warehousing – Standard $ 60.00

6. Warehousing – High Cube $ 60.00

7. Manufacturing and Assembly $ 60.00

8. Industrial/Other $ 60.00

9. Industrial and Health Care $ 60.00

Non-Residential Fee per Room
Hotel/Motel $ 10.00

Section 11. The Acquisition of Water Stocks and Water Rights Fee is hereby established in the following amounts:

Residential Development Fee per Building Sq.Ft.

Residential Property $ 0.6633

Non-Residential Fee per 1,000 Building Sq.Ft.

1. Retail $ 123.00

2. Commercial $ 267.00

3. Food Service and Entertainment $ 267.00

4. Office $ 320.00

5. Warehousing – Standard $ 53.00

6. Warehousing – High Cube $ 53.00

7. Manufacturing and Assembly $ 267.00

8. Industrial/Other $ 267.00

9. Industrial and Health Care $ 880.00

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
392 of 864
7 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2968 Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

Non-Residential Fee per Room
Hotel/Motel $ 533.00

Note, the Acquisition of Water Stocks and Water Rights Fee shall not be applicable to any accessory dwelling unit created within the existing space of a single -family residence or accessory structure, including but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure.

Section 12. The City Council hereby determines that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because this City Council determines that it can be seen with certainty that approval of this ordinance will have no direct or indirect impact on the physical environment, and that approval of this ordinance is not a “project” under CEQA as that term is defined in Public Resources Code section 21065.

Section 13. Notwithstanding any other section of this ordinance, the development impact fees established herein shall take effect sixty (60) days after the effective date of this ordinance and Resolution No. 7951 shall be rescinded.

Section 14. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or the application thereof to any entity, person or circumstance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council of the City of Redlands hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 1 5. The Mayor shall sign this ordinance and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause it, or a summary of it, to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City, and thereafter, this ordinance shall take effect as provided by law.

________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor

ATTEST:

____________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
393 of 864
8 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2968 Establishing Development Impact Fees for New Development.docx-ms

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
394 of 864
May 2, 2024
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
395 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
396 of 864
TABLE

OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE
I INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ............... 1 II LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ................................ ................................ ... 4 III DEMOGRAPHICS ................................ ................................ ............. 10 A Existing Development Within the City ................................ ....... 13 B Future Development Within the City ( 2022-2035).................. 14 C Total Development Within the City ( 2035)............................... 15 D EDU Projections ................................ ................................ .............. 16 IV FEE CALCULATIONS ................................ ................................ ..... 20 A Police Facilities ................................ ................................ ............... 20 B Fire Facilities ................................ ................................ ................... 29 C Park Facilities ................................ ................................ .................. 36 D Library Facilities ................................ ................................ ............. 43 E General Government Facilities ................................ .................... 49 F Transportation Facilities ................................ ............................... 54 G Storm Drain Facilities ................................ ................................ .... 66 H Water Facilities ................................ ................................ ............... 76 I Water Supply ................................ ................................ ................... 84 J Sewer Facilities ................................ ................................ ............... 88 K Solid Waste Facilities ................................ ................................ ..... 95 V IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE SCHEDULE ................................ ... 102 A The Collection of DIFs ................................ ................................ 102 B The Assignment and Expenditure of Fee Revenue ............... 103 C Exemptions, Reductions and Waivers. ................................ ..... 104 D Developer Improvement Credits ................................ .............. 104 E Existing Development Credit ................................ ..................... 104 F Annual Reporting and Accounting of Fees ............................. 104 G Refunding Policy ................................ ................................ .......... 105 H Annual Update of the Capital Improvement Plan ................. 106 I Administration Costs of Fee Implementation ........................ 106 J Indexing of Impact Fee Rates ................................ .................... 107 K Updating the Impact Fee Study ................................ ................. 107 L Administering an Impact Fee Program ................................ ... 107 VI SUMMARY OF FEES ................................ ................................ ...... 108 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
397 of 864

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A DEMOGRAPHICS SUMMARY

APPENDIX B FEE MODELS

APPENDIX C STORM DRAIN RUNOFF FACTORS

APPENDIX D SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND SERVICE AREA MAPS
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
398 of 864
1 SECTION I

INTRODUCTION
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com

I INTRODUCTION
The City of Redlands ("City"), a political subdivi sion of the State of California, authorized DTA to prepare a nexus study (the “Fee Study”) to justify proposed Development Impact Fees (“DIFs”) to be imposed on new development. The fees to be collected will provide a source of revenue to fund public improvements that will mitigate the impacts of such new development. This Fee Study will meet the requirements of California Government Code Section 66001 known as the "Mitigation Fee Act" and will achieve the following goals related to said section:
 Ensure the DIFs do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of pro viding the service for which the fee is imposed; and
 Provide a clear and concise document that will serve as the basis for the proposed fee levels.

A DIF is a one-time charge imposed by a local agency on new development to recover, or partially recover, the estimated reasonable cost of providing public facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of such new development. Further discussion on the legal limitations related to imposing DIFs is discussed in Section II, "Legal Requirements." This Fee Study and the resulting fee structure will focus on the justification for imposing impact fees to fund, or partially fund, police, fire, library, park, general government, transportation, storm drain, water, water supply, sewer, and solid waste facilities necessary to mitigate the impacts of new development. All fees will be charged to new development within the City limits. In addition, fees for water facilities, water supply, and sewer facilities will also be charged to property withinthe area in the unincorporated County known as the “Donut Hole” which consists of predominantly non-residential development. Fees for water facilities, water supply, and sewer facilitieswill also be changed tocustomers outside of the City limits within the City’s sphere of influence (“SOI”). Customers within the sphere of influence are located within the eastern portions of the Cities of San Bernardino and Loma Linda, western portions of the City of Yucaipa and certain unincorporated areas of the County near Mentone and Crafton. Appendix D herein includes a map of the SOI as well as the City’s service area for water services (“Water Service Area”) and service area for sewer services (“Sewer Service Area). Fees are charged to the Donut Hole area and the City’s SOI since the City is providing services to such areas.

This Fee Study uses a planning horizon of 2035 for all projections of demographic growth and the future facilities needed . To ensure the proposed fee structure meets the nexus requirements of Section 66001 and ensure the fees are proportionate to the impacts generated by the various land uses, this Fee Study uses an Equivalent Dwelling Unit ("EDU") method to fairly allocate costs to new development and determine the appropriate fee levels that will provide a source of funds to pay for the proposed facilities. A more detailed discussion regarding the EDU methodology can be found in Section III(C).

Application of the EDU methodology depends upon reasonable choices of variables that Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
399 of 864
2 SECTION I

INTRODUCTION
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
adequately measure demand for respective facilities ("demand variable"). For instance, transportation impacts can be c onsidered to be proportional to traffic volumes generated on public streets. Therefore, the demand variable is the standard trip generation rates for various land uses. Another example is that the demand for police facilities can be measured by the number of residents and employees requiring police protection services from the various land uses.

In addition, the fees for residential property is calculated ona per square foot basis pursuant to AB 602 which was approved by the California State Legislature and signed by Governor Newsom in 2021 . A more detailed discussion regarding AB 602 can be found in Section II(B).

Table I-1 summarizes the demand variables used in this Fee Study.

Table I-1: Demand Variables
Facility Category Demand Variable
Police Population and Employees
Fire Population and Employees
Library Population
Parks Population
General Government Population and Employees
Transportation Average Daily Trips
Storm Drain Runoff Coefficient
Water Water Usage
Water Supply Water Usage
Sewer Sewer Generation
Solid Waste Waste Volume
Section IV of this Fee Study provides detailed analyses of facility needs (the “Needs List”) for each fee category, allocation of costs to new development and calculation of fee structures for police, fire, library, park, general government, transportation, storm drain, water, water supply, sewer, and solid waste facilities. Section VI also adds an administrative component of 2.0% of the total fee amounts to pay for the City's overhead costs incurred in the administration of the Fee program . Table I-2 sum marizes the proposed Fee structure , including the administrative component.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
400 of 864
3 SECTION I

INTRODUCTION
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table I-2: Fee Summary
Residential Property
(Fee per Building Sq. Ft.)
Non-Residential ( Fee per 1,000 Sq. Ft.) Fee per
Room
Land Use
Retail
Commercial
Food Service and
Entertainment
Office
Warehousing –
Standard
Warehousing –
High Cube
Manufacturing and
Assembly
Industrial/Other
Institutional and
Health Care
Hotel/Motel
Police $0.5197 $765 $190 $3,814 $2,397 $1,029 $206 $277 $2,837 $636 $165 Fire $0.4503 $663 $165 $3,305 $2,077 $891 $178 $240 $2,458 $551 $143 Parks $1.1794 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Library $0.5997 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Government $0.7145 $1,052 $261 $5,243 $3,296 $1,414 $283 $381 $3,900 $874 $226 Transportation $1.3954 $7,382 $7,150 $14,979 $4,312 $1,522 $563 $833 $2,729 $6,462 $2,253 Storm Drain $0.5113 $611 $611 $611 $611 $611 $611 $611 $645 $645 $351 Water $2.3657 $438 $951 $951 $1,141 $190 $190 $951 $951 $3,139 $1,902 Water Supply $0.6633 $123 $267 $267 $320 $53 $53 $267 $267 $880 $533 Sewer $0.2696 $450 $450 $450 $450 $480 $480 $480 $480 $150 $392 Solid Waste $0.0702 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $10 Subtotal $8.7393 $11,542 $10,105 $29,680 $14,665 $6,250 $2,624 $4,099 $14,326 $13,397 $5,975 Administration (2%) $0.1891 $231 $202 $594 $293 $125 $52 $82 $287 $268 $119 Grand Totals $8.9141 $11,773 $10,307 $30,273 $14,958 $6,375 $2,677 $4,181 $14,612 $13,665 $6,094 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
401 of 864
4 SECTION II

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com

II LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
The City has identified the need to levy impact fees to pay for police, fire, library, park, general government, transportation, storm drain, water, water supply, sewer, and solid waste facilities. These fees will finance facilities on the Needs Lists at levels identified by the City as appropriate for new development. Upon the adoption of the Fee Study and required legal documents by the City Council, all new development will be required to pay its “fair share” of the cost of facilities on the Needs Lists through these fees. The fees are established pursuant to AB 1600 as described below.

Prior to World War II, development in California was held responsible for very little of the cost of public infrastructure . Public improvements were financed primarily through jurisdictional general funds and utility charges. It was not uncommon during this period for speculators to subdivide tracts of land without providing any public improvements, expecting the closest city to eventually annex a project and provide public improvements and services.

However, starting in the late 1940s, the use of impact fees grew with the increased planning and regulation of new development. During the 1960s and 1970s, the California Courts broadened the right of local government to impose fees on developers for public improvements that were not located on project sites. More recently, with the passage of Proposition 13, the limits on general revenues for new infrastructure have resulted in new development being held responsible for a greater share of public improvements, and both the use and levels of impact fees have grown substantially . Higher fee levels were undoubtedly driven in part by a need to offset the decline in funds for infrastructure development from other sources.

The levy of impact fees is one authorized method of financing the public facilities necessary to mitigate the impacts of new development, as the levy of such fees provides funding to maintain an agency's existing level of service for an increased service population. A fee is “a monetary exaction, other than a tax or special assessment, which is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of publicfacilities related to the development project...” (California Government Code, Section66000). A fee may be levied for each type of capital improvement required for new development, with the payment of the fee occurring prior to the beginning of construction of a dwelling unit or non -residential building (or prior to the expansion of existing buildings of these types). Fees are often levied at final map recordation, issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or more commonly, at building permit issuance. Actual fees will be collected as proscribed in the Redlands Municipal Code.

Assembly Bill (“AB”) 1600, which created Section 66000et. seq.of the Government Code, was enacted by the State of California in 1987. This Fee Study is intended to meet the nexus or benefit requirements of AB 1600, which mandates that there is a nexus between fees imposed, the use of the fees, and the development projects on which the fees are imposed.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
402 of 864
5 SECTION II

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
A Government Code Section 66001
In 2006, Government Code Section 66001 was amended to clarify that a fee cannot include costs attributable to existing deficiencies, but can fund costs used to maintain the existing level of service or meet an adopted level of service that is consistent with the general plan.

Section 66000 et seq.of the Government Code requires all public agencies to satisfy the following requirements when establishing, increasing or imposing a fee as a condition of new development:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee. [Government Code Section 66001(a)(1)]

2. Identify the use to which the fee will be put. [Government Code Section 66001(a)(2)]

3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development on which the fee is to be imposed . [Government Code Section 66001(a)(3)]

4. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is to be imposed . [Government Code Section 66001(a)(4)]

5. Discuss how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

The sections below present each of the five requirements listed above as they relate to the imposition of the proposed fees.

1. PURPOSE OF THE FEE [GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66001(A)(1)] New residential and non -residential development within the City will generate additional residents and employees who will require additional public facilities. Land for these facilities will have to be acquired and public facilities and equipment will have to be expanded, constructed or purchased to meet thisincreased demand.

This Fee Study has been prepared in response to the projected direct and cumulated effect of future development. Each new development will contribute to the need for new public facilities. Without future development many of the new public facilities on the Needs Lists would not be necessary as the existing facilities are adequate for the City’s present population. In instances where facilities would be built regardless of new development, the costs of such facilities have been allocated to new and existing development based on their respective level of benefit.

The proposed impact fee will be charged to all future development, irrespective of location, in the City. Even future “in fill” development projects contribute to impacts on public facilities because they are an interactive component of a much greater universe of development located throughout the City. First, the property owners and/or the tenants associated with any new development in the City can be expected Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
403 of 864
6 SECTION II

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
to place additional demands on City facilities funded by the fee . Second, these property owners and tenants are dependent on and, in fact, may not have chosen to utilize their development, except for residential, retail, employment and recreational opportunities located nearby on other existing and future development. Third, the availability of residents, employees, and customers throughout the City has a growth- inducing impact without which some of the “in-fill” development would not occur.

As a result,all development projects in the City contribute to the cumulative impacts of development.

The impact fees will be used for the acquisition, installation, and construction of public facilities identified on the Needs Lists and appropriate administrative costs to mitigate the direct and cumulative impacts of new development in the City.

2. THE USE TO WHICH THE FEE IS TO BE PUT[GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66001(A)(2)]
The fee will be used for the acquisition, installation, and construction of the public facilities identified on the Needs Lists, included in Section IV of the Fee Study and other appropriate costs to mitigate the direct and cumulative impacts of new development in the City. The fee will provide a source of revenue to the City to allow for the acquisition, installation, and construction of public facilities, which in turn will maintain the current standard of service, preserve the quality of life in City an d protect the health, safety, and welfare of the existing and future residents, visitors, and employees.

3. DETERMINE THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FEE’S USE AND THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT UPON WHICH THE FEE IS IMPOSED (BENEFIT RELATIONSHIP) [GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66001(A)(3)]
It is the projected direct and cumulative effect of future development that has prompted the preparation of the Fee Study. Each development will contribute to the need for new public facilities. Without future development, the City would have no need to construct many of the public facilities on the Needs Lists . For all other facilities, the costs have been allocated to both existing and new development based on their level of benefit. Even future “infill” development projects, which may be adjacent to existing facilities, further burden existing public facilities. Consequently, all new development within the City, irrespective of location, contributes to the direct and cumulative impacts of development on public facilities and creates the need for new facilities to accommodate growth.

The fees will be expended for the acquisition, installation, and construction of the public facilities identified on the Needs Lists and other authorized uses, as that is the purpose for which the Fee is collected. As previously stated, all new development creates either a direct impact on public facilities or contributes to the cumulative Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
404 of 864
7 SECTION II

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
impact on public facilities. Moreover, this impact is generally equalized among all types of development because it is the increased demands for public facilities created by the future residents and employees that create the impact upon existing facilities.

For the foregoing reasons, new development benefits from the acquisition, construction, andInstallation of the facilities on the Needs Lists.

4. DETERMINE HOW THERE IS A REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE

NEED FOR THE PUBLIC FACILITY AND THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT

PROJECT UPON WHICH THE FEE IS IMPOSED (IMPACT RELATIONSHIP) [GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66001(A)(4)]
As previously stated, all new development within the City, irrespective of location, contributes to the direct and cumulative impacts of development on public facilities and creates the need for new facilities to accommodate growth . Without future development, many of the facilities on the Needs Lists would not be necessary. For certain other facilities, the costs have been allocated to both existing and new development based on their level of benefit.

For the reasons presented herein, there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities included on the Needs List and all new development within the City.

5. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE AMOUNT OF THE FEE AND THE COST

OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE DEVELOPMENT UPON WHICH THE FEE IS IMPOSED (“ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY”
RELATIONSHIP) [GOVERNMENT CODE 66001(A)]
As set forth above, all new development in the City impacts public facilities .

Moreover, each individual development project and its related increase in population and/or employment, along with the cumulative impacts of all development in the City, will adversely impact existing facilities. Thus, imposition of the Fee to finance the facilities on the Needs Lists is an efficient, practical, and equitable method of permitting development to proceed in a responsible manner.

New development impacts facilities directly and cumulatively. In fact, without any future development, the acquisition, construction, and/or installation of many of the facilities on the Needs Lists would not be necessary as existing City facilities are adequate. Even new development located adjacent to existing facilities will utilize and benefit from facilities on the Needs List.

The proposed fee amounts are roughly proportional to the impacts resulting from new development based on the analysis in Section IV. Thus, there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the Fee and the cost of the facilities.

Identifying these items will enable an impact fee to meet the nexus and rough Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
405 of 864
8 SECTION II

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
proportionality requirements established by previous court cases. These findings are discussed in the nexus test for each proposed fee element as presented in Sections IV(A)-IV(F). Current State financing and fee assessment requirements only allow new development to pay for its fair share of new facilities’ costs. Any current deficiencies resulting from the needs of existing development must be funded through other sources. Therefore, a key element to establish legal impact fees is to determine what share of the benefit or cost of a particular improvement can be equitably assigned to existing development, even if that improvement has not yet been constructed. By removing this factor, the true impact of new development can be assessed and equitable fees assigned.

B Assembly Bill (“AB”) 602
The impact fees included herein were circumscribed by the requirements of AB 602, which was approved by the California State Legislature and signed by Governor Newsom in 2021. Among the significant impacts of AB 602 are the following:
 On or after January 1, 2022, fee justification studies must identify the existing Level of Service (“LOS”) for each public facility, identify the proposed new LOS, and (if proposed new LOS is greater than existing LOS) include an explanation of why the new LOS is necessary.
 For housing development projects, nexus studies adopted after July 1, 2022, must calculate the amount of fees based on square footage of proposed units of the development, unless the local agency demonstrates that another metric is more appropriate. The b ill would require that a “local agency that calculated fees proportionally to the square footage of the proposed units be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by development.” This would also apply to multi- family residences.
 The bill also requires the Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”), on or before January 1, 2024, to create an impact fee nexus study template that may be used by local jurisdictions to calculate their fees. The bill requires that the templ ate include a method of calculating the feasibility of housing being built with a given fee level. The template must be completed by 2024, and local jurisdictions will have the option (it will not be required) to use the HCD template.
 The bill authorizes any member of the public, including an applicant for a development project, to submit evidence that the city, county, or other local agency had failed to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act. The bill requires the legislative body of the city, county, or other local agency to consider any timely submitted evidence and authorize the legislative body to change or adjust the proposed fee or fee increase, as specified.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
406 of 864
9 SECTION II

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
 If a nexus study supports the increase of an existing fee, the local agency shall review the assumption of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of the fees collected under the original fee.  Large jurisdictions (county population greater than 250,000) and cities within those counties must adopt a capital improvement plan(“CIP”) as part of the nexus study.
 Nexus studies shall be updated at least every 8 years from the period beginning January 1, 2023.

The Parks, Libraries, General Government , Transportation, Storm Drain, Water, Water Supply, Sewer, and Solid Waste Facilities impact fees included herein are based on the City’s current LOS, while the Police, Fire, and Park and Recreation impact fees are based on the City’s list of needed facilities (“Needs List”).

For purposes of complying with AB 602, the Needs List shown herein is considered to be the CIP.

In addition, DTA worked with the City to determine the average square footage for residential property. Using building permit data provided byCity staff from 2020 to 2023, DTA calculated the average residential square footage for residential unit s constructed in the City within the past three years, as shown in Table II-1 below. Once the Fees per dwelling unit were calculated for the residential land use category, the average square footage estimate shown in Table II-1 was divided into the Fees per dwell ing unit to generate Fee levels per residential square foot, as now required under AB 602. The Fee levels per residential square foot can be found in Section VII.

Table II-1: Future Residential Development Average Sq. Ft. Calculation (2020-2023)
Land Use Type Total Square
Footage Total Units Average Sq. Ft.
per Unit
All Residential Property 2,649,534 1,366 1,940
Table II-2 below shows the calculation of the total estimated future residential building square footage which is used in the calculation of the cost per square foot for the fee categories included herein.

Table II-2: Future Residential Development Total Sq. Ft. Calculation Land Use Type Average Sq.

Ft. per Unit
Total Future
Units Total Sq. Ft.

All Future Residential Property 1,940 11,200 21,728,000 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
407 of 864
10 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com

III DEMOGRAPHICS
In order to determine the public facilities needed to serve new development as well as establish fee amounts to fund such facilities, the City provided DTA with projections of future population, employees and development within the City. For purposes of projecting future population and employment growth, the City categorizes developable land uses as residential property and non-residential property. Residential and non-residential property is further categorized into subclasses as shown in Table 3. Based on these designations, DTA established fees for these land use categories to acknowledge the difference in impacts resulting from various land uses and to make the resulting fee program implementable. A summary of the land use classes utilized in thisFee Study are included in Table3. However, not all fees will apply to all land uses.

Table III-1: Summary of Land Use Categories
Land Use Classification for Fee
Study Definition
Residential Property
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Single-family detached homes;
 Single-family attached homes ; Buildings with attached residential units including apartments, town homes,
condominiums, except for units within a Transit -Oriented Development (“TOD”); and
 A 2 nd residential unit on property zoned and entitled for single-family residential use (an Accessory Dwelling Unit, or “ADU”) unless collection of DIF is prohibited by California law;  Multi-family residential units located within TOD zones identified in the City General Plan and conforming to TOD development requirements;
 Note: Retail and Commercial development within TOD zones will be assessed at the standard DIF rates for Retail and Commercial; and
 Attached or detached single -family residential units which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family dwelling is situated.

Retail
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Department stores, discount stores, furniture/appliance outlets, home improvement centers;
 Neighborhood shopping center; and
 Subregional and regional shopping centers.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
408 of 864
11 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Land Use Classification for Fee
Study Definition
Commercial
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Automobile sales and services;
 Entertainment and cultural facilities;
 Business Parks; and
 Service-oriented business activities unless specifically listed elsewhere.

Food Service and Entertainment
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Theatres;
 Full-service restaurants;
 Fast Food restaurants;
 Coffee shops and all other limited food/beverage businesses;  Bars and tasting rooms; and
 Bowling alleys, etc.

Office
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Business/professional office;
 Professional medical offices not located on the same
property/development as a hospital; and
 Service oriented business activities where the focus in on customer service delivery in an office environment.

Warehousing - Standard
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Warehouse facilities, or portions of other buildings, used for storage and distribution of materials not qualifying as High Cube warehousing.

Warehousing – High Cube
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 >200,000 SF warehouse over 24 feet high used for storage and consolidation of manufactured goods prior to distribution to other warehouse facilities utilizing a high level of on -site automation and logistics management.

Manufacturing and Assembly Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Facilities used for manufacturing and assembly of products.

Industrial - Other
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Rock, Sand, and Gravel Production;
 Storage Facilities;
 Redlands Municipal Airport;
 Parking lots; and
 Utility Facilities.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
409 of 864
12 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Land Use Classification for Fee
Study Definition
Public/Institutional and Health
Care
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Public schools and educational facilities;
 Private schools;
 Universities;
 Community Centers;
 Post offices;
 Religious buildings; and
 Hospitals.

Hotel/Motel Rooms
Includes but is not limited to buildings used as the following:
 Short-term and intermediate term housing with room rental businesses defined as hotel or motel in the Redlands Municipal Code.

The time horizon used for all fees is through the year 2035. The City was able to utilize available data from the City’s General Plan (the “General Plan”) to generate existing and future development projections through 2035.

The following sections summarize the existing and future development figures used in calculating the impact fees:
 Subsection A below summarizes the existing development in the City;  Subsection B below summarizes the future development in the City through the year 2035;
 Subsection C below summarizes the total development in the City in the year 2035; and
 Lastly, Subsection D below summarizes the EDU methodology used in all fee calculations.

Note that the City also provides public services to theunincorporated area, or “Donut Hole” and the City’s SOI. The Donut Hole consists mainly of existing commercial and industrial development. Customers within the sphere of in fluence are located within the eastern portions of the Cities of San Bernardino and Loma Linda, western portions of the City of Yucaipa and certain unincorporated areas of the County near Mentone and Crafton . The City-wide demographic data used herein does not include data within th e Donut Hole or the SOI. Demographic data for the Donut Holeand SOI is not available from the City at this time. It is assumed that the inclusion of development data from the Donut Hole and SOI will have a negligible impact on the calculation of the amount of the fees for the various land uses.

Please note that for purposes of this Fee Study, future ADUs are included in the buildout projections, but some of these units may not be required to pay an impact fee.As described Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
410 of 864
13 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
in Section V herein, pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.2(f), ADUs are exempt from incurring impact fees from local agencies, special districts, and water corporations if such unit is less than 750 square feet. If an ADU is 750 square feet or larger, impact fees shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the ADU to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. In addition, the water capital improvement fee, water supply fee, and sewer capital improvement fee shall not be applicable to any ADU created within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure, including, but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure.

A Existing Development Within the City
A.1 Residential Development
The City estimates there were 73,737 residents residing in 27,406 residential units within the City as of January 1, 2022.

Table III-2 summarizes the existing residential development within the City.

Table III-2: Estimated Existing Residential Development Residential Property Existing Number of
Residents (20 22)
Existing Number of
Residential Units ( 2022)
Existing Residential Property 73,737 27,406
A.2 Non-Residential Development
In terms of non -residential development, the City has estimated there are approximately 268 Hotel/Motel rooms and 30.3 million square feet of other non-residential development within the City as of January 1, 2022.

In terms of employees, there are 36,200 existing employees within the City.

Table III-3 summarizes the existing non-residential development within the City.

Table III-3: Estimated Existing Non -Residential Development Non-Residential Property Number of
Employees
Number of
Non-Residential SF
Number of
Rooms
Retail 3,500 3,747,747 N/A
Commercial 1,000 1,928,805 N/A
Food Service and Entertainment 3,200 378,015 N/A
Office 10,000 2,830,658 N/A
Warehousing - Standard 500 265,250 N/A
Warehousing - High Cube 3,000 12,038,333 N/A
Manufacturing and Assembly 2,400 2,532,603 N/A
Industrial - Other 500 73,748 N/A
Institutional and Health Care 12,000 6,522,384 N/A
Hotel/Motel 100 N/A 268
Total 36,200 30,317,543 268
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
411 of 864
14 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
B Future Development Within the City ( 2022-2035)
As discussed in the introduction above, the time horizon used for all fees is through the year 2035. Therefore, this section describes development through 2035. These fee calculations rely on the development information provided by the City related to population, residential dwelling units, employees, non-residential building square feet, and hotel/motel rooms as described below.

B.1 Residential Development
The City estimates there will be 101,187 residents residing in 38,606 residential units within the City in the year 2035. Therefore, the City will have a population increase of 27,450 new residents and growth in residential development of 11,200 new dwelling units from 2022-2035.

Table III-4 summarizes the future demographics for residential property through the year 2035.

Table III-4: Estimated Future Residential Development ( 2022-2035) Residential Property Future Number of
Residents ( 2022-2035)
Future Number of Residential
Units ( 2022-2035)
Future Residential Property 27,450 11,200
B.2 Non-Residential Development
In terms of non-residential development, it is estimated there will be approximately 500 new Hotel/Motel rooms and 10.2 million new square feet of other non - residential development within the City from 2022 to 2035.

In terms of employees, it is estimated there will be 17,300 additional employees within the City through 2035.

Table III-5 summarizes the future demographics for the non -residential land uses through the year 2035.

Table III-5: Estimated Future Non -Residential Development ( 2022-2035) Non-Residential Property Number of
Employees
Number of
Non-Residential SF Number of Rooms
Retail 3,000 1,613,362 N/A
Commercial 750 1,622,735 N/A
Food Service and Entertainment 2,000 215,736 N/A
Office 5,000 858,004 N/A
Warehousing - Standard 250 100,000 N/A
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
412 of 864
15 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Non-Residential Property Number of
Employees
Number of
Non-Residential SF Number of Rooms
Warehousing - High Cube 1,000 2,000,000 N/A
Manufacturing and Assembly 750 1,114,568 N/A
Industrial- Other 250 36,256 N/A
Institutional and Health Care 4,100 2,652,045 N/A
Hotel/Motel 200 N/A 500
Total 17,300 10,212,706 500
C Total Development Within the City ( 2035)
Table III-6 describes the total residential development in the City in the year 2035. This is based on the sum of Tables III-2 and III-4.

Table III-6: Estimated Residential Development (Year 2035) Residential Property Description
Total Existing
(2022)
(From Table III-2)
Future
Development
(2022-2035)
(From Table III-4)
Total
Development
(2035)
Total Residential
Property
Residents 73,737 27,450 101,187
Units 27,406 11,200 38,606
Table III-7 describes the total non-residential development in the City in the year2035. This is based on the sum of Tables III-3 and III-5.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
413 of 864
16 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table III-7: Estimated Non -Residential Development (Year 2035) Non-Residential
Property Description
Total Existing
(2022)
(From Table III-3)
Future Development
(2022 to 2035)
(From Table III-5)
Total
Development
(2035)
Retail Employees 3,500 3,000 6,500
Non-Res. SF 3,747,747 1,613,362 5,361,109
Commercial Employees 1,000 750 1,750
Non-Res. SF 1,928,805 1,622,735 3,551,540
Food Service and
Entertainment
Employees 3,200 2,000 5,200
Non-Res. SF 378,015 215,736 593,751
Office Employees 10,000 5,000 15,000
Non-Res. SF 2,830,658 858,004 3,688,662
Warehousing –
Standard
Employees 500 250 750
Non-Res. SF 265,250 100,000 365,250
Warehousing – High
Cube
Employees 3,000 1,000 4,000
Non-Res. SF 12,038,333 2,000,000 14,038,333
Manufacturing and
Assembly
Employees 2,400 750 3,150
Non-Res. SF 2,532,603 1,114,568 3,647,171
Industrial - Other Employees 500 250 750
Non-Res. SF 73,748 36,256 110,004
Institutional and
Health Care
Employees 12,000 4,100 16,100
Non-Res. SF 6,522,384 2,652,045 9,174,429
Hotel/Motel Employees 100 200 200
Rooms 268 500 768
Total
Employees 36,200 17,300 53,500
Non-Res. SF 30,317,543 10,212,706 40,530,249
Hotel Rooms 268 500 768
D EDU Projections
California Government Code §66001(4)(b) requires there to be a "...reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility, or portion of the public facility, attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed." To ensure a reasonable relationship is maintained within the proposed fee structure, thisFee Study uses an EDU methodology . This approach establishes, for given land uses, a method of comparison of that land use to a baseline land use, utilizing acommon demand variable. A demand variable is a measurable factor directly related to the size of the public facility.

As stated earlier, fees are calculated for various land use categories . Each land use has Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
414 of 864
17 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
different levels of demand for the new facilities depending upon the demand variable most closely related to the determination of the size, extent and cost of the facility in question .

For instance, additional traffic generated by new development requires expansion of existing roadway systems, therefore vehicular trips generated by growth in the various land uses would be a reasonable variable to measure traffic demand . In this case the Average Daily Trips ("ADTs") would be the common demand variable and the ADTs generated by a residential dwelling unit would be the baseline value to which the ADTs generated by the remaining land uses would be compared. Likewise, additional residents resulting from new residential development will generate demand for expanded library facilities in the existing library system, therefore population increase would be considered a reasonable common demand variable and the pop ulation growth from a new residence would be used as the baseline.

Table III-8 shows the fee category, service factor, applicable land uses for which the EDUs are calculated, and location of property subject to the fee.

Table III-8: EDUs
Facility Type Service Factor Fee Charged to
Land Uses Locations Subject to the Fee
Police Residents and Employees Served Res. and Non-Res. City-wide Fire Residents and Employees Served Res. and Non-Res. City-wide Parks Residents Served Res. Only City-wide
Library Residents Served Res. Only City-wide
Government Facilities Residents and Employees Served Res. and Non-Res. City-wide Transportation Average Daily Trips Res. and Non-Res. City-wide Storm Drain Runoff Coefficient Res. and Non-Res. City-wide Water Water Usage Res. and Non-Res. City-wide + Donut Hole + SOI Water Supply Water Usage Res. and Non-Res City-wide + Donut Hole + SOI Sewer Sewer Generation Res. and Non-Res. City-wide + Donut Hole + SOI Solid Waste Waste Volume Res. and Non-Res. City-wide
Table III-9 shows the existing EDUs for each land use. The data presented below is used for the police, fire, parks, library, and government facilities fees . The EDUs for transportation, which are based on average daily trips, are described in Section IV(E).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
415 of 864
18 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table III-9: Existing EDUs ( From 2022 to 2035)
Residential Property Number of Existing
Residents
Number of
Residential Units
EDUs per
Residential Unit
Total Existing
EDUs
Existing Residential Property 73,737 27,406 1.098 30,086 Non-Residential Property Number of Existing
Employees
Number of
Non-Residential
SF/Rooms
EDUs per 1,000
Non-Res.

SF/Room
Total Existing
EDUs
Retail 3,500 3,747,747 0.381 1,428
Commercial 1,000 1,928,805 0.212 408
Food Service and Entertainment 3,200 378,015 3.454 1,306 Office 10,000 2,830,658 1.441 4,080
Warehousing – Standard 500 265,250 0.769 204
Warehousing – High Cube 3,000 12,038,333 0.102 1,224
Manufacturing and Assembly 2,400 2,532,603 0.387 979
Industrial – Other 500 73,748 2.766 204
Institutional and Health Care 12,000 6,522,384 0.751 4,896 Hotel/Motel Rooms 100 268 0.152 41
Subtotal 36,200 30,317,811 14,770
Grand Total 44,856
Table III-10 shows the total number of future EDUs calculated for each land use for the time period from 2022-2035. Please note that the future EDU factors differ from the existing EDU factors due to various reasons including estimated changes in residents per unit and employees per square foot as provided by the City. The City estimated such future changes based on current census data statistics, housing density within the City, planning projections, and employee levels of current business in the City.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
416 of 864
19 SECTION I II

DEMOGRAPHICS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table III-10: Future EDUs (From 2022 to 2035)
Residential Property Number of Future
Residents
Number of
Residential Units
EDUs per
Residential Unit
Total Future
EDUs
Future Residential Property 27,450 11,200 1.000 11,200
Non-Residential Property Number of Future
Employees
Number of
Non-Residential
SF/Rooms
EDUs per 1,000
Non-Res.

SF/Room
Total Future
EDUs
Retail 3,000 1,613,362 0.759 1,224
Commercial 750 1,622,735 0.189 306
Food Service and Entertainment 2,000 215,736 3.783 816
Office 5,000 858,004 2.378 2,040
Warehousing – Standard 250 100,000 1.020 102
Warehousing – High Cube 1,000 2,000,000 0.204 408
Manufacturing and Assembly 750 1,114,568 0.275 306
Industrial – Other 250 36,256 2.813 102
Institutional and Health Care 4,100 2,652,045 0.631 1,673 Hotel/Motel Rooms 200 500 0.163 82
Subtotal 17,300 10,212,706 7,059
Grand Total 18,259
Table III-11 shows the total number of EDUs calculated for each land use in the year 2035.

Table III-11: EDUs (in 2035)
Residential Property Number of
Residents
Number of
Residential Units Total EDUs
Total Residential Property 101,187 38,606 41,286
Non-Residential Property Number of
Employees
Number of
Non-Residential
SF/Rooms
Total EDUs
Retail 6,500 5,361,109 2,652
Commercial 1,750 3,551,540 714
Food Service and Entertainment 5,200 593,751 2,122
Office 15,000 3,688,662 6,120
Warehousing – Standard 750 365,250 306
Warehousing – High Cube 4,000 14,038,333 1,632
Manufacturing and Assembly 3,150 3,647,171 1,285
Industrial – Other 750 110,004 306
Institutional and Health Care 16,100 9,174,429 6,569
Hotel/Motel Rooms 300 768 Rooms 122
Subtotal 53,500 40,530,249 21,828
Grand Total 63,115
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
417 of 864
20 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com

IV FEE CALCULATIONS
The subsequent sections present the reasonable relationship for benefit, impact, and rough proportionality tests for each fee element (i.e., police facilities, fire facilities, library facilities, etc.) and the analysis undertaken to apportion costs for each type of pub lic facility on the Needs List. More detailed fee calculation worksheets for each type of facility are included in Appendix B.

A Police Facilities Fees
The Police Facilities will serve the residents and employees of Redlands by providing law enforcement and public safety services. The Fee Study includes a component for new police vehicles/aircraft. Table IV-A1 illustrates how the police fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of the fee, the type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and the proportionality requirements.

Table IV-A1: Police Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
acquire vehicles, equipment, and facilities that will
mitigate the impacts of new residential and non-
residential development to the City’s Police facilities. 66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put. Acquisition of vehicles and equipment.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential and non-residential development in
the City will generate additional residents and
employees increasing the need for trained police
personnel. Vehicles and equipment used to provide
these services will have to be purchased to meet this
increased demand.
66001(a)(4)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the need for the public facilities
and the type of development
project on which the fee is
imposed.

The additional residents and employees from new
development will impact demand for police vehicles
and equipment. New police vehicles and equipment
are needed to mitigate the impacts of the additional
residents and employees. If additional police vehicles
and equipment are not acquired, then overall public
safety in the City will suffer.
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

The police fee is based on the cost to provide new
vehicles, equipment, and facilities.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
418 of 864
21 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
A.1 Existing Facilities
The City currently has four police facilities totaling 34,680 building square feet. In addition, the City currently has 118 vehicles and 552 items of equipment items. See Table IV-A2 for a summary of the existing inventory.

Table IV-A2: Existing Police Facilities
Type Facility Unit Units
Police Facilities
Annex - Admin, Detectives, MET Square Feet 21,231
EOC - Patrol, Dispatch, Reords Square Feet 8,237
Office Space Square Feet 1,979
City Hall Basement - Property and Evidence Square Feet 3,233 Total Square Feet 34,680
Vehicles
Marked Police Units Vehicles 48
Motorcycles Vehicles 7
Off-Road Vehicles Vehicles 5
Unmarked/Undercover/Cold Units Vehicles 38
Crime Scene/Evidence Vehicles Vehicles 2
CSO/Pkg Control/CVP/Explorer/CVP Vehicles Vehicles 15
Custody/Transport Vehicles 2
Mobile Command Center Vehicles 1
Total Vehicles 118
Police Equipment
Cameras Items 200
Body-worn cameras Items 112
Radios Items 130
Iphones Items 100
Ipads Items 10
Total Items 552
A.2 Proposed Facilities
In order to determine the proposed facilities, the City must determine the demand upon infrastructure created by new development. Residents and businesses benefit Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
419 of 864
22 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
from law enforcement services in three ways: (i) directly, (ii) indirectly, and (iii) through standby availability . Direct services are those where a resident or business owner requires a direct response, usually as a result of being the victim of a crime. Direct service results in the form of a law enforcement officer contacting the victim. Indirect benefits, such as crime prevention programs, free patrol time and other law enforcement services that serve all business, citizens, and visitors, are impossible to calculate for a specific boundary. An example of indirect benefit would be the apprehension of a burglar in a particular neighborhood. Had the burglar not been apprehended and arrested, he/she may have broken into additional homes in the neighborhood. Most residents and businesses may go for many years before ever requiring a call-for-service. However, these fortunate residents and businesses still benefit from law enforcement services, if in no other way than by the knowledge that a law enforce ment officer is available, through adequate planned standby to respond when needed.

The addition of new residential units and new business will increase the demand upon enforcement service level, more areas requiring preventative patrol, and in general, will create more opportunities for crimes to be committed . Demands will be made upon the previously listed assets in Table IV-A2 above in a direct, indirect, or standby form. Therefore, such assets would need to be expanded.

Table IV-A3 identifies the vehicles/aircraft proposed to be funded in whole or in part with the collection of Police fees . Quantity and costs are based on estimates provided by the City. For purposes of complying with AB 602, the Needs List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Table IV-A3: Needs List
Future Police Needs List Facility Unit Number Facility Cost Police Facilities
Police Station (1625 W. RB) Sq. Ft. 109,850 $85,000,000 Police Substations (North & East) Sq. Ft. 1,200 $1,000,000 Subtotal Facilities 111,050 $86,000,000
Police Vehicles
Police Vehicles Vehicles 45 $2,250,000
Outfitting Vehicles 45 $1,575,000
Rescue Vehicles Vehicles 2 $700,000
Subtotal Vehicles 92 $4,525,000
Police Equipment
Cameras Cameras 300 $1,500,000
Body-worn Cameras Cameras 30 $150,000
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
420 of 864
23 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Future Police Needs List Facility Unit Number Facility Cost Miscellaneous Technical Hardware IT 1 $1,000,000
Handheld radios, In-car & Desktop radios Radio Equipment 250 $2,125,000 Iphones, Ipads, Cell Service Cellular 150 $500,000
Guns Guns 30 $60,000
Electric Charging Stations Charging Stations 8 $1,000,000 Subtotal Equipment 769 $6,335,000
Grand Total $96,860,000
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($22,322) Net Facilities Cost $96,837,678
The needs identified above is based on information provided by the City and consistent with a needs analysis prepared by Holt Architects on behalf of the City.

A.3 EDUs
For police facilities, the development of property intoresidential and non-residential uses generates residents and employees increasing the need for trained police personnel. Vehicles and aircraft used to provide police services will have to be purchased to meet this increased demand.

Since the facilities proposed to be financed by the impact fees will serve both residential and non-residential property, DTA projected the number of future EDUs based on the number of residents or employees generated by each land use class.

As shown in Section III (D) (Demographics - EDUs), there are 44,856 total existing EDUs and 18,259 future EDUs, bringing the total EDUs in 2035 to 63,115 EDUs.

A.4 Allocation of Costs
The total cost of $96,837,678, as shown in Table IV.A-3, for police facilities needed to serve existing and new development is allocated to existing and new development based on the share of total EDUs in 2035.

A.4.i Police Stations
Table IV-A4 summarizes the allocation of police station costs to existing and new development. The City currently has 34,680 square feet of existing police station buildings. Based on the locations of existing and new development, additional police facilities will be needed at various locations. The City has determined 111,050 new building square feet are needed to adequately serve both existing and new development, bringing the total to 145,730 square feet.

Since the buildout standard of 4,045.54 (111,050 square feet divided by 27,450 future Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
421 of 864
24 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 470.32 (34,680 existing square feet divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000), the future costs is limited to the existing standard of 470.32.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing 34,680 square feet and a reduction to maintain the existing standard , 84% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 16% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Table IV-A4: Allocation of Police Facilities Costs
Type of
Development EDUs
Percentage
of Total
EDUs
Total
Facilities Sq.

Ft. in 2035
Sq. Ft. Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Building Sq.

Ft. Net of
Credit
Percentage
of Costs
Allocated
Facility Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 44,856 71% 103,571 (34,680) 0 68,891 84% $72,408,316 Future
Development 18,259 29% 42,159 0 (29,249) 12,910 16% $13,569,362 Total 63,115 100% 145,730 (34,680) (29,249) 81,801 100% $85,977,678 A.4.ii Vehicles
Table IV-A5 summarizes the allocation of vehicle c osts to existing and new development. The City currently has 118 existing police vehicles. The City has determined 92 new vehicles are needed to adequately serve both existing and new development, bringing the total to 210 vehicles.

Since the buildout standard of 3.35 (92 vehiciles divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 1.60 (118 existing vehicles divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000), the future costs is limited to the existing standard of 1.60.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing 118 vehicles and a reduction to maintain the existing standard , 42% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 58% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
422 of 864
25 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-A5: Allocation of Police Vehicle Costs
Type of
Development EDUs
Percentage
of Total
EDUs
Total
Vehicles
2035
Vehicles Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction
to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Vehicles
Net of
Credit
Percentage
of Costs
Allocated
Vehicle Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 44,856 71% 149 (118) 0 31 42% $1,882,803
Future
Development 18,259 29% 61 0 (17) 44 58% $2,642,197
Total 63,115 100% 210 (118) (17) 75 100% $4,525,000
A.4.iii Equipment
Table IV-A6 summarizes the allocation ofpolice equipment costs to existing and new development. The City currently has an inventory of 552 equipment-related items.

The City has determined 769 additional items are needed to adequately serve both existing and new development, bringing the total to 1,321 items.

Since the buildout standard of 28.01 (769 units divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 7.49 (552 existing units divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000), the future costs is limitedto the existing standard of 7.49.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing552 items and a reduction to maintain the existing standard, 65% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 35% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Table IV-A6: Allocation of Police Equipment Costs
Type of
Development EDUs Percentage of
Total EDUs
Total
Equipment
Items 2035
Items Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Equipment
Items Net of
Credit
Percentage
of Costs
Allocated
Equipment
Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 44,856 71% 939 (552) 0 387 65% $4,136,117
Future
Development 18,259 29% 382 0 (177) 206 35% $2,198,883
Total 63,115 100% 1.321 (552) (177) 593 100% $6,335,000 A.4.iv Total Facilities Costs
See Table IV-A7 for the total facilities costs allocated to new and existing development.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
423 of 864
26 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-A7: Total Costs
A.5 Proposed Fee Amount
The Fee per EDU was calculated by dividing the costs allocated to future development by the number of future EDUs as shown in the table below.

Table IV-A8: Cost per EDU
Type of Development EDUs Facility Costs
Allocated
Total Cost
Per EDU
Future Development 18,259 $18,410,443 $1,008.31
See the table below for the fee amount for each land use based on the cost per EDU as calculated above.

New Facility Cost Allocated to
Existing Development
Cost Allocated to
Future Development Total Costs
Buildings $72,408,316 $13,569,362 $85,977,678
Vehicles $1,882,803 $2,642,197 $4,525,000
Equipment $4,136117 $2,198,883 $6,335,000
Total $78,427,236 $18,410,442 $96,837,678
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
424 of 864
27 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-A9: Proposed Fees
Land Use Type EDUs per Unit
/ 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Number of Future
Units/Rooms/1,000
Sq. Ft.

DIF per
Unit/Room/1,000 Sq.

Ft.

Cost
Financed by
Fees
Residential Property
Residential Property 1.000 11,200 $1,008.31 $11,293,109 Non-Residential Property
Retail 0.759 1,613 $765.00 $1,234,220
Commercial 0.189 1,623 $190.14 $308,555
Food Service and Entertainment 3.783 216 $3,813.98 $822,813 Office 2.378 858 $2,397.46 $2,057,033
Warehousing – Standard 1.020 100 $1,028.52 $102,852
Warehousing – High Cube 0.204 2,000 $205.70 $411,407
Manufacturing and Assembly 0.275 1,115 $276.84 $308,555 Industrial – Other 2.813 36 $2,836.82 $102,852
Institutional and Health Care 0.631 2,652 $636.02 $1,686,767 Hotel/Motel 0.163 500 $164.56 $82,281
Total $18,410,443
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $78,427,235
Total Cost of Police Facilities $96,837,678
Based on the development projections in Section III and Appendix A, the fee amount presented in Table IV-A9 above are expected to finance approximately 19% of the facilities needed. The City will need to fund the remaining costs from other sources of funds.

In compliance with AB 602, DTA has calculated the residential fees on a per-square- foot basis. Table II -2 (Legal Requirements) provides the calculation for the total future residential square footage that is then used in the cost per square foot calculation shown in Table IV-A10 below.

Table IV-A10: Police Facilities Fee Summary (per Sq. Ft.) Land Use Type
Costs Financed
by Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Units $11,293,109 21,728,000 $0.5197
DTA has reviewed the available information related to the City’s prior impact fee assumptions and has determined that the new fee amounts, which are generally Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
425 of 864
28 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
higher than the City’s existing impact fees, are needed due to the current facility needs of the City, updated development projections, and updated methodology changes in compliance with AB602.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
426 of 864
29 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
B Fire Facilities Fees
The Fire Facilities will serve the residents and employees of Redlands by providing fire protection services. The Fee Study includes a component for new fire facilities, equipment, and vehicles. Table IV-B1 illustrates how the fire fee will meet the requirements ofAB 1600 with regard to use of the fee, the type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and the proportionality requirements.

Table IV-B1: Fire Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
construct various Fire facilities and acquire
equipment and vehicles that will mitigate the impacts
of new residential and non-residential development
to the City’s Fire facilities.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Expansion/construction/acquisition of Fire facilities,
equipment, and vehicles.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential and non-residential development in
the City will generate additional residents and
employees increasing the need for trained Fire
personnel. Buildings, equipment, and vehicles used
to provide these services will have to be expanded,
constructed or purchased to meet this increased
demand.
66001(a)(4)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the need for the public facilities
and the type of development
project on which the fee is
imposed.

The additional residents and employees from new
development will impact demand for fire facilities.

New Fire facilities, vehicles, and equipment are
needed to mitigate the impacts of the additional
residents and employees. If additional Fire facilities, vehicles, and equpment are not constructed and
equipment and vehicles are not acquired, then overall
public safety in the City will suffer.
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

The Fire fee is based on the cost to provide new
facilities, equipment, and vehicles.

B.1 Existing Facilities
The City currently has four fire stations totaling 27,643 building square feet , 16 primary fire vehicles, 14 support staff vehicles, 6 secondary units, and 60 items of personal protective equipment . See Table IV-B2 for a summary of the existing Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
427 of 864
30 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
inventory.

Table IV-B2: Existing Fire Facilities
Fire Facilities Facility Unit Units
Fire Stations
Fire Station 261 SF 11,912
Fire Station 262 SF 4,339
Fire Station 263 SF 7,142
Fire Station 264 SF 4,250
Total Fire Stations 27,643
Primary Fire Vehicles and Equipment
Type 1 Engine E-261 Vehicles 1
Type 1 Engine E-262 Vehicles 1
Type 1 Engine E-263 Vehicles 1
Type 1 Engine E-264 Vehicles 1
Tractor Drawn Aerial Ladder T-261 Vehicles 1
Type 3 Engine BE-261 Vehicles 1
Type 3 Engine BE-262 Vehicles 1
Type 3 Engine BE-264 Vehicles 1
Water Tender WT-263 Vehicles 1
Squad MS-261 Vehicles 1
Command C-700 Vehicles 1
Command BC-704 Vehicles 1
Command BC-705 Vehicles 1
Command BC-706 Vehicles 1
Command BC-707 Vehicles 1
Command DC-701 Vehicles 1
Total 16
Support Staff Vehicles and Equipment
Staff Vehicle P-751 Vehicles 1
Staff Vehicle 903 Vehicles 1
Utility Vehicle UT-261 Vehicles 1
Incident Support IS-263 Vehicles 1
Rescue Trailer 952 Vehicles 1
Lt Support Trailer 953 Vehicles 1
Repair Vehicle 925 Vehicles 1
Safety Trailer 952 with ARV Vehicles 1
Rehab Trailer 954 Vehicles 1
Arson Vehicle 938 Vehicles 1
Staff-CRR 909 Ford Escape Vehicles 1
Staff-CRR 906 Ford Escape Vehicles 1
Staff-CRR 882 Toyota Rav4 Vehicles 1
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
428 of 864
31 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Fire Facilities Facility Unit Units
Staff-EMS 912 Vehicles 1
Total 14
Secondary Units
Type 1 Engine E-261R Vehicles 1
Type 1 Engine E-263R Vehicles 1
Aerial Ladder T-261R Vehicles 1
Tractor Drawn Aerial Ladder Reserve Vehicles 1
Reserve BC 911 Vehicles 1
Squad MS-261R Vehicles 1
Total 6
Personal Protective Equipment
Personal Protective Equipment Items 60
Total 60
B.2 Proposed Facilities
In order to determine the proposed facilities, the City must determine the demand upon infrastructure created by new development. It is clear all new development in the City will impact the City’s current ability to respond to fire, rescue, and medical calls-for-service. The effect is twofold . Initially, each new residence and business will create, on average, additional calls -for-service increasing the likelihood of simultaneous (and thus competing) calls-for-service. Additionally, as development spreads further from existing stations, the distances (and thus response times) will increase, taking the existing engine companies out-of-service for greater periods of time.

The capacity of any fire station is finite and will reach practical limits (through call frequency and total incident time). When capacity is exceeded, the level of service afforded to existing development will be reduced . In other words, if development continues without an increase in the number of fire stations, the existing stations would be overwhelmed in terms of calls -for-service, increasing the possibility of a greater number of simultaneous calls-for-service. Additional demands will be made upon the previously listed asset s in Table IV-B2 above and therefore, such assets would need to be expanded.

Table IV-B3 identifies the facilities, equipment, and vehicles proposed to be funded in whole or in part with the collection of Fire fees. Quantity and costs are based on estimates provided by the City. For purposes of complying with AB 602, the Needs List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
429 of 864
32 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-B3: Needs List
Fire Facilities Facility Unit Number Facility Cost
Future Fire Facilities Unit Building Size Costs
Fire Station 264 Replacement SF 9,000 $9,742,723
NE Fire Station SF 9,000 $9,742,723
NW Fire Station SF 9,000 $9,742,723
Total 27,000 $29,228,169
Future Apparatus and Support Staff Vehicles Unit Vehicles Costs Staff Vehicle – BC Vehicles 1 $86,602
Staff Vehicle – Community Risk Reduction Vehicles 1 $32,476 Staff Vehicle – Emergency Management Vehicles 1 $32,476 Type 1 Engine Vehicles 2 $1,900,000
Total 5 $2,051,554
Future Staff Personal Protective Equipment Unit
Personal Protective Equipment Equipment 18 $103,554
Total $31,383,276
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($427,545) Net Facilities Cost $30,955,731
The need for additional fire stations is driven by the increasing demand due to urban development and population growth. These stations would enhance the coverage area, ensuring timely reach to all parts of the growing community, crucial for reducing response times and managing multiple emergencies simultaneously. The Fire Engine, the primary response vehicle, Support Vehicles, providing essential logistical and operational support, and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), ensuring firefighter safety, are integral to these additions. These resources are vital for the safety and well -being of our growing community.

B.3 EDUs
For Fire facilities, the development of property into residential and non -residential uses generates residents and employees increasing the need for trained fire personnel. Buildings, equipment, and vehicles used to provide fire protection services will have to be expanded, constructed or purchased to meet this increased demand.

As shown in Section III (D) (Demographics - EDUs), there are 44,856 total existing EDUs and 18,259 future EDUs, bringing the total EDUs in 2035 to 63,115 EDUs.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
430 of 864
33 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
B.4 Allocation of Costs
The total cost of $30,955,731, as shown in TableIV-B3 above, for fire facilities needed to serve existing and new development is allocated to existing and new development based on the share of total EDUs in 2035.

B.4.i Fire Stations
Table IV-B4 summarizes the allocation of fire station costs to existing and new development. The City currently has 27,643 square feet of existing fire station buildings. Based on the locations of existing and new development, additional fire facilities will be needed at various locations . The City has determined 27,000 new building square feet are needed to adequately serve both existing and new development, bringing the total to 54,643 square feet.

Since the buildout standard of 983.61 (27,000 square feet divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 374.89 (27,643 existing square feet divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000), the future costs is limited to the existing standard of 374.89.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing 27,643 square feet and a reduction to maintain the existing standard , 52% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and48% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Table IV-B4: Allocation of Fire Facilities Costs
Type of
Development EDUs
Percentage
of Total
EDUs
Total
Facilities Sq.

Ft. in 2035
Sq. Ft. Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Building Sq.

Ft. Net of
Credit
Percentage
of Costs
Allocated
Facility Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 44,856 71% 38,835 (27,643) 0 11,192 52% $15,004,487 Future
Development 18,259 29% 15,808 0 (5,517) 10,291 48% $13,796,136 Total 63,115 100% 54,643 (27,643) (5,517) 21,483 100% $28,800,623 B.4.ii Future Apparatus and Support Staff Vehicles
Table IV-B5 summarizes the allocation of support staff vehicle costs to existing and new development. The City currently has 14 existing support staff vehicles and six existing secondary unit vehicles . The City has determined that an additional five support staff vehicles are needed to adequately serve both existing and new development, bringing the total to 25 support staff vehicles.

Since the existing standard of 0.27 (20 existing vehicles divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000) isgreater thanthe buildout standard of0.18 (five future Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
431 of 864
34 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
vehicles divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000), 100% of the costs will be allocated to new development.

B.4.iii Personal Protective Equipment
The City currently has 60 units of staff personal protective equipment. The City has determined the personal protective equipment identified on Table IV-B3 will be needed to serve new development. Since the existing standard of 0.81 (60 existing vehicles divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the buildout standard of 0.66 (18 future units divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000), 100% of the costs will be allocated to new development.

B.4.iv Total Facilities Costs
See Table IV-B5 for the total facilities costs allocated to new and existing development.

Table IV-B5: Total Costs
B.5 Proposed Fee Amount
The Fee per EDU was calculated by dividing the costs allocated to future development by the number of future EDUs as shown in the table below.

Table IV-B6: Cost per EDU
Type of Development EDUs Facility Costs
Allocated
Total Cost
Per EDU
Future Development 18,259 $15,951,243 $873,63
See Table IV-B7 for the fee amount for each land use based on the cost per EDU as calculated above.

New Facility
Cost Allocated
to Existing
Development
Cost Allocated to
Future
Development
Total Costs
Building Sq. Ft. $15,004,487 $13,796,136 $28,800,623
Support Staff Vehicles $0 $2,051,553 $2,051,553
Personal Protection
Equipment
$0 $103,554 $103,554
Total $15,004,487 $15,951,243 $30,955,730
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
432 of 864
35 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-B7: Proposed Fees
Land Use Type
EDUs per
Unit
/ 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Number of Future
Units/Rooms/1,000
Sq. Ft.

DIF per
Unit/Room/1,000
Sq. Ft.

Cost Financed
by Fees
Residential Property
Residential Property 1.000 11,200 $873.63 $9,784,618
Non-Residential Property
Retail 0.759 1,613 $662.81 $1,069,357
Commercial 0.189 1,623 $164.75 $267,339
Food Service and Entertainment 3.783 216 $3,304.52 $712,905 Office 2.378 858 $2,077.22 $1,782,262
Warehousing – Standard 1.020 100 $891.13 $89,113
Warehousing – High Cube 0.204 2,000 $178.23 $356,452
Manufacturing and Assembly 0.275 1,115 $239.86 $267,339 Industrial – Other 2.813 36 $2,457.89 $89,113
Institutional and Health Care 0.631 2,652 $551.07 $1,461,455 Hotel/Motel 0.163 132 $142.58 $71,290
Total $15,951,244
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $15,004,487
Total Cost of Fire Facilities $30,955,731
Based on the development projections in Section III and Appendix A, the fee amount presented in Table IV-B8 above are expected to finance approximately 51% of the facilities needed. The City will need to fund the remaining costs from other sources of funds.

Table IV-B8: Fire Facilities Fee Summary (per Sq. Ft.)
Land Use Type
Costs Financed
by Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Units $9,784,618 21,728,000 $0.4503
DTA has reviewed the available information related to the City’s prior impact fee assumptions and has determined that the new fee amounts, which are generally higher than the City’s existing impact fees, are needed due to the current facility needs of the City, updated develop ment projections, and updated methodology changes in compliance with AB602.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
433 of 864
36 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
C Park Facilities Fees
Public parks play an important part in the overall quality of life for residents in the City of Redlands. The Fee Study includes a component for new parks and trails . Table IV-C1 illustrates how the parks fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of the fee, the type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for facilities and the proportionality requirements.

Table IV-C1: Parks Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
acquire land and construct park and trail facilities that will mitigate the impacts of new residential
development to the City’s Parks facilities.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Acquisition of land and development of parks and
trails and construction of community centers.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential development in the City will generate
additional residents increasing the need for Parks
facilities. Park and trail facilities and community
centers used to provide these services will have to be
expanded or constructed to meet this increased
demand.
66001(a)(4)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the need for the public facilities
and the type of development
project on which the fee is
imposed.

The additional residents from new development will
impact demand for Parks facilities. New parks and
trail facilities and community centers are needed to
mitigate the impacts of the additional residents. If
additional park and trail facilities are not constructed, then the overall quality of life for residents in the City will suffer.
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

The Parks Facilities fee is based on the cost to provide park and trail facilities and community centers.

C.1 Existing Facilities
See Table IV-C2 for a summary of the existing inventory of the City’s park facilities.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
434 of 864
37 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-C2: Existing Parks, Trails, Sports Fields, and Community Center Buildings Park Facility Units
Existing Parks
Brookside Park 9.2 Acres
Caroline Park 16.8 Acres
Community Park 18.2 Acres
Crafton Park 7.5 Acres
Ed Hales Park 0.3 Acres
Ford Park 27.0 Acres
Franklin Park 0.6 Acres
Jennie Davis Park 5.2 Acres
Prospect Park 11.4 Acres
Simonds Parkway 0.9 Acres
Smiley Park 9.2 Acres
Sylvan Park 23.3 Acres
Texonia Park 8.8 Acres
The Terrace 2.5 Acres
Isreal Beal Park 8.1 Acres
Oakmont Park 14.6 Acres
Redlands Sports Park 48.0 Acres
Heritage Park 18.7 Acres
Orange Street Alley 0.1 Acres
Total Park Acreage 230.3 Acres
Existing Trail(s)
Orange Blossom Trail Phases 1, 2, and 3 4.48 Acres 1
Sports Fields
Fields 23 Fields
Existing Community Center Buildings
Redlands Community Center 22,900 Sq. Ft.

Redlands Community Senior Center 7,500 Sq. Ft.

Joslyn Senior Center 8,925 Sq. Ft.

Redlands Bowl 3,046 Sq. Ft.

Mission Gables 5,014 Sq. Ft.

Total Buildings 47,385 Sq. Ft.

Note:

1. Based on a trail length of 3.7 miles and standard width of 10 ft per US Dept. of Transportation.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
435 of 864
38 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
C.2 Proposed Facilities
In order to determine the proposed facilities, the City must determine the demand upon infrastructure created by new development . It is clear new residential development in the City will impact the City’s current park and trail system.

The capacity of the park and trail facilities is finite and will reach practical limits (through park and trail visitors) . When capacity is exceeded, the level of service afforded to existing development will be reduced . In other words, if development continues without an increase in the number of park and trail facilities and community center, the existing facilities would be overwhelmed in terms of providing Parks services . Additional demands will be made upon the previously listed assets in Table IV-C2 above and therefore, such assets would need to be expanded.

Table IV-C3 identifies the park and trail facilities and community center proposed to be funded in whole or in part with the collection of Parks fees . Quantity and costs are based on estimates provided by the City.For purposes of complying with AB 602, the Needs List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Table IV-C3: Needs List
Parks Facilities Facility Unit Number Facility Cost (20 23) Park Acres Acres 108.0 $27,000,000
Trails 2 Acres 13.37 $5,516,000
Sports Fields/Courts
Baseball Fields Fields 5 $1,750,000
Multi-Use Fields Fields 5 $1,250,000
Tennis/Pickleball Courts Courts 6 $750,000
Total 16 $3,750,000
Total $36,266,000
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($383,398) Net Facilities Cost $35,882,602
Note:

2. Based on a trail length of 11.03 miles and standard width of 10 ft per US Dept . of Transportation.

The City Facilities and Community Services Department developed the needs list above based on projected population growth and future development in the City as provided in Section III (Demographics) herein. The goal was to maintain an equivalent ratio of facilities in square footage or acreage to projected population. Development costs were based on a combination of previous project Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
436 of 864
39 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
costs and construction estimates from the City’s on -call architect to project an average per square foot or per acre cost for acquisition and/or development.

C.3 EDUs
For Parks facilities, the development of property into residential uses generates residents increasing the need for Parks facilities. Developed park acreage, trails, and community center buildings will have to be expanded, constructed or purchased to meet this increased demand.

City records do not indicate a significant link between the business community and park use, therefore, no fee is required from non-residential property. Therefore, the EDUs for existing and future development are based on the residents generated from existing and future residential units. There are no EDUs assigned to Non-Residential Property.

As shown in Section III (D) (Demographics - EDUs), there are 30,086 total existing residential EDUs and 11,200 future residential EDUs, bringing the total residential EDUs in 2035 to 41,286 EDUs.

C.4 Allocation of Costs
The total cost of $ 35,882,602, as shown in Table IV-C3 above, for Parks facilities needed to serve existing and new development is allocated to existing and new development based on the share of total EDUs in 2035.

C.4.i Park Acres
Table IV-C4 summarizes the allocation of park acreage development costs to existing and new development. The City currently has 230.3 acres of existing parks . Based on the locations of existing and new development, additional park facilities will be needed at various locations . The City has determined 1 08.0 new park acres are needed to adequately serve both existing and new development, bringing the total to 338.3 acres.

Since the buildout standard of 3.93 (108.0 future acres divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 3.12 (230.3 existing acres divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000), the future costs is limited to the existing standard of 3.12.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing 230.3 acres and a reduction to maintain the existing standard , 16% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 84% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
437 of 864
40 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-C4: Allocation of Park Acreage Costs
Type of
Development
Residentia
l EDUs
Percentag
e of Total
EDUs
Total Park
Acres in
2035
Acres Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction
to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Acres Net
of Credit
and
Reduction
Percentag
e of Costs
Allocated
Facility
Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 30,086 73% 246.6 (230.3) 0.0 16.2 16% $4,243,301 Future
Development 11,200 27% 91.8 0.0 (6.0) 85.7 84% $22,438,340 Total 41,286 100% 338.3 (230.3) (6.0) 102.0 100% $26,681,641 C.4.ii Sports Fields/Courts
Table IV-C5 summarizes the allocation of the future sports field/court costs to existing and new development . The City currently has 23 existing sports fields/courts. The City has determined16 new fields/courtsare needed to adequately serve both existing and new development, bringing the total to 39 fields/courts.

Since the buildout standard of 0.58 (16 fields/courts divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 0.31 (23 existing fields/courts divided by 73,737 existing residentsmultiplied by 1,000), the future costs is limited to the existing standard of 0.31.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing 23 fields/courts and a reduction to maintain the existing standard, 39% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 61% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Table IV-C5: Allocation of Sports Field/Court Costs
Type of
Development
Residentia
l EDUs
Percenta
ge of
Total
EDUs
Total
Fields/Cour
ts in 2035
Fields Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction
to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Fields Net
of Credit
and
Reduction
Percentag
e of Costs
Allocated
Facility
Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 30,086 73% 28 (23.0) 0.0 5 39% $1,453,885
Future
Development 11,200 27% 11 0.0 (2.0) 9 61% $2,296,115
Total 41,286 100% 39 (23.0) (2.0) 14 100% $3,750,000
C.4.iii Trail Acres
Table IV-C6 summarizes the allocation of trail acreage development costs to existing Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
438 of 864
41 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
and new development. The City currently has 4.48 acres of existing trails. Based on the locations of existing and new development, additional trails will be needed at various locations . The City has determined 13.37 new trail acres are needed to adequately serve both existing and new development, bringing the total to 17.9 acres.

Since the buildout standard of 0.49 (13.37 future acres divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 0.06 (4.48 existing acres divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000), the future costs is limited to the existing standard of 0.06.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing4.48 acres and a reduction to maintain the existing standard, 84% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 16% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Table IV-C6: Allocation of Trail Acreage Costs
Type of
Development
Residentia
l EDUs
Percentag
e of Total
EDUs
Total Trail
Acres in
2035
Acres Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction
to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Acres Net
of Credit
and
Reduction
Percentag
e of Costs
Allocated
Facility
Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 30,086 73% 13.0 (4.48) 0.0 8.5 84% $4,558,655 Future
Development 11,200 27% 4.8 0.0 (3.2) 1.7 16% $892,305
Total 41,286 100% 17.9 (4.48) (3.2) 10.2 100% $5,450,960 C.4.iv Total Facilities Costs
See Table IV-C7 for the total facilities costs allocated to new and existing development.

Table IV-C7: Total Costs
New Facility
Cost Allocated to
Existing
Development
Cost Allocated to
Future
Development
Total Costs
Park Acres $4,243,301 $22,438,340 $26,681,641
Sports Fields/Courts $1,453,885 $2,296,115 $3,750,000
Trails $4,558,655 $892,305 $5,450,960
Total $10,255,841 $25,626,760 $35,882,601
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
439 of 864
42 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
C.5 Proposed Fee Amount
The Fee per EDU was calculated by dividing the costs allocated to future development by the number of future EDUs as shown in the table below.

Table IV-C8: Cost per EDU
Type of Development EDUs Facility Costs
Allocated
Total Cost
Per EDU
Future Residential Property 11,200 $25,626,760 $2,288.10 See Table IV-C9 for the fee amount for each land use based on the cost per EDU as calculated above.

Table IV-C9: Proposed Fees
Land Use Type EDUs per Unit Number of Future
Units DIF per Unit
Cost
Financed by
Fees
Residential Property
Residential Property 1.000 11,200 $2,288.10 $25,626,761 Cost Allocated to Existing Development $10,225,841
Total Cost of Parks Facilities $35,882,602
Based on the development projections in Section III and Appendix A, the fee amount presented in Table IV-C9 above are expected to finance approximately 71% of the facilities needed. The City will need to fund the remaining costs from other sources of funds.

In compliance with AB 602, DTA has calculated the residential fees on a per -square-foot basis. Table II-2 (Legal Requirements) providesthe calculation for the total future residential square footage that is then used in the cost per square foot calculation shown in Table IV- C10 below.

Table IV-C10: Parks Facilities Fee Summary (per Sq. Ft.) Land Use Type
Costs
Financed by
Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Property $25,626,761 21,728,000 $1.1794
The new fee amount shown above is generally less than the City’s existing impact fees.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
440 of 864
43 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
D Library Facilities Fees
The Library Facilities will serve the residents of Redlands by promoting literacy and learning, as well as providing an improved quality of life . The Fee Study includes a component for the acquisition/construction of new library facilities as well as remodeling/refurbishing of existing library facilitiesand acquisition of newlibrary materials. Table IV-D1 illustrates how the library fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of fees, the type of development on which the fee is imposed, the reasonable relationship to the need for collection items, and proportionality requirements.

Table IV-D1: Library Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
acquire/construct new library facilities,
remodel/refurbish existing facilities, and acquire
various library collection items that will mitigate the impacts of new residential development to the City’s
Library facilities.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Construction of new library facilities,
remodel/refurbishment of existing facilities, and
expansion of library collection items. Collection
items include, but are not limited to, books,
periodicals, newspapers, DVDs, e-books, etc.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential development in the City will generate
additional residents who will become library patrons.

New facilities will need to be acquired/constructed,
existing facilities will need to be
remodeled/refurbished and collections will have to be
expanded and additional volumes acquired to meet
this increased demand. Fees collected from new
residential development will be used for the
acquisition/construction of new facilities,
remodel/refurbishment of existing facilities, and
acquisition of collection items. City records do not
indicate a significant link between the business
community and library use. Therefore, no fee is
required from non-residential property.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
441 of 864
44 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(4)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the need for the public facilities
and the type of development
project on which the fee is
imposed.

The additional residents from new development will
impact demand for library space and collection items.

New facility space will need to be
acquired/constructed, existing facility space will need to be remodeled/refurbished, and new collection
items are needed to mitigate the impacts of the
additional residents. If new facilities are not
acquired/constructed, existing facilities are not
remodeled/refurbished, and additional library
collection items are not acquired, then the City’s
libraries will have insufficient space and materials.
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

The library fee is based on the cost to provide new
materials at the same levels as provided to existing
residents.

D.1 Existing Facilities
The City currently has two library facilities totaling 68,800 building square feet and 274,829 collection items. Collection items include, but are not limited to, books, periodicals, newspapers, DVDs, e-books, etc. See Table IV-D2 for a summary of the existing inventory.

Table IV-D2: Existing Library Facilities
Library Facilities Facility Unit Units/Building Size
Library Facility
A.K. Smiley Library Building SF 64,000
Lincoln Memorial Shrine SF 4,800
Total Library Facilities 68,800
Existing Library Materials
Books Books 134,808
Non-Book Items Units 140,021
Total 274,829
D.2 Proposed Facilities
Table IV-D3 identifies the new library facilities as well as remodeling/refurbishing existing library facilities and acquisition of new library materials proposed to be funded with the collection of Library fees. Quantity and costs are based on estimates provided by the City. For purposes of complying with AB 602, the Needs List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
442 of 864
45 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-D3: Needs List
Library Facilities Facility
Unit Number Facility Cost
Future Library Facilities
Branch Library Sq. Ft. 20,000 $15,000,000
Main Library Expansion (new bldg.. sq. ft.) Sq. Ft. 28,046 $5,000,000 Subtotal Sq. Ft. 48,046 $20,000,000
Future Library Materials
Books Books 52,000 $1,560,000
Non-Book Items Units 180,000 $54,000
Subtotal Sq. Ft. 232,000 $1,614,000
Total $21,614,000
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($25,616) Net Facilities Cost $21,588,384
Regarding the need for a branch library in 2001, the City hired an outside consultant who reported that the population of the city of 63,5741 fully supported the need for a branch library. In the subsequent 20 years the population of Redlands has grown to 73,1682.

In 2023 the Library Board of Trustees commissioned Architectural Resources Group to provide an estimate for repurposing the approximately 2,250 sq ft lower level. The cost for this project was projected to be $1,600,000. The DIF estimates for the cost of both a potential branch library and an expansion of Smiley Library were based on these figures. The City also consulted American Library Association standards and the Public Library - Whole Building Design Guide3 for estimates on needed space and number of books and materials per patron.
1https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2002/dec/phc -1-6.pdf 2https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/redlandscitycalifornia/PST045223 3https://www.wbdg.org/building-types/libraries/public-library D.3 EDUs
For library facilities, the development of property into residential uses generates residents who increase the demand on the finite amount of library space and collection items.

City records do not indicate a significant link between the business community and library use. Therefore, no fee is required from non-residential property. Therefore, the EDUs for existing and future development are based on the residents generated Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
443 of 864
46 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
from existing and future residential units . There are no EDUs assigned to Non - Residential Property.

As shown in Section III (D) (Demographics - EDUs), there are 30,086 total existing residential EDUs and 11,200 future residential EDUs, bringing the total residential EDUs in 2035 to 41,286 EDUs.

D.4 Allocation of Costs
The total cost of $ 21,588,384, as shown in Table IV-D3 above, is for new library facilities as well as remodeling/refurbishing existing library facilities and acquisition of new library materials needed to serve existing and new development. Described below is more detail regarding the methodology used to allocate the costs.

D.4.i New Library Facilities
Table IV-D4 summarizes the allocation of library facilities costs to existing and new development. The Cityhas determined the48,046 building square feet of new library facilities identified in Table IV-D3 will be needed in order to serve both existing and future development.

Since the buildout standard of 1,750 (48,046 building square feet of future buildings divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 933 (68,800 existing building square footage divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000), the future costs is limited to the existing standard of 933.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing 68,800 building square feet and a reduction to maintain the existing standard , 39% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 61% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Table IV-D4: Allocation of Library Facility Costs
Type of
Development
Residential
EDUs
Percentage
of Total
EDUs
Total Sq.

Ft. in 2035
Sq. Ft. Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction
to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Sq. Ft. Net
of Credit
and
Reduction
Percentage
of Costs
Allocated
Facility
Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 30,086 73% 85,148 (68,800) 0.0 16,348 39% $7,782,934 Future
Development 11,200 27% 31,698 0 (6,086) 25,612 61% $12,193,363 Total 41,286 100% 116,846 (68,800) (6,086) 41,960 100% $19,976,297 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
444 of 864
47 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
D.4.ii Future Library Materials
The City currently has 134,808 books and 140,021 non -book items in its library system. The City has determined that the 52,000 new books and 180,000 new non- book items identified in Table IV-D3 will be needed to serve new development.

Since the buildout standard of 8,452 (232,000 future library materials divided by 27,450 future residents multiplied by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 3,727 (274,829 existing library materials divided by 73,737 existing residents multiplied by 1,000), the future costs is limited to the existing standard of 3,727.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing 274,829 building square feet and a reduction to maintain the existing standard , 48% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 52% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Table IV-D5: Allocation of Library Material Costs
Type of
Development
Residential
EDUs
Percentage
of Total
EDUs
Total
Items in
2035
Items Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction
to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Fields Net
of Credit
and
Reduction
Percentage
of Costs
Allocated
Facility
Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 30,086 73% 369,336 (274,829) 0.0 94,507 48% $774,088 Future
Development 11,200 27% 137,493 0 (35,182) 102,310 52% $837,999 Total 41,286 100.00% 506,829 (274,829 ) (35,182) 196,818 100.00% $1,612,087 D.4.iii Total Facilities Costs
See Table IV-D6 for the total facilities costs allocated to new and existing development.

Table IV-D6: Total Costs
D.5 Proposed Fee Amount
The Fee per EDU was calculated by dividing the costs allocated to future New Facility
Cost Allocated to
Existing
Development
Cost Allocated
to Future
Development
Total Costs
New Library and Remodel/Refurbish Existing
Buildings
$7,782,934 $12,193,363 $19,976,297
Library Materials $774,088 $837,999 $1,612,087
Total $8,557,022 $13,031,362 $21,588,384
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
445 of 864
48 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
development by the number of future EDUs as shown in the table below.

Table IV-D7: Cost per EDU
Type of Development EDUs Facility Costs
Allocated
Total Cost
Per EDU
Future Residential Property 11,200 $13,031,362 $1,163.51 See Table IV-D8 for the fee amount for each land use based on the cost per EDU as calculated above.

Table IV-D8: Proposed Fees
Land Use Type EDUs per Unit Number of Future
Units DIF per Unit
Cost
Financed by
Fees
Residential Property
Residential Property 1.000 11,200 $1,163.51 $13,031,362 Cost Allocated to Existing Development $8,557,022
Total Cost of Library Facilities $21,588,384
Based on the development projections in Section III and Appendix A, the fee amount presented in Table IV-D8 above are expected to finance 60% of the facilities needed.

The City will need to fund the remaining costs from other sources of funds.

Table IV-D9: Library Facilities Fee Summary (per Unit and per Sq. Ft.) Land Use Type
Costs
Financed by
Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Property $13,031,362 21,728,000 $0.5997
DTA has reviewed the available information related to the City’s prior impact fee assumptions and has determined that the new fee amounts, which are generally higher than the City’s existing impact fees, are needed due to the current facility needs of the City, up dated development projections, and updated methodology changes in compliance with AB602.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
446 of 864
49 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
E General Government Facilities Fees
The General Government Facilities will serve the residents and employees of Redlands by providing general government services. The Fee Study includes a component for government facilities, senior center and recreation building, field operations facilities, and parking facilities. Table IV-E1 illustrates how the government facilities fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of the fee, the type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for facilities and the proportionality requirements.

Table IV-E1: General Government Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
construct government facilities that will mitigate the
impacts of new residential and non-residential
development to the City’s general government
facilities.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Construction of new government facilities, senior
center and recreation buildings, field operations
buildings, and parking facilities.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential and non-residential development in
the City will generate additional residents and
employees increasing the need for general
government services. Buildings and parking used to
provide these services will have to be expanded,
constructed or purchased to meet this increased
demand.
66001(a)(4)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the need for the public facilities
and the type of development
project on which the fee is
imposed.

The additional residents and employees from new
development will impact demand for general
government facilities. New government facilities,
senior center and recreation buildings, field
operations buildings, and parking facilities are
needed to mitigate the impacts of the additional
residents and employees. If additional government
facilities are not constructed, then overall general
government services provided to the residents and
employees in the City will suffer.
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

The General Government Facilities fee is based on the
cost to provide new government facilities, senior
center/recreation buildings, field operations facilities, and parking facilities.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
447 of 864
50 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
E.1 Existing City Hall and Safety Hall
See Table IV-E2 for a summary of the existing inventory of the City’s existing government facility and safety hall.

Table IV-E2: Existing City Hall and Safety Hall
Facility Units
Existing City Hall 50,999 Square Feet
Existing Safety Hall 23,838 Square Feet
In addition, the City currently has public parking lots and a public parking structure.

E.2 Proposed Facilities
In order to determine the proposed facilities, the City must determine the demand upon infrastructure created by new development. It is clear all new development in the City will impact the City’s current ability to provide general government services.

The capacity of the government facilities is finite and will reach practical limits (through various general government requests) . When capacity is exceeded, the level of service afforded to existing development will be reduced. In other words, if development continues without an increase in the number of government center facilities, the existing facilities would be overwhelmed in terms of providing general government services. Additional demands will be made upon the previously listed asset in Table IV-E2 above and therefore, such assets would need to be expanded.

Table IV-E3 identifies the government facilities proposed to be funded in whole or in part with the collection of General Government fees . Quantity and costs are based on estimates provided by the City.For purposes of complying with AB 602, theNeeds List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Table IV-E3: Needs List
General Government Facilities Facility Unit Number Facility Cost (2023)
Community / Rec / Senior Center Buildings Square Feet 40,000 $36,000,000 City Government Office and Admin Buildings Square Feet 25,000 $22,500,000 City Field Operations Facilities Square Feet 35,000 $31,500,000 Parking Facilities Square Feet 80,000 $32,000,000
Total $122,000,000
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($138,580) Net Facilities Cost $121,861,420
The City Facilities and Community Services Department developed the needs list above based on projected population growth and future development in the City as provided in Section III (Demographics) herein. The goal was to maintain an Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
448 of 864
51 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
equivalent ratio of facilities in square footage to projected population.Development costs were based on a combination of previous project costs and construction estimates from the City’s on-call architect to project an average per square foot.

E.3 EDUs
For general government facilities, the development of property into residential and non-residential uses generates residents and employees increasing the need for general government services. Government facilities used to provide these services will have to be expanded, constructed or purchased to meet this increased demand.

As shown in Section IV (D) (Demographics - EDUs), there are 44,856 total existing EDUs and 18,259 future EDUs, bringing the total EDUs in 2035 to 63,115 EDUs.

E.4 Allocation of Costs
The total cost of $ 121,861,420, as shown in Table IV-E3 above, for general government facilities needed to serve existing and new development is allocated to existing and new development based on the share of total EDUs in 2035.

E.4.i Future Government Facilities
Table IV-E4 summarizes the allocation of the future government facility costs to existing and new development.

The City has determined additional government facilities, including community, recreation, senior center buildings, government offices and administration facilities, City field operations facilities, and parking facilities are needed to adequately serve both existing and new development.

Since the buildout standard of 6,557 (180,000 building square feet of future buildings divided by 27,450 future residents divided by 1,000) is greater than the existing standard of 1,015 (74,837 existing building square footage divided by 73,737 existing residents divided by 1,000), the future costs is limited to the existing standard of 1,015.

Therefore, after providing a credit to existing development for the existing 74,837 building square feet and a reduction to maintain the existing standard , 79% of the costs will be allocated to existing development and 21% will be allocated to new development as shown below.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
449 of 864
52 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-E4: Allocation of Government Facility Costs
Type of
Development
Residential
EDUs
Percentage
of Total
EDUs
Total Sq.

Ft. in
2035
Sq. Ft. Credit
for Existing
Development
Reduction
to
Maintain
Existing
Standard
Sq. Ft. Net
of Credit
and
Reduction
Percentage
of Costs
Allocated
Facility
Costs
Allocated
Existing
Development 44,856 71% 181,114 (74,837) 0 106,277 79% $96,551,428 Future
Development 18,259 29% 73,723 0 (45,863) 27,860 21% $25,309,992 Total 63,115 100% 254,837 (74,837 ) (45,863) 134,137 100% $121,861,420 E.4.ii Total Facilities Costs
See Table IV-E5 for the total facilities costs allocated to new and existing development.

Table IV-E5: Total Costs
E.5 Proposed Fee Amount
The Fee per EDU was calculated by dividing the costs allocated to future development by the number of future EDUs as shown in the table below.

Table IV-E6: Cost per EDU
Type of Development EDUs Facility Costs
Allocated
Total Cost
Per EDU
Future Development 18,259 $25,309,992 $1,386.19
See Table IV-E7 for the fee amount for each land use based on the cost per EDU as calculated above.

New Facility
Cost Allocated to
Existing
Development
Cost Allocated to
Future
Development
Total Costs
Future Building Sq. Ft. $96,551,428 $25,309,992 $121,861,420 Total $96,551,428 $25,309,992 $121,861,420
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
450 of 864
53 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-E7: Proposed Fees
Land Use Type EDUs per Unit
/ 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Number of Future
Units/Rooms/1,000
Sq. Ft.

DIF per
Unit/Room/1,000
Sq. Ft.

Cost Financed
by Fees
Residential Property
Residential Property 1.000 11,200 $1,386.19 $15,525,347 Non-Residential Property
Retail 0.759 1,613 $1,051.69 $1,696,759
Commercial 0.189 1,623 $261.40 $424,190
Food Service and Entertainment 3.783 216 $5,243.32 $1,131,173 Office 2.378 858 $3,295.94 $2,827,932
Warehousing – Standard 1.020 100 $1,413.97 $141,397
Warehousing – High Cube 0.204 2,000 $282.79 $565,586
Manufacturing and Assembly 0.275 1,115 $380.59 $424,190 Industrial – Other 2.813 36 $3,899.95 $141,397
Institutional and Health Care 0.631 2,652 $874.38 $2,318,904 Hotel/Motel 0.163 500 $226.23 $113,117
Total $25,309,992
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $96,551,428
Total Cost of Gen eral Government Facilities $121,861,420 Based on the development projections in Section III and Appendix A, the fee amount presented in Table IV-E7 above are expected to finance approximately 21% of the facilities needed. The City will need to fund the remaining costs from other sources of funds.

Table IV-E7: General Government Facilities Fee Summary (per Sq. Ft.) Land Use Type
Costs
Financed by
Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Property $15,525,347 21,728,000 $0.7145
DTA has reviewed the available information related to the City’s prior impact fee assumptions and has determined that the new fee amounts, which are generally higher than the City’s existing impact fees, are needed due to the current facility needs of the City, updated development projections, and updated methodology changes in compliance with AB602.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
451 of 864
54 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
F Transportation Facilities Fees
The planning tool the City uses to identify current and future needs for an effective overall circulation system within the City is the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Mandated by State Law, the Circulation Element must be linked to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. In addition, the Circulation Element must be consistent with, and integrated with, the Riverside-San Bernardino Area Comprehensive Transportation Plan Model (CTP Model) .

Consistency is a requirement for eligibility for State and local transportation funds.

The Circulation Element of the City's General Plan serves as the City's Transportation Master Plan, which identifies future transportation facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of new development through build out conditions, beyond the year 2035. The City provided a listing of future transportation facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of new development through 2035. The facilities listed included interchanges, railroad grade separations, regional arterials, local arterials, and local streets an d signals. Project limits and costs for the first three categories are consistent with San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Development Mitigation Nexus Study and the Congestion Management Plan ("CMP"), with appropriate cost escalators,
City staff uses current traffic and land use data to update their traffic model. Any significant changes to impacts resulting from new development are incorporated into the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) at regular intervals . Such changes are also incorporated into the Circulation Element at periodic intervals.

Table IV-F1 illustrates how the transportation fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of fees, the type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and the proportionality requirements.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
452 of 864
55 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-F1: Transportation Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

Provide a revenue source that will provide funds to
construct various transportation projects that will
mitigate the impacts of new development on the
City's circulation system.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Fund or partially fund the construction of new
roadways within the City limits. The roadway
improvements to be funded or partially funded are
summarized in Table 56 and further listed in
Appendix B.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential and non-residential development
will generate additional traffic on City streets. The
fee revenue will be used to construct new
transportation projects upon which new residents
and employees will travel. A fee imposed on new
residential and non-residential development is a
reasonable method for mitigating the impacts of such
new development.
66001(a)(4)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the need for the public facilities
and the type of development
project on which the fee is
imposed.

The additional traffic volumes generated by new
development will impact current levels of congestion.

New roadways and supplemental lanes are needed to
mitigate the impacts of the increased traffic volumes.

If the proposed projects are not constructed in
concert with new development the City's circulation
system will experience higher traffic volumes and
increase the level of congestion to a condition well
below City standards.
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

Project costs are allocated to new development
based on the percentage of traffic volume generated
by new development to the total traffic volume at
buildout . The specific fee imposed on the various
land uses are based on the relative trip generation
rate as compared to a residential unit (baseline rate
or EDU factor).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
453 of 864
56 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
F.1 Proposed Facilities and Costs
As mentioned above, City Staff provided a detailed breakdown of the citywide transportation projects needed to mitigate the impacts of new development through the year 2035. While the year 2035 precedes build out conditions, it was chosen as a reasonable planning horizon with respect to the City's circulation system . The projects consist of Citywide roadway improvements totaling over $257 million. The project list includes improvements to interchanges, railroad grade separations, regional arterials, local arterials, local streets and local signals. Roadway projects and intersection projects are part of the City's Circulation Element of the General Plan, the City Traffic Model , and the City's Capital Improvement Program . The interchange projects as well as the grade separations and regional arterial projects are part of the Riverside -San Bernardino Area Comprehensive Transportation Plan Model (CTP Model) by SCAG and San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Nexus Study and CMP . These projects are id entified by these models and master plans as being needed solely or partially to mitigate the impacts of new development.

Where projects are partially needed to cure existing deficiencies or otherwise benefit existing development, those projects would have to be funded by sources other than impact fees.

Regional and local arterials, local streets and signals will be constructed on existing City streets and will benefit both existing and new development. The allocations to new development are based on the percentage of ADTs generated by new development to the total ADTs of the City's roadway network . ADTs assigned to interchanges and regional arterials are consistent with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Nexus Study. The calculation of the ADTs and percentage of total ADTs for local art erials, streets and signals is shown in the discussion of "Methodology" within this Section of the Fee Study . The project categories, costs and allocations are shown in Table IV-F2.

Table IV-F2: Transportation Cost Summary
Component Total Project Cost
Less Offsetting
Revenue (Existing
Fee Balance)
Net Project Cost
Interchange Improvements $153,995,150 ($181,987) $153,813,163 Regional Arterials $90,123,130 ($18,788) $90,104,342
Railroad Grade Crossings $2,521,750 $0 $2,521,750
Local Street Improvements $10,851,100 ($304,832) $10,546,268 Grand Total $257,491,130 ($304,832) $256,985,523
The list of projects to be funded, or partially funded , are shown by components in Tables IV-F3 through IV-F6. The total project cost as well as the costs allocated to new development are also shown in the tables. For purposes of complying with AB 602, the Needs List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
454 of 864
57 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-F3: Interchange Improvements
Location
% Allocation
to Existing
Development
$ Allocation
to Existing
Development
% Allocation
to New
Development
$ Allocation
to New
Development
2023 Estimated
Cost
I-10 at Mountain View 70.37% $46,888,559 29.63% $19,742,455 $66,631,014 I-10 at Wabash 70.37% $36,830,551 29.63% $15,507,525 $52,338,075 I-10 at Live Oak 70.37% $17,153,829 29.63% $7,222,630 $24,376,459 I-10 at 5th Street 70.37% $7,366,110 29.63% $3,101,505 $10,467,615 Total $108,239,049 $45,574,115 $153,813,163
Table IV-F4: Regional Arterials
Location Limits
% Allocation
to Existing
Development
$ Allocation to
Existing
Development
% Allocation
to New
Development
$ Allocation
to New
Development
2023
Estimated
Cost
Alabama St
N City Limit to Palmetto
Ave 70.37% $9,818,455 29.63% $4,134,066 $13,952,521
California St Redlands Blvd to I-10 70.37% $716,131 29.63% $301,527 $1,017,658 California St
Lugonia Ave to San
Bernardino Ave 70.37% $869,126 29.63% $365,946 $1,235,072 Citrus Ave Auburn Ct to Wabash Ave 70.37% $716,131 29.63% $301,527 $1,017,658 Citrus Ave Dearborn St to Wabash Ave 70.37% $1,091,247 29.63% $459,470 $1,550,717 Cypress Ave I-10 to Citrus Ave 70.37% $588,020 29.63% $247,586 $835,606 Ford Ave 5th Ave to I-10 70.37% $1,896,778 29.63% $798,640 $2,695,418 Live Oak Canyon
Road
San Timoteo Canyon to E
City Limits 70.37% $5,533,653 29.63% $2,329,948 $7,863,600 Lugonia Ave Orange St to Wabash Ave 70.37% $6,818,448 29.63% $2,870,912 $9,689,360 Lugonia Ave Tennessee St to Orange St 70.37% $3,185,260 29.63% $1,341,156 $4,526,416 Orange St Lugonia Ave to I-10 70.37% $2,728,117 29.63% $1,148,675 $3,876,792 Orange St N City Limit to Pioneer Ave 70.37% $8,613,844 29.63% $3,626,864 $12,240,708 Orange St
San Bernardino Ave to
Lugonia Ave 70.37% $1,201,846 29.63% $506,038 $1,707,884 Orange St
San Bernardino Ave to
Pioneer Ave 70.37% $651,614 29.63% $274,363 $925,977
San Bernardino Ave SR 210 to Orange St 70.37% $1,817,516 29.63% $765,266 $2,582,781 San Bernardino Ave Church St to Wabash Ave 70.37% $2,529,038 29.63% $1,064,853 $3,593,891 SR 38 (Orange
St/Lugonia Ave) W City Limit to E City Limit 70.37% $7,364,071 29.63% $3,100,647 $10,464,718 Wabash Ave 5th Ave to I-10 70.37% $4,066,368 29.63% $1,712,147 $5,778,515 Traffic Signal Wabash Ave at 5th Ave 70.37% $457,313 29.63% $192,552 $649,864 Traffic Signal Wabash Ave at I-10 70.37% $457,313 29.63% $192,552 $649,864 Traffic Signal Ford St at I-10 70.37% $457,313 29.63% $192,552 $649,864 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
455 of 864
58 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Location Limits
% Allocation
to Existing
Development
$ Allocation to
Existing
Development
% Allocation
to New
Development
$ Allocation
to New
Development
2023
Estimated
Cost
Traffic Signal Dearborn St at Citrus Ave 70.37% $457,313 29.63% $192,552 $649,864 Traffic Signal Ford St at I-10 WB 70.37% $457,313 29.63% $192,552 $649,864 Traffic Signal
6th Street at I-10 WB Off-
ramp 70.37% $457,313 29.63% $192,552 $649,864
Traffic Signal Wabash Ave at Citrus Ave 70.37% $457,313 29.63% $192,552 $649,864 Total $63,406,854 $26,697,495 $90,104,342
Table IV-F5: Railroad Grade Crossings
Location
% Allocation
to Existing
Development
$ Allocation
to Existing
Development
% Allocation
to New
Development
$ Allocation
to New
Development
2023 Estimated
Cost
San Timoteo Canyon Road 70.37% $1,774,567 29.63% $747,183 $2,521,750 Total $1,774,567 $747,183 $2,521,750
Table IV-F6: Local Street Improvements
Location Limits
% Allocation
to Existing
Development
$ Allocation
to Existing
Development
% Allocation
to New
Development
$ Allocation
to New
Development
2023
Estimated
Cost
Street Widening (4
Lanes)
Colton Ave (Texas St to
Orange St) 0.00% $0 100.00% $1,427,900 $1,387,787
Street Widening (4
Lanes)
Texas St (Colton Ave to
Pennsylvania Ave) 0.00% $0 100.00% $2,580,700 $2,508,202 Street Widening
Pioneer Ave (Furlow Dr
to Texas St) 70.37% $1,343,934 29.63% $582,220 $565,864 Intersection
Improvements Church St at Colton Ave 0.00% $0 100.00% $327,500 $318,300 Traffic Signal
Installation 6th St at Colton Ave 0.00% $0 100.00% $650,000 $631,740 Traffic Signal
Installation 6th St at Stuart Ave 0.00% $0 100.00% $650,000 $631,740 Traffic Signal
Installation 6th St at Citrus Ave 0.00% $0 100.00% $650,000 $631,740 Traffic Signal
Installation Eareka St at Colton Ave 0.00% $0 100.00% $650,000 $631,740 Traffic Signal
Installation
University St at Colton
Ave 0.00% $0 100.00% $650,000 $631,740
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
456 of 864
59 SECTION IV

ADT was chosen as the demand variable because it is consistent with the metric used in the regional transportation plans mentioned at the beginning of this section and is an industry standard. Without question the design and cost estimates for new and expanded roadways are based on traffic volumes generated, congestion levels of service and standards adopted by the local agency . ADTs are a fair and reasonable measure of the demand placed on the City's roadway system. The ADTs generated by a residential dwelling, whose value is determined from the ITE 1 manual, is used as the baseline variable. Comparison of ADTs for the other land uses to the baseline ADT produces EDU factors for the various land uses. When these factors are applied to the demographic data for existing and new development, total calculated EDUs for existing and new development as a percentage of total EDUs can be used in the allocation of facility costs to new development.

F.3 Trip Rates
As discussed in Section II, the land uses considered upon whichDIFs will be imposed include Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Office and Hotel/Motel, with their various sub -categories. Within the Residential category are single -family, multi-family and transit-oriented subcategories, which were chosen to best fit the type of residential development throughout the City, and for which the ITE manual has data and recommended trip rates. In a similar manner, the ITE Commercial land use designation includes commercial, retail trade and food service sub -categories.

Industrial category includes warehousing, manufacturing, general industrial and health care. Weighted average ADTs from the above subcategories are calculated for the purposes of determining existing and future ADTs and the allocation of transportation costs to existing and new development . Table IV-F7 shows the 1 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 8th Edition, Volumes 1,2 and 3.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
457 of 864
60 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
weighted average trip rates, in ADTs, for this Fee Study.

Table IV-F7: Trip Generation Rates
Land Use City
Designation
2016 City Uses ITE
Designation 1
ITE
Code
ITE Ave.

Trip Rate 2
%
Reduction
for Pass-By
Trips
Average
Trip
Length
Trip
Length
Factor
Average
Daily Trip
Rate 4
Residential
(Dwelling Units)
Single-Family Single-Family 9.94 7.4 1.02 10.09
Multi-Family Apartment 6.89 7.4 1.02 6.99
Mobile Home Transit-Oriented
Development 3 7.06 7.4 1.02 7.17
ADU Accessory Dwelling Units 6.99
Commercial/Retail Commercial Commercial 820 42.94 30% 5.39 0.74 22.22 (1,000 s.f.)
Retail Trade 814 44.32 30% 539 0.74 22.94
Food Service and
Entertainment 931 89.95 30% 5.39 0.74 46.55
Industrial Industrial Warehousing Standard 150 3.89 8.87 1.22 4.73 (1,000 s.f.)
Warehousing High Cube 152 1.44 8.87 1.22 1.75
Manufacturing and
Assembly 140 2.13 8.87 1.22 2.59
Industrial Other 110 6.97 8.87 1.22 8.48
Institutional and Health
Care (Hospital) 610 16.5 8.87 1.22 20.08
Office (1,000 s.f.) Office General Office Building 710 11.01 8.87 1.22 13.40 Hotel/Motel Hotel/Motel Hotel 310 8.92
(Room) Motel 320 9.11
Hotel/Motel 9.02 5.66 0.78 7.00
Notes:

1. ITE categories were chosen that best fit the intent and purpose of the City subcategories.

2. The land use designations for non-residential uses in this Study differ completely from the 20 03 DIF. Therefore, ITE rates are used that most closely fit the descriptions for the new categories.

3. This Fee Study assumes an ADT rate of 4.00 until better information is available . A rate of 4.00 is less than other high -density residential, and is reasonable.

4. Numbers in this column (bold italic) are used in this Fee Study for calculating ADTs and Fee Schedule.

In order to fairly allocate costs between existing and new development, total ADTs must be calculated for both cases . ADTs for existing development for a given land use category are found by multiplying the number of residential units or one thousand square feet (" KSF") of non -residential development in each category, as shown in Section III(A), "Existing Development Within City," by the ADTs per unit or KSF from Table IV-F7, "Trip Generation Rates," shown above.

The total ADTs for existing development as well as the percentage of total ADTs are shown in Table IV-F8.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
458 of 864
61 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-F8: Existing ADTs
Residential Property Amount Units Average Daily
Trips per Unit/ KSF ADTs
Residential Property 27,406 Dwelling Units 9.25 253,568 Non-Residential Property Amount Units Average Daily
Trips per Unit/ KSF ADTs
Retail 3,747,747 Square Feet 22.94 85,973
Commercial 1,928,805 Square Feet 22.22 42,858
Food Service and Entertainment 378,015 Square Feet 46.55 17,597 Office 2,830,658 Square Feet 13.40 37,931
Warehousing – Standard 265,250 Square Feet 4.73 1,255
Warehousing – High Cube 12,038,333 Square Feet 1.75 21,067 Manufacturing and Assembly 2,532,603 Square Feet 2.59 6,559 Industrial – Other 73,748 Square Feet 8.48 625
Institutional and Health Care 6,522,384 Square Feet 20.08 130,969 Hotel/Motel 268 Rooms 7.00 1,876
Total 600,279
Total Existing and Future ADTs 853,026
% of Total ADTs 70.37%
ADTs for future development for a given land use category are found by multiplying the number of residential units or one thousand squarefeet ("KSF") of non-residential development in each category, as shown in Section III(B) , "Future Development Within City ( 2022-2035)," by the ADTs per unit or KSF from Table IV-F8, "Trip Generation Rates" shown above.

The total ADTs for future development as well as the percentage of total ADTs are shown in Table IV-F9.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
459 of 864
62 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-F9: Future ADTs
Residential Property Amount Units ADTs per
Unit/KSF ADTs
Residential Property 11,200 Dwelling Units 8.41 94,220
Non-Residential Property Amount Units ADTs per
Unit/KSF ADTs
Retail Trade 1,613,362 Square Feet 22.94 37,011
Commercial 1,622,735 Square Feet 22.22 36,057
Food Service and Entertainment 215,736 Square Feet 46.55 10,043 Office 858,004 Square Feet 13.4 11,497
Warehousing – Standard 100,000 Square Feet 4.73 473
Warehousing – High Cube 2,000,000 Square Feet 1.75 3,500 Manufacturing and Assembly 1,114,568 Square Feet 2.59 2,887 Industrial – Other 36,256 Square Feet 8.48 307
Institutional and Health Care 2,652,045 Square Feet 20.08 53,253 Hotel/Motel 500 Rooms 7.00 3,500
Total 252,748
Total Existing and Future ADTs 853.026
% of Total ADTs 29.63%
The percentage of total ADTs for future development, as shown in the table above, is used in Table IV-F2, "Transportation Cost Summary" to allocate to new development new local street and signal costs that have Citywide benefit.

F.4 Allocation of Costs
The transportation costs allocated to new development are then divided by total new ADTs to determine the cost per ADT. The cost per ADT is then multiplied by the ADT rate for a single-family unit. This is the baseline EDU used in calculating the various fees.

Table IV-F10: Cost per ADT
Total Cost of
Transportation Projects
Cost Allocated to
New Development
Total New
ADTs Cost per ADT
$256,985,523 $81,332,005 252,748 $321.79
F.5 Proposed Fee Amount
The proposed fee schedule for transportation is shown in Table IV-F11.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
460 of 864
63 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-F11: Transportation Fee Schedule
Residential Property ADTs Cost Per ADT DIF per Unit Units Residential Property 8.41 $321.79 $2,707.07 DU
Non-Residential Property ADTs Cost Per ADT DIF per 1,000 SF/Room Units
Retail Trade 22.94 $321.79 $7,381.89 KSF
Commercial 22.22 $321.79 $7,150.20 KSF
Food Service and Entertainment 46.55 $321.79 $14,979.38 KSF Office 13.40 $321.79 $4,312.00 KSF
Warehousing – Standard 4.73 $321.79 $1,522.07 KSF
Warehousing – High Cube 1.75 $321.79 $563.13 KSF
Manufacturing and Assembly 2.59 $321.79 $833.44 KSF
Industrial – Other 8.48 $321.79 $2,728.79 KSF
Institutional and Health Care 20.08 $321.79 $6,461.57 KSF Hotel/Motel 7.00 $321.79 $2,252.54 Room
For the Transportation Fee calculation using a project specific traffic study, as permitted by City rules, the fee shall be $321.79 per ADT.

F.6 Expected Revenue
Using the demographic data from TableIV-F9, "Future ADTs," the residential units or non-residential square footages or hotel rooms are multiplied by the corresponding proposed fee rates to determine the expected revenues.

As shown in Table IV-F12, the total expected revenue is equal to the transportation costs allocated to new development as shown in Table IV-F2, "Transportation Cost Summary.”
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
461 of 864
64 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-F12: Revenue
Residential Property Units Units DIF per Unit Cost Financed by Fees
Residential Property 11,200 Dwelling Units $2,707.07 $30,319,173 Non-Residential Property SF/Rooms Units DIF per 1,000
SF/Room
Cost Financed
by Fees
Retail Trade 1,613,362 SF $7,381.89 $11,909,664
Commercial 1,622,735 SF $7,150.20 $11,602,883
Food Service and Entertainment 215,736 SF $14,979.38 $3,231,592 Office 858,004 SF $4,312.00 $3,699,716
Warehousing – Standard 100,000 SF $1,522.07 $152,207
Warehousing – High Cube 2,000,000 SF $563.13 $1,126,269 Manufacturing and Assembly 1,114,568 SF $833.44 $928,925 Industrial – Other 36,256 SF $2,728.79 $98,935
Institutional and Health Care 2,652,045 SF $6,461.57 $17,136,371 Hotel/Motel 500 Rooms $2,252.54 $1,126,269
Total $81,332,005
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $175,653,518
Total Cost of Transportation Facilities $256,985,523
Based on the development projections in Section III and Appendix A, the fee amount presented in Table IV-F12 above are expected to finance approximately 32% of the facilities needed. The City will need to fund the remaining costs from other sources of funds.

In compliance with AB 602, DTA has calculated the residential fees on a per -square-foot basis. Table II-2 (Legal Requirements) providesthe calculation for the total future residential square footage that is then used in the cost per square foot calculation shown in Table IV- F13 below.

Table IV -F13: Transportation Facilities Fee Summary (per Sq. Ft.) Land Use Type
Costs
Financed by
Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Property $30,319,173 21,728,000 $1.3954
DTA has reviewed the available information related to the City’s prior impact fee assumptions and has determined that the new fee amounts, which are generally higher than the City’s existing impact fees, are needed due to the current facility needs of theCity, Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
462 of 864
65 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
updated development projections, and updated methodology changes in compliance with AB602.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
463 of 864
66 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
G Storm Drain Facilities Fees
The Storm Drain Facilities will serve the residents of City by providing new drainage systems that provide the required level of protection against flooding within the City limits. Storm Drain facilities include pipes, catch basins and appurtenances required to both upgrade and replace existing facilities as well as mitigate the runoff impacts of new development. The planning horizon assumed in thisFee Study is the buildout year of 20 35. Section G.1 below identifies the projects needed to meet the City’s flood protection objectives in the build out condition.

Table IV-G1 below illustrates how the storm drain fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of fees, the type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and the proportionality requirements.

Table IV-G1: Storm Drain Facilities Nexus Requirement
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

Provide a revenue source to pay for construction
of various projects that will mitigate the impacts of
new development on the City’s drainage facilities,
pipeline and appurtenant structures.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Fund or partially fund the construction of new storm
drain facilities. The improvements to be funded or
partially funded are summarized in Table IV-G2
below and further listed in Appendix B.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

The cost of storm drain systems is related to the
amount of runoff delivered to City streets. New
development will increase the amount of
impermeable surface in the City and subsequently
the amount of stormwater runoff that needs to be
collected in a manner that will prevent flooding.

New storm drainage systems and infrastructure are
necessary to ensure that adequate facilities are
available to serve new residential and non-
residential development. Therefore, there is a
reasonable relationship between the need for the
facilities and new development. Fees collected
from new development will be used exclusively for
the construction and construction related costs
associated with these projects.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
464 of 864
67 SECTION IV

The additional runoff generated by new development
will increase the risk of flood damage in proportion to the increase runoff. New storm drainage systems and
infrastructure are necessary to mitigate the impacts
of the increased runoff. If the proposed projects are
not constructed in concert with new development,
the City's storm drain system will experience higher
risk of flood damage due to runoff in excess of the
current levels of protection.
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

Project costs are allocated to new development
based on the relative runoff among land uses. Given
the same area, runoff from the various land uses
differ by the percentage of impervious area for each
land use. Rational Method Hydrology is used in order
to determine the relative runoff values for each land
use. The project costs can then be allocated to the
various land uses and the fee for each land use
determined.

G.1 Proposed Facilities and Costs
In order to determine the proposed improvements, the City must determine the demand upon infrastructure created by new development. It is clear all new development in the City will impact the City’s current ability to provide drainage systems and flood protection. The discharge capacity of the existing drainage systems is determined by design and in many cases is at design capacity for the appropriate storm event. When capacity is exceeded due to the runoff impacts of new development, the level of flood protection afforded to existing development will be reduced. In other words, if development continues without new improvements to the drainage systems, the existing facilities would be unable to provide the level of flood protection consistent with City standards. Table IV-G2 below identifies the drainage improvements proposed to be funded in whole or in part with the collection of Drainage Facilities fees. Quantity and costs are based on estimates provided by the City.

The project categories, costs and allocations are shown in Table IV-G2.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
465 of 864
68 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV -G2: Storm Drain Cost Summary
Component Total Project Cost
Less Offsetting
Revenue (Existing
Fee Balance)
Net Project Cost
Mill Creek Drainage Area $3,740,000 ($10,305) $3,729,695 Reservoir Canyon Drainage Area $16,506,000 ($45,481) $16,460,519 Downtown Drainage Area $10,206,000 ($28,122) $10,177,878 North City Drainage Area $20,055,000 ($55,260) $19,999,740 South City Drainage Area $18,100,000 ($49,873) $18,050,127 Grand Total $68,607,000 ($189,041 ) $68,417,959
The list of projects to be funded, or partially funded, are shown by components in Table IV-G3. The total project cost as well as the costs allocated to new development are also shown in the tables. For purposes of complying with AB 602, the Needs List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
466 of 864
69 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-G3: Drainage Needs List
G.2 ERUs
The reasonable relationship used to allocate storm drain costs between existing, converted use and future development is relative runoff contribution. A rational method of computing runoff rates was used in the form of Q = C * I * A where “Q” is equal to runoff volume, “C” is the ratio of impervious area to total areaof the subject % Amount % Amount
Mill Creek Drainage Area
27 E Colton Ave $2,808,241 74.26% $2,085,316.60 25.74% $722,924.14 27-B 8th St $921,454 74.26% $684,244.51 25.74% $237,209.48 Reservoir Canyon Drainage Area
22 Redlands Blvd $1,219,630 74.26% $905,661.29 25.74% $313,968.83 22-G 10 FWY/ Cypress Ave $1,405,118 74.26% $1,043,398.82 25.74% $361,718.79 22-J Garden St $9,243,460 74.26% $6,863,920.30 25.74% $2,379,539.72 25-A 10 FWY/ Cypress Ave $4,134,576 74.26% $3,070,214.00 25.74% $1,064,362.03 26-A 5th Ave $457,735 74.26% $339,900.68 25.74% $117,834.58 Downtown Drainage Area
21 Eureka St $299,173 74.26% $222,157.31 25.74% $77,016.07 22 Redlands Blvd $2,634,720 74.26% $1,956,465.36 25.74% $678,254.82 22-A Redlands Blvd $169,532 74.26% $125,889.14 25.74% $43,642.44 22-B Redlands Blvd $190,474 74.26% $141,440.15 25.74% $49,033.56 22-D Redlands Blvd $74,793 74.26% $55,539.33 25.74% $19,254.02 22-E Redlands Blvd $228,369 74.26% $169,580.08 25.74% $58,788.93 22-K Redlands Blvd $5,935,600 74.26% $4,407,601.00 25.74% $1,527,998.75 22-L Redlands Blvd $645,217 74.26% $479,119.26 25.74% $166,097.98 North City Drainage Area
7 Western Ave $3,206,141 74.26% $2,380,785.82 25.74% $825,355.51 7-A Lugonia Ave $1,468,941 74.26% $1,090,792.38 25.74% $378,148.88 7-B San Bernardino Ave $3,156,279 74.26% $2,343,759.60 25.74% $812,519.50 8 Orange St $1,832,936 74.26% $1,361,083.78 25.74% $471,851.76 9 Church St $3,406,587 74.26% $2,529,631.22 25.74% $876,956.27 10 Wabash Ave $4,488,598 74.26% $3,333,100.15 25.74% $1,155,497.71 10-B Dearborn St $2,440,257 74.26% $1,812,063.11 25.74% $628,194.38 South City Drainage
17-B Redlands Blvd $264,270 74.26% $196,238.96 25.74% $68,030.86 17-A Lugonia Ave $4,345,992 74.26% $3,227,205.17 25.74% $1,118,786.72 18-A New Jersey St $1,997,481 74.26% $1,483,270.30 25.74% $514,210.60 18-A1 New Jersey St $220,391 74.26% $163,655.88 25.74% $56,735.17 19 Alabama St $1,380,187 74.26% $1,024,885.72 25.74% $355,300.78 38 Brookside Ave $824,721 74.26% $612,413.65 25.74% $212,307.62 38-B Brookside Ave $610,314 74.26% $453,200.91 25.74% $157,112.77 39 San Mateo St $1,086,997 74.26% $807,171.55 25.74% $279,825.04 39-A San Mateo St $1,585,619 74.26% $1,177,433.73 25.74% $408,185.15 39-C San Mateo St $340,060 74.26% $252,518.81 25.74% $87,541.60 40 Cypress Ave $2,074,269 74.26% $1,540,290.67 25.74% $533,978.06 41 Buena Vista St $3,319,827 74.26% $2,465,205.60 25.74% $854,621.61 Total Facilities Costs $68,417,959 $50,805,155 $17,612,804 Facility Location Facility Cost Existng Developemnt New Development Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
467 of 864
70 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
lot or parcel, “I” is rainfall intensity and “A” is Area, in acres of the study area. For example, A runoff factorof “C” of 1.00 indicates a totally impervious site, where every drop of rain would find its way to the public streets as run-off.

An impervious area factor of 0.55, known as the value of “C,” is used for new single- family residential development. This value is based on assumed values for lot dimensions, lot frontage, house footprints and landscape designs . See Appendix C for calculations supporting the C value for the various land uses . The City has confirmed these assumptions based on their best prediction of future homeowner/consumer trends. Furthermore, the calculations for the residential C was compared to values shown in the County of San Bernardino Hydrology Manual and there is a reasonable correlation. The County of San Bernardino’s Hydrology Manual also sets forth average impervious area factors for multi -family (apartment dwelling units), retail/commercial, and industrial, of0.80, 0.90, and 0.95 respectively.

For the purposes of this nexus study only the relative runoff from each land use needs to be considered. For convenience, a storm intensity value (“I”) is chosen as 1. The calculation of runoff per acre for a storm intensity of 1 is equal to C *1*1 based on the equation Q=C*I*A, or simply “C.”These per acre runoff values are then compared to the runoff per acre from one residential unit to determine each ERU factor.

The ERU factors are presented in Table IV-G4 below:

Table IV-G4: Equivalent Runoff Factors
Land Use Units
Residential
Density
(units/acre) or
Non-Residential
FAR/Rooms per
Acre
Runoff
Coefficient
“C”
Runoff per
unit or ksf;
Q=C*I*A
Residential Property Dwelling Units 7.00 0.55 0.08
Retail Square Feet 0.5 0.90 0.04
Commercial Square Feet 0.5 0.90 0.04
Food Service and
Entertainment
Square Feet 0.5 0.90 0.04
Office Square Feet 0.5 0.90 0.04
Warehousing - Standard Square Feet 0.5 0.90 0.04
Warehousing - High Cube Square Feet 0.5 0.90 0.04
Manufacturing and
Assembly
Square Feet 0.5 0.90 0.04
Industrial - Other Square Feet 0.5 0.95 0.04
Institutional & Health Care Square Feet 0.5 0.95 0.04
Hotel/Motel Rooms Rooms 40.0 0.95 0.02
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
468 of 864
71 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
When these factors are applied to the demographic data for existing and new development, total calculated ERUs for existing and new development as a percentage of total E RUs can be used in the allocation of facility costs to new development.

G.3 Methodology
In order to fairly allocate costs between existing and new development, total ERUs must be calculated for both cases. ERUs for existing and future development for a given land use category are found by multiplying the number of residential units or one thousand square feet (" KSF") of non -residential development in each category by the ERU factors shown in the table below.

The total ERUs for existing development as well as the percentage of total ERUs are shown in Table IV-G5 below:

Table IV-G5: Existing E quivalent Runoff Units
Land Use Units
Residential
Units/Non -
Residential SF
ERU Factor Total ERUs
Residential Property Dwelling Units 27,406 1.18 32,234
Retail Square Feet 3,747,747 0.62 2,307
Commercial Square Feet 1,928,805 0.62 1,187
Food Service and
Entertainment
Square Feet 378,015 0.62 233
Office Square Feet 2,830,658 0.62 1,742
Warehousing - Standard Square Feet 265,250 0.62 163
Warehousing - High Cube Square Feet 12,038,333 0.62 7,410 Manufacturing and Assembly Square Feet 2,532,603 0.62 1,559 Industrial - Other Square Feet 73,748 0.65 48
Institutional & Health Care Square Feet 6,522,384 0.65 4,238 Hotel/Motel Rooms Rooms 268 0.35 95
Total Existing Development ERUs 51,216
% of Total ERUs 74.26%
Total ERUs 68,971
ERUs for future development for a given land use category are found in a manner similar to that for existing development by multiplying the number of residential units or one thousand square feet (" KSF") of non -residential development in each category by the applicable ERUs per unit or KSF.

The total ERUs for future development as well as the percentage of total ERUs are shown in Table IV-G6 below:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
469 of 864
72 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-G6: Future Equivalent Runoff Units
Land Use Units
Residential
Units/Non -
Residential SF
ERU Factor Total ERUs
Residential Property Dwelling Units 11,200 1.00 11,200
Retail Square Feet 1,613,362 0.62 993
Commercial Square Feet 1,622,735 0.62 999
Food Service and Entertainment Square Feet 215,736 0.62 133 Office Square Feet 858,004 0.62 528
Warehousing - Standard Square Feet 100,000 0.62 62
Warehousing - High Cube Square Feet 2,000,000 0.62 1,231 Manufacturing and Assembly Square Feet 1,114,568 0.62 686 Industrial - Other Square Feet 36,256 0.65 24
Institutional & Health Care Square Feet 2,652,045 0.65 1,723 Hotel/Motel Rooms Rooms 500 0.35 177
Total Future Development ERUs 17,755
% of Total ERUs 25.74%
Total ERUs 68,971
The percentage of total ERUs for future development, as shown inTable IV-G6 above, is used in TableIV-G2, "Drainage Needs List," to allocate tocosts to new development for new storm drain facilities that have Citywide benefit.

G.4 Allocation of Costs
The storm drain costs allocated to new development are then divided by total new ERUs to determine the cost per ERU. This is the baseline ERU used in calculating the fees for the various land use categories.

Table IV-G7: Cost per ERU
Total Cost of Storm
Drain Projects
% Allocated to
New
Development
Cost Allocated to
New
Development
Total New
ERUs Cost per ERU
$68,417,959 25.74% $17,612,804 17,755 $991.98
G.5 Proposed Fee Amount
The ERU factors for the various land uses shown in Table IV-G4 are then multiplied by the cost per ERU to determine the proposed fee for each land use category. The proposed fee schedule for storm drainage facilities is shown in Table IV-G8 below:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
470 of 864
73 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-G8: Storm Drain Fee Schedule
Residential Property ERU Factor Cost Per ERU DIF per Unit Units Residential 1.00 $991.98 $991.98 Units
Non-Residential Property ERU Factor Cost Per ERU DIF per 1,000 SF/Room Units
Retail Trade 0.62 $991.98 $610.61 KSF
Commercial 0.62 $991.98 $610.61 KSF
Food Service and Entertainment 0.62 $991.98 $610.61 KSF Office 0.62 $991.98 $610.61 KSF
Warehousing – Standard 0.62 $991.98 $610.61 KSF
Warehousing – High Cube 0.62 $991.98 $610.61 KSF
Manufacturing and Assembly 0.62 $991.98 $610.61 KSF
Industrial – Other 0.65 $991.98 $644.53 KSF
Institutional and Health Care 0.65 $991.98 $644.53 KSF
Hotel/Motel 0.35 $991.98 $350.95 Room
G.6 Expected Revenue
Using the demographic data from Table IV-G6, "Future Equivalent Runoff Units," the residential units or non-residential square footages or hotel rooms are multiplied by the corresponding proposed fee rates to determine the expected revenues.

As shown in Table IV-G9, the total expected revenue is equal to the drainage costs allocated to new development as shown in Table IV-G2, "Drainage Needs List.” Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
471 of 864
74 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-G9: Expected Revenue
Residential Property Units Units DIF per Unit Cost Financed by Fees
Residential Property 11,200 Dwelling Units $991.98 $11,110,208 Non-Residential Property SF/Rooms Units DIF per 1,000
SF/Room
Cost Financed
by Fees
Retail Trade 1,613,362 SF $610.61 $985,127
Commercial 1,622,735 SF $610.61 $990,850
Food Service and Entertainment 215,736 SF $610.61 $131,729 Office 858,004 SF $610.61 $523,902
Warehousing – Standard 100,000 SF $610.61 $61,061
Warehousing – High Cube 2,000,000 SF $610.61 $1,221,210 Manufacturing and Assembly 1,114,568 SF $610.61 $680,561 Industrial – Other 36,256 SF $644.53 $23,368
Institutional and Health Care 2,652,045 SF $644.53 $1,709,316 Hotel/Motel 500 Rooms $350.95 $175,473
Total $17,612,804
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $50,805,155
Total Cost of Storm Drain Facilities $68,417,959
Based on the development projections in Section III and Appendix A, the fee revenue presented in Table IV-G9 above is expected to finance approximately 26% of the facilities needed. The City will need to fund the remaining costs from other sources.

In compliance with AB 602, DTA has calculated the residential fees on a per -square-foot basis. Table II-2 (Legal Requirements) providesthe calculation for the total future residential square footage that is then used in the cost per square foot calculation shown in Table IV- G10 below.

Table IV -G10: Storm Drain Facilities Fee Summary (per Sq. Ft.) Land Use Type
Costs
Financed by
Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Property $11,110,208 21,728,000 $0.5113
DTA has reviewed the available information related to the City’s prior impact fee assumptions and has determined that the new fee amounts, which are generally higher Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
472 of 864
75 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
than the City’s existing impact fees, are needed due to the current facility needs of the City, updated development projections, and updated methodology changes in compliance with AB602.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
473 of 864
76 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
H Water Facilities Fees
The City of Redlands provides potable water service to customers within the City’s Water Service Area. A map depicting the Water Service Area is included in Exhibit D herein. Information and data used in the calculations herein for development impact fees for potable water were taken from the 2022 City of Redlands Water Systems Master Plan (“Water Master Plan”), and the 2015 San Bernardino Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan (“UWMP”). A map of the City’s water service area is included in Appendix D herein.

Table IV-H1 below illustrates how the water facilities fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of fees, the type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for facilities, and the proportionality requirements.

Table IV-H1: Water Facilities Nexus Requirement
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

Provide a revenue source to pay for construction of
water projects that will mitigate the impacts of new
development on the City’s water facilities.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Finance the construction of water facilities used to
provide general water delivery at the current levels of service.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential and non-residential development in
the City’s Water Service Area will generate additional
residents and employees who will increase the
demand for water facilities. New water distribution
mains and storage facilities are needed to deliver
water to new residents and employees. Fees collected
from new development will be used exclusively for
the construction and construction related costs
associated with the distribution and storage projects.
66001(a)(4)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the need for the public facilities
and the type of development
project on which the fee is
imposed.

Residential and non-residential growth within the
City’s Water Service Area will increase the demand for
potable water. In order to meet this demand at the
current levels of service, the City will need to expand their potable water system to mitigate the impacts of
new development in the Water Service Area.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
474 of 864
77 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

The cost of the proposed potable water facilities is
based on increased demand for potable water from
new development. Project costs are allocated to new
development based on the percentage of relative
water demand from new development as compared
to total service area demand. The fees for each land
use is based on the relative potable water demands
among the various land uses for new development.

H.1 Existing Water Facilities
The water sources for the City’s potable water system include two water treatment plants that treat surface water from Santa Ana River and Mill Creek. The potable water system also includes seventeen groundwater wells, 18 reservoirs, 38 booster pumps, and approximately 450miles of distribution pipeline systems. Annual surface water supply and groundwater supply are split approximately 50/50 by volume in their contribution to the City’s potable water production. The total production can be supplemented by State Water Project (“SWP”) through the local SWP contractor , San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District.

H.2 Proposed Water Facilities
The City provided a list of capital improvement projects that will serve the needs of both new and existing development through buildout development conditions. It is assumed that the percentage allocation of the total costs assigned to new development represents the fair share costs needed to provide the necessary capacity in the system t hat can provide the current level of service to new development as development occurs. The list of improvements and costs is shown in Table IV-H2 below. For purposes of complying with AB 602, theNeeds List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
475 of 864
78 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-H2: Potable Water Needs List
Facility Location Facility Cost
Less Offsetting
Revenue (Existing
Fee Balance)
Net Project
Cost
Water Distribution System Citywide $126,300,000 ($308,620) $125,991,380 Hinckley Treatment Plant
Improvements Hinckley Treatment Plant $2,200,000 ($5,376) $2,194,624 Tate Treatment Plant
Improvements Tate Treatment Plant $9,285,549 ($22,690) $9,262,859 Booster Stations (Potable) Citywide $8,743,690 ($21,366) $8,722,324 Reservoirs (Potable) Citywide $55,922,400 ($136,649) $55,785,751 Ground Wells Citywide $28,720,000 ($70,179) $28,649,821 Laboratory Wastewater Treatment Plant $4,000,000 ($9,774) $3,990,226 Total Facilities Costs $235,171,639 ($574,654) $234,596,985 The need for additional facilities is highlighted in the City’s Water Master Plan.

Through simulated scenarios using hydraulic modeling, the Water Master Plan identified infrastructure vulnerabilities caused by projected development and anticipated population growth. The deficiencies in the water system caused by new development were identified as future projects. The pr oposed project costs were determined based on the costs associated with projects currently in construction, thus providing an estimate that reflects current market conditions and industry standards. This data -driven approach was used to develop the needs l ist, aligning the current level of service with future projections.

H.3. Water Demand and Water Use Factors
The average annual delivery for potable water by the City for customers within its service area between 2016 and 2020 was 20,770 Ac re-feet. Of this total approximately 73% was delivered to residential customers. The average per capita usage was approximately 222.9 gallons per capita per day (“gpcd”).

For future residential and non-residential potable water usage, the usage data by customer class is based on average usage data as confirmed by the City.

H.4. EDUs
For the purposes of this Fee S tudy an equivalent development unit (“EDU”) methodology is used to allocate costs to the various land uses. The average potable water usage for each land use category, in gpd, is compared to the average usage for a single -family unit. These factors, when multiplied by the existing and new Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
476 of 864
79 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
development residential units and the non -residential buildings thousand square feet (KSF) provide the total EDUs in the potable water system.

The percentage of total EDUs contributed by new development is multiplied by the total cost of the potable water capital program to determine the amount assigned to new development. This amount is further divided by the total EDUs for new development in order to determine the cost per EDU assigned to new development.

The demographic data used for the EDU calculation is consistent with the data in Section III, “Demographics.”
Table IV-H3: Existing Development EDUs
Land Use Residential
Units
Non-
Residential
SF
Water Use
Factor (gpd
per unit or ksf)
EDU
Factor Total EDUs
Residential Property 27,406 NA 261.08 1.08 29,659
Retail NA 3,747,747 23.00 0.10 357
Commercial NA 1,928,805 50.00 0.21 400
Food Service and Entertainment NA 378,015 50.00 0.21 78 Office NA 2,830,658 60.00 0.25 704
Warehousing - Standard NA 265,250 10.00 0.04 11
Warehousing - High Cube NA 12,038,333 10.00 0.04 499
Manufacturing and Assembly NA 2,532,603 50.00 0.21 525
Industrial - Other NA 73,748 50.00 0.21 15
Institutional & Health Care NA 6,522,384 165.00 0.68 4,461 Hotel/Motel Rooms NA 268 100.00 0.41 111
Total Existing Development EDUs 36,821
% of Total EDUs 72.03%
Total EDUs 51,116
As mentioned earlier, the City also provides public services to the unincorporated area, or “Donut Hole” and the City’s SOI. The Donut Hole consists mainly of existing commercial and industrial development. Customers within the sphere of influence are located within the eastern portions of the Cities of San Bernardino and Loma Linda, western portions of the City of Yucaipa and certain unincorporated areas of the County near Mentone and Crafton. The City -wide demographic data used herein does not include data within the Donut Hole or the SOI. Demographic data for the Donut Hole and SOI is not available from the City at this time. It is assumed that the inclusion of development data from the Donut Hole and SOI will have a negligible impact on the calculation of the amount of the fees for the various land uses.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
477 of 864
80 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
See Table IV-H4 below for the calculation of future EDUs:

Table IV-H4: Future EDUs
Land Use Residential
Units
Non-
Residential
SF
Water Use
Factor (gpd
per unit or ksf)
EDU
Factor Total EDUs
Residential Property 11,200 NA 241.25 1.00 11,200
Retail NA 1,613,362 23.00 0.10 154
Commercial NA 1,622,735 50.00 0.21 336
Food Service and Entertainment NA 215,736 50.00 0.21 45 Office NA 858,004 60.00 0.25 213
Warehousing - Standard NA 100,000 10.00 0.04 4
Warehousing - High Cube NA 2,000,000 10.00 0.04 83
Manufacturing and Assembly NA 1,114,568 50.00 0.21 231
Industrial - Other NA 36,256 50.00 0.21 8
Institutional & Health Care NA 2,652,045 165.00 0.68 1,814 Hotel/Motel Rooms NA 500 100.00 0.41 207
Total Future Development EDUs 14,295
% of Total EDUs 27.97%
Total EDUs 51,116
H.5. Proposed Fee Amount
The total facility cost of $ 234,596,986 as shown in Table IV-H2 is multiplied by the percentage allocation to new development of 27.97% from Table IV-H4 as shown above to determine the total cost allocated to new development.

The resulting cost of approximately $ 65.6 million allocated to new development is then divided by 14,295 EDUs for future development, or a cost per EDU of $4,589.54 as shown in Table IV-H5 below:

Table IV-H5: Cost Per EDU
Total Cost
% Allocated to
New
Development
Cost Allocated to
New
Development
Total New
EDUs Cost per E DU
$234,596,986 27.97% $65,606,964 14,295 $4,589.54
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
478 of 864
81 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
See Table IV-H6 below for the fee amount for each land use based on the cost per EDU as calculated above and the EDU factors from Table IV-H4.

Table IV-H6: Fee Schedule
Residential Property EDU Factor Cost Per EDU DIF per Unit Units Residential Property 1.00 $4,589.54 $4,589.54 DU
Non-Residential Property EDU Factor Cost Per EDU DIF per 1,000 SF/Room Units
Retail Trade 0.10 $4,589.54 $437.55 KSF
Commercial 0.21 $4,589.54 $951.20 KSF
Food Service and Entertainment 0.21 $4,589.54 $951.20 KSF Office 0.25 $4,589.54 $1,141.44 KSF
Warehousing – Standard 0.04 $4,589.54 $190.24 KSF
Warehousing – High Cube 0.04 $4,589.54 $190.24 KSF
Manufacturing and Assembly 0.21 $4,589.54 $951.20 KSF
Industrial – Other 0.21 $4,589.54 $951.20 KSF
Institutional and Health Care 0.68 $4,589.54 $3,138.96 KSF Hotel/Motel 0.41 $4,589.54 $1,902.40 Room
As shown in Table IV -H7 below, the total expected revenue is equal to the water facilities costs allocated to new development as shown in Table IV-H5.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
479 of 864
82 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV -H7: Expected Revenue
Residential Property Units Units DIF per Unit Cost Financed by Fees
Residential Property 11,200 Dwelling Units $4,589.54 $51,402,881 Non-Residential Property SF/Rooms Units DIF per 1,000
SF/Room
Cost Financed
by Fees
Retail Trade 1,613,362 SF $437.55 $705,930
Commercial 1,622,735 SF $951.20 $1,543,547
Food Service and Entertainment 215,736 SF $951.20 $205,208 Office 858,004 SF $1,141.44 $979,361
Warehousing – Standard 100,000 SF $190.24 $19,024
Warehousing – High Cube 2,000,000 SF $190.24 $380,480
Manufacturing and Assembly 1,114,568 SF $951.20 $1,060,178 Industrial – Other 36,256 SF $951.20 $34,487
Institutional and Health Care 2,652,045 SF $3,138.96 $8,324,668 Hotel/Motel 500 Rooms $1,902.40 $951,201
Total $65,606,964
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $168,990,022
Total Cost of Storm Drain Facilities $234,596,986
Based on the development projections in Section III and Appendix A, the fee amount presented in Table IV-H7 above are expected to finance approximately 28% of the facilities needed. The City will need to fund the remaining costs from other funding sources.

In compliance with AB 602, DTA has calculated the residential fees on a per -square- foot basis. Table II-2 (Legal Requirements) providesthe calculation for the total future residential square footage that is then used in the cost per square foot calculation shown in Table IV-H7 below.

Table IV -H7: Water Facilities Fee Summary (per Sq. Ft.) Land Use Type
Costs
Financed by
Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Property $51,402,881 21,728,000 $2.3657
DTA has reviewed the available information related to the City’s prior impact fee assumptions and has determined that the new fee amounts, which are generally Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
480 of 864
83 SECTION IV

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
481 of 864
84 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
I Water Supply Fees
The City of Redlands provides basic water supply service to customers within the City’s Water Service Area. A map depicting the Sewer Service Area is included in Exhibit D herein.

Table IV-I1 below illustrates how the water supply fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of the fee, the type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for new water rights and the proportionality requirements.

To ensure that the City can meet the demands of future development and provide a reliable source of water needed to meet current levels of service, the City intends to purchase shares in nearby water agencies (“water rights”) which will entitle the City to make future water commodity purchases. The fees calculated in this section of the report provide a funding source needed to purchase water rights only. The actual purchase of water on an annual basis is paid through water commodity rates charged to water customers. The water facilities fee discussed in Section H of this report provides a funding source needed to pay for expande d facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of new development.

Table IV -I1: Water Supply Justification
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

To provide a revenue source that will pay for the
purchase of additional water rights that will increase
the water supply to the City that will be used to
mitigate the impacts of new development in the
Water Service Area.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Revenue from this fee will be used to purchase new
water rights.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential and non-residential development will
generate new residents and employees within the
water service area. This will increase demand for
potable water. New sources of raw water will be
needed. The fee imposed on new development for
the purchase water rights will ensure that the City
will be able to provide potable water to future
development at the current levels of service.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
482 of 864
85 SECTION IV

Residential and non-residential growth within the
City’s Water Service Area will increase the demand for
new water sources. In order to meet this demand at
the current levels of service, the City will need to
purchase additional water supply to mitigate the
impacts of new development in the City’s Water
Service Area.
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

The amount of the fee calculated for each land use
category is based on the relative water demand and
the cost of new water rights. The fee charged to new
development, based on the number of residential
units and the amount of non-residential square feet
will provide the necessary revenue to purchase the
required new water rights.

IV-I-1 Water Rights Purchases
The City has indicated that it will need to purchase new water rights to meet the needs of new development . The City has previously purchased water rights in t he form of shares in private water companies. Table IV-I2 below lists the private sellers of water rights and the number of shares sold to the City.

Table IV -I2: Historical Water Rights Purchases
Company Shares
Bear Valley Mutual Water Company 90,952.0
Happe Mutual Well Company 12.0
Crafton Water Company 408.8
Lugonia Park Water Company 48.5
Lugonia Water Company 837.5
Redlands Heights Water Company 982.5
Redlands Water Company 1,234.8
West Redlands Water Company 448.0
Total 94,924.1
It is assumed, for the purposes of estimating the amount of new water rights shares that will need to be purchased by the City in order to mitigate the impacts of new development in the City’s Water Service Area , that the number of new shares is proportional to the increase in potable water usage through build out. The percentage of usage for both existing and new development is determined by calculating EDUs for both existing and expected new development, based on typical potable water demands from the various land uses. The EDU calculations for future water rights purc hases will be the same as was shown for new development in Section H of this Fee S tudy, “Water Facility Fee” (see Table IV -H3, “ Existing Development EDUs” and Table IV-H4, “Future EDUs” in Section H).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
483 of 864
86 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Based on the EDU percentages shown in Tables IV -H3 and IV-H4 herein, and the historical water rights purchases to date, the number of shares expected to be purchased through buildout is estimated at 36,852 shares. The City also provided an assumed cost of future shares at $500 per share and deducted any existing fee balances on hand with the City . Table IV-I5 below shows the expected cost of new shares through buildout.

Table IV -I3: Expected Cost of New Water Shares
DTA assumes that the volumetric ratio of current potable water capacity from City water facilities to the capacity from currently owned shares in local water agencies remains unchanged with regard to future water share purchases.

IV-I-2 Cost Per EDU
The cost per EDU is determined by dividing the total expected cost of new water rights by the total number of future EDUs to estimate the cost per EDU as shown in Table IV-I4 below:

Table IV -I4: Cost per ED U
Cost Allocated to New
Development Future EDUs Cost per EDU
$18,395,002 14,295 $1,286.82
The cost per EDU determined from TableIV-I4 above is multiplied by the EDU factors from Table IV-H3 above to determine the fee for each land use and is shownin Table IV-I5 below.

As shown in Table IV -I5 below , the total expected revenue is equal to the water facilities costs allocated to new development as shown in Table IV-I3 above.

Item Existing
Developemnt
Expected New
Developemnt
Expected
Total
% Allocation from Usage 72.03% 27.97% 100.00%
Number of Shares 94,924.1 36,852.4 131,776.4
Assumed Cost per Share $500.00
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($31,178) Cost Allocated to New Development 18,395,002$
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
484 of 864
87 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV -I5: Fee Schedule
Residential Property Units Units DIF per Unit Cost Financed by Fees
Residential Property 11,200 Dwelling Units $1,286.82 $14,412,435 Non-Residential Property SF/Rooms Units DIF per 1,000
SF/Room
Cost Financed
by Fees
Retail Trade 1,613,362 SF $122.68 $197,930
Commercial 1,622,735 SF $266.70 $432,782
Food Service and Entertainment 215,736 SF $266.70 $57,537 Office 858,004 SF $320.04 $274,595
Warehousing – Standard 100,000 SF $53.34 $5,334
Warehousing – High Cube 2,000,000 SF $53.34 $106,680
Manufacturing and Assembly 1,114,568 SF $266.70 $297,255 Industrial – Other 36,256 SF $266.70 $9,669
Institutional and Health Care 2,652,045 SF $880.11 $2,334,086 Hotel/Motel 500 Rooms $533.40 $266,699
Total $18,395,002
In compliance with AB 602, DTA has calculated the residential fees on a per -square-foot basis. Table II-2 (Legal Requirements)provides the calculation for the total future residential square footage that is then used in the cost per square foot calculation shown in Table IV- I6 below.

Table IV -I6: Water Supply Fee Summary ( per Sq. Ft.)
Land Use Type
Costs
Financed by
Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Property $14,412,435 21,728,000 $0.6633
DTA has reviewed the available information related to the City’s prior impact fee assumptions and has determined that the new fee amounts, which are generally higher than the City’s existing impact fees, are needed due to the current facility needs of the City, updated development projections, and updated methodology changes in compliance with AB602.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
485 of 864
88 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
J Sewer Facilities Fees
The City of Redlands provides sewer service to customers within the Cit y’s Sewer Service Area. A map depicting the Sewer Service Area is included in Exhibit D herein.

Information and data used in the calculations herein were taken from the 2021 City of Redlands City-wide Wastewater Master Plan(“Sewer Master Plan”), prepared by Dudek.

Table IV-J1 below illustrates how the sewer facilities fee will meet the requirements of AB1600 with regard to the use of the fee, the type of development funded, or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for the facilities and the proportionality requirements.

Table IV-J1: Sewer Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

To provide a revenue source that will pay for the
construction of sewer projects that will be used to
mitigate the impacts of new development in the
City’s Sewer Service Area.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Revenue from this fee will be used to construct new
sewer facilities that will be used to provide general
sewer collection and treatment services
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential and non-residential development will
generate additional residents and employees that will
increase the demand for sewer facilities. Sewer fees
collected from new development will be used
exclusively for construction-related costs associated
with these projects.
66001(a)(4)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the need for the public facilities
and the type of development
project on which the fee is
imposed.

New residential and non-residential development
City’s Sewer Service Area will generate additional
residents and employees that will increase the need
to collect and treat sewage generated by such new
development. New sewer pipelines and treatment
facilities are needed to collect and treat sewer
generated from new development in the City’s Sewer
Service Area.
66001(b)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the amount of the fee and the
cost of the public facility.

The cost of the proposed facilities are based on
projected sewer generation from the various land
uses. The amount of the fee for each land use is
calculated based on the relative contribution of City-
wide sewer flow from each land use.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
486 of 864
89 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
IV.J.1 Existing Facilities
The City’s sewer system includes approximately 245 miles of gravity sewer lines, one pump station (San Bernardino/Mountain View Pump Station), and one 9.5 MGD treatment plant (Redlands Wastewater Treatment Facility.) The gravity sewer collection system includes gravity sewer pipelines ranging from 3 inches in diameter to 48 inches in diameter and also includes six inverted siphons and two diversion manholes.

IV.J.2 Proposed Facilities
Expected future development within the City will generate impacts to the City’s sewer system in terms of sewage collection and sewage treatment capacity. Because future development will occur throughout the City, the improvements that are necessary to miti gate the impacts of new development will be the upsizing of existing gravity sewer pipes. These improvements will benefit both existing and future development. The City provided a list of capital improvement projects that will serve the needs of both new a nd existing development through buildout development conditions. Section J.3 of this Fee S tudy will allocate these costs to existing and future development based on sewer flows.

Gravity Sewer Collection System
As described in the Sewer Master Plan, Dudek conducted a sewer capacity analysis of the existing collection system at existing flows (2020), Near-Term projected flows (2030), Long -Term flows (2045) and build -out flows (2070).

The City provided a list of ten projects needed to provide the flow capacity to meet the needs of new development, based on the findings of the Sewer Master Plan. Projects identified as “Existing (2020)” in the Sewer Master Plan were included in the City’s list of projects, as these pr ojects were not constructed and operational as of this Report. These projects and costs are listed in Table ES.4 and Table 6.4 “Project Cost Summary” in the Sewer Master Plan.

This list of upsizing projects provide additional capacity to meet the needs of future development. However , without the impacts of future development the City would need to slip line the existingsewer lines. In order to determine the net impact of future development, the cost of slip lining that would normally be borne by the City must be subtracted from the cost of the new upsized sewer line. The slip lining prices per lineal foot for 8 inch through 12 inch were provided by the City and werebased on recent contracts within the Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
487 of 864
90 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
City limits. Prices per lineal foot for larger sizes were extrapolated from this data. See Table IV -J2 below for the sewer upsizing costs. For purposes of complying with AB 602, the Needs List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Table IV -J2: Gravity Sewer Upsizing Costs
The total net cost allocated to future development for upsizing sewer lines in the sewer collection system is $9,948,815.

The need for additional facilities is highlighted in the City’s Sewer Master Plan.

Through simulated scenarios using hydraulic modeling, the Sewer Master Plan identified infrastructure vulnerabilities caused by projected development and anticipated populat ion growth. The deficiencies in the wastewater system caused by new development were identified as future projects. The proposed project costs were determined based on the costs associated with projects currently in construction, thus providing an estimate that reflects current market conditions and industry standards. This data - driven approach was used to develop the needs list, aligning the current level of service with future projections.

IV.J.3 Sewer Flows And Sewer Generation Factors
Tables ES.1 and 4.9 from the Sewer Master Plan lists total flows to the WWTP from the sewer service area for years 2020, 2030, 2045, and 2070. Flows are measured by Average Dry Weather Flow (“ADWF”) in terms of million gallons per day (“MGD”). The City-wide flow to the WWTP for 2024 is prorated from 2020 and the percentage of Facility Location Lineal Feet Facility Cost Slip Lining cost per L.F. Slip Lining Cost
Cost Allocated to
New
Development
Gravity Sewer - Sewer Pipe Upsize
10" to 12" Cajon St 1350 $827,000 $36 $48,600 $778,400
12" to 15" Cajon St 100 $141,000 $50 $5,000 $136,000
30" to 36" Alabama St 2700 $4,967,000 $162 $437,400 $4,529,600 8" to 10" Brockton Ave 700 $445,000 $32 $22,400 $422,600 24" to 27" Citrus Plaza 350 $671,000 $120 $42,000 $629,000 27" to 30" Nevada St 1900 $2,452,000 $141 $267,900 $2,184,100 8" to 10" South Ave 300 $233,000 $32 $9,600 $223,400
10" to 12" Cajon St 2180 $1,136,000 $36 $78,480 $1,057,520 8' to 10" South Ave 300 $233,000 $32 $9,600 $223,400
12" to 15" Cajon St 300 $346,000 $50 $15,000 $331,000
Totals $11,451,000 $935,980 $10,515,020
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($566,205) Net Cost Allocated to New Development $9,948,815
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
488 of 864
91 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
existing flows and future flows to ultimate projected flow to the WWTP is shown in the Table IV-J3 below:

Table IV-J3: Existing and Future Sewer Flows to the WWTP Year 2020 2024 2030 2045 2070
ADWF (MGD) 5.8 6.2 6.9 7.7 8.0
% of Buildout 72.5% 78.0% 86.3% 96.3% 100.0%
Existing % = 78.0% Future %= 22.0%
ADWF = Average Dry Weather Flow
MGD = Million Gallons per Day
Table 3.2 of the Sewer Master Plan lists the unit sewage flow factors for City-wide land uses, including the proposed Transit Village Specific Plan land uses. These values are used to allocate costs to the various land uses and calculate the related DIF fees. These unit sewage flow factors were assigned to the various land uses used in this report, as best that can be correlated. See Table IV-J4 below:

Table IV-J4: Unit Sewage Flow Factors
Land Use Type Residential
gpd per unit
Non-Residential
gpd per acre
Single-Family 160.18 NA
Retail NA 3,000.00
Commercial NA 3,000.00
Food Service & Entertainment NA 3,000.00
Office NA 3,000.00
Warehousing - Standard NA 3,200.00
Warehousing - High Cube NA 3,200.00
Manufacturing & Assembly NA 3,200.00
Industrial - Other NA 3,200.00
Institutional & Health Care NA 1,000.00
Hotel Motel Rooms NA 3,000.00
gpd = gallons per day
IV.J.4 Analysis
The total costs listed in the City’s Needs List and costs allocated to future development are shown in Table IV-J5. Costs that are shared between existing and new development are allocated in proportion to the average dry weather flows Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
489 of 864
92 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
(“ADWFs”) to the WWTP . From Table IV-J2 t he total costs allocated to future development is $9,948,815.

Demographic data for City-wide future development provided by the City in Section III of this report is consistent with the demographic data used in the Sewer Master Plan to determine future flows and project cost required to mitigate the impacts of new development on the City-wide sewer system.

For the purposes of this Sewer Study an equivalent development unit (“EDU”) methodology is used in order to calculate the fee for each of the various land uses .

The average sewage generation for each land use category, in gpd, is compared to the average sewage generation for a single -family unit. These factors, when multiplied by the future development residential units and the non -residential thousand square feet (KSF), provide the totalfuture EDUs that contribute flows in the sewage system. Because the unit flow rates for non-residential land uses provided in the Sewer Master Plan and given in Table IV-J4 above are in terms of gpd per acre, these factors must be converted to gpd per thousand square feet of building area .

See Table IV-J5 below for the future EDUs and EDU factor calculation.

Table IV -J5: Future EDUs
Land Use Residential
Units
Non-
Residential
SF
Sewer Use
Factor (gpd
per unit or
acre)
EDU
Factor Total EDUs
Residential Property 11,200 NA 160.18 1.00 11,200
Retail NA 1,613,362 3,000.00 0.86 1,387
Commercial NA 1,622,735 3,000.00 0.86 1,395
Food Service and Entertainment NA 215,736 3,000.00 0.86 186 Office NA 858,004 3,000.00 0.86 738
Warehousing - Standard NA 100,000 3,200.00 0.92 92
Warehousing - High Cube NA 2,000,000 3,200.00 0.92 1,834 Manufacturing and Assembly NA 1,114,568 3,200.00 0.92 1,022 Industrial - Other NA 36,256 3,200.00 0.92 33
Institutional & Health Care NA 2,652,045 1,000.00 0.29 760 Hotel/Motel Rooms NA 500 3,000.00 0.75 375
Total Future Development EDUs 19,023
% of Total EDUs 25.64%
Total EDUs 74,179
The cost per EDUallocated to future developmentis determined by dividing the total Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
490 of 864
93 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
cost allocated to new development shown in Table IV-J2 by the total new EDUs shown in Table IV-J5 above. See Table IV-J6 below:

Table IV -J6: Cost per Future EDU
Total Cost Less Slip
Lining Cost
Less Offsetting
Revenue
(Existing Fee
Balance)
Net Cost
Allocated to New
Development
Total
Future
EDUs
Cost per E DU
$11,451,000 ($935,980) ($566,205) $9,948,815 19,023 $523.00 The maximum fee charged to new development to mitigate the impacts on the sewer system is determined for each land use by multiplying the cost per EDU by the EDU factor for each land use, as shown in Table IV-J7 below:

Table IV -J7: Fee Schedule
Residential Property EDU Factor Cost Per EDU DIF per Unit Units Residential Property 1.00 $523.00 $523.00 DU
Non-Residential Property EDU Factor Cost Per EDU DIF per 1,000 SF/Room Units
Retail Trade 0.86 $523.00 $449.74 KSF
Commercial 0.86 $523.00 $449.74 KSF
Food Service and Entertainment 0.86 $523.00 $449.74 KSF Office 0.86 $523.00 $449.74 KSF
Warehousing – Standard 0.92 $523.00 $479.72 KSF
Warehousing – High Cube 0.92 $523.00 $479.72 KSF
Manufacturing and Assembly 0.92 $523.00 $479.72 KSF
Industrial – Other 0.92 $523.00 $479.72 KSF
Institutional and Health Care 0.29 $523.00 $149.91 KSF
Hotel/Motel 0.75 $523.00 $391.81 Room
The proposed sewer fee schedule shown above is intended to fund the costs required to mitigate the impacts of new development to the sewer system.See the table below for the expected costs financed by fees for each land use.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
491 of 864
94 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-J8: Proposed Sewer Fees
Land Use Type
EDUs per Unit
/ Room /
/ 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Number of Future
Units/Rooms/1,000
Sq. Ft.

DIF per
Unit/Room/1,000 Sq.

Ft.

Cost
Financed by
Fees
Residential Property
Residential Property 1.00 11,200 $523.00 $5,857,564
Non-Residential Property
Retail 0.86 1,613 $449.74 $725,588
Commercial 0.86 1,623 $449.74 $729,803
Food Service and Entertainment 0.86 216 $449.74 $97,024 Office 0.86 858 $449.74 $385,876
Warehousing – Standard 0.92 100 $479.72 $47,972
Warehousing – High Cube 0.92 2,000 $479.72 $959,438
Manufacturing and Assembly 0.92 1,115 $479.72 $534,679
Industrial – Other 0.92 36 $479.72 $17,393
Institutional and Health Care 0.29 2,652 $149.91 $397,574 Hotel/Motel 0.75 500 $391.81 $195,905
Total $9,948,815
IV.J.6 AB 602 Compliance
In compliance with AB 602, DTA has calculated the residential fees on a per-square- foot basis. Table II -2 (Legal Requirements) provides the calculation for the total future residential square footage that is then used in the cost per square foot calculation shown in Table IV-J10 below.

Table IV -J10: Sewer Facilities Fee Summary (per Sq. Ft.) Land Use Type
Costs
Financed by
Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Single-Family $5,857,564 21,728,000 $0.2696
The new fee amounts shown above aregenerally less than the City’s existing impact fees.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
492 of 864
95 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
K Solid Waste Facilities Fees
The Solid Waste Facilities element includes those facilities to be used by the City to provide basic solid waste services to serve future development through the year 2035. The solid waste service area includes customers within the City limits. The current demand is based on the number of carts and bins (dumpsters) for refuse assigned to customers. This data was provided by the City.

In order to ensure that each future land use category pays its proportionate share of the cost to provide new and expanded facilities, the metric used to allocate costs is the volume of trash generated by each land use. The volumes are relative volumes based on a typic al collection cycle, such as 1 week.

Table IV-K1 below illustrates how the solid waste facilities fee will meet the requirements of AB 1600 with regard to use of the fee, the type of development funded or partially funded by the fee revenue, the reasonable relationship to the need for facilit ies and the proportionality requirements.

Table IV -K1: Solid Waste Facilities
AB 1600 Code
Section Description Justification
66001(a)(1) Identify the purpose of the Fee.

Provide a revenue source to pay for construction
of solid waste facilities that will mitigate the
impacts of new development on the City’s trash
facilities.
66001(a)(2) Identify the use to which the fee
is to be put.

Acquisition of facilities used to provide solid waste
services to new development.
66001(a)(3)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the fee’s use and the type of
development project on which
the fee is imposed.

New residential and non-residential development
in the City will generate additional residents and
employees who will increase the demand for City
services including solid waste facilities. An increase
in trash volume has a direct impact on the need for
solid waste facilities, thus a reasonable relationship
exists between new development and the solid
waste facilities, which will have to be acquired to
meet the increased demand. Fees collected from
new development will be used exclusively for Solid
Waste Facilities on the Needs List.
66001(a)(4)
Demonstrate how there is a
reasonable relationship between
the need for the public facilities
and the type of development
project on which the fee is
imposed.

Additional residents and employees that accompany
new residential and non-residential development will
generate additional trash volume. This new volume
will require expanded City facilities for pick up and
disposal.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
493 of 864
96 SECTION IV

The fee for dwelling units within the residential land
use category or for each thousand square feet in the
non-residential category is based on the
proportionate share of waste volume contributed.

IV.K.1 Facilities
The City’s solid waste system includes vehicles, vehicle maintenance facilities, and solid waste transfer station and disposal facilities. The City will need additional vehicles and will need to expand the existing facilities to handle the increased volume of solid waste.

IV.K.2 Existing Demand
The City provided trash container data forresidential and non-residential customers as summarized in Table IV-K2 below:

Table IV-K2: Existing Demand
Land Use Type Refuse
Carts
Recycle
Carts
Green
Waste
Carts
Total
Carts Refuse Bins Recycle
Bins
Total
Bins
Residential Property 22,345 17,965 20,359 60,669 222 91 313 Non-Residential Property 458 194 161 813 986 578 1,564
Total 22,803 18,159 20,520 61,482 1,208 669 1,877
The metric for trash collected is based on the volume of the type of trash container used. The capacity of a cart is assumed to be 96 gallons (0.475 cubic yards) and the capacity of a bin is assume d to be 2 cubic yards. Based on the total carts and bins shown in Table IV-K2 above, for the purposes of this report, the total relative volume assigned to existing development is shown in Table IV-K3 below:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
494 of 864
97 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-K3: Existing Volume
Unit Item
Count
Unit Volume
(Cubic Yards)
Volume
(calendar year, “c.y.”)
Carts 61,482 0.475 29,225
Bins 1,877 2.000 3,754
Total Existing Volume 32,979
% of Total Volume 66.64%
IV.K.3 Future Volume
In order to calculate future demand for bins, existing demand and existing demographics were used to estimate the number of bins per thousand square feet for non -residential development. This factor, number of bins per one thousand square feet (“KSF”), can then be applied to future data to determine future volume.

Table IV-K4: Existing Bins per KSF
Future demographics, as described in Section III of this report, along with individual cart and bin capacities (in cubic yards) and an assumed ratio of six (6) units per bin were used to estimate the total volume of solid wa ste generated by new development. As shown in Table IV-K5 below, future development contributes

33.30% of the total relative solid waste volume in a typical collection cycle.

Future ADU demand, for the purposes of this report,is assumed to be negligible. The addition of an ADU unitof limited square feet of living area, will not prompt the need for additional receptacles on the shared residential lot.

Existing Non-
Residential
KSF
Existing
Bins Existing carts Equivalent
Bins KSF per bin Number of bins
per KSF
30,318 1564 813 1757 17.25 0.0580
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
495 of 864
98 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-K5: Future Volume
Land Use
Residential
Units / KSF
/ Rooms
Number
of Carts
Volume
per Cart
(c.y.)
Total
Cart
Volume
(c.y.)
Number
of units
per bin /
per KSF
Number
of bins
Volume
per bin
(c.y.)
Total
bin
volume
(c.y.)
Total
Volume
(c.y.)
Residential 10,400 15,000 0.475 7,130 12 2,300 2.00 4,600 11,730 Non-Residential 1,613 0.058 374 2.00 748 748
Retail 1,623 0.058 376 2.00 752 752
Commercial 216 0.058 50 2.00 100 100
Food Service 858 0.058 199 2.00 398 398
Office 100 0.058 23 2.00 46 46
Warehousing - Standard 2,000 0.058 464 2.00 927 927
Warehousing – High Cube 1,115 0.058 258 2.00 517 517
Industrial 36 0.058 8 2.00 17 17
Institutional & Health Care 2,652 0.058 615 2.00 1,230 1,230 Hotel/Motel Rooms 500 0.058 20 2.00 40 40
Total NA 15,000 NA 7,130 NA NA NA 9,375 16,506
V.K.4 Facility Cost
The City provided a list of capital improvement projects that will serve the needs of both new and existing development through buildout development conditions. It is assumed that the percentage allocation of the total costs assigned to new development represents the fair share costs needed to provide the necessary capacity in the system that can provide the current level of service to new development as development occurs. The list of improvements and costs is shown in Table IV-K6 below. For purposes of complying with AB 602, the Needs List shown below is considered to be the CIP.

Table IV-K6: Solid Waste Needs List
Facility Number of Units Total Cost
Solid Waste Trucks 9 $4,500,000
Bulldozer 1 $1,100,000
Compactor 1 $1,100,000
Total $6,700,000
Less Offsetting Revenue (Existing Fee Balance) ($266,670) Net Costs $6,433,330
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
496 of 864
99 SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
The City Facilities and Community Services Department developed the needs list above based on projected population growth and future development in the City as provided in Section III (Demographics) herein. The goal was to maintain an equivalent ratio of facilities in vehicles to projected population. Development costs were based on a combination of previous project costs from the City’s on -call architect to project an average future cost.

The allocation to new development is based on the percentage of volume of solid waste generated by new development from Table IV-K5 above. The cost per cubic yard of solid waste generated by future development is estimated by multiplying the total facility cost by the percentage of solid waste generated, by volume, by future development. The percentage is taken from Table IV-K5 above. See Table IV-K7 below for the estimated facility cost allocated to future development.

Table IV-K7: Facility Cost per Cubic Yard
Total Cost
Less
Offsetting
Revenues
(Existing Fee
Balance)
Net Cost
% Allocated
to New
Development
Cost
Allocated to
New
Development
Total
Volume from
New
Development
Cost per
Cubic
Yard
$6,700,000 ($266,670) $6,433,330 33.36% $2,145,842 16,506 $130.01 IV.K. Fee Calculation and Fee Schedule
The relative volume of each land use category is determined by multiplying the capacity of each container by the number of containers (combination of refuse, recycled, green waste). See TableIV-K7 below for the estimated container capacities:

Table IV-K7: Container Capacities
Land Use
Category Item Capacity
c.y.

Number
of Items
Units per
Bin
Non
residential
Bins per
KSF
Volume
(c.y.)
Single Family Carts 0.475 3 1.426
Multi Family bins 2.000 3 6 1.000
Non Residential bins 2.000 2 0.058 0.232
Based on the container capacities, in cubic yards of solid waste, as shown in Table IV-K7 above, and the cost per cubicyard allocated to future development from Table IV-K6, the fee for each land use category is determined as shown in Table IV-K8 below:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
497 of 864
100

SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table IV-K8: Fee by Land Use Category
The fee for each land use category within the land usecategories shown in Table IV- K8 above can then be used to provide a complete Fee Schedule with respect to the land use categories used throughout this report. This fee schedule can then be multiplied by the future land use demographics used throughout this report to validate that the expected revenues will match the estimated costs allocated to future development. See Table IV-K9 below for the complete fee schedule and the revenue/cost validation:

Table IV-K9: Proposed Solid Waste Fees
Land Use Type
Number of Future
Units/Rooms/1,000
Sq. Ft.

DIF per
Unit/Room/1,000 Sq.

Ft.

Cost
Financed by
Fees
Residential Property
Residential Property 10,400 $146.63 $1,524,996
Non-Residential Property
Retail 1,613 $60.28 $97,257
Commercial 1,623 $60.28 $97,822
Food Service and Entertainment 216 $60.28 $13,005
Office 858 $60.28 $51,722
Warehousing – Standard 100 $60.28 $6,028
Warehousing – High Cube 2,000 $60.28 $120,565
Manufacturing and Assembly 1,115 $60.28 $67,189
Industrial – Other 36 $60.28 $2,186
Institutional and Health Care 2,652 $60.28 $159,871
Hotel/Motel 500 $10.40 $5,200
Total $2,145,842
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $4,287,488
Total Cost of Sewer Facilities $6,433,330
In compliance with AB 602, DTA has calculated the residential fees on a per -square-foot Land Use Category Cost per
c.y.

Avg.

Volume Fee units
Residential Property 130.01 $ 1.128 146.63 $ D.U.

Non Residential 130.01 $ 0.464 60.28 $ KSF
Hotel Rooms 130.01 $ 0.080 10.40 $ Rooms
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
498 of 864
101

SECTION IV

FEE CALCULATIONS
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
basis. Table II-2 (Legal Requirements) providesthe calculation for the total future residential square footage that is then used in the cost per square foot calculation shown in Table IV- K10 below.

Table IV -K10: Solid Waste Facilities Fee Summary (per Sq. Ft.) Land Use Type
Costs
Financed by
Fees
[a]
Total
Square
Footage
[b]
Fee per
Sq. Ft.
[a] / [b]
Residential Property $1,524,996 21,728,000 $0.0702
The new fee amounts shown above are generally less than the City’s existing impact fees.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
499 of 864
102

SECTION V

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE

SCHEDULE
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com

V IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE SCHEDULE
In addition to the legal requirements covered in Section II, there are a number of recommendations for the adoption and administration of the DIFs presented in this report.

All recommendations presented in this section are based on the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code §66000 et seq.), also referred to as the “Act,” which provides specific requirements for establishing and administering DIF programs. The Act also mandates procedures for administering impact fee programs , such as the collection and accounting of impact fees, refunds, mandatory updates, and reporting requirements.

At the time the City imposes an impact fee, Government Code 66020 requires a written statement of the amount of the fee and a written notice of a 90 -day period during which the imposition of the fee can be protested . Prior to the enactment of Section 66020, a developer could not challenge the validity of fees imposed on a residential development without refusing to pay them. Under these circumstances, developers were required to pay disputed fees before they could be challenged . Section 66020 was drafted to correct that problem.

The various subparts ofSection 66020 allow for a procedure that permits a developer to pay the fees under protest, obtain the relevant building permit, and then proceed with the project while pursuing an action to challenge the fees . If the action is successful, the fees will be refunded with interest. However, failure to protest imposition of the fee during the allowed period may deprive the fee payer of the right to any subsequent legal challenges .

Any challenges to be filed must be submitted within90 days of enactment. The subsequent sections provide specific guidelines in implementing DIFs.

A The Collection of DIFs
According to Government Code Section 66007, any local agency that imposes any fees or charges on a residential development for the construction of public improvements or facilities shall not require the payment of those fees or charges, notwithstanding any other provision of law, unti l the date of the final inspection or the date the Certificate of Occupancy is issued, whichever occurs first.

However, utility service fees may be collected at the time an application for utility service is received. If the residential development contains more than one dwelling, the local agency may determine whether the fees or charges shall be paid on a pro rata basis for each dwelling when it receives its final inspection orCertificate of Occupancy, on a pro rata basis when a certain percentage of the dwellings have received their final inspection orCertificate of Occupancy, or on a lump sum basis when the first dwelling in the development receives its final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever of the three occur first.

An exception allows DIFs to be collected at an earlier time if they will be used to reimburse the agency for expenditures previously made or for public improvements or facilities for which money has already been appropriated. If any fee or charge specified is not fully paid prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction, the local agency issuing the Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
500 of 864
103

SECTION V

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE

SCHEDULE
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
building permit may require the property owner, or lessee if the lessee’s interest appears of record, as a condition of issuance of the building permit, to execute a contract to pay the fee or charge, or applicable portion.

Statutory restrictions in place for residential development at the time at which fees may be collected do not apply to non -residential development. In cases where the fees are not collected upon the issuance of building permits, Sections 6607(c)(1) and (2) provide that the City may require the property owner of a non-residential development to execute a contract to pay the fee, and subsequently record that contract as a lien against the property owner.

In addition, pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.2(f), ADUs are exempt from incurring impact fees from local agencies, special districts, and water corporations if such unit is less than 750 square feet. If an ADU is 750 square feet or larger, impact fees shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the ADU to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. Furthermore, the water capital improvementfee, water supply fee, and sewer capital improvement fee shall not be applica ble to any ADU created within the existing space of a single family residence or accessory structure, including, but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure. Please note that for purposes of this Fee Study, future ADUs are included in the buildout projections, but some of these units may not be required to pay an impact fee. As a result, the City may not collect the full amount of costs as shown in the Needs Lists included herein.

Lastly, where the service areas include the “Donut Hole” or other unincorporated areas of the County, the City may enter into an agreement with the County regarding procedures for collecting the applicable DIF. For example, the County may agree to collect the City’s sewer or water impact fees from the developer seeking a building permit within unincorporated areas of the City’s service area. This revenue would then be transferred to the City to be deposited in the various DIF fund accounts. Alternatively, t he County might issue a building permit to the developer upon the developer providing documentation from the City confirming that all appropriate DIF fees have been paid to the City.

B The Assignment and Expenditure of Fee Revenue
According to Section 66006, if a local agency requires the payment of a fee specified in connection with the approval of a development project, the local agency receiving the fee shall deposit it with the other fees for the improvement to be funded in a separate capital facilities account or fund in a manner to avoid any commingling of the fees with other revenues and funds of the local agency, except for temporary investments, and expend those fees solely for the purpose for which the fee was collec ted. Any interest income earned in the capital facilities account or fund shall also be deposited in that account or fund and shall be expended only for the purpose for which the fee was originally collected.

Common practice is to maintain separate funds or accounts for impact fee revenues by facility category (i.e., street and park improvements, but not for individual projects ). DTA recommends the continuation of that approach.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
501 of 864
104

SECTION V

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE

SCHEDULE
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
C Exemptions, Reductions and Waivers.

If a project has characteristics that indicate its impact on a particular public facility or infrastructure system will be significantly and permanently smaller than the average impact used to calculate impact fees in thisFee Study, the fees should be reduced accordingly. The City may decide to voluntarily waive or reduce the fees that would otherwise apply to a project to promote goals such as affordable housing or economic development. However, the implementation of this policy may not result in increa sed costs for other development projects and are allowed only if such costs are offset from other revenue sources.

D Developer Improvement Credits
If the City maintains a policy that requires a developer, as a condition of project approval, to construct facilities for which impact fees have been or will be charged , the impact fee imposed on that development project for that type of facility must be adjusted to reflect a credit for such dedication or construction . Furthermore, the impact fee imposed on that development project for that type of facility must be adjusted to reflect a credit for the cost of the facilities or improvements constructed by t he developer. If circumstances allow a developer to dedicate land, buildings, or other valuable considerations in lieu of paying fees, the City maintains the discretion to accept or reject such offers and may negotiate the terms under which an offer would be accepted.

E Existing Development Credit
If a project involves the replacement, redevelopment , or intensification of previously existing development, impact fees should be applied only to the portion of the project which represents a net increase in demand for relevant facilities, applying the measure of demand used in this study to calculate that particular fee . Since residential service demand is normally estimated on the basis of demand per dwelling unit, an addition to a single-family dwelling unit typically would not be subject to an impact fee if it does not increase the number of dwelling units in the structure. In any project that results in a net increase in the number of dwelling units, the added units would normally be subjected to impact fees . A similar analysis can be applied to non-residential development using a measure of demand on which impact fees are based.

F Annual Reporting and Accounting of Fees
AB 1600 requires that both general law and charter cities account for every fee that they collect under its terms. Funds collected for each capital facility or service shall be deposited in separate accounts and not commingled with any other funds for other impact fees. While funds are accruing for individual capital facilities, theCity must keep track of each fund and provide an annual report . Section 66006 requires that for each separate account or fund established, the local agency shall , within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year, make available to the public the following information for the fiscal year:

1. A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund; Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
502 of 864
105

SECTION V

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE

SCHEDULE
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com

2. The amount of the fee;

3. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund;

4. The amount of the fees collected and interest earned;

5. An identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees;

6. An identification of an approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, as identified in Paragraph (2) of Subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete;

7. A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan; and

8. The amount of refunds made pursuant To Subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocations pursuant to Subdivision (f) of Section 66001.

The City must review the information made available at the next regularly scheduled public meeting not less than 15 days after this information is made available to the public. Notice of the time and place of the meeting, including the address where this information may be reviewed, shall be mailed at least 15 days prior to the meeting to any interested party who files a written request with the local agency for mailed notice of the meeting.

G Refunding Policy
Under the Mitigation Fee Act, Govt . Code §66000 et seq., each development fee must be deposited in a separate capital facilities account and may be expended only for the purposes for which it was collected. For all unexpended fees, the agency must make findings every 5 years that:

1. Identify the purpose to which the fee will be put;

2. Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the unexpended balance and the purpose for which the fee was charged;

3. Ascertain the sources and funding for any as-yet-incomplete public improvements; and

4. Designate the approximate date the agency expects the funding for uncompleted improvements to be deposited in the account [§66001(d)(1)]. The Act provides that “if the findings are not made as required by [the Act], the local agency shall refund Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
503 of 864
106

SECTION V

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE

SCHEDULE
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
the moneys in the account” to the current owners of the properties for which the fees were paid [§66001(d)(2)].

Failure to make the findings specified in Mitigation Fee Act requires a refund of all unexpended DIFs. When sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing of the public improvements contained in the CIP, the public agency shall identify "an approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will be commenced" within 180 days of collection of the required funds (Gov. Code §66001(e)]. Failure to comply with this requirement also mandates the return of the collected funds, as stated above.

Furthermore, pursuant to Gov. Code §66008.1, otherwise known as AB 516, any fees for improvements that are collected and that are not expended within a reasonable time of deposit of such feesshall be returned to the qualified applicant that originally deposited the fees.

H Annual Update of the Capital Improvement Plan (“CIP”) It is common for jurisdictions to prepare a CIP in conjunction with a fee program . In fact, AB 1600 encourages the use of a CIP to assist in scheduling and implementing the services and improvements funded through impact fees (Gov. Code §66002). A good CIP establishes a schedule of improvements necessary to accommodate the projected growth . The CIP must indicate the approximate size, location, time of availability, and estimated costs of all improvements to be financed through fees [Gov. Code §66002(a)]. In order to create a usable CIP, a municipality must have an accurate understanding of its current service baseline and its projected growth. This requires an understanding of when, where, and how growth may occur within the area. The more information collected about future growth, the more comprehensive and accurate the CIP will be . A CIP can also help a municipality determine when new public improvements or the expansion of existing public improvements is needed in relation to the timing of new development.

If the public agency adopts a CIP, it must be updated annually [Gov. Code §66002(b)]. 10 days’ published notice is provided pursuant to Government Code §65090 and is also provided to any city or county that may be significantly affected by the CIP. If a CIP is adopted and is used as a basis for identifying the use of impact fees, the CIP must be adopted and updated annually by a resolution of the governing body at a public hearing . In the absence of a CIP, an alternative is to identify improvements in other public documents, such as General Plans, land studies, and other documents.

I Administration Costs of Fee Implementation
The cost of implementing the DIFs is not included in the fees themselves and must be determined by the City. To recover the periodic costs of updating the fees studies, implementing the program, ongoing staff costs, managing the updates , and preparing annual and five-year updates required by the Act, an administration fee may be added to the impact fees calculated in this Fee Study. DTA recommends that these fee expenses are handled administratively and pass the costs on to user fees charged to applicants for Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
504 of 864
107

SECTION V

IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE

SCHEDULE
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
processing fee applications. The calculation of the administrative cost for each fee in this Fee Study is presented in each respective fee section and in the Executive Summary.

J Indexing of Impact Fee Rates
The DIFs presented in this report are based on current facility costs provided by the City and should be adjusted annually to account for inflation. The purpose of the adjustment is to account for future escalation in costs for land , equipment, vehicles, and construction.

DTA recommends that after adoption, the fee should be reviewed each year and adjusted by a reliable index such as ENR ’s BCI generally used as the primary basis for indexing construction costs. Ordinarily, land costs make up asignificant portion of the costs covered by the fees and do not lend themselves to traditional cost indexes . As such, land costs should be adjusted to changes in local land prices.

K Updating the Impact Fee Study
As stated in Section II, AB 602 was signed into law in September of 2021by the Governor of California, and it provides new Statewide requirements for local jurisdictions seeking to impose DIFs on development projects. Among these requirements are that nexus studies shall be updated at least every 8 years as of January 1, 2023 . However, DTA concurs with the generally accepted policy that 5 years is a good rule -of-thumb time period for impact fee updates, particularly because the required 5-year findings (see above) can be approved at that same time. In some instances, fees may remain valid for a longer period of time if the City’s land use and facility plans do not change . A case in point is a municipality at or near full build-out capacity. However, a dynamic, growing municipality facing significant changes in land use would do itself a disservice if it maintained the current fee structure for too long without a Fee Study to update the current rates.

L Administering an Impact Fee Program
Creating and administering an impact fee program can be a labor -intensive process requiring considerable preparation and training that should not be undertaken more often than necessary. A well-planned fee program can generate sufficient funds to allow theCity to adequately mitigate impacts created by future development. Conversely, a poorly planned fee can result in either collecting too little money and being forced to pay forpublic facilities required as a result of future development through its General Fund or collecting too much money based on an unsupported fee program, thus exposing the City to a fee challenge or a requirement to refund unexpected proceeds.

All personnel involved in the process, including accounting, capital budgeting, and project management of any other area, must be made fully aware of the difference between impact fees and other fees, such as user fees, and of the guidelines and restrictions placed on the expenditure of impact fee revenues. The building impact fees generated in this report are tied to specific facility improvements and cost estimates provided by the City. The fees must be expended accordingly and must be able to withstandany challenges and show that the funds have been properly directed in accordance with proper AB 1600 guidelines.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
505 of 864
108

SECTION VI

SUMMARY OF FEES
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com

VI SUMMARY OF FEES
Table VI-1 is a summary of the proposed fees for the various land uses within the eleven facility categories. These fees represent the maximum fee that can be charged to any land use.

In order to recover administrative costs incurred by the City in the administration of the Fee program, an administrative component equal to 2.0% of the total fee is added on to the proposed fees . Table VI-1 summarizes the total fees, including the administrative component.

In addition, pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.2(f), ADUs are exempt from incurring impact fees from local agencies, special districts, and water corporations if such unit is less than 750 square feet. If an ADU is 750 square feet or larger, impact fees shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the ADU to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, t he water capital improvement fee, water supply fee, and sewer fee shall not be applicable to any accessory dwelling unit created within the existing space of a single -family residence or accessory structure, including, but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure.

This report does not address, nor has DTA been asked to determine, whether any current or proposed development impact fees are valid under the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment Takings Clause. In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado (2024) ___U.S.___, the U.S.

Supreme Court held that its decisions in Nollan v. California Coastal Comm’n(1987) 483 U.S. 825 and Dolan v. City of Tigard(1994) 512 U.S. 374 apply to legislatively imposed conditions on land -use permits. But the Supreme Court left it to the Californi a appellate court on remand to address the validity of the traffic impact fee at issue in the case and determine how to apply Nollan/Dolan in this context. DTA cannot predict how courts will resolve such issues in the future and is providing no services o r guarantees of any kind concerning the validity of any impact fees under the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment Takings Clause.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
506 of 864
109

SECTION VI

SUMMARY OF FEES
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Table VI-1: DIF Summary
Residential Property
(Fee per Building Sq. Ft.)
Non-Residential ( Fee per 1,000 Sq. Ft.) Fee per
Room
Land Use
Retail
Commercial
Food Service and
Entertainment
Office
Warehousing –
Standard
Warehousing –
High Cube
Manufacturing and
Assembly
Industrial/Other
Institutional and
Health Care
Hotel/Motel
Police $0.5197 $765 $190 $3,814 $2,397 $1,029 $206 $277 $2,837 $636 $165 Fire $0.4503 $663 $165 $3,305 $2,077 $891 $178 $240 $2,458 $551 $143 Parks $1.1794 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Library $0.5997 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Government $0.7145 $1,052 $261 $5,243 $3,296 $1,414 $283 $381 $3,900 $874 $226 Transportation $1.3954 $7,382 $7,150 $14,979 $4,312 $1,522 $563 $833 $2,729 $6,462 $2,253 Storm Drain $0.5113 $611 $611 $611 $611 $611 $611 $611 $645 $645 $351 Water $2.3657 $438 $951 $951 $1,141 $190 $190 $951 $951 $3,139 $1,902 Water Supply $0.6633 $123 $267 $267 $320 $53 $53 $267 $267 $880 $533 Sewer $0.2696 $450 $450 $450 $450 $480 $480 $480 $480 $150 $392 Solid Waste $0.0702 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $60 $10 Subtotal $8.7393 $11,542 $10,105 $29,680 $14,665 $6,250 $2,624 $4,099 $14,326 $13,397 $5,975 Administration (2%) $0.1891 $231 $202 $594 $293 $125 $52 $82 $287 $268 $119 Grand Totals $8.9141 $11,773 $10,307 $30,273 $14,958 $6,375 $2,677 $4,181 $14,612 $13,665 $6,094 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
507 of 864
110

SECTION VI

SUMMARY OF FEES
City of Redlands May 2, 2024
Development Impact Fee Justification Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
New development, at the time of permit issuance, or as proscribed by the Redlands Municipal Code, shall pay the appropriate fee for each facility category and the City shall deposit the funds in a separate account dedicated to the construction of the respective facilities proposed, in accordance with Government Code Section 66006(a).

Every 5 years, the City shall report the status of the funds in accordance with Government Code Section 66001(d) and shall i) identify the purpose to which the fee is put; ii) demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charge, iii) identify the sources and amounts of funding needed to complete the program, iv) list the facilities not yet completed, and v) identify, to the extent possible, the timing of when the remaining funds are expected to be received.

It is further recommended that the City update its Capital Improvement Plan annually, by resolution of the City Council, in accordance with Government Code Section 66002.

Finally, it is recommended that the City include in its Council Resolution to adopt the fees recommended in this Fee Study, a provision to automatically increase the fees annually tied to an inflation index, such as the Engineering News Record Construction Price Index, or some other reasonable measure of inflation.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
508 of 864

APPENDIX A
City of Redlands
Development Impact Fee Justification Study

DEMOGRAPHICS

SUMMARY
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
509 of 864
4/25/2024

CITY OF REDLANDS

DEMOGRAPHICS INFORMATION & EDU CALCULATION

EDU BACKUP
Number of Number of Residents per EDUS per Total
Residential Property Residents [1] Residential Units [1] Residential Unit Residential Unit Existing EDUs Residential Property 73,737 27,406 2.69 1.098 30,086
Number ofNumber of Non-Residential SF Employees per EDUs per Total Non-Residential Property Employees [1] / Rooms [1] 1,000 Non-Res. SF / Room 1,000 Non-Res. SF / Room Existing EDUs Retail 3,500 3,747,747 0.93 0.381 1,428
Commercial 1,000 1,928,805 0.52 0.212 408
Food Service & Entertainment 3,200 378,015 8.47 3.454 1,306 Office 10,000 2,830,658 3.53 1.441 4,080
Warehousing - Standard 500 265,250 1.89 0.769 204
Warehousing - High Cube 3,000 12,038,333 0.25 0.102 1,224 Manufacturing & Assembly 2,400 2,532,603 0.95 0.387 979 Industrial - Other 500 73,748 6.78 2.766 204
Institutional & Health Care 12,000 6,522,384 1.84 0.751 4,896 Subtotal 36,100 30,317,543 1.19 14,729
Hotel/Motel Rooms 100 268 0.37 0.152 41
Grand Total 36,200 44,856
Number of Number of Residents per EDUS per
Residential Property Residents [1] Residential Units [1] Residential Unit Residential Unit Total Future EDUs Residential Property 27,450 11,200 2.45 1.000 11,200
Number ofNumber of Non-Residential SF Employees per EDUs per Non-Residential Property Employees [1] / Rooms [1] 1,000 Non-Res. SF / Room 1,000 Non-Res. SF / Room Total Future EDUs Retail 3,000 1,613,362 1.86 0.759 1,224
Commercial 750 1,622,735 0.46 0.189 306
Food Service & Entertainment 2,000 215,736 9.27 3.783 816 Office 5,000 858,004 5.83 2.378 2,040
Warehousing - Standard 250 100,000 2.50 1.020 102
Warehousing - High Cube 1,000 2,000,000 0.50 0.204 408
Manufacturing & Assembly 750 1,114,568 0.67 0.275 306
Industrial - Other 250 36,256 6.90 2.813 102
Institutional & Health Care 4,100 2,652,045 1.55 0.631 1,673 Subtotal 17,100 10,212,706 1.67 6,977
Hotel/Motel Rooms 200 500 0.40 0.163 82
Grand Total 17,300 18,259
Number of Number of Residents per
Residential Property Residents Residential Units Residential Unit Total Future EDUs Residential Property 101,187 38,606 2.62 41,286
Number ofNumber of Non-Residential SF Employees per
Non-Residential Property Employees / Rooms [1] 1,000 Non-Res. SF / Room Total Future EDUs Retail 6,500 5,361,109 1.21 2,652
Commercial 1,750 3,551,540 0.49 714
Food Service & Entertainment 5,200 593,751 8.76 2,122
Office 15,000 3,688,662 4.07 6,120
Warehousing - Standard 750 365,250 2.05 306
Warehousing - High Cube 4,000 14,038,333 0.28 1,632
Manufacturing & Assembly 3,150 3,647,171 0.86 1,285
Industrial - Other 750 110,004 6.82 306
Institutional & Health Care 16,100 9,174,429 1.75 6,569 Subtotal 53,200 40,530,249 1.31 21,706
Hotel/Motel Rooms 300 768 0.39 122
Grand Total 53,500 63,115
[1] Data provided by City 10/19/22.

Total Development (2035)
Existing Development (2022)
Future Development (2022 - 2035)
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
510 of 864

APPENDIX B
City of Redlands
Development Impact Fee Justification Study

FEE MODELS
 Police Fee
 Fire Fee
 Parks Fee
 Library Fee
 General Government Facilities Fee
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
511 of 864
4/25/2024
Table 1
Inventory of Existing Facilities
Facility Facility Unit Units
Existing Police Facilities Location
Annex - Admin, Detectives, MET 30 Cajon Street Square Feet 21,231 EOC - Patrol, Dispatch, Reords 1270 W. Park Avenue Square Feet 8,237 Office Space San Mateo/Brookside Square Feet 1,979
City Hall Basement - Property and Evidence 35 Cajon Street Square Feet 3,233 Total Stations 34,680
Existing Police Vehicles
Marked Police Units Vehicles 48
Motorcycles Vehicles 7
Off-Road Vehicles Vehicles 5
Unmarked/Undercover/Cold Units Vehicles 38
Crime Scene/Evidence Vehicles Vehicles 2
CSO/Pkg Control/CVP/Explorer/CVP Vehicles Vehicles 15
Custody/Transport Vehicles 2
Mobile Command Center Vehicles 1
Total Vehicles 118
Existing Police Equipment
Cameras 200
Body-worn cameras 112
Radios 130
Iphones 100
Ipads 10
Total Equipment 552
Table 2
Existing Standards
Standard per
Existing Units Existing Residents 1,000 Residents
Existing Police Station Building Square Feet 34,680 73,737 470.32 Exising Police Vehicles 118 73,737 1.60
Exising Police Equipment 552 73,737 7.49
City of Redlands
Police Facilities
Fee Calculation
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
512 of 864
4/25/2024
City of Redlands
Police Facilities
Fee Calculation
Table 3
Proposed Facilities
Facility
Facility Location Facility Unit Number Cost
Future Police Facilities
Police Station 1625 W RB SF 109,850 $85,000,000
Police Substations (2) North & East SF 1,200 $1,000,000 Total Facilities 111,050 $86,000,000
Future Police Vehicles
Police Vehicles 1625 W RB Vehicles 45 $2,250,000
Outfitting 1625 W RB Vehicles 45 $1,575,000
Rescue Vehicles 1625 W RB Vehicles 2 $700,000
Total Vehicles 92 $4,525,000
Future Police Equipment
Cameras 1625 W RB Cameras 300 $1,500,000
Body-worn Cameras NA Body-worn Cameras 30 $150,000
Miscellaneous Technical Hardware 1625 W RB IT 1 $1,000,000 Handheld radios, In-car & Desktop radios 1625 W RB Radio Equipment 250 $2,125,000 Iphones, Ipads, Cell Service 1625 W RB Cellular 150 $500,000 Guns 1625 W RB Guns 30 $60,000
Electric Charging Stations 1625 W RB Charging Stations 8 $1,000,000 Total Equipment 769 $6,335,000
Total Facilities Cost $96,860,000
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($22,322) Net Facilities Cost $96,837,678
Table 4
Allocation of Facilities to Existing and New Development Police Station Facilities - All new stations allocated to new development Percentage of Total Station SF Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Station Credit Existing Standard Allocated Stations Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 44,856 71% 103,571 (34,680) 0 68,891 84% $72,408,316 Future Development 18,259 29% 42,159 0 (29,249) 12,910 16% $13,569,362 Total 63,115 100% 145,730 (34,680) (29,249) 81,802 100% $85,977,678 Vehicles - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Percentage of Total Vehicles Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Vehicle Credit Existing Standard Allocated Vehicles Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 44,856 71% 149 (118) 0 31 42% $1,882,803 Future Development 18,259 29% 61 0 (17) 44 58% $2,642,197 Total 63,115 100% 210 (118) (17) 75 100% $4,525,000
Equipment - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Percentage of Total Equipment Reduction to Maintain
Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Equipment Credit Existing Standard Allocated Equipment Total Cost Existing Development 44,856 71% 939 (552) 0 387 65% $4,136,117 Future Development 18,259 29% 382 0 (177) 206 35% $2,198,883 Total 63,115 100% 1,321 (552) (177) 593 100% $6,335,000 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
513 of 864
4/25/2024
City of Redlands
Police Facilities
Fee Calculation
Table 5
Future Standards
Future
Future Units Standard per Existing
Allocated to New Development Future Residents 1,000 Residents Standard Resulting Status Future Police Station Building Square Feet 12,910 27,450 470.32 470.32 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Future Police Vehicles 44 27,450 1.60 1.60 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Future Police Equipment 206 27,450 7.49 7.49 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Table 6
Proposed Facilities and Cost Per EDU
Number of Cost
Facility Cost Future EDUs Per EDU
Buildings $13,569,362 18,259 $743.17
Vehicles $2,642,197 18,259 $144.71
Equipment $2,198,883 18,259 $120.43
Total $18,410,443 NA $1,008.31
Table 7
Development Impact Fee per Unit or 1,000 SF
EDUs per EDUs per Units / Fees per Fees per Cost Financed Land Use Type Unit 1,000 SF / Room 1,000 SF / Room Unit 1,000 SF / Room by DIF Residential Property

1.000 NA 11,200 $1,008.31 NA $11,293,109
Non-Residential Property
Retail NA 0.759 1,613 NA $765.00 $1,234,220
Commercial NA 0.189 1,623 NA $190.14 $308,555
Food Service & Entertainment NA 3.783 216 NA $3,813.98 $822,813 Office NA 2.378 858 NA $2,397.46 $2,057,033
Warehousing - Standard NA 1.020 100 NA $1,028.52 $102,852 Warehousing - High Cube NA 0.204 2,000 NA $205.70 $411,407 Manufacturing & Assembly NA 0.275 1,115 NA $276.84 $308,555 Industrial - Other NA 2.813 36 NA $2,836.82 $102,852
Institutional & Health Care NA 0.631 2,652 NA $636.02 $1,686,767 Hotel/Motel Rooms NA 0.163 500 NA $164.56 $82,281
Total $18,410,443
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $78,427,235
Total Cost of Police Facilities $96,837,678
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
514 of 864
4/25/2024
Table 1 Table 2
Inventory of Existing Facilities Existing Standards
Facility Facility Unit Units Standard per
Fire Station 261 Square Feet 11,912 Existing Units Existing Residents 1,000 Residents Fire Station 262 Square Feet 4,339 Existing Fire Station Building Square Feet 27,643 73,737 374.89 Fire Station 263 Square Feet 7,142 Exising Support Staff Vehicles & Secondary Units 20 73,737 0.27 Fire Station 264 Square Feet 4,250 Existing Personal Protective Equipment 60 73,737 0.81 Total Fire Stations 27,643
Existing Primary Fire Vehicles
Type 1 Engine E-261 Vehicles 1
Type 1 Engine E-262 Vehicles 1
Type 1 Engine E-263 Vehicles 1
Type 1 Engine E-264 Vehicles 1
Tractor Drawn Aerial Ladder T-261 Vehicles 1
Type 3 Engine BE-261 Vehicles 1
Type 3 Engine BE-262 Vehicles 1
Type 3 Engine BE-264 Vehicles 1
Water Tender WT-263 Vehicles 1
Squad MS-261 Vehicles 1
Command C-700 Vehicles 1
Command BC-704 Vehicles 1
Command BC-705 Vehicles 1
Command BC-706 Vehicles 1
Command BC-707 Vehicles 1
Command DC-701 Vehicles 1
Total 16
Existing Support Staff Vehicles
Staff Vehicle P-751 Vehicles 1
Staff Vehicle 903 Vehicles 1
Utility Vehicle UT-261 Vehicles 1
Incident Support IS-263 Vehicles 1
Rescue Trailer 952 Vehicles 1
Lt Support Trailer 953 Vehicles 1
Repair Vehicle 925 Vehicles 1
Safety Trailer 952 with ARV Vehicles 1
Rehab Trailer 954 Vehicles 1
Arson Vehicle 938 Vehicles 1
Staff-CRR 909 Ford Escape Vehicles 1
Staff-CRR 906 Ford Escape Vehicles 1
Staff-CRR 882 Toyota Rav4 Vehicles 1
Staff-EMS 912 Vehicles 1
Total 14
Existing Secondary Units
Type 1 Engine E-261R Vehicles 1
Type 1 Engine E-263R Vehicles 1
Aerial Ladder T-261R Vehicles 1
Tractor Drawn Aerial Ladder Reserve Vehicles 1
Reserve BC 911 Vehicles 1
Squad MS-261R Vehicles 1
Total 6
Existing Initial Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Items 60 City of Redlands
Fire Facilities
Fee Calculation
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
515 of 864
4/25/2024City of Redlands
Fire Facilities
Fee Calculation
Table 3
Proposed Facilities
Facility Facility
Facility Facility Unit Number Cost (2022) Cost (2023)
Future Fire Facilities
Fire Station 264 Replacement SF 9,000 $9,000,000 $9,742,723 NE Fire Station SF 9,000 $9,000,000 $9,742,723
NW Fire Station SF 9,000 $9,000,000 $9,742,723
Total 27,000 $27,000,000 $29,228,169
Future Apparatus and Support Staff Vehicles
Staff Vehicle (BC) Vehicles 1 $80,000 $86,602
Staff Vehicle (Community Risk Reduction) Vehicles 1 $30,000 $32,476 Staff Vehicle (Emergency Management) Vehicles 1 $30,000 $32,476 Type 1 Engine Vehicles 2 NA $1,900,000
Total Vehicles 5 $140,000 $2,051,553
Future Staff Initial Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Initial Start Up PPE Cost 18 NA $103,554
Total Facilities Cost $31,383,276
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($427,545) Net Facilities Cost $30,955,731
Table 4
Allocation of Facilities to Existing and New Development Stations - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Percentage of Total SF Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 SF Credit Existing Standard Allocated SF Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 44,856 71.07% 38,835 (27,643) 0 11,192 52% $15,004,487 Future Development 18,259 28.93% 15,808 0 (5,517) 10,291 48% $13,796,136 Total 63,115 100.00% 54,643 (27,643) (5,517) 21,483 100% $28,800,624 Fire Apparatus and Support Staff Vehicles - All new vehicles allocated to new development Total Support
Percentage of Staff Vehicles Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Vehicle Credit Existing Standard Allocated Vehicles Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 44,856 71.07% 18 (18) 0 0 0% $0
Future Development 18,259 28.93% 7 0 0 7 100% $2,051,553 Total 63,115 100.00% 25 (18) 0 7 100% $2,051,553
Future PPE - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Total PPE
Percentage of Units Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 PPE Credit Existing Standard Allocated PPE Units Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 44,856 71.07% 56 (56) 0 0 0% $0
Future Development 18,259 28.93% 22 0 0 22 100% $103,554 Total 63,115 100.00% 78 (56) 0 22 100% $103,554
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
516 of 864
4/25/2024City of Redlands
Fire Facilities
Fee Calculation
Table 5
Future Standards
Future
Future Units Standard per Existing
Allocated to New Development Future Residents 1,000 Residents Standard Resulting Status Future Fire Station Building Square Feet 10,291 27,450 374.89 374.89 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Future Support Staff Vehicles 7 27,450 0.26 0.27 Future Standard Less Than Existing Standard Future Personal Protective Equipment 22 27,450 0.81 0.81 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Table 6
Proposed Facilities and Cost Per EDU
Number of Cost
Facility Cost Future EDUs Per EDU
Stations $13,796,136 18,259 $755.59
Future Apparatus & Support Staff Vehicles $2,051,553 18,259 $112.36 Personal Protective Equipment $103,554 18,259 $5.67
Total $15,951,244 NA $873.63
Table 7
Development Impact Fee per Unit or 1,000 SF
EDUs per EDUs per Units / Fees per Fees per Cost Financed Land Use Type Unit 1,000 SF / Room 1,000 SF / Room Unit 1,000 SF / Room by DIF Residential Property

1.000 NA 11,200 $873.63 NA $9,784,618
Non-Residential Property
Retail NA 0.759 1,613 NA $662.81 $1,069,357
Commercial NA 0.189 1,623 NA $164.75 $267,339
Food Service & Entertainment NA 3.783 216 NA $3,304.52 $712,905 Office NA 2.378 858 NA $2,077.22 $1,782,262
Warehousing - Standard NA 1.020 100 NA $891.13 $89,113
Warehousing - High Cube NA 0.204 2,000 NA $178.23 $356,452 Manufacturing & Assembly NA 0.275 1,115 NA $239.86 $267,339 Industrial - Other NA 2.813 36 NA $2,457.89 $89,113
Institutional & Health Care NA 0.631 2,652 NA $551.07 $1,461,455 Hotel/Motel Rooms NA 0.163 500 NA $142.58 $71,290
Total $15,951,244
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $15,004,487
Total Cost of Fire Facilities $30,955,731
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
517 of 864
4/25/2024
Table 1
Inventory of Existing Facilities
Facility Facility Unit Units
Existing Parks
Brookside Park Acres 9.2
Caroline Park Acres 16.8
Community Park Acres 18.2
Crafton Park Acres 7.5
Ed Hales Park Acres 0.3
Ford Park Acres 27.0
Franklin Park Acres 0.6
Jennie Davis Park Acres 5.2
Prospect Park Acres 11.4
Simonds Parkway Acres 0.9
Smiley Park Acres 9.2
Sylvan Park Acres 23.3
Texonia Park Acres 8.8
The Terrace Acres 2.5
Isreal Beal Park Acres 8.1
Oakmont Park Acres 14.6
Redlands Sports Park Acres 48.0
Heritage Park Acres 18.7
Orange Street Alley Acres 0.1
Total Park Facilities 230.3
Orange Blossam Trail Park Phases 1, 2, & 3 Acres 4.48 [1] Sports Fields Fields 23
Existing Community Center Buildings
Redlands Community Center Square Feet 22,900
Redlands Community Senior Center Square Feet 7,500
Joslyn Senior Center Square Feet 8,925
Redlands Bowl Square Feet 3,046
Mission Gables Square Feet 5,014
Total Buildings 47,385
Table 2
Existing Standards
Standard per
Existing Units Existing Residents 1,000 Residents
Existing Parks Acres 230.3 73,737 3.12
Exising Sports Fields 23.00 73,737 0.31
Exising Parks Trails 4.48 73,737 0.06
City of Redlands
Parks Facilities
Fee Calculation
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
518 of 864
4/25/2024
City of Redlands
Parks Facilities
Fee Calculation
Table 3
Proposed Facilities
Facility
Facility Facility Unit Number Cost per Acre/Field/Court or Sq. Ft. Cost Future Park Facilities Acres 108.0 $250,000 per Acre $27,000,000 Sports Fields (Baseball) Field 5 $350,000 per Field $1,750,000 Sports Fields (Multi-use) Field 5 $250,000 per Field $1,250,000 Sports Fields (Tennis/Pickleball) Court 6 $125,000 per Court $750,000 Total 16 $3,750,000
Additional Projects
Trails Acres 13.37 [2] $412,500 per Acre $5,516,000
Subtotal 13.37 $5,516,000
Total Facilities Cost $36,266,000
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($383,398) Net Facilities Cost $35,882,602
Table 4
Allocation of Facilities to Existing and New Development Future Park Acres - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Residential Percentage of Total Acres Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Acres Credit Existing Standard Allocated Acres Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 30,086 73% 246.6 (230.3) 0.0 16.2 16% $4,243,301 Future Development 11,200 27% 91.8 0.0 (6.0) 85.7 84% $22,438,340 Total 41,286 100% 338.3 (230.3) (6.0) 102.0 100% $26,681,641 Future Sports Fields - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Residential Percentage of Total Fields Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Field Credit Existing Standard Allocated Fields Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 30,086 73% 28 (23.0) 0.0 5 39% $1,453,885 Future Development 11,200 27% 11 0 (2.0) 9 61% $2,296,115 Total 41,286 100% 39 (23.0) (2.0) 14 100% $3,750,000
Future Park Trails Acres - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Residential Percentage of Total Acres Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Acres Credit Existing Standard Allocated Acres Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 30,086 73% 13.0 (4.48) 0.0 8.5 84% $4,558,655 Future Development 11,200 27% 4.8 0.00 (3.2) 1.7 16% $892,305 Total 41,286 100% 17.9 (4.48) (3.2) 10.2 100% $5,450,961 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
519 of 864
4/25/2024
City of Redlands
Parks Facilities
Fee Calculation
Table 5
Future Standards
Future
Standard per Existing
Future Units Future Residents 1,000 Residents Standard Resulting Status Future Parks Acres 85.7 27,450 3.12 3.12 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Fuiture Sports Fields 9 27,450 0.31 0.31 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Future Parks Trails 1.7 27,450 0.06 0.06 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Table 6
Proposed Facilities and Cost Per EDU
Number of Cost
Facility Cost Future EDUs Per EDU
Park Acres $22,438,340 11,200 $2,003.42
Park Buildings $2,296,115 11,200 $205.01
Park Trails $892,305 11,200 $79.67
Total $25,626,761 NA $2,288.10
Table 7
Development Impact Fee per Unit or 1,000 SF
EDUs per EDUs per Units / Fees per Cost Financed
Land Use Type Unit 1,000 SF 1,000 SF Unit by DIF
Residential Property 1.000 NA 11,200 $2,288.10 $25,626,761 Non-Residential Property NA NA NA NA $0
Total $25,626,761
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $10,255,841
Total Cost of Park Facilities $35,882,602
[1] Based on trail length of 3.7 miles and standard width of 10 ft per US Dept. of Transportation. [2] Based on trail length of 11.03 miles and standard width of 10 ft per US Dept. of Transportation. [3] Based on cost information from prior fee study escalated by ENR to 2016.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
520 of 864
4/25/2024
Table 1
Inventory of Existing Facilities
Facility Facility Unit Units
Existing Libraries
A. K. Smiley Library Building Square Feet 64,000
Lincoln Memorial Shrine Square Feet 4,800
Total Library Facilities 68,800
Existing Library Materials
Books Books 134,808
Non-Book Items Units 140,021
Total 274,829
Table 2
Existing Standards
Standard per
Existing Units Existing Residents 1,000 Residents
Existing Library Sq. Ft. 68,800 73,737 933.05
Exising Library Materials 274,829 73,737 3,727.15
Table 3
Proposed Facilities
Facility
Facility Location Facility Unit Number Cost
Future Library Facilities
Branch Library TBD Square Feet 20,000 $15,000,000
Main Library Expansion (new building sq. ft.) 125 W Vine. St. Square Feet 28,046 $5,000,000 Total 48,046 $20,000,000
Future Library Materials
Books Books 52,000 $1,560,000
Non-Book Items Units 180,000 $54,000
Subtotal 232,000 $1,614,000
Total Facilities Cost $21,614,000
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($25,616) Net Facilities Cost $21,588,384
City of Redlands
Library Facilities
Fee Calculation
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
521 of 864
4/25/2024
City of Redlands
Library Facilities
Fee Calculation
Table 4
Allocation of Facilities to Existing and New Development Future Library Facilities - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Residential Percentage of Total Sq. Ft. Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Sq. Ft. Credit Existing Standard Allocated Sq. Ft. Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 30,086 73% 85,148 (68,800) 0 16,348 39% $7,782,934 Future Development 11,200 27% 31,698 0 (6,086) 25,612 61% $12,193,363 Total 41,286 100% 116,846 (68,800) (6,086) 41,960 100% $19,976,297 Future Library Materials - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Residential Percentage of Total Items Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Materials Credit Existing Standard Allocated Materials Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 30,086 73% 369,336 (274,829) 0 94,507 48% $774,088 Future Development 11,200 27% 137,493 0 (35,182) 102,310 52% $837,999 Total 41,286 100% 506,829 (274,829) (35,182) 196,818 100% $1,612,087 Table 5
Future Standards
Future
Standard per Existing
Future Units Future Residents 1,000 Residents Standard Resulting Status Future Library Sq. Ft. 25,612 27,450 933.05 933.05 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Future Library Materials 102,310 27,450 3,727.15 3,727.15 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Table 6
Proposed Facilities and Cost Per EDU
Number of Cost
Facility Cost Future EDUs Per EDU
Facilities $12,193,363 11,200 $1,088.69
Materials $837,999 11,200 $74.82
Total $13,031,362 NA $1,163.51
Table 7
Development Impact Fee per Unit or 1,000 SF
EDUs per EDUs per Units / Fees per Cost Financed
Land Use Type Unit [2] 1,000 SF [2] 1,000 SF Unit / 1,000 SF / Room by DIF Residential Property 1.000 NA 11,200 $1,163.51 $13,031,362 Non-Residential Property NA NA NA NA $0
Total $13,031,362
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $8,557,022
Total Cost of Library Facilities $21,588,384
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
522 of 864
4/25/2024
Table 1
Inventory of Existing Facilities
Facility Facility Unit Units
Buildings
Government Center SF 50,999
Safety Hall SF 23,838
Total SF 74,837
Table 2
Existing Standards
Standard per
Existing Units Existing Residents 1,000 Residents
Existing Building Sq. Ft. 74,837 73,737 1,014.92
Table 3
Proposed Facilities
Facility
Facility Facility Unit Number Cost ($2023)
Future Facilities
Community / Recreation / Senior Center Buildings SF 40,000 $36,000,000 City Government Office and Administration Facilities SF 25,000 $22,500,000 City Field Operations Facilities SF 35,000 $31,500,000
Parking Facilities SF 80,000 $32,000,000
Subtotal 180,000 $122,000,000
Total Facilities Costs $122,000,000
Less Offsetting Revenues (Existing Fee Balance) ($138,580) Net Facilities Cost $121,861,420
Table 4
Allocation of Facilities to Existing and New Development Future Facilities Costs - Based on Total EDUs - Credit given to existing development Percentage of Total SF Reduction to Maintain Percentage of Type of Development EDUs Total EDUs in 2035 Unit Credit Existing Standard Allocated SF Costs Allocated Total Cost Existing Development 44,856 71% 181,114 (74,837) 0 106,277 79% $96,551,428 Future Development 18,259 29% 73,723 0 (45,863) 27,860 21% $25,309,992 Total 63,115 100% 254,837 (74,837) (45,863) 134,137 100% $121,861,420 City of Redlands
Government Facilities
Fee Calculation
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
523 of 864
4/25/2024City of Redlands
Government Facilities
Fee Calculation
Table 5
Future Standards
Future
Standard per Existing
Future Units Future Residents 1,000 Residents Standard Resulting Status Future Building Sq. Ft. 27,860 27,450 1,014.92 1,014.92 Future Standard Equal to Existing Standard Table 6
Proposed Facilities and Cost Per EDU
Number of Cost
Facility Cost Future EDUs Per EDU
Buidings $25,309,992 18,259 $1,386.19
Total $25,309,992 NA $1,386.19
Table 7
Development Impact Fee per Unit or 1,000 SF
EDUs per EDUs per Units / Fees per Fees per Cost Financed Land Use Type Unit [2] 1,000 SF / Room 1,000 SF / Room Unit 1,000 SF / Room by DIF Residential Property 1.000 NA 11,200 $1,386.19 NA $15,525,347 Non-Residential Property
Retail NA 0.759 1,613 NA $1,051.69 $1,696,759
Commercial NA 0.189 1,623 NA $261.40 $424,190
Food Service & Entertainment NA 3.783 216 NA $5,243.32 $1,131,173 Office NA 2.378 858 NA $3,295.94 $2,827,932
Warehousing - Standard NA 1.020 100 NA $1,413.97 $141,397 Warehousing - High Cube NA 0.204 2,000 NA $282.79 $565,586 Manufacturing & Assembly NA 0.275 1,115 NA $380.59 $424,190 Industrial - Other NA 2.813 36 NA $3,899.95 $141,397
Institutional & Health Care NA 0.631 2,652 NA $874.38 $2,318,904 Hotel/Motel Rooms NA 0.163 500 NA $226.23 $113,117
Total $25,309,992
Cost Allocated to Existing Development $96,551,428
Total Cost of Government Facilities $121,861,420
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
524 of 864

APPENDIX C
City of Redlands
Development Impact Fee Justification Study

STORM DRAIN ERU

FACTORS
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
525 of 864
The residential ERU factors and the weighted average residential ERU factor calculation is presented in the table below:

Residential Weighted Average Equivalent Runoff Factor
Land Use Units Residential
Units
Res. density
(units/acre) or
ADU s.f. per
unit
Acres,
"A"
Runoff
Coefficient,
"C"
Runoff per
unit or ksf;
Q=C*I*A
ERU
Factor
Total
ERUs
Single Family Residential D.U. 5,000 7.00 714.3 0.55 0.08 1.00 5,000 Accessory Dwelling Unit D.U. 800 600.00 11.0 1.00 0.01 0.18 140 Multi Family Residential D.U. 3,000 10.00 300.0 0.8 0.08 1.02 3,055 Transit Oriented D.U. 2,400 20.00 120.0 0.90 0.05 0.57 1,375 Subtotal 11,200 1,145.3 9,569
Weighted Average 0.85
For residential ERU factors, an average density of seven units per acre is assumed for single -family residential property, while multi -family residential density is assumed to be ten units per acre. Transit oriented land uses are assumed to be at a higher density equal to 20 units per acre. For accessory dwelling units, it is assumed that an average 600 square foot structure is constructed outside of the footprint of the associated single-family residence and is 100% impervious (“C” factor is equal to 1.00).

The runoff per acre for single-family, multi-family and transit-oriented uses is simply the C value for each land use, as described above and shown in the table below . The runoff per unit for each land use is determined by dividing the per acre runoff by the density for that land use. For example, the runoff per acre for a single -family unit is 0.55 cfs (Q= 0.55*1*1). The runoff per single -family unit would then be determined by dividing the runoff per acre by the single-family density of seven units per acre. The runoff per unit for each of the other residential land uses is divided by the runoff per unit of a single-family land use to determine the ERU factors.

For the special case of ADU units, the total acres for ADU units is determined by multiplying the 800 total future units by 600 square feet per unit, and then dividing this total square feet by 43,560 square feet per acre.

Finally, the total ERUs (9,569) for the residential category is divided by the total residential units (11,200) to determine the weighted average ERUs for the combined residential category. This weighted average of

0.85 is used to calculate the residential fee per square foot in compliance with AB602.

For non-residential ERU factors, in order to calculate the runoff per thousand square feet (“KSF”) of building footprint, an average floor area ratio (“FAR”) of 0.50 is assumed. The runoff per acre is adjusted by the FAR and the conversion factor of 43.56 KSF per acre to determine the runoff per KSF of building area. These runoff factors are then divided by the runoff per dwelling unit for a single -family dwelling unit to determine the ERU factor for each non-residential land use category.

Line
Number Description Source Amount Units
1 Density (units per acre) City Provided 7 DU per Acre
2 1 Acre 43,560 Square Feet
3 Lot Frontage Assumed or City Provided 50 Lineal Feet
4 Street half width City Standard 25 Lineal Feet
5 House footprint Ave. Single Family (City) 1,200 Square Feet 6 hardscape (Percent of available surface area)Assumed 25% % Analysis
7 Frontage Street Area Line 3 x Line 4 1,250 Square Feet 8 Lot depth to Centerline (Line 2 / Line 1)/Line 3 124 feet 9 Lot Depth Line 8 - Line 4 99 Square Feet
10 Lot net area Line 3 x Line 9 4,973 Square Feet
11 House footprint Line 5 1,200 Square Feet
12 hardscape (Percent of available surface area)Assumed 25% Square Feet 13 hardscape (Line 10 - Line 11) x Line 12 943 Square Feet 14 Impervious area per lot Line 11 + Line 13 2,143 Square Feet 15 Impervious Area (lot + street) Line 14 + Line 7 3,393 Square Feet 16 Gross acreage per lot Line 2 / Line 1 6,223 Square Feet 17 % impervious area - C Factor (Line 11 x Line 12 ) 0.55 "Runoff Ratio" Calculation of Single Family Residential Runoff Factor,"C" Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
526 of 864

APPENDIX D
City of Redlands
Development Impact Fee Justification Study

SOI AND SERVICE

AREA MAPS
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
527 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
528 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
529 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
530 of 864
18201 VON KARMAN AVENUE, SUITE 220
IRVINE, CA 92612
PHONE: (800) 969 -4DTA
Public Finance
Public-Private Partnerships
Development Economics
Clean Energy Bonds
www.FinanceDTA.com
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
531 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
532 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
533 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
534 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
535 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
536 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
537 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
538 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
539 of 864
City Council Meeting K. 3.

DATE: 07/02/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Hear Protest Pertaining to the Adoption of Ordinance No. 2964 and Ordinance No. 2965 Amending Chapters

3.52 and 3.62 of the Redlands Municipal Code relating to Water Utility and Wastewater Utility Rate Adjustments (Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Harris)
PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING:

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

Mayor calls upon Department Director for report.2.

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

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

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

Mayor closes the public hearing.6.

City Council considers the motion and votes.7.

MOTION(S):

If City Council determines the staff recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:

I move to adopt Ordinance No. 2964 and Ordinance No. 2965.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends City Council adopt Ordinance No. 2964 and Ordinance No. 2965 to amend Redlands Municipal Code Chapters 3.52 and 3.62 relating to Water Utility and Wastewater Utility rate adjustments.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
540 of 864

DISCUSSION:

Chapter 2.70 of the Redlands Municipal Code establishes a framework for a citizen committee, the Utility Advisory Committee (UAC), to develop fair and equitable rate adjustments to cover costs of services for the City's water and wastewater utilities. The seven (7) member UAC was appointed by City Council on January 16, 2024, and worked with Municipal Utilities and Engineering (MUED) staff and the City's Utility Rate Consultant, Raftelis, to develop rate recommendations that provide adequate revenue to recover costs for services, are equitable to all customer classes, comply with state and federal laws, and are easily explained to customers. The UAC serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council.

The rate review process began by introducing the UAC to the MUED structure, water and wastewater utilities, and 6-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP).

The UAC reviewed historic and projected operating, maintenance, and CIP costs necessary to provide high-quality services for Redlands' utility customers.

Raftelis presented a financial analysis including multi-year revenue projections, target reserve balances, and annual labor and material cost escalations. Several rate scenarios were modeled and considered by the UAC which ultimately recommended the following revenue adjustments:

Potable Water Utility:
2% increase in FY 24/25
2% increase in FY 25/26
Non-Potable Water Utility:
0% increase in FY 24/25
0% increase in FY 25/26
Wastewater Utility:
10% increase in FY 24/25
10% increase in FY 25/26
These increases will be applied to customer classifications proportionally based on the demands placed on each utility, and will generate the additional revenue necessary to continue providing water and wastewater utility services for all Redlands customers.

On May 7, 2024, City Council adopted Resolution No. 8583, a notice of intent to Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
541 of 864
increase water utility and wastewater utility rates, and directed staff to issue a Public Hearing Proposition 218 notice and protest procedures detailed in Resolution No. 7128. The Proposition 218 notice and Resolution No. 7128 were mailed to each Redlands property owner and each water utility and wastewater utility customer on May 10, 2024.The notice provides rate increase protest directions. One (1) written protest per identified parcel or property will be counted for determining whether a majority protest exists.

If City Council adopts Ordinance No. 2964 and Ordinance No. 2965 as proposed, the new rates will be implemented no sooner than thirty (30) days after the adoption of the ordinances. Staff anticipates this rate implementation date will be August 5, 2024. If City Council directs staff to revise either Ordinance, a new Proposition 218 notice must be sent to property owners and customers, and a new public hearing date must be scheduled no sooner than forty-five (45) days after the notices are sent.

Adoption of Ordinance No. 2964 and Ordinance No. 2965 is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act since it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council may deny the staff recommendation and provide alternate direction.

If City Council recommends an alternative rate structure, a new Proposition 218 notice must be sent to property owners and customers, and a new public hearing date must be scheduled no sooner than forty-five (45) days after the notices are sent.

SUBMITTED BY:

John R. Harris, Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director RECOMMENDED BY:

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

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

John R. Harris, Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
542 of 864
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year: FY 24/25
Revenue Generating: Y
Appropriation Required Y/N: N
Discussion:

Adoption of the recommended Water Utility and Wastewater Utility rates will generate revenues necessary to offset operating, maintenance, and capital improvement costs for each utility.

Attachments
Ordinance No. 2964
Ordinance No. 2965
Proposition 218 Notice
Resolution No. 7128
Raftelis Rate Study
Resolution No. 8583
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
543 of 864

1 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2964 Amending Chapter 3.52 Water Fundv3.docx-msv2-jm

ORDINANCE NO. 2964

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AMENDING CHAPTER 3. 52

OF THE REDLANDS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO WATER FUND

Section 1. Chapter 3.52 of the Redlands Municipal Code, titled “Water Fund,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“CHAPTER 3.52

WATER FUND
SECTION:

3.52.010: Establishment

3.52.040: Water Service Rate Schedule

3.52.010: ESTABLISHMENT:

There is established a water fund to provide for administration, operation and maintenance of the Redlands domestic water system and its capacity to serve its existing users. The following rules shall apply:

A. All service charges and all miscellaneous charges not otherwise designated shall be credited to the water fund. The water fund shall be operated as an enterprise fund. All interest on the cash balance of the fund shall accrue to the water fund.

B. Established within the water fund are a reserve for capital and a reserve for legal.

1. The reserve for capital shall be in addition to the annual capital replacement budget, to establish a fund for capital expenditures necessary due to unforeseen or unusual capital costs in any year, necessary to maintain the existing system and its capacity.

2. The reserve for legal shall be in addition to the annual budget for legal costs, to establish a fund for legal expenditures due to unforeseen or unusual legal costs in any one year.

3.62.040: WATER SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE:

Amounts of charges are set out in table 3.52.040 of this section.

TABLE 3.52.040

WATER SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE

BIMONTHLY RATES
A. Potable water rates effective August 5, 2024:

1. Water Usage Charge:
a. Building water use:

Tiers Units1 Rate
Tier 1 1 to 16 hcf $1.57
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
544 of 864

2 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2964 Amending Chapter 3.52 Water Fundv3.docx-msv2-jm

Tier 2 17 to 27 hcf $1.86
Tier 3 > 27 hcf $2.79
Note: 1 unit equals 100 cubic feet (hcf).

b. Nonbuilding water use:

Tiers Units1 Rate
Tier 1 1 to 27 hcf $1.77
Tier 2 > 27 hcf $2.49
Note: 1 unit equals 100 cubic feet (hcf)

2. Bimonthly Water Service Charge:

Meter Size (inches) Total Water Service
Charge1
Customer Service
Component1
5/8 $32.94 $6.85
¾ $44.01 $6.85
1 $65.50 $6.85
1 ½ $117.60 $6.85
2 $173.62 $6.85
3 $299.97 $6.85
4 $462.79 $6.85
6 $853.56 $6.85
8 $1,257.36 $6.85
10 $2,976.76 $6.85
12 $3,914.61 $6.85
Note: Prior agriculture irrigation customers are charged the customer service component of the water service charge only.

3. Fire Protection Water Service Charge:

Meter Size (inches) Total Fire Protection Water Service Charge (Bimonthly)
2 $11.81
3 $21.20
4 $37.39
6 $95.48
8 $195.69
10 $346.42
12 $555.33

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
545 of 864

3 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2964 Amending Chapter 3.52 Water Fundv3.docx-msv2-jm

4. Fire Hydrant Construction Water Service:

Water Usage Charge $2.79/100 cubic feet
Monthly water service charge1 $299.97
Fire hydrant construction meter prepayment1,2 $1,200.00 Notes: 1. Minimum water service charge (if less than 30 days) will be $299.97. Repairs to damaged fire hydrant construction meters shall be charged at prevailing time and material rates to repair the meter.

2. Lost or stolen fire hydrant construction meters shall be charged a $1,200.00 replacement charge.

5. Water Meter Installation Charge:

Meter Size (inches) Installation Charge
¾ $175.00
1 $225.00
1 ½ $430.00
2 $595.00

6. Outside City Service Review:
$50.00/unit, $500.00 maximum

7. Miscellaneous Fees:

4 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2964 Amending Chapter 3.52 Water Fundv3.docx-msv2-jm

Obstructed meter resulting in an estimated
read or reread trip
$15.00
Jumper fee (for use on buildings under
construction – prelandscape)
$50.00
Submittal to collection agency 40% of outstanding balance submitted for collection action
Unauthorized fire protection water usage $40.00, plus full nonfire protection meter service charge and any applicable wastewater
charge at the prevailing rate
Unauthorized fire hydrant connection $150.00, plus estimated water usage charge at the prevailing usage rate

B. Potable water rates effective July 1, 2025:

1. Water Usage Charge:
a. Building water use:

Tiers Units1 Rate
Tier 1 1 to 16 hcf $1.61
Tier 2 17 to 27 hcf $1.90
Tier 3 > 27 hcf $2.85
Note: 1 unit equals 100 cubic feet (hcf).

b. Nonbuilding water use:

Tiers Units1 Rate
Tier 1 1 to 27 hcf $1.81
Tier 2 > 27 hcf $2.54
Note: 1 unit equals 100 cubic feet (hcf)

2. Bimonthly Water Service Charge:

Meter Size (inches) Total Water Service
Charge1
Customer Service
Component1
5/8 $33.60 $6.99
¾ $44.90 $6.99
1 $66.81 $6.99
1 ½ $119.96 $6.99
2 $177.10 $6.99
3 $305.97 $6.99
4 $472.05 $6.99
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
547 of 864

5 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2964 Amending Chapter 3.52 Water Fundv3.docx-msv2-jm

6 $870.64 $6.99
8 $1,282.51 $6.99
10 $3,036.30 $6.99
12 $3,992.91 $6.99
Note: Prior agriculture irrigation customers are charged the customer service component of the water service charge only.

3. Fire Protection Water Service Charge:

Meter Size (inches) Total Fire Protection Water Service Charge (Bimonthly)
2 $12.05
3 $21.63
4 $38.14
6 $97.39
8 $199.61
10 $353.35
12 $566.44

4. Fire Hydrant Construction Water Service:

Water Usage Charge $2.85/100 cubic feet
Monthly water service charge1 $305.97
Fire hydrant construction meter prepayment1,2 $1,200.00

Notes: 1. Minimum water service charge (if less than 30 days) will be $305.97. Repairs to damaged fire hydrant construction meters shall be charged at prevailing time and material rates to repair the meter.

2. Lost or stolen fire hydrant construction meters shall be charged a $1,200.00 replacement charge.

5. Water Meter Installation Charge:

Meter Size (inches) Installation Charge
¾ $175.00
1 $225.00
1 ½ $430.00
2 $595.00

6. Outside City Service Review:
$50.00/unit, $500.00 maximum

7. Miscellaneous Fees:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
548 of 864

6 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2964 Amending Chapter 3.52 Water Fundv3.docx-msv2-jm

After hours request for turn on service
(standby call)
$60.00
Broken angle meter stop $75.00
Broken lock $15.00
Remove meter after illegal turn on $50.00
Remove straight connection $75.00
Cut service at main Time and Materials
Water meter test charge $40.00, plus cost of new meter
Turn off for nonpayment $46.00
Recheck after turn off for nonpayment $20.00
Returned check $35.00
Check by phone $6.00
Establish new municipal services account $15.00
Failure to notify change of ownership $35.00
Request for same day water turn on after 3:00
P.M.
$26.00
Obstructed meter resulting in an estimated
read or reread trip
$15.00
Jumper fee (for use on buildings under
construction – prelandscape)
$50.00
Submittal to collection agency 40% of outstanding balance submitted for collection action
Unauthorized fire protection water usage $40.00, plus full nonfire protection meter service charge and any applicable wastewater
charge at the prevailing rate
Unauthorized fire hydrant connection $150.00, plus estimated water usage charge at the prevailing usage rate

Section 2. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or the application thereof to any entity, person or circumstance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council of the City of Redlands hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 3. Resolution No. 2830 is rescinded effective August 5, 2024.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
549 of 864

7 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2964 Amending Chapter 3.52 Water Fundv3.docx-msv2-jm

Section 4. The Mayor shall sign this ordinance and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause it, or a summary of it, to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City, and thereafter, this ordinance shall take effect as provided by law.

__________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:

__________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
550 of 864

8 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2964 Amending Chapter 3.52 Water Fundv3.docx-msv2-jm

I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk, City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council at the regular meeting thereof, held on the 2nd day of July, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

__________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
551 of 864

1 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2965 Amending Chapter 3.62 Sewer Service Fundv2.docx-msv2-JM

ORDINANCE NO. 2965

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AMENDING CHAPTER 3.62

OF THE REDLANDS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SEWER SERVICE FUND

Section 1. Chapter 3.62 of the Redlands Municipal Code, titled “Sewer Service Fund,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

“CHAPTER 3.62

SEWER SERVICE FUND
SECTION:

3.62.010: Establishment

3.62.020: Definitions

3.62.030: Charges

3.62.040: Amount of Charges

3.62.010: ESTABLISHMENT:

There is established the sewer service fund to provide for administration, operation and maintenance of the Redlands domestic sewerage system and its capacity to serve its existing users.

All interest on the cash balance of the fund shall accrue to the sewer service fund. The following rules shall apply:

A. All service charges and all miscellaneous charges not otherwise designated shall be credited to the sewer service fund.

B. Established within the sewer service fund is a reserve for capital. The reserve for capital shall be in addition to annual capital replacement budget, to establish a fund for capital expenditures necessary due to unforeseen or unusual capital costs in any year, necessary to maintain the existing system and its capacity.

3.62.020: DEFINITIONS:

For the purpose of carrying out the intent of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply:

MULTIPLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT: A structure designed and used for occupancy of two (2) or more families, but does not include motels, hotels, or rest homes, nursing homes, with common cooking facilities.

PREMISES: A lot, parcel of land, building or establishment.

SEWER CONNECTION OR CONNECTION: Physically tapping into sewer mains or their laterals for the purpose of serving a private sewer line or building sewer from a property or premises.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
552 of 864

2 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2965 Amending Chapter 3.62 Sewer Service Fundv2.docx-msv2-JM

SEWER RATES: The sewer rates, rate structures and rate classes to be established by the city council to be used as a basis for charging users for service from the sewerage system.

SEWER SERVICE CHARGE: Service charges for the use of the sewerage system based on sewer rates.

SEWERAGE SYSTEM: Those pipelines and appurtenances maintained and operated by the city for the collection and conveyance of sewage to the plant owned and operated by the city, wastewater treatment, and treatment and discharge of such wastewater to required standards.

SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT: A structure or portion thereof used exclusively for the occupancy of one family.

3.62.030: CHARGES:

The wastewater service charges for the following categories shall be paid for wastewater service.

Every person whose premises in the city is served by a connection with the wastewater system of the city, whereby the sewage or industrial wastes, or either or both, are disposed of by the city, either through the facilities of the wastewater treatment and sewage disposal works owned by the city, or otherwise, shall pay a sewer service charge which shall be as specified in section 3.62.040 of this chapter.

A. Residential Rates: For all residential dwelling units, including single-family and multiple- family dwelling units, there shall be a bimonthly charge.

B. Nonresidential Rates: For all nonresidential users there shall be a bimonthly charge based upon the strength of the wastewater discharged for each one hundred (100) cubic feet or fraction thereof. Wastewater strength data is adapted from state water resour ces control board's "Revenue Program Guidelines for Wastewater Agencies".

1. Large volume users are classified as users with greater than twenty-five thousand (25,000) gallons per day discharge.

2. A minimum bimonthly charge equivalent to the multiple-family dwelling unit rate shall apply to any nonresidential user whose wastewater discharge per one hundred (100) cubic feet or fraction thereof results in a total charge less than the equiva lent of the multiple-family dwelling unit rate.

C. School Rates: Each school shall pay a bimonthly charge for each one hundred (100) average daily attendance or part thereof.

3.62.040: AMOUNT OF CHARGES:

Amounts of bimonthly charges are as follows:

Wastewater rates effective August 5, 2024:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
553 of 864

3 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2965 Amending Chapter 3.62 Sewer Service Fundv2.docx-msv2-JM

City Customers
A. Residential:

Single-family dwelling unit $66.04
Multiple-family dwelling unit $52.40
B. Nonresidential:

Low strength I $2.82/100 cubic feet
Low strength II $3.41/100 cubic feet
Low strength III $3.99/100 cubic feet
Medium strength I $4.58/100 cubic feet
Medium strength II $5.16/100 cubic feet
Medium strength III $5.75/100 cubic feet
High strength I $6.34/100 cubic feet
High strength II $6.92/100 cubic feet

1. Large volume user:
>25,000 gallons per day $3.99/100 cubic feet

2. Nonresidential minimum charge:

All strengths $52.40
C. Schools:

Elementary $143.11/100 ADA
Secondary and high school $238.52/100 ADA
D. Septage:

Tank dumping $0.10/gallon
$15.00 minimum

Note:
 ADA: Average Daily Attendance

Wastewater rates effective July 1, 2025:

City Customers
A. Residential:

Single-family dwelling unit $72.65
Multiple-family dwelling unit $57.64
B. Nonresidential:

Low strength I $3.11/100 cubic feet
Low strength II $3.76/100 cubic feet
Low strength III $4.39/100 cubic feet
Medium strength I $5.04/100 cubic feet
Medium strength II $5.68/100 cubic feet
Medium strength III $6.33/100 cubic feet
High strength I $6.98/100 cubic feet
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
554 of 864

4 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2965 Amending Chapter 3.62 Sewer Service Fundv2.docx-msv2-JM

High strength II $7.62/100 cubic feet

1. Large volume user:
>25,000 gallons per day $4.39/100 cubic feet

2. Nonresidential minimum charge:

All strengths $57.64
C. Schools:

Elementary $157.43/100 ADA
Secondary and high school $262.38/100 ADA
D. Septage:

Tank dumping $0.11/gallon
$16.50 minimum

Note:
 ADA: Average Daily Attendance

Section 3. Resolution No. 8335 is rescinded effective August 5, 2024.

__________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:

__________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
555 of 864

5 I:\cmo\Ordinances\2965 Amending Chapter 3.62 Sewer Service Fundv2.docx-msv2-JM

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

_________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
556 of 864

CITY OF REDLANDS
The proposed increases are
scheduled to go into effect on
August 5, 2024, and on July
1, 2025
Redlands Wastewater Treatment Plant as it
stands today.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED ADOPTION OF WATER AND

WASTEWATER UTILITY RATE INCREASES
MAY 2024
The City Council of the City of Redlands is currently considering an increase to its water and wastewater utility rates.

You are receiving this notice because you are a City water and/or wastewater utility customer, or an owner of property receiving water and/or wastewater utility services from the City. This notice describes the proposed rate increases and explains how you may participate in a public hearing and the rate setting process.

On July 2, 2024, at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, pursuant to Article XIIID of the California Constitution (Proposition 218), a public hearing on the proposed water and wastewater rate increases will be held by the City Council in the Council Chambers, located at 35 Cajon Street, Redlands, CA 92373. The purpose of the hearing is to consider verbal and written testimony, and any written protests, relating to the proposed increases to water

REDLANDS RATE SETTING BACKGROUND
Wastewater rates were last increased in July 2022 and water rates were last increased in July 2018. Periodic rate increases are necessary to (i) ensure that each water and wastewater service customer bears a fair and proportionate share of the costs of providing services (consistent with Proposition 218 legal requirements); (ii) recoup the rising cost of providing services, including operation and maintenance costs, debt service and capital program needs; and (iii) meet financial, regulatory, and service obligations.

Water and wastewater system costs include energy, fuel, and chemical costs; distribution and collection costs; treatment and disposal costs; administrative and customer service account costs, and costs related to facilities replacement, rehabilitation, and upgrades. The City has made significant improvements to its utility infrastructure to ensure continued functionality and reliability, and to meet State and Federal regulatory agency requirements.

The City recently expended more than $14,000,000, and will expend an additional $45,000,000 to upgrade its Wastewater Treatment Plant during the next five years. Additionally, antiquated pipelines have been and will continue to be replaced to avoid leaks, overflows, and related potential regulatory penalties. The City recently completed water utility and wastewater utility master plans that identify necessary capital improvements for the efficient and effective operation of the City ’s water and wastewater utility infrastructure.

These plans serve as a guide for the efficient and timely replacement, rehabilitation, and/or maintenance of water and wastewater infrastructure.

PROPOSED BI-MONTHLY SEWER SERVICE CHARGES

CUSTOMER CLASS CURRENT

RATE PROPOSED RATE
August 5, 2024 July 1, 2025
Residential
Single Family Dwelling Unit $62.43 $66.04 $72.65
Multi-Family Dwelling Unit $48.08 $52.40 $57.64

NON-RESIDENTIAL BASED ON WATER USE IN CCF
Low Strength I $2.42 $2.82 $3.11
Low Strength II $2.87 $3.41 $3.76
Low Strength III $3.32 $3.99 $4.39
Medium Strength I $3.77 $4.58 $5.04
Medium Strength II $4.22 $5.16 $5.68
Medium Strength III $4.67 $5.75 $6.33
High Strength I $5.12 $6.34 $6.98
High Strength II $5.56 $6.92 $7.62
Large Volume User $3.32 $3.99 $4.39

Schools ($/100 students)
Elementary School $134.38 $143.11 $157.43
Secondary & High School $215.02 $238.52 $262.38

Septage $0.11 $0.10 $0.11
The table shows the current
and the proposed wastewater
rates which, if approved, will
become effective in 2024 and
2025. While modest rate
increases are proposed to
reflect the increased costs to
the City of providing service
and meeting financial
obligations, the basic
wastewater rate structure for
all customer classes remains
unchanged.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
557 of 864

CITY OF REDLANDS

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED ADOPTION OF SEWER SERVICE MAY 2024

PROPOSED BI-MONTHLY WATER SERVICE CHARGES

WATER SERVICE CURRENT

RATE PROPOSED RATE
August 5, 2024 July 1, 2025
5/8” $32.10 $32.94 $33.60
3/4” $43.17 $44.01 $44.90
1” $64.67 $65.50 $66.81
1 1/2” $116.79 $117.60 $119.96
2” $172.83 $173.62 $177.10
3” $299.23 $299.97 $305.97
4” $462.10 $462.79 $472.05
6” $853.02 $853.56 $870.64
8” $1,256.97 $1,257.36 $1,282.51
10” $2,977.00 $2,976.76 $3,036.30
12” $3,915.20 $3,914.61 $3,992.91

FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE
2” $10.19 $11.81 $12.05
3” $18.10 $21.20 $21.63
4” $31.75 $37.39 $38.14
6” $80.73 $95.48 $97.39
8” $165.22 $195.69 $199.61
10” $292.32 $346.42 $353.35
12” $468.46 $555.33 $566.44
FIRE HYDRANT SERVICE $73.60 $299.97 $305.97
The table shows the current
and the proposed water
service rate which, if approved,
will become effective in 2024
and 2025. The Water Service
rate is a fixed charge that does
not fluctuate with increasing
and/or decreasing water
usage. While modest rate
increases are proposed to
reflect the increased costs to
the City of providing service
and meeting financial
obligations, the basic water
service rate structures for all
customer classes remains
unchanged.

The table shows the current
and the proposed water usage
rate which, if approved, will
become effective in 2024 and
2025. The Water Usage rate
varies with increasing and/or
decreasing water usage. While
modest rate increases are
proposed to reflect the
increased costs to the City of
providing service and meeting
financial obligations, the basic
water usage rate structures for
all customer classes remains
unchanged. Water use is
measured in one hundred
cubic feet increments (CCF).

One (1) CCF equals 748
gallons.

PROPOSED BI-MONTHLY WATER USAGE CHARGES

BUILDING WATER USAGE CURRENT

RATE PROPOSED RATE
August 5, 2024 July 1, 2025
TIER I (≤ 16 ccf) $1.46 $1.57 $1.61
TIER II (17 ccf - 27 ccf) $1.78 $1.86 $1.90
TIER III (> 27 ccf) $2.69 $2.79 $2.85

NON-BUILDING WATER USAGE

TIER I (≤ 27 ccf) $1.78 $1.77 $1.81
TIER II (> 27 ccf) $2.69 $2.49 $2.54

FIRE PROTECTION WATER

ALL UNITS $2.69 $2.79 $2.85
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
558 of 864

UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
In accordance with Chapter 2.70 of the Redlands Municipal Code, every two years the City Council appoints seven utility customers of the City to be members of its Utilities Advisory Committee (UAC). Members of the UAC provide oversight and guidance for the process to assist the City ’s financial consultant and staff in establishing water, wastewater and non -potable water rates, charges and revenue requirements. The UAC provides recommendations to the City Council to ensure that water, wastewater, and non -potable water rates and charges (1) recover costs reasonably borne in providing water, wastewater and non-potable water services; (2) are equitable to all customer classes; (3) are in compliance with all state and federal law; and (4) are easily explained to customers. The UAC was formed by the City Council on January 16, 2024, and the UAC provided its recommendations for City Council consideration on May 7, 2024.

HOW DO I PROTEST THE RATE CHANGES?
If you wish to oppose the proposed water and wastewater rate increases, you must submit a written protest pursuant to the Resolution No. 7128 which establishes a policy for the submission and tabulation of protests with respect to the public heari ngs for utility rate adjustments. The written protest must contain the printed name and original wet signature of the property ow ner or customer, and must include the street address, or the county of San Bernardino Assessor ’s parcel number of the property served. During the public hearing, the City Council will consider all public testimony and all written protests. At the concl usion of the public hearing, the City Council will decide whether to adopt the proposed rate increases. Only one written protest per identified parcel or property will be counted for determining whether a majority protest exists. If valid written protests ar e received from a majority of the affected property owners, the City Council will not approve the proposed rate increases. Your written protest must be received (not postmarked) by the City Clerk prior to the close of the public hearing on July 2, 2024. Protes ts should be addressed and mailed to: City Clerk, Redlands City Hall, 35 Cajon Street, Suite 4, Redlands, CA 92373. Written protests may also be presented in -person to the City Clerk prior to the July 2, 2024 meeting. Written protests may also be submitted during the public hearing. Protests may not be submitted via email or by other electronic means.

Additional information regarding the proposed water and wastewater rate increases is presented in the City of Redlands 2024 Water, Wastewater, and Non -Potable Water Financial Plan & Rate Study which is available for review during business hours at the City Clerk’s Office or you may review the report on the City ’s website at www.cityofredlands.org. For questions or additional information regarding the proposed rate increases, you may also contact the City ’s Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department at (909) 798-7698.

PRESORT STD
U.S. POSTAGE PAID

SAN BERNARDINO, CA
PERMIT 1123
City of Redlands
Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department
P.O. Box 3005
Redlands, CA 92373

MAIL MERGE

XXXX XXXXXX XX
XXXXXXXXX, XX. XXXXX
APN: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
559 of 864
RRESOLUTION NO. 7128

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE SUBMISSION AND TABULATION OF PROTESTS WITH

RESPECT TO PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR PROPOSED UTILITY RATE ADJUSTMENTS WHEREAS, Article XIIID, section 6 of the Califomia Constitution requires the City to consider written protests to certain proposed increases to utility rates; and WHEREAS, the California Constitution does not offer specific guidance as to who is allowed to submit protests, how written protests are submitted, or how the city is to tabulate the protests;
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Redlands as follows:

Section 1. When notice of a public hearing with respect to a utility or other rate adjustments has been given by the City pursuant to Article XIIID, Section 6 of the California Constitution, the following guidelines shall apply:

A. Submission of Protests

1. Any property owner or utility customer may submit a written protest to the City Clerk, either by mail or delivery to the City Clerk's Office, 35 Cajon Street, Suite #4, Redlands, CA 92373 or by submitting the protest at the public hearing.

Protests must be received by the end of the public hearing.

2. Each protest must state that it is a protest (or indicate opposition to the proposed rates). If the City has given notices for the public hearings regarding rates for both sewer and water service, and those hearings are to be held on the same date, then the protest may indicate whether it is made (i) with respect only to water rates, (ii) with respect only to sewer rates, or (iii) with respect to both water and sewer rates. If no limitation is indicated. the City will interpret the protest as covering all rates to be considered on the hearing date. Email or facsimile protests cannot be accepted. Although oral comments at the public hearing will not qualify as a formal protest unless accompanied by a written protest, the City Council welcomes input from the community during the public hearing on proposed fees.

3. A protest by a property owner that is a trust must be signed by the Trustee and identified as such with the signature (i.e_ John Smith. Trustee for Smith Family trust). Protests by property owners that are corporations, partnerships, or similar entitles must be signed by a person authorized to execute documents on behalf of the property owner.

4. If a parcel served by the City is owned by more than a single record owner, or more than one name appears on the City's records as the customer for the property, or the customer is not the record owner, each owner or customer may I:\cclerk\Resolutions\Res 7100-7200\7128 Guidelines Submission Tabulation Protests.doc Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
560 of 864
ssubmit a protest, but only one protest will be counted per parcel and any one protest submitted in accordance with these rules will be sufficient to count as a protest for that property.

5. In order to be valid, a protest must bear date. designation of parcel address or parcel number, printed name. and original signature of the record owner or customer of record with respect to the property identified on the protest. The customer of record is the name of the person whose name is printed on the utility bills for the parcel. Except as set forth in paragraph 3 above, protests not bearing the original signature of a record owner or customer of record shall not be counted. Protests which have been altered by someone other than the person who signed them shall not be counted.

6. Any person who submits a protest may withdraw it by submitting to the City Clerk a dated. written request that the protest be withdrawn. The withdrawal of a protest shall contain sufficient information to identify the affected parcel and the name of the record owner or record customer who submitted both the protest and the request that it be withdrawn.

7. A fee protest proceeding is not an election.

8. To ensure transparency and accountability in the fee protest tabulation, protests shall constitute disclosable public records from and after the close of the public hearing.

B. Tabulation of Protests

1. The City Clerk shall determine the validity of all protests. The City Clerk shall not accept as valid any protest if the City Clerk determines that any of the following conditions exist:
a. The protest does not identify a property that will be subject to proposed fees.
b. The protest does not bear an original signature of a record owner or identified as trustee of the parcel identified on the protest or of a record customer of that parcel.
c. The protest does not state its opposition to the proposed fees or is illegible. d. The protest has been altered in any way by someone other than the person who is signed to it.
e. The protest was not received by the City Clerk before close of the public hearing on the proposed fees.
f. A request to withdraw the protest was received by the City Clerk prior to the close of the public hearing on the proposed fees.

2. The City Clerk's decision that a protest is not valid shall constitute a final action ofthe City and shall not be subjected to any internal appeal.

I:\cclerk\Resolutions\Res 7100-7200\7128 Guidelines Submission Tabulation Protests.doc 2 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
561 of 864

33. A majority protest exists (50% plus one) if written protests are timely submitted and not withdrawn by the record owners. trustee. or customers with respect to, a majority of the properties subject to the proposed fee. If both water and sewer rates are being considered, a separate determination will be made for with respect to each ofthese two types of fees.

4. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Clerk shall count all protests received, including those received during the public hearing, and shall report the results to the City Council upon completion. If review of the protests received demonstrates that the number received is manifestly less than one-half of the parcels served by the City with respect to the fee which is the subject of the protest, then the City Clerk may advise the City Council of the absence of a majority protest without determining the validity of all protests.

5. If, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Clerk determines that the City Clerk will require additional time to count the protests, the City Clerk shall so advise the City Council, which may adjourn the meeting to allow the count to be completed on another day or days. If so, the City Council shall declare the time and place of the count, which shall be conducted in a place where interested members of the public may observe the counting, and the City Council shall declare the time at which its meeting shall be resumed to receive an act in the report of the City Clerk.

Section 2. The City Council hereby directs City staff to include the requirements described in Section 1.A of this Resolution, which govern the submission of written protests, within all notices of protest hearings that are mailed to property owners and customers of City utility services.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 6* day of March, 2012.

Peté Aguilar, Mayor
A TT EST:

Sam Irwin ity'Clerk
I celerk R emlutions\Res 7100-7200\7128 Guidelines Submission Tabulation Protests.doc 3 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
562 of 864
II, Sam Irwin, 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 6* day of March 2012. by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Harrison, Bean, Gardner; Mayor Aguilar NOES: Councilmember Foster
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Sam Irwin, City Clerk
I:\cclerk\Resolutions\Res 7100-7200\7128 Guidelines Submission Tabulation Protests.doc 4 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
563 of 864

CITY OF REDLANDS
Water, Wastewater, and
Non-Potable Water
Financial Plan and Rate Study
FINAL REPORT / MARCH 27, 202 4
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
564 of 864
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
565 of 864

227 W. Trade Street, Suite 1400, Charlotte, NC 28202

www.raftelis.com
March 27, 2024

John R. Harris
Municipal Utilities & Engineering Director
City of Redlands
Municipal Utilities and Engineering
35 Cajon Street
Redlands, CA 92373

Subject: Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Financial Plan and Rate Study Report

Dear Mr. Harris:

Raftelis is pleased to provide this Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Financial Plan Study Report (Report) for the City of Redlands (City). This report presents the analyses, rationales, and methodologies utilized in the study to determine utility rates that align with the requirements of Proposition 218. The study was developed with feedback and input from City staff.

The study involved a comprehensive review of the City’s current water, wastewater, and non-potable water cost requirements to determine rates that meet the City’s objectives. The main objectives that informed the study include:
• Adequately recovering all costs to ensure the financial sufficiency of the City’s utilities • Determining feasible capital financing plans for all three utilities • Developing long-term financial plans for all three utilities • Calculating cost of service-based rates for all three utilities • Minimizing customer impacts from rate adjustments

We are confident that the proposed rates developed during this study are fair and equitable for the City’s customers and are in alignment with the requirements of Proposition 218. We appreciate the input provided by City staff which helped guide the final recommendations of the financial plan and resulting rates. It was a pleasure working with you and your team, and we wish to express our gratitude for the support you and other City staff provided during the study.

Sincerely,

Sudhir Pardiwala Lindsay Roth
Executive Vice President Consultant

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
566 of 864

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
567 of 864
Client Name / Report Title

Contents

1. Executive Summary ..................................................................... 1

1.1. Study Background ........................................................................................................1

1.2. Current Rates ................................................................................................................1

1.3. Process and Approach .................................................................................................4

1.4. Legal Framework ...........................................................................................................5

1.5. Results and Recommendations ...................................................................................5

1.5.1. Water Utility ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 5

1.5.2. Wastewater Utility ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 6

1.5.3. Non-Potable Water Utility ................................ ................................ ................................ 6

1.6. Proposed Rates .............................................................................................................6

1.7. Combined Customer Impacts ......................................................................................9

1.8. Regional Rate Survey ................................................................................................. 10

2. Key Assumptions ....................................................................... 12

2.1. Customer Account Growth ......................................................................................... 12

2.2. Revenue Inflation Factors .......................................................................................... 12

2.3. Expense Inflation Factors ........................................................................................... 13

3. Water – Financial Plan ................................................................ 14

3.1. Projected Revenues .................................................................................................... 14

3.2. Projected O&M Expenses ........................................................................................... 15

3.3. Debt Service ................................................................................................................ 16

3.4. Capital Projects ........................................................................................................... 17

3.5. Current Financial Plan – Status Quo ......................................................................... 20

3.6. Proposed Financial Plan ............................................................................................. 23

4. Water – Cost-of-Service Analysis and Rates .............................. 28

4.1. Process and Approach ............................................................................................... 28

4.2. Revenue Requirement ................................................................................................ 28

4.3. Peaking Factors .......................................................................................................... 29

4.4. Operating and Capital Cost Allocation ...................................................................... 30

4.5. Allocation of Fire Protection Costs – Public vs. Private .......................................... 35

4.6. Final Cost Allocation of Revenue Requirement ....................................................... 35 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
568 of 864
Client Name / Report Title

4.7. Unit Cost Components ............................................................................................... 37

4.8. Distribution of Cost Components to Customer Classes ......................................... 42

4.9. Rate Calculation .......................................................................................................... 44

4.9.1. Proposed Bi-Monthly Fixed Charges ................................ ................................ ............. 44

4.9.2. Proposed Bi-Monthly Fire Service Charges ................................ ................................ ... 44

4.9.3. Proposed Water Usage Rates ................................ ................................ ....................... 45

5. Wastewater – Financial Plan ...................................................... 50

5.1. Customer Accounts and Usage ................................................................................. 50

5.2. Current Rates .............................................................................................................. 51

5.3. Calculated Rate Revenues at Current Rates ............................................................. 52

5.4. Projected Revenues at Current Rates ....................................................................... 53

5.5. Projected O&M Expenses ........................................................................................... 54

5.6. Debt Service ................................................................................................................ 55

5.7. Capital Projects ........................................................................................................... 56

5.8. Current Financial Plan – Status Quo ......................................................................... 58

5.9. Proposed Financial Plan ............................................................................................. 61

6. Wastewater – Cost of Service Analysis and Rates .................... 65

6.1. Process and Approach ............................................................................................... 65

6.2. Revenue Requirement ................................................................................................ 65

6.3. Plant Mass Balance ..................................................................................................... 66

6.4. Operating and Capital Cost Allocation ...................................................................... 70

6.5. Unit Cost Components ............................................................................................... 72

6.6. Revenue Requirement Allocation .............................................................................. 74

6.7. Rate Calculation .......................................................................................................... 75

6.8. Proposed Rates ........................................................................................................... 77

7. Non-Potable Water – Financial Plan ........................................... 79

7.1. Projected Revenues .................................................................................................... 79

7.2. Projected O&M Expenses ........................................................................................... 80

7.3. Debt Service ................................................................................................................ 80

7.4. Capital Projects ........................................................................................................... 80

7.5. Current Financial Plan – Status Quo ......................................................................... 81

7.6. Proposed Financial Plan ............................................................................................. 84

7.7. Proposed Rates ........................................................................................................... 84 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
569 of 864
Client Name / Report Title

8. Appendix A – Alternative Wastewater Rate Scenario ............... 86

9. Addendum – Water Rates for Largest users .............................. 87

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
570 of 864
Client Name / Report Title

Tables
Table 1-1: Current Bi-Monthly Water Service Charges ($/meter size) ................................ ...................... 1 Table 1-2: Current Water Usage rates ($/ccf of water) ................................ ................................ ............. 2 Table 1-3: Current Bi-Monthly Residential Wastewater Service Chargers ($/dwelling unit) ...................... 2 Table 1-4: Current Non-Residential Wastewater Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ................................ ........ 3 Table 1-5: Current Bi-Monthly Schools Wastewater Service Charge ($/100 students) ............................. 3 Table 1-6: Current Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size) ................................ .. 3 Table 1-7: Current Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ................................ ....................... 4 Table 1-8: Proposed Bi-Monthly Water Service Charges ($/meter size) ................................ ................... 7 Table 1-9: Proposed Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ................................ ................................ ........ 7 Table 1-10: Proposed Bi-Monthly Residential and Schools Wastewater Service Charges ....................... 8 Table 1-11: Proposed Non-Residential Wastewater Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ................................ ... 8 Table 1-12: Proposed Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size) ............................ 9 Table 1-13: Proposed Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ................................ .................. 9 Table 1-14: Proposed Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Impacts (3/4” meter, 40 ccf) ........................ 10 Table 2-1: Customer Account Growth Projections ................................ ................................ .................. 12 Table 2-2: Revenue Inflation Factors ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 12 Table 2-3: Expense Inflation Factors ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 13 Table 3-1: Projected Water Revenues ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 15 Table 3-2: Projected Water O&M Expenses ................................ ................................ ........................... 16 Table 3-3: Existing Water Debt Service ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 17 Table 3-4: Inflated Water Capital Projects ................................ ................................ .............................. 18 Table 3-5: Proposed Water Capital Financing Plan ................................ ................................ ................ 20 Table 3-6: Projected Water Financial Plan (Status Quo) ................................ ................................ ........ 21 Table 3-7: Proposed Water Revenue Adjustments ................................ ................................ ................. 24 Table 3-8: Projected Water Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) ................................ ....... 25 Table 4-1: Water Revenue Requirement Calculation ................................ ................................ ............. 29 Table 4-2: System Peaking ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 29 Table 4-3: System-Wide Peaking Factors ................................ ................................ .............................. 30 Table 4-4: Water Operating Cost Allocation ................................ ................................ ........................... 32 Table 4-5: Water Asset Allocation ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 34 Table 4-6: Fire Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 35 Table 4-7: Revenue Requirement by Cost Component ................................ ................................ .......... 36 Table 4-8: FY 2025 Projected Water Usage by Class ................................ ................................ ............ 37 Table 4-9: Derivation of Equivalent Meters................................ ................................ ............................. 37 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
571 of 864
Client Name / Report Title

Table 4-10: Derivation of Equivalent Fire Lines ................................ ................................ ...................... 38 Table 4-11: Calculation of Peak Capacity ................................ ................................ .............................. 39 Table 4-12: Cost Causation Component Unit Cost Calculation ................................ .............................. 41 Table 4-13: Derivation of Costs to Serve Each Class ................................ ................................ ............. 43 Table 4-14: Proposed Bi-Monthly Service Charge (FY 2025) ................................ ................................ . 44 Table 4-15: Proposed Bi-Monthly Fire Service Charge (FY 2025) ................................ .......................... 45 Table 4-16: Peaking Unit Cost Calculation ................................ ................................ ............................. 45 Table 4-17: Potable Water Supply Cost ................................ ................................ ................................ . 46 Table 4-18: Supply Component Calculation ................................ ................................ ........................... 47 Table 4-19: Proposed Water Usage Rates (FY 2025) ................................ ................................ ............ 48 Table 4-20: Proposed Bi-Monthly Service Charges ................................ ................................ ................ 49 Table 4-21: Proposed Water Usage Rates ................................ ................................ ............................. 49 Table 5-1: Projected Wastewater Customer Accounts and Usage ................................ ......................... 51 Table 5-2: Current Bi-Monthly Wastewater Service Charges and Usage Rates ................................ ..... 52 Table 5-3: Calculated Wastewater Rate Revenues at Current Rates ................................ ..................... 53 Table 5-4: Projected Wastewater Revenues at Current Rates ................................ ............................... 54 Table 5-5: Projected Wastewater O&M Expenses ................................ ................................ .................. 55 Table 5-6: Existing Wastewater Debt Service ................................ ................................ ........................ 55 Table 5-7: Proposed Wastewater Debt Service ................................ ................................ ...................... 56 Table 5-8: Inflated Wastewater Capital Projects ................................ ................................ ..................... 57 Table 5-9: Proposed Wastewater Capital Financing Plan ................................ ................................ ....... 58 Table 5-10: Projected Wastewater Financial Plan (Status Quo) ................................ ............................. 59 Table 5-11: Proposed Wastewater Revenue Adjustments ................................ ................................ ..... 61 Table 5-12: Projected Wastewater Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) ............................ 62 Table 6-1: Wastewater Revenue Requirement Calculation ................................ ................................ .... 66 Table 6-2: Schools Wastewater Flow Estimate ................................ ................................ ...................... 67 Table 6-3: Wastewater Plan Balance Calculation ................................ ................................ ................... 68 Table 6-4: Residential Proportion of Wastewater Flow ................................ ................................ ........... 69 Table 6-5: Estimated Residential Wastewater Loadings ................................ ................................ ......... 69 Table 6-6: Wastewater Operating Cost Allocation ................................ ................................ .................. 71 Table 6-7: Wastewater Capital Allocation ................................ ................................ ............................... 72 Table 6-8: Wastewater Service Units by Cost Components ................................ ................................ ... 73 Table 6-9: Wastewater Cost of Service and Unit Costs ................................ ................................ .......... 74 Table 6-10: Allocation of Wastewater Revenue Requirement to Customer Classes ............................... 75 Table 6-11: Wastewater Bi-Monthly Rate Calculation ................................ ................................ ............ 76 Table 6-12: Wastewater Bi-Monthly Rate Comparison ................................ ................................ ........... 77 Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
572 of 864
Client Name / Report Title

Table 6-13: Proposed Bi-Monthly Wastewater Service Charges ................................ ............................ 77 Table 6-14: Proposed Non-Residential Wastewater Rates ................................ ................................ ..... 78 Table 7-1: Projected Non-Potable Water Revenues ................................ ................................ ............... 79 Table 7-2: Projected Non-Potable Water O&M Expenses ................................ ................................ ...... 80 Table 7-3: Inflated Non-Potable Water Capital Projects ................................ ................................ ......... 81 Table 7-4: Projected Non-Potable Water Financial Plan (Status Quo) ................................ .................... 82 Table 7-5: Proposed Non-Potable Water Revenue Adjustments ................................ ............................ 84 Table 7-6: Proposed Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size) ............................ 85 Table 7-7: Proposed Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ................................ .................. 85 Table 8-1: Proposed Bi-Monthly Residential and Schools Wastewater Service Charges ....................... 86 Table 8-2: Proposed Non-Residential Wastewater Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ................................ ... 86

Figures
Figure 1-1: Regional Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Sewer Bill Comparison ................................ .. 11 Figure 3-1: Proposed Water Capital Financing Plan (Status Quo) ................................ .......................... 22 Figure 3-2: Projected Water Financial Plan (Status Quo) ................................ ................................ ....... 23 Figure 3-3: Projected Water Fund balances (Status Quo) ................................ ................................ ...... 23 Figure 3-4: Proposed Water Capital Financing Plan ................................ ................................ ............... 26 Figure 3-5: Projected Water Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) ................................ ...... 26 Figure 3-6: Projected Water Fund Balances (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) ................................ ..... 27 Figure 5-1: Proposed Wastewater Capital Financing Plan ................................ ................................ ..... 60 Figure 5-2: Projected Wastewater Financial Plan (Status Quo) ................................ .............................. 60 Figure 5-3: Projected Wastewater Fund Balances (Status Quo) ................................ ............................ 61 Figure 5-4: Proposed Wastewater Capital Financing Plan ................................ ................................ ..... 63 Figure 5-5: Projected Wastewater Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) ............................. 63 Figure 5-6: Projected Wastewater Fund Balances (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) ........................... 64 Figure 7-1: Proposed Water Capital Financing Plan (Status Quo) ................................ .......................... 83 Figure 7-2: Projected Non-Potable Water Financial Plan (Status Quo) ................................ .................. 83 Figure 7-3: Projected Non-Potable Water Fund Balances (Status Quo) ................................ ................. 84

Appendices
Appendix A: Alternative Wastewater Rate Scenario
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
573 of 864
Client Name / Report Title

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
574 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

1. Executive Summary

1.1. Study Background
In 2022, the City of Redlands (City) contracted Raftelis to conduct a Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study, which included developing long-term financial plans and cost of service rates.

This report presents the three financial plans and resulting rates for the water, wastewater, and non-potable water utilities for a five-year period to ensure fairness and equity for its customers and the financial stability of the three enterprises.

This Executive Summary outlines the proposed financial plans and resulting rates and contains a description of the rate study process, methodology, and recommendations for the City’s rates. The main objectives that informed the Study include:
• Adequately recovering all costs to ensure the financial sufficiency of the City’s utilities • Determining feasible capital financing plans for all three utilities • Developing long-term financial plans for all three utilities • Calculating cost of service-based rates for the three utilities • Minimizing customer impacts from changes to the rate structures

1.2. Current Rates
The City’s current water rates were adopted on July 1, 2018, and include a bi-monthly service charge based on meter size for water service, fire protection service, fire hydrant service, and tiered water usage rates per hundred cubic feet (ccf) of water by customer class. Table 1-1 shows current bi-monthly service charges and fire protection and hydrant service charges, and Table 1-2 shows the water usage rates by customer class.

Table 1-1: Current Bi-Monthly Water Service Charges ($/meter size)

A B C D
Line Meter Size Water Service
Charge
Fire Protection
Water Service
Charge
Fire Hydrant
Service Charge
1 5/8" $32.10
2 3/4" $43.17
3 1" $64.67
4 1 1/2" $116.79
5 2" $172.83 $10.19 $73.60
6 3" $299.23 $18.10 $73.60
7 4" $462.10 $31.75 $73.60
8 6" $853.02 $80.73 $73.60
9 8" $1,256.97 $165.22 $73.60
10 10" $2,977.00 $292.32 $73.60
11 12" $3,915.20 $468.46 $73.60

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
575 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Table 1-2: Current Water Usage rates ($/ccf of water)
A B
Line Customer Class
Water
Usage
Rate
1 Building Water Usage
2 Tier 1 $1.46
3 Tier 2 $1.78
4 Tier 3 $2.69
5 6 Non-Building Water Usage
7 Tier 1 $1.78
8 Tier 2 $2.69
9 10 Other Water Usage
11 B Contract $100.46
12 Recycled $110.00
13 14 Fire Protection Water Usage
15 All Units $2.69

The current wastewater rates were implemented on July 1, 2018, and include a bi-monthly service charge for residential customers and schools and non-residential wastewater usage rates per ccf of water usage. Table 1-3 shows the current bi-monthly residential service charges, Table 1-4 shows the non-residential wastewater usage rates for all non-residential customer classes, and Table 1-5 shows the bi-monthly schools service charge by school type.

Table 1-3: Current Bi-Monthly Residential Wastewater Service Chargers ($/dwelling unit) A B
Line Residential Customer Class Wastewater
Service Rate
1 Single Family $62.43
2 Multiple Family $48.08

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
576 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Table 1-4: Current Non-Residential Wastewater Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) A B
Line Non-Residential Customer Class Wastewater
Usage Rate
1 Low Strength I $2.42
2 Low Strength II $2.87
3 Low Strength III $3.32
4 Medium Strength I $3.77
5 Medium Strength II $4.22
6 Medium Strength III $4.67
7 High Strength I $5.12
8 High Strength II $5.56
9 Large Volume User $3.32
10 Minimum Charge ($) $48.08
11 12 Septage Charge ($/gal) $0.11

Table 1-5: Current Bi-Monthly Schools Wastewater Service Charge ($/100 students) A B
Line Schools Customer Class Wastewater
Service Rate
1 Elementary $134.38
2 Secondary & High $215.02

The current non-potable water rates include a bi-monthly service charge and a usage rate per ccf of non- potable water usage. Table 1-6 and Table 1-7 show the bi-monthly non-potable water service charges and non-potable water usage rates, respectively.

Table 1-6: Current Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size) A B
Line Meter Size
Non-Potable
Water Service
Charge
1 3/4" $13.81
2 1" $20.65
3 1 1/2" $37.29
4 2" $55.16
5 3" $95.50
6 4" $147.45
7 6" $272.16
8 8" $401.04

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
577 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Table 1-7: Current Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) A B
Line Non-Potable Customer Class Non-Potable
Water Usage Rate
1 Non-Potable Water $0.99
2 Conversion Customer $0.64

1.3. Process and Approach
The City’s rate-setting process involves participation and feedback from City staff. During the study, Raftelis met with City staff to discuss and understand the challenges the City’s three utilities face and to provide guidance to finalize the rate recommendations, which are detailed in this report.

During these meetings, Raftelis presented the various assumptions, inputs, and scenario analyses that were utilized to determine the water, wastewater, and non-potable water financial plans. City staff discussed the upcoming capital project requirements, which are some of the main drivers for the revenue adjustments in the final recommendations presented in this report. Raftelis designed and presented the financial plan and rate models to analyze various scenarios, such as those related to debt issuances, revenue adjustments, and capital funding.

The proposed financial plans detailed in this report followed industry standard practices for long-term financial planning and utilized commonly accepted assumptions in the absence of specified assumptions from the City, such as general inflation based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Raftelis worked closely with City staff to determine the most accurate methodology to project future revenues and expenses to reinforce sound fiscal management practices.

The City opted for no revenue adjustments for non-potable water. The cost of service analysis utilized to develop the water rates followed the guidelines for allocating costs outlined in the American Water Works Association’s (AWWA) “Principles of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges: Manual of Water Supply Practices M1, 6th edition” (M1 Manual). Wastewater rates followed the guidelines for allocating costs outlined in the Water Environment Federation (WEF) Manual of Practice No. 27, Financing and Charges for Wastewater (2018).

The cost of service analysis and rate design process consists of seven major steps, as outlined below:

1. Determine the revenue requirement, equal to the revenue to be recovered from rates.

2. Functionalize operations and maintenance (O&M) expenses and capital assets into functional categories such as supply, distribution, treatment, laboratory, collection, engineering, etc.

3. Allocate each functional category into cost components such as supply, base delivery, peaking, meter and customer service for water, and wastewater flow and strength, which includes biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS) for wastewater.

4. Develop customer class characteristics and units of service by cost component.

5. Calculate the unit cost component rates by dividing the total cost in each component by the total units of service for that component. For example, wastewater service units include flow which is measured in ccf and BOD and TSS which are measured in pounds (lbs) per year.

6. Calculate the cost for each customer class by multiplying the unit cost by the units of service for each customer class.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
578 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

7. Design rates to meet the City’s objectives.

The financial plans for the three utilities include the five-year Study period from fiscal year (FY) 20251 to FY 2029. The proposed rates were developed for implementation on July 1, 2024 (beginning of FY 2025) and in July of every year thereafter until 2029.

1.4. Legal Framework
California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 6, commonly referred to as Proposition 218, was enacted in 1996 to ensure that rates and fees are reasonable and proportionate to the cost of providing service. The principal requirements for the fairness of the fees, as they relate to public wastewater service are as follows:

1. A property-related charge (such as water and wastewater rates) imposed by a public agency on a parcel shall not exceed the costs required to provide the property-related service.

2. Revenues derived by the charge shall not be used for any other purpose other than that for which the charge was imposed.

3. The amount of the charge imposed upon any parcel shall not exceed the proportional cost of service attributable to the parcel.

4. No charge may be imposed for a service unless that service is actually used or immediately available to the owner of the property.

5. A written notice of the proposed charge shall be mailed to the record owner of each parcel at least 45 days prior to the public hearing, when the agency considers all written protests against the charge.

Proposition 218 requires that rates cannot be “arbitrary and capricious,” meaning that the rate-setting methodology must be sound and there must be a nexus between the costs and the rates charged. Raftelis follows industry standard rate setting methodologies to perform the cost of service analysis for the water utility based on the M1 Manual and for the wastewater utility based on WEF’s Manual No. 27.

1.5. Results and Recommendations
Raftelis worked closely with City staff to define the final results and recommendations of the water, wastewater, and non-potable water rate Study. The recommendations presented in this report will ensure the financial sufficiency and stability of the City’s three utilities to fund all necessary operating costs, capital costs, and to maintain sufficient cash balances. To minimize customer impacts due to changes in rate structure, which is a key objective that informed the Study approach, Raftelis recommends that the City maintain the same rate structure for the water, wastewater, and non-potable water systems.

1.5.1. Water Utility
• The water O&M expenses are expected to increase, on average, by 3.6 percent each year of the Study based on the City’s FY 2024 budget and inflationary assumptions. • The City plans to spend approximately $52.8 million on capital projects from FY 2025 to FY 2029. • Raftelis recommends 2.0 percent revenue adjustments per year in FY 2025 through FY 2029 to fund its capital project spending and to maintain a sufficient cash balance.

1 FY 2025 is the period from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
579 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

1.5.2. Wastewater Utility
• The wastewater O&M expenses are expected to increase, on average, by 3.7 percent each year of the Study based on the City’s FY 2024 budget and inflationary assumptions. • The City plans to spend $66.3 million in capital projects from FY 2025 to FY 2029, the majority of which is to refurbish and modify the City’s current wastewater treatment plant. • The City plans to obtain an SRF loan of $45 million in FY 2026 to fund most of the wastewater treatment plant project costs.
• Raftelis recommends 10 percent revenue adjustments per year in FY 2025 through FY 2028 and 8 percent revenue adjustment in FY 2029 to fund capital projects and debt service and to meet debt coverage requirements. The wastewater financial plan will be reviewed again in the next rate cycle.

1.5.3. Non-Potable Water Utility
• The non-potable O&M expenses are expected to increase, on average, by 3 percent each year of the Study based on the City’s FY 2024 budget and inflationary assumptions. • The City plans to spend $1.5 million in capital projects for the non-potable water utility from FY 2025 to FY 2029.
• Raftelis recommends no revenue adjustments for FY 2025 through FY 2029 as the utility has sufficient cash balance to fund capital project costs and operating expenses.

1.6. Proposed Rates

Table 1-8 and Table 1-9 show the proposed bi-monthly water service charges and water usage rates for the City’s water utility, respectively, based on the above recommendations. The proposed water rates for FY 2025 are determined by the cost of service analysis, and rates for the following years are increased from those rates based on the proposed revenue adjustments.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
580 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Table 1-8: Proposed Bi-Monthly Water Service Charges ($/meter size)

A B C D E F G
Line Bi-Monthly Water Service
Charges
Current
Rates July 2024 July 2025 July 2026 July 2027 July 2028 1 Water Service
2 5/8" $32.10 $32.94 $33.60 $34.28 $34.97 $35.67
3 3/4" $43.17 $44.01 $44.90 $45.80 $46.72 $47.66
4 1" $64.67 $65.50 $66.81 $68.15 $69.52 $70.92
5 1 1/2" $116.79 $117.60 $119.96 $122.36 $124.81 $127.31 6 2" $172.83 $173.62 $177.10 $180.65 $184.27 $187.96 7 3" $299.23 $299.97 $305.97 $312.09 $318.34 $324.71 8 4" $462.10 $462.79 $472.05 $481.50 $491.13 $500.96 9 6" $853.02 $853.56 $870.64 $888.06 $905.83 $923.95 10 8" $1,256.97 $1,257.36 $1,282.51 $1,308.17 $1,334.34 $1,361.03 11 10" $2,977.00 $2,976.76 $3,036.30 $3,097.03 $3,158.98 $3,222.16 12 12" $3,915.20 $3,914.61 $3,992.91 $4,072.77 $4,154.23 $4,237.32 13 14 Fire Protection Service
15 2" $10.19 $11.81 $12.05 $12.30 $12.55 $12.81
16 3" $18.10 $21.20 $21.63 $22.07 $22.52 $22.98
17 4" $31.75 $37.39 $38.14 $38.91 $39.69 $40.49
18 6" $80.73 $95.48 $97.39 $99.34 $101.33 $103.36
19 8" $165.22 $195.69 $199.61 $203.61 $207.69 $211.85 20 10" $292.32 $346.42 $353.35 $360.42 $367.63 $374.99 21 12" $468.46 $555.33 $566.44 $577.77 $589.33 $601.12 22 23 Fire Hydrant Service
24 All Meters $73.60 $299.97 $305.97 $312.09 $318.34 $324.71

Table 1-9: Proposed Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water)

A B C D E F G H
Line Water Usage Rates
Bi-
Monthly
Tiers
Current
Rates July 2024 July 2025 July 2026 July 2027 July 2028 1 Building Water Usage
2 Tier 1 16 $1.46 $1.57 $1.61 $1.65 $1.69 $1.73
3 Tier 2 27 $1.78 $1.86 $1.90 $1.94 $1.98 $2.02
4 Tier 3 Over 27 $2.69 $2.79 $2.85 $2.91 $2.97 $3.03 5 6 Non-Building Water Usage
7 Tier 1 27 $1.78 $1.77 $1.81 $1.85 $1.89 $1.93
8 Tier 2 Over 27 $2.69 $2.49 $2.54 $2.60 $2.66 $2.72 9 10 Fire Protection Water Usage
11 All Units $2.69 $2.79 $2.85 $2.91 $2.97 $3.03

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
581 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Table 1-10 and Table 1-11 show the proposed bi-monthly residential and schools wastewater service charges and non-residential water usage rates for the wastewater utility, respectively. The proposed wastewater rates are based on the cost of service analysis.

Table 1-10: Proposed Bi-Monthly Residential and Schools Wastewater Service Charges

A B C D E F G
Line Bi-Monthly Wastewater
Service Charges
Current
Rates July 2024 July 2025 July 2026 July 2027 July 2028 1 Residential ($/dwelling unit)
2 Single Family $62.43 $66.04 $72.65 $79.92 $87.92 $94.96 3 Multiple Family $48.08 $52.40 $57.64 $63.41 $69.76 $75.35 4 5 Schools ($/100 students)
6 Elementary $134.38 $143.11 $157.43 $173.18 $190.50 $205.74 7 Secondary & High $215.02 $238.52 $262.38 $288.62 $317.49 $342.89

Table 1-11: Proposed Non-Residential Wastewater Usage Rates ($/ccf of water)

A B C D E F G
Line Wastewater Usage Rates Current
Rates
July 2024 July 2025 July 2026 July 2027 July 2028
1 Non-Residential Usage ($/ccf)
2 Low Strength I $2.42 $2.82 $3.11 $3.43 $3.78 $4.09 3 Low Strength II $2.87 $3.41 $3.76 $4.14 $4.56 $4.93 4 Low Strength III $3.32 $3.99 $4.39 $4.83 $5.32 $5.75 5 Medium Strength I $3.77 $4.58 $5.04 $5.55 $6.11 $6.60 6 Medium Strength II $4.22 $5.16 $5.68 $6.25 $6.88 $7.44 7 Medium Strength III $4.67 $5.75 $6.33 $6.97 $7.67 $8.29 8 High Strength I $5.12 $6.34 $6.98 $7.68 $8.45 $9.13 9 High Strength II $5.56 $6.92 $7.62 $8.39 $9.23 $9.97 10 Large Volume User $3.32 $3.99 $4.39 $4.83 $5.32 $5.75 11 Minimum Charge ($) $48.08 $52.40 $57.64 $63.41 $69.76 $75.35 12 13 Septage Charge ($/gal) * $0.11 $0.10 $0.11 $0.13 $0.15 $0.17 14 Minimum Septage Charge $15.00 $16.50 $18.15 $19.97 $21.57

Table 1-12 and Table 1-13 show the bi-monthly non-potable water service charges and non-potable water usage rates, respectively. Raftelis recommends no revenue adjustments for the study period. The proposed rates for FY 2025 are based on the cost of service analysis and remain the same through FY 2029.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
582 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Table 1-12: Proposed Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size)

A B C D E F G
Line Bi-Monthly Non-Potable
Water Service Charges
Current
Rates July 2024 July 2025 July 2026 July 2027 July 2028 1 Non-Potable Water Service
2 3/4" $13.81 $13.81 $13.81 $13.81 $13.81 $13.81
3 1" $20.65 $20.65 $20.65 $20.65 $20.65 $20.65
4 1 1/2" $37.29 $37.29 $37.29 $37.29 $37.29 $37.29 5 2" $55.16 $55.16 $55.16 $55.16 $55.16 $55.16
6 3" $95.50 $95.50 $95.50 $95.50 $95.50 $95.50
7 4" $147.45 $147.45 $147.45 $147.45 $147.45 $147.45 8 6" $272.16 $272.16 $272.16 $272.16 $272.16 $272.16 9 8" $401.04 $401.04 $401.04 $401.04 $401.04 $401.04

Table 1-13: Proposed Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water)

A B C D E F G
Line Non-Potable Water Usage
Rates
Current
Rates July 2024 July 2025 July 2026 July 2027 July 2028 1 Non-Potable Water Usage
2 Non-Potable Water $0.99 $0.99 $0.99 $0.99 $0.99 $0.99 3 Conversion Customer $0.64 $0.64 $0.64 $0.64 $0.64 $0.64

1.7. Combined Customer Impacts
Table 1-14 outlines the proposed customer bi-monthly impacts for a Single Family customer with a ¾” meter using 40 ccf of water each billing period. The customer impacts show the water, wastewater, non-potable water, and combined bill impacts. A typical Single Family customer will have water and wastewater service, and the total impact for this typical customer does not exceed $8 per bi-monthly billing period in the first year (Column B, Line 15).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
583 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Table 1-14: Proposed Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Impacts (3/4” meter, 40 ccf)

A B C D E F
Line Bi-Monthly Impacts Proposed
July 2024
Proposed
July 2025
Proposed
July 2026
Proposed
July 2027
Proposed
July 2028
1 Current Water Bill $121.08 $121.08 $121.08 $121.08 $121.08 2 Proposed Water Bill $125.86 $128.61 $131.37 $134.15 $136.95 3 Difference ($) $4.78 $7.53 $10.29 $13.07 $15.87
4 5 Current Wastewater Bill $62.43 $62.43 $62.43 $62.43 $62.43 6 Proposed Wastewater Bill $66.04 $72.65 $79.92 $87.92 $94.96 7 Difference ($) $3.61 $10.22 $17.49 $25.49 $32.53
8 9 Current Non-Potable Water Bill $53.41 $53.41 $53.41 $53.41 $53.41 10 Proposed Non-Potable Water Bill $53.41 $53.41 $53.41 $53.41 $53.41 11 Difference ($) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
12 13 Current Water and Wastewater Bill $183.51 $183.51 $183.51 $183.51 $183.51 14 Proposed Water and Wastewater Bill $191.90 $201.26 $211.29 $222.07 $231.91 15 Difference ($) $8.39 $17.75 $27.78 $38.56 $48.40 16 17 Current Combined Bill $236.92 $236.92 $236.92 $236.92 $236.92 18 Proposed Combined Bill $245.31 $254.67 $264.70 $275.48 $285.32 19 Difference ($) $8.39 $17.75 $27.78 $38.56 $48.40

1.8. Regional Rate Survey
Figure 1-1 shows the bi-monthly sewer bill comparison for a Single Family Dwelling Unit customer. The graph shows the City’s proposed wastewater charge to be implemented in July of 2024.

Figure 1-2 shows the bi-monthly water bill comparison for a Single Family Dwelling Unit customer using a 3/4” meter and 40 ccf of water use per bi-monthly billing period. The graph shows the City’s proposed water rates to be implemented in July of 2024.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
584 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Figure 1-1: Regional Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Sewer Bill Comparison

Figure 1-2: Regional Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Water Bill Comparison

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
585 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

2. Key Assumptions
The key assumptions outlined in this section of the report represent the global assumptions utilized in the Study to project the number of customer accounts, revenues, and expenses for future years. City staff provided data on customer accounts, usage, and actual revenues and expenses for FY 2022 and budgeted revenues and expenses for FY 2023 and FY 2024. The remaining years of the Study, from FY 2025 to FY 2029, were projected based on this information and the key assumptions shown in this section.

2.1. Customer Account Growth
Table 2-1 shows the customer account growth projections for each customer class based on recommendations from City staff. The values from the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) were maintained for this rate study cycle. This conservative value was used as a prudent fiscal practice to ensure that adequate revenues are collected to fund the City’s utilities in the event that large growth does not occur.

Table 2-1: Customer Account Growth Projections

A B C D E F G
Line Customer Account
Growth FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029
1 Single Family 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
2 Multiple Family 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
3 Commercial 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
4 Municipal 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
5 Non-Building 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
6 Fire Service 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
7 School 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
8 Non-Potable 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%

2.2. Revenue Inflation Factors
Table 2-2 shows the revenue inflation factors utilized to project future revenues and calculate investment income. Projections assume no increase in miscellaneous, non-rate revenues throughout the study period. The reserve interest rate is used to calculate the investment income based on projected fund balances and is based on conservative estimates.

Table 2-2: Revenue Inflation Factors

A B C D E F G
Line Revenue Inflation
Factors FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Non-Rate Revenues 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
2 Reserve Interest Rate 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
586 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

2.3. Expense Inflation Factors
Table 2-3 shows the expense inflation factors, which are used to project future operating and capital project expenses for the study period. These factors were determined with input from City staff and reference industry standard escalations and commonly used price indices. The general inflation factor is based on the long-term change in the CPI. Water supply, utilities, power, and chemical costs are based on industry averages. The capital inflation factor is based on the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI).

Table 2-3: Expense Inflation Factors

A B C D E F G
Line Expense Inflation
Factors FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 General 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%
2 Salary/Benefits 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0%
3 Water Supply 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
4 Utilities/Power 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
5 Chemicals 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
6 Supplies/Materials 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%
7 Capital 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
587 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

3. Water – Financial Plan
This section of the report details the water enterprise’s long-term financial plan, based on the projected revenues, expenses, debt service, and capital project costs. Raftelis modeled the financial plan without revenue (status quo) and with proposed revenue adjustments to ensure the financial sustainability and solvency of the water utility. The results of the water financial plan are the proposed rates for five years based on the proposed revenue adjustments.

3.1. Projected Revenues
City staff provided the actual FY 2022 revenues and budgeted FY 2023 and FY 2024 revenues for the water utility, which were used to project revenues for the remainder of the study period. Table 3-1 shows the projected water revenues for each of the water funds.

The water rate revenues (Lines 4, 6, 8-10) are calculated for future years based on the weighted customer account growth assumptions for each customer class (Table 2-1). The City expects modest increases in water rate revenues for all years of the study. The investment income (Lines 13, 27) is calculated using the reserve interest rate (Table 2-2 , Line 2). The remaining revenues are inflated using the non-rate revenue inflation factor (Table 2-2, Line 1).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
588 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Table 3-1: Projected Water Revenues

A B C D E F G
Line Projected Revenues FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Water Service (501)
2 Cost Recover/Reimb
Expenditure $25 $25 $25 $25 $25 $25
3 Plan Check $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 4 Water Usage $26,337,835 $26,482,428 $26,624,274 $26,766,879 $26,910,248 $27,054,385 5 Fire Flow Testing $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 6 "B" Contract Water Usage $105,000 $82,423 $82,860 $83,299 $83,741 $84,185 7 Water Meter Install $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 8 Irrigation Water Usage $3,100,000 $3,146,152 $3,162,826 $3,179,589 $3,196,441 $3,213,382 9 Fire Hydrant Water Usage $155,000 $140,931 $141,689 $142,451 $143,218 $143,988 10 Fire Protection Water Usage $420,000 $541,627 $544,541 $547,470 $550,415 $553,376 11 Conservation Violation
Penalty $525 $525 $525 $525 $525 $525
12 Frontage Charge $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 13 Investment Income $510,297 $286,933 $227,614 $215,110 $202,470 $201,514 14 Returned Check Charge $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50
15 Rental Income $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 16 Miscellaneous Receipts $105,000 $105,000 $105,000 $105,000 $105,000 $105,000 17 Total - Water Service (501) $32,917,731 $32,970,095 $33,073,404 $33,224,399 $33,376,133 $33,540,430 18 19 Source Acquisition (508)
20 Water Source Acq Residential $437,000 $437,000 $437,000 $437,000 $437,000 $437,000 21 Water Source Acquisition
Non-Resident $46,000 $46,000 $46,000 $46,000 $46,000 $46,000 22 Total - Source Acquisition
(508) $500,297 $505,300 $510,353 $515,457 $520,611 $525,818 23 24 Water CIP (509)
25 Capital Improv Chrg Non-Res $345,000 $345,000 $345,000 $345,000 $345,000 $345,000 26 Capital Improv Chrg Resident $1,610,000 $1,610,000 $1,610,000 $1,610,000 $1,610,000 $1,610,000 27 Investment Income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
28 Total - Water CIP (509) $1,955,000 $1,955,000 $1,955,000 $1,955,000 $1,955,000 $1,955,000 29 30 Total - Revenues $35,373,029 $35,430,395 $35,538,757 $35,694,856 $35,851,745 $36,021,248

3.2. Projected O&M Expenses
City staff provided the actual FY 2022 and budgeted FY 2023 and FY 2024 O&M expenses for the water utility based on expense function. Table 3-2 shows the projected O&M expenses for the study period, inflated for FY 2025 and beyond using the expense inflation factors (Table 2-3).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
589 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Table 3-2: Projected Water O&M Expenses

A B C D E F G
Line Projected O&M Expenses FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Water Service (501)
2 Salaries and Benefits $7,678,736 $7,985,885 $8,305,321 $8,637,534 $8,983,035 $9,342,356 3 Services - Power $2,330,125 $2,459,708 $2,596,497 $2,740,467 $2,892,419 $3,052,796 4 Services $11,441,234 $11,784,471 $12,138,005 $12,502,145 $12,877,210 $13,263,526 5 Supplies - Purchased Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
6 Supplies - Treatment $475,500 $501,944 $529,858 $559,237 $590,245 $622,973 7 Supplies $3,179,750 $3,275,143 $3,373,397 $3,474,599 $3,578,837 $3,686,202 8 Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
9 Total - Water Service (501) $25,105,345 $26,007,150 $26,943,078 $27,913,981 $28,921,745 $29,967,853 10 11 Water Project (503)
12 Salaries and Benefits $7,035 $7,316 $7,609 $7,913 $8,230 $8,559 13 Services - Power $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
14 Services $500,000 $515,000 $530,450 $546,364 $562,754 $579,637 15 Supplies - Purchased Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
16 Supplies - Treatment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
17 Supplies $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
18 Fixed Assets $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
19 Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
20 Total - Water Project (503) $507,035 $522,316 $538,059 $554,277 $570,984 $588,196 21 22 Source Acquisition (508)
23 Fixed Assets $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
24 Total - Water Project (503) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
25 26 Total - O&M Expenses $25,612,380 $26,529,467 $27,481,137 $28,468,258 $29,492,730 $30,556,049

3.3. Debt Service
The City currently has two existing debt issues for the water utility. Table 3-3 shows the annual principal and interest payments for the existing debts.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 07-02-24
590 of 864
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 1

Redlands City CouncilJuly 2, 2024

Redlands City Council
July 2, 2024